Evil

A few thoughts.

Recommended Posts

Hello.

 

I am Evil. Not by nature, though. I've had two tulpas for as long as I can remember. Ever since my youth, I've had one gentleman watching over me, and the other coming out of pits of sadness. Respectively Dimitrov and Blak, they feel like travelers; not in a way they leave often, but in a way we seem so accommodated to each other, yet, without ever expressing a shred of emotions... just like people you would travel with on a regular basis.

 

I was thinking about this entire tulpa thing. In my youth, I had no idea that such things existed. More than that, I had no idea that people actually wanted tulpas by their side. As much as a tulpa can be an advantage to you, assuredly, there can be some cons that people might completely refuse, depending on social standards. But I am not one to criticize this decision. More than anything, I embrace it, but all in all, on the grander scheme of things, of my existence, and everyone's existence, the way identity had always been recognized... things are about to differ, are they not?

 

I have seen people qualify this site with many words. Alike to that other person who came in and tried to get members into Hermetics, for instance, it was bizarre to me how much hate the community got. I, for one, do not feel a shred of dislike for the community, and the insults it got seem more unwarranted than anything, to be fair. As a member of the community, and without bias, though, I come to understand why it would get some hatred, or, to be fair, why it would receive some disdain. We seem to consider that tulpas are always a 'good' addition to one's life. I am speaking of earlier cases, like Dreemurr who asked if they were actually a tulpa, or just an imaginary friend; the general response was that 'Yes, Dreemurr, you ARE a tulpa.'. We knew close to nothing of their interactions, of their thoughts, of their entire reality. It could have been someone completely random, in all fairness, expressing close to no details, and we'd have called them a tulpa. That, my friends, is more than fair to me. This community is driven around tulpamancy, but in more than one case, it does not imply that a tulpa is assuredly a 'better' addition to one's life.

 

That, I understand.

 

But there is one thing I fail to understand.

 

When people welcomed Dreemurr with such warmth and acceptance, it made me reflect on one person. Worry not, I do not want to cause any drama in their absence, but... Mistgod and Melian. Especially Melian. I would lurk a lot on the forums, and saw many people refuse Melian's status as a tulpa. Part of it was out of elitism, and part of it was out of disdain, I suppose? Hatred and denial because they were... 'different'. I do not know if Dreemurr truly was, is and will be a tulpa. But it was rather surprising when I saw the high rate of 'acceptance' for their entire ideal of, well, 'being' a tulpa and a large consensus that Melian was not a tulpa.

 

But this isn't about people, in the end. I do not wish to discuss any specific case. What it is about, though, is general acceptance; why are we so encouraging of newbies? Whenever someone has intrusive thoughts, for instance, or just a thought they did not pay attention to. Whenever someone has a vivid imagination that tends to overreact with tulpamancy-related topics... why do we encourage them? Would it not be wise to include both possibilities? In the time I was writing this down, Dimitrov was saying the following: 'Surely, we may not know if it IS a tulpa or not. But in the case it is a tulpa, it is beneficial to tell them it is. In the case it is not, no harm will be caused. We might as well tell them they're always right, then.'. Logically speaking, telling someone they are on the right track if such is the actual case IS beneficial. But, as we seem to also be reserved in a way that members do not give profound, in-depth insight on their experiences (there ARE some members that do, but their posting is as rare as an eclipse), if they are not on the right track, there are many ways they could be going wrong, to be fair. I know the idea that 'you can't go wrong with tulpamancy' is widespread, and it is true in some cases. But you 'can' actually go wrong in the case you follow a wrong lead. In my opinion, instead of always encouraging people, we should focus more on telling them the truth: That, yes, while they may be on the right track, they should know that.... this... that... be careful about this....

The whole idea is that we seem to enforce this sense of optimism into newbies; that is great, that's just great to see. But too much optimism causes imbalance, especially with the limited information that is provided. Overall, I have very little criticism to provide, I just wanted to make the point that there needs to be a case-by-case evaluation before giving out an opinion. Letting people know what surrounds them, the possibilities, while remaining positive, would be ideal. But I am very, very far from telling people what to do.

 

Next thing is the entire metaphysical position. I understand that tulpas are purely psychological, I adhere to that ideology and would never really buy into something of the occult. But Dimitrov and I have been discussing of a few things, lately. Especially when it comes to the entire research thing. I remember a post by Lumi saying that he would not feel surprised if, during an MRI or EEG test (or tests of the nature, I am ignorant in those fields.), some regions of his brain were not highlighted during a conversation with his tulpa(s)(e)(tulparamabang)(whateveryouwant). In the case tests do take place, and in the case nothing odd shows up with the entire EEG thing... what then? Will the perspective change regarding the entire occult thing? In a way, I feel like we should stick to the way we are now, but I also feel like if the metaphysical commune spoke more of their own experiences, we might get to hear out different opinions, some of what they could present might help us in the long run. To understand each other, to understand their own point of view.

In all fairness, if I were into metaphysics, I would feel hesitant to post about my own experiences. Even in the metaphysical section. Trust me, I truly understand that it IS a sensitive topic, one that most people don't really believe in. But I believe we have such a wide room for... learning, overall, that anything that can be tossed in there would be an interesting read AT WORST.

 

I apologize if I came off as condescending or rude. I do not mean to criticize anyone, and the way the community is currently going, I'd say it is pretty good. This is just my insight, and I feel like some people might agree with it.

 

With sympathy.


 

Ah, I'm too tired. I only came here to help.

« — Va, je ne te hais point ! »

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

Wall of text about excessive newbie-acceptance and elitism thatIwon'tquoteherebecauseit'swaytoogoddamnlongandI'dbreakpeople'sscrollwheels

 

Well... yes.

That's something that's been on my mind as well, and it's the reason I often times keep out of these newbie threads.

 

Really, I mean no offense by this, but I agree: Too often have I watched someone go "Hey, I have experienced this thing, I definitely have a tulpa, right?", and many of the members here tend to immediately jump aboard the train and go "Sure!".

 

Or, which is the part that actually irks me a bit, people coming here with outrageous stories, filled with all sorts of drama and ripe for a book, or at least a comic - and... many people here still just jump right aboard the train.

Without really inquiring or differentiating.

 

So, yes.

I too feel that this community can be very over-accepting at times, and that's not always a good thing.

Actually, to some degree, it's a pretty bad thing at times.

 

To be honest, I feel people believed everything WE said way too fast as well, for example.

 

I feel so as well. People were quick to believe anything we said. It was surprising. I honestly expected much more skepticism for a person with a tulpa that is the way I am practically immediately after starting up the first conversation.

 

Skepticism is healthy in the right amounts, even for the person that is doubted. This community sometimes forgets that. At least that's my observation.

 

 

Metaphysical stuff ohgodthisissolongIwon'tquotethisIamthesaviorofthescrollwheels

 

Honestly... I'm a person that refuses to believe anything is supernatural. I refuse to accept that there's anything that can't be explained scientifically, no matter what it is.

And in addition to that - well, Esterina told me about many of the methods she has for achieving things such as projection or affecting my mind in other ways, none of which sound very Witch-like at all; it's all perfectly sensible.

 

But yes... simply for the sake of having it and seeing things from a different point of view every now and again, the metaphysical section is important.

It would be interesting to see more people who believe in that kinda stuff post about it, simply for the sake of looking at things from as many angles as possible - but I also understand that this community is highly scientifically focused to begin with.

Hell, I'm part of that, like I said.

So it's not surprising to see a lack of post quantity there.

 

I have nothing to add here. I fully support the statements made by Felix.

 

And that's our two cents.

 

 

Greets,

AG & Rina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've moved this to Forum Questions & Comments. There's more talk about the way users approach things than general tulpa discussion.

 

I do think that there's too much over-acceptance on this site, and it's one of the reasons why a few people seem to dislike it. There have been a bunch of threads where, when someone comes in with something different, something like "is this a tulpa", people will rush to it to respond with "yes" instead of reading the thread and telling the OP about any other possibilites. If there's a sentence that pops into someone's head that could just be a stray/intrusive thought, people don't think of that possibility and just jump to "yes, this is a tulpa, you're set". I don't want people to be blindly accepting everything, I want there to be actual discussion and questions about these situations in the threads. This is something that can't be fixed by any individual; it needs to be a community effort to make sure that we're looking deeper into these claims, that we're civilly responding to claims that we don't agree with. That's one of the main things that I think can improve this site.

 

Now, when it comes to the metaphysics board, I'm also purely on the psychological side of things, but I wouldn't mind seeing some different points of views if more threads were made there. A lot of people write that stuff off as silly, but I think that, at the very least, we could learn a little bit and see some interesting perspectives if we tried to prod (reasonably) the claims in there and see where we could take them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tulpa.info has developed an overarching "Doubt is unproductive" belief, because doubting your tulpa is a good way to not have a tulpa. It's become so pervasive though that it goes a bit too far for some, who either forgot or never knew that not everything is a tulpa. The point of telling someone what they have sounds like it is or could be a tulpa, is to enable them to have or get one. But that's different from saying, yes, that is definitely a tulpa without knowing anything about them. Heck, even if you know everything about them, you can't say that. As far as I'm concerned every thoughtform is basically the same thing, and people just choose umbrella labels based on what they feel best describes theirs. My tulpas could easily be alternate personalities if I left out the fact that I often talk directly to them. Mistgod's Melian is literally a perfect example of a tulpa until he mentions he doesn't believe she's really independent from his will. And a ton of people who come here with pre-existing thoughtforms have no idea what they have, other than it's a person in their head who they talk to. The label you choose (or choose not to have) is up to you. People just like to try and make you pick one because it makes it easier for them to know how to think about your thoughtform.

 

We shouldn't ever tell somebody they definitely have a tulpa. Just simply adding the qualifier "could" would be enough to fix that, though. "That sounds like a tulpa" vs "That sounds like it could be a tulpa". At the very least, over-acceptance is better than under-acceptance. It's better to tell everyone they have a tulpa than to tell everyone they don't have a tulpa. But we shouldn't do either, we should tell them the possibilities, tell them their options. We're not spreading a religion or amassing a tulpa army, we're teaching people about the possibilities available to them and their thoughtforms. Of course, we focus on tulpas here, but most of us have a good amount of information on other similar types of thoughtforms too.

 

 

I dunno, people need to remember why this site exists. Not everything has to be a tulpa or not-a-tulpa. But we're pretty open to tons of technically different thoughtforms using the title "tulpa" should they want to. And those with "tulpas" can still teach those with other thoughtforms about things they've learned. People are always gonna take what works for them and drop what doesn't, so it's not a huge deal. Just remember not to be forceful with your own, or others', beliefs. That's not why we're here. We're here to teach of possibilities, not rules or this-is-so.


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 stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would lurk a lot on the forums, and saw many people refuse Melian's status as a tulpa. Part of it was out of elitism, and part of it was out of disdain, I suppose? Hatred and denial because they were... 'different'.

 

I'm loath to keep this one up again, but look. Yes, being different. Like a desk lamp is different from a tulpa. You're forgetting who the number one proponent of "Melian is not a tulpa" was: Mistgod. Besides which, the hatred was nothing to do with that, and entirely to do with Mistgod himself.

 

 

why are we so encouraging of newbies? Whenever someone has intrusive thoughts, for instance, or just a thought they did not pay attention to. Whenever someone has a vivid imagination that tends to overreact with tulpamancy-related topics... why do we encourage them? Would it not be wise to include both possibilities?

Tulpa.info has developed an overarching "Doubt is unproductive" belief, because doubting your tulpa is a good way to not have a tulpa.

What Lumi says is correct. In this case, and almost this case alone, there are very significant effects from belief to reality; more than just motivation, expectation and belief play a huge role in shaping the creation process. Most people here tend to be in the process of creating, or already have, a tulpa. As such, the kind of advice and language that the community offers is shaped around easing this. It's not necessarily a conscious "I'll give advice that will help their creation" thing, but that the people who answer Q&A threads are, by now, second or third generation or more. By that I mean that they learned and took beliefs from people before them, who themselves took beliefs from people before them, who ... etc., removed to the second or third order from the first people who realised that this attitude was a better one, like here. (broken link fixed)

 

In my opinion, instead of always encouraging people, we should focus more on telling them the truth: That, yes, while they may be on the right track, they should know that.... this... that... be careful about this....

 

I get where you're coming from. Of course, the truth is great and all. But it's not that clear-cut. Let me put it this way: there is no truth independent of what we tell people. I don't want to pull the older and wiser card, but it would help if you had context for this, awareness of previous paradigms that this community had. Before doubt was fear, so-called 'parrotnoia' or 'parrot-phobia' - the idea that responses you get could be your tulpa or could be you leads to focusing heavily on the negative side.

It's become so pervasive though that it goes a bit too far for some, who either forgot or never knew that not everything is a tulpa.

I agree, it's probably unawares, not really directly motivated by what I'm saying. However, the community now has a way healthier attitude towards tulpa creation now than it did before. It might be partly to do with where I go around here now, but I see way fewer people talking about "doubting problems", and obviously "parrotnoia" as a term is gone. I take this to mean that this state of affairs is better than what was before. And moreover, the more optimistic the community gets about these things, the more reason there is to be.

 

Another thing to be aware of; as a policy, "tell the truth" tends to become "skew what you say towards x" where x was what was closer to truth originally. You'd like people to tell the truth, which today means being more cautious. Tomorrow, when everyone is more cautious, it means being less cautious, but instead of creating a mindset of truth-telling you've created a mindset of caution. In a way, you can say that's what you're complaining about here, but the difference is that optimism works.

 

 

Why tell the truth?

 

I know the idea that 'you can't go wrong with tulpamancy' is widespread, and it is true in some cases. But you 'can' actually go wrong in the case you follow a wrong lead.

 

I guess, in principle, sure, but I have a hard time imagining the relevance; would telling someone that such-and-such a voice was their tulpa really lead them down the garden path? As far as initial creation goes, I'm not sure that this is true.

 

we should tell them the possibilities, tell them their options. We're not spreading a religion or amassing a tulpa army, we're teaching people about the possibilities available to them and their thoughtforms. Of course, we focus on tulpas here, but most of us have a good amount of information on other similar types of thoughtforms too.

but

The point of telling someone what they have sounds like it is or could be a tulpa, is to enable them to have or get one.

 

What are we here for? Is it to coldly inform people about tulpas, or help them to make one? I'm not sure I know the answer.

 

 

I feel so as well. People were quick to believe anything we said. It was surprising. I honestly expected much more skepticism for a person with a tulpa that is the way I am practically immediately after starting up the first conversation.

I don't want people to be blindly accepting everything, I want there to be actual discussion and questions about these situations in the threads. This is something that can't be fixed by any individual; it needs to be a community effort to make sure that we're looking deeper into these claims, that we're civilly responding to claims that we don't agree with. That's one of the main things that I think can improve this site.

 

I find this kind of idea strange. It's not that I'm not a fan of scepticism, when it's called for. But I have trouble arousing any amount of surprise at most of the claims people make. Sentient in ten minutes? Yeah, whatever. Seen it before. I used to have strong, rigid and predictive ideas (the good, falsifiable kind) about what tulpas were, and what kind of experiences could and couldn't happen - and I was wrong. I don't feel confident enough to make strong claims about what experiences can and can't happen, as long as they don't violate physics (ahem, meta). In fact, my ideas about tulpas now tend to revolve around allowing this to happen.

 

That's why scepticism and newbie threads go together like pasta and marmalade to my tastes. There's nothing to be sceptical about, in the main.

 

 

TL;DR:

More caution is a bad policy, things work better this way regarding creation. More scepticism doesn't make sense because outside of meta, there's little to be sceptical about.

 

 

 


 

 

Will the perspective change regarding the entire occult thing?

 

The perspective will never change on the occult, because it has nothing to do with tulpas. Occult is wrong a priori, it's wrong in every field it rears its head. It's practically the definition of magic nowadays.

 

I also feel like if the metaphysical commune spoke more of their own experiences, we might get to hear out different opinions, some of what they could present might help us in the long run. To understand each other, to understand their own point of view.

In all fairness, if I were into metaphysics, I would feel hesitant to post about my own experiences. Even in the metaphysical section.

 

Their experiences are fine, their beliefs are not. Do you understand the difference? I have no desire to hear about the astral plane, but I'd be interested if they 'used' it to achieve things. But yeah, you'll get a slaughtering if you bring up magical beliefs around here. And, well, good, because you shouldn't. Come back when you have sane beliefs - be it magical ones with evidence, which I find unlikely, or non-magical ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The metaphysics board exists so that people like us can't complain about, or feel the need to tell those there why their beliefs make no sense. And so that those who are interested in reading about others' unscientific beliefs have a place to do so. Tulpa.info is hardly the place to go for these sorts of things, but the board serves its purpose.

 

Absolutely nothing metaphysical outside of that board, but inside, anything goes. I consider it a place of volatility and questionable usefulness to myself, my value being on ability to teach and help people. I have some knowledge of new age spirituality, having been a "New Ager" skeptic for a few years, in which time I was able to find the logic behind every single belief in the places I learned from. Spirit guides, higher self, purpose for incarnating, spirits who don't pass over, Source/God, I figured out what purpose believing in them all served and eventually left with the insight I'd gained. So I occasionally use that knowledge to assist people who still believe in such things without said skepticism for the sake of helping them.

 

But, y'know, sometimes someone asks to be sent a tulpa to heal them as they're too sick to make one themselves, and I bail out. Leave that to the others functioning on the same wavelength..


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 stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I feel bad about not explaining why I thought Dreemurr was lying. I always did plan on going back to that thread and explaining what I meant, but it ended up being long enough ago that it would seem like self-indulgent necroposting for me to say what I should have said back then.

 

Doubt, or noncynical skepticism with an open mind, is healthy. Even in the tulpa creation process, doubt can be healthy. In this past month since I've come back, I've seen many people complain or be worried about being unable to discern whether they or their tulpa was the one speaking. There's also a bunch more little indications here and there that tulpas aren't as independent from their hosts as they could be. Sharing thoughts, feelings, etc. seems to be going on a whole lot more than it did back in mid 2012 and early 2013 when I was here before. I think demonizing doubt has led to a lot of this. Sure it makes a "tulpa" quicker, but how complete or how independent is this tulpa? If you put up a block that your tulpa has to cross on its own before being able to truly speak (or head pressure or whatever other form of communication) to you, it should wham bam out of the gate feel like a totally different person talking to you when they finally get around to it, even if they get out of the gate slower than other tulpas Like the waveform of a square wave versus a more gradual increase like the upward slope of the cumulative distribution function or something.. A bit further into the analogy, you could say that having to cross that barrier should make your tulpa stronger. Sure the hour counts are bogus since everyone's experience is going to be different, but being doubting, careful, and cautious about believing too many potential leads are your tulpa like in FAQ_man's method is still a legitimate method for those who are willing to be patient.

 

It's like people forget how they used to think before they started to make a tulpa, and now they think formerly normal thought patterns are actually their tulpa talking to them. Take Drakeler first post in his PR for instance as a very recent example (that I replied to with similar thoughts as this rant). This community's overlenient viewpoint has made people get uncomfortable about doubting things that are perfectly normal to doubt.

 

As for the Metaphysics subforum? It's just quarantine to prevent that sort of stuff from shitting up the rest of the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can now see where you're coming from with this mindset, Lacquer. Obviously there seems to be a shift in the common mindset on how tulpas should be handled, and I can see that your doubt based take on tulpamancy has its own advantages and disadvantages. You have a very clear line you're following, which results in a tulpa which isn't that much influenced by your own thoughts, like you would have with the now common way of dealing with it. It isn't easy to keep an eye on your own thoughts, to not influence your tulpa with your very ideas and wishes regarding their behaviour. (I keep asking my tulpa a lot about stuff like this, so I have a more clear picture about it. She gets annoyed because of it.)

 

However, still I don't see where "lying" would come in. I can see that people might be ending up with puppeting and parroting, because they wish that their tulpa react in a certain way, especially in early phases of development. Dreemurr could've been delusing himself out of enthusiasm about a game/a show or stuff like this. Sure. But that doesn't need to be the case. It is surely something to have in mind. Accidental tulpas are still a legit thing, though. If you're not aware that you're taking actions that may result in a tulpa for a longer period of time, you can get pretty surprised by it. You probably even end up with your more independend from your definition of start tulpa, since you don't have a reason to put words in their mouth during the development, for starters.

 

I don't think someone is consciously lying on this, so calling them out that way is just wrong. And even if they would lie on purpose, how would that affect any of us?

 

Edit: This brings me back to AGGuys and Esterinas statement. It is not that we don't doubt what people are telling us, it is just that we have no reason to not believe that they're honest with us. In the worst case they're just fooling themself. We can just rule out the possibilities based on given information.


Tulpa: Alice

Form: Realistic Humanoid/Demonic Creation

She may or may not talk here, depends on her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

Doubt, or noncynical skepticism with an open mind is healthy. Even in the tulpa creation process, doubt can be healthy.

 

Exactly my point.

 

Hell, that even applies to people with well-developed tuppers.

 

Even with my lovely and fully-developed Esterina, we have enough situations where I go "Did you say something?" or "Did you say this and that?", only to receive "I didn't say anything." or "No, I didn't, I said this and that."... ^^

 

Sure, exaggerated doubt is bad, but healthy skepticism and a realistic mindset are a good thing.

There's a big difference between the two.

 

 

Greets,

AG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Exactly my point.

 

Hell, that even applies to people with well-developed tuppers.

 

Even with my lovely and fully-developed Esterina, we have enough situations where I go "Did you say something?" or "Did you say this and that?", only to receive "I didn't say anything." or "No, I didn't, I said this and that."... ^^

 

Sure, exaggerated doubt is bad, but healthy skepticism and a realistic mindset are a good thing.

There's a big difference between the two.

 

 

Greets,

AG

 

Tripling this. I still have a bunch of times when I have to weed out which thoughts came from where, too. It's really one of the important skills one's gotta learn when getting in to this stuff, learning to discern thoughts.

 

I think the issue comes in when a person does verify and pay attention to where the thoughts come from, but then rejects them anyway. Like when you ask your partner something, they respond, you then double check it with them, they confirm, but then you reject it because you're afraid you made them confirm it via will. This sort of doubt is more a lack of trust in your companion's abilities, and I have a feeling this is one of the issues people have with doubt. Instead of discerning where thoughts come from, they don't trust the source.


Sock Cottonwell's

Sketchbook, Journal, and Ask thread.

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
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.