Dreams & Rationalism

@mister kitten,

If we must speak through tags, then so be it.
I don't think the two are very remote. I have knowledge of my dreams, and the dreams come without the help of the senses.
Score one for rationalism?

0 Replies

@mister kitten,

mister kitten wrote:

Are dreams proof of rationalism? Or soft empiricism?

Are dreams a knowledge of a kind without the senses?

A person without his/her senses would be in a state of dream-like experience?

Wherever did you get the idea that dreams are a source of knowledge. If I dream that my house is on fire, that is no reason to believe that my house in on fire.

2 Replies

@kennethamy,

I didn't say that dreams are a source of knowledge...notice the question marks.
I have knowledge of my dreams; isn't that knowledge independent of my senses?

1 Reply

@mister kitten,

mister kitten wrote:

I didn't say that dreams are a source of knowledge...notice the question marks.
I have knowledge of my dreams; isn't that knowledge independent of my senses?

No more than that knowledge that I have a headache is independent of my senses.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

The experience of dreams is independent of the senses, but the knowledge is not?
Experience and knowledge are separate.

What about lucid dreaming?
Having knowledge of being within a dream and experiencing it at once.
As similar as one has knowledge of having that headache and experiencing it.

1 Reply

@mister kitten,

mister kitten wrote:

The experience of dreams is independent of the senses, but the knowledge is not?
Experience and knowledge are separate.

What about lucid dreaming?
Having knowledge of being within a dream and experiencing it at once.
As similar as one has knowledge of having that headache and experiencing it.

Hi mister kitten! The nature of dream images is smack dab in the middle of the whole history of philosophy, since they suggest the nature of ideas.

And what is connecting remote dots supposed to mean? Who wrote that?

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy wrote:

Wherever did you get the idea that dreams are a source of knowledge. If I dream that my house is on fire, that is no reason to believe that my house in on fire.

Seems someone has never woken up panicked from a dream with a real will to save himself from whatever s/he was dreaming. Obviously you knew something in the dream, or knew it long enough to act upon it. We know lots of things that may not be 'true' or 'real'. If you know it enough to act upon it, then you know it well enough to know it. Its material veracity is inconsequential at the point of action, and at the point of action one has committed him/herself to that knowledge as being true.

1 Reply

@GoshisDead,

GoshisDead wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

Wherever did you get the idea that dreams are a source of knowledge. If I dream that my house is on fire, that is no reason to believe that my house in on fire.

Seems someone has never woken up panicked from a dream with a real will to save himself from whatever s/he was dreaming. Obviously you knew something in the dream, or knew it long enough to act upon it. We know lots of things that may not be 'true' or 'real'. If you know it enough to act upon it, then you know it well enough to know it. Its material veracity is inconsequential at the point of action, and at the point of action one has committed him/herself to that knowledge as being true.

What has the fact, if it is a fact, that a dream frightens me, have to do with whether a dream is a source of knowledge? If I get out of bed when I dream that the house is afire and call the fire department, what knowledge do I have? Do I know the house is on fire? No, I do not, since it is not on fire. So, just what are you talking about? (All knowledge is true, else it would not be knowledge).

1 Reply

@Arjuna,

Hi Arjuna : )
Somebody tagged the thread in the "Connecting Very Remote Dots" forum.

1 Reply

@mister kitten,

mister kitten wrote:

Hi Arjuna : )
Somebody tagged the thread in the "Connecting Very Remote Dots" forum.

I never really noticed the tags before. That really pissed me off last night. 'Course I was frustrated from a long day of frustrations... but still... that's lame. You'd think if somebody had a pee-head comment to make... ok, it's still pissing me off.

One of the things your post made me think of is ideals. I once traveled to North Dakota in a dream. A picture of a map of the US appeared with a dotted line showing my progress. I was trying to hide from the mafia. The way it looked in the dream is the way I think about Platonic ideals.

1 Reply

@Arjuna,

Arjuna wrote:

mister kitten wrote:

Hi Arjuna : )
Somebody tagged the thread in the "Connecting Very Remote Dots" forum.

I never really noticed the tags before. That really pissed me off last night. 'Course I was frustrated from a long day of frustrations... but still... that's lame. You'd think if somebody had a pee-head comment to make... ok, it's still pissing me off.

One of the things your post made me think of is ideals. I once traveled to North Dakota in a dream. A picture of a map of the US appeared with a dotted line showing my progress. I was trying to hide from the mafia. The way it looked in the dream is the way I think about Platonic ideals.

You did not travel to North Dakota in a dream. You dreamed that you traveled to North Dakota. You did not travel to North Dakota at all, unless you did so while sleeping, and that had nothing to do with dreaming you traveled to North Dakota.

I traveled to North Dakota in a plane implies you traveled to North Dakota. But I traveled to North Dakota in a dream does not imply you traveled to North Dakota because all that means is that you dreamed you traveled to North Dakota, and that does not imply that you traveled to North Dakota.

"Philosophy is a constant battle against the bewitchment of the intelligence by language" Wittgenstein

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

Relevantly, there's a theory that speech first developed when humans felt driven to communicate their dreams to each other.

The already functioning Wernicke's and Broca centers entered some relation with the frontal lobe to allow expression of abstraction.

I have travelled to North Dakota, by the way.

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

kennethamy wrote:

GoshisDead wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

Wherever did you get the idea that dreams are a source of knowledge. If I dream that my house is on fire, that is no reason to believe that my house in on fire.

Seems someone has never woken up panicked from a dream with a real will to save himself from whatever s/he was dreaming. Obviously you knew something in the dream, or knew it long enough to act upon it. We know lots of things that may not be 'true' or 'real'. If you know it enough to act upon it, then you know it well enough to know it. Its material veracity is inconsequential at the point of action, and at the point of action one has committed him/herself to that knowledge as being true.

What has the fact, if it is a fact, that a dream frightens me, have to do with whether a dream is a source of knowledge? If I get out of bed when I dream that the house is afire and call the fire department, what knowledge do I have? Do I know the house is on fire? No, I do not, since it is not on fire. So, just what are you talking about? (All knowledge is true, else it would not be knowledge).

Just as people acted in their lives as if the earth was flat until they didn't. You will act as if your house is on fire until you don't. "Facts" and "reality" don't mean a thing if you are convinced of something else. This is not an epitemological thing, this is a behavioral thing. I can then redefine "knowing" or justification. In your dream you are justified to be afraid. You can arbitrarily define what "knowing" something is until you are blue in the face, and it will never matter. If you have the will to act on something out of belief, that is what changes things, that is what makes you you. The fact of a bus speeding in your direction is nothing compared to the results of you not believing in that bus. In a dream if you believe in that dream as reality you will act as such until such time as you no longer believe. The truth in justified true belief is the point of knowing that you will never truely know and that tuely doesn't matter. If you only acted upon things that you have truth verified you would not get very far in your day.

1 Reply

@GoshisDead,

GoshisDead wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

GoshisDead wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

Wherever did you get the idea that dreams are a source of knowledge. If I dream that my house is on fire, that is no reason to believe that my house in on fire.

Seems someone has never woken up panicked from a dream with a real will to save himself from whatever s/he was dreaming. Obviously you knew something in the dream, or knew it long enough to act upon it. We know lots of things that may not be 'true' or 'real'. If you know it enough to act upon it, then you know it well enough to know it. Its material veracity is inconsequential at the point of action, and at the point of action one has committed him/herself to that knowledge as being true.

What has the fact, if it is a fact, that a dream frightens me, have to do with whether a dream is a source of knowledge? If I get out of bed when I dream that the house is afire and call the fire department, what knowledge do I have? Do I know the house is on fire? No, I do not, since it is not on fire. So, just what are you talking about? (All knowledge is true, else it would not be knowledge).

Just as people acted in their lives as if the earth was flat until they didn't. You will act as if your house is on fire until you don't. "Facts" and "reality" don't mean a thing if you are convinced of something else. This is not an epitemological thing, this is a behavioral thing. I can then redefine "knowing" or justification. In your dream you are justified to be afraid. You can arbitrarily define what "knowing" something is until you are blue in the face, and it will never matter. If you have the will to act on something out of belief, that is what changes things, that is what makes you you. The fact of a bus speeding in your direction is nothing compared to the results of you not believing in that bus. In a dream if you believe in that dream as reality you will act as such until such time as you no longer believe. The truth in justified true belief is the point of knowing that you will never truely know and that tuely doesn't matter. If you only acted upon things that you have truth verified you would not get very far in your day.

What has any of that to do with whether dreaming your house is on fire is evidence for your house being on fire? Answer: nothing at all.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy wrote:

GoshisDead wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

GoshisDead wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

Wherever did you get the idea that dreams are a source of knowledge. If I dream that my house is on fire, that is no reason to believe that my house in on fire.

Seems someone has never woken up panicked from a dream with a real will to save himself from whatever s/he was dreaming. Obviously you knew something in the dream, or knew it long enough to act upon it. We know lots of things that may not be 'true' or 'real'. If you know it enough to act upon it, then you know it well enough to know it. Its material veracity is inconsequential at the point of action, and at the point of action one has committed him/herself to that knowledge as being true.

What has the fact, if it is a fact, that a dream frightens me, have to do with whether a dream is a source of knowledge? If I get out of bed when I dream that the house is afire and call the fire department, what knowledge do I have? Do I know the house is on fire? No, I do not, since it is not on fire. So, just what are you talking about? (All knowledge is true, else it would not be knowledge).

Just as people acted in their lives as if the earth was flat until they didn't. You will act as if your house is on fire until you don't. "Facts" and "reality" don't mean a thing if you are convinced of something else. This is not an epitemological thing, this is a behavioral thing. I can then redefine "knowing" or justification. In your dream you are justified to be afraid. You can arbitrarily define what "knowing" something is until you are blue in the face, and it will never matter. If you have the will to act on something out of belief, that is what changes things, that is what makes you you. The fact of a bus speeding in your direction is nothing compared to the results of you not believing in that bus. In a dream if you believe in that dream as reality you will act as such until such time as you no longer believe. The truth in justified true belief is the point of knowing that you will never truely know and that tuely doesn't matter. If you only acted upon things that you have truth verified you would not get very far in your day.

What has any of that to do with whether dreaming your house is on fire is evidence for your house being on fire? Answer: nothing at all.

Yeah nothing, it has to do with the arbitrarily defined 'nature' of knowledge which you are imposing on the OP's question

1 Reply

@GoshisDead,

Yeah nothing, it has to do with the arbitrarily defined 'nature' of knowledge which you are imposing on the OP's question
[/quote]

I don't understand what you mean. Unless you believe (with some occultists) that dreams are somehow predictive, so that what we dream is a reliable indicator of future events (which is clearly false) then the op question which is whether dreams are a source of knowledge is clearly answered by, no. I have no idea what you can mean by the "arbitrarily defined 'nature' of knowledge". But I am content that you realize that your reply had nothing to do with the issue. What it had to do with I have no idea, since I did not understand it in the least. Don't you mean by "knowledge" what "knowledge" means? If not, why not?

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

It alright Ken if you don't get it after a couple years its not gonna sink in.

2 Replies

@GoshisDead,

GoshisDead wrote:

It alright Ken if you don't get it after a couple years its not gonna sink in.

I'd suggest noticing how "confidence" and "knowledge" evoke the same thing... but I know better than to expect any sinking there either.

2 Replies

@GoshisDead,

GoshisDead wrote:

It alright Ken if you don't get it after a couple years its not gonna sink in.

Except that I strongly suspect that there is nothing to "get". In any case, whatever you are saying (whatever that is) has to do with psychology or sociology, and not much, if anything, with philosophy. So, it does not concern me that I don't get it (even supposing that there is something to get). Of course, if you could translate what you are saying into something that resembles ordinary English, we might make some progress. But I have tried to decipher too much of what you write to hope for that. Academese seems to be your native language. And I am not versed in academese.

1 Reply

Dreams & Rationalism

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know