We group dreams, sleep paralysis, and night terrors by when they occur.
But that says little about what actually happens within them.
When you compare the features, the boundaries don’t hold as well as we assume.
Dreams and sleep paralysis are often treated as separate.
But people report the same kinds of experiences in both.
The difference is usually how they’re interpreted.
Some experiences we call dreams don’t behave like dreams.
They repeat, follow structure, and involve interaction.
I’ve begun mapping this as Dream Contact, part of the Threshold Contact Experience framework.
https://t.co/ysiyDRbNc9
Dreams and sleep paralysis are treated as different categories.
But some dream experiences repeat, show structure, and involve interaction.
At that point, the distinction becomes less clear.
Sleep paralysis is usually explained before it’s properly described.
What’s missing isn’t explanation, it’s structure.
A framework for Threshold Contact Experience (TCE).
https://t.co/DMf23HcJUi
I’ve published a foundational framework for what is commonly called “sleep paralysis” on Substack
Not as a disorder.
But as a structured form of contact.
This is the beginning of a wider system.
https://t.co/oyqoHxBJ6d
Categories help us organise experience, but they can also hide connections between phenomena.
Many experiences reported during sleep paralysis, contact events, and psychic states share overlapping features.
More reflections on these ideas at TRANSCEND see bio.
Why are sleep paralysis, contact experiences, and psychic phenomena usually studied in separate domains?
In this essay I explore how the categories we use shape what we think these experiences are.
New post on TRANSCEND:
https://t.co/6Ffl8t5MgD
#Sleepparalysis#Consciousness
Sleep paralysis is often explained through parasomnia and REM intrusion models.
Yet many experiencers report structured perceptual features that remain poorly understood.
Understanding these experiences requires careful description before explanation.
More on Substack.
Many people remain silent about unusual experiences because they anticipate one of two reactions: medicalisation or belief.
This essay examines why.
https://t.co/m5srybYeag
Many unusual experiences are explained in one of two ways: pathology or belief.
But what happens when neither category is sufficient?
New Substack essay: The Limits of Pathology and Belief