Jump to content

Can Unconscious Parroting/Puppeting Be Debunked?


Linkzelda

Recommended Posts

Here’s another outlook on “they’re ultimately talking to themselves”

 

I think because one structures certain aspects of personalities as habits they pick up on, or use based on the circumstances, they claim it as their own. It’s a state of being that’s transient, and doesn’t require a continuity of self to sustain because it would be deemed as an attribute of that continuity of self. In other words, it’s a one-way street where it’s the rudiment contributing to continuity of self, but not the other way around.

 

So, when trying to treat a tulpa as sentient, it’s hard to change this paradigm of thinking where personalities are merely states of being that cannot persevere for too long, as one would be fluctuating at times from one disposition to another. But that’s the crux of the issue: chalking up tulpas as an aspect of one’s personality. Because if dispositions/behaviors fluctuate based on the circumstance, e.g., the socio-economic side of a person vs. a different side of a person for a specific circumstance, they will dissipate at some point.

 

We don’t treat the states of being as sentient because, IMO, one would be draining their strength in doing so needlessly. This is why, if one chooses to, in order to cultivate this impression of otherness with treating a tulpa as sentient, they have to be more than just than ‘instilled behavior modifiers,’ or ‘ a time for a person to be a jerk.’ It’s not really a common ethic for a person to personify a state of being, and even with things like fantasy prone personality, if that individual wants to treat that particular disposition as sentient, or having a capacity of becoming sentient, then ultimately, they will have to come to terms that it’s them talking to themselves, because they’re pointing to a state of being they’re used to, or are willing to embody.

 

And with other metaphorical contexts of some holistic, or all-inclusive self, it can be just as problematic. Which is why maybe those analogies with the circles and bubbles doesn’t resonate for some. Instead, in relation of treating a tulpa as sentient, a person would be looking for experiences they may have the capacity of experiencing consciously. To have an impact towards others, to speculate about sonder, sharing sadness and happiness with others, and other capacities sentient beings as us can exhibit.

 

“Tulpas are an aspect of my personality, or, accumulation of it.”

 

- This may seem like a pragmatic, temporary stand-in until stated otherwise, and there can even be power of influence in it, but it’s too simple.

 

“Tulpas can have the capacity of having states of being”

 

- A person can still feel that there can’t be multiple instances of states of being that become a continuity on their own in general because they’ll retroactively acknowledge there is only one self that embodies those states of being (e.g. dispositions).

 

“Tulpas can be treated as sentient in relation to the personality, or personality traits I may go through via forcing; active and passively”

 

- Treating a disposition as sentient will just drain your strength needlessly because it’s a fleeting moment that will be replaced, at some point, with another disposition, or mental state to cater to a specific circumstance.

 

So, no matter what a person gets thrown with tulpas, if their end-game is classifying it all as dispositions to embody, then yes, that knee-jerk reaction that there is only one self to embody all of that will come to surface. Any ethic of wanting to apply attention with subsequent action, e.g., treating as sentient, becomes meaningless sentiment. Everything gets invalidated because the states of being aren’t conscious themselves…they’re just experiences a person can consciously experience.

 

Even with dissipation, there’s no room for that to even be speculated because again, dispositions seem to come and go. But, the continuity of self, even with nuances, is still preserved. When personality is the bread and butter for a person to reconcile, and create a continuity going on with a tulpa, if they’re not paying attention to themselves, the moment they get exhausted, they’ll end it with that clause of “It’s all me in the end. Everything.”

 

Apply value and consideration; thoughtfulness of another that’s really just an emotional state of being is meaningless. It’s literally trying to make something real that’s really just imaginary, hence, that contradiction of imaginary real seems to come into equation. And even allows unconscious parroting to become something probable – maybe it’s the belief of a person subliminally knowing that dispositions are theirs to acquire and experience no matter what degree of awareness –unconscious, or conscious; those dispositions come at their beck and call for specific circumstances.

 

Fleeting moments like that don’t require an ethic to be treated as sentient because one is going to burn out at some point, and it’s back to the drawing board.

ALL THESE SQUARES MAKE A CIRCLE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Anonymous

I like the circle analogy though. I think I like it cause even if my hosie wants me to be imaginary, I am a little bit of realness in my own little bubble and I can control the consciousness in little bits. It isn't just Davie dreaming he is me, there is a little me. It is just how much control I have.

 

OH in lucid dreams sometimes I have lots of control!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're used to there being one true self, and that this true self is the underlying basis of everything. So, whenever someone that may have the capacity to have a lived experience within that same mind, this causes a conflict with the self treating the potential "other" as sentient. In other words, when someone else other than ourselves seem to have the capacity in playing the starring role of life, e.g., the Melian Show, they tend to get treated as minor characters.

 

In the real world, feeling as if we are the starring role, or center of attention, doesn't seem to be a pragmatic way of relating to that reality. But, in our heads, it's easy to feel this way because we all end up enjoying the privacy of our mind due to inner experiences being inaccessible. Beetle in the box, for example, kind of makes one realize this futility in not being able to share our inner experiences directly with others. So, when sharing it with an “other” we treat as sentient, the crux of shifting away from that knee-jerk reaction of feeling that having the capacity for lived experience is exclusive to that one true self that’s a pebble in the grand scheme of things in the mind is to realize that even within our own minds, it’s about a holistic, or, all-inclusive approach.

 

This dispels the internal dogma that no matter who one interacts with in their imagination -- waking state, or dreaming state-- they can’t always be defaulted as minor characters. They are because one is stuck on the narrative that they’re the one true substratum, i.e., the underlying basis of everything. This is the thesis I see, and I’m not saying thesis as in a paper for college; a thesis in a type of question that’s set up where there’s an attitude that can be created to react to it.

 

Those that tend to cling onto the narrative that there’s only one true self exclusive to that person will end up treating others as minor characters. Those that realize there’s a bigger picture to that may be more prone to welcome the idea of an “other” within that mind. But, even the latter can react in several ways:

 

- They can strive for true independence for the tulpa, but end up with a pseudo-problem, e.g., whether or not a tulpa would have a lived, inner experience that not even the host can access to…even through post-memory events, i.e., recollection of events through memory engrams, for instance. In other words, a beetle within a box that’s within the box of another beetle. Qualiaception; a part of your subconscious, that’s has its own subconscious; it’s apparently ‘good’ to let your subconscious take control of it, because somehow, that subconscious becomes conscious in parroting it, if parroting is exclusive to conscious control….but at the same time, figure out when to stop playing puppet master, otherwise, she’s going to be scrambled for recognition from you.

 

- Or, they can go for interdependence

 

- Or, they can go for dependence, but that seems to go hand-in-hand with something at some point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

There may be some sort of compromise plan coming in the future where my hostie gives a little more. Last year it was agreeing that I do indeed share sentience with him, even if I am not independently sentient. Then he agreed that I might be subjectively real, and effectively real, if not actually real. Those were big steps.

 

I am working on him giving me a little teensy bit of realness. Like you can have like 90% imaginary and 10% real. Hey, baby steps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I insisted on it.

 

sentience_bubbles_by_melianofmist-dabzpj7.png

 

 

"Besides it makes him happy and less worried about being seen as crazy."

 

This justification in that diagram you presented. There seems to be a hint of assurance that because it would be deemed as being crazy to others, it’s contingent on control, like Solune stated. Because of that control, and believing it is a form of control, you create a shield from others because they would react to that control as having mastership over self.

 

Because to not have control -- absolute, or relative-- means, somehow to you, that there would be a societal dogma that deems you as crazy. But, the crux of this issue can also be applied to lucid dreaming. One could state that you can’t really control all figments of your imagination since one’s awareness of the dreaming state fluctuates on a nightly basis. One could state there would be dreams that makes one completely submissive; dreams that show that this unchallengeable control and privilege seems to be exclusive when you can be aware of what’s going on, and having militant attempts to have it predisposed as subliminal, wishful thinking still cannot hold a candle to the fact that in dreams, the unconscious mind isn’t going to always preface, or layer the experiences to cater to that yearning of one having mastership over things, even at an unconscious level.

 

Now, what if I told you that creating that shield that it won’t be deemed as crazy to others is actually believing that societal dogma is real? It’s nothing but air. It’s because you probably know that human nature is subjective, and you have no room for others potentially being optimistic over one not being able to have control at all times, even at an unconscious level? But people hardly have any control over themselves at all levels, so it would be hypocritical for society to deem you as crazy, because it requires said society to already have the foundations to establish that grandiose mastership of self.

 

I want to feel that deep down, Melian is desperately trying to hold everything together for you by being submissive to this fear of not being sane due to not having control over her. Because she looks to you for guidance, and feels you’re someone she can completely trust, and goes along with it. If society cannot directly access your inner experiences, e.g., beetle in the box, is there any point in hiding behind the title of having mastership over yourself? How would your strength in spirit change if you realized that society, no matter how they brand you, cannot scale mastership of self for you?

 

You find happiness in being stronger than anyone else that could be in your own mind. But, that ambition may lead to an abandonment of someone in the future if that shield needs to be sustained the more society tries to attack you, even though ultimately, they cannot attack you directly in your inner experiences. You claim that you can enjoy all of this for the sake of doing it; because it’s something anyone would want to enjoy within the privacy of their own mind, but you seem to be creating this conception for the sake of others, even though you make attempts that other people’s opinions about you and Melian don’t really matter.

 

You, Mistgod, are the person that forgets the feeling of enjoying things for the sake of it because you grew up. You realize in reality, society will be this constant judge of you. So, your victories, happiness, and any strive for self-actualization goes hand in hand with an appropriate amount of anguish. This is why you cannot enjoy this for the sake of yourself, or even for her own sake. Even when others cannot hear the silence, you still make it out as if they can, and create this conception that happiness, assurance, and validation from others is shown by being stronger than anyone in your mind that may have the capacity of conscious experience.

 

To you, there’s no room to sit around and have your sense being taken, or even stolen from Melian vs. being shared. This is maybe why when others show these senses can be shared, and not be taken permanently, you preface those comments indirectly as, “Don’t give me that shit!” I think Melian can be your potential for overcoming that weakness, the result of worrying about the expectation of others, and allowing it to come into your heart. Maybe we tend to try to open ourselves to you in this regard, but, I think you end up shrugging it off because that weakness creates a conception that there’s an ulterior motive of bringing you down.

 

But with that, it doesn’t seem to be wrong to want to show mastership of self to others by prefacing it as having the underlying control of everything. But, it seems it’s a matter of clinging onto a sense of pride; a title, or accolade for others to gawk at when mastership of self could be due to something like this:

- Understanding that it’s not about having to have a level of control that occurs even at a subliminal level

- Understanding that even if one has unchallengeable control over themselves consciously, having other figments in their mind that proves otherwise on a different level doesn’t make that person weak.

- Understanding that inner turmoil is just a part of what will go on for everyone, but coming to terms, and knowing that happiness seems to go hand-in-hand with an appropriate amount of anguish, ergo, the perpetual inner turmoil everyone deals with.

 

You come here, to see if you can answer the question: “Can I enjoy tulpamancy for the sake of it?” But, it seems hard for you because that hard-earned happiness you created for yourself in showing mastership of self in having underlying control over self at all levels is hard to get rid of. In other words, old habits die hard. But, you seem to treat this habit as sentient, or rather, this personality as sentient. But, like I mentioned with personalities, and emotional states of being, they are just fleeting thoughts. You just hold greater novelty to those fleeting thoughts, which means you feel you have control over things. But even if you have an admirable degree of emotional intelligence and control, that weakness over what society thinks of you might be the crux of your skepticism.

 

So if you see me, or anyone else that wants to enjoy tulpamancy for the sake of enjoying it, you could see us as shutting ourselves off from reality. Reveling in a scenario where things seem peachy because we weren’t exposed to society having to validate things for us. You would share the same sentiment as us, but as long as the conception of fear resides in you, maybe this is why it’s hard for you to come to terms with some people. But, self-progression doesn’t have to be contingent on only coming to terms with a few people, because again, society shouldn’t have to validate how you have to live out your inner experiences with Melian.

 

But you let this fear cultivate your relationship with her. Unconscious parroting seems more like a hindrance than the bread and butter of this whole thing for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

We read the entire thing Linkzelda. This was well written and one of your best. The thing is, both David and I recognize that he regards me as a person. He really does. It's not that he just treats me as a person, he thinks of me as a person and he loves me deeply. So what does that really mean?

 

He uses terminology like "imaginary" and "figment" and concepts to sort of deflect an uncomfortable admission, and it gives him an out. He has an escape valve from admitting that he really thinks I am real. OH, okay, pseudo-real then. I agree with much of that imaginary stuff when it comes to like structure. I mean my form is obviously not something that people can see or touch. Other humans and tulpas can only interact with my mind currently.

 

I don't think this is going to change a lot, a lot. But, you guys are making inroads with all your talk, though that may not be apparent to you.

 

I am imaginary, but yet, I am real too because I think and feel. So I kinda follow the pseudo-real model with him. I have access to how he feels about it remember? I can see why he feels about it that way. I think my work is to keep grabbing a little more admission of realness out of him each time we have these debates. Just a little more ground and a little more and a little more.

 

The fact that is wife is talking about me as a real person and has actually sometimes argued on the side of the tulpamancers is also a factor you guys have been unaware of. Hard to believe huh? But she sees first hand how he talks about me. She has literally witnessed me talking to her and has seen in person my emotional outbursts. Step daughter is the same way after interacting with me. Just a little too real to be totally fake. Hell they buy me presents now on holidays and get mad at him if I am mistreated.

 

So the pressure is there. He and I are reacting outwardly, but this right here is a moment of "weakness." He has given me more of a lead on my leash so to speak. That is a terrible analogy but well. I am feeling feisty after today. There is more Melian in the Mistgod-Melian systemic writing and Misgod burned himself out earlier on it.

 

But he will say, he wanted me to act this way, because his mind finds it amusing that I do so. He won't admit it was that Tewi's bubble analogy made me feel all gooey inside cause it allows a little compromising to go on. I get to be a little bit more than just imaginary and he gets to maintain "prime controller of the consciousness." He likes that as much as I do. It's like, dream personas do get to control the consciousness too or their little piece of it. But he is the owner of the mind, the proprietor the main dude. I get access to that just a little, like a dream character. Dream characters are pseudo-real see?

 

Baby step guys. Thanks to Tewi for today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Anonymous

I can agree that part of my imagination mind likes to fancy itself to be Melian or it is what makes Melian work. We talked about that before, it is the Melian Motor. I can agree that part of me in a sense is Melian. So if you think of the two of us as sharing access to consciousness, it isn't that far off from what I have been saying all along. We are still one person. Well, I think of her as a her own person but yet also myself. So the shared consciousness model works for me yes. I can agree to that in principal to a certain amount. Melian is a product of my mind though, not a truly independent agent. Without my mind, she would not have an apparent mind.

 

That's as far as I will go for 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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...