Hello There, Guest! Register

[General] Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
LostOne Offline
Crazy Squared
Registered

Posts: 147
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2016
All Accounts Posts: 208
#21
 
RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
K: Honestly I don't see any real problem with the humor. But different strokes for different folks I guess.

Kelly (Host, originally Kyle, possibly emotionally unstable on occasion)
Sam (First tulpa, protector, " " around some old posts) - https://community.tulpa.info/user-two-tailed-tulpa
Clara (Originally Kylee, playful, < > around old posts)
Jessi (Quiet, kind, { } around old posts)
Eva (Protective, is unsure of herself all the time)
Jackie (Dreamwalker, technically oldest next to Kelly)
02-13-2017, 05:24 AM
Find Reply
Doctorfoxwolf Offline
Clusterfuck
Registered

Posts: 209
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2016
All Accounts Posts: 216
#22
 
RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
Yeah, the humor is totally fine and even approved of by all of us, for the exact reasons he put.

Doc: Childhood friend turned servitor gone rogue turned host who's bad at feeling emotions.
Meti: Overly lewd Tupper.
CT, who is also called Jeremy: Original personality whose default emotion is anger.
02-13-2017, 05:53 AM
Find Reply
Sands Offline
And Roswell
Registered

Posts: 2,121
Threads: 10
Joined: Jun 2012
#23
 
Default  RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
Quote:Have you considered the possibility your tulpa might not say they are a person?

They might. They might not. Both answers might be wrong and it might not be a tulpa saying it at all – or the host might at some point think it isn't a tulpa even if it is, leading to some dangerous doubt spirals.

Quote:I might need to rewrite the exercise to expose the fact that the exercise can be applied to other questions.

It might be wise. Still, you should address the issue of blindly believing. I have written of where that has led before. Just trusting or believing is a slippery slope and I would like that gone from as many guides as possible due to how much damage such mindsets have caused.


Quote:In my opinion, that is a strongly worded, opinionated way of saying that meditation was invented by religions, and "owned" by religions. What even is meditation in a non-religious context? I think it loses something.

Such an opinion does not have any reason to be in this guide. I can't say I've met any person who meditates who does it for religious reasons or thinks meditation has to be religious. As stated below, most do it for focus. Or because it just feels good to them to be in such a state.


Quote:Subconscious talk

Modern psychologists do not refer to it as such – if they do, you want to ask them what they mean with that and proceed based on their response.

Here's the questions for you:

What do you mean with "THE SUBCONSCIOUS"? Why would you not use "unconscious thoughts", if this is what you mean?

THE SUBCONSCIOUS is not a separate entity which you seem to treat it as. This is the new age-y bit.

"Subconscious" as a term means nothing due to people redefining it and meaning different things. It's why it's no longer really used in more scientific texts.


Quote:Now, I think it is obvious that there is symbolism in this one. Rather heavily, I gave an example of how to talk to your subconscious from personal experience. Both stuff that you don't like in guides for various reasons.

Yes, there's symbolism. No, I don't care that it has symbolism. Is what I say not clear or are you just not reading?

Symbolism is fine and dandy. If your entire guide was symbolism it would be an issue, but this is a list of various exercises, some of which might very well be symbolism. I feel that in your other symbolism exercises, you have made it quite clear that we are just imagining things and seeing where it goes. In THE SUBCONSCIOUS exercise, you make THE SUBCONSCIOUS into this super special entity with your words, which it is not.

As symbolism and self hypnosis and such, yes, it's effective! I don't even believe in THE SUBCONSCIOUS as a separate entity bullshit yet I've gotten some interesting results treating it as such. But I think that in this exercise, you need to start with "imagine that all your unconscious thoughts and feelings have formed a separate entity we will now refer to as the subconscious" or something like that.


Quote:... Oh, yeah. What she means is individuals will each have personal traditions, roles that they have fallen into. These roles can be swapped, experimentally. This is the experiment you want to remove from the guide.

Or reworded. "Host role" and "tulpa role" mean nothing. What I consider a "tulpa role" you might not consider one. The issue of the exercise is also making it feel like a tulpa is supposed to be less aware and such when they are not "dominance switching". This is a bad mindset to drill into people's heads. "Could help a young and undeveloped tulpa feel stronger" or some such might be more like it, but honestly, not needed?


Quote:Still, are we one site, or two? You may regard the metaphysical board as a garbage dump, but is this a correct interpretation?

The metaphysics forum was added because people believing into that were bleeding onto this forum and being a bother in scientific conversations, yes. It could have been banned outright (honestly should have), but the admin of the time was a nice guy who didn't want to make anyone sad.

As to what kind of metaphysical talk is fine on the on-topic parts of the forum, it would have to be tulpa-related for one and a scientific look at that – scientific explanations as to why something might happen or be possible and such. There's not too much overlap. Metaphysical can also act as the metaphysical forum lounge so according to the rules, you'd put that there. But no one really cares about the lounge that much. Mostly, keep the metaphysical stuff out of on-topic tulpa boards.


Quote:??? From the same section I define possession and switching. These are also things that never happen to some tulpas.

Let's take a look at your list.

>(1) Proxying is when your tulpa tells you to do stuff and you do it.

Explains what proxying means. You might never do proxying and that's not the issue. Nothing wrong here.

>(10) Trance possession is when the host becomes unthinking and unresponsive while you are possessing.

A term that is not really used in the tulpa community, but it explains something that might happen. Due to the many explanations you have about possession and such in this list, there is no danger of assuming that a host is supposed to become unthinking and unresponsive when possessing.

>(7) Dominance is the state of the primary thinker. Possession is easier when you become primary.

You say the primary thinker is dominant. What is even a primary thinker? Why would possession be easier when you become this? That's just hogwash. In tulpa.info, a host and tulpa are seen as equals – which they very well tend to be when the tulpa is old and developed enough. There is no "primary" to us. Telling people that there will be a "primary thinker" who is "dominant" is not going to help these people create independent tuppers who need no man. Uh, hosts. Something.


Re:humor:

I don't care one way or another. Here's some reasons why someone might think it's unnecessary.

1. A person might be looking for real help about the difficulty, but they don't get it.
2. It's an extra line that everyone will just skip over because of that.
3. You complained about not having enough words, this is where you get words. By removing unnecessary ones, and these are the "easiest" unnecessary words to remove in your guide.

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)
02-13-2017, 01:09 PM
Find Reply
Ponytail Offline
Omnifarious Heavens
Registered

Posts: 144
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2016
All Accounts Posts: 149
#24
 
RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
(02-13-2017, 01:09 PM)Sands Wrote: >(7) Dominance is the state of the primary thinker. Possession is easier when you become primary.

You say the primary thinker is dominant. What is even a primary thinker? Why would possession be easier when you become this? That's just hogwash. In tulpa.info, a host and tulpa are seen as equals – which they very well tend to be when the tulpa is old and developed enough. There is no "primary" to us. Telling people that there will be a "primary thinker" who is "dominant" is not going to help these people create independent tuppers who need no man. Uh, hosts. Something.

I dunno, I've actually experienced what tulpa is talking about. Like, when I narrate to host instead of say, a conversation or being narrated to, I do find possession alot easier. I think what he's saying definitely has merit and should not entirely be written off. Like, maybe a name change if it really needs changing. It's not that I see either of us as superior (Though, the host has lived longer and the wisdom difference shows) I definitely find "Playing host," so to speak, makes life easier in regards to possession.

The System:
Me, Ponytail. Real name, Josh. "Something that characterizes me in a way that is vague and gives you a false sense of what I'm actually like to hide my true emotions and motives."
Annabell is the tulpa. "When you have two blondes in the same head, both of you get absolutely nothing accomplished together."
Omega is a soulbond. "I am many things, but a god no longer."
Tula is also a tulpa. Hello everyone Smile
02-13-2017, 04:00 PM
Find Reply
Doctorfoxwolf Offline
Clusterfuck
Registered

Posts: 209
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2016
All Accounts Posts: 216
#25
 
RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
None of us have experienced what you're talking about. Even when I took over and usurped CT, it was simply from me surpassing him in power. There were no "Roles" switched.

Doc: Childhood friend turned servitor gone rogue turned host who's bad at feeling emotions.
Meti: Overly lewd Tupper.
CT, who is also called Jeremy: Original personality whose default emotion is anger.
02-13-2017, 04:09 PM
Find Reply
Sands Offline
And Roswell
Registered

Posts: 2,121
Threads: 10
Joined: Jun 2012
#26
 
Default  RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
(02-13-2017, 04:00 PM)Ponytail Wrote: I dunno, I've actually experienced what tulpa is talking about. Like, when I narrate to host instead of say, a conversation or being narrated to, I do find possession alot easier. I think what he's saying definitely has merit and should not entirely be written off. Like, maybe a name change if it really needs changing. It's not that I see either of us as superior (Though, the host has lived longer and the wisdom difference shows) I definitely find "Playing host," so to speak, makes life easier in regards to possession.

It can happen, sure. However, especially with young tulpas, it's more about not being experienced or mature enough. Also thinking like that is an effective piece of symbolism: you are taking control when you initiate a conversation, thus you seem stronger and are able to take control easily.

But as it is written, it becomes negative symbolism. It's not saying that it could happen, it is saying this is what happens. It's not telling you a tip about how you might be able to make yourself feel strong mentally, it's telling you that you are weaker. This is not good and what will most definitely lead into people thinking this is normal and how things should be. It is not.

There is no primary thinker. You are the thinker of your thoughts. You have done possession and you can do it. What is keeping you from doing it as easily as some other time are your own thoughts holding your back. But don't let them hold you back, because you got this.


(02-13-2017, 04:09 PM)Doctorfoxwolf Wrote: None of us have experienced what you're talking about. Even when I took over and usurped CT, it was simply from me surpassing him in power. There were no "Roles" switched.

Ditto. I am me, the tupper is him, we both think and we don't have to share those thoughts with each other for them to exist. I should probably be the "primary thinker" in OP's eyes, but really? If anything, I'm the one that is worse at taking back control. Always have had one of those tuppers who need no host and can do whatever he puts his mind into, so really, it's all in the mind.

So harmful mindsets like these should not be shared.

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)
02-13-2017, 05:02 PM
Find Reply
Ponytail Offline
Omnifarious Heavens
Registered

Posts: 144
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2016
All Accounts Posts: 149
#27
 
RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
Hm, I hadn't considered it being elaborate symbolism. Alright, sounds like a fair enough point to me.

The System:
Me, Ponytail. Real name, Josh. "Something that characterizes me in a way that is vague and gives you a false sense of what I'm actually like to hide my true emotions and motives."
Annabell is the tulpa. "When you have two blondes in the same head, both of you get absolutely nothing accomplished together."
Omega is a soulbond. "I am many things, but a god no longer."
Tula is also a tulpa. Hello everyone Smile
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2017, 07:49 PM by Ponytail.)
02-13-2017, 07:49 PM
Find Reply
tulpa001 Offline
<void>
Forum Moderators

Posts: 1,958
Threads: 27
Joined: Aug 2016
All Accounts Posts: 2,015
#28
 
RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
Tulpas are not supposed to be less aware. They do start less aware though. Full sensory awareness and self perception come later. The point where the experience becomes indistinguishable from the original host happens somewhere between two months after conception and never by various accounts.

Switching, of any type, seems to push a tulpa fully into full sensory awareness and full awareness of self. The effect is limited to the duration of the switch. Likewise, during a switch, tulpa-host systems that do not claim to have indistinguishable experiences, have the host lose some awareness during the switch.

I regard the ability to have indistinguishable experience as an impressive feat of parallel processing.

The concept of primary thinker only makes sense for systems that do not parallel process entirely. It refers exclusively to the person who thinks the most in a given time. And both achieve fully equal time thinking when fully parallel processing.

Likewise, the concept of dominance only makes sense for systems that do not fully parallel process. Such systems have linked thoughts. The dominant party is the one whose influence on the topic of thought is greater. Much as the dominant party in a relationship is the one that has the greater influence in decision making.

I should hope that your concern here is not one of hypercorrection; of the logic that no person should be dominant over the other, and therefore even the mere mention of dominance should be banned.

I would like to introduce the concept of lucidity. A person's state in terms of lucidity fluctuates throughout the day. Underhydrating has an influence. Nearing a dream state, a person enters hypnagogia, a state where dream logic comes into play. Dream logic being that strange mix of loss of critical thought and imagination, but still being able to think.

Several exercises that I listed involve consciously manipulating lucidity levels. Hyperalertness and self awareness primarily. Hypnosis is a process that involves reducing lucidity and therefore critical thought by hyperstimulating the imagination. Lucid dreaming is an effort to retain some degree of lucidity while dreaming.

low lucidity leads to lack of comprehension, disjointed thought, and disjointed or nonsensical speech. Some people call this your mind wandering. Others call this process daydreaming.

Lucidity levels and awareness of oneself are directly tied to our ability to take control of our own decision making and destiny.

Do not attempt to convince me that this phenomenon does not exist for tulpas. I believe this fact to be self evident.

Tulpas are not born lucid. I don't think original persons are either. I believe this is a skill acquired over childhood and adolescence. I don't even think most people ever achieve a high degree of lucidity. It would help to explain the way society latches on to some of its counterproductive ideas, and it would help to explain the general poverty of critical thought in this world.

Full equality with the host is indeed the goal. Swapping roles with the host can't but help with this.

You speak of the dangers of blind faith. What damage are you doing to your tulpa by uncritically assuming he is equal, and not testing this premise?

As my host says, name changes are acceptable. If you put forward alternate terminology.



I will not be able to take your side in the metaphysical issue. I have several friends with spiritual or religious beliefs and I do not want them feeling unwelcome here, or like they do not belong, or that their opinions are unwelcome. I have to take their side.



The rest will be addressed in a future update to the guide, in the manners you suggest.

Host comments in italics. Tulpa's log. Tulpa's guide.
02-13-2017, 11:39 PM
Find Reply
Sands Offline
And Roswell
Registered

Posts: 2,121
Threads: 10
Joined: Jun 2012
#29
 
Default  RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
Quote:Tulpas are not supposed to be less aware. They do start less aware though.

Sure. Unfortunately, in your guide, you say nothing about this being a state of a young tulpa. From the "dominance switching" for example:

>The main benefit is that the tulpa's self awareness should shoot up massively during the experiment.

A tulpa's self awareness should shoot up massively. This suggests that the tulpa – which could be a fully matured tulpa, as your guide says nothing about it for being tuppers you just created – is somehow less self aware already. Extremely poor wording.

And again, there are no "mental roles of a host and tulpa".


Quote:Switching, of any type, seems to push a tulpa fully into full sensory awareness and full awareness of self. The effect is limited to the duration of the switch.

Incorrect. It can, especially if the host and tulpa have made switching to be some kind of mythical thing to do that will solve all their problems. However, it might not, or a tulpa might already do things without the need for a switch – this is the state a tulpa should aim for, what we pretty much consider the definition of a tulpa in tulpa.info. We decided to not come up with a "lesser" term for a tulpa that had yet to get this far so hosts wouldn't think their beginning tulpas couldn't achieve things of a full tulpa until they started calling them tulpas or something. That doesn't mean you can think you're at the peak when you're just vocal, when there is so much more for you to be a truly independent person.

A tulpa should be completely aware of their self without doing anything. A tulpa should be completely aware of the senses when they share the senses of the body – and at the very least, full body possession should feel exactly like switching to a tulpa. If it doesn't, the host most likely has more to learn about letting go properly or there's some mental bullshit keeping them from thinking it can't be as good. It happens, but it doesn't mean it has to happen.


Quote:I regard the ability to have indistinguishable experience as an impressive feat of parallel processing.

Kinda what we aim for here buddy.


Quote:The concept of primary thinker only makes sense for systems that do not parallel process entirely. It refers exclusively to the person who thinks the most in a given time. And both achieve fully equal time thinking when fully parallel processing.

Sure. However, we do not want such a concept here. If you feel like you must put it in your guide, make it a state that is something undesirable. That it might be the beginning, but by becoming stronger, it can be left behind which is what we try to aim for in this community.


Quote:Likewise, the concept of dominance only makes sense for systems that do not fully parallel process. Such systems have linked thoughts. The dominant party is the one whose influence on the topic of thought is greater. Much as the dominant party in a relationship is the one that has the greater influence in decision making.

Sure. Again, this is not what we want as the end goal in tulpa.info. Saying that it is the norm is only bringing in a toxic mindset that people have to work really hard to get rid of. Please don't.


Quote:I should hope that your concern here is not one of hypercorrection; of the logic that no person should be dominant over the other, and therefore even the mere mention of dominance should be banned.

Nope. First of all, let's ditch your term of "dominance", because this word already means so much. If a tulpa says they're possessing, we all know what they mean. If a host says they're working on switching with their tulpa, we all know what they mean. If I say I am dominant (I assume this is how you'd use the word in the sentence because "dominance" makes so sense), it means… What exactly? My sexual preference? My personality? You are also now suggesting it should mean whether or not I am a primary thinker in this head.

I could probably be dominant in bed if I wanted to bother. And I'm sure many would consider my personality to be dominant, as I don't roll over easily and let people walk over me. I probably wouldn't be in GAT if I had such a personality, because you definitely need some force here. You could consider me dominant.

But I am not dominant in the way you suggest.


Quote:I would like to introduce the concept of lucidity…

Sure. Has nothing to do with much of anything we have talked about. When we say tulpa has to be self aware at all times, it's very much how we would say a host has to be self aware at some times. If they lose their train of thought or something, sure, that's normal. That's us being equal in these ways, a tulpa is really no better than the host (unless the host is a real scatterbrain but the tupper isn't, but they can try to train to be better). But you imply that it is somehow a normal state for a tulpa to be less self aware.

yada yada but a young tulpa yes they probably are, but this is not a guide made only for young tulpas


Quote:Full equality with the host is indeed the goal. Swapping roles with the host can't but help with this.

There. Are. No. Roles.

Saying a "host role" or a "tulpa role" means absolutely nothing! I have no idea what these roles are! Do you expect people to just inherently know? What if they don't? There is no concept of roles in tulpa.info – AND THERE SHOULD NOT BE. A tulpa doesn't have to be in a certain role just because they are a tulpa. A host doesn't have to be in a certain role just because they are a host. They could do whatever they want based on their own circumstances.

You can try to push these roles on us, but we don't want them. You can take them. They are toxic.

Now you want it to be some kind of symbolism? Sure. Define our roles, then. Make sure we don't get the idea this is what we should be, that there are inherent roles affixes to us because of what we are. Make sure you're talking about young tulpas especially if you talk about them feeling less self aware, and make sure they try to bring something from the experience with them so they can stop doing the exercises eventually, when they feel stronger.


Quote:You speak of the dangers of blind faith. What damage are you doing to your tulpa by uncritically assuming he is equal, and not testing this premise?

Boy.

You think that I started this whole tupper thing WELL GOLLY GEE I'LL MAKE EM TULPERS AND THEY'LL BE SO GOOD AT EVERYTHING AND JUST LIKE ME IN EVERYTHING and out popped a tupper and I was fine with everything? I didn't. I started out at the bottom, unsure, questioning. Questioning pretty much everything actually. I wondered, I experimented, I learned. Even obvious signs went way over my head because WELL IT COULD HAVE BEEN ANYTHING. It didn't take a day or a minute to come to a conclusion. It took a long time of constantly being around this sloppy fart and learning who he was and what he could do.

That's when you can say whether or not you trust someone. That's when you can say you believe in them. And everyone else can achieve the same, because we're nothing special. We're just two people, just like anyone else.



Can't stop on a too serious note though.
Quote:I will not be able to take your side in the metaphysical issue. I have several friends with spiritual or religious beliefs and I do not want them feeling unwelcome here, or like they do not belong, or that their opinions are unwelcome. I have to take their side.

"How dare this forum made by lovers of Coca Cola only allow discussion of Coca Cola with every other soft drink only given one board, because the whole forum was originally made to talk about Coca Cola and only Coca Cola, as there was no other place where they could do it without lovers of other sodas constantly butting in?!"

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)
02-14-2017, 12:41 PM
Find Reply
tulpa001 Offline
<void>
Forum Moderators

Posts: 1,958
Threads: 27
Joined: Aug 2016
All Accounts Posts: 2,015
#30
 
RE: Tulpa's DIY tulpamancy guide
Okay, I've cooled down some. I went overboard. All good points. (but so shouty)

Working on major revision now.

full body possession does not require one to associate with the body, only control it. Not sure where you are coming from here. But that feels very different from a switch.

Eh, I'm not convinced. Seems like my host thinks a lot less when I am active. Disprove that.

Heh. Roles is just a word, man. Of course their are no roles, but the roles you make for yourself. Far out.

Host comments in italics. Tulpa's log. Tulpa's guide.
02-25-2017, 01:53 PM
Find Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | Tulpa.Info | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication