Jump to content

[split] Are tulpas subjective and in the mind?


tulpa001

Recommended Posts

MODERATOR'S NOTE: thread derail from here

 


 

Well, good luck tethys.

 

I do wonder why people keep saying that tulpas are entirely subjective and exist only in the mind. If it is a defence mechanism or what. I know that humans also only exist in their minds. Except they don't. They also exist in their communities and in their legacies and products.

 


 

THIS thread has gone through some evolution.

 

* PART 1: A conversation about what it means to say tulpas are subjective starting here.

* PART 2: A confusing debate largely surrounding philosophical categories and implications.

* PART 3: A conversation concerning, err... misconceptions about tulpas and evidence.

* PART 4: A discussion about hypnosis.

Host comments in italics. Tulpa's log. Tulpa's guide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, good luck tethys.

 

I do wonder why people keep saying that tulpas are entirely subjective and exist only in the mind. If it is a defence mechanism or what. I know that humans also only exist in their minds. Except they don't. They also exist in their communities and in their legacies and products.

 

I think that saying "tulpas are subjective and only exist in the mind" is synonymous to saying "I admit that my tulpas are actually imaginary friends, but you can't judge me because you can't even prove that you have tulpas."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said experience is subjective, with some common sense you should be able to tell what is purely subjective to you and what is more or less universal and you can choose to see it how you want but you'd probably be wrong, while the purely subjective stuff ("Is my tulpa real") has no right answer so you can choose how to experience that, if you want

 

or you can pretend there are rules for experiencing purely subjective things, but that's usually societal brainwashing tbh

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.

I think being happy and having fun makes life worth living, so spreading happiness is my number one goal!

Talk to us? https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How you experience things is the definition of subjective. Is my tulpa real? Is that a question about experience? Is it even a question about you?

 

Of course it's not a question about experience or myself, the whole point of a tulpa is that it exists no matter what your subjective experiences are. Tulpas are not subjective, I view them as another person within the host's mind and body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant your experience of them is subjective :|

 

for "on topic"/future leave-ers' sakes, all I meant was nobody but you can experience your tulpas so nobody's experience - their opinions or beliefs or whatever - matter unless you want them to. Also in case you missed that Luma, the post I linked was my host talking about how he created me ~instantaneously, and I'm super part of this community fine

 

the IRC is really not the forum at all...

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.

I think being happy and having fun makes life worth living, so spreading happiness is my number one goal!

Talk to us? https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant your experience of them is subjective :|

 

for "on topic"/future leave-ers' sakes, all I meant was nobody but you can experience your tulpas so nobody's experience - their opinions or beliefs or whatever - matter unless you want them to. Also in case you missed that Luma, the post I linked was my host talking about how he created me ~instantaneously, and I'm super part of this community fine

 

the IRC is really not the forum at all...

 

I think that post is really interesting, however I was there when Tethys "created" her first tulpa. There was no forcing involved, and it was done within a few minutes, and there were no signs of previous plurality. As soon as she thought she had a tulpa then she was feeling head pressure. A few minutes later, the tulpa was talking, and later that day, the tulpa had gathered the courage to possess and stuff. Now she's working on a so-called "godform" because of her egoistical longing to be god-like. A tulpa won't make you god-like and a tulpa cannot be god-like. If Tethys thinks that then she has greatly misinterpreted what tulpas are, and I don't think she is ready to share her mind and body with another person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accidental tulpas are often walk-ins that just appear out of nowhere. A number of hosts have expressed concerns about getting results way too fast. A number of characters become tulpas over time.

 

Someone wrote a guide about how to get a tulpa in ten minutes.

 


 

Also, please no attacking other members on the forum.

Host comments in italics. Tulpa's log. Tulpa's guide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing about whether or not there’s fast results in relation to a sudden instantiation of a sentient entity is that even if it’s possible, experiential context over time would still be needed as I would imagine if one wanted to believe there’s a full-fledged tulpa, that would imply continuity of themselves over time as well.

 

It’s like this weird spell people get themselves into thinking that by assuming sentience in such little time is the person feeling there’s no need to build continuity over time. If there’s such a stigma; a stigma that I can’t seem to condemn nor condone so readily, it seems there’s a lot of ambiguity over what it means to treat a tulpa as sentient. Or, maybe perhaps, assuming sentience isn’t exclusive with the phrase ‘from/at the start.’

 

It seems it’s like grasping at semantical straws to pull out a win only to realize the futility of trying to quantify other people’s subjectivity even when thought experiments like the beetle-in-the-box portray this futility.

 

As for tulpas existing objectively outside of a person’s subjectivity. If we go beyond that through a metaphysical lens over how the Universe is structured, then this would imply a Universe with subjectivist ideologies (e.g. panpsychism – all matter being conscious or even protopanpsychism where there’s a potential; which is somewhat less ‘matter-of-factly’ as the former…..solipsism, etc.). There wouldn't be objectivity...just collective amnesia that gets branded as individuality.

 

But, if this truly were the case; where these subjectivist ideologies were apparent, then there would be a collective awareness over instantiations of other entities. But, that gets way too deep in diving into what the Universe may be. So, something easier to digest is the metaphorical implications of tulpas existing irrespective of the host’s subjectivity. But, that seems to create another apparent issue as to whether or not it’s a dead-end kind of dualism that can’t reconcile with themselves….in fact, a one-way dualism where something comes out (the instantiation of this subjective-independent tulpa), but no way coming in (e.g. the host coming to terms as to how they, the tulpa, can even be known to them if they're not within their own subjectivity --> that automatically implies some metaphysical rooting).

 

It’s like this one-way type of dualism with the whole ‘objective existence’ irrespective of one’s own subjectivity is in fear that if there’s an inclusive experience of continuities of selves….that somehow, the individuality of the tulpa-in-question gets downplayed. I can’t really wrap my mind as to how one believes tulpas have an existence beyond one’s own subjectivity without first tackling the metaphysical implications behind that.

 

If they play pretend, and jump around semantics and metaphors….it’s still questioning the ontology, i.e., theorizing the existence of something and someone. It seems too shady, and full of holes. Because those holes makes the hard problems of consciousness apparent. Man, this feels like some next-level tulpaing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your statement that subjectivist theories will rule the world under certain conditions always confuses me, because when I think of subjectivist theories, I always immediately jump to Subjectivism. A specific doctrine that is implied by nothing you say implies subjectivist theories. Now I realise this is definitely not what you are talking about.

 

After getting sorted with that, a second thing always strikes me. The implication that panpsychism is metaphysical. Study this chart carefully.

Dualism-vs-Monism.png

 

Metaphysical theories are any theory here other than physicalism.

 

Panpsychism fits probably in idealism, and protopanpsychism in physicalism. This set of theories don't belong in the other two categories for sure.

 

By my guess I take it you are referring to idealism when you refer to subjectivist theories.

 

Though I know that metaphysical refers to anything other than the study of the physical, in my mind, it always triggers thoughts of dualism. I forget about the other non-physicalist theories. My bad.

 


 

Anyhow, as much as I get sidetracked by these pair of semantic difficulties, at first I thought, "No, there's no way that a universal consciousness exists, and I'm not sure how those subjectivist theories imply that." But then I realised. Civilisation itself could be a conscious entity, with us the neurons, and our relationships the connections. So, yes, there could be an overarching consciousness, vaguely aware of us and that contains us.

 


 

Your question as to how you can know your tulpa if they exist independent of your subjective perspective has a trivial solution. The same way you can know other humans. By communication.

Host comments in italics. Tulpa's log. Tulpa's guide.

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...