Stanford Tulpa Study looking for more participants
(if you're chosen they'll pay for travel and lodging!)

Use of Psychedelic Drugs Severely Hurts Tulpa Info Credibility
#31
I will not make any comment on that, but what I will say is that there are still people that come in with inquiries about tulpamancy, there are still people who, after months, have no real results, or very weak results in terms of how 'imposing' they are. Just look at the PR section, look at how many people are 'facing issues', how many beginners seem to worry about the duration, go on IRC, talk to people like Auriroth and the likes.
I will not make a comment on that because I believe that a lot of people in this community tend to pretend, and I've seen distinctions between 'pretending' and having a tulpa. It is not pleasant to hear that from me so I won't admit it as a reality, but that was just to explain my reason for which I won't make a comment, else we'd go into a whole different topic.

Yes it does require efforts, concentration and attention. The glasses in your avatar seem to imply you can read well so you should understand the site's definition of a tulpa and understand that making a different person in your head does take efforts. To add on to my point, I've seen a lot of people who made tulpas 'very fast', chemical enhancers or not, facing a world of issues and ordeals (e.g Raelyn25 from IRC, for instance.), while people who spent a lot of time until they got an answer and took their time while giving attention, care, etc... seem to face less issues, while there are still concerns about parroting and the likes, there seems to be less issues overall.

Overall, I think that discussing this point of view would drive us into a completely different discussion; One I would be glad to take part in, but in another thread.

To address your second point, no, not at all. As you know, people tend to be skeptical about anything that's related to drugs and your mind, let's take tripping as an example, nothing is actually real but it seems quite vivid to the guy who's having the trip, correct? I'd compare it to this whole thing, because now, with the methods, guides (old ones, as you said), there is a basis, logical explanation as to HOW tulpas exist. Wait. If there was a doubt-mongering part (loved the expression), people would doubt the guides and methods at hand all the same, no? But since it's about drugs, and drugs CAN give you a lot of hallucinations/the psychosis Mistgod spoke of in his original post, I think that you're kind of wrong.

Experiences issued from a trip, or drugs overall, as I previously said, don't tend to sound credible to most people. I'm not saying they aren't, I'm trying to adapt an impartial point of view deprived of bias and speaking logically, but most people would, as a matter of fact, just straight out call bullshit on this whole thing; Because the methods we have MAKE SENSE in layman's terms, to put it that way. 'You imagine a being, you talk to it, you give it a name and traits, and voila, after a few months you have a tulpa, and you will need to experiment stuff with your tulpa, make it go through stuff, it will have emotions, problems, epiphanies of their own, etc...' is what I mean, not 'Alright so you smoke this kind of herb/plant, and you will get a hallucination that IS SUPPOSED to be your tulpa, next....', just the start of this will bring up even MORE suspicion and skepticism overall, to anyone, anyone at all. We tend to try to study this phenomenon from the most scientific side of things (even though I would agree with Mistgod when it comes to pseudo-science, heh).

They give a general idea, though, that's something you cannot deny. As I said, as a demonstration of that, go on the IRC and try to talk to the people over there about their general idea of tulpamancy, it tends to be the same as what the methods/guides/main site promotes, and then you have the meta folks but we're not talking of meta in here.

I think that you're biased, but in the same while, Mistgod also seems biased considering he cares for the well-being of youngsters and is an educator, and also sees bad stuff in drugs, bad stuff that beats the good stuff. I'm not speaking of morality or ethics, though.

Wait, dude. If you need to, like, read each line of my post, stop, put down your glasses, drink some coffee and spit it on the screen then resume reading my post, you might have a problem with comprehending the stuff I tell you, because I said that my personal opinion had no place in this discussion in the same paragraph... And I'm Bizarro. Hm. I apologize if I hurt some of your IRC-friends (*cough*), but that should be no reason for me to be mocked for no reason.

What actually happens is a world of possibilities, though. As I said, and keep on saying, now for the third time, drug usage has proved to be largely relative, and there IS a possibility, which really does matter. A lot of stuff happens with people but there's a general identification for this phenomenon as we know it (force--->make tulpa--->live with tulpa), odd cases happen, but drugs are a whole different thing, because every experience is really, really relative to the user.
Reply

Sponsors:
Lolflash - click it, you know you want to

#32
(08-31-2015, 08:27 PM)Mistgod Wrote: Let's go a new route. Let's say it is your seventeen year old daughter who wants to make a tulpa. LSD okay waffles?

Man, you're such a teacher, pulling out that argument. And it seems like it should work too, every time. But the response is always something like "My daughter could think for herself, and after informing her of the possible risks and benefits and seeing that she understands, I would let her make her own decision." How boring.

I would personally convince my children that drugs alter who they are and illegitimize their experiences to a large part of society, and then tell them they can do what they want as long as they think it through. And then I would be very concerned if they somehow managed to get a hold of said drugs.. But hey, I'm not an advocate.

---

Whelp. I was originally going to say "You might not want to ask that, you might regret the response". Was not wrong.
Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.
Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.
My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us stuff.
Reply
#33
(08-31-2015, 08:39 PM)Luminesce Wrote: Man, you're such a teacher, pulling out that argument. And it seems like it should work too, every time. But the response is always something like "My daughter could think for herself, and after informing her of the possible risks and benefits and seeing that she understands, I would let her make her own decision." How boring.......
Whelp. I was originally going to say "You might not want to ask that, you might regret the response". Was not wrong.

Thanks. It was more thinking like a dad than a teacher I think. But thanks.

I wonder if I said "your 23 year old daughter" instead, if that would make a difference for some? The answer would not change for me. It would still be unthinkable.

EDIT: I added something to the end of the original OP along these lines of reasoning.
Reply
#34
I agree with Mistgod, I do not see how drug use can be a good reputation for tulpamancers or this community and I do not see why people would risk their health as well as mental health to create and talk to tulpas when it can be done without, drugs have destroyed many peoples lives and even mental health, I still don't see how it can be allowed to discuss the benefits of different drugs and tulpas.
I'm worried about younger members, if I had a teenage kid I wouldn't want him or her to think it is positive to use drugs at all.
Reply
#35
(08-31-2015, 09:01 PM)Elvode Wrote: I agree with Mistgod, I do not see how drug use can be a good reputation for tulpamancers or this community and I do not see why people would risk their health as well as mental health to create and talk to tulpas when it can be done without, drugs have destroyed many peoples lives and even mental health, I still don't see how it can be allowed to discuss the benefits of different drugs and tulpas.
I'm worried about younger members, if I had a teenage kid I wouldn't want him or her to think it is positive to use drugs at all.

Because some people want to make tulpas fast. Some people don't want to deal with whatever issues the awful old methods tell you to do, they think it's easy... were it so easy. (Play on words not intended)
Reply
#36
(08-31-2015, 09:01 PM)Elvode Wrote: I agree with Mistgod, I do not see how drug use can be a good reputation for tulpamancers or this community and I do not see why people would risk their health as well as mental health to create and talk to tulpas when it can be done without, drugs have destroyed many peoples lives and even mental health, I still don't see how it can be allowed to discuss the benefits of different drugs and tulpas.
I'm worried about younger members, if I had a teenage kid I wouldn't want him or her to think it is positive to use drugs at all.

OMG! Thank you! I have been losing my mind all day over this. I was despairing and beginning to lose all hope. THANK YOU!
Reply
#37
People today want shortcuts for everything, people in world of warcraft is so lazy they need portals... in a game...to go everywhere.. creating a tulpa takes dedication and time.
Everyone use whatever method they want but I would never destroy my own mind or body for a tulpa, that is going too far.. I see it becoming very unhealthy to have a tulpa if drugs need to be used for progress or creation.
Tulpas do have this tiny reputation about health benefits, why destroy it with drugs..
Reply
#38
I would love to hear an affirmative of some kind from a mod or an admin. What I am getting so far is pretty much "Mistgod's point is attention seeking and/or a non-issue on this forum. We take a neutral and unconcerned stance on it." Have you even seen what people are talking about in the chat? Everyone was all concerned about Melian's silly antics and shit posting driving away new members. But what about talking about getting high to make your tulpa experience better? Is that good for our image? And yes, I have seen it being discussed in the chat several times and definitely on the forum.
Reply
#39
(08-31-2015, 08:39 PM)Anderson Wrote: And I'm Bizarro. Hm. I apologize if I hurt some of your IRC-friends (*cough*), but that should be no reason for me to be mocked for no reason.

No, Bizarro-Anderson is bizarro. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro_World. My point was that an alternative version of you could be saying what you said, except applied to forcing in broad. Not making fun or anything.

(08-31-2015, 08:39 PM)Anderson Wrote: What actually happens is a world of possibilities, though. As I said, and keep on saying, now for the third time, drug usage has proved to be largely relative, and there IS a possibility, which really does matter. A lot of stuff happens with people but there's a general identification for this phenomenon as we know it (force--->make tulpa--->live with tulpa), odd cases happen, but drugs are a whole different thing, because every experience is really, really relative to the user.

Really? Honestly, I would have said that drugs tend to have broadly consistent experiences associated with them. Sure, there's variation. But that variation isn't exactly mystical; we can look at it and say how likely having certain experiences in. As I said, there IS a possibility of tulpas going wrong for some people, drugs regardless. But it's something you don't pay much attention to because it's not the usual experience.


(08-31-2015, 08:39 PM)Anderson Wrote: Yes it does require efforts, concentration and attention. The glasses in your avatar seem to imply you can read well so you should understand the site's definition of a tulpa and understand that making a different person in your head does take efforts.

Well, even the definition isn't like, set in stone, but no, it doesn't directly imply that. You might expect that, but then, how much effort? What's the amount of effort you'd expect a priori? A mature adult takes decades. What about months, weeks, years? Days? Seriously, it's totally nonobvious how much effort is 'enough' effort.

(08-31-2015, 08:39 PM)Anderson Wrote: To add on to my point, I've seen a lot of people who made tulpas 'very fast', chemical enhancers or not, facing a world of issues and ordeals (e.g Raelyn25 from IRC, for instance.), while people who spent a lot of time until they got an answer and took their time while giving attention, care, etc... seem to face less issues, while there are still concerns about parroting and the likes, there seems to be less issues overall.

Yeah, that's totally true. I'm on board here, 100%. As I said before, I'd prefer that people do go the long road over it, one reason for which being what you just said. But, said issues might be better to face than an absolute roadblock in creation, to give the other extreme. Or, maybe there are methods to 'cope' with faster creation that would patch this without slowing things - I have my ideas as to why it is, anyway, though they're not really relevant.


(08-31-2015, 08:39 PM)Anderson Wrote: To address your second point, no, not at all. As you know, people tend to be skeptical about anything that's related to drugs and your mind, let's take tripping as an example, nothing is actually real but it seems quite vivid to the guy who's having the trip, correct?
[...]
Experiences issued from a trip, or drugs overall, as I previously said, don't tend to sound credible to most people.

Okay, sure, agreed. Like, if it was only possible to interact with tulpas while high, I'd think the same thing. But it isn't, it wouldn't be. Really not sure if you've replied to this before, but we're not exactly talking about a drugs-only forcing method. If what's under consideration is taking drugs to enhance communication, vividness of whatever, or even as a creation aid - but not as the only way of communication - then I don't see how this is a problem. You still have a tulpa, when you take the drugs away.



(08-31-2015, 08:39 PM)Anderson Wrote: I'd compare it to this whole thing, because now, with the methods, guides (old ones, as you said), there is a basis, logical explanation as to HOW tulpas exist. [...]
Because the methods we have MAKE SENSE in layman's terms, to put it that way. 'You imagine a being, you talk to it, you give it a name and traits, and voila, after a few months you have a tulpa, and you will need to experiment stuff with your tulpa, make it go through stuff, it will have emotions, problems, epiphanies of their own, etc...'
[...]
They give a general idea, though, that's something you cannot deny.

Well, yes, I can see the attraction of presenting a 'sanitised' view of tulpa creation, both internally and externally. But that's not a correct account of events, is it? I mean, you have to ignore everyone who ever had their tulpa appear out of nowhere. Anyone who didn't do exactly that is an outlier, and a threat to the whole view. It's problematic. Sure, it makes sense, but it's not correct, even disregarding the question of drugs.

And even then, it's still helpful, I'd say. I'm sure not denying that this is how a lot of people conceptualise tulpas, or that knocking it down in favour of a more freeform approach would help creation. Still, either the community has to at some point bite the bullet and accept that it's a bit of a fairy tale, or we can keep on doing this forever and reject certain classes of experience because they don't fit it. And I don't even mean to imply that the former choice is the obviously correct one; if it seriously stunts creation, maybe it isn't. The answer isn't obvious to me. But I think even you might not agree that that's why you don't want to condone drug usage.


Also for what it's worth, I don't wear glasses in real life.





(08-31-2015, 08:39 PM)Luminesce Wrote: Man, you're such a teacher, pulling out that argument. And it seems like it should work too, every time. But the response is always something like "My daughter could think for herself, and after informing her of the possible risks and benefits and seeing that she understands, I would let her make her own decision." How boring.

I would personally convince my children that drugs alter who they are and illegitimize their experiences to a large part of society, and then tell them they can do what they want as long as they think it through. And then I would be very concerned if they somehow managed to get a hold of said drugs.. But hey, I'm not an advocate.

Ah, but it legitimises them in the eyes of their friends. Well, not going to argue the point too hard. Still, I'm sure that the parent who supplies their kids with psychedelic drugs is probably going to get listened to more than not when it comes to drug advice (not a serious suggestion, don't worry, Melian).

Still, that said, I think any pro-abstinence parents would be disappointed if they found out the truth. I mean, unless their kids coincidentally don't ever go out, in which case, you're safe. I'm fairly certain that statistically, this experience of mine is not atypical.
Reply
#40
(08-31-2015, 08:27 PM)Mistgod Wrote: Let's go a new route. Let's say it is your seventeen year old daughter who wants to make a tulpa. LSD okay waffles? Sure as fucking hell wouldn't be okay for my step-daughters. Maybe you have different family standards.

As I've said, this community doesn't *encourage* drug use. Neither would I. If my daughter came to me wanting to make a tulpa, I would never suggest LSD to her.

On the other hand, if my daughter came to me wanting to experiment with LSD, I would do what I could to help her. I'm sure you know as a parent that one of the most effective ways of getting a child or a teenager to do something is to tell her that she's not allowed to. I would prefer my daughter's LSD experience to be at home with me, rather than at some party with a bunch of irresponsible teenagers or complete strangers who probably wouldn't have her interests at heart.

Likewise for the community -- if a teenager comes here wanting to try some sort of drug for forcing, I'd rather have people saying "these drugs can kill you, and be very careful with these drugs, and drugs may not be the right way to do this for these reasons" -- all of which I've seen in this thread and in others -- than I would want to see people saying "No, drugs are bad!"

In my own personal experience, I have trouble even remembering rules (let alone following then) when I don't understand why the rule exists. For that reason, I'd rather see a discussion of drugs and their effects than I would see a generic warning not to do them.
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Sponsors:
Lolflash - click it, you know you want to