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

Non-Tulpamancer Discussion on Tulpae
Every so often I like to do spontaneous Google searches and look at what people think about Tulpamancy. I came across this thread from from

The thread is driven by some very curious non-Tulpamancers (however at least one of them tried it) from 2014, but they go over some really interesting topics that I think it would be nice to shed a little more light on their thoughts, especially since some of the topics bellow can be the topics of their own threads. I wanted to leave a comment on the thread myself, but I couldn't make an account because the reCAPTCHA refused to load for me, nor could I report the problem because a reCAPTCHA was required to send a request form.

Here's a list of most of the things they touch on:
  • The Materialism Model (Phycology) and Tulpae
  • How Tulpae impact the mind
  • How valuable is eye-witness account of a event?
  • Is a report valuable if multiple eye-witnesses report that same strange event?
  • Is Tulpamancy slavery?
  • Tulpa Tale: Steve Moore
  • Tulpa Tale: Alvin Schwartz
  • Book: Jeffrey Kripal's book, "Mutants and Mystics" (apparently mentions Tulpae)
  • Book?: Kirby Surprise " his Synch book." - Sciborg_S_Patel
  • The Philip experiment in Toronto in 1972
  • How Tulpae are more than hallucinations (or not)
  • Tulpae and Religion
  • Attempt at Tulpamancy: Szechuan
  • The Problems with lacking scientific research on Tulpae
  • The Subconscious and Tulpae
  • Tulpae and their effects outside of the Host's mind
  • Sharing Tulpae with other minds
  • DID vs Tulpae?
  • Near Death Experiences are what exactly?
  • Psychic and Median experiences vs. Tulpae
My Wonderland form minus the glasses and the fur. I'm not a hippo, I promise.
I sometimes speak in pink and Ranger sometimes speaks in blue (if it's unmarked and colored assume it's Ranger). He loves to chat.

My other Tulpas have their own account now.

Lolflash - click it, you know you want to

Their discussion touches on a few points I've been thinking about in relation to the tulpa community, namely the role of anecdotal evidence in the belief in tulpas. A tulpa is a phenomenon for which the best existent evidence is the direct experience thereof; you can't deduce the existence of tulpas based on extrapolation from any known law of nature, nor can you prove to anyone else that you definitely have a tulpa. Anyone who believes in tulpas does so either because they have one or because they believe other people's claims of having tulpas.

At the same time, in what is one of the great ironies of the "skeptic" tulpa community, a good number of tulpamancers are quick dismiss anecdotal evidence out of hand if it's being used to support the existence of anything paranormal, without realizing that by those same standards belief in tulpas (even under the psychological model) can be dismissed in precisely the same way, as shown by the user D. Shropshire in that thread. Indeed, evidence for tulpas is of the same nature as the evidence for many "paranormal" phenomena, such as astral projection.

If belief in tulpas is to be justifiable, then, what is needed is an epistemology by which anecdotal evidence can, at least in certain situations, be used to justify claims of knowledge. The thing about that, though, is that, because many paranormal beliefs are justified by the same type of evidence as tulpamancy, any justification of one would at least imply the possibility of the other being justifiable.

Of course, that's without getting into the much more serious problems that pop up from the idea that anecdotal evidence is inherently without value.
For death begins with life's first breath, 
And life begins at touch of death.
well we try to teach people that real and fake aren't a thing in tulpamancy and only experience matters, it seems like such a simple truth but it just hasn't entirely caught on I guess

there's nothing to be skeptical about really, unless you're studying the like physical-science-y aspects of tulpas, because you can't tell someone they didn't experience what they did. What you should ask is "Did you really experience tulpas being like other people in your head?" and then we answer "Yes!" and like, why the heck would we lie about that lol

but sharing personal understanding has never been easy and you can never really do it on such a big scale as it seems like would be necessary so owel
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
In all fairness, the only thing that's provably real with what is known now is the Tulpamancer's belief in Tulpamancy. I can't prove to you if Tulpas are real but there's no question that hundreds of people dedicated huge amounts of time into Tulpamancy and congregated to places like here to talk about it. Therefore, in my mind, Tulpamancy itself and Tulpae are real because the belief in Tulpas - or really a strong belief in anything - is real, and therefore there is at least a reason for why Tulpae are real to their Hosts, and only that explanation can answer if Tulpae are real for everyone else.

For someone on the outside, they are not going to go "Oh wow I can relate to that" so they will respond with intense skepticism and or fear towards Tulpamancy. As for anecdotal evidence, it's really only valuable in two very different ways: for a Tulpamancer, it's something they may be able to connect to with their own experiences. For a scientist that isn't a Tulpamancer, the stories are an indicator something is happening, and that something may or may not have a digestible explanation. I see our experiences as something a scientist can use as somewhat a guide to learning more about how people interact with Tulpamancy and what questions to ask about it instead of concrete evidence that stands to prove anything true or false.
My Wonderland form minus the glasses and the fur. I'm not a hippo, I promise.
I sometimes speak in pink and Ranger sometimes speaks in blue (if it's unmarked and colored assume it's Ranger). He loves to chat.

My other Tulpas have their own account now.
This is what I keep telling people over in the tulpas subreddit as well. We currently have very little scientific data on tulpas in general and there's lots of things being claimed as "truth" in lots of guides. Although I have several tulpas myself, I still scientifically cannot prove that they're there, I cannot prove that they're sentient, I cannot prove that they have agency of their own.

I do hope science one day turns it's eye towards this phenomenon and gives us some answers, but until it does, all we have is pet theories pretty much.
Mech: Logical side, a tactician
Circe: Emotional side, a hedonist
Mirror: A huntress

Thor: Fictive based off the Norse pantheon.
Jane: A perfectly normal woman. Honest!

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Lolflash - click it, you know you want to