Guest fordaplot

Request Questions for Professor Luhrmann

Recommended Posts

Guest fordaplot

I’m going to be talking with Stanford Psychology & Anthropology Professor Tanya M. Luhrmann again in a couple weeks, and wanted to check if the community had any questions they’d like me to ask her. If it’s appropriate, I’ll try and weave it into our chat :)

 

Our previous discussion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-QfbEVSLzA

 

Her TEDx Talk:

 

Her NY Times Article “Conjuring Up Our Own Gods”, which discusses tulpas: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/15/opinion/luhrmann-conjuring-up-our-own-gods.html

 

Her website: http://luhrmann.net/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read through all this stuff, but if it hasn't already been brought up, why not ask her what she thinks about researching tulpas. It's extraordinarily difficult to do a controlled study with tulpamancers because so much of this phenomenon is subjective and in the mind. The best thing I can think of would be some kind of neuroimaging study, but those can be astronomically expensive to do and there might not even be a point if we don't know what we're looking for. Also, most of the research that is out there on tulpamancy was done by anthropologists such as Dr. Veissiere, and not psychologists who might have deeper insight into the reasons why people create tulpas and what practical benefits they have to offer.


"Science isn't about why, science is about why not?" -Cave Johnson

Tulpae: Luna, Elise, Naomi

My progress report

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never considered a tulpa to be exclusively 'god'.

But I believe all living things share a fraction of the soul that makes up 'god'. So a tulpa, as a real sentient being [or a connection to my own soul], would constitute that.

 

But then again my belief system is pretty unconventional. 

 

Unfortunately I have no questions, but it's cool you can network with professionals interested in our shenanigans!


[align=right]The songs carried on and began to grow long as the moon watched it all from above

And the old ripened berries and the juniper fairies delivered their gifts and their love.[/align]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fordaplot

Glitch: "ask her what she thinks about researching tulpas"

 

That's definitely on my list. I'll have to clarify how much I can talk about publicly, but Luhrmann and myself in the process of getting a study going with a neuroscientist from Yale. Additionally, I've been working independently on a case study where the subject of interest intends to purchase a 24-channel OpenBCI EEG scanner for personal use. Even so, the usefulness of neuroimaging towards tulpa research has yet to be seen.

 

"How should we research tulpas and other experiences of plurality?", "What poorly supported beliefs about plurality permeate in the mental health arena?", and "What sort of research is needed to investigate and clarify these areas?" are all important questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm inclined to say that those 'god' spirits are not actually God, but God avatars, so god is not a tulpa. (Or they could be your superconscious talking to you)

 

--relevance of eeg, cat, and f-mri to personality based research.

--her opinions on the community's various metaphysical views to tulpas (psychological, spiritual, divides within these theories), is this the domain of philosophy, or can science tell us something.

--personhood, can it be defined, can it be proved for any entity, and what she thinks of the push for scientific evidence on this front.

--Outside perspectives on tulpamancy. Is there a cringe effect that prevents acceptance, other reasons that cause scepticism, or an element of exoticism.

--As a subculture, could it form a belief system, traditions, practices, a notion of inclusion, and exclusion, could it enforce conformity and expel the noncompliant.

--Accidental tulpas could be the norm. Could they be walking among us and no one know? (most never tell anyone out of fear of being crazy)

--Soulbonding, it is older than tulpamancy. It seems very similar, writer's tend to get them, but they are not always considered persons/plural.

--Could there be a spectrum from characters to simulated persons in the mind? Could this cause tension within the community.

--What counts as science? Thoughts on seeking validation of your community through science. Can you be scientific about subjective phenomena.

 

Edit:

--Could there be aspects of 'new age' to these communities? Could they be using outdated theories, using terms like subconscious and superconscious wrong, or have unusual definitions for other words, like person or consciousness.

--Historical precedent. These phenomenon have been occurring forever, so why now are communities forming, and research being done?


Host comments in italics. Tulpa's log. Tulpa's guide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As stated here I'd be highly interested in Prof. Luhrmann's opinion on the differences between tulpas and the 'voice' of Evangelicals.

 

How much are thoughtforms shaped and ultimately restricted by their host's and the community's expectations and can they overcome these barriers?

What does she think about the limits of tulpa self-awareness and independence? And how much do communities define such limitations? Just think of imposition, possession, switching or parallel processing. Most people including me would not have figured out such techniques on their own, not even dreamt that such was even possible.

So if accidential tulpa-like thoughtforms are common, is their development limited by a lack of community support? Coming up with a thoughtform is fairly easy. But I guess only few people put enough effort into them to actually achieve results without some sort of backing. At least for me it was highly encouraging to learn about other people's progress and achievements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm inclined to say that those 'god' spirits are not actually God, but God avatars, so god is not a tulpa. (Or they could be your superconscious talking to you)

IIRC, Luhrmann talks about it in a similar fashion in her book. (I'm still only about 50% into it, but my impression is that she is very nice to believers and doesn't make statements about god itself, only about the experiences.)

 

--Soulbonding, it is older than tulpamancy. It seems very similar, writer's tend to get them, but they are not always considered persons/plural.

--Could there be a spectrum from characters to simulated persons in the mind? Could this cause tension within the community.

Those questions would interest me as well, but I think it could be hard to come up with widely-accepted definitions of all the different terms. Maybe you, ford, could make a video about those sometime in the future? Or maybe interview (off-air) people using the different words to describe their system, and sum it up or something?

 

- or ask Luhrmann if she has found different types in her research, and what those would be.

 

Good luck with the next interview! You've done an awesome job so far. :-)


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive watched her tedtalk previously, and was impressed by how much imagination and being attentive to inner mind activity is important, but my question would be 'how is this new' or better, 'why has western world consistently dismissed imagination' when practically every single person we hold significant has engaged in this process. Einstein, Tesla, Jung, Edison, Hill, even Plato- have all championed 'dreaming' or some fundamental imgaination technique. Jung called it 'active imagination' and credits his insights, through challenging hallucination, as how he discovered 'the collective unconscious.' Einstein credits 'thought experiments' for realitivity. Tesla claim he traveled to countries and made friends all in his mind, till his mind became so good at it he could invent things in his mind to such precision he didnt have to practice in a lab. Napoleon Hill put 'the invisible counselors techniques ' in think and grow rich, 1937, but it seems clear he got it from somewhere else, unless we are all just reinventing the wheel. I grew up in an extremely religious environment and never had the consistent inner experience that tulpamancy has offered. Ive had experiences, but they seem random, and were usually in a dream that family dismissed, and so i stopped sharing. Now i share, even at risk of negatively impacting my livelihood. Probably not a great idea to be in the mental health field holding conversations with 'others,' but this stands out as something different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Ford and everyone :)

 

I saw your video about how your tulpa saved your life, watched the interview and prof Luhrmann at TEDx talks. I also found her research report on her study about evangelical christians. I am impressed by the way prof Luhrmann handles the topic and her respect for the matter, as well as by your way of communicating your experiences.

 

I think it's very important work. As someone who still struggles with finding an explanation for what happened, her work gives me another approach on the topic.

 

I don't know what to ask her, to be honest. But I guess I am interested in cases when people also look for some kind of external confirmation for what they are experiencing in the form of synchronicities (meaningful coincidences, like Jung and Pauli talked about in their letters). And also, I think neurosciences will reveal new technologies that will maybe establish some kind of intersubjectivity, like pseudo-telepathy via electronic devices for example. Maybe this will open up new discourses.

 

After all, I think it's important that therapists gain more insight on the subject. I got the feeling there are more people walking around with a companion in their head than most people would expect. My psychiatrists answer to all is: Meds... My therapist is a Jungian, thank God. I guess, everyone here who loves their tulpa knows how hard it is to admit that we need our friends.. and to defend ourselves not to get the injection :D Reminds me of the movie "Harvey", which is a great piece of work for those of us who have a friend not everyone can see.

 

Foucault said, listen to the crazy ones. Look at those discourses that are forbidden by society. So you both doing good :)

Share this post


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.