Ok, I did second guess that.
I dont think this dream however is "way out there". I have no opinion about the venus fly trap as I was stuck with Croizat reference with them "dotting" the ground in Australia less the cell and not the organism makes the cut. That is a hard part of thinking heirarchically. It seems odd to me that I would have to attribute the fear say of a large form in a dream to God as I had this dream many years after I long ridded myself of not thinking that I was able to use science to ascend in a better way should God act in the way I was brought up or by means of a different religion I was not familiar or knowingly able to explain with.
I think the effect of dreaming was caused rather by Kant's page 121 (see below)
quote:
"With regard to what is statutory in religion, we may require biblical hermenutics (hermenutica scara) - which, since it has to do with a scientific system, cannot be left to the laity - to tell us whether the exegete's findings are to be taken as authentic or doctrinal. In the first case, exegesis must conform literally (phiologically) with the author's meaning. But in the second case the writer is free, in his exegesis, to ascribe to the text (philosophically) the meaning it admits of for morally practical purposes (the pupil's edification).
I think it was just my laity of thought that responded during sleep.
I thought that because Kant also wrote:
quote:
Here we have two mystical theories of feeling offered as keys to the problem of becoming the new man. What is at issue between them is not the object and end of all religion(which, both agree, is conduct pleasing to God), but the subjective conditions which are necessary for us to acquire the power to work out that theory in ourselves. The subjective condition in question cannot be virtue (which is an empty name to them), but only grace; for both sides agree that we cannot acquire this power naturally. But thier theories then diverge, since one side thinks we can escape from the dominion of the evil spirit only by a fearful struggle with it, whereas the other finds this quite unnecessary and even censures it as hypocritical; instead it straightaway concludes an alliacne with the good spirit, since the eariler pact with the evil spirit (as pactum turpe) can give rise to no objection to this.
p101-103
in Der Streit Der Fakultaten(The Conflict of the Faculties).
I would have had to ascribe grace to a dream state rationally while awake but this would cure rather than prevent any illness in me. It does not. I must repent only without begging. The science of this dream can ONLY be as a puzzle(reconstruction) being put together not the use of Scripture to relate dinos to creatures in the Bible for we can not claim to have had a supernatural experience but only to approach the unconditioned supersensibly BY REASON else it IS religious. So that determines the reflection on any philology possible interpretable by Freud or others the analysis of the plant eating meat seems more involved than that, to me.
™ Version 4.2
