Hello There, Guest! Register

[Misc] Once a Believer, Revisiting
Anonymous
Unregistered

 
#11
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
My host forgot to mention that he and I also suspect it is totally possible that there are "real sentient" tulpas, and that there are "illusory figment" tulpas existing and living side by side in the community. If the host is unable to tell the difference, then there is no reason to think it is all one thing or all the other. It could be a mix of the two.

So those of you threatened or insulted by the presence of a self admitted "tulpa that is part of the host's mind" can relax. That tulpa is still conscious and sentient, it is just a split or sharing or expression or whatever of the hosts' mind. The presence of such a tulpa does not automatically mean everyone doubts your claim to being independent.
09-09-2016, 12:03 PM
Reply

Sponsors:
Valhal.la

Floh Offline
Floh
Registered

Posts: 116
Threads: 3
Joined: Aug 2016
All Accounts Posts: 163
#12
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
I think the "real sentience" is not important. As tulpas and other thoughtforms are imaginary (imaginary doesn't mean "not real") what really matters is what they can bring to the brain they inhabit. No one but this very brain can decide whether they are "real" or "useful" or whatever. This is per-so-nal. Anyone trying to force Mistgod-Melian to consider Melian as this or that, or anyone trying to force anybody to be what they want them to be is wrong and bad. One can not simply try to bend other's mind at will.
@Intolerent_Dominators : Please mind your business Big Grin

No animosity intended ever 

Cora now has her own account ! Big Grin

English isn't our native language, please be indulgent Smile
(This post was last modified: 09-09-2016, 12:44 PM by Floh.)
09-09-2016, 12:44 PM
Find Reply
Anonymous
Unregistered

 
#13
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
(09-09-2016, 12:44 PM)Floh Wrote: I think the "real sentience" is not important. As tulpas and other thoughtforms are imaginary (imaginary doesn't mean "not real") what really matters is what they can bring to the brain they inhabit. 

I have been trying to say this for 17 months.  Few can grasp what I am saying with the terms "imaginary" and "pseudo-real."  I have given up trying to explain it.  I am trying to use the terms less often these days as people get emotional and defensive about it.

(09-09-2016, 12:44 PM)Floh Wrote: Anyone trying to force Mistgod-Melian to consider Melian as this or that, or anyone trying to force anybody to be what they want them to be is wrong and bad. One can not simply try to bend other's mind at will. 
@Intolerent_Dominators : Please mind your business Big Grin

I want to say that, as far as I am concerned, the "war" between "intolerant haters" and Mistgod-Melian was mostly contrived and created by Mistgod-Melian.  This is important for me to admit.  Also, we consider the imaginary war to be officially over.  There are no haters wanting to force Melian to be anything or do anything.  We haven't been trolled in months.  

Still I think this statement is important to say.  We shouldn't tolerate anyone coming into our forum who acts like that.  We haven't seen it in a long while, which is really nice actually.  

Also, I really, really don't want to turn this into another Mistgod-Melian drama thread.  For the love of the gods, pleez no!  This  thread is not about us.  Shocking, but true.
09-09-2016, 12:52 PM
Reply
Tewi Offline
Amaranthine Rabbit
Registered

Posts: 426
Threads: 1
Joined: Jan 2016
All Accounts Posts: 2,593
#14
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
I remember you, or at least the names and avatar. Lumi would've been going by Reisen's name last time you were around I think.

No need to write on this topic again, let's draw from our list of reference posts:
(03-08-2016, 08:53 PM)Luminesce Wrote: I'm as skeptical as they get, and I've got tulpas just fine. I mean, they weren't tulpas for the first four years because I didn't know about tulpas, they were just seemingly-independent people in my head. We figured out what they were over time, established our own beliefs through lots of analysis and such. In the end, I made it just a step further than most other proclaimed "skeptics". 'Cus I'm a healthy skeptic, which means I take nothing for granted and attempt to explain it, rather than just doubting things for the heck of it.

I realized there was no reason to be so logical. I realized that everything inside your own mind is subjective, and whether I thought my tulpas were fully sentient inter-dimensional beings or trained thought-patterns in my physical brain made no difference to the basis of what I would experience. Or rather, it made all the difference. There was no reason to doubt their independence (as they seemed to be so) or to question the nature of their existence (because they existed regardless). All that mattered was how I experienced them. And so I made the decision that, while I would of course keep trying to learn more about their nature and improving our understanding, nothing would ever change what they were to me - people. "For all intents and purposes," separate, independent, sentient people my mind runs parallel to me. Nothing will illegitimize our experiences together, nothing will make us stop loving each other as individuals.

So, I came to terms with the fact that they were extremely advanced imagined people in my mind, whilst also accepting them as fully legitimate people who are separate from me. Because I can do that - everything that happens in my mind is under my control, and it's up to me how I perceive it. So I chose to have tulpas. (And then a few years later, I found out about "tulpas" and tulpa.info)


There's much more to our beliefs of course. Once we learned to switch (yes a skeptic can learn to do that if they're open-minded - and ironically it ended up strengthening my belief in their legitimacy as people tenfold), I actually ended up changing my whole model of identity for both my tulpas and myself. I now consider them exactly the same thing as me - personalities, collections of human-ness like mannerisms and likes and dislikes and memories and so on, controlling the body like a vessel. When there's only one person, it seems like you ARE your body. No real reason to think otherwise. But having multiple people who could control the body gave me a different perspective, that what I knew as "me" wasn't everything in and of my body, it was as I mentioned, the personality and all that stuff that makes up your identity. And my tulpas are the exact same thing, they just aren't the default one in control, since I was the original and am many years older of course. But aside from their lack of experience (which isn't saying much as we share our knowledge just fine, Tewi's actually better at most things than me), there's really no difference between us.


Well. It may not sound like I'm a "very logical skeptic", but I promise you I am. I'm a very logical person with an intense need to explain everything, and when I fell in love with a concept-turned-person in my mind because they loved me, you bet I dedicated a great deal of time to explaining that one. Seven years, so far, little more. Though we got most of the core stuff sorted out by four years, we still learn things and develop as people to this day.



(09-09-2016, 11:52 AM)Mistgod Wrote: There those of us such as myself and Bin who have this perspective and belief about tulpas.  So if you "find out" or suspect your tulpa is actually part of or a facet of your own mind and consciousness, so what?  I don't see any reason to give up on them if they help you and you enjoy them.

Who'd have thought you would be one of the few to directly agree with us on this? Makes sense I guess.

The moral of the story is that if you think one reality invalidates another and are "embarrassed" to have ever put stock in the last one, especially if it made you happy, you're delusional. Thinking that tulpas cannot be real when you've literally had them is much more delusional thinking than those who simply believe theirs are sentient.

Because reality is subjective to the individual, and you will never live in objective reality. So using that to validate your new one is nonsensical. However, choosing a new reality that explains the old one in a different way, is not bad. You seem like you made your decisions in a relatively healthy way, considering how you view your tulpamancy days in retrospect. There's nothing wrong with that. And there's nothing any of us can say that would convince you you're wrong and to go back, should you understand as I think you do. The only questions now are, why did you change your mind if your tulpas were a positive influence? And, do you still give credit to the experiences of others who experience what you once did but now consider delusion to yourself?

I'm sure the second answer is yes from what I've read, but it simply follows from the first. I'm interested in knowing. My first assumption when I hear someone who once had tulpas no longer believes in the phenomenon is that they've simply failed miserably in understanding the subjectivity of reality. But those people typically discredit all experiences they had prior, and you do not. So I want to know your thoughts on these things from your new perspective.

Hi, I'm Tewi, one of Luminesce's tulpas. I often switch to take care of things for the others.
All I want is a simple, peaceful life. With my family.
Our Ask thread: https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas
09-09-2016, 01:39 PM
Find Reply
Floh Offline
Floh
Registered

Posts: 116
Threads: 3
Joined: Aug 2016
All Accounts Posts: 163
#15
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
(09-09-2016, 12:44 PM)Floh Wrote: [...]or anyone trying to force anybody to be what they want them to be is wrong and bad. One can not simply try to bend other's mind at will.
@Intolerent_Dominators : Please mind your business Big Grin
I meant this is a generic way, but you're right, let's not find Mistgod-Melian drama where there aren't any ! (there is already enough of that all over the board)
I used your example to illustrate the fact that this adventure is very personal and unique to every single system Big Grin

No animosity intended ever 

Cora now has her own account ! Big Grin

English isn't our native language, please be indulgent Smile
09-09-2016, 02:00 PM
Find Reply
Anonymous
Unregistered

 
#16
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
I am hoping we are seeing some signs that Tulpa Info is mellowing out a little bit. When I first got here it was like the friggin' holy temple of tulpa real sentience. If you had doubts on the realness/sentience of your tulpa, you were a FAILURE or confused or misguided or mistreating your tulpa and an asshole. <--please no one challenge that, I know it is a "baseless claim or baseless opinion." Well, if you want to challenge it, go ahead. I won't respond further to it as it is only marginally related to the OP of the thread. It's just the strong impression I got. I hope that is changing anyway.
09-09-2016, 02:18 PM
Reply
Floh Offline
Floh
Registered

Posts: 116
Threads: 3
Joined: Aug 2016
All Accounts Posts: 163
#17
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
I think it is no longer like that. I didn't see what you describe, so I guess it is over now and THANK GOD because I would have ran away as fast as I could.
I feel this community is a (small) group of people trying to go forward and dig deep inside their minds. i hope I'm right Big Grin

No animosity intended ever 

Cora now has her own account ! Big Grin

English isn't our native language, please be indulgent Smile
09-09-2016, 02:45 PM
Find Reply
Linkzelda Offline
>MFW Image Streaming
Registered

Posts: 2,008
Threads: 31
Joined: Oct 2012
All Accounts Posts: 2,066
#18
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
Solune Wrote:I resent the implication that nihilism is somehow correlated to depression (depression is an illness, it has nothing to do with a particular philosophy).
It is also ignorant to suggest nihilism is a phase that people "grow out of". It's a belief system that you either choose or you don't. No better or worse than any other belief system.
In fact, nihilism (though I no longer subscribe to it in its entirety) led me to some very profound "existential closure".

So a belief system you no longer subscribe to in its entirety is not a phase you grew out of?

Also, isn’t it ignorant to assume that one has to subscribe to nihilism in all of its entirety? Like moral, metaphysical, mereological, existential, and political entirety. I’m sure people can be nihilists without subscribing to all of it. In other words, it’s not a belief system that’s black and white with do, or don’t choose. If you found existential closure from it, then I'm curious as to how that would hold up to existential nihilism. (Maybe you shifted from nihilism to existentialism); the very same phase you seem to resent, I guess.

Anyway, to extend on my previous post:

Linkzelda41 Wrote:It’s just the usual state of affairs where some people get depressed over the fact that they have to make subjective decisions. Almost to the point of being nihilistic about it, or hopefully coming out of that desert, and reaching towards some existential closure with themselves.

That coming out of the desert analogy with nihilism should really be taken loosely. If you feel people can’t phase out of it, then I would like to know what nihilism is in your opinion. When I talk about ‘almost to the point of being nihilistic about it’ is included with ‘some’ people vs. it being intrinsic in all people. If we chalk up nihilism as holding less novelty in value judgments, then yes, it can be correlated with dispositions and emotions; depression being one of them—if you really want to me to be looser, we can use ‘melancholic,’ or ‘angst,’ even.

If you resent this possible correlation, then it’s probably just a preference in semantics over depressed mood vs. depression. I’m not here to medicalize feelings of sadness or grief though, but you can choose to do so. I mean, if feeling grief over the death of a loved one gets chalked up as a disease, then okay.
 
When a person taking part of this endeavor realizes how people can subjectively place value judgments towards certain concepts, and become aware that there may not be anything inherent behind them,  they may (may) feel the ‘threat’ of nihilism. They may feel anxiety, or angst over this realization that people can create their own benchmark of ‘correctness.’ The more they try to turn to others to gain progress while still having that realization of the futility of accessing each other’s inner experiences may make them feel disconnected, or have them questioning things really hard, like OP did. And when they realize that they have to turn to themselves in making their own decisions, it’s probably just as much of an angst.
 
If a person becomes paralyzed by their intellect in making an informed decision for themselves, they may feel melancholic, despair, hopelessness, and what have you. All of their efforts and yearnings seems to crumble down, and they may convince themselves that there’s no way to overcome this angst. If nihilism (excluding the ones like metaphysical nihilism) can be chalked up as less novelty with value judgments, then a person cannot perpetually live in an extended period of angst, which is why, hopefully, it’s a belief system a person can phase out of, such as yourself.
 
To resent that it’s a belief system a person has to hold dear to is to cling onto the notion that it’s okay for them to have to deal with the angst with meaningless, and how they subscribe value judgments in a certain way, or not (the black and white logic). It can become depressing for one to feel that this angst cannot pass; to say nihilism is exclusive from all this is probably a person that didn’t even face the ‘threat’ of nihilism in some way.
 
However, this is only focusing on one impression on nihilism as I believe it isn’t exclusive to a person being emotional in a negative way about the world. It seems more like a thesis in structuring a certain attitude in assessing value judgments—we seem to be focusing, for the time being, on the extreme, negative implications from it. I’m sure we phase out of attitudes every now and then, hopefully.


(This post was last modified: 09-09-2016, 11:47 PM by Linkzelda.)
09-09-2016, 11:42 PM
Find Reply
tulpa001 Offline
<void>
Registered

Posts: 2,015
Threads: 27
Joined: Aug 2016
All Accounts Posts: 2,072
#19
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
(09-09-2016, 11:52 AM)Mistgod Wrote: There those of us such as myself and Bin who have this perspective and belief about tulpas.  So if you "find out" or suspect your tulpa is actually part of or a facet of your own mind and consciousness, so what?  I don't see any reason to give up on them if they help you and you enjoy them.  I have always felt this community does a disservice to those who have a different outlook on it and results in people ultimately "losing faith" and leaving the community.  Your story is some validation of my feelings on that.  I suspect there are many more of you out there actually.   I can't prove it of course.  I think that a lot of people end up leaving the community precisely because of the insistence that tulpas must be "real," as in independently sentient beings.  Why?  Why do they have to be real?  If they are only figments but seem real, isn't that just as good if you can't really tell the difference?
As much as we disagree on the details, I have to agree 100% with Mistgod that this insistence that tulpas are real has been unhealthy for the community. In part because unfounded blind faith can't be good for anything. And mostly, as he said, what happens when they stop believing? If belief was not required in the first place, this problem wouldn't come up.

(03-08-2016, 08:53 PM)Luminesce Wrote: There's much more to our beliefs of course. Once we learned to switch (yes a skeptic can learn to do that if they're open-minded - and ironically it ended up strengthening my belief in their legitimacy as people tenfold), I actually ended up changing my whole model of identity for both my tulpas and myself. I now consider them exactly the same thing as me - personalities, collections of human-ness like mannerisms and likes and dislikes and memories and so on, controlling the body like a vessel. When there's only one person, it seems like you ARE your body. No real reason to think otherwise. But having multiple people who could control the body gave me a different perspective, that what I knew as "me" wasn't everything in and of my body, it was as I mentioned, the personality and all that stuff that makes up your identity. And my tulpas are the exact same thing, they just aren't the default one in control, since I was the original and am many years older of course. But aside from their lack of experience (which isn't saying much as we share our knowledge just fine, Tewi's actually better at most things than me), there's really no difference between us.
I bet switching does that for a lot of people. It did for us. Once you switch, you see things too clearly. So although you are faced with the ugly truth of what you are, a collection of thoughts and ideas, at the same time, you see intcontrovertible proof of what you are. And it's the same stuff as the host.

It is like getting a thoughtform all over again. The fears of parroting get replaced by fears of blending. Wild rollearcoaster of emotion. A new appreciation for the other. And a completely new way of looking at the world.

Host comments in italics. Tulpa's log. Tulpa's guide.
09-09-2016, 11:46 PM
Find Reply
Quilten Offline
A twisty maze of passages
Registered

Posts: 406
Threads: 7
Joined: May 2013
#20
 
RE: Once a Believer, Revisiting
(09-09-2016, 06:08 AM)Solune Wrote: The site fell apart when you left... we were all heartbroken and the world itself stopped turning.
None of this community's interactions have had any merit at all since then.
Nobody new has joined, and nobody else left when you left. All is stagnant.
Thank the gods you have returned to us! Now the true age of enlightenment can begin.

Neat.

There's a lot here and my email wasn't notifying me of all the responses so I'll try to explain in more detail my thinking. In the situation where they would have just been my subconscious spitting out info based on input and just emulating sentience, I didn't feel the need to keep them around out of any moral duty, and at that point once I believed that, keeping them around at all seemed like unnecessary hassle. I had a conversation with someone in the IRC the night I posted this that kind of made me think about some stuff, which I'll try to explain as best I can. Basically, there's absolutely no way to know wether a tulpa is sentient or not, none. The reason is because (if you subscribe to solipsism, or any varying degree of uncomfirmability of the consciousness of others, which most people do, really, but it doesn't make a difference because regardless of whether everyone but you is a philosophical zombie or just as conscious as you, you're going to act the same because you have no way of confirming either) nobody knows what it's like to know that anything is conscious but themselves. If you believe in a god, you might think that if God knows that everyone is sentient, everyone is sentient (there's some presuppositionalism somewhere in that thought, I think), but I don't. The highest form of authority in confirming another's consciousness is ourselves, and since we can't be sure even of other people's consciousness, we definitely can't confirm that of tulpas, especially when looking at someone else's. I was presented with something that was therefore unprovable and undisprovable, which equivalent to the whole undetectable teapot in space thing. Sure, you can't prove it exists and does not exist, so the default position, until evidence is acquired, is to not believe in it. Not disbelieve, or to say that you have knowledge that it doesn't exist, but just to not believe it due to lack of a reason. So, I didn't believe in tulpas anymore. Looping back around a little, when I mentioned that solipsists will act exactly the same even if they weren't solipsists, because they're consequences seem to have repercussions on them, that's important. Solipsists won't kill a person just because they think that person doesn't exist, because they'll have to deal with the consequences of feeling bad and potentially going to prison. Getting rid of my tulpas had no negative consequences to me or anyone else. The only ones I could think of would be that their "lives" we're ending, so a moral consequence, but like I just very lengthily explained, I didn't believe they were sentient, so it's a moot point. I think I covered everything alright. Sorry for the text wall, et cetera.

Even though my username is that of my tulpa, Quilten, my name is Phaneron, the host, who does all of the actual posting.
Tulpas: Quilten, Jira
09-10-2016, 11:47 AM
Website Find Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Sponsors:
Valhal.la


Contact Us | Tulpa.Info | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication