PETT – Is Treating A Tulpa As Sentient A Basis For Virtue Ethics?

[Guest Anonymous]

Considering a tulpa truly independently sentient opens up a giant can of weird implications (ethical and otherwise) and fosters frighteningly profound ramifications. Now you know why I just personally avoid accepting the idea.

 

And people just think I am being block headed and pretentious.

 

Don't generalize here. I never thought you were.

And to anyone who might think I don't have these thoughts about all the ethical implications and all that either, you're wrong, really.

 

I just don't find it to be at all frightening or worrying because that's the attitude I had (at least almost) right from the start, I guess.

 

I am sentient. I don't know how to prove that to anyone but Felix, but I am.

 

I don't think you can.

Hell, for all intents and purposes, no one can prove their own sentience to anyone. It's something you yourself know, hosts and their tulpas being the only exception because "they share a head".

 

 

Greets,

AG & Rina

[Guest Anonymous]

http://wordpreneur.com/wp-content/uploads/smiley-147407_640.png[/img]

 

Right on!

[Linkzelda]

Considering a tulpa truly independently sentient opens up a giant can of weird implications (ethical and otherwise) and fosters frighteningly profound ramifications. Now you know why I just personally avoid accepting the idea.

 

And people just think I am being block headed and pretentious.

 

Absolving from the conversation, and not having a mental fortitude to iron out whatever peculiar implications may arise itself is just a virtue established for you to sustain the hypothetical imperative that Melian, and even tulpas, if you wished, can be categorized as pseudo-sentient, make believe made real, etc. This doesn’t mean your set of virtues catered for your lifestyle with her is any less of an existential horror than the “frighteningly profound ramifications” you feel is implied behind the hypothetical imperative of treating a tulpa as sentient, or even those that still foster assuming sentience from the start. There could even be a stalemate with your notion, and other implied imperatives, for all we know. Especially with the mirror analogue I analyzed here, it created implications of “peculiar” ramifications; mostly in the sense of the idea of a conscious accompaniment, and who’s occupying control of whatever body while the other shifts their awareness somewhere else.

 

If you’re not interested in accepting the idea, that’s fine, but I’m interested as to what those implicit, frighteningly profound ramifications may be. Make me feel the existential horror.

[Guest Anonymous]

Existential horror. I love that phrase. LOL Gods that is good.