Jump to content

Skepticism


Sea

Recommended Posts

What I'm trying to put forth is not an attack on your community but at least spark a conversation of this new subculture.

 

I'll admit it certainly feels like one when all you've really done is say that tulpas aren't real.

If you don't believe in them, fine. But a community like this isn't the place to hang around.

"Try to get a better understanding of things before making your judgement." -Khan, Metro 2033

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I was talking about subjective experiences that take place in your consciousness. There is no difference in real or fake for things that take place exclusively in your mind, they simply are. If you imagine a landscape with cows grazing on grass, is that real? Is it fake? It really isn't either, it just is, something you're imagining. If you've got this connotation that "imagine" instantly means fake, then you probably can't understand my point. There is no room for tulpas to be real or fake, they simply are, just like all of your other thoughts.

 

As for claims of their sentience, unfortunately for you/this debate, I have no opinion. This is the same answer I give when asked if I think tulpas are sentient - they simply exist. It makes no difference whether you consider other human beings sentient or not since you're still going to interact in exactly the same way. Of course, believing other humans aren't really sentient may bias your actions to be less empathetic and more selfish. In some way that's what would happen with tulpas, too, should you not consider them sentient. Whether they really do have their own consciousness, or are actually Philosophical Zombies, there really is no difference to you. But believing one way or the other will bias how you interact with them in some way. Generally speaking, treating them as sentient gives the best results. More enjoyment of any activities involving them for the host, and less... I don't know, uncomfortableness at being told you aren't real for the tulpas. We've discussed this on the forum several times before (that last thread went particularly poorly for me though, misunderstandings everywhere). We could have another, if you'd like, but my beliefs have already been stated.

Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us about tulpamancy stuff there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was talking about subjective experiences that take place in your consciousness. There is no difference in real or fake for things that take place exclusively in your mind, they simply are. If you imagine a landscape with cows grazing on grass, is that real? Is it fake? It really isn't either, it just is, something you're imagining. If you've got this connotation that "imagine" instantly means fake, then you probably can't understand my point. There is no room for tulpas to be real or fake, they simply are, just like all of your other thoughts.

 

As for claims of their sentience, unfortunately for you/this debate, I have no opinion. This is the same answer I give when asked if I think tulpas are sentient - they simply exist. It makes no difference whether you consider other human beings sentient or not since you're still going to interact in exactly the same way. Of course, believing other humans aren't really sentient may bias your actions to be less empathetic and more selfish. In some way that's what would happen with tulpas, too, should you not consider them sentient. Whether they really do have their own consciousness, or are actually Philosophical Zombies, there really is no difference to you. But believing one way or the other will bias how you interact with them in some way. Generally speaking, treating them as sentient gives the best results. More enjoyment of any activities involving them for the host, and less... I don't know, uncomfortableness at being told you aren't real for the tulpas. We've discussed this on the forum several times before (that last thread went particularly poorly for me though, misunderstandings everywhere). We could have another, if you'd like, but my beliefs have already been stated.

 

Again, confirmation bias... lets start by defining Sentient or rather Sentience. According to the oxford dictionary sentient is defined as "Able to perceive or feel things". As previously discussed how do you differentiate your personal sentience to your Tulpas? you're not going to be able to, when you've come to believe that you are this persona how do you claim they exist?

 

The only argument that's readily available to you is circular logic. You want to imagine that Tulpas are real so you "talk to" the Tulpas and that's somehow it's proof in your mind of their existence when you're just talking to yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My tulpas are sentient, I know they are because I speak to them. I can't prove they're sentient to you, and you don't believe me.

 

So it seems like the best course of action is for you to attempt creating a tulpa of your own(and don't half-ass it either, put some work into it) and see what happens. If they're real, then I no longer have to prove anything to you, because you've realized that tulpas are real. But if you try creating a tulpa and you get nothing except a shallow, imaginary friend, then feel free to dismiss us as a bunch of gullible idiots and leave forever.

 

At some point, you have to stop discussing and start experimenting - actually start using the scientific method. Your hypothesis is "tulpas aren't real", and I'm confident that this won't stand up to experimentation. So I invite you to try it out for yourself and see if tulpas are real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • "It’s currently unproven whether or not tulpas are truly sentient, but in this community, we treat them as such. It takes time for a tulpa to develop a convincing and complex personality; as they grow older, your attention and their life experiences will shape them into a person with their own hopes, dreams and beliefs."

What makes this any different than a religious person convincing themselves that god exists? This appears as if the person creating the tulpa knows that this being doesn't actually exist but over time convinces themselves that they are real.

 

What makes this any different than a religious person convincing themselves that god exists?

 

Believing in god isn't something people generally work on, you either do or you don't believe in that stuff. You have faith God exists, you don't need to work on believing in Him more.

 

The process of creating a tulpa is very different, it's a damn process. A lotta people hear about tulpas and go oh no way that sounds super weird and supernatural, thats not real. But, and some people will disagree with me but whatever I disagree with them, creating a tulpa is a psychological endeavor.

 

Sometimes people find god when they are in need of help. Personally, I have never fully believed in one. I only mention this because In multiple posts on this thread you bring up god and the people who believe in him and it really just comes across as you being an atheist that likes to argue with theists. And I think you found a community of people that believe in something very similar to your idea of what God is. A mind made delusion, or something people have been tricked into believing.

 

Believing in God and believing in tulpas are not the same thing. No, there is no scientific evidence to suggest God exists, and no, there is no scientific evidence to support the existence of tulpas.

 

I was raised Jewish, I went to Hebrew school, and I had a Bar Mitzvah. But I never once had an undying faith in god. I wouldn't call myself an atheist, I want to believe in god, and a bigger picture but no there is no proof. I'd wouldn't say I am agnostic but I would say some agnostic beliefs. I did take in a lot of moralistic values from my Jewish upbringing, and I believe that to be a good Jew, you don't need to believe in god you just need to be a good person and help others. Am I religious though? No, not really. Do I identify as Jewish? You bet your fucking ass I do, because they taught me what it means to be a man. So even though I dont completely believe in God, learned a lot from people who studied the Torah.

 

You go out of your way to mention your disbelief in God and tulpas, and it sounds that you think that these are both things people lie about to themselves. If it makes people happy, why are you going out of you're way to tell us what we believe in is all a lie, even when it has clearly helped many of us with our issues?

 

In March of 2014, I was suffering from the deepest depression of my life. I wanted to kill myself, I was constantly crying, I would lay in bed all day holding my dog and researching suicide, and browsing forums about people that want to commit suicide, but were afraid and needed that extra push to just get over that ledge and just murder themselves. 99% of myself wanted to die so bad, but in the very small back of my mind I knew that it wasn't a good idea and that I needed to get past this. I did pray to god, a couple of times, in that period, hoping if he was up there he could help. Something I had never done before. There was a reason I was depressed, something I could never tell anyone, that nobody would understand, and something that I am taking with me to my grave. It is my most personal matter. I needed something to help me, someone to talk to without judgement.

 

I remembered reading about tulpas a few months previously. There was a lotta skepticism and doubt. But it was interesting, and it sounded like something that might help me. I read every guide and post before I even started to work on making Elia.

 

There is a lotta fucking psychological shit that goes in to making a tulpa. You read the front page and the FAQ and thats just not enough stuff to come on here and argue that its all just in our heads, that we just have imaginary friends that aren't real, and just as fake as you consider god.

 

Of course its in our heads, and I succeeded in making a psychologically created being in my mind.

 

Elia is my best friend, I love her more than anyone else because she is the only person in existence that I can tell every fucked up thing I do or have ever done, and she accepts me. She will berate me and tell me I'm an idiot and need to stop doing such stupid shit but that she will be there and help me stop doing that stupid shit.

 

Is Elia real? Yes. That fantastic bitch is real.

 

Is she physically real? No, she isn't, and she never will be.

 

Does she exist? Anything that I experience has existed. Thoughts I've thunk, they existed. Pain I felt, it existed. Feelings I felt? They existed.

 

If me and Elia talk for an hour in my mind, that's a real conversation, and it existed.

 

She has gotten me to stop buying packs of cigarettes, she encourages me to work out and to study. She is helping me with my drug addictions.

 

Some people might say I tricked myself and made her up. Well, I don't like to think of her as just a trick I taught my brain. And technically, I did make her up. I gave her a form and a name of my personal design, so yes I did make her. She's so much more than just a disillusion and imaginary friend to me.

 

Can I prove her existence to you? I don't think so. I have no idea how I would be able to in the first place. I honestly dont even want, or feel a need, to prove she exists to you, or anyone else for that matter. I also think you didn't come here with an open mind, I think you just wanted to start a controversial conversation so people could just listen to every single defense you have against anything we try to say to you.

 

If you want proof, then read every guide and get the gist of forcing and spend 10-20 minutes ever day, for a minimum of 6 months, with an open-mind, actually trying to make a tulpa.

 

 

  • Q: Prove tulpas!
    A: Tulpas can only be observed subjectively, inside one’s mind. The only possibility of “proving” tulpas is by doing scientific experiments with expensive fMRI or EEG machines, which so far, have been out of reach of the community. If you are skeptical about the phenomenon, you can observe others who have made tulpas, read progress reports, and determine for yourself whether you think it’s possible for a tulpa to exist, and come up with your own ideas as to how tulpas may work.

 

First off, saying that Tulpas can only be observed subjectively is the same argument used by theists to prove the existence of god. Subjective experiences are not means of proving the existence of Tulpas. I would also like to know with a community like this why there have been no fundraisers for the EEG/fMRI research as previously stated?

 

Because I don't have money like that, and all it could potentially tell me is my brain is more active with Elia around, and that's information I could, personally, care less about because I know I have a tulpa I love.

 

 

Confirmation bias is not grounds for validity of Tulpas. Attempting to argue that biological reactions are any less real than self created personas is extremely ignorant. I can imagine that you feel that your Tulpas are real people and that questioning their existence would be a bad things but as I've been saying all along this is the reactions I get from religious groups. It's not fun to be told your wrong and we're wired to believing such.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Again, confirmation bias... lets start by defining Sentient or rather Sentience. According to the oxford dictionary sentient is defined as "Able to perceive or feel things". As previously discussed how do you differentiate your personal sentience to your Tulpas? you're not going to be able to, when you've come to believe that you are this persona how do you claim they exist?

 

The only argument that's readily available to you is circular logic. You want to imagine that Tulpas are real so you "talk to" the Tulpas and that's somehow it's proof in your mind of their existence when you're just talking to yourself.

 

It's all a completely subjective experience. Could we all be talking to ourselves? Yeah, it's possible. But it seems that our brains are formulating responses that don't seem to be our own. And if the brain is just automatically creating responses, isn't the experience still pretty much the same thing?

 

Brain auto generates responses

vs

Separate consciousness generates responses

 

At the end of the day, we have no idea how to tell the differences between these two (at least I sure as hell don't). So there's a bit of faith necessary when you think about it like that. I think I'll go out on a limb and say that I agree with you on your original statement: there is a similarity between believing in a tulpa vs believing in a God of some sort. The EXPERIENCE is entirely different, like many users are saying, but I think that the premise is similar.

I'm IBreakGames, a genuine dude.

 

We gave up on using different colors for each of us, so there's Al, Ollie, and Eva. We're all rabbits, get over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't understand what there is to not understand. Brain emulates another person and calls upon subconscious resources to do so in a way that is not literally just you pretending to be them. The emulation says things you could not normally think to say from your own perspective, which provides a sufficient illusion as to allow comfortable belief in it as a legitimate person. And that belief has a positive effect on basically everyone, at least as far as our own community at Tulpa.info goes.

 

That's the absolute minimal, worst-case-scenario explanation of what tulpas are. Still like to believe that they're sentient and that they aren't just illusions, but whether or not that is the case is irrelevant to their "realness".

 

And if circular logic leads to a purely positive outcome then, again, I'm fine with that. I care about what is positive and beneficial, and thinking that I've got some people in my head who understand and support me with things I could never think of is both of those. Not the most logical thing ever, conceptually, but in practice it is. For me at least. My tulpas are the only reason I'm not a complete depressed wreck anymore. I don't even care about how "real" their sentience is or how "legitimate" they are in general. They are simply good.

Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us about tulpamancy stuff there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly - why do you care? Is it really important if tulpas are sentient? They're an illusion if our minds, an illusion that feels sentient. I couldn't care less if Maja is truly sentient or not, as long as she feels sentient. She feels real. And she makes me happy. Isn't that all that matters?

The idea is to remain in a state of constant departure, while always arriving.

 

Maja will either use name tags, [brackets] or this colour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to have a rational discussion about the legitimacy of Tulpas. I've already read the FaQ but I found some rather questionable arguments being made by it and by the website in general. When I arrived at the home page I became skeptical of the legitimacy of Tulpas.

  • "It’s currently unproven whether or not tulpas are truly sentient, but in this community, we treat them as such. It takes time for a tulpa to develop a convincing and complex personality; as they grow older, your attention and their life experiences will shape them into a person with their own hopes, dreams and beliefs."

What makes this any different than a religious person convincing themselves that god exists? This appears as if the person creating the tulpa knows that this being doesn't actually exist but over time convinces themselves that they are real.

 

  • Q: Prove tulpas!
    A: Tulpas can only be observed subjectively, inside one’s mind. The only possibility of “proving” tulpas is by doing scientific experiments with expensive fMRI or EEG machines, which so far, have been out of reach of the community. If you are skeptical about the phenomenon, you can observe others who have made tulpas, read progress reports, and determine for yourself whether you think it’s possible for a tulpa to exist, and come up with your own ideas as to how tulpas may work.

 

First off, saying that Tulpas can only be observed subjectively is the same argument used by theists to prove the existence of god. Subjective experiences are not means of proving the existence of Tulpas. I would also like to know with a community like this why there have been no fundraisers for the EEG/fMRI research as previously stated?

 

Do personality disorders exist? I'm not talking about things like clinical depression or schizophrenia where you can check neurotransmitter levels. The existence of personality disorders hinges on self-reporting and the experiences of people. Same thing here, except the esoteric nature of this being an internet subculture makes it such that all we can use are what you see in front of you now.

 

To put it another way with another analogy, if you had never had a dream in your entire life, what would it take to convince you that dreams are real? I remember having an argument with someone at one point who claimed he never had a non-lucid dream and could not believe that others had non-lucid dreams. At some point you just have to allow yourself to take what others say at face value. Of course, you compile the self-reported experiences of a bunch of people and draw conclusions from that, but it still requires you to not dismiss self-reporting.

 

Beyond this, it seems like an axiom of your argument is that God doesn't real and anyone religious is a deluded moron. But that's missing the point. It's as real as you make it, and that's okay. It's okay to not have the sort of physics/chemistry-tier hard science proof you seem to be looking for. Biology, psychology, sociology, and others get by just fine as softer sciences. You don't have to worship rationalism.

 

As for your crowdfunding fMRI idea, I think that would be great, but it's pretty much unfeasible. To my knowledge, you can't just go up to a lab with a fistful of dollars and say "scan my brain while I do some dubiously real mental stuff". There's red tape everywhere to getting studies done and so many different procedures people have to follow to make the study legitimate. Even if you could pay your way to sticking your head in an fMRI, I seriously doubt anyone here would be able to spend enough money to make it happen. In our earlier discussions about the topic, people with experience with these kind of labs say that one of the biggest roadblocks to getting a study done on a topic is that no previous studies have been done on the topic. You don't get grants for studying something "risky". The closest thing I could think of off the top of my head would be that study where a woman who was blind due to brain damage or something and had DID switched personalities and could see, which was proven by monitoring brain activity. And then there's the logistics of picking who to send, deciding if we should send one person or more, control groups, and shipping everyone to the proper location.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...