Thread: Dream Sharing Course (Suggestion)

I'm a little late to the party, but if RedKali needs someone to vouch for her, I will. I've had several dream shares with her in the past, and she's very knowledgeable about the subject. When we initially started to try and share dreams, I was complete disbeliever of the practice, and thought it was nothing more than people making events up. I would often omit dream journal entries until after I've read hers to see how they would match up...or not match and over time I've learned that there is a huge gray area of what can occur (ie the Jack and Jill example). We've had conversations about various instances and events that have happened, and she was able to explain to me what was going and why it was happening and it was clearly obvious that it wasn't the ramblings of someone else. I have no doubt that she would be fully capable of delivering a solid shared dreaming class to her students; speaking as a former one of sorts.

On a side note, everyone has made great discussion points, and I'm glad that you're all solidifying a subject that should be taught at DVA. As for side debates about the possibility or proof of a SD class, lets hope no one wastes time getting into a class and side tracking it with that can of worms. The students who attend should be ready to learn, not debate.

*coughs* and someone merge that triple!

The problem of course with the healthy diet analogy is that while not everyone may agree with what constitutes a healthy diet, the individual aspects of the particular nutritional components of foods are undisputed and objective and not subject to personal interpretation based on confounding desires or wishes. Additionally, while not everyone may agree on one particular definition, a particular definition may be made without argument about the objective definition itself, or the need for the definition to change over time based on the experience of those wishing to participate in a healthy diet. The practitioner of a healthy diet is not free to determine that a donut has the same contribution towards a healthy diet as a carrot because it "feels that way" or because "I want this to be what healthy diet means."

^^ Oh, that's good!

Originally Posted by AURON

On a side note, everyone has made great discussion points, and I'm glad that you're all solidifying a subject that should be taught at DVA. As for side debates about the possibility or proof of a SD class, lets hope no one wastes time getting into a class and side tracking it with that can of worms. The students who attend should be ready to learn, not debate.

You may have inadvertently indicated another unopened can of worms here, Auron.

I must have answered more than a thousand questions on the assorted threads of my WILD class over the years, and I would guess that a good third of them were of the "How does it work?" variety. The students wish to have a feel for the physical process of the WILD transition so, for instance, they know what to look for, can better refine their own technique to best fit the known process (i.e., adjusting their WBTB to best catch a REM period), and above all to reassure themselves that the WILD transition is "real," and so must be doable. Answering this question is fairly simple, of course, because there is a wealth of information available for specifically how the WILD process physically works, making its "realness" obvious and acceptable. However:

When that question is asked in the SD class, and it will, the best answer we can give is "Nobody has any idea, but trust me, it does." This answer might lead to debate of some sort as students wrestle with learning something that by pretty much every (known) physical measure cannot work -- giving the impression that SD may not be real at all, much less projecting that assuring sense of "realness" around which students need to wrap their efforts.

So coming up with some answer to the "How does it work?" question beforehand might be a good idea, I think, just to avoid a potentially messy open can of worms. Just saying "It does because I say so" might not be enough for some.

This is, of course, all still in the "aside" category, but worth mentioning, I think.

Originally Posted by AURON

On a side note, everyone has made great discussion points, and I'm glad that you're all solidifying a subject that should be taught at DVA. As for side debates about the possibility or proof of a SD class, lets hope no one wastes time getting into a class and side tracking it with that can of worms. The students who attend should be ready to learn, not debate.

The particulars of the syllabus do indeed look intriguing, I think for your last point, this can be avoided by carefully crafting a painstakingly clear, explicit, descriptive introduction that provides a workable solution to the problem that "shared dreaming" has as many meanings as there are people who utter that phrase. This need is unavoidable given the highly individual, subjective meaning inherent in the topic.

As long as the course objective is specific, it will attract the kind of students who are interested in an experiential course (as opposed to theoretical discussion). I think people will more or less be open to shared dreaming, regardless if they understand the theoretical framework for how it works (because theoretical is as far as it will go). If they are taking a course on shared dreaming, and they want to have some shared dreams, then I would give students the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are there to do shared dreaming, and not merely talk about it. There is also the possibility of having an open thread for the theoretical discussion of shared dreaming, though I would suggest such a thing be grounded in the experience of those participating, as opposed to only intellectual guesswork.

And if students show up who disbelieve the entire subject, and only want to argue as to why the phenomenon isn't real, why are they even taking the course?

Also, are there going to be "course requirements?" Ways of measuring progress? Will there be ways to improve success rates? If all we can really say is, "No, that wasn't it," or "yeah, seems like you got it," then I think that is fine, too. When something is that experiential and subjective in nature, determining whether or not someone "got it," is going to be more or less impossible.

^^ Again, and I'll shut up about it after this:

I wasn't talking about discussing the theoretical framework of shared dreaming, its existence, belief about it, or anything else like that. What I was saying is that students will want to know, functionally, how the physical SD process works relative to their own efforts: what is going on during their SD attempt that they should attend to in order to make it work better for them.

For instance, knowing that during WILD you need to fall asleep is not an acknowledgement of belief or exposition of theory, but simply understanding that one of the functions of a successful WILD is falling asleep. You'd be surprised, BTW, how many times I actually had to remind students that they needed to go to sleep in order to dream; they really thought WILD worked differently, somehow.

So, yes, the students will certainly be of an open mind, and will be there to learn to SD, and not argue against it; but they may still want to know what is happening to them as it happens, perhaps from a feedback perspective, so it might be a good idea to have something prepared to give them.

I hope that's clear this time; and promise I won't try again, because it really is an aside, and hardly critical to the class.

As long as I'm here:

Originally Posted by ThreeCat

Also, are there going to be "course requirements?" Ways of measuring progress? Will there be ways to improve success rates? If all we can really say is, "No, that wasn't it," or "yeah, seems like you got it," then I think that is fine, too. When something is that experiential and subjective in nature, determining whether or not someone "got it," is going to be more or less impossible.

That is definitely something well worth thinking about, and perhaps discussing.

Sounds like an interesting class. Do you plan on making a single or multiple threads with the lessons and also have student workbooks? I suppose students will be given some exercises to perform to apply the knowledge. Also, it may be a good idea to set some rules regarding discussions about shared dreaming. For example, one thread could be dedicated to solely discussing the theory behind the whole matter and address related concerns people may have, while another thread or the workbooks could be dedicated to reporting one's experiences.

Originally Posted by ThreeCat

I agree with this. If we think about it, dream imagery is going to be more or less unstable in the majority of dreamers, and just because we are "sharing" a dream, does not mean we are going to see the same appearances. Even during our waking life, our perception of the world is so heavily influenced by our own hardware and software (sense consciousnesses and thinking--views, opinions, etc.) that we often don't "see" the same things as those around us, even though we are most certainly "sharing" the dream in waking life. In a dream, since we are disconnected from the stability of the sense faculties, we are relying entirely on our mental consciousness to "tell" us what it is we "see." The question is, can our mental consciousness and sense of self actually contact another entity, or are we just running the maze?
. . .
I'm interested. Let's start the show.

Exactly. I think you'd be surprised by how extensive the differences really are. When using text to say, "A black cat crossed my path," some will envision a fat cat, some slim, clean, dirty, was the tail docked, misshapen, was all of it black or some of it, what about a collar?, any noise to go along with it? Was it dragging a foot behind it, have anything in its mouth? what about the path itself.....? In dreaming, everyone is given information but how that information is translated varies widely. It's definitely an important arena for consideration.

I certainly think meeting another mind in dreaming is more dramatic than waking life. Just because the feels are so much more intense in dreaming, in my experience. One of the very basic objectives when trying to meet another mind in dreaming is to simply see the same way. Seeing (or perceiving) in the same way makes things a whole lot easier. I mean, this is why scientists from most of the world use the metric system (except for us pesky Americans....for some reasons we think counting feet is more appropriate than meters). If everyone is seeing the same thing, for what it is, then when we communicate our experiences those should be relatively accurate. Understanding the difference between objective and subjective reality is essential; difficulties here lead to basic communication issues.

Lucidity can be helpful though it's not the only way to achieve a shared dream. For a basic example, you know students are often told to do reality checks while they're awake, in hopes of doing them while asleep? If a person is focused on finding another person during waking, then this desire can express itself in dreaming, without having to be lucid. Setting up a sort of cognitive autopilot for ourselves in dreaming is certainly achievable. We don't have to be lucid to have a shared dream, but it can be considerably helpful.
Rigorous testing methods are appropriate for scientific research. What a class aims is not to meet those particular standards. My goal, if to teach this course, would be to help people have the experience of a shared dream. I have no desire to prove to anyone, other than the student, that shared dreaming is possible. I'm not out to produce a scientific article, I want to share the experience with others because a) it's mind blowing and b) if this field is to advance further, there needs to be more people having the experience. Therefore, if I want more scholarly research in this field, people must be having the experience (and yes, I think more research in this field would be amazing). Yeah, and partners may disagree on whether a dream was shared or not, and that's okay both ways. We can't correct people when they call an orange, an apple. If they think an orange is an apple, that's how they perceive things. Now, what we can do is define an orange and apple, then allow people to call things whatever they want. How people integrate knowledge is their responsibility; providing that knowledge is the responsibility of the instructor(s).

I'm interested too! Lol. We're tailgating in the forums until it gets the go-ahead...I've responded to Ophelia's email soon after she sent it so she's likely dotting the 'i's and crossing the 't's.

Originally Posted by AURON

I'm a little late to the party . . .
*coughs* and someone merge that triple!

I JUST figured out the forums have multi-quote capabilities (and only due to your mentioning the merging). Thanks for pointing that out.

You said very kind things here, but I need to address just one thing. I've never seen you as a student (in any form), don't think that. Our exchanges have taught me how to be more accurate in my own dreaming because you've made yourself available to me. We're friends, friends share experiences and it's always a bonus when friends learn from one another

Originally Posted by FryingMan

The problem of course with the healthy diet analogy is that while not everyone may agree with what constitutes a healthy diet, the individual aspects of the particular nutritional components of foods are undisputed and objective and not subject to personal interpretation based on confounding desires or wishes. Additionally, while not everyone may agree on one particular definition, a particular definition may be made without argument about the objective definition itself, or the need for the definition to change over time based on the experience of those wishing to participate in a healthy diet. The practitioner of a healthy diet is not free to determine that a donut has the same contribution towards a healthy diet as a carrot because it "feels that way" or because "I want this to be what healthy diet means."

I'd hate to go further into the diet and shared dreaming comparison, as not all things will translate equally...but...generally speaking:

Every body responds differently to nutrients. Macro- and micro- nutrients are assimilated to varying degrees by the body. Some people respond very well to smaller amounts of protein, while others struggle to develop mass on a higher protein intake. It's not all about what is eaten, it's about other components within the diet, in addition to exercise, in addition to individual biology. So while, yes, most can agree what a healthy diet is, there's no guarantee that the "healthy diet" will be healthy for every body. Some people have allergies, limiting what they may consume, which may deviate from what is recommended as healthy. What is healthy for one person, or even the masses, is not healthy for all.

Going back to shared dreaming, not everyone is suitable for shared dreaming. Shared dreaming requires allowing others access to personal mindspace. This availability can be threatening to people who have things about themselves they don't want revealed or spoken about. How we speak about others can be abrasive too, so being aware of the sensitivities of our dreaming partners should be addressed. It's important to feel relatively comfortable with oneself, before venturing into shared dreaming because people will perceive all sorts of things and then want to talk about those things. This has lead to many awkward conversations. I've been asked by a good friend recently, "Why did you look like you were on crack, tweaking out, and f*cking men behind restaurants in dreaming?" I laughed, because I have a pretty solid grasp on who I am and am comfortable enough to hear things which may seem like an unkind reflection on my character. It takes maturity to be able to hear others speak of us in ways which contradict our own sense of self. Too, I sometimes do prefer to engage in coitus in odd locations and I can see how she may perceive my attitude as being in a state of withdrawal or addiction. Having an awareness of others and ourselves supports honest communication. Those who lack that maturity may want to delay their shared dreaming exploration until they're more comfortable.

What does this have to do with your concern? Well. For someone who isn't comfortable with themselves (a person who thinks eating donuts is healthy), merely taking the time to objectively write their dreams is a HUGE step in self-awareness. So this may be like going from a dozen donuts a day, to just three donuts a day. That would be healthy behavior for that person because it's supportive of better eating habits. Yes, there's room for further improvement but not everyone is capable of sudden changes; long-lasting changes generally involve small changes. As that person progresses, maybe they want to define shared dreaming differently than how most people define shared dreaming. That's fine, everyone has their own vision of what an experience should look like. We'll provide a standard definition and if people deviate from that to properly address their unique beliefs, the concept of shared dreaming won't be any worse for it.

Defining the typical definition of shared dreaming is like the same as defining the typical definition of a healthy diet. However, everyone is different and responds differently depending on their unique circumstances. Therefore, everyone will have their own goals which are appropriate for them.

I know you're saying it's important to not lead people to false beliefs as it sends a confusing message. What's I'm saying is we'll send a single message, but what people do with that message is beyond our control.

Originally Posted by Sageous

So coming up with some answer to the "How does it work?" question beforehand might be a good idea, I think, just to avoid a potentially messy open can of worms. Just saying "It does because I say so" might not be enough for some.

This is, of course, all still in the "aside" category, but worth mentioning, I think.

I know this was directed toward Auron, but I wanted to mention this since it was brought up. Personal experience is typically not helpful as the sole measure of proof or instruction. On the other hand, it is a good supplement to research. From the start, it should be obvious but I'll say it anyway. Shared dreaming won't happen for everyone. Reading literature on what it's like to be a compassionate person, both from the scientific and personal experience sides, will not equate to being compassionate. Not everyone can acquire and apply knowledge in a productive manner.

Originally Posted by ThreeCat

Also, are there going to be "course requirements?" Ways of measuring progress? Will there be ways to improve success rates? If all we can really say is, "No, that wasn't it," or "yeah, seems like you got it," then I think that is fine, too. When something is that experiential and subjective in nature, determining whether or not someone "got it," is going to be more or less impossible.

Yeah, there will be something resembling course requirements. The only true requirement is the willingness to engage, but I'll mention the other features which are supportive of shared dreaming. To measure progress requires dreaming activities, which will be included, and the progress itself will depend on whatever the activity is designed to highlight. One thing to keep in mind is that measuring progress may be complex. Example: if a dreaming exercise is to find another person (imagined or real) and describe them objectively, and the waking description included subjective observations--that could be considered a failure of the exercise. Yet, when those failures are pointed out--and if that individual understands the failures and corrects them--then the failure becomes a success. It should be a fun experience and "getting it" or "not getting it" isn't so much a concern. There are ways to modify exercises to make them accessible to most.

Originally Posted by Sageous

^^ Again, and I'll shut up about it after this:

I wasn't talking about discussing the theoretical framework of shared dreaming, its existence, belief about it, or anything else like that. What I was saying is that students will want to know, functionally, how the physical SD process works relative to their own efforts: what is going on during their SD attempt that they should attend to in order to make it work better for them.

Your reminders and suggestions are very helpful--I ask you NOT to shut up when you notice things that require the additional attention. If I ever don't seem to understand something, please mention it again, I don't mind the repetition especially when I'm missing something or misunderstood you. In fact, I'm using these discussions to improve upon what eventually winds up in the class.

Yes, I agree--explaining what occurs at a physiological level is important. For example, select antipsycotic drugs are HELPFUL to lucidity, which can be indirectly helpful for shared dreaming. Definitely an aspect to be included.

Originally Posted by NyxCC

Sounds like an interesting class. Do you plan on making a single or multiple threads with the lessons and also have student workbooks? I suppose students will be given some exercises to perform to apply the knowledge. Also, it may be a good idea to set some rules regarding discussions about shared dreaming. For example, one thread could be dedicated to solely discussing the theory behind the whole matter and address related concerns people may have, while another thread or the workbooks could be dedicated to reporting one's experiences.

Thanks, and I don't know how the class will be set-up. I'm still waiting on Ophelia to confirm I'm able to teach the class (alongside other instructors, ideally). I was planning on asking her if DVA has a preferred set-up for classes (to keep all the classes similar in functionality, creating a more user-friendly experience). If not, then I'll decide on a more detailed outline for the course and then create an environment supportive of what's to be taught. I love the idea of workbooks (and those seem to work well for the other courses) and there will have to be threads for theory and general inquiries that may not be related to lessons, but are general curiosities.

Rules though? Heh, I've never been too excited about rules. Though, for the sake of the other learners, a decent environment will be necessary but the rules for the general forum will likely be all that's required.

I'll plan to PM you about suggestions when I eventually have the go ahead and finalize the outline since you brought this up

Originally Posted by RedKali

I'd hate to go further into the diet and shared dreaming comparison, as not all things will translate equally...but...generally speaking:

But it allows discussion of important points, so along those lines...

Every body responds differently to nutrients. Macro- and micro- nutrients are assimilated to varying degrees by the body. Some people respond very well to smaller amounts of protein, while others struggle to develop mass on a higher protein intake. It's not all about what is eaten, it's about other components within the diet, in addition to exercise, in addition to individual biology. So while, yes, most can agree what a healthy diet is, there's no guarantee that the "healthy diet" will be healthy for every body. Some people have allergies, limiting what they may consume, which may deviate from what is recommended as healthy. What is healthy for one person, or even the masses, is not healthy for all.
...

Of course one person's requirements may differ from another based on their specific situation, but what is important is that person's ability to accurately measure/evaluate experience and determine their progress towards an objective goal from that. A dozen donuts a day to 3 can only be seen as an improvement or progress if there is a stake in the ground somewhere that says "less donuts is better" for a healthy diet, and if a practitioner is even able at all to determine how many donuts a day they've eaten.

Going back to shared dreaming, not everyone is suitable for shared dreaming. Shared dreaming requires allowing others access to personal mindspace. This availability can be threatening to people who have things about themselves they don't want revealed or spoken about. How we speak about others can be abrasive too, so being aware of the sensitivities of our dreaming partners should be addressed. It's important to feel relatively comfortable with oneself, before venturing into shared dreaming because people will perceive all sorts of things and then want to talk about those things. This has lead to many awkward conversations. I've been asked by a good friend recently, "Why did you look like you were on crack, tweaking out, and f*cking men behind restaurants in dreaming?" I laughed, because I have a pretty solid grasp on who I am and am comfortable enough to hear things which may seem like an unkind reflection on my character. It takes maturity to be able to hear others speak of us in ways which contradict our own sense of self. Too, I sometimes do prefer to engage in coitus in odd locations and I can see how she may perceive my attitude as being in a state of withdrawal or addiction. Having an awareness of others and ourselves supports honest communication. Those who lack that maturity may want to delay their shared dreaming exploration until they're more comfortable.

This is orthogonal to allowing for clarity of measuring experience against an unambiguous goal (which is what I see as the point of the diet thing). But it is very important. This sounds like somewhat of a prerequisite (ala what ThreeCat requested), or at least, "what one should be prepared for" that I didn't see mentioned in your syllabus. What else are among the prereq's and "you should knows"? And is one's ability to detect a sharing experience determined by one's preparedness to hear what other's have seen?

I'm curious, is belief in mind to mind communication required in order to experience shared dreaming? May a current skeptic or an agnostic follow your course, open to the possibility of proof by experience, and "see for themselves?" Or does a skeptical or agnostic point of view prevent the experience in your view?

I see it somewhat analogous to lucid dreaming itself: many people disbelieve it is possible, but those who have experienced it themselves know the reality of it in their bones. LDing however has it relatively easy compared to shared dreaming, because while the experience itself of LDing may be subjective and lucidity itself is on a spectrum just like how you say the shared-ness of a dream may be, the goal post is unambiguous and easy to state: "know you're dreaming while in a dream." It is of course possible to have experiences that leave one semi-doubting, but there is inevitably (in those who persist) that "AHA!" dream where it all becomes clear. Also, a skeptic could read "Exploring the World of Lucid Dreaming," follow what LaBerge recommends, and subsequently very likely experience vivid dreams and quite probably eventually a LD for themselves, and thus become convinced through the experience. I'd hope the same would be true for this course you're proposing.

I know you're saying it's important to not lead people to false beliefs as it sends a confusing message. What's I'm saying is we'll send a single message, but what people do with that message is beyond our control.

It's that and giving people the ability to measure progress via feedback. I think that specifying concrete, but staged for experience, goals or definitions will allow for *less* student frustration rather than more, than if they were completely left to their own means to determine just what "shared" or "same" means.

Originally Posted by FryingMan

A dozen donuts a day to 3 can only be seen as an improvement or progress if there is a stake in the ground somewhere that says "less donuts is better" for a healthy diet, and if a practitioner is even able at all to determine how many donuts a day they've eaten.

Sure, and the working definition Sageous offered does well in this regard. For a class, progress is determined with self-reporting; this is the same method the monthly tasks require before handing out those wings.

Originally Posted by FryingMan

This is orthogonal to allowing for clarity of measuring experience against an unambiguous goal (which is what I see as the point of the diet thing). But it is very important. This sounds like somewhat of a prerequisite (ala what ThreeCat requested), or at least, "what one should be prepared for" that I didn't see mentioned in your syllabus. What else are among the prereq's and "you should knows"? And is one's ability to detect a sharing experience determined by one's preparedness to hear what other's have seen?

I haven't created the lesson plans yet, so I can't say for sure what the preqs will be or even the other "you should knows". First the class needs to be approved--then I'll devote hours to lesson plan creation. Briefly, there are a lot of things going into the "you should knows" and I'd like to avoid overwhelming people with information. I want to really sit down, plan it out in its entirety, then make adjustments and focus on the most important aspects. To address the basic concern, the goal is to experience a shared dream. Detecting shared dreams should be done by the individual, with feedback from the instructor(s). Example, a student doesn't think they had a shared dream, but the instructor does. The instructor points to specific events and brings those into focus. Events may meet the requirement for a shared dream, but if the student still doesn't agree, that's for them to decide. It was their dream. I cannot tell them what they did or did not experience as I wasn't the individual having the experience. I can reflect on their experience, but at the end of the day it's the student's responsibility to determine their experience. Detecting a shared experience can be related to how open an individual is to hearing what others have to say. This gets into the "Proof" portion of my outline. In the beginning students will likely need feedback from others. Once students gain confidence in recognizing shared experiences, then that feedback doesn't have to be a part of their experience. This confidence is achieved by having multiple shared dreams, so this is unlikely to come up within the scope of the class. At a basic level, yes, detecting shared dreams will require being receptive to feedback from others.

Originally Posted by FryingMan

I'm curious, is belief in mind to mind communication required in order to experience shared dreaming? May a current skeptic or an agnostic follow your course, open to the possibility of proof by experience, and "see for themselves?" Or does a skeptical or agnostic point of view prevent the experience in your view?

Nah, no one needs to believe in shared dreaming to experience shared dreaming. Skeptics and agnostics certainly can follow the course and make a personal attempt to "see for themselves." I'm very open to have skeptics and non-believers come and experience for themselves. Forcing people to believe in something is always a terrible idea. I prefer to gently lead people in the direction and allow them to come to their own conclusions based on their personal experiences. I don't pressure people either, I want people to do what they're comfortable with and if this course causes distress, dysfunction, or places anyone in danger then the recommendation to stop will be made. Based on my personal experience, most of those I've had shared dreams with have been firm non-believers. The rest were already sharing dreams when I met them. This isn't a new concept xD it's just very strange and foreign. It's particularly exciting to see the excitement snowball for people when they have their first shared dream. Many curiosities are awakened by that first experience.

Originally Posted by FryingMan

I see it somewhat analogous to lucid dreaming itself: many people disbelieve it is possible, but those who have experienced it themselves know the reality of it in their bones. LDing however has it relatively easy compared to shared dreaming, because while the experience itself of LDing may be subjective and lucidity itself is on a spectrum just like how you say the shared-ness of a dream may be, the goal post is unambiguous and easy to state: "know you're dreaming while in a dream." It is of course possible to have experiences that leave one semi-doubting, but there is inevitably (in those who persist) that "AHA!" dream where it all becomes clear. Also, a skeptic could read "Exploring the World of Lucid Dreaming," follow what LaBerge recommends, and subsequently very likely experience vivid dreams and quite probably eventually a LD for themselves, and thus become convinced through the experience. I'd hope the same would be true for this course you're proposing.

Yes, this is similarly true for the course I'm proposing. Obviously, lucid dreaming is much easier to achieve than shared dreaming. I don't know why that is exactly. Maybe because some people don't have interest in others. Being able to interact genuinely seems like an important feature of shared dreaming. Reaching that level of authenticity seems to be helpful for sharing dreams. Genuine and authentic desires to share in experiences with others. Some people really don't want to connect--it makes some uncomfortable to engage in that type of intimacy. I'm not saying the experiences which occur during shared dreaming are intimate; but the connection to make that communication possible, is intimate.

Originally Posted by FryingMan

It's that and giving people the ability to measure progress via feedback. I think that specifying concrete, but staged for experience, goals or definitions will allow for *less* student frustration rather than more, than if they were completely left to their own means to determine just what "shared" or "same" means.

I agree. There will be a concrete definition and personal goal setting I want to make this as achievable as possible--because it's mind-blowing and people should really have their minds blown xD There's so much potential in this and I want as many intelligent and passionate people involved in the experience as possible.

Update:

I'm aware it has been awhile since this topic has been discussed. I've responded to Ophelia's PM and a couple afterward to follow-up, but haven't heard anything since the first request for more information. It seems there's no movement on the course and there are currently no plans or communication occurring on an administrative level; so I assume it's not going to happen anytime soon.

I have received kind and creative requests to host a shared dreaming course via Skype or Google--and that may become a possibility, but I hesitate to do that because of the lack of support from others. I can't be a one-(wo)man show; there's just not enough time available for that sort of intense and complex discussion and instruction--I need the help from other instructors and shared dreamers and that's most easily achieved here in DV Academy.

On the other hand, perhaps the admins are simply overwhelmed with other issues and they plan to approve it at their earliest convenience. I'll keep this thread updated should I hear anything new. I appreciate the interest and curiosity in the topic

Originally Posted by RedKali

Update:

I'm aware it has been awhile since this topic has been discussed. I've responded to Ophelia's PM and a couple afterward to follow-up, but haven't heard anything since the first request for more information. It seems there's no movement on the course and there are currently no plans or communication occurring on an administrative level; so I assume it's not going to happen anytime soon.

I have received kind and creative requests to host a shared dreaming course via Skype or Google--and that may become a possibility, but I hesitate to do that because of the lack of support from others. I can't be a one-(wo)man show; there's just not enough time available for that sort of intense and complex discussion and instruction--I need the help from other instructors and shared dreamers and that's most easily achieved here in DV Academy.

On the other hand, perhaps the admins are simply overwhelmed with other issues and they plan to approve it at their earliest convenience. I'll keep this thread updated should I hear anything new. I appreciate the interest and curiosity in the topic

Glad to see you post an update. I was thinking about this thread recently. I doubt they would just leave it up in the air after the attention this thread gained. It's most likely that their busy or distracted by other things. Hopefully they will respond to you soon. I'm still interested in seeing it as a class and the results that might come from it. Also, I do think it would be better if the class was here than google too. I don't see a reason to keep it seperate if it could grow more with a group of knowledgeable dreamers.

⚘⚘⚘
It happened to me (BANG!!!)
out of the blue
Saturday March 1, 2008
(see thread link at bottom)

After that

A shared dream
caused the one I shared dreamed with
to send me the link to a
"dream remote viewing experiment" thread
They were up to Target 30.
That was in July 2008

Folks (including, occasionally, "Meee" !!!)
were "Hitting" the target in dreams.

I thought
"They must be cheating"
"Ringing each other up"

So

I asked if any one would play if "I" opened a thread

They said "yes"

They started Slam Dunking my targets (???)

I asked myself

"How the hell are they doing this ???"

"Maybe they got someone here in Adelaide Australia
following me around"

Or

Maybe one of them have brocken into my phone
and can see my latest target photo.

So I out foxed them.

I would wake-up with an hipnopompic or hipnogogic image.
A waking-up or going to sleep dream image.

Then I would get up and go out
And find a metaphor of that image and snap a pic

But

I would snap at least 5 pics
So
No one watching
would know which pic was the dream.

They still "HIT"

AM A NOT A LUCID DREAMER
AM A NOT A SENDER

BUT it still works

What works?

Dream Remote Viewing
And
Share Dreaming.

The bible said
He uses the "Foolish"

1 Corinthians 1:27*King James Version (KJV)

27.) -*But God hath chosen the foolish
things of the world
to confound the wise;

and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

I am a foolish thing.
Meeeee !!!

I don't give a dam if people
don't PUBLICLY participate
Because
rvdc (Robert Van De Castle)
only getted 50 participants
for his last 3
iasd online conferences competitions.
And he began 50 years ago.
And Dr Robert Leon Van De Castle was a big wig
Rvdc was the biggest Wig there Was.

He died in January 2014

Im starting a
Dream Remote Viewing Experiment (a drve)
Here
On his 91st birthday 2018

Here is that thread I mentioned at the top

↘️↘️↘️

https://www.dreamviews.com/beyond-dr...nes-story.html

↗️↗️↗️

Originally Posted by Sageous

Before you start the process for establishing your class, RedKali, you might want to consider an important aspect of DV courses: credibility.

Though your class outline is already impressive enough to me that I'd be interested in following it, there is one thing missing that I think must be addressed:

In order to teach a course on shared-dreaming, I think that you need to have the confidence of your students not only that you are a successful shared dreamer, but also that the things you are teaching might pass that success onto them, if they follow the course properly. I'm not seeing that.

Are you suggesting instead that we have a class about shared dreaming, sort of a survey of popular theories and potentials (which would be fine by me, BTW), or are you suggesting a class for advancing the actual art of shared dreaming, assuming there is one? I thing DVA tends to lean toward the "art" camp, in that they want to offer "how-to" classes, rather than theoretical classes, so we would really need to have an accomplished dream-sharer as instructor, one who can confidently transfer his ability to willing students... would that be you?

On the other hand, I could be wrong; DV might be open to a well-presented theoretical class about dream-sharing. As I said, that would be fine with me too, but by offering such a class you might run the risk of "students" spending their time arguing about whether dream-sharing exists at all, and demanding proof of that from their professor before discussing anything else about the subject, to the point that the interesting and valuable stuff you suggest teaching gets ignored.

tl;dr: Would this be a "how-to" course for shared dreaming? If so, can you confidently provide the necessary "Been there, done that," credibility so that your students can both accept your words and aspire to your example? Or would this class simply be a survey about shared-dreaming, with no expectation of learning how to do it?

I hope this post doesn't come off as negative; it wasn't meant that way -- I actually think this is a good idea.

Edit Edit:

Earworm

Started after I wrote that:

Rvdc is the "biggest Wig there Was"

Rvdc was the biggest Wig there Was.


We're Off to See the Wizard

Judy Garland

Follow the yellow brick road
Follow the yellow brick road
Follow, follow, follow, follow
Follow the yellow brick road

Follow the rainbow over the stream
⚘Follow the fellow who follows a dream⚘
Follow, follow, follow, follow
Follow the yellow brick road

We're off to see the Wizard
The wonderful Wizard of Oz
We hear he is a whiz of a wiz
If ever a wiz there was
If ever, oh ever a wiz there was

The Wizard of Oz is one because
Because, because, because, because, because
Because of the wonderful things he does
We're off to see the Wizard
The wonderful Wizard of Oz

We're off to see the Wizard
The wonderful Wizard of Oz
We hear he is a whiz of a wiz
If ever a wiz there was
If ever, oh, ever a wiz there was

The Wizard of Oz is one because
Because, because, because, because, because
Because of the wonderful things he does
We're off to see the Wizard
The wonderful Wizard of Oz

Songwriters: E.Y. Harburg / Harold Arlen

We're Off to See the Wizard lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC



↘️↘️↘️

https://youtu.be/Mm3ypbAbLJ8

↗️↗️↗️