Jump to content

The Definition of Role Playing and How it Relates to Proxy Typing


Guest Anonymous

Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous

I can hear the audible groans already. But this is a subject that is very important to Mistgod and I and we would like to present a "paper" on this in order to clarify some of the things we have said in the past, examine the subject more seriously, and then get some informed reactions in a discussion on the thread.

 

NOTE: This discussion applies only to tulpas that communicate via proxying without switching or possession. Role playing is totally unrelated to switching and possession.

 

What is the definition of role playing? How does role playing, relate to proxying (proxy typing), if at all?

 

Proxying

In the glossary, the definition of Proxying is: "Communicating on behalf of a tulpa, relaying what the tulpa says to facilitate communication. Usually in writing, but can also be in speech." That is rather vague and leaves room for a lot of interpretation, which I think is actually a good thing. There may be any number of ways the tulpa can communicate with the host and have that communication relayed or interpreted to others in the outside world.

 

Role Playing (Ordinary and "Seasoned")

There is no definition for "role playing" in the Tulpa Info glossary. With such a big emphasis in the community on how inappropriate role playing is to tulpa communication, you would think it would be in there. That may be something the admin my think about adding to the glossary.

 

[hidden]EDIT: Many in the tulpa community use the words "role playing" as synonymous with deliberately lying or faking a tulpa. That may or may not be true in individual cases of role playing. Mistgod and I believe not every role player is insincere about how they feel about their character being a tulpa or thougthform. In fact, Mistgod and I have the personal view that rp characters are legitimate thoughtforms of a kind, if not tulpas exactly. [/hidden]

 

Mistgod and I think there can be different categories or levels of role playing. There is the ordinary make believe role playing or pretending, and then a deeper form of role playing that is similar to method acting.

 

Ordinary Role Playing

Ordinary role playing is pretending. It is mimicking a fictional character. There is no profound emotional connection with the character being portrayed. It is make believe and everything the character says or does is a result of the active will of the role player. This is the level I think most members of the community are referring to when they talk about role playing. Ordinary role playing characters have no discernible autonomous traits of any kind. An imaginative role player may imagine they feel the rp characters emotions and can imagine what they might be thinking, but this is active imagination. The emotions of the character are not persistent and do not feel "alien" or "real" to the role player. Ordinary role playing characters are not "practiced" enough to "feel real."

 

Role Playing a Seasoned Character

Mistgod and I think there is another level of role playing, which we call role playing a seasoned character. Seasoned role playing characters could be considered part way to becoming a tulpa or soulbond. These are characters that have been around for a long time, and are deeply personal and profoundly important to to the creator. Seasoned rp characters have a very detailed profile, background and history. The creator will often think of a seasoned character almost as if they are a real person and have an emotional connection to the character. The role player has practiced a seasoned rp character so much, they "feel real." The creator thinks about the seasoned rp character a lot and it is an important thing in their life. The role player can easily visualize the character and imagine the characters feelings and thoughts almost effortlessly and can "drop into the role" quickly and with ease as if the character is almost a second personality or they are channeling an inner persona. A seasoned role playing character may feel very real while the role player is actively portraying them, but they have little or no autonomous traits.

 

Mistgod and I think seasoned role playing characters are similar to method acting. Method Acting - "A technique of acting in which an actor aspires to complete emotional identification with a part." An actor studies a character in depth, learning as much about the characters personality, mannerisms, background and history, emotions, flaws, strengths and motivations, to the point of knowing the character to such a deep level they can "become the character" almost like an alternate personality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_acting The actor channels the character more than simply portraying the character, actually feeling the emotions and thoughts of the character rather than just simply mimicking them.

 

Role playing a seasoned character is just one step below proxying a tulpa or thougthform.

 

The key difference between role playing a seasoned character and proxying a thoughtform is the existence of autonomous traits. The host does not just actively imagine a character, he or she perceives that the thoughtform is independently communicating with them. This may be in autonomous mind voice or in "tulpish" (raw thoughts, images and emotions). The host then dictates the mind voice words or "interprets" the raw thought into type written words and sentences. Mistgod and I think, in the cases when the host is interpreting raw thoughts, some of the hosts will inevitably becomes part of the process as they interpret and sometimes even "fill in the gaps" of what he or she thinks the thoughtform/tulpa is trying to say.

 

Here is where it gets foggy. Mistgod and I believe that this process of interpetation and filling in the gaps sometimes involves the same process as role playing a seasoned character or method acting. Some of the host's will inevitable becomes part of the process of interpretation and translation. THAT is what we mean when we say that proxying has "elements of role playing." We have never meant to say, EVER, that proxying is faking and pretending.

 

[hidden]Mistgod: In the past, when I said I am a role player, I meant it. I am an experience role player and method actor. I use those active imaginative skills when Melian and I proxy tulpa type. I collaborate and blend with her. I interpret her raw thoughts and I "fill in the gaps" with elements of my own will. I know Melian so well, I am sure I rarely get her wrong. The draw back to this form of communication, especially the blending, is that sometimes some of my intent and emotions bleed through and we do get a little confused as to who wants to say what. But we are usually pretty good at getting pure Melian out to you.

 

(edit) Mistgod: After reading through my responses, it seems like I muddled things more than clarified them. I do make efforts do distinguish my thoughts from Melian's. There really is part of my mind that is Melian or makes Melian (what I call the Melian motor) and I think of her as a separate person. But Melian is more than just her base motor. She is blended with me. She is a mix of conscious active imagination and apparently autonomous tulpa-like "stuff" coming out of that Melian motor. Perhaps the reason why Melian never "advanced" to a fully autonomous tulpa is that I am comfortable filling in the gaps with some stuff from myself. It is a mish-mash of tulpa traits and perhaps what some would regard as blatant role playing or day dreaming. But it works for us. Since I consider Melian part of my own mind and imaginary in nature, it doesn't bother me at all like it seems to bother others. There is no harm in the mix. She is still profoundly real seeming to me and that "life changing experience." If I want to regard her as a tulpa, as she is, I don't see why I shouldn't at this point. It is up to me and her.

[/hidden]

 

I welcome any of your thoughts and reactions to what I have written here about role playing as it relates to proxy tulpa typing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this.

 

While I don't have extensive comment to give now, I do appreciate the nuance you bring to the idea you express. Hopefully, I may have something deeper to say later.

 

Peace.

Sock Cottonwell's

Sketchbook, Journal, and Ask thread.

Peace

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this thread. It has a few very valid points, and I am glad you put an emphasis on those, it was needed.

 

Since I'm a shitty person who likes to ruin everyone's day, I will express a contrarian opinion that I know some people secretly agree with, but will com out as dick-ish;

 

I do not believe in interpretation. I do not believe in tulpish. I do not believe tulpas can communicate with 'emotions' and that I am supposed to know what my tulpa would be meaning. That is for many reasons.

 

The first reason is that there is a huge subconscious factor with 'intrusive thoughts'. Those thoughts are present even with people who have no tulpas, it's a recurrent thing in psychology, there are thoughts that come off as completely alien, and I believe that interpreting whatever comes in your mind to be what your tulpa said is very much like simply giving those subconscious thoughts an identity, putting a nametag on them. There are a lot of thoughts that only make surface at some moments, that we only identify after a while, they are not people, they are part of us.

 

I also do not believe in the general definition for 'tulpish' because when people employ the term, it often comes off as their interpretation of emotions that might have not originated from a tulpa or thoughtform for that matter. I'm hopping off the elitist train that a tulpa is something and other thoughtforms are something else, let's think about it for a moment. If you just interpret anything that comes your way as something your tulpa could potentially mean... the term 'could' implies the existence of 'could not' as well, if 40% of a population is rich then we're implying 60% are poor in varying degrees with a certain margin. Some people are very imaginative, not in the sense they delude themselves, but imagining stuff can make shit seem very vivid. I used to think that my tulpa secretly hated me, for instance. That she hated me for some shit I had done, and I saw in my imagination, her insulting me a lot. But while I saw this delusion, I could hear her screaming "don't listen to her! That's not me! That's not how I feel about you at all!". My tulpa went through a lot of shit to the point I cannot tell what she actually means except if she tells me.

 

The same might not apply to other people, of course, my opinion is not fact and I respect all other positions, and in that connotation I feel like I'm more speaking of what concerns me and the people like me, so please, do not take this personally or apply it to your own being. I know that a lot of people are under different notions and are subject to different things, that is simply the way this whole thing is to me. I do not like interpretation because a part of me is evil and enjoys seeing me suffer. I think.

 

I do not know what to say about the 'roleplaying a seasoned character'. While it is obvious that you seem to partly relate to it from the way Mistgod described you.

 

I'd like to make a differentiation between proxying and roleplaying, though. Not on a very different level either. You can roleplay a character in your own perception, but proxying what your tulpa is telling you requires someone to talk to. People in their inner systems do not really proxy what their tulpas have to say aside from when their tulpas are in a discussion online (sweet old days of ignorance for me and her...), but aside from that, proxying won't be all that much. I am super careful with what my tulpa actually says. I don't roleplay, I never did, because she is someone I love, and the person I am is someone I loathe. If the two were one, that would break me and render my life pointless in my regards. If I interpret what my mind does and put my tulpa's nametag on it, she'd end up being a terrible person. The intrusive thoughts sound nothing like her, but it's my inner paranoia. I fear proxying online and prefer sticking to talking to my tulpa intimately. I feel like roleplaying is something people would only do in public, social identity is not what defines people though.

A wise man once said: 'Before judging a man, walk a mile in his shoes. After that, who cares? He's a mile away, and you've got new shoes.'

 

Graced are those who could avoid this phenomenon. This is perhaps the worst expression of evil in humanity's history, but who am I to judge?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

While I don't have extensive comment to give now, I do appreciate the nuance you bring to the idea you express. Hopefully, I may have something deeper to say later.

 

Awesomesauce!


I like this thread. It has a few very valid points, and I am glad you put an emphasis on those, it was needed.

 

Yay!

 

I do not believe in interpretation. I do not believe in tulpish. I do not believe tulpas can communicate with 'emotions' and that I am supposed to know what my tulpa would be meaning. That is for many reasons.

 

The first reason is that there is a huge subconscious factor with 'intrusive thoughts'. Those thoughts are present even with people who have no tulpas, it's a recurrent thing in psychology, there are thoughts that come off as completely alien, and I believe that interpreting whatever comes in your mind to be what your tulpa said is very much like simply giving those subconscious thoughts an identity, putting a nametag on them. There are a lot of thoughts that only make surface at some moments, that we only identify after a while, they are not people, they are part of us.

 

Mistgod: Perhaps in my case, Melian's raw thoughts and emotional bleed are practiced and channeled intrusive thoughts? LOL I always thought intrusive thoughts are kinda random. Melian is very specific and persistent. She isn't arbitrary or random or transitory.

 

I also do not believe in the general definition for 'tulpish' because when people employ the term, it often comes off as their interpretation of emotions that might have not originated from a tulpa or thoughtform for that matter.

 

Mistgod: Okay, but some may have had a long time to learn how to differentiate and identify their tulpa from intrusive thoughts or themselves. It comes with practice maybe? Have you considered that there may be variations in how well people can perceive raw emotions and thoughts from a tulpa? I know my Melian pretty good most of the time. I do admit it isn't always perfect.

 

I'm hopping off the elitist train that a tulpa is something and other thoughtforms are something else, let's think about it for a moment.

 

Mistgod: I have no problem with that at all. It's your own subjective way of understanding it. It is one perspective and personal view in a collection many competing ones.

 

If you just interpret anything that comes your way as something your tulpa could potentially mean... the term 'could' implies the existence of 'could not' as well, if 40% of a population is rich then we're implying 60% are poor in varying degrees with a certain margin.

 

Mistgod: I think this could be a good point for most tulpas perhaps. In my case, my tulpa is imaginary, so I can decide to assign anything to her I like. I realize not everyone holds this view about their own tulpa and that is fine. Also, to some, an imaginary tulpa is not a tulpa at all. To each his own on that I guess. I don't attribute everything that comes up in my mind to Melian, but a lot of stuff does get associated with her and, quite frankly, I don't lose any sleep over what is me and what is her. I think, in the end, she is just me anyway.

 

The same might not apply to other people, of course, my opinion is not fact and I respect all other positions, and in that connotation I feel like I'm more speaking of what concerns me and the people like me, so please, do not take this personally or apply it to your own being. I know that a lot of people are under different notions and are subject to different things, that is simply the way this whole thing is to me. I do not like interpretation because a part of me is evil and enjoys seeing me suffer. I think.

 

No worries Iscariot. Your are coming from your subjective school of tulpamancy with its own precepts and you have the privilege of representing your school of thought all you like. We are not offended.

 

People in their inner systems do not really proxy what their tulpas have to say aside from when their tulpas are in a discussion online

 

Clarification: "People in their inner systems do not really proxy what their tulpas have to say." Actually Mistgod and I do. Besides you are making an assumption here that we are the only ones who use the internal proxy and that may not be the case. It is an assumption on your part. EDIT: In a related point, not all tulpas communicate in mind voice.

 

I am super careful with what my tulpa actually says. I don't roleplay, I never did, because she is someone I love, and the person I am is someone I loathe. If the two were one, that would break me and render my life pointless in my regards. If I interpret what my mind does and put my tulpa's nametag on it, she'd end up being a terrible person. The intrusive thoughts sound nothing like her, but it's my inner paranoia. I fear proxying online and prefer sticking to talking to my tulpa intimately.

 

That sounds like it works great for you. Thank you for your responses Iscariot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can hear the audible groans already.

 

You can bet your ass on that, I surely did after seeing the title of this thread. :D

 

Oh well, I think I already hinted my opinion on the subject, even though I want to make clear from the start: You did a great job writing this down this time. I pretty much agree with your conclusion, but the role of it appears foggy to me. It seems obvious that there is some influence like that in this form of proxying, I won't deny that. But is it something good or something bad?

 

I see it like that: If you're used to it and have your expectations about the responses, it is very likely that you get a fitting response. This might be a really great help for your tulpa to communicate, because it will need less force to punch the response through. But what if you're expecting something so much, that you veil the real response from your tulpa, if is outside of your expectations? In this case you're falsifying the results, and pretty much dodge the sentience of the tulpa. I think if this goes heavy from the start, you may just end up with a roleplay character, and as you pointed out: It gets blurry in this territory, and you still might end up in tulpa-town.

 

This is something that really bothers me, probably too much, but I think you get the idea. I think in any case it can't hurt if you really ask your tulpa if it really is its own answer/opinion etc. aside from all proxying, instead of just assuming that you've the right idea.

Tulpa: Alice

Form: Realistic Humanoid/Demonic Creation

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

I see it like that: If you're used to it and have your expectations about the responses, it is very likely that you get a fitting response. This might be a really great help for your tulpa to communicate, because it will need less force to punch the response through. But what if you're expecting something so much, that you veil the real response from your tulpa, if is outside of your expectations? In this case you're falsifying the results, and pretty much dodge the sentience of the tulpa. I think if this goes heavy from the start, you may just end up with a roleplay character, and as you pointed out: It gets blurry in this territory, and you still might end up in tulpa-town.

 

Mistgod:

 

I can see this point for someone with the goal of creating an independently sentient tulpa.

 

[hidden]In my case, I don't believe Melian is independently sentient. I think she is imaginary in nature. So there no "veiling the real response" or "falsifying the results" in the end. I attribute to her what I imagine to be her and don't worry about it much. That may not be a tulpa to some, but something else. To me, the entire thing is still that "profound life changing experience." The underlying assumption in your response is that I (or everyone) set(s) out with the goal of creating a independently sentient entity or second personality. I never did and never have had that as my goal. [/hidden]

 

This is something that really bothers me, probably too much, but I think you get the idea. I think in any case it can't hurt if you really ask your tulpa if it really is its own answer/opinion etc. aside from all proxying, instead of just assuming that you've the right idea.

 

Agreed.

 

[hidden]Mistgod: I do sometimes ask her and often get an affirmative answer. I could be imagining the affirmative answer as well, but I don't think it matters.


Mistgod: After reading through my responses, it seems like I muddled things more than clarified them. I do make efforts do distinguish my thoughts from Melian's. There really is part of my mind that is Melian or makes Melian (what I call the Melian motor) and I think of her as a separate person. But Melian is more than just her base motor. She is blended with me. She is a mix of conscious active imagination and apparently autonomous tulpa-like "stuff" coming out of that Melian motor. Perhaps the reason why Melian never "advanced" to a fully autonomous tulpa is that I am comfortable filling in the gaps with some stuff from myself. It is a mish-mash of tulpa traits and perhaps what some would regard as blatant role playing or day dreaming. But it works for us. Since I consider Melian part of my own mind and imaginary in nature, it doesn't bother me at all like it seems to bother others. There is no harm in the mix. She is still profoundly real seeming to me and that "life changing experience." If I want to regard her as a tulpa, as she is, I don't see why I shouldn't at this point. It is up to me and her. [/hidden]

Link to post
Share on other sites

My tulpas and I are very sure of our emotional/"tulpish" communication's accuracy. It's not like it translates perfectly into words, in fact it doesn't and the only words it could would be ones describing how it felt. But I can definitely feel their emotions, intent/meaning, voice, and so on just fine. Not perfect communication obviously, but definitely legitimate at least for us.

 

But, that has nothing to do with proxying. You shouldn't be proxying tulpish unless your tulpa is in early/non-vocal stages of development, in which case you also have to add that it may not be entirely accurate. Tulpish is a bunch of personal emotions and feelings, not words or meaning. You might get meaning out of them, but regardless of how clear it was you did not get full sentences. So don't phrase it as such, without qualifying that it wasn't direct words. (If it was then you're just proxying lol)

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

My tulpas and I are very sure of our emotional/"tulpish" communication's accuracy. It's not like it translates perfectly into words, in fact it doesn't and the only words it could would be ones describing how it felt. But I can definitely feel their emotions, intent/meaning, voice, and so on just fine. Not perfect communication obviously, but definitely legitimate at least for us.

 

But, that has nothing to do with proxying. You shouldn't be proxying tulpish unless your tulpa is in early/non-vocal stages of development, in which case you also have to add that it may not be entirely accurate. Tulpish is a bunch of personal emotions and feelings, not words or meaning. You might get meaning out of them, but regardless of how clear it was you did not get full sentences. So don't phrase it as such, without qualifying that it wasn't direct words. (If it was then you're just proxying lol)

 

We are proxying somehow Lumi. And there is tulpish involved. Somehow David is getting full sentences out of what I am sending him. We keep saying that we are linked/blended and that might explain it maybe. David does here my voice as he types, just as he hears it clearly (in his mind) during the Melian Show day dreams, which we are calling proxy mind voice. Everyone keeps telling us how wrong it is. It isn't wrong if it is working. There is no right or wrong really. We have pondered if maybe he is hearing my voice in his mind, just a fraction of an instant before he types them. It isn't like he hears them, waits for a second and then types what I say. He is typing as I am speaking, typing what I am saying the instant I say it. During that process he also senses my feelings and reactions to what is being said. He also reacts to those emotions, making facial expressions or tilting his head when I do.


The process is still the same as we described it above, some of Melian and some of Davie in a collaboration.


Keep in mind also that Davie does not consider me independently sentient, but a figment of his imagination. He isn't really waiting for me to suddenly start talking. He is channeling me and typing, as we have always explained. He used to call it "channeling a persona" before discovering tulpas. He never needed to wait for a independent mind voice before having me type. So, I am not sure where we are in this between the role playing/method acting imagination and proxying. But the most important thing is Davie and I don't really care really in the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pssh, did you just reply to me explaining how you were an exception? You should know that I know how different you guys are by now. By "That has nothing to do with proxying" I meant it shouldn't in normal tulpamancy practice. Tulpish is not words and should not be explicitly written as such, though meanings translated into words are possible, and if it is words then it's just speaking or a mix of tulpish and mindvoice. That's not "the only way", it's just the normal way for tuppers.

 

Yes, in that aspect, you're different from normal tulpas. The way Mistgod "hears" you and types what you want to say is different than it is for tulpas. I know the process, and there's nothing wrong with it. The only thing is, tulpamancy is reliant on distinct independence of the thoughtform in general, and interpreting such things leaves too much room for wishy-washy 2vague2scary insecure hosts. We stick to such distinctness because doubt is such a huge limiting factor for most people making tulpas, so they need reassurance they aren't just talking to themselves in the form of autonomy and independence. Most people are not capable of the type of relationship you guys have. However, lots of them are. It's not a rule of tulpamancy, it's a bypassable guideline. People like me who have transcended fears of non-independence, or like you guys who simply don't worry about such things in the first place, need not follow it.

 

Guidelines and advice for autonomy and strict distinctions between host and tulpa are just the way we work, and that's not gonna change. It's the most accessible mindset for creating tulpas for the general public. But it's not a rule, as with all subjective "rules" as soon as you understand them and understand you don't need them, you're free to "break" them. In your case the rules were made after you were already doing things your own way, so you're automatically exempted from them. As for everyone else, they're free to do things however they like, but in general it's best to follow rules until you know why they're there and can safely ignore them.

 

I tend to use that philosophy on rules a lot in my life.. And so do many others.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was accused of being a roleplayer waaaay back when I first joined the site in 2012 for saying Luna could possess me and type things on my computer. Everyone who doesn't fit neatly into .info's mold of what constitutes tulpas is a roleplayer. Just don't go on IRC if it bothers you so much.

"Science isn't about why, science is about why not?" -Cave Johnson

Tulpae: Luna, Elise, Naomi

My progress report

 

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.

×
×
  • Create New...