Jump to content

The Consensus on Tulpamancy


Guest Anonymous

Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous

I am sure everyone noticed the recent "wars" between our good Mr. J. Iscartiot and myself. He should not be called an elitist and that was wrong of me. I wish to resolve those differences between us with this discussion thread.

 

The Strong Consensus is that Tulpas are Sentient

First, I do believe what Iscariot has been trying to say is that most tulpamancers believe that tulpas become independently sentient entities and that this consensus of opinion forms the core of tulpamancy as a practice. I am now willing to agree with him on that. He is correct. The consensus is that tulpas are independently sentient minds. Because of that strong consensus (around 65% of tulpamancers in a recent poll), it should be a pillar of tulpamancy practice and emphasized in the creation guides.

  • It is fair for someone to compare and weigh reported claims and reported experiences to the public consensus of what constitutes a valid and legitimate tulpa.
  • Tulpamancers should be able to promote and teach the central precepts of tulpamancy, that are established by the majority consensus (such as tulpas are people with independent sentience), without being immediately contradicted or criticized. Minority competing hypotheses can be written about in appropriate times and places. It is disruptive to challenge the central precepts in each and every thread on the forum.

 

Minority Views on Sentience

In the same recent poll mentioned above, about 10% of tulpamancers hold the view that tulpas are a form of illusion or self deception. Another 25% are still undecided about tulpa sentience. Ten percent is significant and those members should be treated with respect and consideration. However, again, that view is not the consensus and should not be treated as a core precept of tulpa practice. Guides promoting a view contrary to the general consensus or tradition of tulpa practice should be included, but it should be made clear to beginners that they are opposing or minority approaches. There should be a clear choice so it is not confusing or all muddled in the guides list.

 

Tulpas Are Special and Unique

I think it is important to recognize and honor the hard work that people go through in creating a tulpa. Because of that hard work, and the profound experience of having a tulpa that results from that hard work, tulpamancers greatly value tulpas. That should never be trivialized.

Tulpa Info is not Thoughtform Info

This site is for the creation of tulpas, not for creating other types of thoughtforms. The emphasis of course should be on tulpas.

 

Tulpamancy does not exist in a vacuum however. We share internet space with those who have created other types of thougthforms such as soulbonds and daemons and even undefined types of thoughtforms. Many tulpmancers have more than one type of thoughtform. These people visit our forum and many are members.

 

Tulpas are unique in their characteristics, origins and traits and that fact should not be forgotten or trivialized or watered down. But, people with other types of thoughtforms also greatly value them. That should not be trivialized either. A lot of work goes into creating a soulbond with the writing and editing process, daemons also require a lot of focused attention and other thoughtforms are created in ways that are extremely emotionally significant to the creator. Tulpas are a "profoundly life changing experience," but other thoughtform types can also be a profoundly life changing experience.

 

Within the individual minds of the creator a soulbond, a daemond or even a seasoned rp character, can have as much meaning and importance subjectively as a tulpa in another person's mind. It is what we are personally holding dear to our hearts and what they each mean to us.

 

What I am saying is that all I would like to see is tulpamancers take some care to not to address other thoughtforms in a way that implies they are of less value. Even if a person highly values an independently sentient tulpa, and feels that they would personally prefer a tulpa experience over a daemon experience, that does not marginalize or minimize another person experiencing something else.

 

Whether a person has an independently sentient tulpa, an apparently sentient tulpa (voluntary self deception), a soulbond, a daemon, an undefined thoughtform type or traits of natural multiple plural system, they are all "equal" in the sense that the person highly values them and these experiences are persistent, profound, psychologically significant and life changing.

 

This was more of a public service message than a seed for discussion, but still invite comments and reactions. Thank you.

 

ADENDUM:

 

I would like to add a couple of points to this thread.

 

1. There has always been a minority view on tulpa sentience within the tulpa community. It has been here since the beginning and was part of the very earliest discussions on this forum. To assert that someone expressing a minority view on tulpa sentience is an outsider attempting to come in and "change the culture" is patently false.

 

2. The definition of tulpas presented on the Tulpa Info front page does not explicitly state that all tulpas are independent sentience entities. Currently the definition of a tulpa presented on the Tulpa Info home page states that "a tulpa is like a sentient person living in your head" not that a tulpa IS a sentient person living in your head. It also states that "it is currently unproven whether or not tulpas are truly sentient" even though we treat them that way. The definition also states "it takes time for a tulpa to develop a convincing and complex personality."

 

Again, to assert that a person holding an minority view on tulpa sentience is coming from the outside and "trying to redefine tulpas" is patently false. The definition is already ambiguous enough and open to interpretation. It is unnecessary to rewrite it to accommodate the minority hypothesis. It is true that the consensus of opinion in the interpretation of the definition of a tulpa is that tulpas are independently sentient entities, but that the majority consensus does not somehow form a unanimous and universally accepted scientific fact that is beyond question or discussion.

 

3. My host and I are convinced that it is quite possible, and even probable, that BOTH independently sentient tulpas and self delusion/self deception tulpas exist simultaneously within the tulpa community. We should take tulpamancers at their word when they report the kind of subjective experience they are having in their own minds. Tulpamancers reporting self delusion tulpas are reporting that the experience is profound and that they are getting the same level of benefits from their tulpas. We see no logical reason to question their word on that nor to question the validity, credibility and quality of the experiences they are reporting.

 

People have an emotional attachment to believing their tulpas are real, and so see the minority self deception tulpas as threatening or insulting. They should not take the existence of self deception/self delusion tulpas as a threat to themselves or the community. The minority view of self deception/self delusion tulpas is legitimate and valid and has always been here from the beginning days of tulpa land.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with all of this. That's all.

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

*standing ovation*

 

This should seriously be stickied, or posted somewhere on the front page.

Brilliantly written, Guru. I actually physically clapped several times while I was reading. :3

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

-Arthur Conan Doyle

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

I would like to add a couple of points to this thread.

 

1. There has always been a minority view on tulpa sentience within the tulpa community. It has been here since the beginning and was part of the very earliest discussions on this forum. To assert that someone expressing a minority view on tulpa sentience is an outsider attempting to come in and "change the culture" is patently false.

 

2. The definition of tulpas presented on the Tulpa Info front page does not explicitly state that all tulpas are independent sentience entities. Currently the definition of a tulpa presented on the Tulpa Info home page states that "a tulpa is like a sentient person living in your head" not that a tulpa IS a sentient person living in your head. It also states that "it is currently unproven whether or not tulpas are truly sentient" even though we treat them that way. The definition also states "it takes time for a tulpa to develop a convincing and complex personality."

 

Again, to assert that a person holding an minority view on tulpa sentience is coming from the outside and "trying to redefine tulpas" is patently false. The definition is already ambiguous enough and open to interpretation. It is unnecessary to rewrite it to accommodate the minority hypothesis. It is true that the consensus of opinion in the interpretation of the definition of a tulpa is that tulpas are independently sentient entities, but that the majority consensus does not somehow form a unanimous and universally accepted scientific fact that is beyond question or discussion.

 

3. My host and I are convinced that it is quite possible, and even probable, that BOTH independently sentient tulpas and self delusion/self deception tulpas exist simultaneously within the tulpa community. We should take tulpamancers at their word when they report the kind of subjective experience they are having in their own minds. Tulpamancers reporting self delusion tulpas are reporting that the experience is profound and that they are getting the same level of benefits from their tulpas. We see no logical reason to question their word on that nor to question the validity, credibility and quality of the experiences they are reporting.

 

People have an emotional attachment to believing their tulpas are real, and so see the minority self deception tulpas as threatening or insulting. They should not take the existence of self deception/self delusion tulpas as a threat to themselves or the community. The minority view of self deception/self delusion tulpas is legitimate and valid and has always been here from the beginning days of tulpa land.

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...