Talk:Dream

Human dream

This article is specifically about human dreaming. Should there be a separate article about animal dreaming? Most mammals, most birds, some spiders, octopuses, cuttlefishes, etc. dream. We need to have encyclopedic work about that as well. Kingturtle = (talk) 12:09, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Do you have any reference to the empirical evidence that some spiders dream? Or in fact sources for any of the claims for other animals? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:21, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2024

The information saying it cannot be proven that animals dream is incorrect. See: https://news.mit.edu/2001/dreaming 97.151.160.203 (talk) 02:12, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. In particular, you need to show why your source should be used over the current one. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 12:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

That was 13 years ago. Here's another link. But the full details of the paper(s) in Neuron are not given. Seems to have been work at MIT by Matthew A. Wilson, on rats. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

People blind from birth do not have visual dreams

How do we know this? As long as the parts of your brain are there and can be stimulated some OTHER way, other than your eyes feeding you the images (such as when someone has a visual hallucination, for example, it's not coming from their eyes) It's just that they'd have no way to describe what it is, as they can have no concept of what colors and shapes are, unlike people who can see. 173.76.166.185 (talk) 01:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Misleading statement about Neuroscientist Indre Viskontas

Regarding the sentence,

"Neuroscientist Indre Viskontas is even more blunt, calling often bizarre dream content 'just the result of your interpreter trying to create a story out of random neural signaling.'"

The quote used for this is describing one theory of dreaming. The book Brain Myths Exploded doesn't suggest that this is the only, the best theory available or even the view of the author. For instance, she writes the following:

"The activation-synthesis hypothesis has some real limitations. For example, it predicts the way that we dream—the visual images, the bizarre nature, the distortions—but it doesn’t speak to what we dream. The model doesn’t explain the content of our dreams in any satisfying way."

It then goes on to describe other theories like dream-to-erase and the contemporary theory of dreaming. More broadly, this paragraph gives the impression that this theory is non-controversial, when according to this source it isn't even the best evidenced theory on the subject. Liam Seymour (talk) 20:30, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 June 2026

Please change the end of the first sentence to include the template

After all of the scientific research that has come out regarding dreams and dreaming over the last 50 years, this article is based on a dictionary definition. ~2026-32920-02 (talk) 00:23, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done - Not a huge deal, but in the future, please use {{tl}} so this page doesn't get added to the list of ones that require updating with a non-primary source. Thank you! pattersonuwu ^njz (talk) 02:57, 15 June 2026 (UTC)