Tulpa Evidence,Studies and links to psychology ???

[Lucilyn]

hey look I was mentioned in the thread, but you said lucinyn on accident

 

WHY WE SAY TULPAS ARE IMAGINARY

 

"Everybody is their body and there can't be more than one identity in the body, all illusions of independence are under control of the original in charge of everything, mind and body"

summarized that for ya

 

actually I didn't even read it, because that's what the truth is. There's no reason for you not to believe in tulpas as we've explained them to you except for that, that's where you say you disagree. And you keep your opinion on switching a gray zone because you don't believe we're actually people, just imaginary people/concepts that are worthy of acknowledgement but not really real. So by your beliefs you consider "us" still to be Lumi. But it's not fair to even call him Lumi.. "The original and only person in the body and mind" wouldn't just be Lumi, it would be all of us together, right? If you think what we are in this system could be entirely contained in "In Lumi's imagination", I think you're really underestimating us. We think differently, act differently, react differently, way deep down not just after we've thought "huh how would my imaginary friend act here oh like this". I feel my own fitting emotions for how I feel about stuff where Tewi doesn't feel anything at all, she's not repressing them and I'm not faking them. If all of us are actually just one person, that person is not Lumi but all of us.

 

Which isn't a bad way to look at it I guess, especially if you treat us as individuals anyways. I'm not trying to convince you to think differently here, I just wanna make clear how you actually feel about tulpas personally (ie not necessarily what you base interactions on us with, but what they seem like to you). What I want to convince you of is not to think of tulpas as "part of" their hosts. If there's only one person per body, then that person is all the people in their body, not just that person imagining other people. We call tulpas people because they have all their own sorts of emotions and thoughts and stuff. And so they're an important part of who that one person is, if not their own people. Ok?

 

I lied I actually was trying to convince you to think differently technically, but not to believe our beliefs this time just to amend your own

[lyca0n_]

Eh, I'm just going to assume you come from a chemistry background.

 

In psychology, not all tests are conducted in a lab. But more to the point, not all tests conducted scientifically look like blood tests. A baker perfects their art by running tests in a kitchen for example.......

 primarily. If you are hoping for an abstract, I've just given it to you. If you don't believe me, read through those threads.

 

---

 

If, on the other hand, you want to know if the experience of another person in your head is the same thing as an actual other person in your head, talk to a philosopher. This is a site to help people induce the experience......

 

Oh on the contrary as I am becoming a pharmacist and have studied the fundaments of psychology, primarily within psychological dysfunction or unusual psychological phenomena can be verified by neuro activity scans (PET or fMRI) that show under/overproduction in seratonin or dopamine and lower/higher activity in certain parts of the brain , which is why most medication used for mental dysfuntion attempt to focus upon the introduction of a chemical to the brain or the re uptake of a chem (SSRI,SNRI and MAOI's)

 

Or in the case of Psychosis,schizophrenia and personality disorders prior to the discovery of brain scanning technology (the first being pneumoencephalography  they were discovered through blind populace studies and from the demented showing up in asylums with similar mental disorders so maybe you are right in that the popularity and level of success stories verify it.....But that doesn't take the cult mentality into effect for desire of community could just have induced similar false statements like within many religious and magic circles which is sort of a unfalsifiable statement as it's like trying to prove that someone see's the same colour of blue as you do

 

And while I don't believe that tulpa are a dysfunction from what I have read in the PR's quite the contrary I do believe that if this phenomenon is testable, it would be through those means and it is a unusual phenomena as inducing independent internal monologue is a phenomenon only really recorded within those with DID and Schizophrenia

 

.....Yeah I will attempt forcing myself as that's really the only means that I can personally determine credibility myself

[Lucilyn]

since it's a subjective experience anyways finding out for yourself will always be the best way. I would never trust a scientist saying "nah tulpas don't exist" over our own experience. For.. multiple reasons, but you get my point. Make a tup and be happy together. You don't have to believe you just have to not disbelieve. Just go by what you experience because that is realer than beliefs.

[Guest Anonymous]

What I want to convince you of is not to think of tulpas as "part of" their hosts. If there's only one person per body, then that person is all the people in their body, not just that person imagining other people. We call tulpas people because they have all their own sorts of emotions and thoughts and stuff. And so they're an important part of who that one person is, if not their own people. Ok?

 

I lied I actually was trying to convince you to think differently technically, but not to believe our beliefs this time just to amend your own

 

I think you have influenced me, but I am unlikely to ever completely change. "Amend" my beliefs is a good way to say it. I have already amended my beliefs since coming to this forum. I think it isn't much of a difference or really wrong to see a tulpamancer as one person with more than one complex and distinct indentity/persona within his or her mind. Of course tulpas have apparent feelings, desires, emotions, memories and all of those things. That's because we want them to be complex and believable and work hard to achieve that. It's right there in the tulpa creation guides!

 

I do think of Melian as part of myself (hence median aspect), but a part that was contrived or created or fantasized. But I am also part of her! Melian says "I am Melian but I am also Davie." I say "Melian is me." Melian is not real in the sense that she was born and has a biological body. There is no sweet cutie blonde woman. Only in my mind does she exist.

[tulpa001]

Because we cannot perceive the tulpas of other people, to us they are effectively imaginary. All tulpas look just like imaginary friends and role playing characters. In essence they are imaginary, even though we treat them like real people.

• Tulpa talking to Mistgod on a forum - illusion
  

 

I can't agree more. But when it comes to thoughts, ideas, and information, the barrier between imaginary and real is fuzzy. In a computer, a programmer codes math and images into a file. This is a science of manipulating real objects for a programmer. The gamer plays the game. They see it as an imaginary fiction, enjoying it through the use of suspension of disbelief. This attitude would be out of place if what the programmer had been writing was tax software.

[Guest Anonymous]

• Tulpa talking to Mistgod on a forum - illusion
  

 

I can't agree more. But when it comes to thoughts, ideas, and information, the barrier between imaginary and real is fuzzy. In a computer, a programmer codes math and images into a file. This is a science of manipulating real objects for a programmer. The gamer plays the game. They see it as an imaginary fiction, enjoying it through the use of suspension of disbelief. This attitude would be out of place if what the programmer had been writing was tax software.

 

Interesting analogy!  I would have to agree.  I refer you to my concept of pseudo-real or quasi-real.  Quasi-real actually works better but I have been using pseudo-real for a long time and it is kinda embedded in all the writing Melian and I have done.  That is what I have been saying for three years on the internet (if you include DA).  Yeah it is fuzzy.  That doesn't make it the same level of real as the tangible, physical world.  It is on another plane of realness entirely, which is what I have always been saying.  

 

No one gets that though or comprehends what I am saying.  For most it is black and white, real or fake.

 

Melian almost exactly three years ago on her first day going public in 2013 on Deviantart (long before we knew about tulpas, daemons or soulbonds) "I am not quite an completely independent sentient being though. I am (mostly) a character being portrayed on DA, just a very, very real, dear character. He hopes sharing me will inspire another level of artistic creation. Mistgod dreams about me, but doesn't physically see or hear me. In his very vivid imagination, he just imagines that he does. Well, except once he did hear my voice, but he was just waking and more than half asleep. But for a small split second, it was astonishing for both of us until he came fully awake. That incident was never repeated, which probably is a good thing. " link

 

That was the very first description we ever wrote of what Melian is to anyone. It is still accurate.

[tulpa001]

And while I don't believe that tulpa are a dysfunction from what I have read in the PR's quite the contrary I do believe that if this phenomenon is testable, it would be through those means and it is a unusual phenomena as inducing independent internal monologue is a phenomenon only really recorded within those with DID and Schizophrenia

It is also recorded in fiction writers

[Guest Anonymous]

Living characters have been studied as Tulpa points out! However, to continue constantly being a butt (as is my irritating unending role), I am compelled to point out that the writers in the study were experiencing the Illusion of Independent Agency, illusion being the keyword. None of the authors interviewed for the study thought that their IIA characters were real entities. They treat them as real people, and love them, and they are emotionally and psychologically important, but they were not considered real entities or second personalities. None of the authors had their brains tested for the study. It wasn't necessary. No one needed to prove the IIA characters exist, the preponderance of testimonial evidence is strong enough to support the likely existence of such phenomenon.

 

You could say the same thing for many of the things we read about in psychology. The only evidence for much of psychology is observation and testimonial evidence. You don't have to prove the existence of the farmer I dreamed about, only the fact that I was dreaming maybe with REM and EEGs.

[lyca0n_]

Living characters have been studied as Tulpa points out!  However, to continue constantly being a butt (as is my irritating unending role), I am compelled to point out that the writers in the study were experiencing the Illusion of Independent Agency, illusion being the keyword.  None of the authors interviewed for the study thought that their IIA characters were real entities.  They treat them as real people, and love them, and they are emotionally and psychologically important, but they were not considered real entities or second personalities.   None of the authors had their brains tested for the study.  It wasn't necessary.  No one needed to prove the IIA characters exist, the preponderance of testimonial evidence is strong enough to support the likely existence of such phenomenon.  

 

You could say the same thing for many of the things we read about in psychology.  The only evidence for much of psychology is observation and testimonial evidence.  You don't have to prove the existence of the farmer I dreamed about, only the fact that I was dreaming maybe with REM and EEGs.

 

Yup that is correct you beat me to commenting upon it, I hope one day that effective neuro electronic interface comes about so that testimonial evidence isn't the only thing to support most psychological claims :p 

 

Although come to think of it.....if that does come about we are talking about deus ex or neuromancer level of change to society and I don't think humanity will ever be responsible enough for that, hell the US is electing Trump and Hillary to have claims on 40% the worlds nuclear arsenal so we are beyond incapable of adapting to that level of change

 

But I digress yea I get what your stating but there are certain factors that can be observed about your dream such as what emotions were triggered throughout, if empathetic responces are normal ect.

[Vampire]

I personally believe that there is no difference between a tulpa and a person, other than a physical self. The person did not get to choose their form but has been in it so long they identify as it. The person is a tulpa essentially shaped by experiences and memory. Everything a human can do a equally powerful tulpa can do.

 

Having experienced my sister go through possession by an unknown, this is what I personally believe. The fact that tulpa can possess and switch with the host also strengthens the idea for me. Especially in DID systems where you may have multiple fronts that change out and try to make a functioning member of society.

 

I believe that Tulpa001 can attest to this since him and his host play "fight" for possession, it's kind of interesting.

 

Imagine a tulpa being transferred (in the theoretical future) into a newborn. If the tulpa only had memories since "birth" or whenever the human memory kicks in, if they were in complete control from day 1 I believe there would be no way to differentiate them from a normal person. If they didn't have a chance to create a form for themselves they would assume the physical body's form.

 

As for how the original human conscious is formed, I have no idea. Maybe we are originally born just with a subconscious and eventually the higher conscious turns on and decides it needs a "pilot".

 

This thread is now pretty far off-topic for this section I feel.