3

In the Zhuangzi (Taoist text), Zhuang Zhou wrote he dreamed he was a butterfly. When he woke up he did not know whether he was perhaps a butterfly dreaming he is a man. (Wikipedia)

Personally, I never dreamed of being another creature. When I remember a dream I had, the memories are always as if I experienced it. This makes me wonder whether it is actually possible to dream your self is something substantively other than self. By this, I do not mean dreaming something impossible, like flying. I mean an actual other self, like another person or an animal, i.e. a butterfly.

This makes me wonder
a) is Zhuang Zhou's dream of being something wholly other than he, actually possible, or must it be just a fabrication added to a dream about flying;
b) is it implied by a dream, in which self flies, that bodies and souls are separate, because bodies cannot fly?

Reference:

Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhuangzi_(book)

Marquard Dirk Pienaar
  • 173
  • 9
  • 2
    Considering that despite controversies psychologists mostly agree about the existence of the [multiple personality disorder](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissociative_identity_disorder) several "selves" can coexist even when awake. And some people self-identify with all sorts of animals, Zhuang Zhou apparently did. But how is this a question about philosophy? And how is it objectively answerable even if it was: "is it possible" according to whom? What does "where sensing takes place" means? Could you please clarify what you want answered here on SE. – Conifold Sep 19 '17 at 00:15
  • @Conifold, Taoism is regarded part of philosophy and the question is about an important part of Taoism. If answered honestly, from own experience, the answer would be objective. "Is it possible" according to dreamers, according to their own experiences during their dreams? When I dream, my senses work from myself. What I see or feel when dreaming happens from myself. I want to know if any person ever experienced a dream in which s/he was another, because it never happened with me. Does that help? – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 19 '17 at 05:44
  • The idea would be that it is all a dream, and the butterfly story is intended to put this thought in our heads. This is 'philosophical' Taoism, the view that the space-time world is a creation of Mind just like the dreamed butterfly. . –  Sep 19 '17 at 11:35
  • @PeterJ, the story causes extreme doubt about reality. Have you ever had a dream in which you were something other than self? – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 19 '17 at 12:05
  • A dream requires a subject and an object, a dreamer and a dream, an experiencer and an experience. Taoism asks us to journey beyond these dualities to Tao, and so to stop seeing our dreams as anything more than dreams. The story does not cause doubts about reality, it asks to to go and look for reality and stop assuming the dream is reality. –  Sep 19 '17 at 12:55
  • Questions involving philosophers and questions about philosophy (as understood here) are two different things. "According to dreamers, according to their own experiences" is a "what do you think" type of question soliciting primarily opinion-based answers, which is off-topic on this site. Please see [Help Center](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) – Conifold Sep 19 '17 at 17:46
  • 1
    @Conifold, knowing what you dream and honestly stating it is not opinion. It is fact. – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 19 '17 at 17:48
  • Yes, the kind of fact that psychologists study, not a subject for an answerable question on Philosophy SE, see [Dreams and Their Interpretation in Clinical Psychology](http://www.guidetopsychology.com/dreams.htm). What do you want people to say *philosophically*? Do you expect that their personal interpretations of what their dreams amount to will also be "fact"? Constraints on the answers have to come from you, and so far there are none to speak of. – Conifold Sep 20 '17 at 00:37
  • @Conifold, the question was primarily asked because of the functional philosophical influence, the story about the butterfly dream has on philosophy. The story has a functional influence on the concept reality. Zhuang Zhou removes his readers from recognizing reality. The question often asked; "What is reality?", is a result. The question thus have an influence on one of the most important concepts of philosophy; the idea Truth. The philosophy, functionalism is relevant. – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 20 '17 at 07:12
  • This is essentially the argument Descartes advances in [*Meditations*](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/descartes/1639/meditations.htm). As such, it's certainly on topic for philosophy, but I don't perceive a question here. What are you asking? While you touch on several questions, it seems like you provide an answer to each to your own satisfaction. Therefore it seems more as if you are advancing an argument (again, Descartes' argument from the *Meditations*) than legitimately soliciting answers. – Chris Sunami Sep 20 '17 at 14:49
  • @ChrisSunami, the question basically is, could Zhuang Zhou's story of the butterfly be true or does his story promote unwarranted scepticism? After I asked the question my own thoughts developed, which I added to the question, instead of answering my own question. I did not read Meditations, nor did I read about a dream of Descartes. You are not referring to "cogito ergo sum" are you? Looks like you have a possible answer. – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 20 '17 at 16:46
  • @MarquardDirkPienaar You should read *Meditations*, it's quite short, and I think you will find it relevant (full text is at the link I provided). Basically, the relevant part is that Descartes uses the phenomenon of dreams, among other things, to support the idea that the spirit is something separate from, and more fundamental than the body. // I'm afraid I still don't understand the thrust of your question, even with your clarification: Are you asking whether the phenomenon of dreams entails idealism? Or what philosophers might have thought so? – Chris Sunami Sep 20 '17 at 16:51
  • @ChrisSunami my view of the butterfly story is, it is not possible to dream self is something else, like a butterfly, because I experience (sense) things in dreams from my self. I want to know if someone else ever dreamed a similar dream to Zhuang Zhou's dream, in which s/he was something other than self. – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 20 '17 at 16:56
  • OK, I have edited to match my updated understanding of your question, and retracted my close vote. – Chris Sunami Sep 20 '17 at 17:07
  • I don't think the question of whether or not someone can dream that they are a different sort of being than a human is an important part of Taoism". The central philosophical problem that the dream raises is still there even if we all agree it's just a fable and the dream never happened. This question is a question about what is it possible to dream about and that's not a philosophical question, it's a psychological and or neurological question. If it gives you peace of mind I've had dreams where I am a tree, but that's just second hand anecdotal evidence to you. – Not_Here Sep 20 '17 at 20:25
  • @Not_Here, the question also relates to dualism because it asks whether dreams about flying implies bodies and souls are separate, because bodies cannot fly. Dualism is a topical philosophical problem. – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 21 '17 at 05:54
  • @MarquardDirkPienaar no the question is not about dualism. Asking something like "I had a dream that the moon was made out of marshmallows, does that imply that the moon is made out of marshmallows?", for example, is not an astronomy question even if it asks what the moon is made out of. Asking "I had a dream that I wasn't in my own body, does that imply dualism is real?" is not a philosophical question, and if that is your question the answer is clearly "no" for the same reasons the moon is not made out of marshmallows even if you dream that it is. – Not_Here Sep 21 '17 at 07:03
  • @Not_Here, you are complicating your issue by bringing the moon into it and by making comparisons. Focus on the question, which is partly "b) is it implied by a dream, in which self flies, that bodies and souls are separate, because bodies cannot fly?". If you want to discuss it further, I suggest we do it somewhere else, because these comments are not meant for discussion purposes. – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 21 '17 at 07:30
  • @MarquardDirkPienaar No, nothing is being complicated by showing exactly how your reasoning is wrong. "Does being able to dream something imply that it's real?" is exactly what you are asking, it sounds just as ridiculous with butterflies as it does with what the moon is made out of. Whether or not you can dream about actually being a butterfly has absolutely nothing to do with dualism being real or not. This is not a philosophy question. – Not_Here Sep 21 '17 at 10:39
  • @Not_Here, b) is a question about souls and bodies, which relates to dualism. Dualism is part of philosophy. Why don't you write your opinion in an answer? It seems you opine dreams are far from reality, therefore b) does not imply dualism. It is an answer, not a comment. Whether a question is already reasoning, like you say, is another question. The answers will reason the question. I don't want to contribute with answers because I asked the question, but you can. I can comment though. – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 21 '17 at 10:55
  • Let us [continue this discussion in chat](http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/65968/discussion-between-marquard-dirk-pienaar-and-not-here). – Marquard Dirk Pienaar Sep 21 '17 at 16:09

2 Answers2

1

I cannot give a non-opinion based answer to your two explicit questions, but I can give you some context for the second: This is a ancient and durable argument for either idealism, which is the concept that spirit is more fundamental and "real" than body, which is somehow generated by spirit, or dualism, which is the idea that both body and spirit are real and neither reduces to the other.

One influential version of the argument is by Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina (Avicenna), and called the "floating man" argument. It asks us to imagine being created floating in midair, with no sensory connection to the world around us. The mere fact that we can picture this, he claims, means that we are not solely bodies.

Another version is considered by Descartes in his famous Meditations, namely Meditation I and II, in which he considers the phenomenon of dreams as a challenge to the reliability of the senses. His eventual conclusion that the most essential part of people is our souls, not our bodies, is in part an extrapolation from that, and other similar evidence.

Chris Sunami
  • 25,314
  • 1
  • 44
  • 82
0

Several experiments of "out of body experience" or "body structure modification experience" have been tested through the Virtual Reality technology. I can't find the article, but they even tested that if the POV of a subject was transferred via VR set and 3D camera to a silicone mannequin and you poked the mannequin with a knife, the brain felt immediate danger as if it was its real body (even though you can clearly see that it's plastic).

a) From these experiments we can clearly see that you definitely can project yourself in a situation were your body is different from your original self. Even in situation where you are totally conscious that it isn't your body. It appears the brain recognizes something as its body as long as your senses perceptions remain somewhat coherent (you see a ball touching you, you fell it; you send the signal to move your fingers, they move; etc). Therefore, projecting yourself in a butterfly, in a dream where your brain doesn't need much coherence to build a "credible" experience, doesn't seem to be such stretch.

b) This doesn't imply dualism (as in an immaterial spirit and a material body) : everything is just your brain adapting to a new situation. What you call senses are just an abstraction made from the feedback your brain gets from the nerves. As long as when your eyes see your wings hit something, the nerves then indicate that you have hit something, your brain will adapt to the new situation. If you used to have arms, but are now impersonating a butterfly, your brain "reasoning" (adaptation process) would something like : "When this signal is triggered, I know that it is not my arms that hit something any more, it's my wings". Some neuron connections change and you now can feel through your wings. As long as it is coherent, your brain can adapt. You don't need dualism to explain that.

Velraen
  • 17
  • 2