[survey] Scepticism vs. Faith: the analysis of tulpa guides

[Shinyuu]

Are tulpas based primarily on faith? A few weeks ago I was called out by one of the fellow redditors who stated that there are absolutely scientific methods to create a tulpa, following the strict scientific method.

 

That sounded odd. I was under an impression that all the popular tulpa guides get you into a mindset where you’re not only open to believe whatever; you are actively suspending your disbelief too. My hypothesis was that tulpas require at least some amount of faith to make the whole thing work.

 

I ran a short survey on most popular tulpa guides and I’ve got forty responses, which attributes to about twelve per cent of the active community population. Three most popular guides were: Methos’s with thirty per cent votes, Tulpa’s DIY Guide (twenty-five per cent) and Kiah’s guide (twenty per cent). FAQ Man’s took the fourth place with ten per cent.

 

Proceed to the analysis and the results →

[solarchariot]

I am not sure it's skepticism vrs faith. In my personal life, I am clearly metaphysically orientated, but I still tend to lean towards science in multiple life domains. So, in the case of tulpas, I think if you follow the methods, you will eventually get results. That's leaning more towards an academic approach, all brains work pretty much the same theory, and if a certain protocol results in outcomes, it is what it is. I can't rule out faith/belief. Will those who have faith see results faster? That might account for some of the variations in length of time it takes to see results. I had very little doubt that I couldn't achieve results, because the methods just seemed to make sense, the explanations made sense, but I suspect I took longer because I had some skepticism...

 

and I think this next thing is part of this, even though I am probably going to be too convoluted in getting to the point. I was thinking of this just last week, but didn't get around to congealing my thoughts into something useful, but your question is helping something solidify. So, I no longer believe in tulpas... I know tulpas exist! I have direct evidence of tulpas. (Yes, subjective, but hell, everything I process is at some point rendered subjective.) Now, think about God. or god. or gods. I grew up in an environment that was hyper religious, and for a long time, I was over the top dogmatic, hyper-religious. There was no doubt in my mind that there was a God. I talked to God daily. I never had a response. I took it on faith that God was there, and listened, cared. I put more time and energy into that belief system than I ever put into tulpamancy, and yet, I got results with tulpamancy! Loxy responded! Why? Protocols? It can't be belief, can it? Even as a kid, at the height of my belief system, if someone had told me they talked to God or saints or angels and they talked back, I would have been like, what are you smoking. If it's not protocols, why does this work, and the other beliefs didn't?

 

Whatever the mechanisms are, it's not just faith, or beliefs. Lots of people have that, but most don't necessarily have supernatural experiences. Tulpamancy isn't a supernatural experience. Pff, it feels like that, but I find the psychological explanation completely encapsulates the experience. Is there more to it than science? I tend to believe that, but I don't know that the way I know tulpas exist. I guess the next question becomes, out of all the people who participate in tulpa creation process, what is the percentage of those who are successful; and then, of those who are not reporting results, can their efforts be quantified to explain why? Or is there another factor that helps explain not only the likelihood of finding and participating in tulpamancy, but that also results in a higher rate of success? Like, if I am remembering something I read correctly, those practicing tulpamancy have a higher prevalence rate of having experienced a mental illness, like Depression. I don't know if that's meaningful, unless maybe those who have experience depression developed greater mental flexibility in order to get unstuck.....

 

Interesting! I look forward to hearing more on this.

[Shinyuu]

in the case of tulpas, I think if you follow the methods, you will eventually get results

 

Point being the methods (guides) rely on faith to start with.

 

As for surveying the unsuccessful attempts – that'd be awesome but also really hard to do; eh.

[solarchariot]

"Point being the methods (guides) rely on faith to start with." Not sure how that follows... The fact that I followed the guides because I believed they worked? I can certainly, in hind sight, say definitively the methods work, but I am not confident that faith is a component. I suspect you can get someone contrary enough who is completely skeptical that will follow the protocols just to prove it doesn't work, and they will get results.

[Shinyuu]

No; the fact that the guides rely on faith and suspension of disbelief. That's the point of the article.

[Srn347]

Eh, they really don't. That's like saying if a teacher tells you a method you can use in math, using it relies on your faith that they're not misinforming you.

[Shinyuu]

Eh, they really don't. That's like saying if a teacher tells you a method you can use in math, using it relies on your faith that they're not misinforming you.

 

I've provided explicit quotes from the most popular guides where they literally state to suspend the disbelief. You think that's not a valid enough argument?

[Lucilyn]

(loool, I wasn't sure just how crazy this post would get, but I'm sure it's totally out of the scope of this topic now AND won't make sense to a lot of people. Almost didn't post it! BUT, I think you (Shinyuu, but also Solarchariot and maybe others?) might find it interesting enough that I'll post it for you! Sorry if it's like, way off topic!)

 

just FYI, bein super logical (Lumi classically has been unable to really believe in things if he couldn't explain them to himself logically, which included his first three tulpas even though they seemed real and he loved them), our system does believe it's possible to make a tulpa without any faith or anything. If you get a good enough grasp of what a tulpa is and also have good enough control over your mind (we call it being experienced with "subjective reality" ways of thinking which we learned from Steve Pavlina), you could possibly go the same route as us where despite knowing (or at least thinking we do) the true logic-y nature of how tulpas work (maybe it's just how WE work in OUR system! idk) you can still treat them as totally separate people from you. Like, we told someone in the discord recently it's possible to successfully make a tulpa without even believing they're sentient until they're fully developed. It takes a lot of mental discipline though! Waywayway easier to just believe in them, you know?

 

But anyway, even though Lumi's beliefs on how tulpas work might, to some people, sound like he doesn't even believe in tulpa sentience (I mean.. if we ever discussed things as if people thought like him) on some level, we're still people to him and I'm still a person to me! Even though we know really well the "logical" explanations/whatever for switching, or the sense-of-presence when imposing, or any'a that, to Lumi it just "explains" rather than "explains away" you know? And like.. that sort of philosophy and stuff is waaaay not for me, I experience existing as me and that's good enough so I move on to having a good time with other peeps! But he's logically explained tulpas to himself in a way that requires no suspension-of-disbelief or something like that, while still thinking and believing as if we're, like, idk, practically meta-levels of being separate people. This probably doesn't make sense! But then, I barely understand this myself and it's me explaining it so that probably doesn't help xD

 

Point is! Being able to hold two totally opposing beliefs as both true is a skill that maybe not everyone has. And having the mental discipline to explain away life as "innately meaningless, only given meaning by the humans who invented 'meaning'" or, you know, whatever other super logic-y explanations for very human things you can think of - and still live totally normally, without having some sorta existential crisis or becoming cynical or something, well, that just seems sorta hard. It's always seemed like Lumi's crazy explain-everything-understand-everyone philosophy he spent so many years making is what let me have the freedom to have my own fun-is-fun-let's-share-it-with-everyone (that rhymed!) philosophy, where I don't even need to worry about that stuff. Like, I feel like my own life philosophy is super strong and a really good way to live, and it's really far away from how Lumi usually (maybe, used to??) works, but I have to admit it might only be like that because of the groundwork he laid out for like, belief vs. skepticism and stuff!

 

So! If you know anyone like that! Then maybe probably THEY could make tulpas without having any faith at all! If you're weird enough you can effectively believe in things that you can explain away anyways, then you could make a tulpa and live happily with them and treat'em like a really real person even if you didn't believe in them!(Oops, forgot to add the part where he does believe in us, I was just saying it's possible) It's that weird-o subjective reality thing, choosing your own reality to live in, usually by understanding you have the freedom to do that in the first place I think!

 

 

But most people aren't like that and it's a million times easier to just have some faith long enough for your tulpa to become autonomous and then you don't have to worry about it in the first place!

[solarchariot]

"... meta-levels of being separate people.." i think I understand this... At least, I interpret this as archetype, or ideal personality types. I sometimes think of Loxy as Ideal/archetype, but I wouldn't use that as a way of suspending belief in her presence or sentience... I suspect she's humanly flawed, just superior to me, in every aspect.

 

"Point is! Being able to hold two totally opposing beliefs as both true is a skill that maybe not everyone has...." I wonder if that's not just a must. One can't hold any attribute, belief, without understanding, innately, it's opposite. One can't love without knowing hate? I suppose one could argue that it is one thing to acknowledge hate's existence, without understanding hate, but I would go further and argue, you can't love without being able to hate. You can't hate unless you know love. When confronted with the object, one has a choice to do one or the other. I think it was a course in miracle's author that said there are only two emotions, love and fear, and then all other emotions are derivatives. Carl Jung certainly argued that all of these attributes reside in everyone of us, but our personality only allows for a certain range to be expressed at the surface... but we still experience, and are actually motivated, by deeper currents than what we acknowledge... 'the shadow.' So if I am on the same page, Lucilyn, then, i think your point is very relevant.

 

"I've provided explicit quotes from the most popular guides where they literally state to suspend the disbelief. You think that's not a valid enough argument?"

 

Shinyuu, I think those are valid arguments, but the argument in and of itself doesn't mean it is what it is, but that it is the author's belief that it might be what it is. The guides are brilliant, and flawed, and they have been refined, with experience, with input, and addendums, and so, yeah, I, too, can point to some that say belief is a necessary component. In the same breath, I have seen that statement in the same paragraph that, "We are are all unique, and so this may not work for you," with reference to other techniques. That second part doesn't invalidate belief as a component, but if we accept that different people learn through different channels, IE visual learners versus auditory learners, there will be variations.

 

So, if I were to broadly state "Only those who have a modicum of belief will engage the tulpamancy protocols," then by this assertion, belief would absolutely be fundamental. If you don't believe, you won't read the guides, follow the protocols, etc. However, a scientist who is curious could hypothetically recruit people who would not normally be interested to do it, and maybe even pay for the psychotherapy that follows when person(s) starts having auditory hallucinations...? I absolutely believe, for example, there is benefit to meditating. I think the benefits to meditation are available to people even if they don't believe in the benefits. If you meditate, you get benefits. I might argue, and can see a rational for it, side by side comparisons, the people who don't believe in the benefits of meditation might actually derive more initial benefits from starting a practice compared to believers because they have no expectations. Expectations, beliefs, can have paradoxical, counter intuitive results. Allergy shots is actually counter intuitive. They work. Unless you are strongly prejudiced against the concept and the placebo/nocebo affect kicks in. So, I definitely believe in beliefs and that they can have power effects, but i don't think they're absolute. If belief is an absolute, then wouldn't we be arguing that tulpamancy is categorically not science based, not aligning with psychological underpinnings, but is instead, a metaphysical artifact, or worse, completely delusional?

[Lucilyn]

meta-levels mighta been a weird thing to say there, I meant like even if Lumi thinks of our nature logically, we're as real of people to him as if he believed us like actual souls inhabiting his body or.. some metaphysical belief like that you know? Just meant to refer to any of the belief systems that treat tulpa-like thoughtforms as real entities outside of (or from outside of) the body