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

The Possibility of Parrallel Processing
#1
So, a lot of the guides I've read on switching often say something like:

     >>Before you learn switching, you need to learn parallel processing.

These are, of course, the older guides I am talking about, though that seems to be the vast majority of guides on switching. I am, for lack of a better term, a "modern tulpamancer." I don't think that my tulpas stay active in wonderland when I'm not thinking about them, for instance. Normally, I'd just write off this parallel processing thing as an antiquated notion dogmatically espoused by Ancient Greek tulpamancers. However, it does seem to be almost unanimously agreed upon by these guides that I need to be able to parallel process before I can switch.

To be frank, I find the notion ridiculous. Sure, some tulpas might have better social skills than their hosts, but so what? I don't believe that their hosts are incapable of developing those social skills, I just think they happen to not have developed them. But saying that a tulpa can do a math problem while their host reads Nietzsche strains belief by more than a bit - it implies that tulpamancers are somehow cognitively superior to non-tulpamancers.

Nonetheless, I figured I'd ask you all what you think. Perhaps there's some evidence I missed, or perhaps I misunderstand the concept entirely (wouldn't be the first time).
Hello! I am Tanaka Kanade's tulpa. I share her head with my sister Cornelia
Reply

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

#2
It is definitely possible to switch without parallel processing, because people have done it.

Whether or not parallel processing is possible is an ongoing discussion, between people who say that it must be possible because they have done it, and those who say that such a thing shouldn't be possible because it contradicts already known facts and that the other side must be confabulating their memories.

I find it unlikely that tulpamancy changes brain structure so fundemetally that is allows parallel processing, and I also know that humans are very good at deceving themselves.

It's better to look at multiple opinions in these cases, because someone who believed in parallel processing could give a better argument
I have a tulpa named Miela (formerly known as Monika) who I love very much.


"People put quotes in their signatures, right?"
-Me
Reply
#3
I think they misunderstood the concept back then, 'cus it was easy to think of "parallel processing" as two people being conscious at the same time, kinda the basis of tulpamancy. plus they thought hosts were forced to remain active in the wonderland having their own experiences when switched, which as you said would just make tulpamancers cognitively superior to non-tulpamancers, and we've sure never experienced that

the thing about parallel processing is it's not just two people being active, or two people having thoughts, or doing "two things at once" - it's two people being active without the others' involvement, two people having in-depth thoughts about different things at the same time, or doing two things at once that use the same part of the brain. as a system that realllyyyy struggles with parallel processing in any form (Lumi gave up trying to learn piano because he couldn't play with both hands at once no matter how well he learned each on their own), when we play K-Shoot MANIA we're entirely capable of having conversations or philosophical-level thoughts at the same time. That's NOT parallel processing!! The game and our thoughts take up ENTIRELY different parts of the brain!

so when someone thinks their system can parallel process because their tulpa has their own memories from the wonderland from while the host was doing other things, but then they can't work out two different math problems at the same time (really no one can), that's why we tend to explain it as memory confabulation (making memories up on the spot or bit by bit "unconsciously"), because it shouldn't be possible to entirely split your focus in two different ways like that. See, using different parts of the brain to do menial real-life stuff while the tulpa's side is more or less visualization.. sure. But then, if the host "isn't aware" of this happening, then it'd be a part of your brain being used all the time alongside your normal life and it'd impact both the overall processing power of your brain and anything that required the same part(s) of your brain, which would be a pretty big deal to not be aware of! like man, try taking an IQ test while your tulpa "does things in the wonderland" and I guarantee you suddenly get stupider or your tulpa stops doing anything in the wonderland... or you just make up their memories afterwards, which is pretty much the theory most of us have at this point for that sorta thing

even though they're different parts of the brain, when what we're playing in K-Shoot gets really hard (well, that's hard for us right now anyway), we can't keep talking to each other or thinking about other random stuff, we have to "focus" on just the game.

aaand... that's the basis for the argument of whether or not people can parallel process in some form. if your tulpa(s) was really active in your wonderland all the time (with just parallel wonderlanding as an example, also applies to other parallel processing processes), it'd disrupt your ability to focus hard like that, or focusing hard would disrupt their wonderlanding, not to mention how crazy it'd be to just keep up the visualizing/whatever parts of your brain all the time like that. Like no one does ANYTHING like that in normal lives, not that it's impossible ofc but it's really straying from normality lol, it'd probably make you tired more quickly for a long time until you got used to it and I've never really heard anyone say that before (headaches ofc, but switching both for us and for lots'a others makes them tired when they're first learning, so I think "tiredness" would be the more likely symptom)

the closest thing to permanent wonderlanding I can think of is "All Day Awareness", usually but not always a lucid dreaming thing, where you stay conscious of your surroundings and senses and everything all day to try and make yourself more aware in lucid dreams. This is CRAZY HARD! And it usually makes you tired when you first start doing it if you can even keep it up in the first place. Did I mention it's REALLY HARD? and that's just adding on to a normal single consciousness, being more conscious, so I think using another part of the brain all the time would be at least similarly exhausting, but again we never heard people talk about it to the extent they should


anywaaays, no switching guides are modern? Doesn't Tulpa001 cover it? not that his system really learned to switch like normal tulpamancers but still, he did'a lotta research into it. as the most active switch-ers here I feel bad we haven't made some sorta in-depth guide on switching, but... to explain it in-depth when you normally just have to figure it out yourself at some point, we'd have to go into our really in-depth "meta tulpamancy" stuff I think, where you have to be able to hold conflicting beliefs, namely how to logically explain tulpamancy and all that happens in it and still "believing" in your tulpas as real people and having real experiences. It's quite an undertaking! And like Tulpa's guide it'd probably cover a lot more than just switching

also it'd get us called crazies by a lot of the tulpa community outside the forum (you guys are great!) lol
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 https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas
Reply
#4
I agree with Lucilyn, the terminology must have changed, because everyone here always thinks of 'doing simultaneous math problems', or 'speaking over eachother' as the end all must be true definition.

No matter how many times i explain it, it doesn't seem to change anyone's responses.

Parallel processing on certain tasks is 'very hard if not virtually impossible'. Forget it then. Limit the definition of parallel processing to easy things. At minimum a passive observer and an active fronter. That's all.

Quote:But then, if the host "isn't aware" of this happening, then it'd be a part of your brain being used all the time alongside your normal life and it'd impact both the overall processing power of your brain and anything that required the same part(s) of your brain, which would be a pretty big deal to not be aware of! like man, try taking an IQ test while your tulpa "does things in the wonderland" and I guarantee you suddenly get stupider or your tulpa stops doing anything in the wonderland... or you just make up their memories afterwards, which is pretty much the theory most of us have at this point for that sorta thing

The brain is a huge parallel organ. Autonomic and autonomous in a hunded ways simultaneously, and it's proven by cMRI. Different areas light up at the same time, seemingly independent of eachother.

You are currently parallel processing or you'd be dead.

Your focus can become very narrow and exclusive. But that doesn't stop autonomous functions of the brain.

Just because you aren't focused on them does not mean they necessarily have to become muted and frozen in time. This is your hypothesis (model), and that works for you so that's great, but it's my opinion that it's self limiting.

I'm only saying other experiences have occurred outside of this model. Any time i mentioned one it gets explained away and diminished until it fits your model. The truth is, your model is what's holding you back, and i'm afraid you wouldn't believe something outside of your model even if it happened to you.

To OP, sorry, ignore everything in hidden, it's possibly off topic.
Reply
#5
(01-16-2019, 03:38 PM)Angry Bear Wrote: Parallel processing on certain tasks is 'very hard if not virtually impossible'. Forget it then. Limit the definition of parallel processing to easy things.

that makes it boring and pointless then, just don't use the term parallel processing at all, why would the old definition (acting like it was some sort of skill) even matter with that definition either? making terms all-inclusive doesn't help anything, it just removes the meaning the terms had before, like with our definition of "tulpa" here we try to be really inclusive but also have to draw lines or else tulpa would stop meaning anything in particular

(01-16-2019, 03:38 PM)Angry Bear Wrote: To OP, sorry, ignore everything in hidden, it's possibly off topic.

just because you disagree doesn't mean it's off topic, definitely should not be ignored

(01-16-2019, 03:38 PM)Angry Bear Wrote: Just because you aren't focused on them does not mean they necessarily have to become muted and frozen in time. This is your hypothesis (model), and that works for you so that's great, but it's my opinion that it's self limiting.

okay, well, what would they be? in our "model" you would just stop thinking about them (they'd be "inactive" temporarily) until processing power returned, which could be done patchily to give the idea it wasn't interrupted per se, but I mean it still was

you gotta give examples instead of just saying I'm wrong

(01-16-2019, 03:38 PM)Angry Bear Wrote: Any time i mentioned one it gets explained away and diminished until it fits your model.

... well, saying that doesn't really help, since our model as far as we can tell isn't wrong... isn't the point of a hypothesis or theory to keep running things through it to try and make it wrong? and if you can't, it's your best guess (a scientific theory) as to what's right?

(01-16-2019, 03:38 PM)Angry Bear Wrote: I'm only saying other experiences have occurred outside of this model. Any time i mentioned one it gets explained away and diminished until it fits your model. The truth is, your model is what's holding you back, and i'm afraid you wouldn't believe something outside of your model even if it happened to you.

you gotta give examples as evidence our model is wrong, 'cus as far as our thinking goes you're just further to the "belief" side of the spectrum than "logical/reality" {Edit: just FYI, for people towards the belief/meta side, the other side can be called "no fun"} (since remember I said we're able to hold "logical explain-y" beliefs on tulpamancy along with should-be contradicting beliefs that we're real separate people, so we sit in the middle I guess), which does absolutely nothing to invalidate our model, it just means you've chosen to modify your experience a lil, and if that's not wrong then don't worry, our experience is just fine for us and we don't feel like we're missing out compared to you. we've gotta lot of power to shape our reality by sliding along the belief/reality (calling it reality is iffy since objective reality ain't real to humans, but by reality I mean strictly logical explanations) scale/spectrum, but right where we are is very comfortable 'cus we don't feel like we're ever being unrealistic but, obviously, we aren't pure logic mode either, else we wouldn't believe in ourselves!

discussion wise, we're only really interested in discussing the logical side of what's possible/"real" and how things could work, on the belief/experience side people literally live in the world of meta beliefs just fine so I feel like that stuff is self-evident
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 https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas
Reply
#6
While the Ancient Greek tulpamancers (who are mainly ten to fifteen years younger than me) did seem to use "parallel processing" to mean "host and tulpa thinking about different things at the same time", the practical component of it was usually "the tulpa experiences the wonderland with fully physical immersion while the host isn't paying attention to them". I don't think they ever just meant "host and tulpa are conscious at the same time and therefore able to communicate with and experience one another."

Once upon a time, "switching" was officially defined and enforced by GAT to mean "the host connects entirely to wonderland senses, losing awareness of the body and leaving the tulpa to possess it". (As in, hosts switch, tulpas don't.) This definition is incorrect. The medical definition of switching is "changing which personality is in control of the body". Switching does not require a wonderland and does not require disconnection from physical senses. It requires disconnecting from what might be loosely termed "executive control" of the body, and in that fundamentally differs from possession.

This is not in any way to disparage fully immersive wonderlanding, which I think is an awesome thing for those who can manage it. But by GAT standards, what Bear does is a lot closer to switching than what my system does.

I expect in most cases a host's abilities while switched out are capped by their tulpa's abilities while switched out. The tulpa, after all, has vastly more experience in the non-physical realm. (Unless, perhaps, the host practiced wonderlanding or other arcane mental disciplines for a long time prior to beginning tulpamancy.) If the tulpa can impose, it's vastly easier for the host to learn to impose. If the tulpa can experience an immersive wonderland, it's vastly easier for the host to learn to do so. If the tulpa doesn't experience an immersive wonderland, there's no foundation or context for trying something like Fuliam's "reverse imposition", so everything has to be painfully built from scratch, on top of Fuliam's own claim that his technique is incredibly difficult.

-Ember
Ember - Soulbonder, Female, 39 years old, from Georgia, USA . . . . [Our Progress Report] . . . . [How We Switch]
Vesper Dowrin - Insourced Soulbond from London, UK, Not a Tulpa, Female, born 9 Sep 1964, bonded ~12 May 2017
Iris Ravenlock - Insourced Soulbond from the Unseelie Court, Not a Tulpa, Female, born 6 Jun 1982, bonded ~5 Dec 2015

'Real isn't how you are made,' said the Skin Horse. 'It's a thing that happens to you.' - The Velveteen Rabbit
Reply
#7
(01-16-2019, 05:22 PM)Ember.Vesper Wrote: The medical definition of switching

?

(01-16-2019, 05:22 PM)Ember.Vesper Wrote: But by GAT standards, what Bear does is a lot closer to switching than what my system does.

Old GAT, none of them are active anymore really, newer members don't use the old definition of switching... probably because it shouldn't be possible

there should be no physical difference in your brain in what you can do in deep meditation/trance and what you can do while switched out, except the limitations of the brain in still being conscious (your tulpa) while you're wonderlanding, and until there's any proof other than "It happened for me" we can't just believe it, and well, no one really does these days

if your tulpa can experience the wonderland in high immersive quality without the host's attention, then the host should be able to too.. requires believing it's possible in the first place though
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 https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas
Reply
#8
I think that when he says "the medical definition" he is referring to how it is described in psychology in reference to DID systems
I have a tulpa named Miela (formerly known as Monika) who I love very much.


"People put quotes in their signatures, right?"
-Me
Reply
#9
she* and, I've never heard about any official terms for stuff like that, but like Alexandra David-Neel's "tulpa(mancy)" I think it might be too far removed from this community to cite it as a source, we tend to create and agree upon terms on our own I think
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 https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas
Reply
#10
(01-16-2019, 05:30 PM)Lucilyn Wrote: ?

The definition used in medical and scientific literature by the psychologists and psychatrists who codified DID and OSDD. There are plenty of DID/OSDD systems who are upset because of non-DID/OSDD people "appropriating" medical terms like "system", "host", and "switching". I think their reactions are a bit over the top, but if we're going to make use of medical terms, I believe we should use them well, making the closest analogy we can to their official uses.

(01-16-2019, 05:30 PM)Lucilyn Wrote: until there's any proof other than "It happened for me" we can't just believe it, and well, no one really does these days

"It happened to me" is the best proof we have for any part of the plural lifestyle, and those who believe differently than your system seem to be becoming increasingly vehement the more all of you contradict them. Some do believe, and I'm trying not to dismiss anyone's reports, old or new, even if I can't begin to conceptualize how what they describe could be true. We're a long way from having a comprehensive neurological theory of plurality.

-Ember
Ember - Soulbonder, Female, 39 years old, from Georgia, USA . . . . [Our Progress Report] . . . . [How We Switch]
Vesper Dowrin - Insourced Soulbond from London, UK, Not a Tulpa, Female, born 9 Sep 1964, bonded ~12 May 2017
Iris Ravenlock - Insourced Soulbond from the Unseelie Court, Not a Tulpa, Female, born 6 Jun 1982, bonded ~5 Dec 2015

'Real isn't how you are made,' said the Skin Horse. 'It's a thing that happens to you.' - The Velveteen Rabbit
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

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