The nature of dreams may raise the scope of 'mind' and 'consciousness' beyond daily life experiences and understanding. There is a twilight zone, especially in the realm of borderline states of consciousness. Dreams may be seen as fantasy but some unusual states of mind, such as near death experiences may be held to be of greater validity. It is such a speculative area, in relation to the nature of inner experience and what this signifies on a larger scale of objectivity. The subjective experiences of spirits or 'God' may be dismissed or held as as a starting point for so much more philosophically?

The question of dreams, fantasy and idealism may be important here, especially in connection with opposite perspectives, which may involve a reductionist approach, 'flat' thinking, and even nihilism. It is questionable as to what extent nihilism views nihilism. Is everything in life viewed as 'nothing of significance'? Are dreams to be reduced to psychological experience and what does psychological experience amount to? Are dreams a mere aspect of fabricated illusion or an essential aspect of fantasy, as higher aspirations, goals and values?

My understanding is that non-pathological "dreams", like base emotions such as desires & fears, are offline (subconscious-involuntary) cognitions which 'are enabled or constrained by' as well as 'can enable or constrain' online (conscious-voluntary) cognitions such as thoughts, ideas, narratives & experiences. In other words, I think "we dream" because we are 'occasionally self-aware, thinking meat' and that our pre-cognitive, pre-verbal, 'vestigial bodies' repress/express themselves by defragging – deconstructing – our memories.

Also, "dreaming" might be how idle minds play with themselves when they are not minding what their bodies are actively, voluntarily doing. Most mammalian species have been observed 'running in their sleep' and all have been observed 'playing' when awake, so it's reasonable, I think, to surmise from this indirect evidence that "dreaming" is a basic biological function of neurologically complex, sentient species.

Are dreams to be reduced to psychological experience and what does psychological experience amount to? — Jack Cummins

Although there is no real evidence to the idea I have read several papers about how dreams are possibly linked to learning and memory functions.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC534695/

I raise this topic mainly in relation to the philosophy of mind and the nature of consciousness. I come from an interest in psychoanalysis, including the Jungian perspective of dreams. However, I am aware that philosophical consideration of the nature of dreams may go far beyond this. Some may regard dreams as qualia for understanding while others may see it as a debris of psychological understanding.

I am inclined to see it as between the two, especially as ideas of consciousness and unconsciousness may be a continuum. Michael Frayn; in, 'The Human Touch: Our Part in the Creation of a Universe' (2006) looks at the evolution of dreaming, including psychoanalysis as 'working out of some inner conflict.'

The role of dreaming may be viewed as significant or not. Frayn argues,
'Perhaps dreaming has no function. If it really does have no bearing on whether we really live or die, or whether we mate or fail to, perhaps it's not subject to the pressures of selection.' Objectively, dreams may be seen and dismissed so easily in this way. However, it is possible that such a perspective leaves out the mythological dimensions of life as a source of meaning. Also, metaphysically, to dismiss such aspects of existence may be a rather 'flat' perspective of the understanding of the nature of 'mind' and consciousness. So, I am querying the relevance of the layers of meaning of dreams and the nature of symbolic 'reality'. This may be important for understanding literature and the arts. — Jack Cummins

I think and believe that ANY aspect of life may be built upon and become more. Dreams are perhaps the single best example of this that transcends the physical world.

I have FELT my dreams have an effect on my waking state more than once. The meaning was not clear to me after reviewing the dream the first time. I have recurring dreams all the time. I have some that resonate since my childhood and still have them.

Most dreams are just seemingly random and engaged in very much the kind of garbage detail that often invades our lives when we are not ordered. Since we are often not ordered, especially in weak areas of our skillset, this is frequent.

I do have lucid dreams and I can cause them to happen with effort. Flight is frequent for me and the weirdness there is that I sometimes flap, literally leveraging the air density to pull me up with will inside the dream. Then there are times I am like Doctor Strange on a flying carpet that is not there. Then there are times that I am more like Superman and just going anywhere I want.

How important are dreams for understanding the juxtaposition of images and experiential drama at the centre of human life? — Jack Cummins

I think they are meaningful and also a seed of new meaning that will mean more as evolution progresses their functional use. But the seeds of that use are surely already here, now.

On one hand dreams may be seen as having a low profile of importance in contrast to the 'real' events of significance in life, Or, alternatively, dreams may be seen as a psychological bridge in thinking of the 'real' life aspects of human life. — Jack Cummins

I agree and THAT juxtaposition is precisely the growth point for anything, isn't it?

Coaching volleyball its like the girl will walk up under the ball and try to hit it. But no jump. Then they start hopping some and miss the hit. Then then hop and hit. Finally they jump and hit. Then they have a hit and can modify that as a weapon in the game. All desire, all 'becoming' works this way, a progress that starts in seed form.

And I know you know this from the esoteric thread, but 'real' is actually real.

So, I am asking whether dreams are a mere exercise of little significance in human understanding or as central as aspects of the themes and dilemmas of life? Also, how important is the development of one's inner life as an essential narrative aspect of mediating the dramas of outer and inner life experiences? — Jack Cummins

The inner world is the core which projects to the outside. Likewise the outside can impose upon the inner world.

Dreams step beyond both to the unified world, perfection. Various layers of spirituality, esoteric mystery, are the dimension to which dreams offer access. That WILL become reality as experienced soon enough. Baby steps to godhood.

Reading your response, makes me wonder about the specific division between 'sleep' and 'dreams'. It may be a commonsense one but it is not absolute, especially in relation to hypnagogic dream states and lucid dreaming. I am wondering how dream states come into play and the nature of the periphery of such zones as states of awareness or lack of awareness.

Empirical research, rather than philosophical reflection, is much more informative here – consider:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_study

Thank you for your detailed reply. You speak of the inner world and outer world, which is the main dichotomy between waking and sleep/dream consciousness.. So much of waking consciousness may be regarded by many as the basis of what is 'real'. I am not disregarding such a division but when it is seen ad an absolute division it may become more of a burden than a source for helpful reflection.

I know that my dreams are not 'real' in an objective sense and have an inner logic or meaning. It may be involve psychological.meaning and Interpretation primarily, but this may be as important as some other objective criteria for understanding 'truth' and meaning.

I am not wishing to dismiss the value of empirical understanding and evidence, in favour of a form of skepticism. It is possible to get carried away with dream 'reality' to the point where it is seen as more 'real' than waking consciousness. Some Eastern philosophy gets to that point, where the everyday perspective is seen as an illusion or 'maya'. That may be going too far, and, if anything sleep and dreaming may be more about not getting too caught up with the splits between hardcore and rigid thought to the point where the nature and role of imagination are cast aside.

For example, if I meet someone I know in my dreams it is extremely different from a meeting in daily life. However, it may still be important for understanding the relationship on a less conscious or subliminal level. I would go as far ad to say that such 'meeting of minds' may almost as real as what happens in waking life because the nature of connection and relationships involves so much much which is subliminal and beyond the scope of verbal communication and understanding.

I wonder to what extent the experience of dreams is related to a different kind of consciousnes and memory. It may be different from the conventional forms of understanding and causality, or linear logic and the arrow of time in terms of explanation. Here, I am speaking of a way of intuitive understanding, which may so different from the basics of commonsense logic and explanation. In particular, it may involve intuitive understanding.

Thank you for your detailed reply. You speak of the inner world and outer world, which is the main dichotomy between waking and sleep/dream consciousness.. So much of waking consciousness may be regarded by many as the basis of what is 'real'. I am not disregarding such a division but when it is seen ad an absolute division it may become more of a burden than a source for helpful reflection. — Jack Cummins

I try these days to disregard such a division. Not so much that others think I believe they are precisely the same, like a lunatic, but enough to let them know that I do not discount the reality that includes the influence of dreams.

I know that my dreams are not 'real' in an objective sense and have an inner logic or meaning. It may be involve psychological.meaning and Interpretation primarily, but this may be as important as some other objective criteria for understanding 'truth' and meaning. — Jack Cummins

But this is incorrect. Objectively you did have a dream. Objectively the dream itself was real as a dream.

There is a difference between saying that and saying that the contents of the dream are objective within the external world. The unwary can become confused.

Unicorns are real. They are real because they as a concept affect the world. Little girls (mostly) are enamored with and cause real world problems because of unicorns.

Dreams are objectively real. Their content does not always instantiate itself into the external world. But many dreams do become real. That is how advancement in technology happens. Architecture, ideas, etc all start only as dreams. The nature of that progression dream->instantiation->real external truth is amazing to admit and focus on.

In particular, it may involve intuitive understanding. — Jack Cummins

Hmmm...

Dreams are objectively real. Their content does not always instantiate itself into the external world. But many dreams do become real. That is how advancement in technology happens. Architecture, ideas, etc all start only as dreams. The nature of that progression dream->instantiation->real external truth is amazing to admit and focus on. — Chet Hawkins

:up: I like this but I feel I could add something more to this. I think there is more to keep in mind or consider before getting here...i believe. But its not wrong at all, its right.

When you mention advancements in technology, architecture, ideas in that progression, where could one start or begin to understand this? How can you? Its interesting and impressive and worthy of acknowledgment that you chose to word this sentence in the way you did though. Thats more what I am wondering, how you figure that anything about the nature of about this progression only takes "admitting" **(accepting) (satisfaction)???** and focus and will to be amused or amazed? Is that natural to try and force that understanding into someone? Beat the solider into someone is work, chet! Good work, keep it shining.

The nature of that progression is for who to learn and who to teach? Who to make things happen from these "dreams" you mention...I like to use "visions" instead of dreams in my notes on this progression, and use slightly different stances. Its not about bridging gaps but finding and building new routes...that is always happening and going to happen, I believe. But thats my problem and I am willing to solve it with what I claim to be real knowledge not necessarily linked to any belief system but reason to believe and experience I can explain to an end that is real...

Chet when you said " That is how advancement in technology happens." I am just making sure you considered and confirm that its not that is HOW it happens but what happens and what is to be true is contained within our understanding of the world and the real external truth is bigger and more certain and this, our current scope is limited, until it isnt....Until its what is real?

Sure it's possible to bring into existence a "design" of something, anything one imagines to be "a good idea" or invention or dream or patent idea whatever... but when there is an absence of evidence/intention/dedication to the process of design within the visionaries original idea, it might make the how important to keep in mind...

How to get intelligent design from unintelligent visions?....And why is it the design or designer in question of any concern? It seems maybe perhaps one believes in intelligent design, but i think those same people could confuse the reality of the design and origin of the vision. It is important to regard the how and why you should go about the design, which isnt always the final product or overall vision, as the vision could evolve based on how it is consumed in reality....The design is perfected through many tests and trials, prototypes, different versions/adaptations stemming from a vision, that was maybe founded on a baseless idea.... but through and with an intelligent design, it is possible to start manipulating the very function and overall purpose of a vision (intentions and functions, and abilities and usage could change over time, as people go through phases and so does standards and environments.)

So, by being able to see design capabilities in that vision, requires intelligence, which is the knowledge one has to be able to see a design from the vision but not just see it, be able to produce or recreate the design based on approved plans (fully defined by constraints, tolerances and required dimensions, scales, measurements to be recreated accurately and communicating clearly in real life with credentials to back up your ability to work on the design.)

A good deal of the 'creative process' - technological, scientific and artistic - takes place while dreaming. In dream state, the mind of free of external distractions and ego-pressure, thus free to re-image the problem, the idea, the device, the relationship or whatever has been occupying the same mind while awake. By re-image, I mean create situations and dreamscapes in which we can put parts of a puzzle in different configurations, including impossible ones and those that seemed impossible, but now that you see it from another perspective, turns out to be possible - that's the Eureka moment that jolts you awake and into your shoes and back to the drawing board. Dreams are able to make the "what if?" graphic and reachable.
This is probably where the myth-making function resides: a myth, or spiritual idea, is simply excellent story-telling raised to revered status - usually by the social prominence of the dreamer.

On the emotional level, the same kind of thing happens. Our dreaming mind is able to cast the people we know into different roles, so that we are able to express how we really feel about them, unrestarined by obligations and social mores. The dreaming mind also re-figures our internal conflicts and repressed fears, in graphic images, which sometimes suggest what we need to do to improve the situation.
On the most mundane level, as we dream about the new skills we are learning or the new environments in which we are expected to function, dreams provide a kind of safe rehearsal place, allowing us to acclimatize and gain confidence.

What the dreaming mind uses as raw material is whatever images we have stored in memory. It can't create anything unique; it can only recombine what we already know.

Dreams are objectively real. Their content does not always instantiate itself into the external world. But many dreams do become real. That is how advancement in technology happens. Architecture, ideas, etc all start only as dreams. The nature of that progression dream->instantiation->real external truth is amazing to admit and focus on.
— Chet Hawkins
:up: I like this but I feel I could add something more to this. I think there is more to keep in mind or consider before getting here...i believe. But its not wrong at all, its right. — Kizzy

OK, on we go ...

When you mention advancements in technology, architecture, ideas in that progression, where could one start or begin to understand this? — Kizzy

There are myriad accounts of inventors and others that admit freely that 'it came to me in a dream' and this does not even forbid inclusion of simple imagination, ... daydreaming.

How can you? — Kizzy

Understanding proceeds quite naturally from doing. This is anger's participation. Doing is in the now, present tense, anger, being, action. But the how includes the dream itself, the wish, the image forward combining and becoming something new from old patterns. And of course fear is the past, all the old patterns, how well they are known, the structure of proper relationships as opposed to 'eliminated' or unlikely pathways to success and function.

Its interesting and impressive and worthy of acknowledgment that you chose to word this sentence in the way you did though. Thats more what I am wondering, how you figure that anything about the nature of about this progression only takes "admitting" **(accepting) (satisfaction)???** and focus and will to be amused or amazed? — Kizzy

If one does not admit the mechanism, one is forced to rely upon 'magical thinking'. If the mechanism is admitted or suspected, then 'proper' research may begin in earnest to confirm or validate the theory/hypothesis.

Amazement is the joy factor of fear moving from Enneatype 7 into the 'real' world, the present, at Enneatype 8. This requires a challenge to the vision, anger's action with infused desire. All of that matches the model.

Is that natural to try and force that understanding into someone? Beat the solider into someone is work, chet! Good work, keep it shining. — Kizzy

New ideas and change are resisted by cowardice. Fear clings to the side of the pool. But between 7 and 8 we leave the realm of fear and proceed into the realm of anger. From the past to the present led by the future (the vision). This is how reality works, and the dream is included in reality. The joy component of fear, desire infused fear, Enneatype 7 is thus the third and final reaction of fear. It is where Cowardice turns to Hedonism so that the old fears may now be indulged. The trap of 7 though is that we spin and get caught in the eddy of Hedonism, another immoral path. So by both actions, the Hedonistic tendency AND the general cowardice of the new pattern becoming comfortable and old, stability returns and it is a while before we dream again to a new vision.

The nature of that progression is for who to learn and who to teach? — Kizzy

(That is) A great question in light of my efforts these days.

I will quote Aristotle:
"Those who know, do. Those who understand, teach."

But the clarity of AT LEAST learning is clearly for anyone that does not understand. But notice how new groundbreakers face a legion of doubters, over expressed fear (too much stability) from the clingers to the past ways. Copernicus is rolling over in his grave to add his strength to this statement.

I often say this, 'The one-eyed man IS NOT king in the land of blind as the old and foolish aphorism states. The anti-wisdom of that meme is clear to me. No, instead Jerla-merel(the series 'See') is deemed insane and heretical for speaking of these 'visions'. None but a very few smart and wise types can understand the new vision. The rank and file will summarily reject the new idea until the 'gatekeepers' have approved it for public consumption. This accreditation model is horrid and although perhaps inevitable, causes many great new ideas to be lost. There is an 'activation energy', an escape velocity to ideas.

A new sensor (body - mind connection) causes great trouble until its readouts are understood. What does this say of Migraine headaches? What does it say of bipolar disorder? What does it say of Neuralgia? And we just medicate such things. Is that really wise? Put the blinders on. Things that make you go, hmmm. Then there is the tendency in some people to eschew all medicine and be tough (Enneatype 8), to 'heal' naturally. I promise that is the stuff dreams are made of.

Who to make things happen from these "dreams" you mention...I like to use "visions" instead of dreams in my notes on this progression, and use slightly different stances. — Kizzy

Many traditions respect dreams more so than 'modern' science does. But even science now is after it, more open. Desire is really running amok these days. What will happen? Chaos is an explosion. It WILL explode. It's only a matter of time. All things considered the atom bomb was fairly well contained, unless you ask people in two Japanese prefectures.

Its not about bridging gaps but finding and building new routes...that is always happening and going to happen, I believe. — Kizzy

Yes perfection is calling tp us from the end of time maybe. It is the source of desire, of chaos.

But thats my problem and I am willing to solve it with what I claim to be real knowledge not necessarily linked to any belief system but reason to believe and experience I can explain to an end that is real... — Kizzy

As long as 'real' include the unknown, and thus desire to lead us to it, I agree.

Chet when you said " That is how advancement in technology happens." I am just making sure you considered and confirm that its not that is HOW it happens but what happens and what is to be true is contained within our understanding of the world and the real external truth is bigger and more certain and this, our current scope is limited, until it isnt....Until its what is real? — Kizzy

This paragraph is confusing for me. The process I briefly showed IS ... HOW ... it happens. What happens is different in each case, because what is a specific term, whereas how is generic. The process pattern is generic. Any instantiation of it, all the parts of cause and effect are 'what's.

Yes the external truth, perfection, is 'bigger' along each virtue vector than any past understanding of truth was.

Sure it's possible to bring into existence a "design" of something, anything one imagines to be "a good idea" or invention or dream or patent idea whatever... but when there is an absence of evidence/intention/dedication to the process of design within the visionaries original idea, it might make the how important to keep in mind... — Kizzy

It's interesting is it not? The vision of <what> leads to the specifics of how via the general pattern of how. Once a how is specific, it should be a bunch of whats. What I am is what I am, are you what you are or what? Is that clear? I could also quote Puddle of Mud, if needed. Penny for your thoughts! Although Nickleback is the one saying they never made it as a wise man. Derail warning!

How to get intelligent design from unintelligent visions? — Kizzy

They ARE NOT unintelligent. All chaos partakes of patterns, finally. It cannot be made to un-belong from the metaverse.

....And why is it the design or designer in question of any concern? — Kizzy

So, this may not be your point here (I answer by quoting WITHOUT reading ahead), but the designer is not relevant. Truth is unchanging. And current states IMPLY and INFER the next possible states. Designers and visionaries that tap into this process, the how, as the who, are not precisely relevant. Our human tendency to attach these whats to some who is rather childish. It smacks of pointless ego. I am not immune to that immoral tendency myself, but, the truth belongs to all.

It JUST LIKE the idiot that works so hard after the shipwreck and as the population grows onto the island they wrecked on. He gather all the yip root and later it is determined that it is the only source of vitamin c that is easily and readily available here. And in Capitalism we reward this chap for his immoral act of cornering the market. Uh, gee, thanks. We respect his work and let him then ... rule. It's ridiculous. Everything belongs to everyone, but, I digress. Derail warning!

It seems maybe perhaps one believes in intelligent design, but i think those same people could confuse the reality of the design and origin of the vision. — Kizzy

Truth, love, all, and even God are all synonymous to me. Meaning proceeds endlessly and reliably from meaning. Circular is a PROPER type of logic, not bad as is currently 'known'.

Someone WILL discover the resonance with truth amid vision and reveal it to their in group, in this case humanity, or perhaps Cetaceans. So long and thanks for all the fish!

The design is the ONLY ONE it could ever be. That is why truth is objective. The system cannot fail in any way that we know (yet). Maybe if during the life of the universe no one achieves perfection then that universe fails. But I doubt it. It just restarts.

It is important to regard the how and why you should go about the design, which isnt always the final product or overall vision, as the vision could evolve based on how it is consumed in reality.... — Kizzy

Consumption is not as interesting to me. That's like mob rules nonsense. Who cares what idiots do with good things? It's almost certain they will squander them. Like any verb it has to have wise in front of it to be good. You allude to that with why in the statement but why can be immoral as well as moral. And that is my point mostly. How something is used will be mostly immoral. We have already learned to treat new discoveries with some care, because the immoral motivations of many of us are deeply suspect.

The design is perfected through many tests and trials, prototypes, different versions/adaptations stemming from a vision, that was maybe founded on a baseless idea.... but through and with an intelligent design, it is possible to start manipulating the very function and overall purpose of a vision (intentions and functions, and abilities and usage could change over time, as people go through phases and so does standards and environments.) — Kizzy

People 'going through phases' is what I am referring to. The only proper transitions are from lesser moral understanding to greater. But chaos does not work that way. Desire causes the fragmentation of each vision as it is delivered, precisely because too many people are allowed perhaps too much freedom in their use of dangerous new understandings. Yet and still, due to the nature of free will, this is fairly well required. The common man must learn in the body memory what is bad. So they must suffer their depredations, their misuse of new understandings, in order to ACTUALLY understand. An anger type will usually throw fuel on this fire. 'Get er done!' Elect Trump! Bring things to their most conflicted head. Let the earning of wisdom begin in earnest! The game is afoot! {These statements do not reflect the political beliefs of the author or the website. They are only demonstrative.}

So, by being able to see design capabilities in that vision, requires intelligence, which is the knowledge one has to be able to see a design from the vision but not just see it, be able to produce or recreate the design based on approved plans (fully defined by constraints, tolerances and required dimensions, scales, measurements to be recreated accurately and communicating clearly in real life with credentials to back up your ability to work on the design.) — Kizzy

I disagree that credentials are in any way wise, except that we then know the person has been through a peer vetting process. The reverse is not wise. That is denying someone can contribute who has no credentials. The acquiring of credentials is an orderly cowardice thing. It is precisely the non-ordered types that tend to be the BEST inventors and dreamers. Gee, I wonder why? Nod's as good as a wink to a blind man, eh?

So, by being able to see design capabilities in that vision, requires intelligence, which is the knowledge one has to be able to see a design from the vision but not just see it, be able to produce or recreate the design based on approved plans (fully defined by constraints, tolerances and required dimensions, scales, measurements to be recreated accurately and communicating clearly in real life with credentials to back up your ability to work on the design.) — Kizzy

I disagree that credentials are in any way wise, except that we then know the person has been through a peer vetting process. The reverse is not wise. That is denying someone can contribute who has no credentials. The acquiring of credentials is an orderly cowardice thing. It is precisely the non-ordered types that tend to be the BEST inventors and dreamers. Gee, I wonder why? Nod's as good as a wink to a blind man, eh? — Chet Hawkins

I didnt mean the papers chet, I meant the credibility. Thats my bad. Credible in your craft, the experience, the work and projects completed, the relevance to the project, the power?? Thats a problem with who is hiring who to complete and build their visions or dreams or design..Thats just $$$ talk. The order of how one acquires is also in that boat I believe, but while the order is sure cowardice, i agree to what you mean. But I disagree when you say, "It is precisely the non-ordered types that tend to be the BEST inventors and dreamers." Where are they then? Inventors and dreamers....dreamers can be skilled in other ways their baseless visions can be included...but yeah I did not mean credentials in ANY way BUT when they are rightfully attained, is that all it takes for "we" to approve? A peer vetted "process"? (is that not an order, too?) What about just getting to know people, seeing the work, agreeing to work together, a decision is made...Is it not the credentials, fake earned or neither, and also about the money? Credentials can be faked, masked, covered...easily. That surely is not right by me? Its cowardice for BOTH parties... The proof, the portfolio, the past successes that EXIST from those with credentials they rightfully earned and deserve and WHAT comes with that is also accountability if things go wrong. Willing to stamp your name on the plans, or just willing to deal with the consequences that are weakly given to them. Thats what is cowardice, the punishments are designed in favor of them to still win, if they follow "order" I dont like followers......fines are given and paid off willingly, they can afford a loss for their short term gain...blah blah of course it isnt WISE to only seek the those with JUST good credentials...you could have great credentials on paper, its not my problem who isnt getting the chance to contribute...Where are these people? I am not talking buiness money bs...its simpler. Is technology advancing or evolving?

Daydreaming is interesting in this somehow, ill be back. **I wonder if we in the act of Daydreaming vs in the act of Dreaming during sleep are multitasking differently? Similarly? Is that worth a mention or consideration in terms of consciousness and experiences had that one is aware of....memories? images? I wonder also, if the way we daydream may help/worsen the way we dream or vice versa?

There are myriad accounts of inventors and others that admit freely that 'it came to me in a dream' and this does not even forbid inclusion of simple imagination, ... daydreaming. — Chet Hawkins

Yeah and? How did they earn the title of "inventor" was that before or after the "dreams"?

So, I am asking whether dreams are a mere exercise of little significance in human understanding or as central as aspects of the themes and dilemmas of life? Also, how important is the development of one's inner life as an essential narrative aspect of mediating the dramas of outer and inner life experiences? — Jack Cummins

Sounds like you have made an assumptions about dreams and inner life having some kind of important or sacred connection.

I've alwasy thought dreams were like a mental bowel movement. I guess it is important to be regular but I would not consider the content of dreams to be of much use to us, nor can they be readily interpreted. But humans, being meaning making creatures, have always gone in for this kind of thing, as though dreams can be read like a kind of text about our inner life and our external choices.

What have you learned about yourself or your life from a dream?

What have you learned about yourself or your life from a dream? — Tom Storm

Is this question open to the public?
My answer would be: a lot! Several of my best art pieces were literally 'dreamed up' - though I admit that a couple of others I dreamed, I didn't have the skill to carry out. Two major emotional problems resolved - one of them a biggie that had haunted me for a decade. One obstacle identified; one inhibition overcome. Many warnings of potential and imminent difficulties, before I was consciously aware of the signs; several useful insights into the way I relate to the world.

I know one other person who experienced a major breakthrough - identifying a serious problem and discovering what they needed to do. And, of course, numerous instances of the answer to problem in computer programming, engineering design or scientific research coming to someone in a dream.

Is this question open to the public? — Vera Mont

Of course. I was asking Jack mainly because I know of his fondness of Jung and Jung's work on dreams.

Your response is very interesting. We're all different. I dream a lot and I enjoy dreams, but from memory, I have never received an idea or learned a thing from a single dream I've had.

I would guess, because you don't pay attention to them. Perhaps you have a trouble-free life with few difficult challenges. It's also possible that you are more integrated; more in touch, consciously, with your emotions and imaginative machinery than most people, so that you don't need much prompting from the subconscious regions.

Some people do regard dreams as psychological 'garbage', whereas I am inclined to the view that they represent so much more. In saying that I am not going along with ideas of literal dream interpretation, as in books which try to give specific meanings to dream symbols.

I do follow the psychoanalytic model but not just that of Freud or Jung, and their views were different from each other, but the general view that dreams are of such importance in the nature of mental processing of experience.

At one point, I kept a dream diary for about 6 months, which was not easy because dreams need to be written down as soon as possible, before they are forgotten. What I discovered in the process of paying attention to dreams by recording them was that my dream life took on form and patterns, which was useful for self awareness. However, dreams and their recall may be beyond conscious will. In particular, at one point, I did have Jungian analysis, and, what I experienced was that I stopped dreaming for a while, or being able to remember my dreams. It was as though my own subconscious was rebelling against an attempt at analysis and I began having dramas in waking life and my waking experience became the focus.

Of course, the idea of the conscious, unconscious and subconscious are open to philosophical speculation because there may be a continuum, including the depths of self consciousness and awareness in sleep. This may be where the layers of processing occur. One aspect which I am aware of recurring dreams. I do have some recurring dreams, and see these as being of significance for understanding aspects of my life which leave a lot of unresolved issues.

It could be problematic if people see dreams as 'real' as objective as opposed to psychological way. This may be particularly the case with borderline sleep experiences. Having had some disturbing experiences and images on the borderline of sleep, I can see that the danger is of inflating dreams beyond the scope of human imagination. This is where the possiblity of delusion and 'psychosis' creep in.

One way in which I see the nature of the imaginary world of dreams is a way of going through certain experiential adventures in an imaginary way rather than having to wait for the actual experiences in real life. It is about virtual possibilities. Some dreams may involve pleasure,and it may be saddening to wake up from these ones. In contrast, certain horrorific dreams may involve the processing of deep fears, especially nightmares.

Your mention of 'daydreaming' is important as being connected to the imaginary aspect of dreaming but different. Daydreams are chosen which is so different from those which arise spontaneously during sleep. Will and volition enter into daydreams, although it is possible to have intrusive negative fantasies while waking.

The issue of conscious control is of importance though and some people have the ability to be able to navigate such experiences in the form of lucid dreaming. This may be an art, involving awareness that one is dreaming and be almost akin to meditation.

Daydreams are chosen which is so different from those which arise spontaneously during sleep — Jack Cummins

Are you sure? You speak of volition but that is an illusion affected when the Subject "I" is "entailed." When you think, so-called "consciously," day dream or dream, these are the dynamics of autonomously moving Mind.

In "conscious" thinking--you do not first form the consciousness thought, "here is what I will now think about." Rather, something in the external world, the body, or Mind itself acted upon the Signifiers already stored and active in memory, to surface at such a moment as such a thought, and so on. If it was prompted by the thought, "here is what I will now...," what prompted that, if not my previous suggestion?

In daydreams, the same applies, something in the external world, the body, or Mind itself acted upon the Signifiers already stored and active in memory, etc.

In Dreams, the same Signifiers acting autonomously, flood the inner-image-ing sense (the Organic Source of these now autonomous renegade Signifiers) with the same types of Narratives as before, but now the Subject "I" (which is the Signifier purporting to stand-in for the Body, and is thusly confused as a "Self" embodied) is less directly entailed. The Narrative playing from memory in image-ing is more vague, less connected, harder to "believe," than it is in wakefulness. But it is no more and no less the autonomous construction of Narrative out of Signifiers.

Only in so called deep dreamless sleep, does the Body rest in its True Natural state, absent the Fictional chattering of Human Consciousness or Mind. Prior to the emergence/evolution of Mind as described, humans might see flashes of Images stored in memory--but without any Narrative at all. Tiger fangs, Lush fruit trees (stored for the animal human to have autonomously triggered flight or foraging) for example

The nature of volition in daydreaming may be more of a spectrum. It is possible to be extremely passive in the process or involved in an active way. This involves the extent of freedom in thinking itself and the processes of reflection. It may vary so much between individuals and at different times.

For example, I know that at some moments I seem to have more active control over my imagination than at other moments. Under stress, I find my negative imaginary fears seem to run wild. The bodlily processes may come into play and dreamless sleep may be important for thinking of the retreat of ego consciousness.

I am glad that you relate the nature of dreams to the creative processes, as the relevance of dream experiences may have been so essential. This goes back to the role of mythic understanding and the creation of art and science. It may be about intuition and moments of insight.

The surrealists incorporated the nature of dreams into their art work. Personally, I have attempted to draw images from my dream experiences but getting the details of the images correct in the aftermath is extremely difficult. This may be why people experiment or attempt to achieve altered states of consciousness. Dreams are a doorway into the imagination and the crossover between the right and left hemispheres of consciousness.

"I seem to have" I completely understand your point. However, to me, what makes daydreaming a spectrum (and similarly dreaming a seemingly obvious lack of volition, and wakefulness, a seemingly obvious predominance of volition) is that there is actually no volition, if by volition, we mean some inner being, i.e. you/I willfully thinking specific thoughts. That seems to happen eg. in wakefulness. But even when one thinks "I" am involved in an active way, there is no "I," no being at the center (or elsewhere) directing, willing, etc. the thoughts. There are only the thoughts and how those thoughts affect the Body, and the world, both Natural and Cultural.

When I find myself in a daydream, which I know you do not deny that happens (i.e. "finding myself") and then I think, "wait. I will not waste my time daydreaming, instead, I will reflect upon metaphysics or the structure/nature of Mind, that "change" in the Narrative was not prompted by some inner being at the helm. It, that successor thought, was also autonomously triggered by the movement of other Signifiers affecting it.

By the way, I noted in your post that you are inspired by Jung. Jung's archetypes emerge in dreams and conscious thoughts universally because they are some of those very foundational Signifiers input into memory by socialization, and surfacing from time to time when surrounding Signifiers prompt them.

I am still inclined to think that volition in daydreaming and fantasizing is possible as an aspect which can be developed. It is not simply about whether one goes on to theoretical metaphysical analysis, but about the way in which one approaches thoughts and images. In particular, moral ideas may come into play. For example, I was brought up to believe that malicious thoughts were to be avoided, so if I am having such fantasies I am likely to try to avoid indulgence of such fantasies.

However, it is not clearcut, as suggested by the way Jungian view of archetypes and their power. It is not possible to always push aside 'unwanted',thoughts and fantasies. To fight the dark thoughts and fantasies may make them stronger. My understanding of the images of gargoyles in churches was about the attempt to rid the mind of evil. The 'shadow' aspects of consciousness may have some kind of autonomy and to wrestle with the images may not always work. So, mindfulness may be involved in trying not to exercise the feared fantasies, but not being carried away with it.

After all, to fantasise or daydream is different from action in itself and the scope of fantasy and daydreams may be important in the choices of actions in life. A person may daydream with passivity or some active reflectivity. Both dreams and daydreams may provide a background for reflection upon choices of actions in daily life.

I was brought up to believe that malicious thoughts were to be avoided, so if I am having such fantasies I am likely to try to avoid indulgence of such fantasies. — Jack Cummins

You were "brought up to... therefore..." I am suggesting that the "brought up to," has collected structures of Signifiers in your memory which autonomously surface/trigger others because of the ways and structures in which they have been input. Sure, it seems very much like you are choosing, because "I" is involved....

but I'm willing to move on. Your post is very interesting! Thank you

I would guess, because you don't pay attention to them. Perhaps you have a trouble-free life with few difficult challenges. — Vera Mont

As I said, I enjoy dreams. So I do pay attention to them. And I tend to remember some of them. I just have no additional use for them. I can’t imagine a situation I would be in where a dream would provide anything of use. I am not engaged in creative ventures or at a loss for solutions in life, so maybe it’s just down to being boring.

I didnt mean the papers chet, I meant the credibility. Thats my bad. Credible in your craft, the experience, the work and projects completed, the relevance to the project, the power?? — Kizzy

Ah to me when one speaks of credibility, one is referring to authority or some external organized viewpoint. It should be rather obvious if one is speaking in terms of personal credibility as in possibly believable.

Credibility in craft and works is tied directly to authority and even worse, 'public opinion'. Philosophy in general is not something that is credible at all in either sense. It has to appeal to its own internal and rarified structures to maintain credibility and EVEN THAT is still authority based. So, I fail to agree with your point here.

Thats a problem with who is hiring who to complete and build their visions or dreams or design..Thats just $$$ talk. The order of how one acquires is also in that boat I believe, but while the order is sure cowardice, i agree to what you mean. But I disagree when you say, "It is precisely the non-ordered types that tend to be the BEST inventors and dreamers." Where are they then? — Kizzy

They are legion. But chaos does not lend itself to permanence. So they are often lost. Still, many have enough secondary order to get in and be heard. And their creativity and lack of limits allows them the scope to be truly visionary. So they make all the real progress at first.

But the progress of chaos is big hits mostly, and then order fills in the tedious details to make that hit work. So again, balance is the only real wisdom.

Inventors and dreamers....dreamers can be skilled in other ways their baseless visions can be included...but yeah I did not mean credentials in ANY way BUT when they are rightfully attained, is that all it takes for "we" to approve? — Kizzy

In general, yes.

That is to say, as a fact of day to day business, that is what works. Without said credentials one must then be the true wizard, the oddity, the real visionary. Some janitor or patent clerk can change the world, but then teams of ants hack out that work and refine it to make it useful. The grasshopper just sticks his tongue out and has fun with real discovery and musing.

A peer vetted "process"? (is that not an order, too?) — Kizzy

Yes, and that is my point. More credible credentials. Please enter the first, second, and third passwords. Then touch your nose in the presence of a baby zebra. Then enter your 13 security questions. I'm sorry but if any of that fails, YOU ARE NOT YOU.

What about just getting to know people, seeing the work, agreeing to work together, a decision is made...Is it not the credentials, fake earned or neither, and also about the money? — Kizzy

Well I can agree. Let's do that! But society as we know it would fall apart in less than a day on that basis.

Credentials can be faked, masked, covered...easily. That surely is not right by me? Its cowardice for BOTH parties... The proof, the portfolio, the past successes that EXIST from those with credentials they rightfully earned and deserve and WHAT comes with that is also accountability if things go wrong. Willing to stamp your name on the plans, or just willing to deal with the consequences that are weakly given to them. Thats what is cowardice, the punishments are designed in favor of them to still win, if they follow "order" I dont like followers......fines are given and paid off willingly, they can afford a loss for their short term gain...blah blah of course it isnt WISE to only seek the those with JUST good credentials...you could have great credentials on paper, its not my problem who isnt getting the chance to contribute...Where are these people? — Kizzy

It IS your problem that some whos from whoville are not getting to contribute. You have to be aware enough to think it through. If the whole world were some pseudo Communist Utopia where people pursued their own desires, MANY would pursue science and advancements. The world would gain such knowledge at such a pace that it would beggar the past as ridiculous. But many and most are too focused on survival. And some do not take tests well or lack the discipline to score well in a curriculum as they exist. But they are out there in the world contributing to their passion when someone will DEIGN to let them in.

I'm sorry mam, your word count has exceeded your license. You will have to apply in triplicate for a word count increase on the second Tuesday of the first quarter of each year. That is the only application window. That is our policy. We set policy. You comply. Since your post was tl:dr the entire post has been discarded. Post length policy was DULY posted for you to read. Ignorance of our stupidity is no excuse! Repeated offenses of this nature may result in fines or extrication from the site. Do not describe people! Describe spaces! I mean, ... REALLY!

I am not talking buiness money bs...its simpler. Is technology advancing or evolving? — Kizzy

Yes, technology is advancing. Everything is evolving. And evolution can have a negative weight also, devolution. Whip it good!

Daydreaming is interesting in this somehow, ill be back. **I wonder if we in the act of Daydreaming vs in the act of Dreaming during sleep are multitasking differently? — Kizzy

The pilot at the helm is different. The mechanism is similar to me. Tie the helmsman to the ship's steering wheel and let him sleep. Same thing.

Similarly? Is that worth a mention or consideration in terms of consciousness and experiences had that one is aware of....memories? images? I wonder also, if the way we daydream may help/worsen the way we dream or vice versa? — Kizzy

I can say that my relative mastery of daydreaming DOES affect my dreaming. And vice versa. In some assisted states my daydreaming takes on a more dreamlike quality also, where meta background level concerns in my life explode into a mosaic of meaning and images. It is less fettered, but not unfettered exploration of the same intent space.

There are myriad accounts of inventors and others that admit freely that 'it came to me in a dream' and this does not even forbid inclusion of simple imagination, ... daydreaming.
— Chet Hawkins
Yeah and? How did they earn the title of "inventor" was that before or after the "dreams"? — Kizzy

I mean of course, in general, after. They became lauded as inventors and then admitted humbly perhaps that the inspiration came to them in a dream.

By pay attention, I meant attach some significance to and try to identify the origin and meaning of the imagery. Treating dreams as entertainment - as a down-time activity for the mind to indulge in - is perfectly legitimate. Dreams have many functions in normal day-to-day living, which include fixing new knowledge in long-term memory, visualizing the day or task ahead, consolidating our comprehension of some area of thought and getting anxieties sorted and out of the way.
If we are unable to dream for an appreciable length of time, we face health issues that go beyond drowsiness and lack of focus.

If your dreams are more fun than informative, rather than 'boring', I would opt for well-integrated and well-adjusted. I can say from my own experience that, after resolving those long-standing issues, my dreams also turned happier, often enjoyable - though the creative and warning aspects persist.