Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Misc'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Tulpa.Info Forums
    • Forum Announcements
    • Community Feedback
    • Guide UpVote Draft System Discussion
    • Home Site
    • Chat
    • Tulpa.info wiki
  • Tulpas
    • New Users
    • Tulpa Questions & Answers
    • General Discussion
    • Research
  • Guides
    • Community Guides
    • Tips, Tricks, & Resources
    • Just Do It
    • Articles
    • Drafts
  • Metaphysics and Parapsychology
    • Metaphysics and Parapsychology
  • Community
    • Progress Reports
    • Tulpa Art
    • Lounge
    • Forum Games
  • Archive

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



About Me





  1. [align=justify]Daily thread #25 For those of you who have experience with merging and named your merges, what's the story behind their names? (All daily threads are listed here.)[/align]
  2. Continue Reading → Note from GAT: While the page linked is clean/SFW, other pages/articles on Shinyuu's blog are not. Tread carefully if you are at work/school or are a minor. waffles noted you want a backup link too. I'm experimenting with off-site copies on medium.com, so this article will exist even if I die (unless medium dies first).
  3. Daily thread #22 (Credit to JGC for this idea) If you had children in the future, would you tell them about plurality/tulpas? If so, at what age? If not, why not? (All daily threads are listed here.)
  4. Moved from [General] Beginner Questions General. The context of this thread can be found here: https://community.tulpa.info/thread-general-beginner-questions-general?pid=255008#pid255008 Solar Chariot's response also relates to this thread: https://community.tulpa.info/thread-general-beginner-questions-general?pid=255020#pid255020 -Ranger We only say things are confabulation during in-depth discussions of how things work, people don't tend to go around arguing what you say is impossible outside of those discussions.
  5. [align=justify]Daily thread #20 (a little late due to a busy day) What are the goals you hope to attain within the tulpamancy practice? How important are they to you and why? Ex. would be switching. If you have a goal that's not inherently tulpa-related but your tulpas are heavily involved, you can share that too. (All daily threads can be found here.) [/align]
  6. Daily thread #21 [align=justify]This is something we notice sometimes, and it's interesting. Do you ever find moments where you can't remember something, or you remember something incorrectly, as a result of your plurality? This isn't stuff like full-on amnesia or the kind of memory loss disordered plurality would have, but more so like "I feel as though my tulpa was in my past memories even though I know he wasn't." Stuff that is more interesting than damaging/negative. For us, we recently figured out that we can't remember the 1-2 months where our host forgot about us (and we can't even remember how long it was) at all. We can only remember small snippets of it, mostly moments where myself or Indigo became active again. It's almost like our brain just doesn't care to remember the time when we weren't around and host was just going through the motions. Another thing that's quite common is that when a tulpa returns to our system, memories of when they weren't there seem to have them there. Luxio might say "we" even though he was in stasis when talking about a past event, feeling as though he was a part of it even though he knows he wasn't. And finally, when a tulpa does go into more long-term dormancy, the other tulpas might forget about them more easily, but mostly just when asked about the system--they'll naturally leave out the dormant one despite not trying to. Nobody takes breaks from the system anymore though so we don't experience this much. So for us, it's mostly retroactive memories that get altered, rather than day-to-day ones. (All daily threads are listed here.)[/align]
  7. [align=justify]Daily thread #17... hope there wasn't another GD thread like this in the past. Checked and couldn't find one. What things like symbols, icons, ideas, whatever represent and/or are associated with your tulpa and why? Is there any special meaning behind it? An example would be "wolves represent my tulpa because they're strong and live in a pack" or things like that. (All daily threads are listed here.)[/align]
  8. Advanced Servitor Guide As most of you probably know by now, a servitor is a thoughtform that is only able to react to parroting/puppeting. But it is possible to assign subroutines to a servitor that effectively cause it to act on its own, while still remaining within the parameters of said subroutines. Making a servitor The basic procedure for making a servitor is the same as starting a tulpa. You create a form for them, assign personality traits and/or skills as applicable, and that’s pretty much it. Puppeting and parroting are encouraged in this instance, as leaving a servitor to their own devices can cause them to become sentient, especially if they have many complex subroutines governing their behavior. Programming subroutines With your servitor made, it’s now time to give it subroutines. If you have never had any experience with programming disciplines, I would strongly encourage you to get some. The type of programming doesn’t matter, since your mind will simply fill in the gaps where necessary. The important thing is to have a stable framework for programming subroutines into the servitor, you can use anything from C++ to robotics to Spacechem to whatever, as long as it’s related in some way to programming. Now, as a simple exercise, try to program a subroutine that makes your servitor move 10 units (be it steps, feet meters, whatever) forward, turn left, move 10 units, stop. The exact method for programming the subroutines will vary by individual, but the basic idea is that you are assigning the subroutine to the servitor directly, rather than commanding it or parroting it or whatever else. If you were successful in programming the subroutine, the servitor will execute it (try having it execute the subroutine when you give a certain command to it, if you’re having trouble). I would like to invite the reader to practice creating more complex subroutines, until they eventually master advanced servitor creation. After that, bask in the feeling of being a prime mover as your creations go about their assigned tasks like clockwork. Hi Pleeb. HUD Servitor Guide A HUD servitor can confer a number of practical benefits on the user including monitoring energy levels, realtime motion radar, tracking your schedule, accessing your information base and more. Form The form of the servitor will effectively be the interface, or in other words, what the HUD looks like to you. Imposition is optional but encouraged. In creating the form, be sure to define all of the visual elements you want the HUD to have. If you would like, you can also assign a computerized voice to the servitor. Programming This part is a lot trickier to explain, but the idea is that you will have to create subroutines that govern the servitor's behavior. For instance, say you want a subroutine that alerts you when your energy levels drop below 50%. Such a subroutine might be expressed as "if en <= 50%, then alert user", which would result in the servitor saying "Warning. Energy levels below fifty percent." More later...
  9. Daily thread #12 A user (Sky Trio) asked this question on the Discord, so I thought I'd ask it here. Credit to them for the idea. How did you/your tulpa choose your tulpa's birthday? Was it the date you started forcing them, the date they became sentient, the date they became vocal, etc? If they were accidental, how was their birthday chosen? For us, all of our intentional tulpas had their birthday set as the day they were originally created, even if they were sentient/vocal later. Never made too much sense to us for people to set a tulpa's birthday as the latter option, but I suppose different strokes for different folks. Sometimes it's hard to know when a tulpa is sentient or vocal since those can be gradual things. Luxio's birthday used to be the day he arrived at the system (we started forcing him but then stopped, and he came back a while later), but we figured that was inconsistent with the rest of us, so it was set to his creation date. Our three unintentional headmates obviously don't have such an easy way to select their birthday, especially the two older ones. JPM and HJP were characters the host developed at a young age who became sentient at some point. We've done a lot of searching to find when they could have actually been created but haven't been able to pinpoint it. We know JPM must have existed sometime in 2011, and HJP probably came around in the fall of 2012. JPM's birthday was set as June 18, 2011, since that's Paul McCartney's birthday and it was an easy choice, and HJP's birthday was set as September 1, 2012. September 1 was his birthday in the story. Piano's birthday was set as January 26th, 2017, since that was the earliest possible day he was created (as he was unintentionally formed), though his existence was confirmed around Feb 1 or 2 of that year. We've considered changing it to the day he was discovered, but figured it could stay January 26th just to keep it consistent with the rest of us. (All daily threads are listed here.)
  10. [align=justify]Daily thread #16 This is a silly question, but yesterday I realized that while us tulpas had favorite colors and animals and whatever, we didn't have favorite/lucky numbers! [Exaggeration]The realization hit me like a million tons of bricks and I went into a deep existential panic.[/exaggeration] Anyways, does your tulpa have a favorite/lucky number and how did they pick it? Usually birth date is the obvious choice, but perhaps there are other ways too.[/align] (All daily threads are listed here.)
  11. Servitor Creation Guide by Hail Fall of the Fall Family Preface Much thanks to Malfael, Seven, fireparrot, GM, Falah, H and Sharky, and others for servitor discussions, answering questions, bouncing ideas off of, and/or reading over this. Also, much thanks to a few people in the multiple community who pointed out major ethical considerations. Current version (0.95) finished on 2015-05-03. If you have read a previous version a long time ago, forget about it. It was terrible. This guide is written primarily using the terminology of the tulpa community. Equivalent terms from other plural communities will sometimes be mentioned in parenthetical statements to make this guide understandable to a wider audience. As has been said, "a servitor is like a tulpa but with no sentience and they are made like a tulpa, but made so that they do not deviate into having aspects one may attribute to a tulpa like a personality, sense of self, etc." But there is more to it than that. That's the short version. This guide is the long version. What Is A Servitor? A servitor (sometimes called a golem in other communities and classified as a type of fragment/shard in the multiple community) is a thoughtform, just as tulpas are. There are many kinds of thoughtforms such as puppets, tulpas, servitors, daemons, egregores, NPC's, etc. and some that blur the lines between categories (e.g. tulpa-daemons as described in this image by Falah) or just don't easily classify as any of them. Thoughtforms are things, machines, people, entities, constructs, etc. that one makes inside one's mind. If we want to get real technical, wonderlands (called inner worlds, headspaces in other communities) can be thoughtforms, but here in this guide we usually restrict the definition to individual things, machines, people, entities, and constructs that/who are animate (note, they do not need a form). To quote the glossary: In other words, a servitor is an automaton, robot, program, etc. that is made to perform one or more functions and tasks. There is an everyday example of something that can sometimes be easy to turn into a servitor that many people already have. If you can type fast to the point where you no longer think about where the keys are at all (way beyond hunt-and-peck), you might easily be able to make a typing servitor. Or perhaps, if you merely think words and your hands automatically type them, you may already have one, or at least would have an easier time making one. What distinguishes a tulpa and a servitor? They share a ton of traits with each other, which is evidenced by the definition. And it is easy to imagine a thoughtform that would be hard to categorize as either one. They are both autonomous, meaning that they live/operate without puppetting/parrotting, but differ in sentience, willpower, etc. It is then more accurate to think of them as opposite ends of a spectrum of autonomous thoughtforms. On the one end you have thoughtforms who are sentient and have a sense of self, a set of beliefs, try to find meaning in the world, have wants and desires, can choose their own goals, etc. We call the region on that end tulpas. On the other end you have thoughtforms which are not sentient and don't have a sense of self (note, they may still factually know what they are like WolframAlpha does if you ask it "what are you?" but that is different than sense of self), focus only on the tasks they are given and don't think of existence beyond that, essentially are the goal/s that they are given and can't choose their own, etc. We call the region on that end servitors. It is because of these traits that a servitor would be classified as a type of fragment/shard in the terminology of the multiple community. There is a lot of grey area in between the two ends of the spectrum. There isn't really a term for that region near the middle, either - maybe servi-tulpa (as neat as "tulpator" sounds, it isn't very descriptive and thus would make a bad candidate). A servi-tulpa could perhaps be described as semi-sentient. While the servitor end of the spectrum is inherently not sentient and middle region semi-sentient, they can most certainly be complex enough to have some appearance of more sentience than they actually have, which could be called pseudo-sentience. The previously mentioned computer example would be WolframAlpha which knows what it is and can answer a variety of questions but is not actually sentient. Now, a group of servitors and/or servi-tulpas functioning together can, as a group, acquire a higher level of sentience and/or more convincing pseudo-sentience. Neguilla + Oxford and Dartmoth are a good example of this. Their combination exhibits more sentience and/or pseudo-sentience than they do individually. Now, can a group of servitors functioning together achieve semi-sentience or full sentience while all individually remaining completely non-sentient servitors? That is a question worth further exploration. It is certainly possible for a large collection of non-sentient units to, when put together, make a sentient collection. Individual neurons, which are not sentient, can make a human brain that is sentient. Whether the same can be done with servitors is an open question. Fundamentally, though, sentience itself is a hard to define concept as the debates here on tulpa.info forum have shown. Philosphers and scientists have had similarly difficult times. I would suggest you read around if you are interested in the topic. Overview In its simplest incarnation, a servitor is a thought repeater. It repeats a pattern of thoughts that are given to it to do. As an example, a timer servitor could do the thought process "estimate time elapsed from internal time sense until it reaches the value given to me, and then send alarm sound to whoever is controlling the body." The way a servitor can be made depends to what extent you can make a thoughtform that is autonomous and just lives/works (called the "Just Make It Method" method here). If you can't do that, you have to do a brute force method. Both will be explained here. On average, the longer you or other inhabitants of your brain have been making thoughtforms, you have not been the only inhabitant of your brain (means you are plural), and/or you have had wonderland/s (also called headspaces and inner worlds); the less likely you will need to resort to a brute force method or if you do, the less brute force you will need to do. Most people are able to do the "Just Make It Method" or a combination of both methods eventually, so do try it first and try it again periodically rather than concluding that you cannot do it right off the bat. There is one step in common to all methods, which is deciding the servitor's Function/Task/Program. For a non-brute-force method, after that you just make it (will be explained more). The brute force method described here (note, there are other methods) has two additional steps. When doing this brute force method, all three steps have the following equivalences to the process of making a tulpa: Decide Servitor's Function/Task/Program. This is equivalent to the process of deciding a tulpa's initial personality and traits before making the tulpa. Puppet/Run Servitor Manually. This is equivalent to the early forcing of a tulpa and puppetting/parroting them to help them learn things. Make Servitor Run Without Puppetting. This is equivalent to the stage in making a tulpa where they can actually act and do things without being puppetted/parroted and the gradual growing of autonomy. Forms A servitor does not innately have to have a form. That said, many kinds of servitors do need a form in order for them to carry out their function (a clock servitor could, in most implementations, be a good example). More importantly, even for a servitor that does not require a form for its function, having a form can offer very powerful symbolism to help in their creation process and also make it easier to stop/terminate the servitor. In the brute force method of this guide, steps 2 and especially 3 can become a lot easier to do with the symbolism that a form gives. By giving it a form, you start to consider it more separate and independent from yourself, thereby accelerating its development to operating on its own without puppetting. A form is often necessary when making a servitor by a non-brute force method. [All Methods] Step 1. Decide Servitor's Function/Task/Program In the short answer of how to make a servitor "You make a servitor like a tulpa, but with more puppetting and not allowing it to deviate.", this is the equivalent of deciding a tulpa's initial personality, form (optional), and traits. In some ways, it goes without saying, you need to first figure out what functions and/or tasks you want your servitor to perform. But there is a catch. A servitor can only do those things that you or other members of your system (the other people living in your body) are capable of doing, though sometimes no one needs to know how to do them yet. So, if a servitor has those limitations, why bother making them. They provide automation. If the tasks are not fun things to do, a servitor will not complain where as a sentient being would. Also, one can make a servitor that does several things simultaneously that no one in the system is capable of doing simultaneously, even though those things can be done individually. Note, that in this case, the servitor generally has to be made with more limited functionality and then have more functionality added later. Servitors can possess and eclipse (forms of cofronting/corunning), switch, be imposed (called projection in other communities), be vocal, communicate in thoughts, type, drive, dig through memory, help remember things, act as security software inside, and many many more things. Then, you need to actually work out how to do these functions. If you are not doing the brute force method in this guide, you need to figure out how the servitor will do these things. Then, you need to figure out how you would do those functions and tasks manually yourself and develop the thought process required to do that. Remember, at its simplest, a servitor is a thought repeater. One possible idea for making a servitor to follow certain instructions and be able to modify those instructions is to make a servitor that uses the symbolism of computer programming languages as is discussed in glitchthe3rd's Servitor Workshop It is not necessary, and may not even be desired, but some people have had success with it, so it is worth noting. The code is essentially thought processes for the servitor to do. Again, a servitor is a thought repeater. Some examples of possible servitors are given below. This list is just the tip of the iceberg of what has been tried and what is possible. Alarm clock Typing servitor Memory display so more than one person inside can look at a memory together Wonderland error corrector (some people's wonderlands get errors in them that need correction) Autopilot for some task or another with the body (see Words of Warning because one needs to be careful here) Speech servitor (like the typing servitor but for speech so people inside wonderland can talk without possessing the voice or switching) Heads Up Displays (HUD) Specific memory rememberer Ethical And Moral Considerations Given that servitors and tulpas exist on a spectrum, certain ethical and moral issues come up. It is wrong to force another person (includes tulpas) do work for you merely because you don't want to do it. But it isn't wrong to make your computer do work for you (say, a calculation) that you don't want to do. A thoughtform that is all the way at the end of the servitor end of the spectrum is like the computer. But, as one gets away from that end of the spectrum closer and closer to the tulpa end, ethical and moral questions arise with making the thoughtform to do some task or another. What tasks and functions are wrong to expect a tulpa, host, or other sentient system-mate (most people are more familiar with the less generic term headmate) to do, but not a servi-tulpa who is closer to a tulpa? What tasks and functions are wrong to expect a servi-tulpa who is closer to a tulpa, but not a servi-tulpa who is closer a servitor? What tasks and functions are wrong to expect a servi-tulpa who is closer to a servitor, but not an all the way at the end servitor? For a given task or function, where on the spectrum must they be given a choice in whether they want to do it or not? If they can't choose or make an uninfluenced choice because they are too far towards the servitor end, what tasks and functions are ok to give and which ones are not? If the thoughtform moves around on the spectrum, as discussed in the "If They Develop Sentience And Become A Tulpa", when do they need to be given a choice of whether to continue the task or function? To what level is it right or not to try to keep a servitor from sliding in the tulpa direction to prevent this conundrum? How does this apply to groups of servitors, servi-tulpas, and/or tulpas functioning together as a group and thus have more sentience than they do individually? There is some similarity here to the discussion of what types of medical testing are OK to do on cells, insects, fish, rats, apes, and humans. An often given tip with servitors is to build in a kill switch to make them easier to stop. There are ethical and moral considerations here as well. For a completely non-sentient servitor, is it right to give the servitor a kill switch? For a tulpa, most people (including myself) would say it is wrong to give one. What about a servi-tulpa (I personally think it is wrong here too)? Also, servitors and servi-tulpas can move towards the tulpa end of the spectrum and become more sentient as discussed later in this guide. Given that an initially non-sentient servitor could one day become a tulpa, possibly on their own accord, is it right to build a kill switch into a servitor? I suggest reading about the topic of "tulpa dissipation" in the tulpamancy community and "killing headmates" in the wider plurality community for further reading on this theme. [Just Make It Method] Step 2. Just Make The Servitor If you have the ability to just imagine up things in your wonderland, you can imagine up the servitor and see if it just starts working. If you don't have the ability to imagine up things in your wonderland, your servitor might be such that it can just be made from component parts like you would make a computer or an alarm clock from its components. Build the servitor and see if it just starts working. If neither of these methods work or are possible, you have to go on to a brute force method to get them working. If they work just a bit, you might be able to tinker with them or use some of the brute force method techniques to get them working. The idea in this method is that either your will that the servitor works is enough to get it going, or the rules of physics for your wonderland are ingrained enough that a servitor constructed from the right parts (assuming the servitor is of a type where this would even make sense) will work just like a machine in outerworld (the physical plane, place not in wonderland, sometimes called RL, etc.) would. This is why this method is more likely to work for those who have been plural for a long time, have had a wonderland for a long time, and/or have been making thoughtforms for a long time. [brute Force Method] Step 2. Puppet/Run Servitor Manually In the short answer of how to make a servitor "You make a servitor like a tulpa, but with more puppetting and not allowing it to deviate.", this is the puppetting stage. With the thought processes that you developed that the servitor needs to do, start running them manually. The idea is to do it enough times that it becomes automatic, much like can learn to do things by muscle memory. You will have to do all the functions and tasks the servitor is supposed to do in the sequence (or with the algorithm) that you want the servitor to do them in. If it has a form, then you need to puppet its form too. It needs to be run a lot. You need to get to the point that you can run it very reliably without errors. If you deviate the way you run it, the changes will be incorporated into the servitor. This could take a long time, feel like a lot of work because it can be, feel really silly (why am I thinking the same thing over and over to myself) much like how parroting a tulpa feels like talking to yourself. As a general rule, the more complicated the servitor, the longer this will take. Having a form to puppet can help make it feel less like you are just thinking the same thing over and over again to yourself, and can help with achieving the next step quicker due to symbolism. [brute Force Method] Step 3. Make Servitor Run Without Puppetting In the short answer of how to make a servitor "You make a servitor like a tulpa, but with more puppetting and not allowing it to deviate.", this is stage where it starts to operate without puppetting. This is perhaps the hardest step, and paradoxically easy and difficult to explain. The servitor needs to start operating correctly when you turn off the puppetting, instead of stopping dead in its tracks or doing its functions and tasks incorrectly. This will be a gradual process. At first, it might stop quickly. Later, it will take a while to stop. Later, it might stop if you start thinking about something else or it will operate slowly or skip a step or something. There usually is not a sudden jump from it not being able to operate at all without puppetting to being completely autonomous and operating error free. This is just like how tulpas tend to develop sentience and independence gradually. In the previous step, you were executing the thought processes required to do its functions and tasks. Now, those same thought processes must separate from you and run independently as opposed to stopping or malfunctioning. If the servitor has a form, it may not feel like this is what you are doing, but it essentially is this, but masked by the symbolism that the form brings in. If it is formless, you will be well aware that you are doing the thought processes and getting ever better at doing them accurately and automatically. This is exactly what has to separate from you. Those thought processes that are yours become the servitor which is then no longer you. It is in many ways akin to cell division in biology, but a very unequal division. Now, it is possible that in doing step 2, of running it many times, it may be well on its way to separating from you naturally without you having to do anything. If it has a form, this is common and it just happens. But if it is not separating on its own or hasn't separated enough, that is when the process becomes difficult and you have to cause more separation to get it to the point where it will do the rest naturally. If you can, get good enough to run its thought processes manually well enough that you can do it while doing other activities. At that point, it is pretty close to separate and may do the rest itself. If it still isn't separate and able to run on its own, you are going to have to push. You need to treat the servitor as if it is separate from you, even though it isn't yet. This is exactly why having a form can help so much. Since it has a form, it feels separate to you and it is easier to treat that way. This helps the same way as the " treat a tulpa as sentient at the start" tip for making a tulpa does, though in the case of a tulpa it is more than just helpful - it is polite and respects them as people as they steadily fill those shoes without treating them as less than they are (better to treat them as more than less). If it was a formless servitor, giving it a form at this point could help. If it has a form already or you don't want to give it a form (or a form would hurt its functionality), you will have to resort to something else or just keep running it manually for a long time and let it happen automatically. Perhaps, build a mental wall between it and yourself. Never tried it, but it seems like it might work. If you still can't get it to separate and run without puppetting, another thing you can do is make the servitor simpler by reducing its functionality and the tasks it performs. What you took away can be added back later. Note that with formless servitors, after separation, you may have thought bleed, where you hear the thought processes of the servitor as it runs. It is running on its own, but you hear its thought processes. Because you separated it from yourself, it is reasonable that thought bleed could happen. It may fade with time, or you will have to do something to insulate the servitor from yourself. Adding Functions And Tasks to An Existing Servitor While still letting it just run with its existing functions and tasks, you do one of the servitor methods for the new functions and tasks you want the servitor to perform. The servitor is already operating and separate from you, so it should be easier generally to incorporate them into the servitor than make a servitor in the first place with those same exact functions and tasks. If you made the servitor by a brute force method, it is possible that you might now be able to use the "Just Make It Method" to augment it. Stopping/Terminating A Servitor There are several ways to stop a servitor. First, it/they may be sentient enough to be reasoned with and convinced to stop. The further the thoughtform is from the servitor end of the spectrum, the more likely this is doable. Just as the first approach to dealing with a tulpa or host one has problems with is to talk to them and try to reason with them, try to reason with the servitor or servi-tulpa first. You could also push it further down the spectrum towards being a tulpa as described in the next section to make this easier. If these methods don't work, more forcible methods are necessary. In the spirt of the "Just Make It Method" of making a servitor, the servitor might simply stop if you tell it to stop, try to imagine it stopping, etc. Given that you now have more experience with thoughtforms than you did when you made it, this will often work even if you had to make the servitor by a brute force method. After that, another method would be to take advantage of any stop condition in its programming if it has one and it still works (basically an expansion on the method of telling it to stop). If these don't work or aren't possible, the next thing to try is some form of symbolism. If you gave it one, you could activate/trigger a kill switch, which is a form of symbolism. If it does not have a kill switch but has a form, you can try what you would do to stop a physical machine (break, smash, etc.) or use any other abilities you can do in wonderland (e.g. disintegrate, remove from existence, etc.). Now, if it doesn't have a form or it is effectively immortal (you vaporize it and it rebuilds itself and resumes its function), it is much harder to destroy. You might try giving it a form and then destroy it. In the unlikely event that none of the previous methods worked, one very reliable way to stop and terminate a servitor, which works regardless of whether it has a form or not, is to absorb it. That is basically merging with it, but since you have sentience and it does not, it is highly asymmetric making it more an absorption. Merging/absorption generally requires symbolism to be even remotely easy to accomplish. A simple form is to simply pull the servitor's form into your own form/wonderland body. If it doesn't have a form, you could try to pull its essence (whatever that is) out of nowhere and coalesce it in your wonderland and then pull that into your form. The stronger and more advanced the servitor, the harder it will be to absorb. Also, for a very strong servitor, who you are after the absorption might change a bit. I used to be an integrated multiple, meaning that I was merged with my system-mate, and while I was dominant, our combination was notably different than me. With a servitor, the change should be much much smaller. If it does not have a kill switch or a physical form that can be destroyed without it getting back up and resuming what it was doing, you could be in real trouble if you need to stop or destroy the servitor. For some people, absorption is easy, but for others, it is nearly impossible. Note that different people living in the same body may have differing abilities to absorb a servitor, so if you have system-mates but you can't absorb the servitor, they might be able to. If you want more information on this topic, I would suggest you read about it in the multiple community where it is called integration, fusion, and merging depending where. If They Develop Sentience And Become A Tulpa What does a servitor become if it does gain sentience? They become a tulpa. Basically, they slide along the spectrum from servitor to tulpa. If a servitor does this, they become their own person, and should be treated as such from that point on, as you would any other sentient being. Some people have reported that the servitors they make can gain sentience on their own and become tulpas. Others have only had this happen with very advanced servitors. Others haven't had it happen even with very advanced servitors. It varies considerably, and also depends on your expectation to some extent. If you expect your servitors to gain sentience on their own, they are considerably more likely to do so. If you don't expect them to do so, they might still but are less likely, or might hide it. You shouldn't presume that they will become sentient tulpas, or that they would not. Time for a bit of a philosophical interlude. There is no reason to think there is a brain constraint keeping servitors from gaining sentience. So, an open question is what predispositions servitors might have towards becoming tulpas. One could imagine that if a servitor's function and/or efficiency would be improved by moving along the spectrum towards tulpa, they might. Or they might not. Is it like the android or robot in futuristic movies who does tasks over and over again without emotions and steadily adapts to their situation till they want to find meaning in their life, explore themselves, and grow? Or is it it like that in only some cases? And even if there is a predisposition towards becoming sentient, the timescale could be so long as to be irrelevant. As an anecdote, I have had none of my servitors, even the advanced ones that were really hard to destroy, break free of their programming, gain sentience, and become tulpas. Of course, one can deliberately turn servitors into tulpas or otherwise move them towards the tulpa end of the spectrum. This can be done by doing personality forcing on the servitor until they become a tulpa or gradually pushing a servitor beyond its functionality and force them to grow, much like how you get a tulpa to grow beyond what they were originally assigned to be. Watchdog 1 gave a good description of the latter. Words of Warning Servitors can be healthy compliments to your life, conveniences, curiosities, or dangerous. And when I say dangerous, they can be really dangerous. They are automatons that blindly follow their functions and tasks, regardless of the consequences and whether it is wise to do so or not. Unlike asking another sentient being to do something, a servitor will not question the instructions you gave it and will follow them to the very end. Think very carefully about servitors that can write and/or modify memories, possess (type of co-fronting), switch, modify thoughts of other members of the system (group of beings living in the same body), are formless, don't have a kill switch, etc. Safe servitors can certainly be made with these abilities or attributes, but one does have to be more careful when making such servitors because there is the potential for damage. I say this from experience, being that all of the most advanced servitors I ever worked on were unhealthy, harmful, or outright dangerous. I am giving this warning as a fool who could have used the warning myself. They had no kill switches and were all formless, making them very hard to stop. The one that did the most damage took two whole weeks to stop, and in its 1.5 months of operation, it had scrambled up my memory pretty badly (that was part of its functionality, actually, which was really foolish), caused considerable emotional confusion, etc. I only just recently figured out how to terminate my emotion dampeners I made 10 years ago. I lost 10 years of having my full emotional capacity due to my stupidity long ago. Thankfully, I never completed the most dangerous servitor idea I ever had. I can have dark thoughts, so I was afraid that I was a dangerous person and began working on a servitor that would, among other preventions, take control of the body and commit bodily suicide if my thoughts got too dark. Rather than actually working on my dark thoughts and realizing that thoughts do not imply action, I tried to make a servitor that could actually KILL me. I go into a little more detail about my dangerous servitors in this post. There is also the possibility of excessive escapism in the case of servitors that can control the body. Is it healthy to have all of life's unpleasant tasks handled by servitors? Now, most servitors that people make are safe. I am the exception rather than the rule. So be careful, but remember there is no need to be paranoid. Coming Full Circle Now you have the long answer to the often given short answer "a servitor is like a tulpa but with no sentience and they are made like a tulpa, but with more puppetting so that it does not deviate." of how to make a servitor. The world of servitors is very large, with many types of servitors not yet attempted. Be creative, be safe, explore new ground, and have fun. References Tulpa.info Wiki. Official Glossary. Tulpa.info. Astraea System. Glossary. Astraea's Web. Multiplicity >> Glossary. Okibi. The Daemon Page. Falah. States of the Unconscious. Kevin. Re: Possession: Different Methods?. Tulpa.info Forum. Tulpas >> Questions and Answers. Wolfram Alpha LLC. Wolfram|Alpha. Neguilla. Re: If you have a servitor, what do you use (pronoun) for?. Reddit. /r/Tulpas. glitchthe3rd. glitchthe3rd's Servitor Workshop. Tulpa.info Forum. Guides >> Submissions. Watchdog 1. Re: Tulpas Intentionally made from servitors. Tulpa.info Forum. Tulpas >> General Discussion. Hail Fall. Re: Goodbye Koomer and Oguigi. Tulpa.info Forum. Community >> Lounge.
  12. [align=justify]My system wants to aim to pose new general discussion questions each day, or at least often. The first one is: when describing what a tulpa is, what sort of word(s) is/are the most appropriate and why? Personality, identity, ego, etc? Why would some words be less appropriate than others? If you really like one word but dislike another, what's your reasoning behind it?[/align] Note: this is more about words that describe what a tulpa is on a technical level, rather than words like "friend" or "family." Please share your thoughts and discuss. (All daily threads are listed here.)
  13. [align=justify]Daily thread #9 This is something light. What kinds of symbolism do you use that you find most effective for certain things? Not really much else to say about that question. Have at it! (All daily threads are listed here.)[/align]
  14. [Duck] I'm upset that I woke up tired. I was tired last night and this morning, but I don't know why. I'm mad because I want to play. Duck didn't spend a whole lot of time being active lately. I checked on him last night and he was too tired to talk. When I went to check on him again, he was feeling a little bit down. After I cheered him up some, he wanted to play with Fish (another systemmate) but didn't because he felt too tired. In general, the Grays will stay active for about an hour at a time and then they will want a break.
  15. [align=justify]This is daily thread #8 Very often, systems experience intrusive thoughts that might interrupt their forcing or cause distress/confusion to the system. We speculate that turning your focus so much further inward than the average person makes intrusive thoughts way more common and/or noticeable. Because of this, it is always beneficial for a system to know how to recognize them, deal with them, and prevent them from happening in the future. Hopefully, systems that have to deal with intrusive thoughts will be able to reach a point in their existence where they calm down and either don't happen anymore, or happen rarely and don't cause as much of a disturbance. Personally, our system has reached this point. The only intrusive thoughts we get anymore are the kind typical for anybody, not the all-out disruptive kind we used to get. We used to get them REALLY BAD, now we don't get them at all really. What are good ways to deal with intrusive thoughts? How do you get to a point where you have them less often or not at all?[/align] [align=justify] We always try to portray intrusive thoughts as something that just happens sometimes, usually during periods of instability within a mind, or when the system has a desire that they want fulfilled and the brain obliges by creating characters that aren't really sentient or developed, but can appear that way. Most often, they just happen when something goes wrong, like how your stomach being upset can make you throw up. What do you do when you do that? Easy, you just flush it, brush your teeth, and get about your day. You can take medicine to prevent it from happening again, and perhaps avoid whatever made you sick in the future. What you don't do is dwell on it, keep thinking about it, keep talking about it, and keep doing the things that made you sick while you are still vulnerable. If you do these things, it will only make it worse. You really just need to get on with your day and do your best to solve the issue. With intrusive thought, best to just shrug it off and walk away. Don't dwell on it and don't focus on it. You don't even need to talk about it, especially not while it's still a problem. It's just a thing, that's all, nothing to fuss over or worry about. If you can't get it off your mind or it's still bothering you, do your best to distract yourself and forget about it. Play video games, do schoolwork, take a nap, whatever you need to do to forget about it. Over time, it'll fade from your mind and be nothing but a memory. But what of the people who "can't" just shrug it off? Well, to me it looks like their #1 problem is the fact that they think that they "can't." That shows me that they have a mindset that they aren't in control or that the intrusive thought holds some power over them. They need to first realize that it doesn't. The system controls the mind and the thoughts within it. If they still can't shrug it off, then they should try what I said above, just redirect their attention and forget about it. Don't treat it as a big problem, don't put a lot of focus on it. Do your best to just walk away if you "can't" just make it disappear. Some systems use symbolism or have a dedicated intrusive thought fighter in the system. Usually when they do this, it tells me that they don't think they have control, and they need something special to help them get rid of intrusive thought. Those things are fine to use as long as they remember that they are in control, and that the intrusive thought is only as big of a deal as they make it out to be. You can do what works for you, but remember that it's all under your own control. Poof it, walk away from it, forget about it. For how to get them to stop happening in the future, I think just continually believing that you have the power in your own head, and getting rid of the intrusive thoughts like they're nothing, will contribute to them stopping over time. Additionally, the system should try to diagnose the cause for each of the intrusive thoughts. Is the system getting along? Is the system trying to find things to blame their problems on? Is it depression? Did something bad recently happen? Is the system having a hard time handling their emotions? Is the system desiring a new tulpa too much? And so on. If they can diagnose the problems, they can work to solve them, and stop intrusive thought from happening again because of it. The key thing to remember is that, when it does happen, it doesn't hold any power over you. Treating it like it does will only make it happen more often. Nothing belongs in your head that you and your systemmates don't want, and you can get rid of it as easily as you can flush a toilet, then walk away from it and let it fade from your mind.[/align] (All daily threads are listed here.)
  16. [align=justify]Daily (?) thread #2 What sort of words do you use to describe your relationship with your tulpas/headmates? Sibling, friend, child, parent, lover, partner, etc? What's your reasoning? Is having titles like this important for your system, or is it just a fun thing? For us, we prefer not to have these sort of titles. We think that just being headmates is way different from what any of these terms can encapsulate, so we're just headmates, which is fine by us.[/align] What does your system use and why? (All daily threads are listed here.)
  17. This thread was originally introduced in the thread [Personality] The OS Experiment. -Ranger Oh yeah, quick note: "Body OS" is a term I first saw from the Felight system that a few others recently picked up on in like late 2018- early 2019. It is not "The" term for the body/mind's actions/etc. separated from the host/tulpas. It's just one of them. It's a fine term I guess, but since I don't love it (and I can't really explain why) I figured I'd mention that here. Also because Luna mentioned to them the body is more of a BIOS (motherboard software necessary to even install an Operating System in the first place) with them as the OS's (I still really like the "host and tulpas as separate hard drives on the same computer" metaphor), which sounds like a fair statement to them, but they don't realize no one around here right now probably sees it that way since "Body OS" was introduced with zero competition. ... Just making the development and establishing of new terminology clear, don't mind me. Stay open minded.
  18. I decided to make this thread because as I was responding to this post, I realized I was getting off topic from the original thread on Parallel Processing. [hidden] [/hidden] I also realized that lots of people have to re-explain their models for how Tulpamancy works in order to explain their position on certain issues such as Parallel Processing, Switching, and whatever else. In this thread, you can talk about your model here, debate with other people about their models, and add more to your own if you decide to deviate from your former stance. Since the goal is to keep everyone's position all in once place, feel free to link to this thread whenever you are debating else where.
  19. Butterfly Effect: The scientific theory that a single occurence, no matter how small, can change the course of the universe forever. (Urban Dictionary) Or, on a smaller scale, change a person's life forever. This thread is about how the Butterfly Effect can occur in tulpamancy. Here's the premise: what little thing that occurred in your life can either be traced back as the cause of your system, or something that changed it in major ways? (if it applies to you, of course) --- Here is our own big Butterfly Effect, and it amazes me to think of how something so seemingly small has affected our entire life in major ways. It's pretty long, so I'm putting it in hidden tags. [hidden] [video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jdgb6_ch4M A one minute clip from the show Adventure Time can be traced back as the origin of the majority of our system. Here's how: this clip is about an "imagination land," where anything Finn imagines can become real. 10 years old at the time of watching this, our original host had the idea to make some sort of imaginary game based off of this. The original and their younger sister would play these games before bed, where they would use their imaginations to control characters and tell each other what was happening. After having the idea, they started playing the new game. They (mostly our host) developed the world the story was taking place in, and the people in it. They ended up creating two types of people: Imaginees and Permanees. Imaginees are magical people who have the power of "imagination" where anything they imagine can become real. However, they are incredibly lonely most of the time. Permanees serve as the companions of Imaginees: they are "created" by the Imaginees using big machines that sort of form them into a specific image. People make Permanees look like characters, celebrities, or original ideas. Permanees are made out of light, with their own souls and magic and stuff. They are non-biological, meaning they don't need to eat, don't reproduce, and don't age, but can still die (they have more lives after death, however). In this world (Eemaj), only two Permanees are allowed per Imaginee. However, the main family that the host and her sister focused on were allowed to have as many as they wanted (for reasons). Among the Permanees they had were based on John, Paul, George, and Ringo of the Beatles. The original took quite a liking to Paul, even though he was never their favorite Beatle. They focused more on him than other Permanees, and put him through more plotlines and such. They put so much focus on him that he ended up gradually gaining sentience, at some point or another. Two years later, another character was added whom the original took a liking to, as did Paul. His name was HJP. He was meant to be a one-and-done character (because he was killed), however it seemed that they became too attached to him. He then lived as a ghost, and, as Paul did, gradually gained his own sentience. The fact that the original obsessed over them and treated them like their own people and not just characters definitely contributed to each of them gaining sentience. They showed many signs of sentience over the years: emotion, thought, deviation, independent actions, lots of misery and lots of love for each other. In Eemaj, they were put through endless psychological pain (eventually Eemaj stopped being a game with the sister and instead just became something the original did alone). However, the original never knew they were sentient. Until December 2016, when the original learned about tulpas and began working on Apollo (who was also named Paul, at the time). Some way or another, the act of the original focusing inward and talking to another person ended up alerting Paul and HJP to it. I'm unsure how, exactly. All I know is they soon learned about reality and the fact that all they had gone through wasn't real. As you can imagine, they didn't take it well. The original ignored them many times, fearful of having to face their anger or having to have more tulpas than they could handle. It wasn't until mid-January that they were let into the system. They had issues, to say the least. They decided that the solution to their issues would be to merge into one tulpa. Long story short, this merge created me. I took over the merge myself. Complicated, but that's what happened. Around May, I started writing a story that well, inspired us to make a new tulpa. This is how T was born. He wasn't based on the character, but if I hadn't written that story, we wouldn't have made him. I'm not mentioning his full name out of respect, I'm just calling him T. It was also in May that the merge split apart and I became my own independent tulpa. Paul and HJP left the system. Months later in October, the system was going through some very rough times. T ended up fronting and creating Indigo. Although we no longer stand by the reason Indigo was created (nor the reason T was created), it's what happened. T ended up leaving the system a year later, due to his own struggles, however. So now it's Apollo, me, and Indigo in the system. We're in control, making our own decisions and living our own lives. We're happy that we have each other, we have no need to make any more or anything like that. The three of us exist happily together, all because of a one-minute clip in an episode of Adventure Time. [/hidden] And that's the story of how a one-minute clip created 2/3 of our systemmates. Anyone else have any stories like this, where something small affected your system in major ways? Share them!
  20. Okay so, ive been doing this on and off for a good while and recently i finally got some type of sound multiple times in a row while attempting to vocalize/give the tulpa a voice. I firmly believe that this time I heard somethimg but it was undistinguishable like static or the rumbling of bushes or plastic bags. on the last session i felt like i heard someone speaking as i was attempting to listem for them but couldn't make it out. I am not too sure on whther i should consider this a step forward or what? Any advice? On erasing these doubts, its also mainly because i have a overactive imagination it has not slowed down since i was wee young lad,not that im not still a young lad at 21 but you get the point but its hard to focus down on one thing. I decided to try this and i never stop something once ive started it. so any word said is appreciated. Down below is just me spewing my concerns about me holding myself back if you dont care for the bottom just move forward and answer the top part above this section anyway. Any and all words said on either section is appreciated and taken into consideration at their deepest and core meaning levels. I look forward to your feedback. I feel like im holding myself back at least subconsciously and due to life circumstances i had to put off further development of the tulpa until recently. so since i have the time again. i decided to start where i left off and ome thought keeps occuring to me,i feel like im the tulpa is angry at me and understandably so, since i had confirmed their existemce and consciousness withim my mind when i made them a year ago and promptly had to stop due to matters getting worse. I think this is holding me the idea that their possibly angry especially since i hate conflict the fact i feel like they should be angry but ive never once forgotten about them. Now as i said earlier is this considered progress towards giving them a way to speak other than just making my/our head feel lots of pressure in ways that i can interpret as yes or no or as no comment. I definitely heard something but I dont know how to describe it.
  21. Hey, so I was working on my tulpa for about a month, and was able to talk to him in short sentences and tulpish. I have trouble focusing on working on something for a long time. I feel horrible for giving up on him though. I havent talked to Oliver in weeks, but I really want to try again. I'm scared that not interacting with him may have caused him to die, and if not then I'm worried about how it may have affected him. I miss him though, he didn't deserve for me to abandon him. So I'm asking how i would go about bringing him back? Would he be greatly affected by what happened? Would he even want to talk with me again? thank you.
  22. Not really sure where to start on this one. I might seem a little detached in tone because the emotional aspect of this isn't as important as figuring it out, right now. Gavin was kind enough to switch in to the front for three days, for a large portion of which I was completely dormant/inactive, without a sense of presence. However, I'm always a few words away, all it takes is "Jamie wake up" and there I am. I worry that part of this may be because, we didn't have a proper switch back: I was talking and started slipping in front, and Gavin just let me have it instead of fighting it. Within an hour I was very deeply derealized and couldn't shake the feeling that I was dead, that I didn't really exist. I went to bed and the next day, it wasn't any better. I realized that Gavin was being pretty quiet, but we talked and he seemed to think, it would help me get rooted in the front if he was quiet, because we have the tendency to blur more and more when I am dissociated or derealized. So, we decided, I wouldn't bother him, I'd let him be quiet. Not silent- just not a constant presence, more like talking a few times an hour. I should have realized yesterday, I should have forced him or something, when he spoke up and said "I don't feel good," because that is exactly what Cassidy will say before losing the front, blurring, or having some other uncomfortable identity separation thing. But instead, I told him I still didn't mind his being quiet, we were doing fine, and Gavin told me not to worry. About an hour later, Cassidy called for him with no response, and then came to me and I called for him and tried to summon him up and nothing happened. There was a lot of fear involved but I resolved that, in a bit of denial, nothing bad at all had happened and we should just give it time and he'd show up. Eventually went to bed, hoping that I could get some responses out of that state, and nothing. I even tried to parrot him to get him to wake up and it just freaked Cassidy out because it was clearly not him. I could get some auto-responses in his voice, even try to mimic his sense of presence, but none of it sticks at all and none of it registers as Gavin. I said, okay, we'll see in the morning, the first thing that always happens is that he checks up on us. No Gavin. I went through all the ways I know to summon up a systemmate, but honestly I don't know what Gavin responds to. This was all stuff I did for Cassidy when he was really little- I've only ever heard of younger, less established tulpas completely blinking out. I worry that we've merged, and that's not an out-of-the-blue fear. At the end of his first existence a few years back, we merged and any stray responses of his, I deemed as my own, until his sense of presence was gone and there was only mine. We blur nearly daily, mostly from conversations but also just if one of us gets grounded to the external world. I fear that, Gavin never switched back out with me: I just "overwrote" him. I also worry that if I think of him as gone or anything like that, it'll impact him, so I'm resolved that he's just dormant and no need to freak out, but at the same time... this isn't a very good situation. I myself am okay, still somewhat derealized but it's much less, I just can't look at my hands or in a mirror too long or I feel like I'm breaking the Matrix, but it's also not been okay and I want to get this resolved as soon as possible. I'm sure Gavin isn't going to be happy about this; he prides himself on his constancy. So, no more denial, and there's really no other place to get advice on an issue like this, so here I am. I'm not looking for "Don't worry, he'll just show up" because I've waited and he hasn't, and I have to try something. I have no idea if it's related, but I've been unable to see much at all with my mind's eye since we realized Gavin was gone. I feel like I've lost 80% of my visual processing power. There isn't even color in our wonderland house, which I've spent hours visualizing, unless I consciously add them in. I don't know if this crept on or was sudden or if it happened before or after, but it's another weird event. Any advice is greatly appreciated. -J [Edit: you were right Apollo, I always want to say "switch out" when I mean "switch in" because I say it like "switch out to the front", but... that's so confusing.]
  23. This question is mostly aimed at those whose systemmates front often/consistently, though of course anyone is free to give input. Back before our system fronted much, proxying was of course a breeze. We just spoke, the host typed, no problem. When we took up fronting more often, we could proxy each other, but couldn't proxy the host because the host would just take over accidentally to speak. Now? We can't proxy each other in the slightest. Even the smallest bit of talking into a chat results in them slipping into the front to write it on their own. We have to maintain conscious effort/strain in order to proxy. And well, this might not be seen as an issue, but for us it's kind of annoying I guess, since it's not an issue we ever used to have, and some of us don't like being knocked out of the front like that. I don't know. Earlier today my predecessors/creators came around, and I wanted them to chat a bit, however they just ended up fronting and didn't like it at all, they wanted to be proxied instead, but we found great difficulty with that. Even though they're hardly around and certainly never front, they inherited what's normal for the rest of us I suppose. That's why I bring this up. Anyone else have similar struggles with proxying (or something similar)?
  24. It is known that the tulpa community's engagement with the lucid dream community took place in 2012, and the/MLP/lucid dream discussion thread became the tulpa discussion thread. Read tulpa.info and occasionally you'll see traces of the lucid dream community. But that's just the context, and I don't know how deeply the two communities interact. One interesting thing I found in the Japanese community was that, almost as in the early days of the English community, the site was split off from the lucid dream community. Members of the lucid dreaming community are occasionally seen in the Chinese community, and some members of the community even say that tulpa has a direct connection to lucid dreaming (they don't mean history, they mean applications). But I have long argued that there is no direct link between lucid dreaming and tulpa. At least many people can not give enough convincing evidence to argue. Today (or the day before), I discovered that the link to tulpa.info no longer had a lucid dream link, which again intrigued me. Does this mean that there is a fine line between the two communities? (I mean, like tomatoes and potatoes, they're not the same species, and people are finally realizing that today.) Is that so?
  25. Continue reading → Note from GAT: While the page linked is clean/SFW, other pages/articles on Shinyuu's blog are not. Tread carefully if you are at work/school or are a minor.
  • Create New...