Learning through Dreaming

I find dreams to be quite useful. When I read that dreams have the possible purpose of making you understand events that have taken place, I was not surprised. There are several theories on the purpose of dreams. The ones that resonate with me are the ones that propose that dreams strengthen learning and reinforce memory.

I’m usually disappointed by how mundane my dreams are. I don’t dream of dragons or fantastic places. There was a time when my dreams had a sci-fi bent when I was way younger but age and utility seemed to override whatever precious bits of imagination I had left and my habit of watching too many R-rated movies at an early age. Usually dreams start in my home as if it’s a normal day. In most cases the dreams are an alternative way of experiencing how the day went. Sometimes, it simulates the future. What I find interesting is the slight changes in my personality during my dreams. I might be more emotional than I usually am or I have entirely different interests in example. The purpose of the personality change is most likely a way of compelling me to explore other possibilities of my actions.

The results naturally explain themselves and motivate me to emulate those unused aspects of my personality. A positive reinforcement example would be a better job interview turnout if I had spoken more and appeared more affable. A negative reinforcement incident would be one of the dreams where I knocked out someone I really didn’t like and had to run from obvious retaliation. If my dreams really are supposed to help me then it usually asks, “How could I have done this better?” or “This is what could have happened if you decided to do this.” It must be a mechanism of positive and negative reinforcement on my behavior, given that it allows me to explore alternative solutions or possible routes of failure. It’s sure to be flawed, being a subjective method based on no evidence, but I’m sure my subconscious tries its best. The way I interpret my dreams is that the reason that they don’t really go off the rails of reality is that the dreams are more like very deep meditations on how I could more efficiently suit my self-interests rather than sheer fantasy.

As ordinary as the dreams look from the general surroundings, I still find Jung and his archetypes are useful in describing dreams. I find the shadow is usually very relevant most of the time. I once mentioned to my friends about the time I dreamt I was at a mall and I ate an eight legged lizard in a soup. One of my friends ran it through a psychology plug-in; one using Freud’s interpretation and Jung’s interpretation regarding elements of the dream. There are many elements in a dream and much of it is considered, including the shape of the lizard, the number of its legs, the flavor of the soup, and the familiarity of the surroundings. The Freud plug-in was extremely annoying, not surprisingly relating it to sexual frustration somehow, and the Jung interpretation was more realistic. Actually I have the results here but if someone can help me find how my friend found this thing that would be nice.

Freudian Interpretation:
Eating - Fantasizing about an erotic sexual position that you have yet to try.
Lizard - You believe that you are getting too old to have sex or your partner isn't giving you the same satisfaction anymore.
Restaurant - ...A place of pleasure that you are lacking.
Legs - Personal Fetish that you wish to come in contact with.
Eight - A certain position in sex you are currently not attempting but subconsciously want to attempt.

Freudian Verdict: You are sexually unsatisfied.

Jungian Interpretation:
Eating - If eating alone, you are feeling lonely. If eating with friends, then you are enjoying your free time. If eating with family, then you wish to spend more time with your family.
Lizard - Subconscious recognition of a fear you don't want to recognize.
Restaurant - A Socially relaxing place, often related to friendship and sociability.
Legs - Multiple Legs are significance of how much load you are carrying, including work and stress. The more legs the more stressful it is.
Eight - The number 8 is a symbol of a fresh start, freedom, self validity, and responsibility.

Jungian Verdict: You are comfortable with your life, but a certain fear of responsibility looms over you that you wish to ignore but know you can't.

I thought it was hilarious how different the thing turned out. Personally I don’t feel dreams are always trying to tell you something that your unconscious feels is really important, rather, it feels more like a memory cleanup session, rather than digging up deep thoughts. Most of the time I’m just repeating events that happened during the day, and I learn to refine what I do.

The Hottest Place in Hell

Topic Seven is an interesting challenge on apathy. Absolute neutrality seems like the best of both worlds most people would probably think. I can present myself as a friendly face to both sides. Why they fight I have no idea but I probably don’t care. The only problem is that in this world, you most likely live on territory that is owned. Your feet, (if off the ground who made the plane or mined the metals for that plane?) is on tribal territory, gang territory, or government land permanently. They demand taxes or a toll. If you work and you use the land for your self-interest, someone will eventually come along and demand a share because you have just grown your food or slept on land that the owner’s constituents have most likely fought and died for. When you pay your fair share or get arrested and work for them, you have taken their side whether you like it or not. This hypothesis reasons that right now on Earth that you cannot maintain complete neutrality at all. This is an extreme reasoning, embraced by some and this is why civilians are not safe in any conflict. Such is the reasoning of some terrorists, who feel that civilians are fair game due to the fact that they are the ones that pay taxes to their enemies.

There are no actual consequences of true apathy, which would be internalized and more focus, while on the surface the individual looks like a functioning member of society. The consequences are the result of behavioral apathy, or acting out on it. People who claim they are completely neutral might be mistaken, possibly unwittingly having already chosen a side as explained previously. Within the protective community it is social suicide to declare oneself a true neutral individual, apathetic to all other beings. This is a misquotation from Dante but the true reasoning is very long, mostly about the angels who neither supported nor rebelled against God and thrown into hell anyway. “The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crises maintain their neutrality,” is the popular saying attributed to Dante. By withdrawing from both sides of an argument, or committing something as heinous as double-dealing, both sides of an opposition are usually quick to eliminate the third party. Often times one would be considered to be experiencing anti-social behavior. One would then be considered pariah and while not removed from society, they would instead be made an example of what is harmful to society. That is why the remedy for anti-social behavior usually is imprisonment over rehabilitation.

Is true neutrality attainable? For the individual it does not seem possible. A group with enough focus on its own self interest and beliefs has been demonstrated with is as we all know, Switzerland. Geographical qualities and the unpopular Helvetic Republic being ousted (and their overrated font) has made what Switzerland is today. It’s one of the few examples I can summon up and I doubt another similar country can be summoned up in one individual.

Given the conditions above, it would then be clear that living in apathy to others is just not practical in the least sense. Humans are social animals and they should live as such. Society at times seems like a faceless machine that we’re all plugged into but it does reciprocate. Otherwise how to we get our food, and shelter usually? Someone else has already grown the food and built the houses for us and we have to work to get the things we want. Most people can’t live in the wilderness themselves. Sure, I’m stating what consumerism is but apparently with our spending habits and how we voted; it’s what got us into the system today. We do have a choice on whether or not we want to be involved with our communities. To be labeled pariah one would have to make the foolish choice of fighting society but most people whether they think they are involved or not, are helping society in some way. Society has made safeguards so we are all potentially productive, rather than destructive.

Stuck in the Middle

Concerning objectivity I really would have liked to cite a story about jury duty but unfortunately I have never been forced into a case yet. This ongoing dispute will have to suffice. It’s currently ongoing also so I’ll see how it pans out eventually outside of this blog. It’s between some very colorful characters. One’s an autogynephiliac and another one is a high functioning autistic. In the middle of the conflict is our very disturbed ADD/PTSD man who craves attention. My friends knew the guy and he was part of our posse. I was not aware of it but those three were close outside the posse and for the ones who knew ADD/PTSD man the most, eventually ran into problems with him. ADD/PTSD man is very insecure and actually constantly had done tests of loyalty to them over the course of three years. This would include lying about a trespass against him and demanding an apology. This eventually caused a rift in friendship with them after the autogynephiliac and the autistic got tired of it. Currently I’m being harassed over the internet by these three, demanding I take a side. That’s the dilemma. Not only I’m extremely disappointed over their behavior but I’m being forced to take action. I could declare no involvement but am unsure of the side-effects. Could I experience alienation of the rest of the group or the three troubled people I know? It’s something I’m still deciding upon but somehow I’ve discovered the perfect in-between. I’ve established an equilibrium of sorts that allows me to view the conflict from a safe distance.

So here I am watching three sides go at it. Over channels I carry what they think of each other. Although there’s many shoot the messenger moments. I feel I’m doing pretty well as a relay station between the conflicted parties. I feel inclined to mediate since by themselves they are very decent people despite their problems. I find it immature that this is the way they communicate now but it’s better than nothing. Many other sides say I should not get involved, “it is not my business” they say. In many cases they are right. Speaking with ADD/PTSD man can be emotionally draining. I hope I’m wrong on this one but the Desiderata poem by Max Ehrmann says, despite being all about compassion to “Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexatious to the spirit.” I cannot recall where in Erich Fromm Art of Loving is but there exists a similar statement that refers to “poisonous influences.” I do not agree to completely avoid needy people but to lend them a sympathetic ear while respecting your own space can still be very productive. The Desiderata is not an unsympathetic poem, it’s religious side is small compared to its practical side, and encourages that even the ignorant and troubled must be allowed to have a voice.

For the lesson I learned of this situation? I suppose it’s impossible to make everyone happy at the same time. The one piece of solace is that you must find your place in which you cannot be harmed from further conflict but at the same time able to help. The internet is a great thing in that you can lend advice without having to hike over to the person’s home and do face to face time. I’m currently playing the latest of the Fallout series, New Vegas and the game is a constant exercise in objectivity. Sure you’re free to do whatever you want in the world (arson, murder, jaywalking) but the game’s main appeal is the emphasis on learning where everybody is coming from. Once you decide to know a character instead of shooting them you’ll never want to use violence ever again. Of course what I meant by the exercise in objectivity is that they’re all after each other while you’re trying to be friends with them! You miss out when you do not listen.

Saeglopur and Life's Challenges

Finally I get to blog on the topic that I accidentally blogged about before. Let’s call this one a sequel. Checking the list of music I regularly listen to I’d have to pick Sæglópur by Sigur Rós. There’s plenty of room for interpretation and I’m sure that if someone else would enjoy it, they would interpret it differently. The video that was provided with the music consists of a kid almost drowning but I listened to the music first. Judging by the music video the video seemed to have come after too. The definition of Sæglópur is lost at sea and the song seems to have more of a sense of journeying instead of drowning; the music has a more progressive tune, and it moves on rather than thrashing around in monotony. When I meant interpretive nature of the song, part of it comes from the lack of actual lyrics. It sounds like spoken words but it’s totally gibberish, dubbed ‘Hopelandic’ by the lead vocalist Jónsi Birgisson. The song follows typical story structure by the tempo and mood of the music. We have a rising action, conflict, climax, and resolution element to the song.
The pacing is fairly constant and I feel that to keep a pace like that in your normal life would be a positive thing. The song starts out fairly neutral with its synth and bells and the main vocalists strange falsetto. When the tempo goes up and the main guitar starts pouring in, I interpret that part of the song as surmounting of life’s challenges. The rising notes and falsetto with slowing down at the end is the obvious resolution, with maybe themes of character growth. I wouldn’t say the song represents an entire life but I feel life is like a constant progression of these small little situations and stories. Also adding to the story-like nature of the song is the fact that it was used in the Prince of Persia video game. I would suppose it being used in a video game favorite must have influenced me. The trailer for the game used it and was edited in a way to match the characters on screen to reflect the music. I wouldn’t be surprised if the makers of the game, Ubisoft chose the music for Prince of Persia this way. Joseph Campbell is also a large influence so that’s another possible reason I interpreted the structure of Sæglópur that way. Rising action, falling action is inherent in stories and Sæglópur definitely has those elements.
I suppose Saeglopur can be used as a method of attacking life’s challenges. If you don’t read, it could be where you can get your inspiration from. Every day you come across a challenge, and you conflict with it. The middle of the song properly reflects the turmoil of what a challenge is. Once you deal with the challenge in some way you come out of it in better shape than you did before in life; the soft melodies of the last part of the song is the coda. It could represent relaxation, your reward or whatever.

Why limit yourself?

It’s hard for me to choose a favorite song. I prefer to listen to music without lyrics and for music with lyrics I’d rather listen to a whole album. I’m not the person that listens to one track over and over again; I feel I’m limiting myself that way. New music comes in, making it even harder to decide. I grew up with old staples like the Beatles who have such a versatile sound that I’ve only begun to appreciate ones that have existed long before I was born. There’s new stuff from the likes of Anamanaguchi who use old sound chips to compose their music. There are always more things to like. To have a single favorite song seems preposterous. Music itself can be changed to better fit a mood, and humans have many moods. Also, as one grows older, music that sounds like junk might be better appreciated and might throw your old opinions down the toilet.

Music is actually one of the last forms of media I have learned to appreciate. I usually feel I could be doing something else while listening to music but now I feel it detracts from the experience. It’s something I find ironic because my original reason for disliking music is that it’s distracting to every day life. I like to listen to music now by itself and seal the other activities away for some time. Hopefully music can eventually merge with my life, as sometimes I feel music can motivate me instead of distract.

Being John Malkovich brief review with no spoilers

I chose Being John Malkovich for the required movie included in the upcoming essay. I didn’t just choose it because it’s a movie I have seen before and wanted to make the essay either; rather, I think it’s one of the most unique movies out there and deserves to be covered in some sort of way. It’s a rare take on fantastical experiences in modern society. Magic is usually relegated in movies to high fantasy and such fantastic experiences in the modern world are the products of a child’s imagination. Being John Malkovich brings in the fantasy theme in a modern world at an adult level yet it’s not a horror film; well for the ending your mileage may vary.


For those who haven’t watched the film, a puppeteer discovers a portal in his new workplace that allows him to experience whatever actor John Malkovich sees for fifteen minutes. After that he gets dropped on the New Jersey turnpike and more weirdness ensues. Out of school I’d recommend the film just for sheer originality. How it relates to the Platonic theme of the class so far: I’d say the whole concept of mind control concerns the self and consciousness. A big question is what is John Malkovich’s character in the end? He’s definitely not himself any more but is he a singular entity, or a colony of minds? What’s to become of the next vessel? It’s a hard connection to make because of the high concept nature of the film; it’s not exactly Snakes on a Plane but from what it looks like they took the title of Being John Malkovich and then explore the results. Proof lies in the script, which went under multiple revisions before being released. You can use Plato’s theories and apply them to what concepts Being John Malkovich brings up. Plato’s theories apply to so many facets of social phenomena that even a random idea like this movie can’t escape it.

Groundhog Day loop and its relationship to the Allegory of the Cave

The Groundhog Day loop is possibly one of the most benevolent personal hell literary tropes out there. It’s been used before in Star Trek (before the Groundhog Day movie actually), Stargate SG1, and a series of Todd Strasser novels. Although it’s certainly possible to go mad within this time trap it’s seen by the majority as an opportunity for self-improvement albeit forced. Groundhog Day’s connection with the Allegory of the Cave can only be alluded to topically. In Groundhog Day the movie, Phil is the only individual trapped in time and so is in a very different environment from the original Cave. The original cave has a return, possible consequences; the Cave escapee is vulnerable and can die in some circumstances. In the case of Phil, the only outcomes were to find self-improvement or go insane. If Groundhog Day has any connection with the Cave, it’s very heavily modified, being focused on the individual. The Allegory of the Cave was very large in scope and had implications for society, Groundhog Day is more introverted. It’s also a huge modification to the scenario because eternity is thrown into the equation. In Groundhog’s day a permanent solution to Phil’s dilemma would have to end sooner or later. It’s similar to the theorem that if you put together an infinite amount of monkeys and sit them on typewriters, one of them will eventually punch out Hamlet. Concerning Phil’s time spent in his limbo, he was in there for about ten years, according to Ramis, the director. The original draft script mentioned possible 30,000+ years. The Groundhog Day loop is so unique that it deserves to be a thought experiment in its own right.

Cave Story

There is a story of an immortal army where none of their soldiers can ever die. Very curiously however, there is no victory to their name. Every other army always had one up on them; the mortal armies destroyed their roads, their buildings. The immortal army could never gain victory because they were disarmed in infrastructure. The weakness of the immortals lied in the idea of wholesale slaughter of other mortal nations. The immortals could not die, so why not try to kill every last one of the puny mortals? There’s nothing to be afraid of besides the fact that wounds slow them down. It was a reasonable idea but at every battle they mysteriously lacked the capacity to fight. “Sabotage!” the immortal army cried. There was trouble among the ranks.

One immortal soldier observed the tactics of the mortal armies. He came to this conclusion: We cannot fight, for their spies destroy our weapons. We cannot move, because the enemy destroys our roads. Our morale is low, and we cannot sleep because our buildings lack the capacity to shield us from the rain. The next day of battle he decided to go ahead of his mindlessly stubborn brethren. He noticed a tower. The tower rained arrows on the immortals, who only saw the taunting enemies behind it. The lone enlightened immortal did what one else ever thought of doing and charged for the tower on the side instead. He died, many times, with arrows in his chest he managed to find the strength to chop the tower down. The immortals, believing their eternal persistence has paid off, had actually won the battle! The lone immortal soldier told of his efforts on the tower. This reminded the immortals of the sabotage that they believe has been holding them back the whole time so they put him to death, though when immortals kill their own, they don’t come back. Many years later the immortals were pushed back further and further into a cave and sealed up. They still struggle to this day, never realizing that it takes more than killing a man to defeat him.

The concept of taking the initiative is relevant to the Allegory of the Cave. It is one exceptional event that allows one to leave the cave. It is vague and uncertain how the one free man was able to escape from the cave. Likewise the one immortal soldier received the unexplainable spark that allowed him to change the tide of battle. It is not uncertain how the soldier escaped from his rut compared to the man from the cave. It was all from his effort alone, but even then how did it manifest in him? The aspect of one individual becoming exceptional and possibly championing the rest of his or her people disturbs me a bit. One special person among the muddled masses sounds like an argument for dictatorship if you ask me.

The return to the cave intrigues me even more. Besides being so hard to convince the prisoners of the cave to also find the light (in more ways than one), there are the chances of the enlightened one being silenced for his efforts. Is the illusion in the cave so convincing that they are willing to destroy their own to continue a cycle of self-perpetuation? I just do not understand the narrative’s lack of faith in the common people.

Internal Truth

There is a strange personal discomfort when discussing about truth. It tends to feel like regurgitation. To scrape at and work for years on the ground of discovery there's always an anti-climactic feeling in the end; what we find feels familiar instead of what we expect as alien. This could pertain to when Robert Browning stated that: “Truth lies within ourselves: it takes no rise from outward things, whatever you may believe. There is an inmost center in us all, where truth abides in fullness and to Know rather consists in opening out a way whence the imprisoned splendor may escape than in effecting entry for light supposed to be without.” So, just as much as humanity has the insatiable urge to scrape out, and conquer their surroundings for the chance to put their minds at ease, so much can be learned from each individual born into this world it seems. Truth is typically viewed as an event that must be verified through external rigor but the personal truths can be just as important.

The wells of knowledge and insight from other people, regardless of age, are something to be tapped. I think a friend once said that “people are never boring”, maybe because of the infinite amount of perspectives out there. The insight of a person is what makes them able to solve their own problems despite lack of external input. It’s funny thinking back to the recent Scott Pilgrim movie where the protagonist literally digs out love and self-respect from his own body, being there the whole time. Personal truth has its problems though as between people it can clash or become a mutual truth, for better or worse.

There’s the idea that people lie to themselves, implying that it is an active action. Somewhere within the self-deception lies the subconscious, and sometimes it’s obvious, like a memory that bubbles to the surface and the mind tries to push it down. From this I disagree with Ralph Waldo Emerson’s quote: “Every mind has a choice between truth and repose. Take which you please you can never have both.” From my experiences hiding from the truth only leads to more turmoil. It’s like holding back a flood, and only in accepting parts of yourself that you might not like can you find repose. Well, I suppose one can find peace in a personal sense but supposedly righting an external injustice that has been covered up by others is where Emerson’s quote lies.