The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth General => Topic started by: General Disarray on March 18, 2011, 06:16:59 PM
-
Some people here have presented their dreams as evidence (often the only evidence they present) for certain aspects of FET. Is there any reason to believe that dreams accurately represent reality or that they could be used as valid evidence for a theory?
Obviously, dreams are not verifiable by others, so their credibility takes a hit right there, but do they have any other merit as evidence?
-
Some people here have presented their dreams as evidence (often the only evidence they present) for certain aspects of FET. Is there any reason to believe that dreams accurately represent reality or that they could be used as valid evidence for a theory?
Obviously, dreams are not verifiable by others, so their credibility takes a hit right there, but do they have any other merit as evidence?
If the Lord tells you something or gives you information in a dream, it is credible and can be used as evidence.
-
Some people here have presented their dreams as evidence (often the only evidence they present) for certain aspects of FET. Is there any reason to believe that dreams accurately represent reality or that they could be used as valid evidence for a theory?
Obviously, dreams are not verifiable by others, so their credibility takes a hit right there, but do they have any other merit as evidence?
If the Lord tells you something or gives you information in a dream, it is credible and can be used as evidence.
How would you differentiate between communication from the Lord and hallucination/delusion?
-
Carefully.
-
Some people here have presented their dreams as evidence (often the only evidence they present) for certain aspects of FET. Is there any reason to believe that dreams accurately represent reality or that they could be used as valid evidence for a theory?
Obviously, dreams are not verifiable by others, so their credibility takes a hit right there, but do they have any other merit as evidence?
If the Lord tells you something or gives you information in a dream, it is credible and can be used as evidence.
How would you differentiate between communication from the Lord and hallucination?
For one thing, don't take drugs. Then you probably won't hullicinate.
-
For one thing, don't take drugs be an idiot. Then you probably won't hullicinate be illiterate.
I don't think dreams can be completely dismissed, as they might have the potential to reveal otherwise hidden aspects of your subconscious. But to cite dream content as valid evidence of something completely removed from your personal experience is...well, it's the sort of thing you would expect somebody to resort to if they were in the difficult position of arguing in favor of shrimp-like bacteria on the moon (whether trolling or not).
-
From my own personal experience, I have never experienced a dream which I was later able to identify as being factually accurate.
-
From my own personal experience, I have never experienced a dream which I was later able to identify as being factually accurate.
I have not had the Lord give me info in a dream, but there are several times in the Bible where he has given info to people in dreams.
The Lord has told me things which were completely accurate. This info was attained during prayer time.
It was a still small voice, almost indiscernable, but completely accurate.
-
It depends on if you want to have a scientific debate or a philosophy debate.
-
From my own personal experience, I have never experienced a dream which I was later able to identify as being factually accurate.
I have not had the Lord give me info in a dream, but there are several times in the Bible where he has given info to people in dreams.
The Lord has told me things which were completely accurate. This info was attained during prayer time.
It was a still small voice, almost indiscernable, but completely accurate.
We're trying to be serious and talk about it from a scientific stand point.
-
While dreams shouldn;t be counted as truth
Master Lord Willmire's shouldn't be so easily dismissed,
He is a visionary and his dreams should be further investigated.
-
Science has no explanation for dreams. Actually what happens when you dream, you access other realities, other universes, but they are immaterial, vague places, so basically dreams are not very important. Hey Hoppy I didn't know you believed in God. You sided with atheists to attack me in another thread.
-
Science has no explanation for dreams.
False.
Actually what happens when you dream, you access other realities, other universes, but they are immaterial, vague places, so basically dreams are not very important.
How do you know this?
Hey Hoppy I didn't know you believed in God. You sided with atheists to attack me in another thread.
His signature is "God is real."
-
I believe that dreams are real. They exist. They occur.
-
Yeah they exist, they occur but do they mean anything? No
-
Yeah they exist, they occur but do they mean anything? No
If dream don't do us anything, why have the ability to dream? Just for the laughs?
-
Yeah they exist, they occur but do they mean anything? No
If dream don't do us anything, why have the ability to dream? Just for the laughs?
When you dream your soul is traveling through the multiverse, this is why you see yourself in unfamiliar environment, some people you recognize, some you don't. However those other realms and worlds that you see in your dreams are not real, they are immaterial, just vague possibilities stuck somewhere between dimensions, don't try to draw any meaning from it.
-
Yeah they exist, they occur but do they mean anything? No
If dream don't do us anything, why have the ability to dream? Just for the laughs?
When you dream your soul is traveling through the multiverse, this is why you see yourself in unfamiliar environment, some people you recognize, some you don't. However those other realms and worlds that you see in your dreams are not real, they are immaterial, just vague possibilities stuck somewhere between dimensions, don't try to draw any meaning from it.
Could it also be that our brains just sort out things while we're being subconscious?
Perhaps that dreams just takes us through events which we don't have experienced yet, but by dreaming them,
under safe conditions, we learn how to meet and react better, to those experiences in real life?
(If my english is still crap, and you don't understand shit, I'm not sorry!)
-
From my own personal experience, I have never experienced
So you admit your personal experience is rather poor.
-
Dreams can provide empirical data given certain criteria and have the capacity to provide a basis to convert this data to evidence.
You dream that a spider is in a cupboard in your home. In your dream the spider is trapped and is in need of assistance. Upon waking, you go the cupboard and the spider is there in need of assistance. The utility of the dream can not be disputed.
Whether this is an example of mind link or dream to empirical data to evidence conversion could be debated, but not whether data and evidence can be offered from the process.
-
I don't believe that dreams provide evidence of much of anything. However, I do believe that dreams can provide insights to many things. Please don't confuse insight with evidence.
-
Nightmares are real.
-
Except in the example stated you could propose the question "Is there evidence that empirical data has been originiated in a dream that has substantially contributed to the saving of a life?" and the answer will be yes.
How to distiquish between insight and evidence does beccome a task, however, but the evidence is tangible.
-
Insight itself is not evidence, however insight can lead you to evidence.
-
From my own personal experience, I have never experienced
So you admit your personal experience is rather poor.
I am merely giving the reason why I doubt dreams can accurately represent reality. I occasionally have dreams where I can fly, and I know this does not happen in reality.
-
Yeah they exist, they occur but do they mean anything? No
The question was "Are dreams real?''
The answer is an unequivocally "Yes".
-
Yeah they exist, they occur but do they mean anything? No
The question was "Are dreams real?''
The answer is an unequivocally "Yes".
That's just the name of the thread, Tom. Did you try reading the OP?
-
Yeah they exist, they occur but do they mean anything? No
The question was "Are dreams real?''
The answer is an unequivocally "Yes".
Perhaps you should read further rather than just title skimming.
-
Yeah they exist, they occur but do they mean anything? No
The question was "Are dreams real?''
The answer is an unequivocally "Yes".
Perhaps you should read further rather than just title skimming.
Don't ask Tom to do that, we would never have a point with anything he posts.
-
Yeah they exist, they occur but do they mean anything? No
The question was "Are dreams real?''
The answer is an unequivocally "Yes".
That's just the name of the thread, Tom. Did you try reading the OP?
I read the OP. The OP is asking something different than the title of this thread.
I've answered the question literally. Dreams exist. They are real.
His next question is "Is there any reason to believe that dreams accurately represent reality or that they could be used as valid evidence for a theory?"
The answer to this next question is that yes, dreams represent reality. It doesn't necessarily follow that reality reflects dreams, however.
A dream's use as evidence would depend on the context. For example; if I said that I solved an obscure mathematical riddle in a dream, I could submit my dream as evidence. There is nothing wrong with that.
-
But if you see moon shrimp in a dream, is that evidence that they exist? Or would it be more realistic to say it's the start of an idea that there might be shrimp on the moon, and further evidence is needed before conclusion?
-
I wonder what does moon shrimp taste like with some pasta dipped in alfredo sauce.
-
Dreams are not empirical evidence and it is trolling if they are used as such.
-
Dreams are not empirical evidence and it is trolling if they are used as such.
Funny, I dreamt last night that you would post the exact same thing.
-
Oh man, it is fixing to get all inceptional up in this.
-
My point is that when a dream is the only evidence presented for something (as it is many times here), I have reason to doubt its veracity.
-
My point is that when a dream is the only evidence presented for something (as it is many times here), I have reason to doubt its veracity.
The point is generally lost when FE'ers post because you have to avoid anything that proves you wrong.
-
Dreams are not empirical evidence and it is trolling if they are used as such.
Funny, I dreamt last night that you would post the exact same thing.
Good example!
Here the dream was a personal subjective experience, but it did not become evident (or evidence) until the point after Horatio made his comment.
No Dreams cannot be used by themselves as Empirical Evidence (Empirical yes, Evidence no)
Yes, Dreams do sometimes reflect reality, but often, they do not.
Yes, Dreams can lead us to solving problems we had when we went to sleep, but again, they do not become evident/evidence until you can manifest it and show the results of that dream in the morning (or sometime later if the morning is not convenient).
Yes, dreams can lead you to discover evidence, but they do not qualify as evidence. It may be real to you, but it won't be real to anyone else until it does become evident. It is the point where it becomes evident that is the evidence itself, not the idea that lead you there.
-
It would seem yet another person does not understand the difference between evidence (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/evidence) and proof (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/proof_1). I suggest correcting this.
-
Unless you wish to posit the existence of some kind of supernatural soul or self, then dreams are a product (and thus connected to and representative) of objective reality.
Moreover, I do believe that they accurately represent reality. I think most of us have dreams which for the most part accord with our day to day experiences, and many practised oneiromancers find dreams useful in guiding practical action. Indeed, many people awake from dreams with a newfound and seemingly intuitive understanding of themselves, other people and until then problematic real-life situations.
As for whether or not they can be "used as valid evidence for a theory", the obvious answers would be either a) yes, as they already are (even outside the FE/RE debate), or b) maybe, as whether or not they are considered valid evidence for a theory depends entirely on the theoretical framework in question.
-
Wilmore, insight is not the same as evidence.
-
Wilmore, insight is not the same as evidence.
Indeed. Insight (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/insight) is much more than evidence (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/evidence). Your point?
-
Wilmore, insight is not the same as evidence.
Yes, but the insight offered by dreams is evidence that dreams have a disclosive capacity, which appears to be what is in question.
-
It would seem yet another person does not understand the difference between evidence (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/evidence) and proof (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/proof_1). I suggest correcting this.
I'm not sure who this was directed at, but in case it was directed at me...
evidence : one or more reasons for believing that something is or is not true
Dreams, by themselves, do not meet this criteria. They are personal subjective manifestations of the subconscious imagination which may or may mot reflect reality. There is absolutely no reason to believe that a dream, by itself, will show something in reality as true or not true.
proof : a fact or piece of information which shows that something exists or is true
A proof qualifies as evidence, but evidence does not necessarily qualify as a proof. I'm well aware of the difference, but perhaps you were directing your comment at someone else?
-
Dreams can provide empirical data given certain criteria and have the capacity to provide a basis to convert this data to evidence.
Sure, it can be empircal, but not in the sense that it's actually proof of anything.
You dream that a spider is in a cupboard in your home. In your dream the spider is trapped and is in need of assistance. Upon waking, you go the cupboard and the spider is there in need of assistance. The utility of the dream can not be disputed.
What if I dream that I'm making love to Pamela Anderson, but upon waking up, find myself cold and alone in bed in a dark, empty house?
-
What if I dream that I'm making love to Pamela Anderson, but upon waking up, find myself cold and alone in bed in a dark, empty house?
Then you're probably too good at math. :'(
-
What if I dream that I'm making love to Pamela Anderson, but upon waking up, find myself cold and alone in bed in a dark, empty house?
Then you're probably too good at math. :'(
:D ROFL!!!! :D
-
OK Around and About, you couldn't take a joke that I made about math, so avengfully you decided to make it your signature? Some of you won't get laid not because you are good in math but because you have no sense of humor.
Anyways dreams are non sense. Today I saw a series of the most meaningless dreams ever; I was running away from big foot, then I saw myself in my dead grandmother's old house and she was alive talking to me. We were standing at her balcony and watching air balloons. Then my dad stole a Lexus SUV along with traffic light, I was pissed at him, because I knew he was gonna get caught. Then I went out with this hot Middle Easter girl, but at the same time her father was always by her side and she told me she was dating someone else or something like that. Then I went to a carnival but the rides and games were all closed and some marching band was parading around. I was half naked and carried an umbrella for some reason, while there was no rain.
Now you tell me if this series of dreams make any sense? lol
-
It makes no sense at all.
-
OK Around and About, you couldn't take a joke that I made about math, so avengfully you decided to make it your signature? Some of you won't get laid not because you are good in math but because you have no sense of humor.
He aint no coast banger son he aint into gangsta humor
-
Well at least he is not from Germany, or any other wanna be gangsta country lol
-
Wow...well, what is there to say after that?
-
If Einstein had dreamed up E=MC2 would his theories be any less valid?
If Newton had dreamed up F=MA would his theories be any less valid?
-
If Einstein had dreamed up E=MC2 would his theories be any less valid?
If Newton had dreamed up F=MA would his theories be any less valid?
If Stephen Hawking had dreamed up his theory of expanding space-time would his theory be any less valid?
The difference is between having something revealed to you in a dream that can later be verified and tested in the material world; and something revealed to you in a dream that only the dream itself is evidence for. I believe the latter is what the OP is asking about.
-
If Einstein had dreamed up E=MC2 would his theories be any less valid?
If Newton had dreamed up F=MA would his theories be any less valid?
If Stephen Hawking had dreamed up his theory of expanding space-time would his theory be any less valid?
The difference is between having something revealed to you in a dream that can later be verified and tested in the material world; and something revealed to you in a dream that only the dream itself is evidence for. I believe the latter is what the OP is asking about.
Exactly the point markjo was making.
Dr Bishop used to be a brilliant zeteticist but lately I think he might be spending a little too much time in the moonlight, if you know what I mean.
-
Weeellllp, they don't call it moonshine fer nuthin'.
-
So if the theories I refer to (the ones that only have people's dreams to back them up) were true, I would expect the dreams to be followed up with rigorous investigation to prove them. Sadly, this is not the case.
-
So if the theories I refer to (the ones that only have people's dreams to back them up) were true, I would expect the dreams to be followed up with rigorous investigation to prove them. Sadly, this is not the case.
Unfortunately, ascertaining whether or not Luna exist through non-oneiric means is not presently within our capacity. Also, it's worth pointing out that following up oneiric discoveries with "rigorous investigation" would not automatically make them "true".
-
A Dream is not evidence.
A Dream can be a good way to interpret evidence due to the change in brainwaves giving a new perspective.
Dreaming and seeing a flat earth means nothing at all.
After having seen a large ammount of evidence in support of flat earth and going to sleep undecided, then hacing a dream that reveals insight into that evidence which causes you to conclude the earth is flat could mean somthing.
The converse is also true
Neither constitutes evidence, but it can provide opinion.
This being the internet however, opinion is everywhere and valueless.
-
If Einstein had dreamed up E=MC2 would his theories be any less valid?
If Newton had dreamed up F=MA would his theories be any less valid?
If Stephen Hawking had dreamed up his theory of expanding space-time would his theory be any less valid?
The difference is between having something revealed to you in a dream that can later be verified and tested in the material world; and something revealed to you in a dream that only the dream itself is evidence for. I believe the latter is what the OP is asking about.
If I dream up 1+1=2 I don't need to test out my equation in the real world for it to be valid. The equation was already validated in my dream.
-
If Einstein had dreamed up E=MC2 would his theories be any less valid?
If Newton had dreamed up F=MA would his theories be any less valid?
If Stephen Hawking had dreamed up his theory of expanding space-time would his theory be any less valid?
The difference is between having something revealed to you in a dream that can later be verified and tested in the material world; and something revealed to you in a dream that only the dream itself is evidence for. I believe the latter is what the OP is asking about.
If I dream up 1+1=2 I don't need to test out my equation in the real world for it to be valid. The equation was already validated in my dream.
Tom, I thought that you were all about peer review. How do you peer review a dream?
-
If Einstein had dreamed up E=MC2 would his theories be any less valid?
If Newton had dreamed up F=MA would his theories be any less valid?
If Stephen Hawking had dreamed up his theory of expanding space-time would his theory be any less valid?
The difference is between having something revealed to you in a dream that can later be verified and tested in the material world; and something revealed to you in a dream that only the dream itself is evidence for. I believe the latter is what the OP is asking about.
If I dream up 1+1=2 I don't need to test out my equation in the real world for it to be valid. The equation was already validated in my dream.
Tom, I thought that you were all about peer review. How do you peer review a dream?
Telepathically linking minds before dreaming.
-
If I dream up 1+1=2 I don't need to test out my equation in the real world for it to be valid. The equation was already validated in my dream.
Uh oh...you weren't dreaming about rain, were you?
-
So if the theories I refer to (the ones that only have people's dreams to back them up) were true, I would expect the dreams to be followed up with rigorous investigation to prove them. Sadly, this is not the case.
Unfortunately, ascertaining whether or not Luna exist through non-oneiric means is not presently within our capacity. Also, it's worth pointing out that following up oneiric discoveries with "rigorous investigation" would not automatically make them "true".
Yeah... but not testing it beyond only oneiric means ALSO does not make it true either, in fact it doesn't provide any useful evidence at all... and yet there are a number of people that swear by it as "the gospel truth" on this site. At least some "rigorous investigation" could provide some evidence to their existence or to the probability that they might be completely fictitious and the product of someone's dreams only.
-
If Einstein had dreamed up E=MC2 would his theories be any less valid?
If Newton had dreamed up F=MA would his theories be any less valid?
If Stephen Hawking had dreamed up his theory of expanding space-time would his theory be any less valid?
The difference is between having something revealed to you in a dream that can later be verified and tested in the material world; and something revealed to you in a dream that only the dream itself is evidence for. I believe the latter is what the OP is asking about.
If I dream up 1+1=2 I don't need to test out my equation in the real world for it to be valid. The equation was already validated in my dream.
This is erroneous thinking, you are using an example that you know is true before you even had the dream. You already knew 1+1=2, so dreaming about 1+1=2 does not contribute and valid evidence to a fact that was already known ahead of time.
If Newton had dreamed up F=MA, if Einstein had dreamed up E=MC2, if Stephen Hawking had dreamed up his theory of expanding space-time, then they would all still have to study the idea in the real world and demonstrate (provide real world evidence) that it was (at least somewhat) an accurate reflection of reality. Just dreaming up anything and submitting that as your sole source of evidence is not credible by itself without further external testing and study of the idea itself, not the dream interpretation in particular.