Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

I never get lucky in my dreams


Recommended Posts

So i was at this party and i walked by this bedroom and the door was open and there was this gorgeous women sprawn out on the bed naked smiling at me. I still couldn't get laid! What is wrong with me? I am constantly presented with oppurtunities for easy meaningless, safe(dream)sex and i blow it every time! I wouldn't do it in real life cause i have a great relationship with a great woman. But you'd think logically, i'd be able to nail some babes just for fun in dream land, no? I thought at first that the problem was that my morals were at work in my dreams and acting in condsideration of my real life sitution. But then why isn't my logic kiking in and saying to me that "it's just a dream, lets have some fun" Does this suggest that our perception of reality is controlled by the strength of our morals? Do our morals determine what we can percieve as reality? Do we have control over our morals? I heard a very good theory on dreams the other night from a professor at MIT, who said that dreams are residual thoughts of the minds equations. Like the bits that get thrown away with truncation from say 24/96 to 16/41. When we dream, it is the minds way of emptying the recycle bin. Therefore, they are meaningless. Or are they? If our morals let us see these things or create them and store them in our mind, and our logic does some equations and discards the bits that are dreams, then we are putting as much faith in our logic as we are in our morals if we decide dreams are residue. Which leads to the question; why do our morals have more power than our logic? And should we be concious of overriding them with logic. Personally, i think we should. :thu:
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 19
  • Created
  • Last Reply
[quote]Originally posted by halljams: [b]So i was at this party and i walked by this bedroom and the door was open and there was this gorgeous women sprawn out on the bed naked smiling at me. I still couldn't get laid![/b][/quote]Because it's metaphorical for something in your life you don't perceive completely. The part could be an allusion to a social environment, even work. Looking in the bedroom represents an aspect of your life where perhaps you've *casually* been given an "inside" view of something: a "hidden" job opportunity? In which case, this opportunity seems to have many a "sexy" reward. Perhaps the nature of how it's presented reveals that there could be a built in conflict regarding your wife: maybe she won't like what it is, or it conflicts with her schedule, or the rewards may be things she won't like (guitars? gear?). You haven't closed on it in real life, therefore you can't close on it in the dream. Since the dream is not situational involving a specific person(s), it is most likely metaphorically analogous in some way to your life. Or, it could just be you saw a commercial for _Girls Gone Wild_ before you went to sleep. [b]What is wrong with me? I am constantly presented with oppurtunities for easy meaningless, safe(dream)sex and i blow it every time![/b] "Repressed inhibition against taking opportunities that you consider to be rewarding in a manner detrimental to your relationship with your wife"? [b]Does this suggest that our perception of reality is controlled by the strength of our morals?[/b] No, it doesn't have anything to do with sex. [b]Do our morals determine what we can percieve as reality?[/b] Based on what's gone on in my life for the past 2 months literally up until yesterday - absolutely yes, and they can be totally blinding. [b]Do we have control over our morals?[/b] ABSOLUTELY. That is, if one is a rational and self-aware intelligent being. This apparently excludes 99.88897% of the population of the planet. [b]night from a professor at MIT, who said that dreams are residual thoughts of the minds equations.[/b] Makes sense, yep. [b]Like the bits that get thrown away with truncation from say 24/96 to 16/41.[/b] No, I think it's more like scandisk myself. But I'm a loon. Recovering lost clusters and recombining file structures, saving bad sectors as files to be examined and labeled later. *Doesn't that describe what you're doing in this post?* [b]When we dream, it is the minds way of emptying the recycle bin. Therefore, they are meaningless.[/b] Totally disagree. If this were the case, every dream we had would be about trivial inconsequential things in our lives: which obviously isn't the case. I think it's literally a mind-equivalent of having too many file pointers and a corrupt "allocation table". You have information that is too multi-faceted to grasp entirely, causes errors, the brain tries to fix it by metaphorically reducing the dataset to a more easily to absorb concept. [b]If our morals let us see these things or create them and store them in our mind, and our [/b] "Morals" are a modifier to how we interpret our surroundings. "Morals" alone don't see, create or store anything. [b] then we are putting as much faith in our logic as we are in our morals if we decide dreams are residue.[/b] They are not residue. Although perhaps there is residue as a side-effect of dreaming. [b]Which leads to the question; why do our morals have more power than our logic?[/b] They most often don't. That's the problem with humanity. *Morality isn't logical*. For instance, if a person goes into business with you, and realizes you are sharing the expense of operating said business to this person's benefit, morality would say this person has a certain indebtness to you. If another opportunity comes around, it is *logical* to this person to drop his obligation to you and go for the other opportunity, if it perhaps is seen as a better one. The *moral* thing to do would be to see out one's obligation over the selfish act, but logic dictates one has to take the best, most selfish option. ..but of course, as I said, a self-ware intelligent person *has the choice*. An animal takes the selfish route. [b]And should we be concious of overriding them with logic. Personally, i think we should. [/b] I think the human thing is the opposite.

Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com

Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/

 

/ "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing a shot of WD-40 and some duct-tape couldn't fix. No offense Chip, but how can you expect people to take advice on dreams from someone who...doesn't sleep?! :D ( :bor: :freak: ) Just got off the phone with Grandma, mentioned your dilemna in passing, she says drink a glass of schnapps before you go to bed and don't think so much. That'll be 2 cents consultation fee. Send me a couple of peices of your hair, I'll have a voodoo doll made and Madam Zelda can lay it out on a little dollhouse couch, sprout a goatee and pinz-nez, and psychoanalize you for 4.99 a minute. (just ribbing) -Bobro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kind of ironic that I've been MUCH more successful in that department in reality, than I have been in dreams. Don't know why. I wonder about it just as you do. I've also been married for four years now (4 since 7/30) and I have two wonderful children, one two and one three months old. I can't explain why it doesn't work in the dreams, but I think it has more to do with goals that haven't been attained and such. Kind of like chip said (loosely), the metaphorical dangling carrot. Oh well...
No matter how good something is, there will always be someone blasting away on a forum somewhere about how much they hate it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier: [b]Maybe it's just your subconscious way of telling yourself that your relationship is so great that you have no real desire for meaningless sex anymore. [/b][/quote]so are you trying to call me a dream slut? i have always viewed dreams as a place you can escape your everyday reality... and even though im married, i dont think i am sold on the idea of human pair bonding. maybe in certain special situations but i think humanity is discovering now [with thie higher divorce rates or "swinger" lifestyles] that is just not natural for humans to exist in this manner.

alphajerk

FATcompilation

"if god is truly just, i tremble for the fate of my country" -thomas jefferson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, I've got the same "problem." I don't remember a lot of my dreams anyway, but whenever there's a chance for some dream nookie, something happens to either drag the process out so far that I wake up before getting started or my grandma walks in or some crazy shit like that. I think my subconscious mind is just messing with me, really. I WILL get my revenge...
None more black.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by Chip McDonald: [b] *Morality isn't logical*. [/b][/quote]Actually, I disagree. Sure there are some moral constructs that are archaic and silly, but most of the reasons for a moral code are entirely logical and that's why we have them. In fact they are designed to give people emotional and social support behind thinking in terms of long term rather than short term desires. The reason people often act immorally is because most of the time they illogically think in terms of instant gratification instead of their long term welfare. Many of the old "moral" fables have something to do with this concept: people whose thinking is short term rather than long term. Think of the Little Red Hen, or the various stories of people selling their eternal souls to the Devil in exchange for the fulfillment of some shorter term wish. Likewise, a marriage might be a tough thing to maintain over time, and people's short term desire to have sex with other people or run off with someone else may be very strong, but in the long term most of these situations don't work out and are hurtful for everyone concerned, especially if there are children involved. There may be nothing "wrong" with falling in love with two or more people at the same time but what are the odds that each of those other people will be OK with that over time? The fact is that our puny brains and hearts only have so much capacity for intimacy. If we desire deep relationships that means we have to have them at the expense of other relationships, to choose one person or thing over another... and some people have more difficulty acknowledging that than others. Other people also have the capacity to be close to more people than others. Still others don't have the cacacity to be close to anyone at all due to their own personal issues, so they create a shallow kind of intimacy with "everyone". In each case, you gain something and you lose something, and you have to decide what the tradeoff is. Nothing at all illogical about the morality itself - not that people don't respond illogically when faced with moral decisions. I think the key is to make sure your morality is [i]informed[/i] by logic and not just dogma. For example it's a real shame when people stay in a marriage that's clearly destructive to one or both parties (like an abusive marriage) for the sake of "staying married". --Lee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I totally agree alpha ... notice I didn't say "physically" abusive... emotional abuse can be just as bad. People who try to stop their partner from being or becoming what they are meant to be, for example, that sucks. Then again, a lot of people aren't sure who they are or what they want when they get married and you have to be responsible for that decision too... so... it's a tough call either way, and impossible to generalize.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by Bobro: [b]Nothing a shot of WD-40 and some duct-tape couldn't fix. [/b][/quote]Or some ball bearings and some common household bleach. [b]No offense Chip, but how can you expect people to take advice on dreams from someone who...doesn't sleep?! :D [/b] True, but consider perhaps maybe that's why I don't sleep anymore - I'm a pro and there's no point. Went to bed at about 7:30 last night. Fell asleep maybe around about 8:30. Woke up around 9:30. Fell asleep around 10:30. Woke up around 11:30. Still awake. I don't feel that bad, but I don't feel totally awake. I think I've figured out that my sleep rhythm is 180 degrees out of phase with my life. I'm going to have to try to sleep between 2:00-7 one day, then 3-8, then 4-8, etc. until it "makes sense". At least this is my theory. I'm sleeping less and less and feeling more awake when I should be asleep.... ahg... Snapps? Yick... I don't want to start a habit. I dunno. "Don't think too much": I can't stop it. FUN UPDATE: yesterday my "business partner" announced he was bailing on me for the competition. Which means my "Music School" that started out as 6 teachers sharing the costs of the business has now been reduced to me, sharing the costs with.... me. Actually, I think the reason I can't sleep is because I can't lay down with all of these knives stuck in my back. [b]Send me a couple of peices of your hair, I'll have a voodoo doll made and Madam Zelda can lay it out on a little dollhouse couch, sprout a goatee and pinz-nez, and psychoanalize you for 4.99 a minute.[/b] That should be easy enough, I'm shaving it all off soon. Can you make a "corporate entity" voodoo doll? How about a "slow driver in the fast lane" voodoo doll? Or how about "white trash at Walmart writing check for 1 box of cereal in slow motion" voodoo doll? Or maybe a "Greedy corporate bastard money scammer" voodoo doll? No, better hold off on that, we have to have *some* people left in our government to the turn the lights out when they leave...

Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com

Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/

 

/ "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its highly individualized. and children make it a VERY tough call. i have a friend whose wife is leaving him [although IMO, he is better off for it since she was a demanding "bitch"... he certainly was the reciever of the emotional abuse] and the toughest part is he wont be a daily part of his kids life anymore. i think a lot of seperations that weighs in very heavily. its EASY to leave the partner but impossible to leave the offspring. i know from my own situation, i would of left had it not been for my son which makes me fight to make the marriage work.... which is REALLY hard because my wife doesnt know what she wants in life so it makes it difficult for me to "support" her decisions, i on the other hand am very driven in what i want to do and my wife is very jealous of that, not that she tries to stop me from doing it... but i get a lot of "you dont really 'work'" because what i do is FUN for me. so its a very strange dichotomy.

alphajerk

FATcompilation

"if god is truly just, i tremble for the fate of my country" -thomas jefferson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier: [b]Sure there are some moral constructs that are archaic and silly, but most of the reasons for a moral code are entirely logical and that's why we have them. [/b][/quote]No, I understand that *having* morality is logical. [b] The reason people often act immorally is because most of the time they illogically think in terms of instant gratification instead of their long term welfare.[/b] But there are still ways of operating immorally that will be to one's benefit overall in the *long run* that requires not having a sense of morality. In fact, I'm seeing that that in itself is becoming a "new" morality, in that one apparently can be immoral if it means in the balance one stands to ultimately gain much more. Although that's not how it works in my book, apparently that's how it works in everyone else's .. [b]Little Red Hen, or the various stories of people selling their eternal souls to the Devil in exchange for the fulfillment of some shorter term wish.[/b] It's more complicated than that. People in a moral quandary who have a moral obligation with another person, who choose a seperate decision because from a speculative point of view the original moral obligation wasn't as "sound" as the new decision. Modification of initial moral conditions. That is a "logical" behavior from their standpoint, but it's not a moral one IMO. [b]for intimacy. If we desire deep relationships that means we have to have them at the expense of other relationships, to choose one person or thing over another... [/b] That would seem to go without saying, or so *I* would think. [b]For example it's a real shame when people stay in a marriage that's clearly destructive to one or both parties (like an abusive marriage) for the sake of "staying married".[/b] I agree. On the other hand... well. Hmm. I'll have to tell you an interesting story when I come up next... Anyhow, THINGS I'VE LEARNED IN MY NAIVETE IN THE PAST 2 MONTHS: It would seem one should never ever place trust in one's friends in regards to things friends perceive as being "income related". It is erroneous to act on one's moral feelings towards said friends if such action dilutes one's own potential income. Selfishness. I should have struck out on my own as a business as I've done in the past, instead of trying to include friends freaking out in a delicate situation who I *knew* were leeching on. Despite this, I hate the notion that my own apparently trumped up version of morality is not congruent with the norm of society. It would have been convenient if I had somehow learned this as a kid, though.

Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com

Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/

 

/ "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by Chip McDonald: [b] But there are still ways of operating immorally that will be to one's benefit overall in the *long run* that requires not having a sense of morality. In fact, I'm seeing that that in itself is becoming a "new" morality, in that one apparently can be immoral if it means in the balance one stands to ultimately gain much more. [/b][/quote]Actually, I think that makes sense in the big picture, both morally and logically... however, I think also that my definition of "gain" is different from a lot of people's. I think this is an issue of "values" rather than "morals"... moral codes only serve to dictate what your behavior should be, given that you have certain VALUES...and if you don't have those values, the moral code will not make any sense to you and therefore you probably won't follow it... more below. [quote][b]People in a moral quandary who have a moral obligation with another person, who choose a seperate decision because from a speculative point of view the original moral obligation wasn't as "sound" as the new decision. Modification of initial moral conditions. That is a "logical" behavior from their standpoint, but it's not a moral one IMO.[/b][/quote]Well, in the case of your friend who screwed you over, what he is really saying is that he values his financial gain over your friendship. THAT is the thing that's screwed up. If he valued close relationships more so than money, he would have no problem making the "right" decision morally, it would make perfect sense to him. There is nothing particularly logical about valuing money over relationships, though. Not that I just give away my money to anyone who comes along, but I don't mind sacrificing chances of further financial gain if that would damage a close relationship. I never have understood that mentality at all. On the other hand, I do know that not everybody feels that way, and I try to avoid becoming too intimate with anyone who doesn't share that particular value of mine. And you're right - there aren't a whole lot of people who share that value. So, although a lot of people behave perfectly logically within the constructs of their apparent values, I still don't think those values are logical themselves. We definitely need to get together soon for a good long chat... I think we both have some doozies to tell each other! :D --Lee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...