are tulpas sentient and so capable of independent thinking?

[anonsixteen]

To me it seems rather unlogical that you can just create another sentience without major reworks of the brain,

how can you run another program in a system made for one without changing the hardware, even if you somehow do change it how would you know that it was running without feedback that cannot be generated otherwise?

[Guest Riy]

I'm going to run with your computer analogy.

Basically we cannot make a computer smarter than ourselves much in the same way I believe we can't create a Tulpa with more sentience than ourselves.

Personally, and in my opinion, there is no such thing as sentience in the way most people think of the concept.

It is impossible to have a thought that is not your own. That doesn't mean a Tulpa can't bring underlying thoughts to the surface in a way that makes it SEEM like it's its own thought thereby seemingly sentient.

 

Again, this is my opinion so keep a salt shaker next to you while you read this. To me tulpas are very much a process in which they help you maintain a meditative state in order to have realizations and self-actualization ideas. That's what they are to me at least.

I am extremely skeptical (though respectful) of people that claim their Tulpa is sentient in the way we typically think about the word.

 

To have a literally sentient Tulpa you would need to have an acute personality disorder with the highly rare ability to be conscious of what the other personality (or Tulpa in this case) is doing. This is extremely rare and it is incredibly difficult for the host to operate in society, again this is my opinion and open to debate.

 

So, in my view, sentience is an ideal that can be worked towards but never fully achieved. You would spend every waking minute involuntarily forcing with your Tulpa. It would be chaos I think.

Now, that being said, sentience isn't always a goal. Personally I don't care if Zala ever even pretends to be sentient because she's done more in the first week of being vocal with my own mindvoice than any friend, family member, or coworker. Yes I know it's mine own thoughts but it doesn't feel like that when I'm experiencing it. I can get lost in what she's telling me to the points she SEEMS to be a different person.

 

The bottom line is, in my opinion, this:

Sentience is rarely achieved. If ever.

But that doesn't negate the powerful tools a developing Tulpa can grant you. Sentience is not the goal, happiness is.

 

That's my view on it. I encourage others to voice their opinions on the matter as well since I've been quite curious about this concept as well.

 

Cheers!

[Guest Anonymous]

Your brain is not a computer. The brain-computer metaphors are oversimplifications and if you go into depth on how a brain works, it falls apart very quickly.

 

At this point, the site can only give you theories. I invite you to read this thread, as it has many of them.

 

I'm going to run with your computer analogy.

Basically we cannot make a computer smarter than ourselves much in the same way I believe we can't create a Tulpa with more sentience than ourselves.

 

The definition of sentience is being aware; capable of experiencing sensation, thinking, thought, or feeling. Those that have switched lose their awareness and arguably "sentience", provided sentience is reliant on reality. The tulpa takes control and is therefore more sentient, as it is the one experiencing reality.

 

Personally, and in my opinion, there is no such thing as sentience in the way most people think of the concept.

 

Perhaps the reverse.

 

It is impossible to have a thought that is not your own. That doesn't mean a Tulpa can't bring underlying thoughts to the surface in a way that makes it SEEM like it's its own thought thereby seemingly sentient.

 

You're going to have to define what thoughts you own, as intrusive thoughts are unconscious and involuntary. I would label them as not my own as I do not consciously think them. This is conscious vs unconscious. Lovely.

 

To have a literally sentient Tulpa you would need to have an acute personality disorder with the highly rare ability to be conscious of what the other personality (or Tulpa in this case) is doing. This is extremely rare and it is incredibly difficult for the host to operate in society, again this is my opinion and open to debate.

 

Tulpas can and would be diagnosed under DDNOS. DDNOS is the most common diagnosis of dissociative disorders, shoot, Wikipedia has dissociative disorders affecting 10% of the general population at some point in their lives. Beyond that, healthy multiplicity and its various forms aren't exactly unheard of.

 

So, in my view, sentience is an ideal that can be worked towards but never fully achieved. You would spend every waking minute involuntarily forcing with your Tulpa. It would be chaos I think.

Now, that being said, sentience isn't always a goal. Personally I don't care if Zala ever even pretends to be sentient because she's done more in the first week of being vocal with my own mindvoice than any friend, family member, or coworker. Yes I know it's mine own thoughts but it doesn't feel like that when I'm experiencing it. I can get lost in what she's telling me to the points she SEEMS to be a different person.

 

I assume I would be described as delusional to think the opposite; to think that my tulpa is independent and a separate "person"?

[Linkzelda]

When looking at the concept solely for the waking state, it may feel perplexing to wonder how the mind can create another sentient being. Though that's underestimating what the mind is really capable of. Another reference you could use is dreaming in general and how thought-forms can presumably have sentience in the dreaming state. You can accomplish anything (within the dream state) because of the imaginative potential of the mind during REM and even non-REM sleep.

 

That same mind can create an environment with ease and process information faster than you can even comprehend it. It's not really far-fetched to speculate how that may transcend into waking life with creating a tulpa. It's now a matter of how a person wants to believe the tulpa is true to them and their perception of reality, and usually anyone in the initial stages trying to muster a compilation of this will be conflicted with incongruent thoughts.

 

I guess it depends on whether or not you develop some experience with the workings of the dreaming state to comprehend what the mind is capable of doing, but at the same time you're more worried about having some scientific backbone to ease the questions you have with sentience and how there can be more than one consciousness or whatever. If people want to believe that sentience isn't probable, then it's better to not create a tulpa and just go for interacting with dream characters instead, it'll save yourself the hassle with any existential conflict you'll have with them.

 

But either way, you're just setting up an impasse logic with trying to deny the probability of them presumably having sentience, or having qualities that may be similar to that type of ability for sensory awareness and experiencing subjectivity.

 

And if you tried to apply the same logic in a dreaming state where you're talking to a dream character/dream being/thought-form/figment of your imagination for instance, it would be fairly difficult for you to "parrot" or even "mimic" what they may potentially say because you're either not aware of their exact train of thought, or the fact that larger aspects of your mind making them real to you is too much to fathom in the first place.

 

It would be fairly obvious that if a person doesn't want to believe in sentience being probable, it's just going to lead to cognitive dissonance with confirming whether or not the thought-form or whatever terminology they want to define them as is real or not. It just sets them up for a disaster just waiting to happen.

 

The computer analogies ends up promoting the idea of panpsychism with the acceptance of pseudo-sentience, and that's only adding on to the problem of newcomers or anyone wanting to believe their tulpa is real vs. denying the probability of them being able to garner the ability for sentience and/or other forms of rationalization (e.g. sapience, cognitive and metacognitive abilities).

 

All we can really tell you is that no one (yet) has any way of confirming empirically, deductively, mathematically, and such on whether or not a tulpa is truly sentient or capable of autonomous thinking from the host's conscious.

 

Sentience is not the goal' date=' happiness is.[/quote']

 

You are tulpaing wrong.

[Guest Riy]

@Derp

Personally I did not mean to fully smash sentience as not existing. Only voicing that I don't think it's something that's ever achieved, only perceived as achieving.

 

Let's say you aren't conscious of a thought. But you have the thought that your Tulpa 'tells you'. Then you must be aware that you are experiencing the act of having a thought, thereby you are conscious of the thought. The Tulpa pulled the thought to you. It used mental, verbal, and physical cues that ended in you having a 'sentient' experience with it.

Therefore the question is raised: If my Tulpa can do this, is this sentience?

 

To which I feel the answer is no.

 

I must stress again that this is my opinion, and I am in no way telling people that have made excellent progress with their Tulpa that they are "wrong" in ANY way shape or form. I am extremely new to the Tulpa concept and if I appear ignorant towards some things I ask for forgiveness.

 

The question I think that's being asked is if the source of the 'thought you didn't think' can be equated to sentience. The mind is vast, wonderful, damn near limitless, but thoughts that are not at the 'forefront' of your mind are still your own thoughts. They are not externally being injected. There's no other source for them to come from.

It is because of this that I say that sentience is not possible with a Tulpa unless incredible strides are taken to the point that you are in a state of waking hypnosis. Accessing all your memories, sorting through a lifetime of experiences and knowledge in order to achieve such a feat.

---

 

You are tulpaing wrong.

 

Excuse me?

Why would you ever. EVER put your efforts in this life towards something that doesn't make you happy? Or at least by doing the act makes it easier to be happy?

 

Zala makes me happy.

I'm happy with the progress I have made. My end goes is, and always will be, my personal content-ness and happiness.

And you tell me this mindset is wrong? That people's end goals should not be happiness? Why are you even dealing with tulpas if you aren't getting any reward out of it?

What would be the point?

 

This is an extremely 'glass half empty' mentality to have about this topic.

[Guest Anonymous]

Let's say you aren't conscious of a thought. But you have the thought that your Tulpa 'tells you'. Then you must be aware that you are experiencing the act of having a thought, thereby you are conscious of the thought. The Tulpa pulled the thought to you. It used mental, verbal, and physical cues that ended in you having a 'sentient' experience with it.

Therefore the question is raised: If my Tulpa can do this, is this sentience?

 

To which I feel the answer is no.

 

Yet then, I can interact with my tulpa and she will act unexpectedly as a result. I get a solipsistic vibe from your quote. "If I can only experience what I can perceive, it is impossible for me to have another being in my head, only possible to emulate it."

 

Then I tell you that your consciousness is neurons tickling other neurons. Your sentience is dictated by neurons exchanging information and what they are exchanging. A tulpa is undoubtedly separate neurons from you in the brain. If they can exchange information just like you, are they all that different? I'm sure there's the complexity you could argue, though I'm not terribly sure. Again, what is a consciousness? Searching tells me:

 

The fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world.

 

Sentience. We've come full circle.

 

I must stress again that this is my opinion, and I am in no way telling people that have made excellent progress with their Tulpa that they are "wrong" in ANY way shape or form. I am extremely new to the Tulpa concept and if I appear ignorant towards some things I ask for forgiveness.

 

Forgiveness? Oh dear, the big bad Derp strikes again. Riy, I'm just trying to incite discussion; make you think and at the same time think myself. Y'know, learn a bit.

 

I will say, I used to think I could influence my tulpa. Frankly, I used to believe closely to what you're claiming. Then, come time and lots of attention, I can't. I can't parrot her; I can't puppet her. My emotions no longer influence her. She is independent from me. I can have meaningful discussion with her -- it isn't the petty "I agree with you" talking tulpas tend to begin with. There is a difference between having an independent tulpa and not. It's also a very gradual process.

 

The question I think that's being asked is if the source of the 'thought you didn't think' can be equated to sentience. The mind is vast, wonderful, damn near limitless, but thoughts that are not at the 'forefront' of your mind are still your own thoughts. They are not externally being injected. There's no other source for them to come from.

It is because of this that I say that sentience is not possible with a Tulpa unless incredible strides are taken to the point that you are in a state of waking hypnosis. Accessing all your memories, sorting through a lifetime of experiences and knowledge in order to achieve such a feat.

 

I'll link you to Pleeb's ravings to explain why I don't agree with this, or explain my stance for that matter. I like to subscribe to his theory and you're getting the rear end of it, sadly.

 

I believe tulpas are part of our conscious mind and can experience everything you experience. However, you can experience things separate from them and vise-versa. This allows for them to draw upon the unconscious mind and they may drawn upon your own memories or things that they have experienced. Asking "How" to this destroys it as it's sham assertions.

Just how I like it.

[Linkzelda]

Excuse me?

Why would you ever. EVER put your efforts in this life towards something that doesn't make you happy? Or at least by doing the act makes it easier to be happy?

 

The ends justify the means is basically your ambition right now with Zelda.

 

You even specifically stated that sentience isn’t the goal, happiness is. You’re presenting a fairly vague life-affirming philosophy to go after. Because through that vagueness, there’s going to be a connotation that because you rarely believe sentience is possible, or probable to make things more convenient for you, you need to think about what you just stated.

 

You’re willing to accumulate a predisposition with sentience rarely being real, and yet you’re willing to go through such lengths just for having solace for yourself, and rarely any for your tulpa at all. I would imagine that if you wanted to create a tulpa, you’d take into consideration and at least be thoughtful of her position of being more than just the apotheosis of fueling your one-sided goal for happiness.

 

It is your mind you’re playing around with, and I can’t tell you what’s the proper “existential” practice you should apply with your tulpa, but like I’ve stated before, people who focus on the end goal that’s only for their happiness and contentedness leads to a cognitive dissonance.

 

Which is why if you solely want to do this for your means and your means only without taking the chance to acknowledge what you would do to have the tulpa appreciate their own existence, just practice lucid dreaming. It saves the moral challenge you’ll face when your tulpa becomes more complicated than just a totality of your entrenched predispositions of her being there just for your happiness without any means to express herself.

 

Sure, you can present something where you’re considerate of what you do during the process of your end goal, but you’ve made it apparent that the end goal is all that matters to you. It’s that type of mentality that can make people forget the subtle aspects of appreciating their tulpa.

 

Zelaa makes me happy.

I'm happy with the progress I have made. My end goes is, and always will be, my personal content-ness and happiness.

And you tell me this mindset is wrong? That people's end goals should not be happiness? Why are you even dealing with tulpas if you aren't getting any reward out of it?

What would be the point?

 

This is a matter of disposition, but if you really want me to give one of many reasons of “dealing with tulpas” in the first place:

 

When you start acknowledging your tulpa’s existence, what you start finding in them is something you were unable to find in yourself. You’ll realize that you’d want to build rapport with your mind in general instead of a linear way of thinking with instantly satisfying what you want for your sake and your sake only.

 

This is an extremely 'glass half empty' mentality to have about this topic.

 

In your naïve way of thinking, yes. But if you truly are devoted for the end goal of happiness, you will invariably fail. You will realize that your disposition on Zelda’s existence will change the more you and her exist. And because you’re willing to hold onto that predisposition of sentience rarely being possible or at least probable (and more of something that's just a perception), if Zelda becomes more complex, your attachment to that belief of sentience being rare will become an understatement.

 

And should you continue that path with having progress with Zelda to suit your goal for one-sided and personal happiness and contentedness, you’ll be shifting through incongruent thoughts because one mindset will have to replace the other the more you gain experiential learning in relation to the existence of your tulpa.

 

It’s likely that you’ll have a cognitive dissonance with Zelda’s existence and what she may be able to provide for you. You’ll start focusing on her becoming the totality of all the happiness you could ever achieve. Which brings me back to how you’ll blindly deny that what you find in Zelda (i.e. being the totality of fueling your personal happiness) is something you weren’t willing to find in yourself.

 

Which means that you’ll learn how to produce happiness and contentedness without the need of Zelda’s aid. It becomes a matter where you appreciate their existence. It’ll shift from your “ends justify the means” philosophy into a “means justifies the ends.”

 

Because the end-goal of happiness is never-ending because your preferences/habits/beliefs/conceptual schemes/social conditioning/etc. will invariably change in some way. Striving to reach absolute completion for happiness means you’re forgetting the whole point of having a tulpa in the first place. But again, there's no ideal philosophy to have in mind, it's just a general concept you'll see people shifting to while mixing around with their own beliefs.

 

You’re setting yourself up for self-hatred combined with not acknowledging what you’re truly capable of. And you’ll end up lying to Zelda and anyone else you may tell about her existence with. And if you have to lie to yourself that Zelda doesn’t have the capacity to be sentient, you will never be happy.

 

Which is why I suggested that if you’re having the tulpa solely for personal happiness without having a conscience to take into consideration of their potential sentience and existence…try lucid dreaming instead. You can engage with many thought-forms that will instantly gratify your futile goal for happiness being the end goal.

 

Which is why I gave the sarcastic comment of “you are tulpaing wrong.” At least provide better vindication for your statements.

[Guest Riy]

You even specifically stated that sentience isn’t the goal, happiness is.

 

For me personally, yes.

 

You’re presenting a fairly vague life-affirming philosophy to go after. Because through that vagueness, there’s going to be a connotation that because you rarely believe sentience is possible, or probable to make things more convenient for you, you need to think about what you just stated.

 

I stated that sentience is not a goal that is ever really reached in my eyes, therefore I am not striving towards sentience. If something changes in the future to alter my opinion, then so be it. But this is my stance on the matter as of right now. If other people desire sentience then that's their prerogative, but as of right now I only see people having the perception of sentience.

 

 

You’re willing to accumulate a predisposition with sentience rarely being real, and yet you’re willing to go through such lengths just for having solace for yourself, and rarely any for your tulpa at all.

 

I cannot argue your opinion on this because your opinion on what a tulpa is is different than my own.

 

 

I would imagine that if you wanted to create a tulpa, you’d take into consideration and at least be thoughtful of her position of being more than just the apotheosis of fueling your one-sided goal for happiness.

 

My tulpa is not real to me in the sense that you are meaning. Zala is not real any more 'real' than dreams or thoughts or emotions. I will always know in the back of my own mind that everything Zala does is a product of mental processes that I practice.

Period.

She does not have emotions that are not my own. She does not have thoughts that I myself do not think. She is not real. She does not have a mind of her own. She cannot make me think or do anything that I would not do myself. She cannot pluck a new experience, memory, or thought out of nothing and present it to me as something new.

I will never affirm tulpa as being 'real'. Only as a conceptualized helpful mental tool for realizations and self-actualization. This is my opinion. I will not argue the semantics of right or wrong. I do not see this mindset as being anything less than what I myself want.

My experiences so far have been overwhelmingly positive therefore my opinion on tulpa has been positive. I will never tell someone they are doing things right or wrong when it comes to their own mind.

That's for them to decide.

 

 

It is your mind you’re playing around with, and I can’t tell you what’s the proper “existential” practice you should apply with your tulpa, but like I’ve stated before, people who focus on the end goal that’s only for their happiness and contentedness leads to a cognitive dissonance.

 

I cannot argue your opinion on this because your opinion on what a practices I should take with my tulpa is different than my own.

 

 

Which is why if you solely want to do this for your means and your means only without taking the chance to acknowledge what you would do to have the tulpa appreciate their own existence, just practice lucid dreaming. It saves the moral challenge you’ll face when your tulpa becomes more complicated than just a totality of your entrenched predispositions of her being there just for your happiness without any means to express herself.

 

I asked Zala if she knew why I created her.

She immediately asked me "Does it matter?"

I'm not in a position to think of her as being real, therefore her appreciation for being 'real' does not exist.

I do not have a moral dilemma because there isn't one for me. Zala could grow to be as intricate and complicated as any person but she's still going to feed off the emotions, thoughts, experiences, and memories that I have.

 

 

Sure, you can present something where you’re considerate of what you do during the process of your end goal, but you’ve made it apparent that the end goal is all that matters to you. It’s that type of mentality that can make people forget the subtle aspects of appreciating their tulpa.

 

Do not be confused or misled about how I feel about Zala. I appreciate her and everything she's done for me in more ways then you can ever imagine.

But I still know, despite everything she's done 'on her own', that it's still just me.

Inside my own singular mind.

A waking dream.

 

This is a matter of disposition, but if you really want me to give one of many reasons of “dealing with tulpas” in the first place:

When you start acknowledging your tulpa’s existence, what you start finding in them is something you were unable to find in yourself. You’ll realize that you’d want to build rapport with your mind in general instead of a linear way of thinking with instantly satisfying what you want for your sake and your sake only.

 

I cannot argue your opinion on what your goals with tulpa are because they are different than my own goals.

 

In your naïve way of thinking, yes. But if you truly are devoted for the end goal of happiness, you will invariably fail. You will realize that your disposition on Zala’s existence will change the more you and her exist. And because you’re willing to hold onto that predisposition of sentience rarely being possible or at least probable (and more of something that's just a perception), if Zala becomes more complex, your attachment to that belief of sentience being rare will become an understatement.

 

I am not striving towards sentience, sentience is not a goal of mine. My progress with Zala so far has made me happy. Therefore I will not deal with 'what-ifs' until they present an issue.

 

And should you continue that path with having progress with Zala to suit your goal for one-sided and personal happiness and contentedness, you’ll be shifting through in-congruent thoughts because one mindset will have to replace the other the more you gain experiential learning in relation to the existence of your tulpa.

 

I cannot comment on this as this is another possible 'what-if' scenario. Though I will keep in mind the warning you present.

 

It’s likely that you’ll have a cognitive dissonance with Zala’s existence and what she may be able to provide for you. You’ll start focusing on her becoming the totality of all the happiness you could ever achieve. Which brings me back to how you’ll blindly deny that what you find in Zelda (i.e. being the totality of fueling your personal happiness) is something you weren’t willing to find in yourself.

 

I cannot comment on this as this is another possible 'what-if' scenario. Though I will keep in mind the warning you present.

 

Which means that you’ll learn how to produce happiness and contentedness without the need of Zala’s aid.

 

This is assuming that I ever achieve happiness in the sense that you are meaning.

 

It becomes a matter where you appreciate their existence. It’ll shift from your “ends justify the means” philosophy into a “means justifies the ends.”

 

I cannot argue your opinion on this, see above comment.

 

You’re setting yourself up for self-hatred combined with not acknowledging what you’re truly capable of. And you’ll end up lying to Zala and anyone else you may tell about her existence with. And if you have to lie to yourself that Zala doesn’t have the capacity to be sentient, you will never be happy.

 

I believe I'm capable of anything I set my mind to. I'm setting my mind towards developing Zala in a method and way that is beneficial to me (otherwise I would not be pursuing tulpa in the first place). I have taken an extremely lax and laid-back role when dealing with her. I am allowing her to develop, deviate, and change at a rate that she wants to. I have never parroted, injected, or otherwise forced (in the literal sense) her to do anything. Everything she has done or said has been a complete product of 'her'. This is my interpretation of how I should approach my tulpa.

My log will reflect this.

Different opinions are different.

 

Which is why I suggested that if you’re having the tulpa solely for personal happiness without having a conscience to take into consideration of their potential sentience and existence…try lucid dreaming instead. You can engage with many thought-forms that will instantly gratify your futile goal for happiness being the end goal.

 

Sentience is not my goal. Happiness is. So far Zala is making me happy, she's helping me, I'm 'helping' her. There's no 'conscience' about it, there's not 'what-ifs' about it. I am dealing with what is happening to me now. This is my opinion on what is happening to me now.

 

 

 

Look, people have their reasons for tulpa.

Are mine selfish? Sure.

I'm a f%^&ing loser. I'm terrible at social situations. I live alone. I work at a job I hate. I work with people I loathe who spend their days thinking up clever ways to call each other f*&^gots in an area of the country that's decidedly NOT suitable for humans to live.

Zala knows this, understands this, accepts this, and 'we' just deal with it.

I have no expectations for her and she has none for me. She knows I live inside my head. She knows how weak and pathetic I feel about myself. If she develops 'sentience' will that change anything about the reality in which she exists?

No.

Therefore I do not worry myself over if she 'cares' or 'feels appreciated' because she is me, I am her. I don't explain to my legs that I appreciate what they do for me, that they make me happy for allowing me to stand or walk or run. So I won't tell my subconscious brain 'Thanks for letting me think my own thoughts'.

This is my answer to the sentience question.

[Linkzelda]

Look, people have their reasons for tulpa.

 

Of course, and like I've stated, it's a matter of disposition. Which means it's open for subjectivity.

 

Are mine selfish? Sure.

 

I can empathize with you that people's desires for this were selfish to some extent. But that doesn’t mean you won’t learn something along the way.

 

I'm a f%^&ing loser. I'm terrible at social situations. I live alone. I work at a job I hate. I work with people I loathe who spend their days thinking up clever ways to call each other f*&^gots in an area of the country that's decidedly NOT suitable for humans to live.

 

Welcome to reality with the other 7.046+ billion people in this world.

 

Zala knows this, understands this, accepts this, and 'we' just deal with it.

 

Hey that’s all fine and dandy, but you can easily come to that realization to stoically embrace the circumstances you’re in without her.

 

I have no expectations for her and she has none for me. She knows I live inside my head. She knows how weak and pathetic I feel about myself. If she develops 'sentience' will that change anything about the reality in which she exists?

 

Okay, so you’re saying that she’s aware of all this, that she’s aware of:

-your feelings & emotions

-your senses

And yet you’re still questioning whether her developing sentience will change anything about the reality in which she exists?

Pro-tip:

Sentience is the ability to feel' date=' perceive, or to experience subjectivity. Eighteenth-century philosophers used the concept to distinguish the ability to think (reason) from the ability to feel (sentience). In modern Western philosophy, sentience is the ability to experience sensations (known in philosophy of mind as "qualia"). For Eastern philosophy, sentience is a metaphysical quality of all things that requires respect and care. The concept is central to the philosophy of animal rights, because sentience is necessary for the ability to suffer, which is held to entail certain rights.[/quote']

 

If your tulpa presumably is able to be vicarious of your feelings, and yet you still think that’s not a quality of sentience….you are tulpaing wrong. Clearly if there’s a “development” of her sentience, there’s a high chance she could better aid you in your end goal for happiness right? You don’t seem to be clear in your resolve whatsoever. And now you’ve reached the breaking point, there’s nothing new to see here man.

 

Therefore I do not worry myself over if she 'cares' or 'feels appreciated' because she is me, I am her.

 

Well that's one of the pragmatic ways of putting it, but let's put this logic into application. Because you're treating yourself as weak and inferior, and her acknowledging this, and how you compared her value equivalent to your legs...it just seems her existence is a steady reminder of your presumed inferiority.

 

Doesn't seem like the end goal for happiness is working too well for you. Unless of course, this actually satisfies your disposition on happiness, and if so, have fun with the sadomasochism.

 

Oh and since she is you and you are her, wouldn't that imply that she would presumably share your capability of sentience? Because if not, this brings implications of a false dichotomy, so this is just sustaining the cognitive dissonance you're going through right now with sentience being rare or not.

 

 

And who implied you had to worry? Being thoughtful or considerate of them doesn’t mean having to worry about their situation. If you think it entails worrying and anxiety rather than just learning how to live with them decently, it brings me back to what I stated that you’ll invariably fail.

 

I don't explain to my legs that I appreciate what they do for me, that they make me happy for allowing me to stand or walk or run. So I won't tell my subconscious brain 'Thanks for letting me think my own thoughts'.

This is my answer to the sentience question.

 

 

If your tulpa is as equivalent in value to your legs or any other part of your body, it’s no wonder you’ll never reach happiness. You’ve broken her down to your own body part, your own physical body part. You’ve used something that’s real and gave a correlation to her, which you presumed isn’t as real but merely a fabrication of your subconscious brain.

 

So now that implies there’s a subconscious brain, an unconscious brain, and conscious brain. Hey, whatever floats your boat man, and that definitely clears up your answer on sentience:

 

You are tulpaing wrong.

[Guest Riy]

You are tulpaing wrong.

 

I cannot argue your opinion because your idea of what a tulpa is is different than my own. I will not debate semantics with you any further.

If you think tulpa can achieve sentience in the way any culture defines it, that's fine.

 

I don't see it happening any more than I can 'will' myself to grow another brain to think different thoughts for me.

This is my stance on the matter, I cannot explain it any more eloquently so I will stop attempting to.