Two years ago, a test resulted that my IQ was 139 (German IQ, IQ ratings depend on the country you live in, 100 is always the exact average), with 130 being the border to intellectual giftedness. Normally you’d think that this is unrestrainedly cool, but it sometimes isn’t. I tend to analyze everything, which makes me afraid of talking to other people.
I was just wondering, do you think this faciliates or hempers lucidity?
I was quite the overthinker until a while ago, and I gotta say I liked it for that time. About LD’ing, I did jolt down pages of notes about thoughts, techniques and experiences, and I was being confident about it, which has brought a semi-constant stream of frequent, if short, LD’s. I was always thinking about not waking up, fearing the dream would end somehow, and in fact it did, cause of the fear itself. Also, I could hear myself reasoning in all my dreams, and even if I recognized that there was something strange, I wouldn’t use it as a dreamsign to get lucid. Those thoughts weren’t being of any use, and I was a little frustrated by that.
Lately, with the aid of Zen books and meditation, I’ve discovered what it’s like to leave the mind at peace, in silence, and let things be done by intuition, and I like it even more. For one, I’m all the more friendly/happy in social relationships, even if I can still make the same reasonings I could before, only now with a hint of healthy detachment (like that shyness, I can now decide to act out of it or not).
I can say I’m a little lucid even in my ordinary dreams, knowing it’s a dream deep down and mostly enjoying the whole thing, even if getting truly lucid still requires my intent and a little effort.
With time one learns to discover, the way we think and act in dreams is profoundly different from our waking life one, so it’s somewhat futile to think our day-like reasonings will get us lucid by night. Plus, since one does know it’s a dream afterall, it’s more of letting the dream get lucid spontaneously, this by resolving to be conscious and alert by the time you live one.
yea the way i work is i analyzes things constantly then gain unheart-felt but highly complex reasonings for why these things simply “are”, and its all based on a tightly woven fabiric my thoughts have placed in my brain. so i.e. i can accurately analyze & understand emotions of others and myself, but it cant be felt in the moment, this is the result of not “living enough” (experience). and from this i will say yes, if you are a high intellcet then your knowing of what must be done puts a hand over your eyes while it builds a barrier of entanglement and confusion form what truely is living. as for those with insufficient knowledge, their path to enlightenment takes on the form of learning whats with and around them at all times.
We could always do a little experiment on here.
We could get any member who wants to participate to take a particular IQ test, and then write down how many LDs they’ve had.
Then we could produce some results. It would hardly be very scientific I know, but maybe worth a try?
If anyone wanted to include factors other than IQ, we could include that aswell.
Is there a preferred IQ test? It would be interesting.
I was in gifted programs, advanced classes (math especially) since 2nd grade or so. Yeah, in the long run it’s tough to say if this is a flat out positive. While other people can blindly have fun, I think and reason, etc. prompting people to ask why I’m not having more fun. I’d say it’s steered me away from some potholes and likely led me to others.
Someone ended a meeting the other day with the phrase ‘ever upward’. I think this overanalysis overthinkers tend to feel is lifting us up by the scruff of our neck. But…to where?
Facilitate.
I’ve taken lots of IQ tests (all online however), and I seem to land around the 140 range. Not saying this is legit, but some would be around 126, some have said 160+, but IQ is whatever. I consider myself very intelligent (and so do my professors and peers).
I learned to lucid dream in about 4 days. If anything, have an analytic mind will help you lucid dream.
There are only two benefits of possessing a high intelligence. The first one is that it increases your ability to survive well in life. If you posses high intelligence and still have difficulty in achieving your goals, you are not fully using your intelligence. There is no other possible explanation. Possessing and using a high intelligence will always result in increased succes in life. And yes, that also goes for LD’s.
IQ is not very much related to intelligence. It measures your verbal reasoning and spatial abilities, but there is much more to intelligence that that. For example, learning LD’s requires knowlegde, motivation, and skill. Therefore, learning to LD is an act of intelligence. Yet there is no relation between the type of questions asked in an IQ test and the knowlegde and skill required for LD’s. Sientists can’t even define intelligence accurately (there are many definitions available), so how would an IQ test ever be able to measure it accurately?
I’m aware that IQ tests aren’t a reliable measure of intelligence, but it is the easiest way to get some kind of results if we were to measure LD success against intelligence.
Yet such a test would be worthless, and not only because if the inaccuracy of IQ tests. Someone who is accurately defined as a highly intelligent person by an IQ test, will not have succes in lucid dreaming unless he applies his intelligence correctly. True intelligence is not some theoretical variable, but is directly related to ones succes in life.
Now that I think of it too, intelligent people should fare better in LD’ing, simply by definition of intelligence: it’s the ability of getting good at doing stuff.
Not that an IQ test measures it or anything, though.
The most accurate definition of intelligence I have come across is that it is the ability to differentiate. This definition is explained in The Genius Formula (check: www.megagenius.com for more information). Basically, the more intelligent a person is, the more accurately he or she can describe differences in the environment.
For example, when I started playing piano I didn’t have the skill to play all but the simplest tunes. Yet as I practised, my ability slowly increased. These days I can play classical music and jazz at a pretty high level. Over the years my ability to differentiate in the area of piano music increased.
Following this definition, it becomes clear the intelligence is not pre defined, but can easily be increased by increasing your ability to differeniate in as many fields as possible. Increasing your knowlegde, skill and motivation in various areas of life will slowly build your general intelligence. This is yet another reason not to spend valuable hours of your day in front of the TV! 
You can’t say that the test would be worthless, and then go ahead and give what you think the conclusion of the test would be!
You think that IQ will have no bearing on LDing skills. Well that’s what the test might prove!
Also, increasing ability in piano playing skills does not indicate an increase in intelligence. The intelligence of your piano playing hasn’t changed since you started playing piano, your ability has. Someone who is very intelligent would be able to progress to a high level of playing with practice. Someone of a low intelligence (in this area of course) would not progress with the same amount of practice.
I agree anyway that you can become more intelligent over time. But I think there is a core intelligence that we all have, which is either genetic or set at a young age, which is hard to deviate from in either way. This is what the IQ test aims to measure. I highly doubt there are many examples of intelligent 20 year olds becoming stupid 40 year olds and vice-versa.
I did not give my opinion on what the conclusion of such a test would be. I merely stated that intelligence is directly related to your ability to succeed in life, and therefore also directly related to your ability to LD. If one is more intelligent one will be better able to learn and apply the various techniques used to LD. That’s all there is to it.
I did not say IQ would not have an effect on LD skills. I merely stated that IQ is an innacurate term to describe intelligence. IQ does not accurately describe ones ability to succeed in life, it merely measures ones ablity to succeed in taking IQ tests. And one can easily to do that. It is quite possible for an individual with a higher IQ to perform better at LD. But the crucial factor is how that individual applies his or her intelligence, and not his or her IQ.
Also, intelligence is directly related to ability. Aquiring new abilities in various areas of life will eventually increase your intelligence. This is because new abilities will not only help you to differentiate in a specific area of life, but also in life in general. Intelligence is mainly a result of the various activities you undertake in life. The reason not many people realize this, is because not many people use their time intelligently. Just about anyone who watches TV is guilty of this. Try speed reading three books (knowlegde related, not fiction) a week instead for a while and you’ll be suprised where it get’s you.
This is a nice definition.
Solaris, the acquisition of knowledge or skills does not necessarily increase your intelligence. Perhaps if you define intelligence, as you do, by “differentiation” but not only is this incredibly vague, its also not an accepted definition of intelligence. I could read three books and find out all there is to know about how to make the perfect apple pie. I would not be any more intelligent for it though. However, perhaps if you read books that were fiction (not knowledge related) you might get more intelligent because it would foster new ways of thinking and form new neural connections in you brain. Reading philosophy for instance, will not increase your knowledge about anything pragmatic, but it will increase your intelligence.
I guess what I’m trying to say is: intelligence is having the potential to gain new skills and abilities. But it’s not having those skills and abilities themselves.
For example, two people can play the same piece on the piano at exactly the same level of skill. According to your definition, they are both equally intelligent in this area. However, one has been playing for 10 years, one only 1 year. The latter is vastly more intelligent.
Solaris, the acquisition of knowledge or skills does not necessarily increase your intelligence. Perhaps if you define intelligence, as you do, by “differentiation” but not only is this incredibly vague, its also not an accepted definition of intelligence.
There is no generally accepted definition of intelligence among the scientific community that I am aware of. If there is one, I would certainly like to hear it.
Possessing an ability to differentiate means that you can accurate describe differences between two or more objects/creatures/people in your environment. Taking the example of piano playing again, if I just started playing I would not be able to read music. By practising, I would slowly increase my ability to read different notes and couple them to specific keys on the piano. By increasing my ability to read music, I am better able to differentiate in the area of piano music.
I guess what I’m trying to say is: intelligence is having the potential to gain new skills and abilities.
Precisely. Intelligence is your potential, or ability to learn new knowledge and skills. It cannot be defined by the number of skills the number of skills and abilities you already possess.
However, you do not seem to realize that there is a difference between possessing an ability to differentiate in a specific area in life, such as piano playing, and possessing an ability to differentiate in life in general. It is quite possible for an individual to be highly intelligent in one area of life, and a complete fool in another. Taking your example of two people playing piano, it is impossible to state that one player is more intelligent then the other. One can only accurately state that the person who has been playing for a year is more intelligent in the area of piano playing. It is probable that he is more intelligent in life in general, but he might not.
What I stated was that you can build you ability to differentiate in life in general by learning to differentiate in as many specific areas of life as possisble. I will take your example of baking of an apple pie as an example. Reading three books on this subject will definately increase your ability actually bake an apply pie. However, by doing so you will probably pick some things up about cooking. Thus, by increasing your ability to differentiate in a specific area of life, you will also increase your ability to differeniate in a broader field.
If you learn to differentiate in enough specific areas of life, you will slowly increase your ability to differentiate in life in general. Thus, you will increase your intelligence.