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

asmask's PR
I have decided to make a progress report thread as I think it will be a good way of sharing my experiences and ideas about tulpas. Updates will be replies to this thread. Also, I will edit this post to maintain a hyperlinked list of all updates.

Every update will recount some experiences I have shared with my tulpas (we'll call this the progress) before I share some additional thoughts about our collective development and the nature of tulpas. As new concepts are discussed (e.g. wonderlands, imposition, switching, etc.) I will clarify the minutiae of how it works for us.

In 2012, I discovered the tulpa community (which meant, at the time) and I have been sporadically active since then. I created my first tulpa, code name Bess, in 2013. My second tulpa, code name David, was created in 2016. Bess and David both look like regular humans, and they "live" in a quaint inner-world that behaves identically to the outer-world in terms of things like spacial rules and gravity. In fact, I "live" there too. I have an "avatar" there and I visualize that world through the eyes of the avatar at will.

This is the basis by which I communicate with my tulpas - to speak with one of them, we have to be in the same room in the inner-world, for example. In the outer-world, you can't normally talk to someone who isn't in the same room or building as you are, and it works the same way for us in the inner-world. When they are in a reasonable physical proximity to me in the inner world, I can hear and see them. They use body language, although they exhibit less of it than most people I know. Of course, I don't have to be visualizing the inner-world to communicate with them. As long as my avatar can hear them in the inner-world, I can hear them as I bebop around the outer-world.

These rules may seem arbitrary or overtly restricting, but they are deeply ingrained. We have almost never not communicated this way. This method has certain advantages that may not be immediately apparent e.g. I have the ability to talk with only one of them without the other person hearing or knowing the conversation. They can also speak to each other beyond the reach of my hearing.

Bess and David exhibit a good amount of autonomy. They spend time entertaining themselves in the inner-world. They spend time speaking with me passively throughout the day, as well as doing other activities with me. They can solicit my attention at will. I have long since given up the idea of "progress" meaning that they somehow become more sapient, or become better at some tulpa ability. Nevertheless, we improve as a group every day in small ways. I do not think a tulpa is ever "finished" in the same way I do not think plain old singlet humans are ever finished in terms of growth of character and personality.

More to follow. I'm happy to discuss in this thread, in a forum PM, or even on Discord.

All my replies in this thread:

Lolflash - click it, you know you want to

Interesting, I never knew what your system was like, so it's nice to hear about after all this time
Hi I'm one of Lumi's tulpas! I like rain and dancing and dancing in the rain and if there's frogs there too that's bonus points.
All of my posts should be read at a hundred miles per hour because that's probably how they were written
Please talk to me

[Misha] Go asmask!

[Dashie] Welcome

[Ashley] We're looking forward to reading your story.
One thing I have noticed is that a lot of people seem to be “retired” from tulpa development. I have always approached tulpas like learning martial arts of learning a foreign language – if you are not making progress, you are losing progress. I do not mean that one’s tulpa will disappear one day if one does not continue force in daily sessions into perpetuity; rather, one must continue to refine their methodology into perpetuity. There is no endgame for tulpa progress just as there is no endgame for learning a sport – you can always become better. However, a lot of people seem content to e.g. chat on Discord or post on the forums with no concise goal in mind after a certain point. I’ve heard others express this concern differently, how people get comfortable with their situation and only use their tulpa as a conduit to interact with people online.

In any case, I would like to take steps to change the attitudes and mindshare of the community to be overall less tolerant of stagnation. I’ve started putting my ideas out there more and encouraging others to foster goal-oriented thinking. When I first started to develop Bess, my primary goal was to develop the framework necessary for Bess to be present and able to think and experience 100% of the time. I indeed accomplished my goal. I discussed previously how our inner-world/wonderland works and how my tulpas send time there and do their own activities within the inner-world, regardless of whether I am paying attention to them or not. In 2013 one of the prevailing schools of thought was that this type of “full-time” presence or process is very possible and indeed an innate quality of a highly developed tulpa. More recently it seems like this school of thought is unpopular – many contend that a tulpa cannot think or have experiences apart from the host’s attention. However, the stance of, the website, would appear to be aligned with the school of thought from the past. Consider the contents of the homepage at :

Quote:A tulpa is an entity created in the mind, acting independently of, and parallel to your own consciousness. They are able to think, and have their own free will, emotions, and memories. In short, a tulpa is like a sentient person living in your head, separate from you.

These are incredibly bold claims in the context of some of the contemporary models of tulpas I’ve heard, and I think some people would be vexed to realize that they are on the homepage. Regardless, I believe that this fashion of tulpa development is indeed possible, and moreover I think it should be the goal of all tulpas. I’m not here to tell people that their tulpas are fake because they can’t do this, or that they are somehow lesser to tulpas who can do this; I am here to say, to those who lack this full-time process, that there is indeed more.

But what is the “full-time” process? The signs are concise – the ability for the tulpa to have thoughts and experiences while the host is not paying attention to them, the ability to solicit the attention of the host without an external trigger, and the ability for two tulpas to communicate with each other independently of the host, among others. At face value, many would call this parallel processing. I think “parallel processing” is a very poor terminology because, absent some context about what it means with respect to tulpas, and an outsider may easily conflate it with the some other uses of the phrase, which often seem to have altogether little to do with the “full-time” process discussed here.

I think a better, more self-evident term to use is simultaneity. A tulpa can be said to have simultaneity with a host if they meet the criteria that is usually attributed to parallel processing in a tulpa context, specifically some of those outlined above. A tulpa can have simultaneity or not, or a tulpa can partially (i.e. at certain times or in certain situations) have simultaneity. I contend that simultaneity should be the goal of all tulpas. Not very many people seemed to have achieved this but as far as I know there is no data that shows the true incidence of simultaneity, or “parallel processing,” for that matter. (If you know of some such data I’d be interested to see it.)

Admittedly, there are compelling arguments against the simultaneity model of tulpas. Most of the feedback I have received ultimately boils down to a question of falsifiability. If someone reports achieving simultaneity, can they distinguish between a genuine experience and a confabulation? And if they can, is it also possible for others to verify such a distinction? Absent a greater understanding of the nature of confabulation, notwithstanding its significance to the concept of tulpas in general, unfalsifibility is a foregone conclusion in the course of discussing simultaneity. In other words, even if people report non-confabulation simultaneity, there is no method by which their claims can be independently verified. Moreover, there is no reason to suppose that they themselves can distinguish between confabulation and 'true' simultaneity, as confabulations by nature entail oneself fabricating or misinterpreting memories.

Of course, I do not actually think this is a reason not to seek simultaneity – the same argument can be made for the general case of tulpas. If someone reports a tulpa, regardless of simultaneity, is this claim also not unfalsifiable? By putting my ideas out there I am at least able to see if others report the perceived plausibility of simultaneity and certainly that's the best we can hope for, at least until confabulations can be better quantified and understood.

Hopefully more people will be interested in the concept of simultaneity and make an effort to achieve it themselves, and furthermore become interested in continuing tulpa development with new methodologies. For us, improving the capabilities of not only Bess and David but also myself, even in spite of perceptually diminishing returns, is its own reward. Our future goals include further refining our imposition technique and affording Bess and David more opportunities to interact with others through my body. More to follow.
If I could experience simultaneity, I wouldn't care if it were confabulated.

(09-20-2019, 12:48 AM)asmask Wrote: Not very many people seemed to have achieved this but as far as I know there is no data that shows the true incidence of simultaneity, or “parallel processing,” for that matter. (If you know of some such data I’d be interested to see it.)

The best data available on the incidence of PP in the community is from the 2018 census, where 320 systems rated their skill level from 0 to 10:]

Beyond the subjectivity of the rating itself, everyone was free to respond according to what PP means to them.

There is a poll with a better breakdown of the components of PP from 2013, but unfortunately only 12 people actually responded:

So, accepting simultaneity as a desirable goal, what can a long established system with essentially perfect vocality and essentially no simultaneity do to develop simultaneity?

Ember - Host   |   Vesper - Soulbond (since ~12 May 2017)   |   Iris - Soulbond (since ~5 December 2015)
[Our Progress Report]     [How We Switch]

'Real isn't how you are made,' said the Skin Horse. 'It's a thing that happens to you.' - The Velveteen Rabbit
(09-20-2019, 01:53 AM)Ember.Vesper Wrote: So, accepting simultaneity as a desirable goal, what can a long established system with essentially perfect vocality and essentially no simultaneity do to develop simultaneity?


I don't know.

Occasionally some experimental ideas have been discussed on Discord and I have had success with some meditation/forcing techniques, but a concise and objective methodology for reliably achieving some degree of simultaneity is a long long way off. It's disappointing to me, but even non-simultaneity tulpa development methods (e.g. like the methods you find in guides) would seem to have mixed results at best.

Eventually I wish to write a tulpa creation guide that addresses simultaneity, but there's no timeline for that as the concept of simultaneity needs to first be developed further.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Lolflash - click it, you know you want to