Jump to content

Skepticism


Sea

Recommended Posts

I'd like to have a rational discussion about the legitimacy of Tulpas. I've already read the FaQ but I found some rather questionable arguments being made by it and by the website in general. When I arrived at the home page I became skeptical of the legitimacy of Tulpas.

  • "It’s currently unproven whether or not tulpas are truly sentient, but in this community, we treat them as such. It takes time for a tulpa to develop a convincing and complex personality; as they grow older, your attention and their life experiences will shape them into a person with their own hopes, dreams and beliefs."

What makes this any different than a religious person convincing themselves that god exists? This appears as if the person creating the tulpa knows that this being doesn't actually exist but over time convinces themselves that they are real.

 

  • Q: Prove tulpas!
    A: Tulpas can only be observed subjectively, inside one’s mind. The only possibility of “proving” tulpas is by doing scientific experiments with expensive fMRI or EEG machines, which so far, have been out of reach of the community. If you are skeptical about the phenomenon, you can observe others who have made tulpas, read progress reports, and determine for yourself whether you think it’s possible for a tulpa to exist, and come up with your own ideas as to how tulpas may work.

 

First off, saying that Tulpas can only be observed subjectively is the same argument used by theists to prove the existence of god. Subjective experiences are not means of proving the existence of Tulpas. I would also like to know with a community like this why there have been no fundraisers for the EEG/fMRI research as previously stated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well as of now there is next to no solid evidence to the outside observer that tulpas DO exist. As far as we know, nobody has put their head into an MRI machine or had a CAT scan to know whether anything actually goes on. Any mental positives we announce can be pushed away with the explanation of placebo, we think that it will help us, so it does.

Why has there been no fund raiser? Well, who would go? Why should I provide money if I don't even know that ___'s tulpa exists?

"Try to get a better understanding of things before making your judgement." -Khan, Metro 2033

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to have a rational discussion about the legitimacy of Tulpas. I've already read the FaQ but I found some rather questionable arguments being made by it and by the website in general. When I arrived at the home page I became skeptical of the legitimacy of Tulpas.

  • "It’s currently unproven whether or not tulpas are truly sentient, but in this community, we treat them as such. It takes time for a tulpa to develop a convincing and complex personality; as they grow older, your attention and their life experiences will shape them into a person with their own hopes, dreams and beliefs."

What makes this any different than a religious person convincing themselves that god exists? This appears as if the person creating the tulpa knows that this being doesn't actually exist but over time convinces themselves that they are real.

 

  • Q: Prove tulpas!
    A: Tulpas can only be observed subjectively, inside one’s mind. The only possibility of “proving” tulpas is by doing scientific experiments with expensive fMRI or EEG machines, which so far, have been out of reach of the community. If you are skeptical about the phenomenon, you can observe others who have made tulpas, read progress reports, and determine for yourself whether you think it’s possible for a tulpa to exist, and come up with your own ideas as to how tulpas may work.

 

First off, saying that Tulpas can only be observed subjectively is the same argument used by theists to prove the existence of god. Subjective experiences are not means of proving the existence of Tulpas. I would also like to know with a community like this why there have been no fundraisers for the EEG/fMRI research as previously stated?

 

Hello,

To begin, a person who believes in a god usually has a much more one-sided conversation. Their god is usually totally perfect and all that jazz, however a person will never truly understand perfection, thus, if you look at a god as a tulpa, you'll notice quite a few differences. Tulpas respond immediately, don't require prayer, are a lot more "life-like" than a dusty old deity, have access to your memory and let it show in their conversations with you, even recalling things long forgotten, and finally, every tulpa is different from the last. You seem like a skeptical person, fair enough, but should you ever look up the metaphysical elements on tulpa and thoughtforms, it'll really hit home on the differences between a god and a tulpa.

To my knowledge, people have tried to set up crowd funded efforts to prove the existence of tulpas using machines, but it has been for naught.

As a wise man once said on Tulpamancy,

"You may get confused with the rudiments of the phenomenon since the majority of it relies on faith, which is something that may be hard to sustain for others, especially when they find themselves wanting instant-gratification with a sentient, sapient, and vocal tulpa. You don't have to actually attempt this if you don't want to, and it's a good thing that you're skeptical, and I heavily encourage you to be skeptical of others."

Hope that helps, if not feel free to ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Brassow

In that case you could have a trusted member of the forum undergo the scans. I would assume that Tulpas are a meaningful part of your being so wouldn't it be an incentive to have research backing it up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skeptism is healthy, and of course is it objectively impossible to prove that a tulpa is something real without the necessary equipment. The main difference to traditional beliefs would be that you can achieve results. You can hear, see and even feel your tulpa. You can let your tulpa control your body, or parts of it without actively thinking "my tulpa moves it in this direction". It can get smart and mentally strong if you invest some time and energy. It is more than "I believe it is warm, so it get's warm". It is more like it suddenly get's warm and you've no idea why, since you were busy with something else.

 

I think one of the main things you got wrong is that anyone of us claims to be able to "prove" the existence of tulpas. It's the opposite: most tulpamancers suffer from a lot of doubt, because they can't really prove anything. Most of us would love to know for sure what exactly is going on.

 

Edit: Oh, i also want to add that you can pseudo-prove it. We can't prove that our tulpas are real, but it is almost certain that if you follow the advice you will achive some results yourself, which you could rate as proof for yourself atleast. You can't prove your experience to other people.

Tulpa: Alice

Form: Realistic Humanoid/Demonic Creation

She may or may not talk here, depends on her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the same thing that pisses me off about people who end up leaving. Who cares what "real" is, and what does that even mean? Are you pondering whether I can share my tulpas' existence with you in some way? A tulpa is no more real than an imagined conversation between two famous people in your mind, or the thought "Today's going to suck, I really don't want to go to my Health class", or the feeling of pain when you stub your toe. Do you see what all of those have in common? They're real to you, but you can't prove them to anyone else, because they might as well not be real to the rest of the world. Why do we consider things like pain of others real? Because those people express it to us, they affect the world in a way that shows they're existing.

 

And that's what tulpas do. They can't prove they're sentient, we can't prove ours exist. But they speak, they converse with and often provide compelling arguments to their hosts, and most older members on this forum will tell you that their tulpas have changed their lives. That's how they prove they *might* be sentient to us. Same way you can prove you *might* be sentient to a solipsist (one who believes they are the only sentient creature in their reality). And to answer my earlier question - my tulpas can speak to you, through my body. They can give you ideas and thoughts I would not have. That's how they show that maybe they're real.

 

But what is real? That doesn't mean anything when what you're talking about exists exclusively in your head. Some day a huge study will show that - gasp - some parts of your brain are more active when communicating with your tulpas than they normally are. Wow, they're suddenly real! All those experiences I had with them, all the ways they've changed me as a person, those were real! Because a scan said my brain was functioning!

 

 

Anyway. Not a fan of this line of skepticism. I understand everyone finds this phenomenon as a sort of brick-wall of information to take on faith, but if you'll give it some time you'll (hopefully) realize there's no faith involved. It's a subjective, mental experience. Real is not a thing.

Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us about tulpamancy stuff there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Brassow

In that case you could have a trusted member of the forum undergo the scans. I would assume that Tulpas are a meaningful part of your being so wouldn't it be an incentive to have research backing it up?

 

Maybe so, but in the end, does it really affect me?

Not particularly in any way. Assuming tulpamancy becomes a phenomenon known by the masses, it might even be frowned on.

So I'm not really inclined to funding a trip to a vMRI because I'm fine with what I know and have.

"Try to get a better understanding of things before making your judgement." -Khan, Metro 2033

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hello,

To begin, a person who believes in a god usually has a much more one-sided conversation. Their god is usually totally perfect and all that jazz, however a person will never truly understand perfection, thus, if you look at a god as a tulpa, you'll notice quite a few differences. Tulpas respond immediately, don't require prayer, are a lot more "life-like" than a dusty old deity, have access to your memory and let it show in their conversations with you, even recalling things long forgotten, and finally, every tulpa is different from the last. You seem like a skeptical person, fair enough, but should you ever look up the metaphysical elements on tulpa and thoughtforms, it'll really hit home on the differences between a god and a tulpa.

To my knowledge, people have tried to set up crowd funded efforts to prove the existence of tulpas using machines, but it has been for naught.

As a wise man once said on Tulpamancy, Hope that helps, if not feel free to ask.

 

I'm not directly comparing god to Tulpas but the arguments behind them. But as you were mentioning this along with theism requires faith. I can understand why people would want a Tulpa but my issue lies with the message that the website is giving off.

It's attempting (or at least it appears) to be validating the existence of Tulpas.

Q: Do I already have a tulpa? I have been talking to an imaginary friend or character, and think they might be a tulpa.

A: This is an extremely common phenomenon in this community. Seeing as tulpas develop through focused attention, they can potentially emerge when someone spends a lot of time thinking about a character, or talking to an imaginary friend. If you think you have something like that, have a close look at them and answer for yourself: Are they independent from you, seemingly doing things of their own volition? Do they surprise you sometimes? Do they feel like another human being, rather than just a character? If you answered yes to one or more questions, your character could be described as a tulpa. Of course, they may not be fully developed or independent yet. If you decide to treat them as a tulpa from now on, and work on developing them and learning to communicate with them more clearly, they may become a fully independent tulpa.

 

The argument that thinking about an imaginary character makes it sentient is illogical. When you spend enough time imagining stories they become more in depth but it's not grounds to declare them to be sentient being.

 

In the second underlined statement this still doesn't validate that they aren't just a figment of your imagination. He's essentially stating that if you feel it's different from any other aspect of an imaginary friend then it must be a tulpa, this is an absurd claim. As the author stated prior the imagery friend is created by the "Host" and they begin to convince themselves of this person being real. This is arguably the same method used to convince people that god exists.

 

I'm not saying that Tulpas don't help the people who created them but Tulpamancy is no more logical than any theistic religion as it claims to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My brain is capable of making me feel like I'm talking to a separate person, and that comes with a ton of positive things like encouragement, ideas and criticisms on basically anything going on in my life, and loneliness to some extent. Of course they aren't another human being, but they sure are convincing when I'm feeling crappy and they help me feel better. Which they are also waaay better at doing than normal humans, as they live in the same brain and understand me perfectly.

 

Still no such thing as real or fake. At least for me, there's only pure logic. Is it a bit silly, and socially weird as heck? Sure. But I don't care about societal norms, I care about what seems logical and beneficial. If they don't line up, I'm not the type to conform.

Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us about tulpamancy stuff there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the same thing that pisses me off about people who end up leaving. Who cares what "real" is, and what does that even mean? Are you pondering whether I can share my tulpas' existence with you in some way? A tulpa is no more real than an imagined conversation between two famous people in your mind, or the thought "Today's going to suck, I really don't want to go to my Health class", or the feeling of pain when you stub your toe. Do you see what all of those have in common? They're real to you, but you can't prove them to anyone else, because they might as well not be real to the rest of the world. Why do we consider things like pain of others real? Because those people express it to us, they affect the world in a way that shows they're existing.

 

And that's what tulpas do. They can't prove they're sentient, we can't prove ours exist. But they speak, they converse with and often provide compelling arguments to their hosts, and most older members on this forum will tell you that their tulpas have changed their lives. That's how they prove they *might* be sentient to us. Same way you can prove you *might* be sentient to a solipsist (one who believes they are the only sentient creature in their reality). And to answer my earlier question - my tulpas can speak to you, through my body. They can give you ideas and thoughts I would not have. That's how they show that maybe they're real.

 

But what is real? That doesn't mean anything when what you're talking about exists exclusively in your head. Some day a huge study will show that - gasp - some parts of your brain are more active when communicating with your tulpas than they normally are. Wow, they're suddenly real! All those experiences I had with them, all the ways they've changed me as a person, those were real! Because a scan said my brain was functioning!

 

 

Anyway. Not a fan of this line of skepticism. I understand everyone finds this phenomenon as a sort of brick-wall of information to take on faith, but if you'll give it some time you'll (hopefully) realize there's no faith involved. It's a subjective, mental experience. Real is not a thing.

 

Confirmation bias is not grounds for validity of Tulpas. Attempting to argue that biological reactions are any less real than self created personas is extremely ignorant. I can imagine that you feel that your Tulpas are real people and that questioning their existence would be a bad things but as I've been saying all along this is the reactions I get from religious groups. It's not fun to be told your wrong and we're wired to believing such.

 

What I'm trying to put forth is not an attack on your community but at least spark a conversation of this new subculture.

 

Still no such thing as real or fake. At least for me, there's only pure logic.

So there's no difference between real and fake? Do you really believe that? By your "pure logic" you can't differentiate TV cartoons from reality? if so I suggest seeking help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...