Ritualistic Lucid Dreaming
In a lucid dream infinite power, within the bounds of the dreamers own body, is bestowed upon the dreamer; if the dreamer can control the dreamers urge for fun, the dreamer may conduct a ritual, which will result in a downgrade to a normal dream wherein the dreamer may find answers to difficult questions, that they like or dislike, or enlightenment---or the dreamer may be granted special, sometimes unique, mental or physical powers. To conduct a ritualistic lucid dream follow the steps that're written below this paragraph in full:

1. Be in a state of a lucid dream; sleeping multiple times in a day can help influence lucid dreams, either on the second sleep, third or thereafter. Another method is to keep a healthy mind; do not touch narcotics, as narcotics, especially cannabis and tobacco, may reduce your dopamine or make your rapid-eye-movement weaker.
2. Focus dream energy into a small focal point; a triangle made out of the fingers will suffice, but it's fine to use any shape or form. The more expertise that you have, the greater flexibility you will attain.
3. Use vocal or visual stimulation to perform the ritual; perhaps ask, "what happens when I, or they, die", and then the ritual will present to you, in a normal dream format, the answer(s) to your question. There are many rituals that one can perform---it doesn't always have to be a question.

s13ep wrote:
3. Use vocal or visual stimulation to perform the ritual; perhaps ask, "what happens when I, or they, die", and then the ritual will present to you, in a normal dream format, the answer(s) to your question. There are many rituals that one can perform---it doesn't always have to be a question.

I accept that you used this question for illustrative purposes only, rather than as a suggestion of the sort of question that could only be answered through this ritualistic process.

Sendraks wrote:

s13ep wrote:
3. Use vocal or visual stimulation to perform the ritual; perhaps ask, "what happens when I, or they, die", and then the ritual will present to you, in a normal dream format, the answer(s) to your question. There are many rituals that one can perform---it doesn't always have to be a question.

I accept that you used this question for illustrative purposes only, rather than as a suggestion of the sort of question that could only be answered through this ritualistic process.

I trust the dream...

Good for you. I trust evidence that is verifiable.

Sendraks wrote:Good for you. I trust evidence that is verifiable.

That which is evident is enough for me; if it was all about evidence how could I interpret my dream properly? Wouldn't it simply be blackness?

I've no idea how you would verify that you had interpreted a dream properly.

Nor is it obvious why improperly interpreting a dream would simply be blackness.

Sendraks wrote:I've no idea how you would verify that you had interpreted a dream properly.

Nor is it obvious why improperly interpreting a dream would simply be blackness.

I wake up with the answer in my head, it's not fuzzy for everyone...

Wait, aren't you the one who only takes merit in hard-evidence? Where do you go about witnessing a dream-state? Any 'evidence' of a dream-state you've witnessed?

I take it you've never had a ritualistic lucid dream.

s13ep wrote:I wake up with the answer in my head, it's not fuzzy for everyone...

As I said, good for you.

s13ep wrote:Wait, aren't you the one who only takes merit in hard-evidence?

I would suggest that my comments in this discussion thus far would indicate that I value verifiable evidence.

s13ep wrote:I take it you've never had a ritualistic lucid dream.

No idea.

I've had answers to problems come to me in my sleep before now. The thing here is that these were "answers" I could go and verify i.e. the key you're looking for is in the brown coat. The usefulness and general accuracy of the "dream answer" were verifiable. There was no ritualistic process involved though, just that my sub-conscious state was able to resolve a problem my waking mind hadn't been able to untangled.

s13ep wrote:
I take it you've never had a ritualistic lucid dream.

Alternatively, we might have had experiences similar to what you're describing, but we interpreted them differently. For example, I would simply call it a dream, and I would attach no more meaning to it than I do to any other flight of fancy- with the understanding that sometimes good ideas can arise from flights of fancy. But these ideas, once obtained from whatever source, must make it through a much more discerning process than uncritical acceptance if they are to be useful.

ScholasticSpastic wrote:

s13ep wrote:
I take it you've never had a ritualistic lucid dream.

Alternatively, we might have had experiences similar to what you're describing, but we interpreted them differently. For example, I would simply call it a dream, and I would attach no more meaning to it than I do to any other flight of fancy- with the understanding that sometimes good ideas can arise from flights of fancy. But these ideas, once obtained from whatever source, must make it through a much more discerning process than uncritical acceptance if they are to be useful.

I don't interpret imagery with words. It's a case of, if I see it happen, I believe it.

If I asked what's going to happen when I die, and then I'm presented with a dream-state that shows me a chair in some Hostel (referring to the horror movie) room I'd take it for what it is, was, and felt like, alone, without attached word.

The hypocrisy in this thread.

s13ep wrote:The hypocrisy in this thread.

Is where?

I don't need a lucid dream to answer the question what happens when I die. Which, in so far as I am concerned, amounts to "not a lot." I realise that yourself and others out there, have fanciful notions attached to what happens when you die, but they are a) not verifiable and b) at odds with the prevailing evidence that supports no ongoing concerns vis the conscious mind of that individual.

Sendraks wrote:

s13ep wrote:The hypocrisy in this thread.

Is where?

I don't need a lucid dream to answer the question what happens when I die. Which, in so far as I am concerned, amounts to "not a lot." I realise that yourself and others out there, have fanciful notions attached to what happens when you die, but they are a) not verifiable and b) at odds with the prevailing evidence that supports no ongoing concerns vis the conscious mind of that individual.

Let other people have their go before you prance around making innate assumptions.

s13ep wrote:
Let other people have their go before you prance around making innate assumptions.

That doesn't answer the question about your claim of hypocrisy.

I'm also not required to "let other people have their go." The available evidence does not support any sort of continuation of consciousness after death. Fanciful claims of post-death consciousness are not verifiable.

I have solved problems in dreams. Usually the dreamed solution has absolutely fuck all to do with the real world problem, but I can sort of squish it into a semblance of relevance if I squint and look out of the corner of my eye. For example, I was worrying about the port engine, it runs rougher than the starboard, and smokes more when it's started. That night I dreamed about a man fucking a penguin (not me, of course, it was some other guy). After a while I realized that penguins are affected by oil spills, and diesel is an oil product, and fucking something can be viewed as injecting them with a penis. Et voila, my problem is the diesel fuel injectors!

Thanks, Timecube!

Ah, but you're interpreting. According to Timecube, you should be out watching some guy fuck a penguin.

If you've never had a ritualistic lucid dream, you're not qualified to argue for it's falsehood. In my dream, Trump nuked Syria, and then Syrians started to eat one another.

Plus, even though they minimalized collateral damage, it still damaged Syria and it's people!

My point is, again, there was no 'working out' to do, it was the dream-news, per say, and I enjoyed it.

I also took to belief in it's content, that if Trump nukes Syria, it's people will be damaged, as well as the other nature there.

Knowing how people know the evident probability, and possibilities within range, it's probable that there will be no collateral damage.

Doesn't seem so stupid in my eyes! Furthermore, what exactly do you know about the power of dreams other than "It's chemical reactions in in the body"?

Too dull for me! I'm a believer in beautiful, intense colours.

Yes, well, around here we're bored to tears with people believing whatever sort of fanciful nonsense they want. The site's called Rational Skepticism, not I Dreamed I Fucked A Penguin And I Liked It.

laklak wrote:I have solved problems in dreams. Usually the dreamed solution has absolutely fuck all to do with the real world problem, but I can sort of squish it into a semblance of relevance if I squint and look out of the corner of my eye. For example, I was worrying about the port engine, it runs rougher than the starboard, and smokes more when it's started. That night I dreamed about a man fucking a penguin (not me, of course, it was some other guy). After a while I realized that penguins are affected by oil spills, and diesel is an oil product, and fucking something can be viewed as injecting them with a penis. Et voila, my problem is the diesel fuel injectors!

Thanks, Timecube!

So your power animal is Marla Singer?

s13ep wrote:If you've never had a ritualistic lucid dream, you're not qualified to argue for it's falsehood.

Bullshit.

And that is all the strength of argument that's required to deal with your silly little claims.

In this thread, the egotistical "smart ones" express how my claims are stupid by reading "Trump nukes Syria" as "man fucks penguin".