yenu February 25, 2016 Share February 25, 2016 I have had this particular model of myself for quite a while, but I don't remember where I got it from; I also can't say if it fits the current understanding of neuropsychology, because I am obviously only a layman in that area. That said, I wonder what you have to say about it. :-) . . . Let's say the whole mind consists of lots of fragments. Those may be memories, or abilities, or habits, or whatever. Now, to every given time, only some of them are conscious, whereas the rest remains in the dark. In the following picture the small gray dots represent fragments, and the yellow circle is the conscious part of the mind. Note that in order to represent it, you have to imagine that the circle is not fixed, but rather moving around a bit all the time, sometimes encompassing other fragments than the moment before. Now I adapt the model to speak about personality. Because I think, what we call "person" or "me" is also a selection of the mind. There are other fragments that remain subconscious or are intentionally locked away; like behaviour you learned to abstain from. I think when creating a tulpa, there are different possibilities how it can relate to the host personality. It can either be created mostly from fragments that are already conscious, or it can be created mostly from subconscious parts of the self. I would think that normally there is always some overlap. (Things like "speech" are not exclusive to the host) Therefore, the green circle represents most likely just a dream character, which may not even be able to communicate with the dreamer in a meaningful way, because it doesn't use the same language. So my wild guess now is, that there are different types of tulpas/thoughtforms, depending on how much overlap there is between host and tulpa/thoughtform. As one of the goals of tulpamancy is (usually) independency of the host, I think that the more the tulpa has outside of the circle of the host-personality, the more independent it appears (or is) to the host - because the parts that are not conscious to the host, but accessible to the tulpa, make it possible for the latter to surprise the host with something that she can't come up with herself, it is literally outside her personality. As for sentience, it seems to me like there is only one sentience, but some parts are conscious to the host, and some to the tulpa. In this model I would imagine sentience to stretch across the whole picture. I hope I could make the concept somewhat clear. Now, you can smash it with criticism. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.