"Dream interpretation is nonsense"

Cavehill Red

Fuinseog wrote: »

dreams are supposed to tell you something

Says who?
The only scientists who attribute any meaning to dream content are those who consider dreams to be threat and courtship rehearsals.
Oh, and psychoanalysts, but they've got as much credibility as Mrs Muggins with her magic ball.

Kanoe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Says who?
The only scientists who attribute any meaning to dream content are those who consider dreams to be threat and courtship rehearsals.
Oh, and psychoanalysts, but they've got as much credibility as Mrs Muggins with her magic ball.

Take what you want from it, if it doesn't apply to you then walk away.

Cavehill Red

zxy wrote: »

Take what you want from it, if it doesn't apply to you then walk away.

I'm only clarifying that any claim to 'dream interpretation' is scientifically speaking an act of fantasy, nothing more.

Kanoe

actually the process of dream interpretation can assist people in accessing the subconscious, which can be used to help alleviate or understand underlying symptoms of concern, for instance in cases of depression or anxiety, especially where expression might otherwise be difficult.


you might be insterested in reading this

Cavehill Red

More charlatans. See here: http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/35828845/Human-Givens-Therapy-The-Evidence-Base

Kanoe

you are entitled to your opinion and your own set of beliefs, the fact of the matter is sleeping and dreaming is an important and integral process necessary for our health and wellbeing. Choosing to understand it is not a game of fortune telling and I have no interest in challenging your disregard for it.

Cavehill Red

zxy wrote: »

you are entitled to your opinion and your own set of beliefs, the fact of the matter is sleeping and dreaming is an important and integral process necessary for our health and wellbeing.

Absolutely correct. It functions to rest the body and stimulate the mind in a safe environment.
Anything asserted about dreaming beyond that is either speculation or spoofery.

zxy wrote: »

Choosing to understand it is not a game of fortune telling and I have no interest in challenging your disregard for it.

I was hopeful to find this particular forum to be a launchpad for discussion on issues like REM research and sleep disorders.
I was dismayed to find it populated by threads promoting the equivalent of tarot card reading.

Kanoe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Absolutely correct. It functions to rest the body and stimulate the mind in a safe environment.
Anything asserted about dreaming beyond that is either speculation or spoofery.



I was hopeful to find this particular forum to be a launchpad for discussion on issues like REM research and sleep disorders.
I was dismayed to find it populated by threads promoting the equivalent of tarot card reading.

There is plenty of information in the resources thread on sleep disorders and rem research, the above link actually contains some if you were to read it. The forum itself is titled sleeping and dreaming and was designed to accommodate peoples desire to express as much. The fact that you don't approve of the subject matter is irrelevant and understanding the meaning of metaphors, sleeping or waking doesn't require faith to work and the ability to construct a meaningful solution nothing more than experience of the human condition.

Cavehill Red

zxy wrote: »

There is plenty of information in the resources thread on sleep disorders and rem research, the above link actually contains some if you were to read it. The forum itself is titled sleeping and dreaming and was designed to accommodate peoples desire to express as much. The fact that you don't approve of the subject matter is irrelevant and understanding the meaning of metaphors, sleeping or waking doesn't require faith to work and the ability to construct a meaningful solution nothing more than experience of the human condition.

The fact that you disapprove of me highlighting the unscientific nature of oneiromancy is also irrelevant.
It's demonstrably an act of faith to ascribe meanings to dreams or to claim to be able to 'interpret' them.
I consider it a public service to let people know that according to the best scientific research, dreams have no semantic relevance and are meaningful at best only in the sense of abstractly functioning as rehearsals of threat or courtship experiences.

Kanoe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

The fact that you disapprove of me highlighting the unscientific nature of oneiromancy is also irrelevant.
It's demonstrably an act of faith to ascribe meanings to dreams or to claim to be able to 'interpret' them.
I consider it a public service to let people know that according to the best scientific research, dreams have no semantic relevance and are meaningful at best only in the sense of abstractly functioning as rehearsals of threat or courtship experiences.

Actually it's your inability to recgnise that dream interpretation is not "oneiromancy" as it has no bearing on divination, nor is it about predicting the future; that demonstrates your ignorance of the subject.
Perhaps if you were to actually read the informtaion provided you might understand that. The process of dream interpretation is not an art form, its a very simple method of recognising that dreaming is functional process of the brain filing and storing information gathered during the previous day. Therefore, It is NOT irresponsible to want to garner insight into oneself.

I strongly suggest you take your own concerns into a new thread, I'm sure there are others out there who would be happy to discuss these issues with you.

Cavehill Red

zxy wrote: »

Actually it's your inability to recgnise that dream interpretation is not "oneiromancy" as it has no bearing on divination, nor is it about predicting the future that I disapprove of.

Claiming to interpret dreams by ascribing meaning to them is no less nonsensical than claiming to tell the future.

zxy wrote: »

It is NOT irresponsible to want to garner insight into oneself.

Of course not. But inventing meanings for dreams is not in any way garnering insight into anything, other than the level of fantasy of the 'interpreter' and the level of gullibility of the dreamer.

zxy wrote: »

Perhaps if you were to actually read the informtaion provided you might understand that. The process of dream interpretation is not an art form, its a very simple method of recognising that dreaming is functional process of the brain filing and storing information.

Would you care to provide peer-reviewed evidence for that assertion?

zxy wrote: »

I strongly suggest you take your own concerns into a new thread, I'm sure there are others out there who would be happy to discuss these issues with you.

Your suggestion has been noted. However, I have the same right to be here as you.

Kanoe

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Claiming to interpret dreams by ascribing meaning to them is no less nonsensical than claiming to tell the future.

no, it isn't. It concerned with understanding topics that are being dealt with presently, or have caused issue in the past.

Of course not. But inventing meanings for dreams is not in any way garnering insight into anything, other than the level of fantasy of the 'interpreter' and the level of gullibility of the dreamer.

Understanding metaphor isn't exactly rocket science, it's a process of recognition.

Would you care to provide peer-reviewed evidence for that assertion?

The paper links to every contributor, try and actually read it.

Your suggestion has been noted. However, I have the same right to be here as you.

and believe me, I'm only here becuse you asked the question. I will contact a mod and request that this thread be either moved or recycled to allow you have your own space, it's hardly fair on the op to have this thread deginerate into debate for the sake of your own personal grievance.

DublinWriter

Skeleton in the closet, perhaps?

Fuinseog

Your suggestion has been noted. However, I have the same right to be here as you.[/QUOTE]

indeed you do, but perhaps you could open a new thread as it appears to be staying from my original post.
thanks to those who gave interesting input on my dream.

Goodshape

I've split this thread from the original interpreting a dream thread.

Debate and scepticism is perfectly welcome, in my opinion, but not if it causes other threads to be derailed.

Cavehill Red

zxy wrote: »

no, it isn't. It concerned with understanding topics that are being dealt with presently, or have caused issue in the past.

No, it claims to do that, but there is no evidence to support it whatsoever.

zxy wrote: »

Understanding metaphor isn't exactly rocket science, it's a process of recognition.

Ascribing the content of dreams to semantic meanings is not a 'process of recognition', but an act of faith or charlatanism.

zxy wrote: »

The paper links to every contributor, try and actually read it.

That's not what I asked for. I asked for you to present some peer-reviewed research supporting your position, and you have thus far failed to do so.

zxy wrote: »

and believe me, I'm only here becuse you asked the question. I will contact a mod and request that this thread be either moved or recycled to allow you have your own space, it's hardly fair on the op to have this thread deginerate into debate for the sake of your own personal grievance.

I don't have a personal grievance. I am merely curious about what qualifies you to tell other people what their dreams 'mean', given the scientific fact that they have no semantic meaning.

Kanoe

Hi Cavehill.
First of all, I don't come here and tell people what their dreams mean, I offer suggestions based on my understanding of how the information can be applied and I've only done this once or twice. (here and here and I responded to the one which spawned this thread.)
I base my understanding on the expectation fulfilment theory put forward by Tyrell and Griffen which is explained here.

All opinions cast about dreaming and the rem state are theoretical and there is no scientific document stating that dreaming serves no purpose. All the theory's put forward are based on documented evidence of current understanding of how the brain works, which in itself is limited. The expectation fulfillment theory is a combination of previously studied theories and current biologlical understanding of rem sleep.
The theory itself is new and still being peer reviewed

First, has any evidence against the expectation fulfilment theory been put forward? Since it was first published 12 years ago, it has been looked at by professors at various universities. Professor Hans Eysenck of the Institute of Psychiatry saw it at the very beginning and advised me to publish it in book form, to do it justice. Lots of other people working in dream research have looked at it as well, and no flaws have been identified in the theory, to date.

There is, however, a considerable amount of evidence in support of it. First is the experiment I carried out, the findings of which were published in The Therapist,[18] predecessor of the Human Givens journal, and then in book form, in The Origin of Dreams,[19] and further updated in Dreaming Reality (see right).[20] It was the first time in scientific dream research, I believe, that someone set out to predict their own dreams, with the hypothesis that dreams relate to emotional experiences of the day before a hypothesis that has since been well validated. Dreams do involve waking emotional material.

I've always been interested in sleeping and dreaming (it's my favourite pastime ) but unfortunately I keep a busy schedule these days so I don't have the time to go through an in-depth evaluation of scientific studies of rem with you, but I do hope you will read the information provided and check out the references as they do provide a lot of interesting material.
best of luck.

Cavehill Red

zxy wrote: »

Hi Cavehill.
First of all, I don't come here and tell people what their dreams mean, I offer suggestions based on my understanding of how the information can be applied and I've only done this once or twice. (here and here and I responded to the one which spawned this thread.)
I base my understanding on the expectation fulfilment theory put forward by Tyrell and Griffen which is explained here.

And I've already cited how the Human Givens Institute provide no peer-reviewed evidence for their assumptions.
Nor, incidentally, do Jungian psychoanalysts, the only other group of charlatans to peddle oneiromancy with a pseudoscientific spoof justification.

zxy wrote: »

All opinions cast about dreaming and the rem state are theoretical and there is no scientific document stating that dreaming serves no purpose.

That's not the same as saying dreams have semantic meaning. Of course dreaming serves a variety of purposes, including threat rehearsal, courtship rehearsal and maintaining the brain in an active state while the body rests.

zxy wrote: »

All the theory's put forward are based on documented evidence of current understanding of how the brain works, which in itself is limited. The expectation fulfillment theory is a combination of previously studied theories and current biologlical understanding of rem sleep.
The theory itself is new and still being peer reviewed

First posited nearly 20 years ago, actually and yet STILL not peer reviewed. ROFL.

zxy wrote: »

I've always been interested in sleeping and dreaming (it's my favourite pastime ) but unfortunately I keep a busy schedule these days so I don't have the time to go through an in-depth evaluation of scientific studies of rem with you, but I do hope you will read the information provided and check out the references as they do provide a lot of interesting material.
best of luck.

When I was at college, there was an annual fundraising event, and I would appear as a tarot card reader and fortune teller. Using cold reading, I was able to astound many gullible people quite easily by telling them things they clearly wanted to hear, and informing them about themselves in ways that they could not discern, yet were quite simple to achieve.
It's self-evident that, just like those whose cards I 'read', those seeking 'meaning' from their dreams are likewise keen to a) discuss themselves, b) gain attention in ways that perhaps their lives do not currently provide, c) wish to have certain assumptions about their lives confirmed and d) are susceptible to suggestion.
There is NO scientific basis for dream interpretation, and the practice of such is oneiromancy.