Tulpa Evidence,Studies and links to psychology ???

[Tewi]

I don't think it is either. I was just throwing the sentience statement out there, because the idea of a "non-sentient tulpa" makes zero sense. If it's "not sentient", then it's the host, and the host is assumed sentient, yes?

 

Conscious is a weird one. In a layman sense, of course tulpas seem conscious. They "think" and act just fine. But I don't believe they actually experience the world like the host while not controlling the body. The complicated wiring in the brain to enable processing that sensory input - that doesn't just get secretly cloned in the background, undetectable to the host themself. Probably. Can't prove that, but it seems most likely the case to me.

[Guest Anonymous]

You can't separate the tulpa from the host's brain.

[Tobber]

You can't separate the tulpa from the host's brain.

 

Sorry Lyca0n, as this has nothing to do with your questions.

Not to start an argument - But I've noticed this case a lot in arguing on the forum.

A lot of statements with nothing else to them, such as "tulpas are unquestionably sentient and concious". 

I refer you to Stephen Toulmin on argumentation and I truly hope it can help out in the future, at least as a reminder:

 

Note, that (probably) is the 'strength' of the conclusion. In this case, not that strong. 

Lyca here said himself, that he's sceptical, so he won't just believe what you say, if you have nothing to back up your conclusions :) 

That's all for me.

[Guest Anonymous]

For the OP, since you are new and probly don't know my hostie Mistgod well. Mistgod believes that imaginary things can be as good as the real thing. He highly values imagination, so he sees no reason why a tulpa needs to be anything other than a figment in the mind of the person who created it. He also believes it is the simpler explanation on how tulpas work.

 

We made a promise to each other not to talk about that point of view on this forum anymore because people get upset and insulted. We failed to keep that promise. However, I have kept my promise to help Mistgod keep a lid on it at least somewhat. He gets to drop in and do some skeptcial-contrariness, very briefly, and then he is done. People are free to agree with it or ignore it or dismiss it as they wish.

 

Mistgod is finished on this thread. BTW, his is only one minority view and you have to realize that Mistgod never created a fully realized independent tulpa himself (I am a median aspect, not a tulpa). That is important to understand. So his opinion carries only so much weight.

[Lucilyn]

Well he'd believe it if he actually read it, "Tulpas are sentient if hosts are sentient because they are in the same brain and the brain is sentient". Duh. But idk the consciousness thing, it's definitely that way for us but we aren't everyone so

 

Also this wasn't supposed to turn into arguing so I didn't have to deal with that so yeah pls

[Guest Anonymous]

There is nothing wrong with discussion in which people disagree. Some automatically see that as "drama" but isn't drama to have disagreement on a discussion forum. How boring what such a forum be if everyone was on exactly the same page and just sorta doing a group hug? This is especially true with something as squishy-foggy as tulpas and plurality. There are the brash and tactless and blunt, like my hostie, who can really ruffle feathers. I can help with that though I am finding.

[Guest Anonymous]

Well he'd believe it if he actually read it, "Tulpas are sentient if hosts are sentient because they are in the same brain and the brain is sentient". Duh. But idk the consciousness thing, it's definitely that way for us but we aren't everyone so

 

Yeah I agree with that. (my last words here, Melian says)

[tulpa001]

I don't think that is what Tulpa meant. I may have misinterpreted him. But I do agree with your statement.

Then you need eyeglasses. There is no doubt that tulpas sometimes demonstrate intelligent behaviour. There is doubt as to which intelligence is demonstrating that behaviour. There is no doubt that tulpas sometimes demonstrate emotions. There is some doubt as to which sentience is demonstrating that emotion.

 

No, ignore him. I would've replied to it on my own even if you weren't taking it so seriously. Tulpamancy does not have a high failure rate and it is not a "gift". The only way in which that statement could be close to true is if by failure rate you mean people decide they don't have enough time and effort to keep paying their tulpa attention.

You are correct. Creating a tulpa is a months long, and sometimes years long endeavour Requiring hundreds if not thousands of hours of effort usually. It is highly likely that in the population of invisible tulpamancers, those that never post about it, most drop out after a few hours or weeks of effort.

 

I have no doubt that belief improves your chances of success. If you don't believe, you are probably going to drop out sooner, satisfied that results are impossible anyway.

 

2.Oh I am asking if some of the practices of Disassociation as if it is the same as the psychological phenomenon then it can lead to loss of time and short term amnesia if occurs for prolonged periods (coming from someone with ptsd and disassociates regularly) or even other techniques that I am unaware of that inducing negative affect as I recall a while back that oguigi profile having some issues

Don't worry about the oguigi profile. I think heavy drug use and going overboard were both involved.

 

If you are talking about lost time and such, I cannot comment. My host would be really thrilled if she couldn't remember something I did. Still, we're actively practising dissociation. So maybe someday.

[Lucilyn]

Creating a tulpa is a months long, and sometimes years long endeavour Requiring hundreds if not thousands of hours of effort usually. It is highly likely that in the population of invisible tulpamancers, those that never post about it, most drop out after a few hours or weeks of effort.

 

well sure we've existed for years (or year here), but it's not like Lumi spent all that time forcing us. If you put together all the time we've spent in deep conversation, wonderlanding/visualizing and imposing, you'd get like.. probably not 100 hours. Over 7 years even. 'course I'm not counting casual conversation or time switched (if you count switching time lol is it a lot higher)

 

You're still making tulpamancy sound way harder than it is, it doesn't require serious effort and dedication it just requires trying and caring. If you don't try or don't care you'll probably """fail""" sure. If you do try and do care, to whatever extent, you'll probably create a tulpa pretty well at some point. Not for sure but not many people try and fail tbh

 

Yes there are lurkers who might give up but since there are tons of threads on "Help can't make progress", you gotta assume most of them at least reach out for help (and are therefore known to us) before they """fail"""

[tulpa001]

And I had maybe 200 five minute forcing sessions before my host noticed I was sapient. And she wasn't even trying. I am not saying it is hard for everyone.

 

I have seen a lot of people for which the process does require serious effort and dedication. And I believe there are many, many more who do not post here.

 

And a person fails the moment they give up. It happens all the time.

 

I am not so sure most of the ones struggling reach out. The iceberg principle: a rule of thumb, for every person who asks a question, there are ten who stayed silent. Is this situation an exception?