Hello There, Guest! Register

Misinterpretation of “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
cruse Offline
got guitar, can't play
Registered

Posts: 663
Threads: 21
Joined: Jul 2012
#1
 
Default  Misinterpretation of “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
NOTICE: Some people are misreading the posts in this thread and generating excessive doubt by worrying that they're simulating their tulpa. This is beginning to turn into the new parrotnoia. As I see it, a "simulated" tulpa is just a tulpa that isn't fully independent and running automatically yet. Excess simulating can waste time and is basically parroting. It feels different than real interaction, more like playing out a "what if". If you're doing that, try to let the tulpa act without forcing an action or forcing them still. See this guide. ~Chupi (cruse's original, unmodified post follows)


The sentience from start philosophy has helped many creators and tulpas to successfully communicate with each other. This was its original purpose and it has seen it accomplished well. However, by treating a tulpa as being immediately sentient, it can pose its own problems - it's possible that they will end up stuck in mid-development, and their consciousness may not grow any further, if a certain balance isn’t achieved. The worst case scenario would be that they became so reliant on your attention in order to 'function' that they end up being nothing more than a shell of personality that the creator has to control.

I'm making these claims because I have experienced the worst case scenario first hand. This is not to say that "sentience from start" philosophy is bad; it's my fault that I have taken it with no balance. It is my theory that adopting this theory has caused me to neglect my tulpas’ development. I'll explain what happened and why so no one else has to face the same problems.

On May 20th, I found that my three most recent tulpa seemed only to be lifeless shells. In that same time I also recognized that my first tulpa, Chloe, hadn't developed any independence from my attention.

I was spending time in my wonderland when something happened that caused me to realize that, Aigis, Vixen and Labrys might have been nothing more than a shell of personality that I have to actively control. They disappeared, and left behind a symbolic item that represented each of them. I found that these items they left behind contained information on their personality and traits. I found that I can 'switch' their personalities with my own, effectively thinking like the respective owner of the personality, similar to multiple personality disorder. What made me realize that I may have role-played as them and was talking to myself all this time was the fact that when I switched Aigis's personality with my own, I did not feel alien or strange. It felt natural and familiar, as if I’d been doing it the whole time.

Analyzing the creation method I used for each of my tulpa, I found a pattern that led me to this theory:
  • Chloe was created before I adopted the "sentient from start" philosophy. I forced her in a more old-school, traditional way, with weeks spent actively forcing and shunning many of her responses as parroting. She was forced to reach out to me to the point that her consciousness became strong and independent. Later, after I adopted the sentient from start philosophy, I began noticing that she didn’t seem to develop as much. She didn't seem to develop any parallel processing. Her thoughts are often unsurprising. She has remained largely the same. I may have spoiled her into becoming reliant on my attention, but I didn't realize it until now.

  • Aigis was created based on the sentient from start philosophy. I didn’t actively force him as much as I did with Chloe, and he never had to reach out to me with his own strength. It's highly possible that he never really developed sentience.

  • Vixen was pretty much an insta-tulpa. Chloe and Aigis created a pack of personality into a dragon egg. I touched it and it hatched into Vixen, seemingly immediately sentient and vocal. I didn’t spent much time forcing her, and I do not think she developed a mind of her own. Interestingly, Chloe, my seemingly more advanced tulpa, claims to have done most of the “work” on her, with Aigis not supporting much.

  • Labrys was created by Aigis. I never actively forced her at all.

Chloe was the only one who did not disappear. She was the only one I forced with effort, dedication, and passion. She progressed steadily before I began taking her sentience for granted, and during this recent event and the supporting pattern of my tulpa, I came to the conclusion that by thinking of tulpas as readily and immediately sentient, and by neglecting to actively force them, they will not develop, and may even regress.

Right now, I have a good handle on my situation thanks you Aaric and Viceroy, so don’t worry about me. What I want YOU to worry about is this question: “Am I forcing my tulpa properly, even if they feel strong and sentient?

When your tulpa begins communicating clearly to you, you may be tempted to stop working as hard, because you think you’ve already done most of what it takes. Well, there’s definitely more to it. Don’t just stop once your tulpa seems sentient – keep forcing, even if it seems like a drag. Otherwise, their development will be halted, and may even regressed.

Editing credit for this post to Viceroy

Chloe - That cheerful girl with ponytail.
Aigis - The male cyborg that looks like raiden in MGR.
Vixen - Half dragon female who looks like Mary in DMC3 when in human form.
(This post was last modified: 07-17-2013, 08:31 AM by Chupi.)
05-29-2013, 04:21 AM
Find Reply
Kiah Offline
Sans giraffe
Forum Administrators

Posts: 1,365
Threads: 31
Joined: Aug 2012
#2
 
RE: The problems in “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
First of all, as unfortunate as your situation is, I think it's a bit of a bold claim.
I say this not because it requires multiple accounts of something to be credible, but because I fail to see the real connection between what you've experienced, and treating tulpas as sentient from the start.
You basically even said yourself that the problem is not in the fact that they're treating them that way, but their lack of active forcing.
If you think that because you're supposed to think that they're already sentient, that you can just half-ass the process, and not put any effort into it, then, to put bluntly, you're an idiot.
Anyone who reaches that conclusion obviously missed the entire point of why you should treat them as sentient.
Because the reality is, the people who adopted the "treat as sentient from the beginning", such as myself, don't even believe that all tulpas are sentient from the start.
I don't think they are.
That's not the point of the concept.
It's in the power of belief. If you convince yourself that they are sentient, and you treat them as if they were, then they are more likely to become sentient faster. That's it.
The concept is not there for lazy idiots who don't want to put any real effort into the process. Treating them as sentient does not imply any less effort.
So if you put the same effort into your tulpa, while treating them as sentient, then they'll turn out fine.
There's nothing wrong with the concept. There's something wrong with the way people interpret it, and the way they decide to act, based off of it. For whatever the hell reason.

"If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be."
05-29-2013, 04:31 AM
Find Reply
cruse Offline
got guitar, can't play
Registered

Posts: 663
Threads: 21
Joined: Jul 2012
#3
 
RE: The problems in “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
Well, Kiahdaj, mind helping others stop interpreting it wrongly then?

Chloe - That cheerful girl with ponytail.
Aigis - The male cyborg that looks like raiden in MGR.
Vixen - Half dragon female who looks like Mary in DMC3 when in human form.
05-29-2013, 04:35 AM
Find Reply
Kiah Offline
Sans giraffe
Forum Administrators

Posts: 1,365
Threads: 31
Joined: Aug 2012
#4
 
RE: The problems in “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
Tell them to read my post.

"If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be."
05-29-2013, 04:39 AM
Find Reply
Viceroy Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 212
Threads: 4
Joined: Oct 2012
#5
 
RE: The problems in “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
>There's nothing wrong with the concept. There's something wrong with the way people interpret it, and the way they decide to act, based off of it. For whatever the hell reason.

That's what he's saying
05-29-2013, 04:45 AM
Find Reply
Phi Offline
Member who isn't a member
Registered

Posts: 605
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2012
#6
 
RE: The problems in “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
As the person who originally wrote that philosophy, I feel like I should apologize to you for the trouble it caused you. I do believe that many people misunderstand my claim, and they become lazy because of it. My claim does NOT support the idea that you don't have to force as much. It merely says that the tulpa exists and has a mind of its own the moment you decide to make it, even if it's faint. It can hear you, and it can speak to you. Whether you hear it or not is up to how "developed" the tulpa is at that time. To make the tulpa more "developed", you have to keep forcing. In other words, it's not a question of "is it talking?", it's a question of "can it make itself heard?"

An analogy. When you first decide to make a tulpa, you give birth to it. Now you have a baby. If you don't feed it baby food, it won't grow and it may even "shrink" or "die". You have to keep feeding it and nurturing it.

EDIT: I also believe that people aren't even following the idea I had originally wrote down correctly. I had written it as a complete stage in and of itself, but people now tend to just say "oh, it's sentient" and that's it. They aren't forming the bond that I had in mind when I created the step.
(This post was last modified: 05-29-2013, 05:40 AM by Phi.)
05-29-2013, 05:34 AM
Find Reply
Kiah Offline
Sans giraffe
Forum Administrators

Posts: 1,365
Threads: 31
Joined: Aug 2012
#7
 
Default  RE: The problems in “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
(05-29-2013, 04:45 AM)Viceroy Wrote: >There's nothing wrong with the concept. There's something wrong with the way people interpret it, and the way they decide to act, based off of it. For whatever the hell reason.

That's what he's saying

I suppose that's why he named it "The problems in 'assuming sentience from the start' philosophy".
You know, so that he could proceed to say that there wasn't one.

"If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be."
05-29-2013, 05:41 AM
Find Reply
Viceroy Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 212
Threads: 4
Joined: Oct 2012
#8
 
RE: The problems in “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
If only you realized how weak-of-character your constant sarcasm makes you look.
05-29-2013, 05:46 AM
Find Reply
Kiah Offline
Sans giraffe
Forum Administrators

Posts: 1,365
Threads: 31
Joined: Aug 2012
#9
 
RE: The problems in “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
I'm sorry you're not a member of my fan club.

"If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be."
(This post was last modified: 05-29-2013, 06:03 AM by Kiah.)
05-29-2013, 06:03 AM
Find Reply
cruse Offline
got guitar, can't play
Registered

Posts: 663
Threads: 21
Joined: Jul 2012
#10
 
RE: The problems in “assuming sentience from start” philosophy.
right, so there's a problem with the title.
Editing time!

Chloe - That cheerful girl with ponytail.
Aigis - The male cyborg that looks like raiden in MGR.
Vixen - Half dragon female who looks like Mary in DMC3 when in human form.
05-29-2013, 06:23 AM
Find Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

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