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

Did i give the right answer?
I had my dad ask me what is the difference between a normal imaginary friend and a tulpa.My answer was a normal imaginary friend can only do things you imagine them doing and are not like tulpas.Because tulpas are literally like another person in your head and they can do things that you don't imagine them doing.Was this a good answer?Also after i answered my dad's question he didn't seem interested.Sad

Lolflash - click it, you know you want to

It's a highly debatable topic. Some claim that some children's imaginary friends are sentient individuals and some claim that their tulpas don't have any passion to be independent people but have alternate goals in wonderland or helping their host. I think most agree that both exist in the mind, therefore both must be imagined entities.

There's not really a "right" answer to this question, it really depends on how "imaginary friend" and "tulpa" are defined. I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
I'm Gray's/Cat_ShadowGriffin's Tulpa and I love Hippos! I also like forum games and chatting about stuff.
Temporary Log | Chat | Yay!

The Grays, my other head-mates, have their own account now.
That sounds pretty reasonable to me, Ghost.
the difference in an imaginary friend and a tulpa, generally speaking, is that you control an imaginary friend and they aren't autonomous or really independent - but when it comes to kids, it's likely some actually have basically-tulpas and they just use the term imaginary friend, which is fine - in that case "imaginary friend" just refers to the childhood phenomenon and not the ~deliberate practice of considering them a separate person (but yeah you pretty much said it right, it's just not everyone is interested in this sorta thing)

a post of Lumi's from a discussion about this:
(03-28-2019, 01:58 AM)Luminesce Wrote: Good points about how "imaginary friend" interaction with children goes. I specifically have one and only one memory of when I was.. between 4 and 6 years old, playing with my stuffed animals. I was playing pretend (something I grew allergic to ages like 7+), playing out some sort of scenario with me and two dog stuffed animals. I'm sure at this point in my life I did it at least a few times, but it surely wasn't a common thing or I'd have more than one memory of it, and I was self-conscious enough age 6+ I don't think it happened that late.

So anyways, that's where my thoughts on how imaginary friends work comes from, how I think of it personally. It was fluid, me acting for them, but it was still me. And despite being extremely fond of those dog stuffed animals for ages 4-9 or so, I did not think of them as sentient outside of that(those?) play session(s). Meaning, they had zero thoughts associated with them, just love given towards them. Only in that time of playing pretend did they have any "sentience", but the sentience was very obviously me (I think out-loud voice and all) acting for them. Even as a kid, I think I could easily have told you if questioned that I was pretending for them, I wouldn't have for a second told you they were real.

But, as tulpamancy exists, there must so varying extents of separateness and autonomy in what is umbrella'd as "imaginary friends". I can only give my own experience and "tulpamancy" definition of imaginary friend as a non-sentient character you consciously control.
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
I've previously touched on this subject as well:

(07-08-2019, 01:55 PM)Ember.Vesper Wrote: These articles, based on the research of Dr. Marjorie Taylor, address the matter of whether children actually believe in their imaginary friends:

Apparently, most children believe that their imaginary friends are just pretend, actively volunteering this information to researchers in mid-interview. This does not mean they are correct, however, as a third of imaginary friends studied were sometimes uncooperative with their physical partner -- "didn’t always come when called, didn’t leave when asked, talked too loudly, didn’t share, or did annoying things like 'put yogurt in my hair'". It seems likely that, in the course of intense play, many imaginary friends do acquire temporary independence and may satisfy local definitions of tulpas.

Since then, we've acquired Dr. Taylor's book "Imaginary Companions and the Children Who Create Them", which should shed additional light on the subject when we get around to reading it.

Granted I never had an imaginary friend growing up, but I had never heard that you're expected to control them until I came to this forum. That sounds very odd to me, as if it were a requirement invented within this community specifically to distinguish them from tulpas.

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

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Lolflash - click it, you know you want to