Philosophy:Current theories of dream mentation

From HandWiki

Dream mentation is composed of 4 theories: Threat Simulation Theory (TST) and Social Simulation Theory (SST) introduced by Antti Revonsuo, Continuity Hypothesis (CH) introduced by Calvin Hall, and Mimetic Theory (MT) introduced by Jeannette Mageo.

Threat Simulation Theory

Antti Revonsuo hypothesizes in his Threat Simulation Theory (TST), originally proposed in 2000,[1] that there is an adaptive purpose to dreaming. His evolutionary hypothesis of dreaming states dreams simulate dreamers' real life threats to teach them how to escape, avoid or handle them in waking life. Through this rehearsal and repetition in dreams the dreamer improves their chance of survival in the waking world. Revonsuo argues dreams were incorporated/ selected for during human ancestral times. In the environment of the prehistoric Pleistocene humans were often subject to predators.. In dreams, animal attacks were simulated to give the dreamer the opportunity to prepare for an attack in real life to increase chance of survival. The environment of ancestral times have changed and with it have the threats to humans. Nowadays humans live through different kinds of threats like failing an exam, losing a job etc., but dreams still function as “threat scripts”.

Revonsuo's TST consists of 6 propositions that are empirically testable, except for his assumption of the evolutionary historical origin of “threat scripts”.(Revonsuo) Furthermore, Revonsuo and associate professor in cognitive neuroscience Katja Valli developed a Dream Threat Scale,[2] a quantitative content analysis to measure threats in dreams. TST focuses  on threatening dreams, like nightmares, dreams of fears and anger etc.

Social Simulation Theory

To think about non-threatening dreams Antti Revonsuo and Katja Valli propose the Social Simulation Theory (SST).[3] They hypothesize that non-threatening dream narratives (i.e. defined through the absence of fear or anger) function to simulate situations where the dreamer can rehearse and practice social interactions and skills with important social relationships. Social simulations are necessary for humans to constitute social bonds that are indispensable for survival like relationships with friends, family, significant others etc. Furthermore, they speculate dreams fail to display waking life's social realities, by being imaginally bizarre, reflecting a failure of the dreaming mind to simulate complex human interactions. In a paper published in 2016[4] the researchers reconsidered ideas of bizarre dream imagery as having underlying meaning for the dreaming mind to work on solutions dreamers have in their waking life.

Continuity Hypothesis

Calvin S. Hall introduced the Continuity Hypothesis (CH) arguing that dreams are a continuum of waking events and waking life worries. If humans worry about a specific problem it very likely appear, in one way or another, in a dream. Dreams reflect bonds/connections dreamers have with oneself, family or friends etc.

Hall used quantitative and comparative dream content analysis to test the CH. Implications of CH are that dreams and waking experience can be used for learning about the conscious mind.

Mimetic Theory

Jeannette Mageo hypothesizes in her mimetic theory (MT) that in dreams, dreamers think image-based (mimetically) about a specific topic, a cultural model. What seems like a variation of the waking life original (i.e. you are in your childhood home but “not quite” because there are stairs in it that reach into the sky) represents a comment on this model. Therefore, Mageo argues that visual “ambiguity is definitive of dreams”[5] and  is not a failure of the dreaming mind.

MT supports the idea that dreams are simulations of waking life but only “in preface to altering it.” [6] Dreams “meaningfully alter daily events, concerns and bonds.” [7] Dreams do not only simulate what is going on in the dreamers waking life (like SST and CH posit) but offer commentary through alterations, by using visual metaphors, on the cultural model (and its ideals) the dreamer is having ambivalence thoughts about. MT is unique in that it takes culture into consideration in dream theory.

The cognitive anthropologist Roy D’Andrade states cultural models are the “how to’s”: how humans conceive of and act in a domain of experience.[8] Working with D'Andrade definition, psychological anthropologist Jeannette Mageo describes cultural models as “cultural templates for perception and action.”[9]

Mageo argues nightmares use threat-to-survival metaphors to comment on problems or negative feelings associated with an internalized cultural model that the dreamer struggles with fulfilling as part of their social identity often because they have ambivalent thoughts about it.[10] Both CH and SST argue bizarreness is not definitive of dreams. Bizarreness, a repetition-with-variation (which is mimetic thinking), counts as one of seven types of visual ambiguity.[11] Mageo theorizes dreams are constituted through ambiguous images. Visual ambiguity is “constitutive to this thought process [of dreams] because the hyper-associative thinking evident in REM-type dreams [...] simulates and alters images of concerns and relationships."[12] Furthermore, Mageo argues that if a dream image closely resembles a waking life counterpart this indicates the dream is not commenting on this specific topic. The focus of the dream is ascertained through the mimetic repetition-with-variation, questioning and showing ambivalent thoughts (and how to resolve them) about a cultural model and therefore about its meaning for the dreamer.

References

  1. ↑ Revonsuo, Antti (December 2000). "The reinterpretation of dreams: An evolutionary hypothesis of the function of dreaming" (in en). Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (6): 877–901. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00004015. ISSN 0140-525X. PMID 11515147. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0140525X00004015/type/journal_article. 
  2. ↑ Revonsuo, Antti; Valli, Katja (2017-02-13) (in en). Dream Threat Scale. doi:10.1037/t57955-000. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/t57955-000. 
  3. ↑ Revonsuo, Antti; Tuominen, Jarno; Valli, Katja (2015). Thomas Metzinger, Jennifer M. Windt, MIND Group, MIND Group. "The Simulation Theories of Dreaming: How to Make Theoretical Progress in Dream ScienceThe Simulation Theories of Dreaming: How to Make Theoretical Progress in Dream Science: A Reply to Martin Dresler: A Reply to Martin Dresler" (in en). Open MIND. doi:10.15502/9783958570894. ISBN 9783958570894. http://www.open-mind.net/DOI?isbn=9783958570894. 
  4. ↑ Verfasser, Revonsuo, Antti. The avatars in the machine dreaming as a simulation of social reality. OCLC 971237798. http://worldcat.org/oclc/971237798. 
  5. ↑ Mageo, Jeannette Marie (2022). The Mimetic Nature of Dream Mentation: American Selves in Re-formation. Culture, Mind, and Society. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-90231-5. ISBN 978-3-030-90230-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90231-5. 
  6. ↑ Mageo, Jeannette Marie (2022). The Mimetic Nature of Dream Mentation: American Selves in Re-formation. Culture, Mind, and Society. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-90231-5. ISBN 978-3-030-90230-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90231-5. 
  7. ↑ Mageo, Jeannette Marie (2022). The Mimetic Nature of Dream Mentation: American Selves in Re-formation. Culture, Mind, and Society. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-90231-5. ISBN 978-3-030-90230-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90231-5. 
  8. ↑ D'Andrade, Roy G. (1995-01-27). The Development of Cognitive Anthropology (1 ed.). Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9781139166645. ISBN 978-0-521-45370-7. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/9781139166645/type/book. 
  9. ↑ Mageo, Jeannette Marie (2016). Dreaming culture : meanings, models, and power in u.s. american dreams.. [Place of publication not identified]: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-349-34087-3. OCLC 951513615. https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/951513615. 
  10. ↑ Mageo, Jeannette (December 2017). "Nightmares, abjection, and American not-quite identities.". Dreaming 27 (4): 290–310. doi:10.1037/drm0000060. ISSN 1573-3351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/drm0000060. 
  11. ↑ Marie., Mageo, Jeannette (2022). The Mimetic Nature of Dream Mentation. Springer International Publishing AG. ISBN 978-3-030-90231-5. OCLC 1295279891. http://worldcat.org/oclc/1295279891. 
  12. ↑ Mageo, Jeannette Marie (2022) (in en). The Mimetic Nature of Dream Mentation: American Selves in Re-formation. Culture, Mind, and Society. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-90231-5. ISBN 978-3-030-90230-8. https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-030-90231-5. 




Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Philosophy:Current_theories_of_dream_mentation&oldid=2572057"