Tag Info

As far as I know, there is no accepted science to dream interpretation. In fact, there's no science to it at all. Evidence has shown that indeed, dreaming draws material from people, places, and things in our lives, but there's absolutely no scientific data out there (that I'm familiar with) that links dreams to anything meaningful in our actual daily lives. ...

As you mentioned in your question, Jung was less than perfectly consistent in his definition of archetype throughout his career. This ambiguity reflects the continuing debate about semantic representation in the brain. His early work stressed the emergence of archetypes as fundamental dichotomies of self experience- whose Enantiodromaic character was the ...

As far as I know, dreams are meaningless information, strung into a story or series of events and interpretation are therefore highly subjective. The theory that I know best is that dreams are a result of memory consolidation during sleep. Of course, this is still controversial. Memory consolidation is explained (simple version) as follows: during ...

I was influenced by this lecture. I will jump ahead to the pertinent part: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ei6wFJ9kCc&t=59m20s My interpretation is that there are two general areas in the brain responsible for memory formation: 1) hippocampus and 2) basal ganglia. According to the speaker, a study shows a direct correlation between the amount of ...

We could have scientific clinical study of the reports of dreams. Given that the dreams don't relate to specific real world events and often have very bizarre properties there's no reason to believe the report has much to do with what really happened. Therefore, from a clinicians standpoint they're useful in that you're in a relaxed state when they occur ...