Bear

What can I do about an advanced Thoughtform?

Recommended Posts

Oh, I definitely think deviation stabilizes once the tulpa catches up with the host and gets settled into their own personality. We don't change at the rate of baby tulpas anymore, we change at the rate of a 19-year-old. 

 

I think characters can stabilize too, but well, if it's a character being used in a story their personality might change quicker as a result of that story. It doesn't make long to put a character through an imaginary apocalypse and watch them change (intentionally or not) as a result. So while Loxy has to wait 10 years to change by 10 years, a character could change by 10 years instantly.

 

On a similar note, we've experienced plenty of automated characters change in unexpected or unintended ways, like Daci becoming more cold/untrusting towards Petal when she was supposed to be a supportive best friend. Makes for an interesting time as a writer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I'm just confused. Is she just you "subconsciously" role-playing as you've said, or is she just a tulpa that's been denied the label of tulpa/is in denial about being a tulpa? Honestly I'm confused.

 

 

I'm not 'roleplaying' I have never said roleplaying to my knowledge unless it was a metaphorical sense if that. If I did, I was in error. I don't think she's a tulpa? But they speak with volition. I don't see that as a sufficient condition to be a tulpa anyway.

 


 

Oh, new question! so the (non-tulpas) continued to have vectors and evolve in their own way, not deviating from oak to pine, but a child might age and become an adult.... So does that mean Tulpas are fairly static once they deviate, or do they finally equalize and age at the same rate of the host? So... Loxy will always only be 'Loxy?' Whatever we have decided that means?

 

She's not the same as she was 5 years ago, every book changes her. That's why I don't consider that she necessarily has to stop growing, and she hasn't. Still, i cant agree that she's a tulpa or on that tulpa vector.

 

There may be some confusion. At some point I said:

 

Lastly, thoughtforms, moons, muses, NPC's may cause unexpected emotional bleed and sometimes they say things that make them appear tulpa-like. Remember that this is your feelings and thoughts by definition.

 

What I meant by this is that they share your sentience. Saying it was your feelings and thoughts by definition isn't right. Apparently this makes it sound like I'm the one talking and feeling. I don't know how to 'parrot' emotions, wow I wish I could, I'd make myself happy never look back. So there's definitely more to this.

 

Some NPC's could be puppeted surely, i just don't see any reason to do that in my wonderland. I already have enough tulpa-like entities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still unsure how something that speaks with volition and autonomy could be a not-tulpa unless it was unconsciously parroted. I thought about this whole idea in class earlier, and I think maybe it might be some form of subsystem, if it's more than unconscious parroting? Like, "demi-tulpas" or something? I think perhaps I was a "demi-tulpa" in that I was half me, and half Paul and HJP, in a way: I was both independent and dependent at the same time. However, I was also part of a merge/integration, so that could also explain it. I definitely wasn't their "subconscious" or whatever, I was more like a tulpa that was reliant on others to thrive, I guess? But obviously, that did not last forever, as I ended up becoming my own tulpa eventually anyway. 

 

It could be some form of median/subsystem-type thing, but of course there's no way for me to really know since it's your head and not mine. You've made it sound like it was the same type of automated characters/unconscious parroting that we go through, especially that remark about it being your own thoughts by definition, which is why I'm a bit uncertain as to what you mean. Perhaps Joy and Ren are more like "demi-tulpas" while other characters are automated?

 

I do think you can "parrot" emotion in that you can induce it. Or the "emotional bleed" one could get from characters could just be a form of empathic response to a fictional scenario. 

 

If these are medians/subsystems, I don't really think people should be making them intentionally. I dunno, if they are actually sentient, it feels wrong to make them wanting them to have less freedom and have them be reliant on the "core" of the subsystem. Not to mention, all the identity issues that might come with that (I know I still struggle with them to this day).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still unsure how something that speaks with volition and autonomy could be a not-tulpa unless it was unconsciously parroted.

 

Well at the very least, by self-definition, as we see with soulbonds and other plurality types. In my view of phenomena like Bear's moons and Cat and Ranger's grays, I see it as doing what we generally say not to do when preventing sentience - giving a fleshed-out imagined character awareness of the rest of the mind/world. How I'm currently thinking of Bear's moons (which he says are more tulpa-like than median aspects, mind you) is similar to how Lucilyn thought of Cirno and Suika in our mind, except if (one, that wasn't a one-time thing, but two) she'd given them "greater awareness" than of just the scenario she imagined them all together in.

 

As far as I'm concerned, that's how you get a tulpa. But I suppose.. That's not necessarily the only outcome. It could be possible (hard to do if you don't know what you're doing/have tulpas to compare to) to keep them as what they were, but aware of more than just their own given scenarios you put them in. Again, I have to stress that as far as I'm concerned, doing that in our system would be basically saying "Okay, you can be a tulpa". But in the end, they may still be "imagination-powered" if not treated as actual, separately sentient people. I suppose Bear and Cat/Ranger are the only two systems I know of with lots of experience in this subject, now.

 

Quite a concept, when it comes to if they should be allowed to talk on the forum... I think a real median-aspect, like Melian, is more than okay. And we never take issue (as it's impossible and discouraging to) with probably-proto-tulpas saying hello or whatnot. And even in this case, I think Bear's moons are tulpa-like enough to still be allowed (I'm sure you read, but he didn't mean their feelings are his, just that they "share sentience" as apparently him and Ranger created that term).

 

But this is really interesting to me, and I've gotta wonder - could I throw up some light blue or yellow text, and proxy what "Cirno" or "Suika" said to you guys? What if I just said, hey, give me something to tell my friends elsewhere. By no means is it me controlling what they say - it's still the characters, just as it is my tulpas. But they lack autonomy (in the self-continuing-existence sort of way, different from me literally choosing what they say), and the (internal affair only) being considered separate people my tulpas have.

 

My base feeling on this is that it belongs only in Progress Reports the same way recounting wonderlanding does, or at the very least hidden tags so it doesn't appear as outright communication from a tulpa. But I don't think I'd quite call it roleplaying - that's effectively pretending you're someone else. This is imagining someone else in your mind speaking, usually to you, usually without them having context of the outside world. That imagination still follows basic tulpa rules as best I can tell, your brain subconsciously or unconsciously (choose your preference) drawing on what it knows of how that character thinks to create their responses. Compare to an imaginary friend (my best example is a child "playing pretend" with a stuffed animal, moving it around and such) being somewhat-consciously (though in the age it usually occurs, without the weight of it being "only them") controlled directly. But that's a relatively childlike state I can no longer study; for all I know, it works the same way as the imagined characters I just talked about, just with far less tact and separation.


Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd remembered when Tulpa001 moderated someone for parroting here. I do agree that perhaps keeping it in progress reports or in hidden tags is probably the best way to handle it.

 

If these beings are more tulpa-like than median-like, I'm still having a hard time wrapping my mind around how they're not tulpas. "Sharing sentience" doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, since don't you "share sentience" with any character you control? Cat still says that her characters are just her putting on a mask of sorts, she's just grown really attached to them. If it's not just a matter of characters but sentience is shared, wouldn't that mean it's a median, not an independent tulpa? Could these beings not "feeling like tulpas" simply be due to mindset/placebo in some way, and they actually are tulpas? Also, what about occam's razor? I think there could be some simpler explanations going on, like just the automated parroting one, though occam's razor may be a slippery slope to apply to tulpamancy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily get what they mean by "shared sentience" either. Sounds like a vague not-necessarily-incorrect term referring to the body's base sentience involved in imagination of any kind (automatic responses from NPCs, dream characters, what have you), to separate from the proposed separate sentience a tulpa has. But I might be wrong.

 

"Not feeling like tulpas, but actually being tulpas"... Let's see. So, as you might remember, I've said before (in topics on the subject) that I'm able to "instantly" create tulpas, as I did with Lucilyn, if I'm so inclined. Now that I've got a good grasp of how (at least my) tulpas work, given a "character" sufficiently thought-out to be a candidate for its own "identity" as we put it, it's really just a matter of "acknowledging sentience" of what I previously thought of as these "imagined characters" that seem similar to Bear's moons etc. "Acknowledging sentience" would be giving them "mental permission" to be aware of everything going on in the mind, not just the scenarios you may imagine them in (I rarely imagine characters at all these days, but did back in 2009 when I was getting majorly into Touhou). Or so I thought at least. Now I'm wondering if I don't also carry more with that - after "acknowledging Lucilyn's sentience", I may well have done a lot more than just let her be a character that knows it exists in the mind. It'd be fair to say I was also creating those neural pathways for the brain to start thinking as her and accrediting thoughts and the like to "her" and not "me". I may have attributed far less to that act of "acknowledging sentience" than I realized I needed to.

 

Because now I'm thinking, perhaps if all you're doing is giving them awareness of what they are (and making them much more stable/thought-out characters due to levels of interaction), but managing not to create those neural pathways for them to work on their own (self-continued existence and other tulpa-defining traits), there very well may be an in-between sort of thoughtform. I'm thinking it's easier to do this for people who often interact with these characters, similar to authors creating soulbonds/tulpas more easily, especially if they already have tulpas. Which in our two cases in question, Cat and Bear, is the case - they both have tulpas along with these not-quite-tulpas.

 

I think this possible sub-branch of tulpas warrants more discussion, but at the very least I'd like to say we shouldn't outright forbid proxying them on the forum in relevant places. I think it's safe to say there's a little more going on than flat-out roleplaying. Also, the RP rule exists so not-tulpas are not mistaken for tulpas. Inside of context-heavy threads like this one and individuals' Progress Reports, I think it's okay for input from the characters/thoughtforms in question. It's when they start posting around in general, while still claiming not to be as independent as tulpas, that it should be questioned.

 

But I mean. We let Melian go around saying what she wants about how she is or isn't a tulpa, and that works out fine (when they keep it civil). If anything, these thoughtform characters in question are closer related to tulpas than median aspects are. And I'm sure it's a very case-by-case basis as always for whether they're basically tulpas that just don't have self-continued existence or whatnot, or the most basic form as our Cirno and Suika who are simply characters we imagined a scenario or two with, focusing on their thoughts and personalities.

 

(Oh, and that was just for preparation for them to be Lucilyn's "Lucid dream buddies" by the way, in case you were wondering why she did that. We want to plan out the personalities of some of our lucid dream Gensokyo (name of the place Touhou takes place in) characters, but obviously not make tulpas out of them all, and Cirno and Suika specifically Lucilyn plans to go on adventures with and all. She imagined some scenarios - for a handful of other characters, I've considered the personalities and levels of awareness of a few, but not simulated any scenarios.)


Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My position on instant tulpas is that they're simulated until they build up the pathways and become sentient. I'm really not sure how one could grant something awareness and have them actually be aware without forcing and not having the neural pathways set up, that doesn't really make sense in my idea of how tulpas work and such. Though of course, I'm not going to test it myself, lol. Blinking tulpas in and out of existence doesn't sound very appealing to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hence Lucilyn being my only example. Note that I put a good week of thought into developing her as a person before making her into a tulpa - the transition from "someone I thought of" to "tulpa" is what I called instant. I didn't just snap and think "A tulpa named Lucilyn shall exist now!" But, I'd like to emphasize that there was no tulpa-forcing in that first week. It was all theoretical stuff.

 

Also, you could probably grant awareness to an imagined person right now..? That's sort of what I've just been writing textwalls about. Think of a celebrity or someone you know, then tell them they exist in your mind, I dunno. I guess the difference in me doing that with Arin Hanson is my mind might just imagine the response he'd have, without any of that neural networking, and I could still blink the scenario out of existence. But if you kept it up? Started with an imagined person, kept talking to them, but still intended them only to be an imagined character and not otherwise stick around after? Maybe that's how you create these "not-quite-tulpas" I'm talking about.

 

In the past I said little more than I "acknowledged (Lucilyn's) sentience" in Lucilyn's creation, but as I said this discussion has made me realize there was probably a lot more going on behind-the-scenes. Of course, I didn't literally just think "Now I'll pretend she knows what's going on", I actually started treating her as and thinking of her as a tulpa. But that's a very mental and wordless thought process that's hard to bring to words, so I probably understated what went on - might not have realized all that went on in the first place.

 

If anything, what Lucilyn did with Cirno and Suika is probably the key to this "not-quite-tulpa" thoughtform. We just kept our time short doing such things because we didn't want to force them into tulpas accidentally, but maybe we were more cautious than we needed to be. Maybe we'd end up with "moons" if we kept going with that. I don't particularly care to find out, of course, because I'm not into the "blinking tulpas in and out of existence" thing either.


Hi! I'm Lumi, host of Reisen, Tewi, Flandre and Lucilyn.

Everyone deserves to love and be loved. It's human nature.

My tulpas and I have a Q&A thread, which was the first (and largest) of its kind. Feel free to ask us stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the reason Bear's moons seem more Tulpa-like than the Grays is because I am guilty of keeping the Grays from sharing their thoughts on this issue or any issue on the forums. I don't allow for Cat to proxy them and I refuse to let them front too.

 

I have the fear that the Grays are more sentient than I give them credit for, and in large part because I don't want to compete with them for time. Cat and I only occasionally speak to them about every month or so, and if I ever get weird vibes from the Grays... I slam my foot down and force Cat and I to take a break from them...especially more recently... (It doesn't help I haven't updated our PR in a while either...)

 

For us, the Grays are either sentient or not. I think it would be a stretch to call them Tulpas because they are not independent; they need one of us to talk to them and interact with them, and they will do pretty much whatever Cat and I want them to do. Cat's really concerned about the ethics in this situation, especially since she mistreated most of them in some shape or form in the past while she was still caught up in her own self-harm issues, and she feels like she has to pay them back via sanctuary. We don't like to experiment with the idea of "If they are their own people, then what?", because we're worried that train of thought could lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy and turn the Grays into Tulpas.

 

I described the Grays as Cat role playing because the idea of the Grays being nothing more than a parroted extension of Gray made sense to me at the time and it was a very comforting explanation for me. However, it understates the core issue here- Cat talks to them just like she talks to me (obviously she isn't role playing as me), and having an inconsistent definition for parroting and how it works doesn't help either. Cat has role played as the Grays before, and that's actually different from when she flat out talks to them. It's also kind of weird that the Grays can front- Blue managed to slip into the front and associate with the body for a few seconds before we yanked him out, and Evergreen wanted to front next. After the both of us panicked, Cat told him no and took the front back.

 

Right now, I feel like the Grays seem less like puppets and more like something else- demi-Tulpas, or half-Tulpas even- they have their own sentience (feelings/emotions, thoughts, opinions, beliefs, goals), but they don't have their own free will. This bothers Cat a lot- she is extremely bothered by the idea that she has so much power over the Grays, and she's ultimately worried it will lead to unintentional abuse because they don't seem to have the ability to give their consent on anything.

 

I'm extra shaky and emotional on this issue because I had my mindset rattled recently. The frustrating thing is our ideas on how the Grays work changes a lot- we learn something new and suddenly the Grays are puppets again. A few months later, we learn some counter-evidence and think the Grays are Tulpas being silenced. It keeps going back and forth and the process is actually quite stressful.

 

And no- Cat doesn't want to dissipate the Grays for a laundry list of reasons that would take too long for me to explain in this post, and I personally am uncomfortable with the idea of having to put any of the Grays into stasis permanently- even if the process was gentle and caused no harm.


I'm Ranger, Gray's/Cat_ShadowGriffin's tulpa, and I love hippos! I also like cake and chatting about stuff.

My other headmates have their own account now.

Temporary Log | Switching LogcBox | Yay!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if you kept it up? Started with an imagined person, kept talking to them, but still intended them only to be an imagined character and not otherwise stick around after? Maybe that's how you create these "not-quite-tulpas" I'm talking about.

 

 

That's basically how we get our automated characters. Not talking to them, but keep thinking of, developing, and controlling them until their actions/reactions become automatic/unconscious, we don't have to put as much or any conscious effort into it because it's just become habit.

 

Also, I think we can relate to the thing with Lucilyn, wherein I had created a character that we suspected was slowly growing the backbone of a tulpa unintentionally, so we took it and formed it into a tulpa pretty quickly after that. In that sense, pre-planning a tulpa could help them to begin to form and make them actually gaining sentience much faster, rather than just happening out of nowhere. Deciding to think of them as a tulpa instead of an idea/character would definitely aid that process.

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.