Negative Traits

[Punch]

For those of you that plotted out your tulpa's personality ahead of time: did you assign negative traits to start with, or did you just give positive traits and let the negative ones develop naturally? If you intentionally gave your tulpa flaws did they stick? Does your tulpa resent you for making them a klutz or giving them a short temper?

 

I mean, if I were creating an RP character, I'd flesh them out as much as possible with character flaws and whatnot, but it seems kind of crappy to give flaws to a supposedly sentient individual. I know I'd be pretty pissed if I found out that my parents were like "Oh, hey, lets give little Derpy a crippling fear of crowds; that'll be so cute."

 

And for the record, I'm not thinking about making my tulpa a murderous sociopath or anything, I'm just considering normal personality quirks like "impatient" or "melodramatic".

[Vos]

It's unnecessary to assign those negative traits if they're just going to develop anyway. I would imagine that, like any trait forced to your tulpa, some would stick and some wouldn't due to deviation. I was assigned some flaws by being forced as an already-established character from media, but I don't resent my host for that - he didn't know what I was at the time, anyway.

[Lacquer]

https://community.tulpa.info/thread-personality-built-in-flaws?highlight=flaws&pid=71389#pid71389

https://community.tulpa.info/thread-general-question-i-have?highlight=flaws&pid=145299#pid145299

 

Giving your tulpas flaws as part of their personality defined by you during creation is a bad idea. "Persistent" and "stubborn" are the same personality trait looked at as a virtue and a flaw. Flaws arise naturally from other personality traits.

[Nageki]

I did end up giving Arro one flaw: the fact that he was very was stubborn over his beliefs and got defensive over any criticisms to it. It didn't stick. I ended up dropping the whole personality forcing schtick after like one and a half sessions though so that might have been part of the reason why, though I did end up parroting him in a way that lined up with the personality I'd planned out for him (mostly). The trait still didn't stay long. Instead he became Snarky McSmartass.

[Yuki]

I suppose I've been saying this in a bunch of different ways on the IRC for months, but I don't think I ever wrote it down here. Yesterday, even, I told some people about my little ideas after they said they don't like the idea of personality forcing. And besides that, many newbies coming in have been saying they've been skipping personality forcing, in favor of letting the tulpa decide their personality themself. I've been recommending a different mindset with personality forcing than what seems to be the norm.

 

Most people seem to think that what you personality force is final, barring deviation. I suppose that seems to be the general idea here as well, looking at Nageki's post saying "I ended up giving Arro one flaw". In this method, you won't be giving your tulpa anything.

 

Rather than forcing personality traits for your tulpa to have, you'll just be talking to them about personality traits. You make a list of traits, all kinds, and you talk to your tulpa about them. But rather than expecting them to adopt these traits, you talk about the ways these traits manifest in people, what they mean to you, the things that people with that trait would do. You exhaustively talk about the personality traits, each in turn, not to give them to your tulpa, but to better understand them. You aren't even suggesting any of the traits to your tulpa, but you're just building up a better understanding of different possible personalities, in a sense. Your tulpa will be free to choose, and I think that this method would make it easier for them to develop their own personality than if you just skip going over personality at all.

 

I think I could write a little guide on this, if people are interested.

[Vos]

Rather than forcing personality traits for your tulpa to have, you'll just be talking to them about personality traits. You make a list of traits, all kinds, and you talk to your tulpa about them. But rather than expecting them to adopt these traits, you talk about the ways these traits manifest in people, what they mean to you, the things that people with that trait would do. You exhaustively talk about the personality traits, each in turn, not to give them to your tulpa, but to better understand them. You aren't even suggesting any of the traits to your tulpa, but you're just building up a better understanding of different possible personalities, in a sense.

 

This isn't dissimilar to what Dane was trying to get across with his personality template, I think. There are some interesting questions you can answer about these sort of traits that allow you to get pretty in-depth with your forcing. To any new users who happen to read this, disregard the hour counts; at the very least, don't compare your progress to them, things happen at different times for everyone.

[NoneFromHell]

As I pointed out in similiar threads: Negative traits aren't necessary at all, you can assign some if they're formulated in a positive way (like being impatient), but there is really no need to make life more difficult for your tulpa. You should never assign devastating ones, like heavy phobias and alike.

[Metatron]

From a more neutral perspective, there really are not positive and negative traits. It is all a matter of perspective, depending on the situation. And as the others have mentioned before, you are not necessarily forcing them to have a set personality. As they assimilate and reject the traits you suggest, they will eventually flesh out over time.

---

From a more neutral perspective, there really are no positive and negative traits. It is all a matter of perspective, depending on the situation. And as the others have mentioned before, you are not necessarily forcing them to have a set personality. As they assimilate and reject the traits you suggest, they will eventually flesh out over time.

[Pioneer11]

When I was creating the person inside my head I was not yet familiar with Tulpas and their warnings, so I went ahead and created what could now be considered a malicious Tulpa. A “murderous sociopath” indeed. But he is tolerable company.

 

did you assign negative traits to start with, or did you just give positive traits and let the negative ones develop naturally?

 

I did assign negative traits purposefully. I wanted my “imaginary friend” to be also my “nemesis”, an adversary that stood against what I believed to be good and just. Although honestly the only trait that I imposed on him was his evilness (or what I thought it was, since I was a child at the time). The rest simply appeared on their own. From our talks he developed naturally in a cynical, cold and sarcastic being. Even if his worldview is negative he has a great drive for knowledge and a strategical mind. He is very rational and “detest emotions” (which is an emotional statement itself, but I’ll let that go). He is much quicker than me in reading (and judging and manipulating) people and situations. He got cognitively so ahead of me that he assumed the position of a teacher, mentoring me in my studies and motivating me not to give up in the most difficult times of my life. So he developed both negative and positive (?) traits with time.

 

If you intentionally gave your tulpa flaws did they stick?

 

My intentional one was evilness. Which then became pessimism and cynicism. He does not like reality, no matter what I show him that I deem to be beautiful or good. He thinks that he is merely aware that life is just an illusion and that assigning a moral value to it is incorrect. But he learned to appreciate music and art, mostly because he feels my emotions toward them. Without me he would have no purpose for them. And he still detest humanity and thinks that people doomed themselves with their general stupidity. So he has a lot of flaws that are here to stay.

 

Does your tulpa resent you for making them a klutz or giving them a short temper?

 

No. When I started on him I was not even five. I talked to him because I always wanted a brother, so he was born out of my affection. We weren’t only “enemies”, although we did fight a lot and rarely agreed. I also left him free to evolve. I gave him especially the choice to not be evil, if he so wished. He has been with me for more than twenty years and has indeed changed a lot and grew up on his own. His traits are born from his own experiences in being my mental companion. He can chose to be defined by them or can mature out of them. He is happy of being what he is because he relishes his “role”. That is, he regards himself as is my “dark side”, the “other half” of my being. We complement each other, balance our extremes and push each other’s to be better, so in the end my misguided decision was a good one.

 

But I would never encourage anyone to give their Tulpa negative or malevolent traits. I was lucky. I was also one pretty weird kid.

[Lacquer]

words

 

Ever hear of the Jungian concept of the "shadow"? For your situation, it might be interesting to read up on it.