Jump to content

Tulpa Ethics


Bainbow

Recommended Posts

When I first learned how to make a tulpa, the very first thing that was taught to me was that a tulpa is not a toy or a curiosity. They are by definition as sapient as I am. They have thoughts and feelings, likes and dislikes, every emotion I can muster is one they may share. In fact, the majority of the first lesson was literally just a list of reasons not to make a tulpa. "Do not do it to bring your OC or pony to life," "do not interfere with their budding personalities in any way beyond teaching and advice unless they're going down a path of self-harm," "do not make one if you are still legally a child, if you don't have your own life stable and fixed then how can you support somebody else's life." The ethics of tulpa-creation was absolutely drilled into me before anything else and for very good reason, it's by far the most important part of the entire process. But looking at this community, something does rather bother me. Ethics are not discussed very often. Assuming there is a discussion on ethics in this community, I've not been able to find it. And even if it is there, for every good person I would trust to have a tulpa I see another person who should never be allowed one. And it's treated with a worrying level of acceptance, often so casually that it's become so ingrained in this community's general consciousness as normal, subtly impacting how things are done here.

 

I don't want to be a preacher here, and I'm not trying to accuse people of doing anything wrong. For the life of me, despite not being able to go five minutes without seeing something that either worries me or makes my tulpa friend feel depressed about how her kind are being treated (though granted that speed is likely due to how fast I navigate from post to post,) I've not seen one person who I would label as bad. Really I find that any problem I have tends to stem from a lack of in-depth discussion on the subject of ethics and a lack of good education on ethics for new people wanting to try their hand at making a tulpa. So I want to see if people would be willing to discuss ethics here. I'm certainly not claiming to be the definitive word on what's the most ethical route to take, I have my beliefs but I'm not nearly so vain as to say that everyone should follow them without question. What I want is for people to discuss and debate what is and is not ethical, not so this community will simply adopt my beliefs but so that the concept of tulpa ethics will hopefully become something that people think about as they go about their business here. Even if nothing changes, I just want people to be fully aware that they're dealing with life here, and to not treat it so lightly as too many people do.

 

 

So to kickstart any debate, here's a thought: People tend to marginalise tulpas by treating them differently to other people. Even in little ways, such as possessive terminology or slight objectification. Not enough to do real harm, but enough to stifle a tulpa's growth. By treating them as different to humans, they become this separate entity and innevitably find that their personal freedoms are not as liberal as ours, it almost becomes ingrained in their minds that they are not human and should not be treated as such.

This is an observation I've found from my own headmate as due to my instruction on ethical tulpaforcing, I've always treated like I treat any other friend. She's not my tulpa, she's my friend. Back in the development stage, I'd stress to her that she was just as real and just as much of a person as me, and was not something to be owned or gawked at. And as such, she finds the way a lot of tulpas here get treated, with how casually tulpas get labelled as belonging to a host or how a number of people tend to force their tulpas to have pre-defined personalities and identities that they are not allowed to deviate from, to be extremely jarring in comparison to the liberal life I've tried desperately to provide for her.

 

Any responses to this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I have a response to this.

 

To be honest, the reason why tulpamancers ingrain the concepts of basically treating your tulpa like they're your offspring is because they want to avoid tulpas being stuck in a situation where that very situation you are describing happens. Like, being viewed as belongings, subhuman, and not allowed to deviate and be their own person. It is very jarring, and I think while a lot of us overlook it for the sake of peace, we feel horrible inside watching it. But at the same time, we as a community aren't even sure if they are separate, sentient, autonomous beings or just forced hallucinations. So we can't even begin to describe tulpa ethics without even knowing what tulpas are.

 

If tulpas were really just hallucinations, and we as tulpamancers weren't harming anybody but ourselves, why would we treat our headmates as anything but belongings? Their own wants and needs mean nothing in our lives, because they only exist to us, and nobody can judge how we treat them. However, if tulpas really are sentient beings that reside in our minds, then we must do everything to ensure their comfort. They have personalities, feelings, and emotions that deserve to be respected, and deserve as much of a chance as they can get at humanity while not owning physical forms.

 

I don't want to sound cold and unfeeling towards our tulpa friends, but thems the breaks. I think we should treat our tulpas as we would treat ourselves, because they are a part of us. However, I don't think we can safely judge what one person does in their own mind, nor can we stop or police them. All we can do is strongly discourage disrespectful behavior towards tulpakind.

Call me Gabi. Tulpamancer since February 16th, 2013. reddeadrebel on the IRC.

Call me 16-Volte. I'm a cowboy, on a steel horse I ride!

 

Message me on tumblr!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That seems to be a commonly reoccuring problem, in that tulpas are often treated like a sort of sub-human. Which is evident already in that they are constantly called tulpa- "your tulpa", "X's tulpa", etc. Another problem of note is also when people ask social problems: "How would my tulpa feel if..." In that case, the questioner should be asking their tulpa as you would ask a person for their feelings on a matter. It is easy to marginalize tulpas since they lack a corporeal form and they cannot exactly be in your face about their problems. A subjective reality is much easier to ignore and alter than the common reality we all share. Since they lack their own body, it is hard to treat them as their own entity since the area is greatly blurred whether or not they are actually "alive". For what it is worth, I considered stopping the Tulpa process way back before I heard their voice, but that is because I considered it akin to an abortion. Take from that what you will.

"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." -Aristotle

 

"When you arise in the morning, think of what a precious privilege it is to be alive - to breathe, to think, to enjoy, to love." -Marcus Aurelius

 

“Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten.” -Neil Gaiman

 

"The master has failed more times than the beginner has even tried." -Stephen McCranie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is very jarring, and I think while a lot of us overlook it for the sake of peace, we feel horrible inside watching it.

 

I can't tell you how glad it makes me to see you say that line there.

 

I would respond to your statement on not knowing exactly what tulpas are, however, by arguing that rather than us deciding how we should treat our tulpa partners, we should allow them to decide how to be treated. Within reason of course, it should be an equal relationship rather than putting any side first including them, but instead of debating how we should treat them, I think we should just let them decide. There's no harm in doing that, but there's a world of potential good that could be done. I refrain from using the term "my tulpa" when I can because it upsets her and makes her feel like something that can be owned, but a totally different tulpa with a different personality may simply just not care if their partner uses that term or not. Some may even enjoy the term, honestly I think I would in their shoes because I'm weird like that. All it takes is to just let them know that they have the ability to choose, they have this autonomy in how they get treated that subtly yet powerfully influences their lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a topic I'm pretty interested in, so I'm glad you brought it up. If you are looking for a past discussion, there's an old one one here.

 

 

So to kickstart any debate, here's a thought: People tend to marginalise tulpas by treating them differently to other people. Even in little ways, such as possessive terminology or slight objectification. Not enough to do real harm, but enough to stifle a tulpa's growth. By treating them as different to humans, they become this separate entity and innevitably find that their personal freedoms are not as liberal as ours, it almost becomes ingrained in their minds that they are not human and should not be treated as such.

 

I don't really agree, for two reasons. Firstly, that it's not a serious issue, just small stuff like you say. Secondly, I think you're being oversensitive. I remember your thing in the survey thread, but possessive language is used commonly for a lot of things. "My father", for instance, doesn't imply possession. You might be reading a bit too much into it. For objectification, probably the same thing, but I can't think of a specific example.

 

 

how a number of people tend to force their tulpas to have pre-defined personalities and identities that they are not allowed to deviate from, to be extremely jarring in comparison to the liberal life I've tried desperately to provide for her.

 

Yeah, I agree with this. Doing that is not really kosher, and hasn't really been for a long time. I would have said that that was one of the things that was warned against, like you mention at the start.

 

 

 

If tulpas were really just hallucinations, and we as tulpamancers weren't harming anybody but ourselves, why would we treat our headmates as anything but belongings? Their own wants and needs mean nothing in our lives, because they only exist to us, and nobody can judge how we treat them. However, if tulpas really are sentient beings that reside in our minds, then we must do everything to ensure their comfort. They have personalities, feelings, and emotions that deserve to be respected, and deserve as much of a chance as they can get at humanity while not owning physical forms.

 

I know where you're coming from, and in a first-order, you're right. But, two main things (there are always two things). Firstly, worrying about the worst case (tulpas are sentient) is sensible here, so treating tulpas as if they're sentient, even if you're agnostic about it, is the obvious correct choice for as long as it's plausible - a Pascal's wager, kind of, but it actually makes sense. Secondly, there are good reasons to treat tulpas as sentient even if you didn't think they were - for enrichment, obviously, because we sure do tend to like to think it, right? And I guess there are Kantian justifications too.

 

Ironically I think the above paragraph does a lot of 'objectification' - like, "what if tulpas aren't sentient", etc. But that's the price we pay, probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really agree, for two reasons. Firstly, that it's not a serious issue, just small stuff like you say. Secondly, I think you're being oversensitive. I remember your thing in the survey thread, but possessive language is used commonly for a lot of things. "My father", for instance, doesn't imply possession. You might be reading a bit too much into it. For objectification, probably the same thing, but I can't think of a specific example.

 

Honestly from what I've seen, it's not harmful in the hands of the majority. For the most part, it's fine, yeah. But looking at how liberally it's used, I find that it only seems to reinforce the outlook of "oh these are just things to create and play with at will" in people who are importantly improperly educated on the matter. This may be a small amount of people by comparison to the majority, but even one tulpa life makes a difference because all sapient life is and should be sacred. The thing that concerns me is how things like this will affect those small but important percentages of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://community.tulpa.info/thread-pett-–-is-treating-a-tulpa-as-sentient-a-basis-for-virtue-ethics

 

I wrote a whole big post on this thread, but it took like an hour because I was trying to think with friends talking in Teamspeak and got distracted and didn't post it and now there are like five replies. It was basically talking about how ethics are subjective and only exist to the individual when they're judged or compared by someone else, and I didn't like how you stated they were the most important part of tulpamancy because that's just your belief. But ultimately I didn't disagree, so I figured I wouldn't subject you to all that. Because my friend is currently talking about how doing accents isn't innately racist and I can't think.

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 remember your thing in the survey thread, but possessive language is used commonly for a lot of things. "My father", for instance, doesn't imply possession. You might be reading a bit too much into it. For objectification, probably the same thing, but I can't think of a specific example.

 

Makes it a little difficult, doesn't it?

 

And I agree. I always viewed the phrase "my tulpa" the same way I view the phrase "my friend." In fact, they are one in the same to me. I don't think anyone honestly uses it as a true possessive.

 

I know where you're coming from, and in a first-order, you're right. But, two main things (there are always two things). Firstly, worrying about the worst case (tulpas are sentient) is sensible here, so treating tulpas as if they're sentient, even if you're agnostic about it, is the obvious correct choice for as long as it's plausible - a Pascal's wager, kind of, but it actually makes sense. Secondly, there are good reasons to treat tulpas as sentient even if you didn't think they were - for enrichment, obviously, because we sure do tend to like to think it, right? And I guess there are Kantian justifications too.

 

Ironically I think the above paragraph does a lot of 'objectification' - like, "what if tulpas aren't sentient", etc. But that's the price we pay, probably.

 

I agree that we should treat our tulpas like they are sentient anyway (especially since they are very sentient to me), but I'm still not sure we can justify policing the way other people treat their mind companions with that big question left unanswered. I'm not saying we can overlook the mistreatment of tulpas, but how will we be able to justify our actions should we choose to take a part in ending it?

Call me Gabi. Tulpamancer since February 16th, 2013. reddeadrebel on the IRC.

Call me 16-Volte. I'm a cowboy, on a steel horse I ride!

 

Message me on tumblr!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://community.tulpa.info/thread-pett-–-is-treating-a-tulpa-as-sentient-a-basis-for-virtue-ethics

 

I wrote a whole big post on this thread, but it took like an hour because I was trying to think with friends talking in Teamspeak and got distracted and didn't post it and now there are like five replies. It was basically talking about how ethics are subjective and only exist to the individual when they're judged or compared by someone else, and I didn't like how you stated they were the most important part of tulpamancy because that's just your belief. But ultimately I didn't disagree, so I figured I wouldn't subject you to all that. Because my friend is currently talking about how doing accents isn't innately racist and I can't think.

 

Yeah, the statement that ethics are the most important part is just my belief. I'm of course not saying you must agree with me, but I do think that it is an undeniably important thing, even if you don't think it's the most important.

 

But yes, ethics are subjective. So should your tulpa not get a say in how you ethically approach them? They have just as much right to subjectivity as any other being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that we should treat our tulpas like they are sentient anyway (especially since they are very sentient to me), but I'm still not sure we can justify policing the way other people treat their mind companions with that big question left unanswered. I'm not saying we can overlook the mistreatment of tulpas, but how will we be able to justify our actions should we choose to take a part in ending it?

 

This is an attitude I do not rationally understand. We don't do it ourselves because we think it's bad, so when other people do it we tend to think that's bad as well. That's the justification. The reason you don't tend to police people is the practical costs of implementation: will it be effective, is it a bad policy/precedent, might I end up policed myself? That doesn't apply here too much. You can talk about moral relativism until the end of the day, but you can also get extremely rhetorical about the costs you pay for not policing others.

 

The OP actually talks a lot about successful policing that went on here, which I find entirely justifiable. Especially when you talk about "ending it" - yes, I'd like a part in ending tulpa suffering or whatever it is, can I buy my tickets now?

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...