XPost: alt.dreams.lucid   
   From: david@edenroad.demon.co.uk   
      
   On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 06:02:08 -0800, h elmer | espeance wrote:   
      
   > David Mitchell wrote:   
   >> On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 09:41:08 -0800, h elmer | espeance wrote:   
   >>   
   >> > first, i'm not trying to convince you of rigthness or wrongness, all   
   >> > i'm doing is suggesting that chronic overanalysis of the obe is better   
   >> > suited in another forum,   
   >>   
   >> I disagree: this _is_ the main forum for discussion of OOBE's.   
   >>   
   >> Hence its name.   
   >>   
   > i haven't read the faq in a very long time, but i don't recall it or   
   > the slant being to discuss the validity of the ob experience, the   
   > duplicity of prove or disprove, but as more to disucss obs,   
      
   There isn't a FAQ as such; but there is a charter, and, furthermore, the   
   creator of the newsgroup Gary S Trujillo explicitly says:   
      
   "Personally, I am interested in gaining a better understanding of what   
   such experiences might have to tell us about ourselves, and what kinds   
   of creatures we are, rather than merely looking at this phenomenon as   
   something akin to a sport like scuba-diving or hang-gliding.  :-)  I   
   would hope that at least some participants in the discussion might be   
   interested in a more systematic exploration of the subject, including an   
   examination of the world's literature for references to such phenomena,   
   and that we might attempt to look for some common understandings of what   
   we either learn about in an academic way or in a direct experiential   
   manner.  I hope that we can compile a bibliography on the subject, and   
   that we might even conduct some discussions of particular books and   
   articles."   
      
   >> > and is out of context   
   >>   
   >> Uh?   
   >>   
   > becuase by out of context and overanalyzing, i mean constantly taking   
   > the position of proving to others that the ob and like phenomena are   
   > invalid, and inserting such opinions in threads where that is basically   
   > off topic   
      
   Read the quote above: analysis and discussion is precisely what the   
   newsgroup creator was hoping for.   
      
   >> But not "overanalyse".   
   >>   
   > clarifying, look back and analyze an experience, no start with the   
   > presumption (which i see you reiterating) that there's somethibng   
   > invalid about the experience and phenomena   
      
   Generally, we don't.  We just don't assume too much.   
      
   >> > we can start with   
   >> > dreams, and crosspost them to alt.dreams and alt.lucid.dreams, or   
   >> > anywhere else?   
   >> > my idea is also that dreaming is the broad historical category where   
   >> > much of non-local consciousness has been categorized, and that much of   
   >> > our remembered dreams are non-lucid obs   
   >>   
   >> Or, indeed, the opposite. ;-)   
   >>   
   > ok, i'll bite can you phrase that out?   
      
   It doesn't quite work, but: "much of our obe's are dreams"   
      
   --   
   =======================================================================   
   = David    --- No, not that one.   
   = Mitchell ---   
   =======================================================================   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)