Do You think we're forever?

[discouraged1]

Hey, some1, I think LoboUivante, has mentioned dreams.

They are very important to me and I try to remember them and write them all down before I forget them, before they vanish into the subconcious(nothing lasts forever?).

I like oneiromancy, although I am not into it, but I like to analyse the messages from the other world.
I think it's my other life, the second, parallel universe, that breathes within me and all the answers might be there.

Your opinions?

 

[mourningstar]

i think we are melting together two different meaning of the word "dream". one thing is what we strive for in our life, something we want to come true, something which sould give us some reasons. another thing is a more scientific acception of the word, something which lies behind when we're conscious and emerges only when we sleep.
as for the second meaning, i do agree with you: they're two different worlds. it would be useful and interesting to find a right connection between problems and answers. sometimes it's really too hard, especially if you have only read freud

 

[Garm]

Oh, by my heathen god! Do you guys also have a special dream world, of which you can return to later? In mine there are alot of my friends and I are gathered in a bus, and we drive around in the world attending to football (soccer for you new world guys)tournaents. But the wierdest thing is, we do not participate in the tournament, we're just there to be there. Having a jolly time.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by discouraged1
Do you think we're forever?

i really hope not. it might get slightly boring after, say, the first 500.000 years.
if you/anathema meant to question if we are forever as individuals, my tentative answer is no. there is no scientific proof whatsoever that identity survives the moment of physical death; there is some evidence - based on observation - that in fact it doesn't (i mean, what with the deceased being unable to walk, talk, breathe, communicate by any means, respond to stimuli...).

if you/anathema were referring to our survival as a species, i'm afraid i still think we have facts to disprove the theory. of course i know nobody can tell for sure, but we can look at events past and make some assumptions, i.e., animal species all tend to have a 'window' in which they are born, they develop to the best of their social and technical means, they reach a (comparatively) high plateau and then they decline and disappear. there is no reason to assume mankind will do different.

all taken into account, my well-pondered answer is: search me, how the hell should i know?

 

[Malveaux]

Yes, we are forever. If our spirit and our body melts down with earth, nothing will be really lost, and as our phisical existence will enter in the cycle of life, giving food to other living beings so will do our spirit, becoming part of the spirit of living things.

You're free to laugh, but this is how I see it.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by Malveaux
Yes, we are forever. If our spirit and our body melts down with earth, nothing will be really lost, and as our phisical existence will enter in the cycle of life, giving food to other living beings so will do our spirit, becoming part of the spirit of living things.

You're free to laugh, but this is how I see it.

i won't laugh at all. i just have some problem with your definition of 'we' (not to mention 'spirit', but that's another kettle of fish entirely). who is forever in your view? you? me? or plain simple life?

rahvin.

 

[Melancholia]

Originally posted by discouraged1
They are very important to me and I try to remember them and write them all down before I forget them, before they vanish into the subconcious(nothing lasts forever?).

I like oneiromancy, although I am not into it, but I like to analyse the messages from the other world.
I think it's my other life, the second, parallel universe, that breathes within me and all the answers might be there.

Your opinions?

a very interesting opinion....
When you say from the other world,you mean the subconscious????

Since i didn't understand this "other world" thing,i can't really argue with what you said,but it will be nice to share my thoughts on dreams with you..
For me dreams aren't messages from the other world,but messages from the self...they are parts of me,my thoughts,my wishes,my beliefs,fears etc...even with things about myself which still aren't very obvious to me...
they breathe with me While i'm sleeping,my body is resting,my mind is sure loose,but still it somehow works.... All my thoughts,beliefs,wishes,expectations,experiences from what has happened to me during my entire life and even the present etc are transformed into less obvious signs (hehe sounds tooooo Freudian,but well i think what the basis of his theory on dreams has some meaning-i can't accept everything he writes though) which actually have nothing to say me.....I don't believe they talk to me about the future...I mean that tney are connected with me and they actually have a meaning.Usually when i think about a dream i had i find out (or at least i think so) why I've had this dream...
I think it's interesting to do and funny
But unlike you I'm toooo lazy to write down my dreams...
I usually think on the dreams/parts of them when i manage to recall them and later i forget all about them.. (except for some strange dreams i've had)
All in all,for me dreams aren't nonsense,they is a reason why i've seen a dream,they are connected to myself,but i don't think they can tell me about my future (maybe they do,i don't know...who knows...i just don't believe they do )

well,maybe i am expressing myself in an awful/wrong way and none will really understand what i mean...

 

[Malveaux]

@rahvin: I speak about all life. A single life ends, but life itself is forever. And we are part of it, from my point of view.
As our body melts into earth, so does our spirit, which is what makes us alive. So the Earth is soaked with this living spirit, and when life grows out of the ground, it is infused with this spirit.

But this is just how I see it...

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by Malveaux
@rahvin: I speak about all life.

in fact, i just wanted to point out how maybe the meaning implied by 'we' in that anathema sentence is not so widespread. me, i wouldn't use 'we' as a synonim of 'all life'. of course your view is perfectly legitimate and valid, and i wouldn't dream of calling it anything else, no matter what my stance on the subject might be.

rahvin.

 

[mourningstar]

Originally posted by Melancholia
sounds tooooo Freudian,but well i think what the basis of his theory on dreams has some meaning-i can't accept everything he writes though

this is how we can reasonably regard freud. moreover, a person who considers a child a "perverse polymorphous" cannot be totally sane

i don't think they can tell me about my future (maybe they do,i don't know...who knows...i just don't believe they do )

i don't think that, too. an event which seems to be connected with a previous dream or with a presentiment can reasonably be considered a coincidence, even if someone is so good in proving (especially to himself) it is not. and then, granting this "power" of dreams, there are too many possible interpretations, which weaken it. and until one can only start from the event and then go back to the dream, what's the purpose?

 

[LoboUivante]

Originally posted by Melancholia

a very interesting opinion....
When you say from the other world,you mean the subconscious????

Since i didn't understand this "other world" thing,i can't really argue with what you said,but it will be nice to share my thoughts on dreams with you..
For me dreams aren't messages from the other world,but messages from the self...they are parts of me,my thoughts,my wishes,my beliefs,fears etc...even with things about myself which still aren't very obvious to me...
they breathe with me While i'm sleeping,my body is resting,my mind is sure loose,but still it somehow works.... All my thoughts,beliefs,wishes,expectations,experiences from what has happened to me during my entire life and even the present etc are transformed into less obvious signs (hehe sounds tooooo Freudian,but well i think what the basis of his theory on dreams has some meaning-i can't accept everything he writes though) which actually have nothing to say me.....I don't believe they talk to me about the future...I mean that tney are connected with me and they actually have a meaning.Usually when i think about a dream i had i find out (or at least i think so) why I've had this dream...
I think it's interesting to do and funny
But unlike you I'm toooo lazy to write down my dreams...
I usually think on the dreams/parts of them when i manage to recall them and later i forget all about them.. (except for some strange dreams i've had)
All in all,for me dreams aren't nonsense,they is a reason why i've seen a dream,they are connected to myself,but i don't think they can tell me about my future (maybe they do,i don't know...who knows...i just don't believe they do )

well,maybe i am expressing myself in an awful/wrong way and none will really understand what i mean...

dreams... the most perfect imperfection . I... I think i dont dream anymore. My only dream is concealed by reality... and the only reality that does not dissapoints me is the reality I carry within my mind... mmm... i think im not expressing myself right

 

[Garm]

Originally posted by Melancholia

.....I don't believe they talk to me about the future...

Then you have not had a real dejavue (?). It is in fact quite spooky how perfectly alike a dream and a scene in the real world can be. When people actually say the exact same thing at the exact same time when the exact same thing happends, I think not is a mere coincidence. How could I forsee, in my younger days, that we would find and capture a fish in the school river, who is not wider than the lenght of my arm, and know what the other kids around me was going to say.
Even though science does not prove some things, then it does not mean that they are not true. Time upon time has science and wise men proved, however, that they too could could be certain of something that was wrong. In old Greece, they believed that women where not equal to men, and they were said to be the wise people of that time. I believe that we are as them, only on a bit "grander" scale

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by Garm
Even though science does not prove some things, then it does not mean that they are not true. Time upon time has science and wise men proved, however, that they too could could be certain of something that was wrong. In old Greece, they believed that women where not equal to men, and they were said to be the wise people of that time. I believe that we are as them, only on a bit "grander" scale

old greece was maybe home of the wise, but 'science' was something that hadn't happened yet. science - in the western world - is a method of speculation over reality, defined by some rules (such as replicability of experiments with similar results, trials and errors and way more) that were unknown in the classic world. therefore, gender-differences theories are not to be confused with modern science.
this said, it is undeniably true that science can only go so far, whereas imagination and wondering can cover every distance. it's important however not to mix the two factors in the process. you are entitled to believe you foresaw (or still foresee) something, but to try and call it objectively true or false is meddling with the same science that would object to your foreseeing in the first place.

rahvin.

 

[Garm]

Then what of early 20th century science of the body? They saw that women had a smaller brain, thus it became clear to them that women were more stupid than men. This "fact" is another proof of what science has mistaken by the hasty conclusion based upon the obvius law. And given more time I can come up with tons of other illution that science has created for you. Always take what you hear with a bit of sceptisism.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by Garm
Then what of early 20th century science of the body? They saw that women had a smaller brain, thus it became clear to them that women were more stupid than men. This "fact" is another proof of what science has mistaken by the hasty conclusion based upon the obvius law. And given more time I can come up with tons of other illution that science has created for you. Always take what you hear with a bit of sceptisism.

well, that goes for prophecies in dreams, too, don't you think?

besides, nobody ever saw that women have smaller brain, given that it's not true. during history, factoids of all kinds have been made up by so-called scientists that nevertheless weren't blessed with a scientific approach. none of that was 'science' the way i defined the term above, no matter what political or social power was involved in 'proving' those crappy theories true. the 'obvious law' as you call it i can't really see it in the example you provided: do women have smaller brains? no. is brain size vaguely related to intelligence? mostly, yes.
blaming science for the ever-present superstition of mankind is pointless, and i don't think it helps promote the cause of mysticism, either, since that's one field were skepticism is scarcely allowed.

rahvin.

 

[mourningstar]

perfect. my idea is well expressed by the previous message.
we must not confuse science with scientists.
science never claimed to have found the truth (since theories come and go with new experiments, informations, proofs). this is constitutional, and a theory could be considered a scientific one only when it is possible for us to falsified it.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by mourningstar
and a theory could be considered a scientific one only when it is possible for us to falsified it.

i can falsify the one about women having smaller brains allright, but that doesn't make it the tiniest bit more scientific.

 

[mourningstar]

Originally posted by rahvin


i can falsify the one about women having smaller brains allright, but that doesn't make it the tiniest bit more scientific.

i didn't say "anything that can be falsified is a scientific theory".
there must be something else, i guess.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by mourningstar
i didn't say "anything that can be falsified is a scientific theory".
there must be something else, i guess.

but i can't disprove that male/female brains are the same size. is this not scientific, then?

rahvin.

 

[discouraged1]

Yes, when I said 'another world', I meant subconcious.

Dreams, the messages form the self, the subconcious self, the dark self.

Mel,
you said "there is a reason why I've SEEN a dream",
and though it is something we WATCH indeed, like some thing on tv (and forget about, eventually); but, for me (to me),
I LIVE a dream.

It's a place where I've been, where I stood or ran or flought and when I wake up, I wonder,
"F ck, where have I been?!"...
And I try to remember, try to write 'em down before they vanish into the subconcious again.


"Some1 said, if you don't remember your dreams, then they never happened."