I had a dream OR am I psychic

[Aylen]

 

This video feels relevant for some reason but not sure why, yet.



she shines
in a world full of ugliness
she matters when everything is meaningless

fragile
she doesn't see her beauty
she tries to get away
sometimes
it's just that nothing seems worth saving
I can't watch her slip away

I won't let you fall apart

she reads the minds of all the people as they pass her by
hoping someone can see
if I could fix myself I'd - but it's too late for me

I wont let you fall apart

we'll find the perfect place to go where we can run and hide
I'll build a wall and we can keep them on the other side
...but they keep waiting
...and picking...

it's something I have to do
I was there, too
before everything else
I was like you

This is how it happens with me. I often have a dream and it comes true or I get the answer to a question I have been thinking about. I tend to give myself my own answers and last night I received an answer in a dream. Having said that, in 7 out of 10 situations I am most likely to accept a metaphysical/mystical/supernatural explanation over logical, if the two are of equal weight in my mind.

Since I was very young I have always been able to predict what comes next in movies, books... This seems to amaze some sensing types and annoy some logical types. Last night I had a dream that pretty much explains my process. I woke up "knowing" the socionics types of my immediate family, with the exception of one, who I am divided about.

So I am going to try to describe my process "logically"...

While it appears I am just playing around listening to music, writing, focused on poetry or whatever, I am actually taking in bits of information from different sources. I like to compare my brain to a "dual core processor computer"... I am pretty good at understanding systems but I do it randomly. My step-dad would be annoyed at me for not studying even though I was able to pass tests without a lot of worry. He didn't understand my method of learning. He just thought I was wasting time on music and friends. In reality I was taking in some details here and there then putting them into categories in my head. It was only when I had enough random details that I would go to sleep and wake up just "knowing" something.

So, here is how it works according to my dream. My information is fragmented but there is still enough to "predict" outcomes with some accuracy without knowing the big picture. Once I do have enough random information input I go to sleep and that is when "defragmentation" commences. It is only then that I wake up with a "big picture" and just intuitively understand the system (belief) whatever that system maybe. It takes very little conscious thought on my part because like a computer I am not actually judging the information as I take it in. I see patterns and trends well enough to make accurate assessments but it is only when I have enough input that I see all the random bits of info and can say, yes I can see how the system works.

This was actually helpful for me in computer tech school since I had a strong desire to be top of my class and I was. My teacher even had me work with some of the guys that just weren't getting it. My biggest problem in class came when I had to learn things in proper sequence...the best example was building a computer step by step. This overwhelmed me because I had trouble learning in sequence and remembering. I made myself sick and took 3 weeks off school because of it. It was the only class I received a B+ in and I was totally disappointed in myself even though in all my other classes I had A or A+. I eventually got over it but I was depressed over a stupid B+ for months. I wish I knew more about how I learn back then...I would have been easier on myself.

So yeah, my dream helped me wake up intuitively knowing the types of people I am close to and how/why we relate the way we do. I may edit them in later and share how I typed them but I just wanted to share this for now. Of course I understand socionics is limited in it's ability to predict intertype relations but it is pretty good with some surface stuff and is easy enough to understand how to use it to make interactions easier. It seems almost manipulative in some ways to avoid certain topics or whatever to increase compatibility. I wouldn't use this system with my close friends, family or anyone I wanted a meaningful relationship with. They're gonna see all of me, good, bad or indifferent.

[Not A Communist Shill]

But how many instances have you predicted something and it did not happen?

I probably have several such instances everyday but I don't think anything of it. It would be more amazing if such things did not happen.

[Not A Communist Shill]

I remember getting into an argument with ephemeros because of him having a similar position based on one instance where he said a word and it was somehow exact to some incident...

Even at the base level there must be many times a week when for example I say a word and someone else e.g. on tv or the radio also says it. As for 'predicting' events, there is nothing too remarkable about being 'right' sometimes, particularly if the two comparatives are suitably vague.

further to that, I don't believe that so-called psychics have ever been shown to do better than random chance! (Is random chance in itself mysterious?)

[Aylen]

I remember getting into an argument with ephemeros because of him having a similar position based on one instance where he said a word and it was somehow exact to some incident...

Even at the base level there must be many times a week when for example I say a word and someone else e.g. on tv or the radio also says it. As for 'predicting' events, there is nothing too remarkable about being 'right' sometimes, particularly if the two comparatives are suitably vague.

further to that, I don't believe that so-called psychics have ever been shown to do better than random chance! (Is random chance in itself mysterious?)

Not when "random" is your natural way of being??? You remind me so much of my younger sister who is now definitely an EII within the socionics framework.

Edit: I grew up in a family where "psychic ability" is actually a natural thing, and taken for granted cause we all have these abilities to different degrees. My mom is either ESI or LSI but still very psychic. So we don't see it as supernatural except when discussing with others who do.

An example...my mom has dreamt about friends and family who were pregnant and then told them before they even knew. For me it is death. I dream all the deaths before they happen. I can easily distinguish a real death dream from a symbolic. They "feel" different. So my mom is the birth and I am the death. A guy, I was involved with (complicated business relationship since he fell in love), who was pretty intuitive too said he saw me as his widow, my best friend as his spiritual wife and his girlfriend as his legal wife. It all made sense later, symbolically.

[Esaman]

Normal workings of subconscious. On the good side.

[blackburry]

There is no way you are not psychic. I'm sorry. It is your fate.

[Aylen]

There is no way you are not psychic. I'm sorry. It is your fate.

Aylen + Edgar Cayce 4eva

I read he had problems learning but fell asleep on a stack of books and woke up "knowing" the information, or something like that.

Edit: This is an example of where astrology describes me better than socionics. Just adding here to avoid another post to my count.

[rat1]

I remember getting into an argument with ephemeros because of him having a similar position based on one instance where he said a word and it was somehow exact to some incident...

Even at the base level there must be many times a week when for example I say a word and someone else e.g. on tv or the radio also says it. As for 'predicting' events, there is nothing too remarkable about being 'right' sometimes, particularly if the two comparatives are suitably vague.

further to that, I don't believe that so-called psychics have ever been shown to do better than random chance! (Is random chance in itself mysterious?)

You know light will change from a wave to a particle state with observation. But did you know it will change prior to the observation? In other words, light actually tunnels ahead through time (somehow, we have no idea), and anticipates whether it will be observed; it changes before observation happens, in prediction of it.

So in physics light behaves clairvoyantly.


@Aylen you have this in the ascendant (the first house)
This is a Ketu Neptune conjunction description taken from the book 'the rahu ketu experience':

"This is one of the most esoteric combinations . ... This combination represents extreme, complex, and intense emotional states. In other words it is a psychologist's nightmare. These emotional states are different in their quality than the normal emotions represented by inner planets like Moon and Venus. They can cause severe sense of alienation and estrangement. In its negative aspect it can cause mental derangement by distorting the psyche. It is very easy for this combination to fall prey to drugs, intoxicants, and hallucinations. [...] Just like Rahu-Neptune conjunction, this is the combination of visionaries, mystics, utopians, idealists, prophets, dreamers, clairvoyants, and the like. The only difference being that such gifts are brought over from past [experience]. [...]

In the same vein as Rahu-Neptune conjunction, when working through the higher principle the combination produces people who utilize their talents for the collective betterment. It gives a highly refined sensibility and sensitivity to the higher realms of existence. Dreams, visions, fantasy and imagination form an important part of this combination. [...]

... this combination can help one gain access to the secrets of creation. This combination is thus the closest of a two planet combination gets to bestowing emancipation. ..."

[Not A Communist Shill]

You know light will change from a wave to a particle state with observation. But did you know it will change prior to the observation? In other words, light actually tunnels ahead through time (somehow, we have no idea), and anticipates whether it will be observed; it changes before observation happens, in prediction of it.

So in physics light behaves clairvoyantly.

The observer effect in no way demonstrates clairvoyancy, and recent experiments have shown that such an effect can at least partly be explained by the manner in which the observation is carried out. There is no reason to think that the observer effect is caused by anything other than interference.

[rat1]

A partial alternate explanation is not an explanation, much less a refutation. There is every reason to think the observer effect is a real effect; you are speculating it's only caused by interference. The observer effect is well recorded, not explained by just interference, and rejecting the best explanation while searching for a better one is not more reasonable or more scientific.

The observer effect itself does not explain clairvoyancy. The unexplained behavior of light entangling across time might. This is a possible mechanism which is not understood. That is all.

It amuses me when you try to pass off pure skepticism as science.

EDIT: Observation itself is a source of interference. Demonstrating other sources of interference shows nothing about observation. It's as if you're stating observation has no correspondence in reality.

[Park]

[rat1]

Another observer

[Not A Communist Shill]

I didn't actually say that the observer effect wasn't a real effect. I said that clairvoyancy isn't a real effect, as it has zero evidence going for it and has always been proven to be total bullshit.

[Aylen]

Another observer

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc...04/10/image/a/

"Starry Night," Vincent van Gogh's famous painting, is renowned for its bold whorls of light sweeping across a raging night sky. Although this image of the heavens came only from the artist's restless imagination, a new picture from NASA's Hubble Space Telescope bears remarkable similarities to the van Gogh work, complete with never-before-seen spirals of dust swirling across trillions of miles of interstellar space.

[rat1]

I didn't actually say that the observer effect wasn't a real effect. I said that clairvoyancy isn't a real effect, as it has zero evidence going for it and has always been proven to be total bullshit.

... I don't know what the point in bringing up interference is then. If observation itself is interference than interference is an erroneous concept.

THere is evidence for clairvoyance; you haven't been exposed to it.

Scientific standards for proof and evidence and not absolute standards.

For example, controlled experiments operate by removing uncertainty. Therefor quantum mechanisms cannot be scientifically observed or tested for.

Control itself destroys operating mechanisms...

[Not A Communist Shill]

The point was, you said that the observer effect was proof of clairvoyancy, and I said that not only was there zero evidence for this, the observer effect has been at least partly explained through readily understandable means.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

This thing is completely random. Your brain just pays attention to the hits, and ignores the misses. There have of course been plenty of dreams, 'visions' that you've had that never came true, that really were 'just dreams.'

I went through a period in my life when I was like 'ooh dreams are so deep and MEANINGFUL and mystical!' but I just don't see it that way anymore, I kinda view the world now as this big meaty whore- but I like it better that way because it's more sexual, raw, visceral and I feel it in my body. But so many spiritual texts talk about the bodily level being the 'lowest level.' Meh. I think it's the highest.

[Aylen]

@truck yes I have gone back and forth...sometimes I give dreams more weight but when I am more focused on the physical my dream recall is terrible. I see symbolism in my dreams regardless and they are not all dreams that come true. Those dreams that come true have a totally different energy to them. I know the difference between precognitive dreams and dreams that are only meant to help me find a meaning and or solution in a situation I have struggled with. I often dream things then wake up to find a relevant post and my dream already gave me the words to respond. If I told some people the dream they would say it was totally unrelated to the events but I see the connections so clearly, like the symbolism is too great not to pay attention to. I had a dream directly related to the Absurd thing which was not clear at the time I dreamt it. When I looked at the situation unfold things that did not makes sense suddenly did. So it is like I "tunneled" ahead through time and prepared myself.for something to come... Like when I dream of people close to me dying. Not every death dream comes true because they are not all precognitive...

Over the years I have learned the difference in overall feeling of the dream. I have no way to prove to people that I have dreamt EVERY death of my family and close friends approximately one year before it happened but I have. I was told it was in order to prepare me so I could help others when the time comes. If someone else can relate to this experience then they know how horrible it is to finally see the pattern,,, it took me exactly three deaths and putting together dates in my dream diary, since I write my dreams down, to see that the deaths (pattern) all happened about a year from the dream. In contrast I have only had about 3 death dreams (looking through dream diary) in the past ten years that did not come true and seven that did and match up according to dates. Those 3 did not concern me at all and I noted it when I wrote them down.

I see it as a gift and a curse... It is not something many could handle I imagine but I was brought up to believe death was not a "bad" thing in general even though we do grieve our dead like anyone else. I told my therapist everything I wrote in my op and her response was that I am "extraordinary" not delusional. Since she is the professional I am going to go with that.

Sometimes I feel like I'm living in a Dan Brown novel...no joke...symbolism everywhere.

[rat1]

Spirituality fulfills the beast nature. Unifying the body and mind is a spiritual ideal. The beast represses itself when it seeks an expression which is impossible to materialize.

The point was, you said that the observer effect was proof of clairvoyancy, and I said that not only was there zero evidence for this, the observer effect has been at least partly explained through readily understandable means.

I never said this.

[Aylen]

The beast represses itself when it seeks an expression which is impossible to materialize.

yeah...

[Not A Communist Shill]

I never said this.

You said that light particles react in anticipation of being observed, which amounts to exactly the same thing unless you can prove otherwise, which you can't.

[Slacker]

I had a dream that I won the lottery and what the winning lottery numbers were. I don't believe in all this, but OTOH if I'd remembered those lottery numbers when I woke up, I would have bought a lottery ticket, just in case!

[rat1]

You said that light particles react in anticipation of being observed, which amounts to exactly the same thing unless you can prove otherwise, which you can't.

Light reacting to an event before it occurs is a separate phenomenon. What this proves is that humans precognitively influence the breakdown of light. Whether you ponder the existence of greater human precognitive abilities is up to you. The evidence does lend credibility to greater abilities existing, but it is not proof of them.

[Not A Communist Shill]

As long as this is your belief rather than fact, they do amount to the same thing.

[rat1]

You must not label all facts falling outside of scientific facts as beliefs. That's a misuse of the word belief. For example if I just ate tomato soup, this is a fact but it is not a scientific fact.

[Scapegrace]

.... This is satire, right?

[Aylen]

@truck to kill two birds with one stone...

I had a dream this morning that involved my brother in-law, he is dead and I dreamt his death a year before it happened. He is an example of outwardly aggressive and inwardly gentle. In the dream my sister was introducing me to my brother in-law's identical twin brother, which he didn't have in real life. I remember being aggravated with the twin in my dream for bossing my sister around. He wanted her to take care of a baby girl and teach her to swim and he was being an ass to my sister and everyone else around. So I told him he was nothing like his brother. He was just a pale imitation. I took the baby from my sister and jumped into the pool and started teaching her to swim but she already knew how and she could talk too.

The "twin" was shouting orders at me from the side and I was telling him he had no clue what he was talking about since the baby could clearly swim on her own. Then all the water drained out of the pool and I was standing on the bottom wondering where the water went. I had put the baby on the side of the pool and proceeded to turn the water back on and I stood in the pool letting the water fill up around me. He was still on the side making comments about me. I didn't care because he was no one to me.

My brother in-law was a "go-getter" he never took "no" for an answer and beyond that very few people told him "no" and meant it. Everybody wanted his approval. Except for me. I regularly told him "no" to the ultimate dismay of my sister. Who would privately ask me to show respect for him in front of others and just do what he told me. BUT I did respect him because with all his outward aggression and constantly dominating all the men around him, he put his family first, which included me. He did not try to have the biggest baddest everything. He cuddled puppies and never passed a homeless person without opening his wallet and sometimes emptying it. He cooked dinner with his family every Thanksgiving at a homeless shelter. He treated women with respect even though he owned a strip club. That is how my sister and I met him. There are hundreds of examples which made him inwardly gentle.

They said when he was younger (he was a boxer) he would knock a man's teeth out then take him to the dentist and pay to have them fixed no matter the cost. He chilled out as he got older but he controlled his city. So when I say inwardly gentle and outward aggressive it is not me fooling myself. It is about compassion for others and knowing when to show mercy or dispense justice at the same time. Someone who is all about the money, status and puts the people they love as a lesser priority does not command respect in my eyes so that whole hierarchy thing seemed warped to me. He worked hard and long hours to support an extended family but when his family needed him he would drop everything. When he bought my sister a new car instead of trading the old one in he gave it to me even though I was constantly a challenge to him. He also played as hard as he worked. No one would dispute his "alpha" status if they believe in that sort of thing. I made peace with him before he died and told him how much I really appreciated him and that I was sorry for seeming like an ungrateful bitch at times. He told me that's all he wanted to hear from me. He died knowing I appreciated him and I knew he saw so much potential in me and that is why he was hard on me. Without my dream that conversation may not have happened before his death as it was pretty sudden.

So how does this relate to this thread as well as the hierarchy thread... I dreamt an example in response to your post in @AshSun 's thread so when I woke up I had an answer to a question I didn't know about until I logged in, i.e. you dismissing my idea of "inwardly gentle". I need coffee now...

[Not A Communist Shill]

You must not label all facts falling outside of scientific facts as beliefs. That's a misuse of the word belief. For example if I just ate tomato soup, this is a fact but it is not a scientific fact.

This is not the situation at all: you are saying something is a fact for which you have absolutely no proof for whatsoever. Beliefs can match with reality or not, utterly irrelevant.

[Aylen]

Facts are always subject to change through perspective. One of my favorite shows right now is "Brain Games". It is a fact that plants are not "green".

[rat1]

This is not the situation at all: you are saying something is a fact for which you have absolutely no proof for whatsoever. Beliefs can match with reality or not, utterly irrelevant.

Scientific proof is not the only form of proof. Personal experience is another form of proof. Again, personal experience having just eaten tomato soup is proof that I ate tomato soup. If a belief matches with reality, it is more than a mere belief; it is a fact.

[IBTL]

Aušra Augustinavičūte

[Aylen]

Scientific proof is not the only form of proof. Personal experience is another form of proof. Again, personal experience having just eaten tomato soup is proof that I ate tomato soup. If a belief matches with reality, it is more than a mere belief; it is a fact.

Yes, I like this because it is a fact that plants are NOT green but at the same time it is a fact that plants ARE green. If that makes any sense at all.

Edit: so I am wondering which is the "belief" and which is the "fact" and it is hard to distinguish sometimes. A case could be made for either perspective.

[Aylen]

Aušra Augustinavičūte

Care to elaborate?

[or is this a hit and run?]

[Aylen]

I just realized I had listened to this song before going to sleep and it probably was the inspiration for me to dream about teaching a baby girl how to swim but finding out she was "strong" enough to swim and already knew how.

 

Symbolism

[Not A Communist Shill]

Scientific proof is not the only form of proof. Personal experience is another form of proof. Again, personal experience having just eaten tomato soup is proof that I ate tomato soup. If a belief matches with reality, it is more than a mere belief; it is a fact.

As I said before: "This is not the situation at all: you are saying something is a fact for which you have absolutely no proof for whatsoever. Beliefs can match with reality or not, utterly irrelevant."

What you actually said is such that you might have well have said that you know for a fact that light particles wear pink hats before they are observed. You do not know this. You may belief it and confuse it with fact, but it doesn't make it so.

[rat1]

Pink hats? What are you even talking about? Light particles react in anticipation of observation before the actual observation happens. That is a known fact given to us by physicists.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Pink hats? What are you even talking about? Light particles react in anticipation of observation before the actual observation happens. That is a known fact given to us by physicists.

nope

[rat1]

k

[Not A Communist Shill]

[rat1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed...quantum_eraser
It is disputed... the other theory is the photon is in an undifferentiated state. I do think this is a better explanation... THen it gets complicated with photons and observers being entangled across long distances.

This issue is very muddy and I am going to have to read more before I discuss this further.