Dream Ethics 3

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 2023

Unpleasant dreams occur much more frequently than many people realise. If one is a hedonistic utilitarian-or, at least, one thinks that dreams have positive or negative moral value in virtue of their experiential quality-then one has considerable reason to try to make such dreams more positive. Given it is possible to improve the quality of our dreams, we ought to be promoting and implementing currently available interventions which improve our dream experiences, and conducting research to find new, more effective interventions.

Dreaming has been a subject for debate for thousands of years as to what it entails and how it affects daily living. This paper goes into depth about if dreaming holds reality within, and if morality should be taken into consideration

philosophy of dreams, 2019

dreams play an important role in shaping our way of thinking, knowing and how to act accordingly.

Dreams are inseparable parts of our life. In the past some philosophical books had been studying philosophical aspects of this phenomenon and extracting its important points. But nowadays some philosophers do not take it seriously. In our age, discussion of dream is granted to other scholars such as Freud. He has reduced all dreams to unfulfilled desires. After him, this view of point has been accepted more or less by other scientists. Although dreams have been remained multidirectional among many people, but deep philosophical investigation has not done on it and has been granted to those that had not have necessary ability to discuss it multidirectional. Some branches of philosophy, including philosophy of religion, philosophy of mind, epistemology, ethics, and metaphysics, should study dreams. Surely it does not contrast other aspects of dream that psychologists and psychoanalysts consider it. The important heritage of philosophy, mysticism and religion about oneirology should be...

Academia Letters, 2021

Despite the common perception that dreams are utterly illogical, we do follow some common logic in our dreams, and this is attested by our capability of recalling the contents of dreams. Nevertheless, the logic of dreams naturally differs from our logic of sober thinking, although they do share the basic meaning that the notion of logic might connote. This writing will discuss some basic patterns of the logic of dreams to help better understanding dreams.

Daseinsanalyse 38 (2022) 68–79, 2022

Psychodynamic Practice, 2021

Referring to Freud's influential book, The Interpretation of Dreams, I have often heard individuals say that dreams are the via regia, the 'royal road', to the unconscious. Nevertheless, what Freud in fact wrote, was: 'But interpreting dreams is the via regia, the royal road to knowledge of the unconscious life of the mind' (Freud, 2006., p. 623). Key to Freud's statement is the work of interpretation. Working With Dreams, takes up this question not only of interpretation, but many other necessary elements in such work. To pick at random just a few themes in this timely-crafted work, Giegerich writes of: the dream as already an interpretation; the ontology of the dream's internal world; the significance of dreams in therapy; the soul's speaking; the proper attitude to dreams; who in the therapist interprets the dream; the dream as 'subject' and 'self'; the dream-I and the other; the dream and the patient; the ulterior purpose of and assignment for dream interpretation; beyond working with dreams. These are just some features of the abundant thinking in this seminal, deeply thoughtprovoking book. Central in this work on dreams is the process of dialectic. Such a dialectic brings up the question of who or what interprets the dream: the therapist, the dreamer, both or, the dream itself. Giegerich is a Jungian analyst, living and working in Berlin, Germany. As with his other prolific writings, he takes up and pushes off from Jung's psychology. His dialectical approach returns to and thinks through further Jung's unique insights. At the core of Working With Dreams is Jung's notion of a psychology with soul ('psyche' is the ancient Greek word for 'soul'). Jung writes, in English translation: '. .. we can perhaps summon up the courage to consider the possibility of a "psychology with the psyche"-that is, a theory of the psyche ultimately based on the postulate of an autonomous spiritual principle' (CW 8 § 661). In the German text, Jung speaks not of 'psyche' but Seele, 'Soul'. And not of an 'autonomous spiritual principle', but more fundamentally than this meaning given by the English translation, of an 'autonomous mind' (Geist). Giegerich, then, takes psychology at its word, namely, as the autonomous logos of the soul. Elsewhere, Jung defines psychology thus: 'Psychology, however, is neither biology nor physiology nor any other science than just this knowledge of the psyche' (CW 9i § 63). Psychology grounds itself.