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

[Forcing] On Forcing: Developing the Consciousness
#11
There are a few points that could be improved.
Quote:The separation between active and passive forcing is based on if we focus our attention on the tulpa specifically or only give them little attention while being busy with something else1 — a concept similar to awareness and meta-awareness in psychology: to have an experience is not necessarily to know that one is having it.2 And indeed, “active forcing” is hosts experiencing their tulpas while being aware of it; while “passive forcing” is them doing it while being unaware of the action.
I'm not sure how a host can passive force while not being aware that they are giving the tulpa attention. Usually passive forcing refers to interacting with the tulpa in some way like talking to them or imagining them present, while doing another task or otherwise splitting attention. So while the definition you give is correct, but it doesn't follow that passive forcing involves being unaware of experiencing the tulpa.


Quote:A special mechanism: a Default Mode Network (or DMN), makes sure your brain runs circles in a standby mode, wasting as little energy as possible when you’re not actively busy with specific tasks.

I wasn't sure what DMN was from this description and had to look it up. Here's what wikipedia says: "The default mode network is active during passive rest and mind-wandering which usually involves thinking about others, thinking about one's self, remembering the past, and envisioning the future rather than the task being performed." I think a clearer explanation of what the mind does in this state would help; what exactly is happening when the brain "runs in circles"?

Grammar notes below
Quote:only give them little attention
This sounds off to me, I feel "little attention" should be "a little attention". 

Quote:what changes is the brain’s capability to labelling the thoughts
"Labelling" should be "label".

Quote:the brain needs to take a different ego as a point of reference for the actions body performs

Here "body" should be "the body".

(05-10-2019, 08:02 PM)Piano Wrote: I'm not sure how this is relevant. In fact, none of the Buddhism references seem to have much purpose being there.
I think the idea is that thoughts are just another thing that is perceived. You perceive the thoughts and then sort them, you aren't the thoughts themselves and you're not necessarily creating the thoughts either.

Good article overall with some interesting ideas and theories on how tulpas form and why different types of forcing are important. I'd like to see a better explanation of what the DMN is, but approved for articles.
My tulpa Aya writes in this color.
Reply

Sponsors:
Lolflash - click it, you know you want to

#12
Overall, I believe you have a strong working draft. Your essay takes an interesting approach by breaking down what's going on in your head and connecting both psychology and Buddhist ideologies. While I originally thought some concepts introduced felt a little too technical, I believe your footnotes do an excellent job informing your readers who need the extra context. The only major flaws are the rough transitions and the incorrect usage of active/passive forcing distracting from your core thesis. These flaws hurt the structure of your essay.

The only part of your essay that has to do with active and passive forcing is the beginning:


Shinyuu Wrote:“Can I create a tulpa only by passive forcing?” This question pops up constantly on tulpa forums and discussion groups. It often comes from a thought that “active forcing” requires you to dedicate time to your tulpa, and you ain’t got time for that shite (you still want to have a tulpa, though).
The separation between active and passive forcing is based on if we focus our attention on the tulpa specifically or only give them little attention while being busy with something else

After that, you assume a different definition for "active" and "passive" forcing. This will confuse your readers or make them wrongly assume you don't know what you are talking about. I found you used the term "active focusing" once, and I believe that would be a reasonable replacement for every other instance of "active forcing". The beginning section I quoted should be removed from your essay because it's off topic and needs to be replaced with an introduction relevant to your thesis.

I wrote more detailed comments here:


Shinyuu Wrote:requires you to dedicate time to your tulpa, and you ain’t got time for that shite (you still want to have a tulpa, though).

You don't need to include "shite" or other profanity in your article.

Shinyuu Wrote:For it, focusing on a single task is hard; it’s an effort that increases its energy consumption and, as such, the effort that should be discarded as soon as possible.

The wording is confusing here. If the effort needs to be discarded, why focus at all?

Shinyuu Wrote:Our brain is a muscle that needs training.

That entire paragraph does not mention your thesis even though it adds context to it. Include a reference to your thesis statement and the transition will be smoother.

Shinyuu Wrote:Michael Fox, the Associate Professor of Neurology and the Director of Laboratory for Brain Network Imaging at BIDMC writes: “The default mode network has shown to deactivate during external goal-oriented tasks such as visual attention or cognitive working memory tasks, thus leading some researchers to label the network as the task-negative network.”

This explanation is too technical for someone who hasn't studied psychology. It would be helpful to either paraphrase or re-state what he says in non-technical terms.

Shinyuu Wrote:But let’s get back to tulpas. It’s common to think of them being the products of our thoughts, but what are thoughts, exactly?

If you combine these two into one sentence and reference the last paragraph, your sentence will transition to your next paragraph more smoothly.

Shinyuu Wrote:This is where meta-awareness comes in.

This makes me think the next paragraph will talk about meta-awareness, but it doesn't. If the next paragraph were about meta-awareness, I would use this as part of the first sentence of that paragraph.

Shinyuu Wrote:But is there more to it? This is where our DMN comes back!

This transition is too rough. You shouldn't have to introduce your next paragraph with a rhetorical question and shout "back to this thing!"

I really like this article, but it's too rough to approve in its current state. Core sections need to be further revised or possibly moved around and the introduction needs to be redone to apply to the thesis.
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.
Reply
#13
Review here. (Google drive link)
My opening and closing paragraphs:

Hello Shinyuu! Your website was one of the first resources on tulpamancy my host saw. I’m glad to be able to review a piece of yours. I’ll be focusing on structure and clarity the most. I agree with Piano and AZ’s points re: content: you are defining “active” and “passive” forcing differently than the common usage. I liked AZ’s proposed clarifications for this problem. On to the review! And, keep in mind, this is mostly nit-picking: it’s entirely up to you what suggestions to keep, though I would like to see some level of revising.

Overall, a very nice piece on the merits of passive forcing, active forcing, and switching, as well as the role of the DMN on the development of tulpas as individuals. It needs to be polished now, so that this central idea stands out. Your opening statement needs to be changed- when I read “So, is it better to active force, or passive force, or switch?”, I said, “That’s it- that needs to be the opener!” You then go on to explain how the DMN factors into your analysis, that all methods work, but active is better than passive, and switching is better than active. At least, that was what I took away. 


Give it a good polish, some rephrasing and fine-tuning of definitions, and I’ll approve it for articles. - G
Three brothers. [Progress Report] [Art] [Oops! All Jamie]

"You are the messenger, not the message. You are just like everyone else."
Reply
#14
Thanks for all the feedback; guys!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Sponsors:
Lolflash - click it, you know you want to