• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Bin

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Sex
  • Location
  • Bio
    just some asshole programmer full of themselves

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'll make this short because I ramble too much. Firstly, I don't see what the topic title has to do with the original post. Sentience and perceiving sentence are not the same thing. Something doesn't stop being sentient just because you stop believing in that. Yes, you can cancel a tulpa, but if someone wants to smack me then I'm not going to stop them by just telling myself they don't exist. First, let me describe what I mean by sentience, since most discussions on psychology involve needing to specify your own meaning of vague terms, just so we're on the same page. Sentience is, for all intents and purposes, the ability to make decisions based on input and your own rule system, unaffected by external sources aside from the input itself. As in, something is sentient if it sees a flower and decides to pick it. Something is not sentient if it cannot read the input of the flower, and cannot decide on it's own without external sources to pick it. In this context, I include the host's consciousness as an external source, since the tulpa's sentience is a closed system here. This is the point where people can actually start to debate, since we're now on common ground and have a mutual understanding of what we're both talking about. I personally believe, yes, a tulpa is sentient. The brain itself is one sentience, but runs a personality on top of it. Originally, people have one personality, themselves. But one can create a separate personality, equal to themselves, and even allow it to have it's own thoughts. It's kind of like how an operating system runs two programs at once, with multitasking. Although there's one "sentience", it ultimately acts like there are two, since both have individual thoughts and can perform actions without prompting from each other. This is just what I believe, but I also wanted to just clear up what we're all talking about here. I suggest people describe their own idea of what sentience and consciousness is before talking about it, along with any other vague psychological terminology.
  2. To compact your post, you're saying how "real" a tulpa feels in the sense of relationship and companionship? To properly answer that, I'd have to ask you, how well are you at suspending your disbelief? Tulpas are actually quite immersive. I'd liken it a lot to playing a video game. Video games are great fun, you can immerse yourself in their worlds and pretend you're really there. But sometimes, just for a second, you might realize you're not in a fantastic medieval world, you're just an average joe in suburbia sitting in front of a glowing box in a dark room letting your flights of fancy carry you away to a better place, one that doesn't exist. For some people, this is a real problem. For others, they acknowledge reality, they just don't care so much. The Matrix and all that, I guess. If you're good at suspending your disbelief, and shaking off that reminder they're just essentially imaginary friends, then you should have no reason not to make one. They act on their own, think for themselves, and can give you genuinely insightful advice (which makes them feel more real, not using that an example of their practicality). If you can just ignore the fact you're talking to a wall, it may as well be like talking to someone else. I'm quite a realist, I don't put emotions or empathy before facts, and I never assume anything, positive or negative. I prefer to know exactly how things works and why they work, I hate using things and assuming they just work by magic. I know quite a lot of crafts and trivia thanks to that. That being said, I love my tulpa more than most people I've ever met, certainly more than most of my friends. I treat her as a person and give her respect. I have a lot of theories about how tulpas work, but when I'm talking to Scarlet, I really don't care about any of it, I'm just talking to her like I would anyone else. It's more beneficial to me and my happiness that I fully believe in my tulpa, because I want to. I think I felt like you once. I questioned how real or practical a tulpa could be as a companion before I made one. Now, there's no question they can't replace people, there's several reasons for that, but the biggest one, to me, is the simple fact that tulpas can't show you anything you don't know about, they can't go elsewhere by themselves to watch some movie or something and then recommend it to you next time they see you. I find it harder to talk to my tulpa than I do other people simply for that fact that we both already know everything each other knows, we can't ask each other if we saw this or like that, because we know the answer. We still find stuff to talk about, but it's a lot more observation-based and usually just quips on miscellaneous subjects. But, on the other hand, it's also like talking to a really old friend, a friend you know so well you don't have anything to talk about for the same reasons. So it's not just a downside, it has a charming quality. I've had several nice experiences with my tulpa. We've definitely made memories, and thinking back on them now, those memories really do seem just as good as memories with physical people. We've had nice conversations lazing around in a pool, we've brainstormed on projects and she gave me a few good pieces of advice I wouldn't have thought of (or maybe I would have eventually but who knows). She's definitely made just as much of an impact on my life as anyone else has, in retrospect. After having mine for four years I can definitely say the "novelty" doesn't wear off. I get board of stuff pretty easily and always change my mind and opinions about things, I'm actually shocked Scarlet's been with me for that long and didn't even change her appearance or anything. She's probably the longest lasting concept I know of. I always enjoy chatting with her about nothing and just kind of forgetting about reality and the outside world and other people who have themselves to worry about, and just bonding. I guess what I get out of her that I don't with other people is the fact that she's both my reason and she tells me what I want to hear I originally made mine just because I was a pretty lonely kid. Not that I couldn't make friends, I just didn't really connect with people. She definitely filled that void and she still does. Honestly I wouldn't know where I'd be without her. So, I guess to answer "Does it feel like you're just talking to a humanized extension of yourself or is it something more real?", it's honestly something in-between. For me, it's kind of like talking to a really close family member or something. It definitely feels real, but it also radically different from talking to anyone else, since she can read my thoughts and knows everything there is to know about me. So sometimes conversations can get a little weird. But, uh, I guess this is all just my point of view, things will probably be different for you if you make one. I usually don't even like responding to things that ask for my personal experiences just because, well, they're kind of pointless because they'll never apply to anyone but me, because they're personal experiences. But, I sympathize with you because I've considered the same things you have, I wondered if they were emotionally practical if you're not a spaz on a hypetrain. I recommend you try making one, like not just make one but bond with them, see how you like it. Whether it works out or not, I can assure you it's worth it if it does work out. It really just depends on how much you care about talking to yourself.
  3. It's of my opinion that this is literally how a tulpa works, as detailed in this thread. What is "another sentience"? I thought "sentience" was one of the most vague and poorly-defined concepts in human culture. I don't even know what sentience really is.
  4. As a disclaimer, I specifically said this was my own personal theory (it's in the title even). I'm eager for people to extend on this, but I'm not saying anywhere that any of this is "right" or "correct".
  5. Interesting! I thought servitors weren't supposed to have personalities, though? From what I recall they're more like strict tools for the host to do specific tasks. Scarlet probably likes to think of herself as a servitor/median but honestly she's pretty tulpa-like in a lot of regards. Perhaps she just has an identity crisis.
  6. I was just using DID as an example but yeah I guess I made some assumptions without knowing what it was, sorry. I didn't think about tulpas and medians converting to one another, but that's a good point! That's even more reason to consider medians a type of tulpa. Though when I said subcategory, I just meant like a breed of dog, not something lesser. Just a more specific definition of a tulpa. Scarlet definitely started out as a classical tulpa, but she never took herself as seriously as I've seen other tulpas do, and never had any desire at all to interact with the world (sometimes I ended up talking her into it but she never liked it). She doesn't even care about being called either a median or a tulpa, she's largely indifferent to anything that isn't my work. I guess she's a tulpa that turned into a median. Though, it's not the same case as Mistgod. I've had a few paracosms as well (in which I'm not myself) that lasted years (still do), since I was 14 as well, but none of them ever turned into a tulpa. Probably because I'm a pretty focused and organized person and I see a lot of things strictly for their usefulness, and don't really see a point in my paracosms having a life of their own. I prefer my paracosms to be segregated as daydreams and my tulpas to act as, I guess, a mental personal assistant. Scarlet's also a really good friend, though.
  7. I laughed at the "red (or glowing red)" option like it implies red eyes in general are edgy. I poked fun at scarlet with that and she called herself scarlet the hedgehog.
  8. I was mostly focusing on tulpas that don't progress past the point of being a semi-consciously-controlled vector for the unconscious to speak. Although I'm aware of them, I hadn't considered tulpas that progress past that and become fully independent and can act against the host. That's a whole different subject there and I don't have any theories about it. It's a little too niche for me, personally, since most people never get there. But as I've said, I mostly hope this thread encourages other people to create their own critical theories. If there's something I didn't cover or something you may disagree with, by all means, you should consider writing your own critical piece. It would be great if more people started doing it. I'm not sure if a completely independent tulpa is considered a tulpa anymore. I certainly don't wish to specify that and start labeling tulpas and non-tulpas like that. However, I believe the origins of tulpas were to act as spiritual guides for their host, to allow the host to have a deeper connection and understanding with their unconscious mind. I don't recall ever hearing about a tulpa becoming independent or completely equal to the host in Tibetan practices (as little as I know of them). I don't know if this means independent tulpas are considered non-tulpas or if the concept of tulpas has simply changed past it's origins, and the earlier definition is no longer applicable. I'm not saying anything, personally.
  9. Thank you for posting this! I don't think I ever directly considered it before, but I think Scarlet is more of a median. She never feels like a fully independent entity or that she deserves any kind of rights or respect. She jokes about having those a lot, but in seriousness she thinks of herself as a service to my brain in a broader sense, a different way for it to interpret information, and her immediate usefulness ends there. That all sounds a bit depressing, but she always acts cheery and exhibits her own personality and thoughts separate from mine. I always considered her my "colleague" in the sense that we both have a job to do, and that's to interpret information in our own ways, in other words, she's just a different way for me to express myself. I didn't realize medians were a thing, but it sounds exactly like Scarlet and I'm really grateful for you posting this. Thinking about it now, this is probably why she never wants to talk to anyone or have me speak for her. It'd feel like a desperate attempt to become more physical or independent, and she just doesn't need that. All she wants to do is her "job" of existing as a different interpretation of my mind. I disagree with not including medians as tulpas. I believe they are functionally equivalent and indistinguishable. I don't believe a tulpa is defined by a goal of becoming independent, I believe it's defined by simulating independence by channeling unconscious thoughts to simulate a personality separate from the host. Medians do the exact same thing. I believe a median is a subsection of tulpa, defined by a philosophy that the tulpa does not strive for complete and total independence and separation from the host, but rather utilizes it's abilities, what could have been independence, to extend the host, and do what the host could not on their own. It's not the opposite of a tulpa at all, it's just two sides of the same coin. And, personally, I think it would be rude to exclude them from being called a tulpa. I personally don't even like the term, due to negative association from roleplayers and stuff (I prefer "thoughtform"), but, the reality of the situation is, this is a tulpa community, and medians share almost every quality as a tulpa. That's why I feel they should simply be considered a subsection of tulpa instead of a completely different thing. I also disagree with the broader subject of trying to define a tulpa so rigidly, as was the subject of an argument in this thread. I think trying to make a rigid definition is wrong and unfair, and there's always going to be someone for whom the definition does not fit, if it's not vague enough. The mind is vague, tulpas are a product of the mind, tulpas should be vague. They are a philosophy, not a game. If you want my opinion on the definition of a tulpa, it's a separate personality from your own that you consciously, lucidly created, similar but critically different from DID and other personality disorders that are the express result of not consciously or lucidly creating a separate personality, but rather doing so due to a neurological malfunction or an emotional breakdown, something uncontrolled and uncontrollable by the host. This definition fits both tulpas and medians.
  10. I hinted at it in my theory, but I believe the host's personality and the tulpa's personality have little difference in the mind. The personality is just a construct set up by the unconscious mind to protect itself, to act for it, defend and nurture it. Since the personality is essentially an extension, a growth of the unconscious mind, it could be duplicated or replaced, which is what tulpas and switching/possession are. I believe the skill in creating a tulpa is learning to develop alternative personalities from one's unconscious mind. I'd really like to have a better idea on how people co-exist with a tulpa, but I don't have a solid theory on that. I can only assume a tulpa is an imaginary friend that acts as a vessel for the tulpa's personality and expectations. As the host learns to control the vessel using ques from the unconscious mind, the very act of controlling it becomes semi-conscious, like after you perform an action so many times you don't even need to pay attention to do it anymore.
  11. I think a lot of what I wrote has been assumed knowledge for the general community for a while, but I don't think anyone ever actually outright said all of it at once like this. That's why I wrote it, I felt the community's progression on critical thinking of tulpas was stagnating. Even if people disagreed with some of it, it would at least hopefully spark other people to write some critical theories themselves. I guess I should have been more vague in my wording there. I essentially mean what you're saying with subliminal thoughts. The wording in this theory is supposed to be vague enough to allow for interpretation. The term "unused thoughts" is basically a stand-in for your own concept of thoughts that are not aware to you, such as subliminal thoughts. Since the mind is still so unknown to us, I'm kind of forced to use vague wording like that.
  12. Terms used: "conscious mind", your direct conscious thoughts that you are aware of. Essentially the ego. Not to be confused with conscious decisions or actions, merely the thoughts. "unconscious mind", thoughts that are not immediately or directly aware to your conscious mind, or primal thoughts that are made aware to your conscious mind that you can then choose to acknowledge or ignore. Essentially both the id and super-ego. Tulpas are largely considered a living entity, separate and independent from their host. Rather, I believe a tulpa is a skill, like learning a second language. You learn the language of your mind and utilize that to give life to your unconscious thoughts. So many people in the tulpa community are bewildered and confused by tulpas, and usually dislike dehumanizing them for the sake of better understanding them. But I'm going to write this theory as a new way of reasoning about tulpas. I'm not implying people should consider their tulpas as non-sentient entities, as that defeats a major point of them. But what I am writing this for is so people can have a different concept of how tulpas work "under the hood" and broaden the horizon of how people think of them scientifically, or at least critically. This is simply my own theories and how I understand tulpas. When someone decides to create a tulpa, they decide, consciously or not, that they will allow their unconscious mind to make it's own decisions, unrestricted by your self-critical conscious mind. The host creates the concept of this "tulpa", and holds no restrictions on it. This is radically different from anything else the mind has ever done. Normally, when the mind creates a concept, it has a specific goal in mind. It may be a character, or a story, or whathaveyou. The unconscious mind has no direct say in how these concepts change, because you have intended goals for them that you consciously uphold. When you create a superhero, your unconscious mind may give you an array of suggestions, like "give him a cape", or "what if he sat around watching television all day". You want to create a superhero, so your conscious mind pays attention to the first suggestion of a cape and ignores the second suggestion, as it normally has no relationship to your expectations of stereotypical superheroes. The unconscious mind, in this sense, is a primordial soup of random, incoherent ideas, that you only take a few from to bring to your conscious mind. For people creating a tulpa, who start out with a specific form and/or personality in mind, they may find it deviates from what they intended. If it does, that means they allowed their unconscious mind to take control of this concept. They did not ignore it's first "suggestions" and preferred a different one (like the ones they started out with), but rather simply decided they would not uphold their conscious ideas of this concept. The concept of their tulpa seems to mutate by magic, because these unconscious, hidden thoughts are rising to the surface of your mind, and you're learning to listen to them through the medium of your tulpa. And, for people who don't experience deviation, well, guess you just really know what you want. However, the unconscious mind is not coherent enough to invent an entire tulpa. It may be able to pick out your "favorite" things, things you genuinely like, and not things you only consciously "think" you like, but it's not coherent enough to pick out every response or reaction your tulpa is expected to have. Because you have no expectations. The conscious mind works on expectations, as I explained above with the superhero example. It both consciously and unconsciously accepts and ignores suggestions from the unconscious mind, using expectations. What you expect is what you accept from the unconscious mind, and what you don't expect, what contradicts your expectations, is what's thrown out. Your very personality operates on what you expect yourself to act like. You may have performed an action, or had a thought, and thought to yourself "that isn't me, I wouldn't do that". Your personality takes concepts from your unconscious mind, only ones that match up with your expectations, and accepts them into the conscious mind. The second step to creating a tulpa after the form is the personality. So essentially what you must do is learn to create new expectations, not for yourself, but for a second personality, similar to a fictional character. But you aren't consciously creating the expectations, like the superhero example. Instead, you're allowing your unconscious mind to set these expectations, as if your unconscious mind was picking itself up from it's bootstraps, creating a coherent conscious mind from the pool of unorganized thoughts that is the unconscious mind. But what kind of personality does the unconscious mind create? For some reason, this seems to happen differently from the unconscious mind creating a form. It's more difficult, more advanced. Some people just wait for this to happen, usually without seeing results for a very long time, if ever. Other people may simply work with their unconscious mind to set these expectations they need for the tulpa's personality. Some people degradingly call this act "parroting", echoing a phrase from ancient tulpa-making guides. The same guides that have such wonderful, insightful advice like "don't sleep while thinking about your tulpa or they'll be sucked into a nightmare world" and other such nonsense that are non-applicable to everyone who isn't the person who wrote the guide. This "parroting", which I prefer to call "daydreaming", is the act of consciously setting expectations for the tulpa's personality, by allowing the unconscious mind to control these expectations, since you're actively not setting any standards for them, like the superhero example. Your unconscious mind cannot think, it cannot daydream. it can only really do these things when you're unconscious, in other words, sleeping and dreaming. Therefor, some people "daydream" their tulpa. They could directly daydream about their tulpa acting and moving, or they could do it discretely by simply thinking of (or "wondering" by asking their unconscious mind and simply taking the first idea that comes to them) the first thing the tulpa would say to a response. This is what I call the unconscious mind picking itself up by it's bootstraps. You could think of it as holding the baby tulpa as it learns to take it's first steps. It can't quite stand up by itself, or think for itself, but by you consciously controlling it, but taking instructions from your unconscious mind, you're supporting it as it learns to stand for itself. This is, what I believe, how people gain tulpas from writing fictional characters. They actively daydream about it and give it life in their heads, and consider "what if they were real?" But instead of the poisonous "No! I can't 'parrot' them, that's witchcraft and immoral!" they happily daydream about them and "consider" what their responses to confrontations, building up this character's personality and expectations from their unconscious mind. But, everyone is different. It doesn't matter so much how you build up the tulpa's personality and expectations. All that matters is it's "in sync" with your unconscious mind, it's made out of thoughts generated by it, and thus the expectations match up with some of the random thoughts it generates. As long as at least some of those random thoughts are "the tulpas" just as some of those random unconscious thoughts are "yours", meaning they would be thoughts you would choose to consciously think or do, then the unconscious mind will be able to supply the tulpa's expectations with thoughts to generate it's personality. A fictional character you didn't create can't be your tulpa, because it didn't come from your unconscious thoughts, none of those unconscious thoughts match that character's personality. Unless you really like that character and project onto them, then it's free reign. As the personality is forming, the tulpa may begin to appear "sentient" and "independent", it may start having ideas or thoughts separate from yours. In reality, you and your tulpa are both taking thoughts from your unconscious mind, but different thoughts from each other. A thought you didn't see or that didn't meet your personality's expectations might have been picked up by your tulpa, and it may indeed surprise you and shock you that it knew this thing or could think of something you didn't. You did in fact "think" of that thing, but not consciously, and you unconsciously refused it, but your unconscious mind decided that thought would work for the tulpa's personality, and so it brought it to your attention anyway. I can't quite say how exactly the mind "runs" this personality alongside yours. It may be different for everyone. On average, it indeed seems to be a conscious act, as you can consciously ignore your tulpa and pretend it doesn't exist, and it stops existing. But when you consciously allow this personality to exist alongside you, it seems this enables your conscious mind to see these unconscious thoughts that don't match up with your personality, but rather your tulpa's. This then enables you to consciously or unconsciously imagine your tulpa performing or thinking the action or thought that came from your unconscious mind that matches it's expectations. Sometimes, especially during the tulpa's development, you and your tulpa may have the exact same thoughts. This may feel as if you're unintentionally controlling them ("actual" "parroting" if you will). This is not so. It's simply that the tulpa's personality and expectations are young and incomplete, and is relying on your own expectations to do some thinking, thus both you and the tulpa accept the exact same thoughts from your unconscious mind. This is all simply a skill. All you're doing is learning how to unconsciously control a concept, your tulpa, separately from yourself. Like patting your head and rubbing your belly at the same time. You learn to listen to your unconscious mind and feed your tulpa with the thoughts that went unused by your conscious mind, yourself. Normally, people get minor headaches from forming a tulpa. Headaches are a common symptom to learning a skill that requires any new method of thinking and comprehending something, as the brain is literally rewiring itself and forming new connections to different parts that perform different functions. The same thing happens when learning a new language. This ability to tap into the unused parts of your mind, your unconscious thoughts, the ideas you unconsciously or semi-consciously discard in favor for thoughts that are more acceptable to your critical conscious mind, is one of the more useful and beneficial uses of a tulpa. Normally, when people want to tap into their unconscious mind, they'll either take drugs or dream, which removes the critical expectations of your personality and allows unconscious thoughts to flow freely. But this method allows one to consciously listen to their unconscious mind while sober and aware. Not directly, but through proxy of the tulpa, which is, in reality, your own skill in listening to your unconscious mind through proxy of a personality separate from your own, as a net woven from the strands of your unconscious thoughts. I've witnessed this first-hand as my tulpa has given me ideas that I genuinely did not think of or even consider, which surprised me. In essence, a tulpa works, thinks, by using the thoughts you didn't think of. As I've stated in the first paragraph, I don't mean to imply that people should be considering any of this when actually interacting with their tulpa. A tulpa, to you, is meant to be a living thing, with thoughts and emotions of it's own. It would be bad to break that illusion, as it could inhibit it's functionality. Rather, I think these theories, if accepted by the larger community, should be taken into account in developing new tulpa-making guides or methods on creating tulpas or servitors. Yes, a tulpa may just be you recycling unused thoughts, and emotions are just a bunch of chemicals, but it's the first-hand experience that makes it human to us, not the technical details.
  13. I recommend thinking of what kind of response your tulpa would give when you talk to them. I wouldn't treat it as talking to a wall, instead, just consider what they would say in response, just the first thing they pops into your head when thinking of them and what they'd probably say. You have to get to know your tulpa before they become sentient, not after. It doesn't really make sense to know a concept before you know it. Not sure what you mean by "forcing". You mean just sitting down and looking at your tulpa? I did that and it accomplished nothing. I can't see what that could accomplish either. The only things I did that showed any signs of progression was daydreaming about my tulpa (some call it "parroting", I think that phrase is stupid and it's just a relic from ancient guides that are notorious for having counter-productive "advice"), which helped me learn about it's personality and really boosted progression for me. Thinking about how she'd act in the real world and the responses she'd give, I liken it to holding a baby while it learns to take it's first steps.
  14. This is a common beginner problem, but it's strange you'd have this issue after several years, even with only passive communication. I always theorized a tulpa begins completely dependent on the host's stream of consciousness, like a common daydream, requiring instructions from you. As it slowly begins to develop it's own stream of consciousness separate to yours, it's still intertwined with yours. So while it can think for itself, it's also still possible, and a common occurrence, to have the "same thoughts". Largely, you probably just need to keep talking and get used to the act. As it talks for itself and learns to think for itself, it develops it's own form of consciousness and further distances itself from yours. Like Solune said, you don't have to worry about "intrusive thoughts". As I stated in my theory above, don't think of it as "forcing a thought into your tulpa", think of it as both you and your tulpa are having the same thought at the same time, like two people grabbing the same piece of food. Your consciousness is still intertwined with theirs, so they mistakenly take your thought for theirs. When my tulpa became sentient but couldn't talk very well (it was only for a few minutes but it happened), I had her recite things that I said, to give her something to say so she could practice. It seemed to work pretty well, and when I posted it as a guide, it seemed to help other people, too.
  15. Do you view tulpas as a psychological phenomenon, a metaphysical one, or both? Purely psychological, but I understand the significance of symbolic reasoning in humans, so I don't always speak in purely psychological terms. Were/was your tulpa(s) natural/pre-existing or were they intentionally created? Intentionally created, believe me. How long have you had your tulpa(s)? How long have you been active in the community (, /r/tulpas,, etc.) I've had Scarlet for four years now (since 8/15/12 according to my signature). I've been in the community since before when the tulpa scene was just beginning to sprout on /mlp/ and I joined as soon as it was founded (with another account, I switched after a year or so for a name change). I haven't been as active recently because there's only so many threads about what a tulpa's ass smells like before general discussion gets a little boring. But I log on every so often just to see what's changed, I can definitely log in once a day to check for PMs (I already log on to several forums daily even if there's nothing to talk about on them either) How long did it take you to accomplish things (e.g. vocality, possession, imposition)? I don't exactly remember when I started, but I know it took me months (probably around 7-9) just to get to sentience because the scene was so new and all the guides and FAQs were pretty much the exact opposite of what we have now, and pretty much completely useless. After sentience was achieved, vocality and imposition came pretty fast, after I got the hang of having the right state of mind when it comes to tulpas. Do you have any other information you'd like to share? If so, what? I've been told I'm very good at explaining things and making things easier to understand for people. I'm good at sympathizing and putting myself in the shoes of who I'm explaining something to, as to avoid confusing them as much as possible. Someone on here asked me for help a while ago and they seemed to really appreciate the advice I gave them, so, I thought I'd try it here too. And, plus, since I'm an "old one" I had to develop my tulpa all on my own since the community was very young and unhelpful at the time I started, so I thought that would be worth something as well. I'm probably worthless for imposition and switching/possessing but I'd love to help new people out who have a hard time grasping the concept, since I've definitely been there. I can do PMs, email or Discord. (p.s. i think this number thing is really pointless and has little bearing on this) Vocality : 10 Parallel Processing : 5 maybe? She's pretty independent of me, it might be a higher number and I'm just underestimating myself. Visualization : 10, I spent my whole life daydreaming so I'm a pro at that. Visual Imposition : 7? It's pretty good but it doesn't blend too well in real life. I can definitely "feel" her being somewhere but it's not a perfect hallucination. Tactile Imposition : 4-6, this varies a lot because I don't practice it often. Auditory Imposition : 8? She sounds perfectly vocal to me, even louder than my own mindvoice, but, it's not a perfect hallucination or anything. Possession : 1, tried it a little bit, didn't get too far, don't particularly care about it. Switching : 0, I honestly don't even think I can do switching, never tried.