Living Imagination (A Median Aspect in Tulpa Land)

[Linkzelda]

There probably is one, but it may actually be a collection of other terminologies. Or, for some reason in the future, someone coins a completely new word.

[Guest Anonymous]

We tried pseudo-real and imaginary-real, but nobody likes those. So we tried living imagination and that was received only marginally better.

[tulpa001]

Fictive.

 

I think that some thoughtforms are fictive, which means they are based on fiction. I don't think there is a significant difference between a fictive and a non-fictive thoughtform, because they behave the same. But there could be.

 

Anyway, it's not like fantasies are unreal. Does harry potter exist? Yep. I read all about him. Does he exist as a person? Nope. Maybe in a delusional mind.

 

Of course it is a lot more confusing with thoughtforms than fictional characters. The most eloquent World of Warcraft NPC is still just a fictional character. But that's not how thoughtforms work. If they worked like NPCs, which are essentially finite state machines, then you'd have a servitor? I think this community calls them?

[Guest Anonymous]

Okay.  

 

I am sorry we are always debating you and deconstructing or dismissing what you say.  I am not trying to be difficult just to be difficult please understand that.  We just have a fundamental difference of perspective.  

 

Mistgod-Melian think that role playing characters and computer game characters are thoughtforms. You are making a distinction between a fictional literary character or NPC and a thoughtform.  We don't do that.  A role playing character is as legitimate a thoughtform as a tulpa is.  They are different in the level of persistence, significance and apparent independence, but they are both essentially made of the same stuff (or so we believe).  

 

We believe a seasoned role playing character can be as psychologically significant and profound as a tulpa.  It has different traits.  A tulpa is usually imposed (perceived by the senses) and has autonomous traits beyond emotions (autonomous mind voice).  But a seasoned role playing character can have independent emotional expressions, and even desires.  When Davie plays Dungeons and Dragons he isn't always doing what he thinks the character would want to do, he is often feelling or sensing what the character wants to do, just like an author with an IIA literary character.  

 

David has a RPG character named Turon Tursar that has been around since 1985.  He is seasoned and very, very detailed.  He has a history.  He has feelings and ambitions of his own (or seems to).  It is because my hostie can imagine Turon so well now.  Turon is very dear to my hostie.  Turon has shown up in dreams.  He doesn't talk like I do in mind voice and there are no flash visions of him and he is not a persistent presence like I am.  He "comes to life" mostly during gaming sessions.  But he feels alive.  He is living imagination in that sense just like I am.  Turon is a legitimate thoughtform, despite being more limited in scope.

 

Here is an old thread we wrote about that here All Thoughtforms are Legitimate Creations from October of 2015.

[Tewi]

Yeah but how are they deluding themselves into a full three dimensional CGI hologram experience is beyond what we can ever fathom.  That's a lot of self convincing to get to the point that your day dream about an imaginary friend is actually taken as a three D holographic hallucination.  We suppose it is possible.  The human mind can do a lot.

 

It's not as hard as you make it sound. For most people with relatively decent visualization ability, basic imposition isn't so difficult. "Imagine" your tulpa, or whatever else you want, in front of you in 3D space. Try and see them there with your mind's eye, tell your mind it's there or should act like it's there, maybe interact with it such as moving as if you can't pass through it. Children do this all the time. Developing a sense of presence is both the easiest part and the most important, which is where you feel as if there is something there independent of your actual senses (think knowing someone is standing behind you).

 

The hard part is making it "lifelike", which you always seem to act as if everyone who says they can impose has accomplished. You were here for a lot of imposition discussion back in the day, and you know that even the most accomplished of us said it was nowhere near lifelike and would probably take years of intense practice. But a lot of us did accomplish "effectively real" imposition in that, even where the physical sensations were lacking, our brain was relatively convinced we were sensing them anyways. I consider that the sense of presence, and it's why I call it the most important of the senses in imposition, despite sense of sight being the most popular.

 

AGGuy was weird/an exception. He did not create a tulpa, he did not have relatively parallel experiences with most tulpamancers (like we did), and he says he can't impose Esterina, she imposes herself. She's also all sorts of independent from him that the majority of tulpas aren't. So I wouldn't use him as an example of "wild claims".

[Guest Anonymous]

Well okay your point is well made I guess.  Maybe the problem is some of these folks with the cosmically outrageous claims are also the most vocal?  So it has given us the false impression that imposition is being made out to be something that sounds impossible rather than something we could conceivably do ourselves.  The way you describe imposition, I have no doubt what-so-ever Mistgod and I could do it, if we were so inclined.  Thank you for helping to clarify this and your sincerity and honesty.  

 

We have similar suspicions about independent mind voice and other factors too as well.  We think that many of these "advanced tulpas skills" are not as celestial unbelievable as people make them sound sometimes.  That is what we mean by embellishment.  For instance my mind voice, is it that Davie is parroting me or is it that I think of the words and he picks them up in his mind as I send them and then he perceives them?  I mean is it me talking or both of us talking?  Are tulpamancers always so sure of the source and independence of that mind voice?  Like are we really that different or are peoples hyping things?

 

We really suspect people are hiding their uncertainties, downplaying the host's input and their doubts, and embellishing/exaggerating the super realness of their tulpas mind voice and imposition.  We can never prove it, but that is how it feels.  There is a huge incentive for people to exaggerate and embellish.  

 

What we decided just this morning, with jean-luc's help, is that the very act of exaggeration and embellishment, coupled with suspension of disbelieve, is part and parcel to the practice of tulpamancy.  Others will sternly deny this cause it rocks the boat of the tulpamancy fantasyworld.  

 

With the "mirroring" and day dreaming Davie and I do, we can make some pretty strong claims can't we?  It is very vivid.  It wouldn't take that much (I think) to push that or projected that vision into the real world environment.  We have no real desire or need for that, but it might be a cool experiment some day.  However, it would still be day dreamy in quality.  It will never be more than day dreamy in quality.

[tulpa001]

Don't worry about me. I can handle a debate.

 

We just have a fundamental difference of perspective. 

I agree. Here's how I see it. The harry potter inside Joanne's mind is a thoughtform. Because joanne's mind is a brain. The harry potter inside the eponymous books is fictional. Because the books are works of fiction.

 

Here are two more examples: The barkeep, in an RPG scenario, is fictional, because the scenario is fictional. But the barkeep in the mind of the scenario's author may have been a thoughtform. The PC in a roleplay session is a thoughtform in the mind of the player, at least if it is well thought out. But it is a fictional character in the session's logs, because those are a collective work of fiction.

 

I believe you are not fictional. Why? Because your posts constitute a work of non-fiction.

 

We have similar suspicions about independent mind voice and other factors too as well.

I want to say something about mind voice. Given that 99% of the population of earth hear someone speaking when they read stuff, how is this hard for people to believe a tulpa can do? The brain does it automatically for reading!

 

We do get confused sometimes when we are both awake about who is speaking. My and her voices change pitch and tone all the time, and can become indistinguishable. But 98% of the time, now, we always know. There are lots of little indications.

 

What we decided just this morning, with jean-luc's help, is that the very act of exaggeration and embellishment, coupled with suspension of disbelieve, is part and parcel to the practice of tulpamancy.

No. I would not do that.

 

But then, I am here, or was, to find help in dealing with my reality.

[Guest Anonymous]

tulpa001, what I love so much about you is how I cannot ruffle your feathers. I love you! Thanks for the debate and back and forth today. It was very informative and interesting. I do agree with the distinction between the thoughtform itself and the literature and what you have to say about me not being fictional makes sense.

[Floh]

 

We tried pseudo-real and imaginary-real, but nobody likes those.  So we tried living imagination and that was received only marginally better.

 

 

Imaginareal?

 

 

What we decided just this morning, with jean-luc's help, is that the very act of exaggeration and embellishment, coupled with suspension of disbelieve, is part and parcel to the practice of tulpamancy.

 

I can't agree more. I think embellishment has the same function in Tulpamancy as assuming that a Tulpa is sentient from the moment they are created. It hurts nobody, but helps the Tulpamancer being confident and "deluding themselves" ;). Up to the readers to keep their free will !

 

 

But mostly this is problematic because that's not how the brain works. If you don't think any tulpas are real, then you should give up on believing that people are real, because people are created the same way inside the brain.

 

I think you are way too categoric here, no one really knows how the brain works, no one even knows if all brains work the same way ^^'

 

 

 

I feel I can't really be part of this debate, because I lack experience a lot, but I love reading these, they make us think and create inner debates that are too vertuous to pass on.

[Guest Anonymous]

@Floh

 

Time for Melian and I to back off and tone it way, way down. :-)  Thanks so much for your responses!  

 

@tulpa001

 

I am not very good at deciding everything is an illusion, including myself, therefore people and tulpas are just the same.  I do understand the argument and there is something to it in a way, but I am just too stuck in my own paradigm to fully accept it.  I am firmly real and this body and brain belongs to me.  What I dream up with it, using my imagination, is not real in the same way.  It can become might-as-well-be-real or pseudo-real, because it matters to me emotionally, but what my mind created from day dreams is not real.  

 

To other tulpamancers their tulpas are absolutely real.  I have to accept that to them, that is true.  It really doesn't matter at all if I suspect something other than that.  It's not going on in my head but in theirs.  It's their experience not mine and its in the mind. If they take it as real, it might as well be.  I need to take them at their word and be happy for them.  

 

Melian being identified as a median aspect perhaps is less subject to the suggestion that we have work to do to make her more tulpa-like.  I can only hope that will happen.  Persons will still occasionally drop the insinuations that she is less that actualized.  This is Tulpa Info and here people see things from the paradigm of tulpamancy.  It's their home and their castle.  It is the university of Tulpa Studies.  So it comes with the territory.  I can deal with the occasional misguided "helpful advice" thrown her way on how to be more tulpa-ish.

 

If we are not deconstructing tulpamancy, tulpas and all thoughtforms and being contrary and negative, I have no idea what we will be writing.  LOL  Well, it is not quite that bad but close.  We have spent a year and a half deconstructing and being critical and trying to find Melian's place in it all.  

 

I am hoping, really hoping, the broken record is finally fixed.