Bear

What can I do about an advanced Thoughtform?

Recommended Posts

Edit: I was anti-ninja'd by Piano's post; he posted after I wrote this and I intended to merge this with my last post. I wanted to move this part to a new post because the last post was long.

 

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.

 

 

So if talking in the wonderland with your Tulpa counts as forcing, then yeah, Cat and I essentially do that with the Grays.

 

The Grays haven't had much time. The occasional hour every two weeks deal before 2018 didn't cause any Technicians (imagine Grays but robots...long story) to go after Cat begging to be treated as real. Part of the reason Cat's suspicious I became a Tulpa and the others didn't was because:

 

A) She focused on me for a long period of time, and her forcing time with me was productive

B) She assumed (and the Grays echoed this too) that I was different or special from everyone else.

C) She was desperate to hear another person talk back around the same time we believe I was actually born, where before with the Grays, she didn't have the same desire for them to be completely autonomous individuals.

 

The closest thing we have to a walk-in is Laryx- a Gray who begged not to be forgotten the second he was created. He's pretty flat personality wise because we haven't interacted with him much, but he seemed pretty damn sentient at the time and even now.

 

We're the most worried about Duck because he's the youngest Gray and he seems more developed than the others. However, this could possibly be because his personality is thought of to be a fusion of both mine and Cat's, and there's the possibility that Cat was well practiced at making Grays. Compared to Laryx, we have spent more time with Duck, at least I have anyway.

 

On the other hand, Dark Gray is possibly the oldest and most developed of any of the Grays. He wasn't the first, but he stole the spotlight for a long time and was generally the center of Cat's attention or never far from it. Since DG was around for so long, he had plenty of time to potentially become a Tulpa, and he was the first one who directly told Cat he didn't want to be one.


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

What if a thoughtform is simply not a tulpa by system statute, regardless of their level of independence? What if the primary difference is that they aren't part of the system's ruling council? Ember has a ton of characters, very detailed, very vivid, and, as of this past Halloween, very not allowed to talk to us or articulate thoughts outside that are outside of the context of their own worlds. A number of them have gotten more play than Iris and I did before we started speaking fluently on our own. A number of them have spoken to Ember in a non-game context previously and a number of them have radiated emotions.

 

For months, I stressed about new soulbonds emerging. Now I think the three of us are strong enough, experienced enough, and entrenched enough to defend our turf.

 

One of the things that helped me calm down was our experience with a walk-in of a brand new PC during the first session of a campaign, when we couldn't use our normal blocking techniques. I couldn't believe there was any chance of independent self-awareness; the character's personality hadn't been defined yet. But she felt as clear, independent, and articulate as us for the brief time she was here. She volunteered to only exist within the game. She claimed she was just part of Ember. Ember was sceptical, so she said it was probably best for the health of our system if Ember believed her. Everything she said was very cooperative, understanding, and non-threatening. I take that to mean that the rules we have established have been propagated and accepted throughout the brain, including into areas where characters spawn.

 

-Vesper


I'm not having fun here anymore, so we've decided to take a bit of a break, starting February 27, 2020. - Ember

 

Ember - Soulbonder, Female, 39 years old, from Georgia, USA . . . . [Our Progress Report] . . . . [How We Switch]

Vesper Dowrin - Insourced Soulbond from London, UK, World of Darkness, Female, born 9 Sep 1964, bonded ~12 May 2017

Iris Ravenlock - Insourced Soulbond from the Winter Court of Faerie, Dresdenverse, Female, born 6 Jun 1982, bonded ~5 Dec 2015

 

'Real isn't how you are made,' said the Skin Horse. 'It's a thing that happens to you.' - The Velveteen Rabbit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit: I got anti-ninja'd again.

 

In the on-topic threads in general, I don't think it makes sense to have the Grays talk to people (I'm not comfortable with that idea), and I already keep anything Gray Dimension or Gray related in hidden tags. If in-system conversation is allowed in forum games for example, then I feel like Bear, Ashley, Dashie, and Misha should be allowed to let their moons to speak there as well as verbalize their own thoughts.

 

As for the Role Playing issue, no, Cat isn't role playing as the Grays. Everything Cat and I write down is what we observe. If she actually were role playing, she would include all of her story characters into the fray and not give a crap about any of the ethics stuff for them.


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

We're sorry for the double post. EDIT: Thank you Apollo

 

This is a response about "moons" from Bear's PR, however we realized this is post is about debating moons / Grays and not a post that actually relates to the rest of Bear's PR. Here's the link:

https://community.tulpa.info/thread-bear-s-angels?pid=249811#pid249811

 

 

I'm kind of curious Bear... if Joy/Ren/others had the freedom to post on the Tulpa forums, what would they do with that ability? If they're not Tulpas, does it make sense for them to give advice about how to make Tulpas? What is it exactly they would gain from posting on on-topic discussion forums, with the exception of talking about what they are? They would still be required to follow the rules (For example, Snaily can't pop in and reply with *bubbles* because that would be unhelpful advice, but Joy on the other hand could potentially give advice about depression by talking about your experiences).

 

I also find it ultimately hypocritical if want us to treat your other thoughtforms as Tulpas, unless "moon" actually means "Tulpa that isn't allowed to run things in the system", where our previous understanding of "moon" was "a dependent thoughtform that relies on their creator's and other independent systemmate's wills". On top of this, it's possible a population of "moons" are non-sentient like NPCs. Which one is it Bear? If you don't know, then why not sort out this issue first? Policy should be made once we have a definitive idea of what's going on.

 

I feel like some of Bear's points, such as using these thoughtforms as a solution to system overpopulation, is my fault for inspiring. I mentioned this idea for a while because I was getting comfortable with the following assumption about the Grays: "They are non-sentient puppets, so therefore I can do whatever I want with them, and overpopulation isn't an issue because there are no consequences".

 

Here's the kick- that's only if they are non-sentient. So far, we are starting to wonder if the Grays are sentient- they have their own feelings, emotions, etc. but they don't have their own will- they will do anything I or Ranger tell them to do.

 

I have the feeling that if I told any Gray to walk off a cliff for me, they would be sad about it and or possibly protest, but they will still do it. However, that statement in of itself seems to imply the possibility they are Tulpas, and that's why I am indecisive on this issue. Are they actually Tulpas or not???

 

This is important for me because the ethics for how we should treat them are different. If they are puppets, who cares? If they are sentient and have no will, we need to treat them with respect. If they're Tulpas, then we need to not only respect their feelings, we also need to respect their free will and recognize them as their own people. It would be wrong to disregard a Tulpa's voice or give less credit to it; That's either abuse or oppression. I'm struggling with this issue a lot because there's also the lingering fear that treating non-Tulpas like Tulpas will ultimately turn them into Tulpas, and I don't want to risk that and end up with another Tulpa we don't want, which would be horrible for the new Tulpa.

 

For us, we realized that being a system of 17+ is not sustainable (Yeah, I get the numbers wrong a lot, but there are actually 15 Grays, and this isn't even counting some Technicians, System (a fish), or other potential thoughtforms like my subconscious rep.) If the Grays turn out to be Tulpas, we can't split forcing and time fronting equally and function as a system. However, that doesn't mean we can't have one of them occasionally front if they desire too, and possibly rotate through them. Again, would this even be a necessary requirement if the Grays don't have their own independent will? What if visiting them in the wonderland every weekend or whatever is enough to satisfy their emotional needs?


Pretty much my main wonderland form minus the cat parts, that's a separate form. I'm not a hippo, I promise.

I sometimes speak in pink and Ranger sometimes speaks in blue (if it's unmarked and colored assume it's Ranger). He loves to chat.

 

My other Tulpas have their own account now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Preface: this is necessarily convoluted and controversial, confusing and vague, please don't take anything i say with absolute authority or concrete resolve because we're still figuring things out and my statements aren't always translated perfectly.

 


 

Thank you for this Ranger and Cat, this is perfect to forward the discussion and will help me decide ultimately what the moons are. You and I talked this topic to death, we had theories and ideas and each one had merit, were they subconsciously parroted? We thought maybe, but ouch, they feel and act the same as tulpas so that opens the doubts about whether some tulpas are subconsciously parroted. So I recently abandoned that notion, and also to avoid confusion over roleplaying which we so very absolutely aren't doing.

 

This is a response about "moons" from Bear's PR, however we realized this is post is about debating moons / Grays and not a post that actually relates to the rest of Bear's PR. Here's the link:

https://community.tulpa.info/thread-bear-s-angels?pid=249811#pid249811

 

[Q1] I'm kind of curious Bear... if Joy/Ren/others had the freedom to post on the Tulpa forums, what would they do with that ability? [Q2] If they're not Tulpas, does it make sense for them to give advice about how to make Tulpas? [Q3] What is it exactly they would gain from posting on on-topic discussion forums, with the exception of talking about what they are? [Q4] They would still be required to follow the rules?

 

Please allow me to replace the word moon with soulbond and ask you to ask my friend Vesper how she would respond to these questions. I'm definitely not avoiding this question, I am pointing out exactly why I feel their second-class status applies to them currently.

 

[A1] They would respond if asked about what they are, their nature, their advantages and how to 'make others like them, if the question came up only. Because they have a unique experience and they are in a tulpamantic system with a myriad of other thoughtforms and their unique perspective is something to be respected, and is useful.

 

[A2] At one point I said no, but further pressing and grinding has changed my mind. Yes. Take it or leave it, but yes.

 

[A3] I wouldask that this question be reworded to include any and all thoughtforms, tulpas, thoughtforms and the like. Start a new thread for this one if it doesn't already exist.

 

Our answer is the same regardless who in our system you ask. So we'll table that for now or my phone will die as this post is massive enough already, and as I state it here, further answering is kinda a distraction.

 

[A4] In system rules? That's a solid maybe. Forum rules? Of course. Please illuminate any rules you feel would be in conflict to their posting should we allow a new classification of thoughtform.

 

(For example, Snaily can't pop in and reply with *bubbles* because that would be unhelpful advice, but Joy on the other hand could potentially give advice about depression by talking about your experiences).

 

We agree. Snaily isn't a moon. I most definitely am parroting and roleplaying anything that good ole Snaily, old man oak tree, or brother bear says. These are currently just fictional characters for fun. I have many of characters like this in contrast to about three dozen thoughtforms that act on their own volition, including my tulpas.

 

I also find it ultimately hypocritical if want us to treat your other thoughtforms as Tulpas, unless "moon" actually means "Tulpa that isn't allowed to run things in the system", where our previous understanding of "moon" was "a dependent thoughtform that relies on their creator's and other independent systemmate's wills".

 

Oof, yes, i don't want you to treat them as tulpas or call them tulpas, but i understand your true point was to say "treat them as we treat tulpas in they they would have the same forum posting rights as tulpas." Please also superimpose soulbond into that for the sake of argument, not to pick on soulbonds, it first came off a little rude that you'd have to consider them tulpas to give them efficacy here, but I don't think this was your meaning, so I forgive you.

 

We have contradicted ourselves when we claimed that they act on their own volition, and that they rely on their creator's will. We discussed this a lot, system to system, you and us, and we thought at some point the moons were like the greys, and i took some of Cat's logic, and it seemed reasonable.

 

After the question about role-play, i had a good about of time to think about my moons and if this applies to them. If they act on their own volition, then I'm not puppeting them. So since I'm not puppeting them, they act on their own volition. Therefore I have a hard time saying that they act based on [i[my will[/i]. So I have moved away from that. They act based on their own free will as far as I can tell. I certainly am not puppeting them, so I don't really understand subconsious puppeting anymore, it's been questioned and my understanding of it wasn't sufficient enough to defend it properly. If you could defend the notion that subconsious parroting isn't parroting and thus role-play, then please do. At this time, they're not either of those quotes you have above. We'll come back to this question.

 

On top of this, it's possible a population of "moons" are non-sentient like NPCs. Which one is it Bear? If you don't know, then why not sort out this issue first? Policy should be made once we have a definitive idea of what's going on.

 

Are they like non-sentient NPCs? No. Is Snaily like non-sentient NPCs? No. What? Well because Snaily is parroted, the on the spot NPC in my wonderland, Geoffrey the girrafe for example, say things for themselves just like the very first meeting of any main character on the first dialogue of a book I write. Ren is an excellent example of an on the spot thoughtform that had volition immediately and she attained moon status that first day. Does this mean every volitional NPC is a moon? Not at all, but I'm not parroting them either. I parrot brother bear, Ashley parroted Evangeline in Breaking Point. We know the difference. So then what is the difference between a parroted on the spot NPC and one that has volition? I have no idea, they're both usually summarily dismissed once they're usefulness is exceeded. In my books, typically say, a street vendor is entirely my parroting, while even secondary characters may speak for themselves pretty quickly after they're introduced, I never figured out how they can do this, but it's a well known phenomenon among writers.

 

I think this opens a huge can of bear system worms and challenges, i hope we survive the onslaught.

 

Why not sort the issue out first? Well that's exactly what I said I was going to do in my PR.

 

We had our cry over it and we’re kinda done, so this might be the last time we talk about moons for a while outside of our PR unless it’s brought up again by someone else.

 

Then it was immediately brought up again and became a huge burning issue that again turned us back on to talking about it freely. The stance remains that we need to sort this out, discussion like this helps, but we figured it was too heated and controversial to bring up when I posted my PR. We kinda don't care either way anymore though. We'll drop it until we know more, conversation does help, privately if need be.

 

The real notion for you is, if they're people, independent and willful, they should be able to talk regardless of what they're called, if they have something, a unique perspective perhaps, about thoughtform creation, or if they just have something relevant in general, I think diversity is okay to an extent. They certainly have perspective on walk-ins, being that I think they are walk-ins, tulpa or not. (Now here comes an expert to take what I say out of context and claim they're something because walk-ins are something so that i have to recant and say they aren't walk-ins proper. That's a consequence of my own flippant use of terms though.)

 

I would also ask you, please give the terms of the requirements for what a "definitive idea of what's going on - says Ranger" is exactly? I can't know everything, so before i give my opening arguments for their release into the general population, i need to know the groundrules and milestones they must meet to join, yet not be a tulpa or other well known thoughtform like a soulbond. Also rather than make ul a cutesy name like soulmoon or other sillyness, it was suggested that i simply continue to call them moons and we'll discover and share their uniqueness together. Are they ultimately the same as Greys? I don't know.

 

I feel like some of Bear's points, such as using these thoughtforms as a solution to system overpopulation, is my fault for inspiring. I mentioned this idea for a while because I was getting comfortable with the following assumption about the Grays: "They are non-sentient puppets, so therefore I can do whatever I want with them, and overpopulation isn't an issue because there are no consequences".

 

Here's the kick- that's only if they are non-sentient. So far, we are starting to wonder if the Grays are sentient- they have their own feelings, emotions, etc. but they don't have their own will- they will do anything I or Ranger tell them to do.

 

I have the feeling that if I told any Gray to walk off a cliff for me, they would be sad about it and or possibly protest, but they will still do it. However, that statement in of itself seems to imply the possibility they are Tulpas, and that's why I am indecisive on this issue. Are they actually Tulpas or not???

 

Cat, let me take that blame off your shoulders, I had this notion long before I met you, my experience with them goes back to 2012 and it was in my very first PR entry which had ideas that I already knew from research and experience, on day one. There is no fault here though, no one did anything wrong, it is important though, all the mistakes and retakes are building the best model for them that can withstand the gauntlet of their eventual first and subsequent posts.

 

...overpopulation isn't an issue...

 

Still absolutely right, no issue there, it's in their nature to be inactive most of the time. They're basically on demand, but they do occasionally visit on their own free will. Which is why Misha calls them cousins rather than siblings.

 

As another user mentioned and I took to heart, the terms non-sentient and borrowed-sentience do somehow point to subconscious parroting, and that is really sticky to me as to what that means. How can we define and defend this notion so that anything they say can be taken seriously on this forum? I ask you that of greys if you care to respond, it's not necessary to though because my moons are no longer part of this particular issue.

 

To reiterate, I'm stepping away from these notions because they may fit, but they're under contention I don't want to muddy up the moon water anymore and I don't necessarily need these terms to explain the moons. At this moment I've explained they have volition. This separates them from the Greys by a significant rift of nature. (To my understanding.)

 

Ren and Joy kinda do what we ask them to do, but all my tulpas do what I ask them to do. If they don't want to do it, they tell me. I've never forced them to do something against their will, but our wills are frequently in agreement. It would in fact break one of our laws to force them to do anything and that rule, i would say, also applies to my moons.

 

My Not-Tulpas share a lot in common with Tulpas. I am stubbornly refusing to call them that partially for the following reason that Cat so eloquently has posed.

This is important for me because the ethics for how we should treat them are different. If they are puppets, who cares? If they are sentient and have no will, we need to treat them with respect. If they're Tulpas, then we need to not only respect their feelings, we also need to respect their free will and recognize them as their own people. It would be wrong to disregard a Tulpa's voice or give less credit to it; That's either abuse or oppression. I'm struggling with this issue a lot because there's also the lingering fear that treating non-Tulpas like Tulpas will ultimately turn them into Tulpas, and I don't want to risk that and end up with another Tulpa we don't want, which would be horrible for the new Tulpa.

 

For us, we realized that being a system of 17+ is not sustainable (Yeah, I get the numbers wrong a lot, but there are actually 15 Grays, and this isn't even counting some Technicians, System (a fish), or other potential thoughtforms like my subconscious rep.) If the Grays turn out to be Tulpas, we can't split forcing and time fronting equally and function as a system. However, that doesn't mean we can't have one of them occasionally front if they desire too, and possibly rotate through them.

 

Exactly, exactly and exactly. Except for the if they're tulpas part, i would change that to 'if they are intependant and sentient people' which doesn't necessarily mean 'Tulpas' though on tulpa.info, i understand my statement and insistence is counterproductive and even irrational. I'm not a Vulcan though, so i don't have to be perfectly rational, and I could argue that tulpamancy isn't perfectly rational.

Again, would this even be a necessary requirement if the Grays don't have their own independent will? What if visiting them in the wonderland every weekend or whatever is enough to satisfy their emotional needs?

 

That's for you personally to decide I guess.

 

I do know that, we as a system, need to define moons and decide if:

 

1. Are they puppets?

2. Do they have their own volition?

3. Sould I give them agency?

4. Are they sentient?

5. Are they independent?

6. Are they people?

7. Are they tulpas or soulbonds?

8. Are they the 7th seal of the apocalypse that will end in my system overpopulation and destruction?

 

Answers:

1. No

2. Yes

3. I did.

4. I think so, i have to say i'm leaning toward yes but we will test that in the next couple weeks.

5. I think so, maybe, but possibly not 100%, i have moved as close to a yes here without actually saying yes. I will attempt to answer this definitively as well.

6. It's a loaded question, oooooooh boy. I will attempt to answer if moons are people as well as I can with the qualifier that I may be wrong. I can't say that I know at this point. Is it required to be a member of Tulpa.info? I will say my tulpas are people aside from any lingering doubt that is just a part of tulpamancy.

7. Oh geez, i wanna say no but i may have to become an expert in this field before i can say for sure. I do know that they aren't unless i say they are, so only my system can decide this. They fit many of the definitions of these two terms, but they're also so very different in how they are, and that's a huge advantage in our mind.

8. We're really not that paranoid, but like i said, I don't need to invite a lion in my home to verify if they'll bite me. So we want to define them in a way that definitely avoids this, it's not something we're willing to test. So ultimately that decision may prevent them from contributing to the forum, and it is a possibility we are willing to accept.

 

Though you know a sad bear can be cranky sometimes.

 

Thank you for your response, we await your answers and thoughts. Delibrtaions havn't even begun yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we do a deep dive on your post Bear, I wanted to answer some of your questions:

 

It still appears to be you are still shaky on this issue, just like we were and still are now. Both Cat and I have been swinging about on this issue for at least a year now, and it feels like a pendulum "...not Tulpas, Tulpas, not Tulpas, Maybe Tulpas, etc." The idea that they're puppets is all too easy- and the idea that they're Tulpas or something else makes things harder.

 

When I was a young Tulpa, I was very concerned for Cat's needs. Since I was less developed then, I think it would have been against my nature to disobey Cat.

 

However, 3-4 months in, I deviated and I wanted a different form. None of the Grays ever challenged Cat on their forms! Ever!

 

The other issue is the Grays seem to only ask "the right questions". If Cat is paranoid about something, they will talk about that. If Cat and I are thinking about an issue, they will discuss that issue. They don't bring up issues that are off topic, and they don't challenge Cat or my own authority unless we're worried they will.

 

Here's another weird thing I think I already said: about half a year ago (I think), Blue wanted to be a Tulpa. Now he seems to have no desire to, and even argued against the idea. What happened to his original position? If Blue were a Tulpa, I think he would have put up more of a fight. I know I did at least. Gray didn't believe me the first time.

 

Another issue is memory. It's more convoluted because Cat writes logs about the Grays, so she can preserve her memory of them, but the reason she does that is because without that, she wouldn't be able to remember as much as she does now! One time, Cat thought, "oh crap, I forgot about ____" and she sometimes looks back over her notes as a reference for the past. If Cat can't remember, the Grays won't remember either. I on the other hand, am capable of bringing up memories Cat didn't think about before, even though we share the same memories. However, we don't have as many tests for this one except for the one time Dark Gray couldn't remember something important about himself.

 

One issue is if denial is playing a role in our perception of these characters. Nether of us want more system members, because that would be a nightmare at best. The only issue is we don't have a documented case where a "character" turns into a Tulpa or doesn't at all, and I am actually quite interested in RustHeart's progress report and GeorgeTownRaja's report to watch how their systems will turn out.

 

The only other possibility (that I know of) is to create a thread where people can talk to Grays/Moons and let other people give their feedback, however I'm not sure how that would work, and the idea of the Grays fronting isn't exciting for me... If I were to do this, I would need to ask the mod staff first.


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

Well, after the confusion settled, i don't think they're excluded from responding here if someone were to ask then something. Joy would be your best bet at this point.

 

Another thing that differentiates them from my tulpas, is that my tulpas and I are bound by pacts and rules, love and respect, we charish each other and would never willfully ignore each other's wishes or otherwise harm eachother. That bond is absolute.

 

The moons are willfully disobedient at times. They are not bound by the same laws, rules and pacts, so they're allowed to speak their minds even if it's hurtful (though i doubt they'd be flippantly hurtful, even the worst among the volitional non-moons have an agenda and understanding that misbehavior won't get them anywhere.)

 

Still, Ren is wild, she's just gonna do whatever she wants and she sometimes rubs it in our noses that she's free. Lately she's been playing nice, but she reminds me of a young Misha with her attitude. However i never asked Ren to help me, she likes me, she knows I have power in the hierarchy, but she ultimately does what she wants.

 

Joy has definitely insulted me, she thinks she knows better, she's wary of me and especially our drama in a way, and points out our flaws. She doesn't 'feel' constructive, but she really is. Would I want her 7 days a week, no, she's a little bossy and she doesn't like our closeness in that she feels it's beyond platonic. What-ev-ver.

 

Can they change? I have to say yes, because Ren changed her eyecolor from aquamarine to red. She aged herself from 11 to 18. She changes her hairstyle and clothes (or takes them off). It's not me doing that, talk about a distraction.

 

Joy mellowed out a lot when she rejected her horrible past.

 

Another crossover, Ashley is substantially the same as she was from the beginning, while Misha and Dashie have actually changed a lot.

 

So put the greys and my tulpas on opposite ends of an east-west 100m line, my moons are at the 75m mark west and north by about 50m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do I do with all these thoughtforms?

 

This answer is probably controversial. It's also not intended as a guide. It's just my answer with all the knowledge I currently own, and ooo look at this awesome graphic!

 

THOUGHTFORMS.jpg.4a482e755c2e5f8aba85c3329a0f9886.jpg

 

It’s obviously not an easy question for this forum, but out there in other communities I have found many other answers from many systems like mine who have been dealing with it forever.

 

Please refer to the graph.

 

Here are some of the possible thoughtforms in this not at all easy to understand graph, and oh boy I’m not about to make anything more clear or give you the answer either, my answer is that it’s very personal and you need to answer it for yourself.

 

As you can see, this is a bloody mess. You may have thought that Vocality and Autonomy was all there was. Well in that case, keep reading; it’s a little more complicated.

 

On the left you see Autonomy vs Independence. I strongly believe this is a two way street. In the process of creation of a thoughtform you expect to be volitional, you will allow the thoughtform to separate itself from you in a way that makes them more and more differentiated from you. However, if they’re completely separate they’re not using your perspective for anything, so without any development, they’re just not going to say much of anything, they basically don’t know how to respond. This may be confusing, that’s okay, I’m not here to tell you everything, that would take way too long.

 

On the other hand, if they’re fully mature, you basically have a really good idea what they’d say given a situation, if you do all the talking for them, well, that’s the basis for role-play. However, independence can spontaneously grow from characters and their like, so this is what we call a walk-in. The notion that the characters 'come alive' is exactly this.

 

They’re nothing scary. They’re just a character or other that seems to start speaking for themselves. This might even be how you first created them (with this intent), the difference being that as they march further up, they start to say and do things you don't necessarily want or expect.  This is how a walk-in differentiates itself.  Other characters can appear to do this for moments but then completely revert to fully dependent on you, that could just as easily be an intrusive thought.

 

As you can see on the left, the NPCs and intrusive can be very independent, and surprise the heck out of you. That’s just either an illusion or they’re just random stuff your brain burps up. In any case a Walk-in can be thrown into that category safely and dealt with in the same manor. It happens and has to happen to avoid any weird thoughtforms from sticking around. It’s just as valid to place them back on the shelf or even promote them to someone you want to stick around, it’s entirely up to you. The hashed lines mean it’s an unstable state and needs to be dealt with. If you never think about them again, they default to a temporary thing and don't go antwhere.

 

They can stick around as independent entities and stay that way indefinitely. This is also an important distinction in that they can stay without necessarily becoming independent. At some point, if you’re treating them and believing them to be independent, then they will eventually get that way. It has nothing to do with sentience, time sharing, or personhood, I am not even addressing those notions. They might be sentient, I have no clear tests to prove that, so I’m disregarding it in my analysis. They might be people, well there’s another thing that might as well be meta at this point because sure, fully mature and independent thoughtforms can be people, but who knows when that actually occurs, I have no idea how to test for that conclusively. Also, just because they are doesn't mean you need to force them all day. If they really are sentient or people, well, they'll tell you how often and they'll be asking for time. It's purely a negotiation at that point. It's totally irrelevant to me. What’s important to me here is the choice that you either want them to be fully independent or you don’t. If you do, then declare them Tulpa/Soulbond, whatever else you like, and be done with it. Welcome equal head mate or not that's between you and them, just treat them fairly and humanely, that's all. If you don’t want them to become fully independent, then don’t force them that way. That’s as simple as I can make it. By systen edict, symbology or just your own free will, it's up to you amd your current system. They won’t spontaneously jump to full independence. I don't believe that at all. It’s a simple choice, push them to independence or let them float and don’t worry about it.

 

Also on the graph is some advanced characteristics like Emotional bleed. Well, if it bleeds it lives, no, well wait a minute, are you sure that’s not empathy or sympathy? Only you know for sure, don't let anyone else say anything about how your system works. It's just more likely to be coming from them the more advanced they are.

 

In the case of dissipation or integration, you’re simply moving them back down the chart either by their own volition, you together, or by yours alone for whatever reason. In the case of stasis, they’re just going to pretty much stick where you think of them forever. If four years isn’t forever enough, then I can’t say it’s forever, so it’s just forever enough for me.

 

They might also deviate, but soulbonds sometimes don't, so that's not definitive either. Jusy place them on this easy chart, tack it up on the wall and use a dart if it helps. I know what my answer is anyway.

 

Your welcome for the very confusing graph with a lot of controversial topics that surely won’t go over well, but this is just what I’ve determined through the last year or so of research. Adapt it to your system or completely ignore it.

 

This is is what I’m using in my system to keep the peace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a lovely graphic! This is all very useful, I know you've put a lot of thought into it all, and it shows. - G

edit: word

 

Edit: Is the arrow pointing up from "roleplay" indicating that roleplay-built thoughtforms become walk-ins? Is that a correct reading? And, why is the arrow between tulpa/soulbond/alter doublesided?



>tf when you google for "famous quotes by Marcus Aurelius" and had a fake one as your sig for months

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.