Psychological-conditioning inspired Tulpaforcing?

[Uguubee]

I probably got everything wrong so just read these

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_conditioning

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning

scroll to bottom of post for TL;DR

 

Classical tulpaforcing:

1. An unconditioned stimulus emits an unconditioned response.

eg. Looking at a picture of the tupper causes it to be more easily able to be visualized.

2. The conditioned stimulus emits no relevant response.

eg. You click your fingers. You can think it sounds cool, but this response isn't relevant.

3. The unconditioned stimulus is paired with a conditioned stimulus to emit a response.

eg. Whenever the picture is shown, which triggers visualization of the tulpa, you click your fingers.

4. The original unconditioned stimulus is taken away, and the conditioned stimulus should emit a conditioned response similar or identical to the unconditioned response.

eg. Clicking your fingers allows you to visualize your tulpa without thinking about the picture. ('cutting out the middle man')

 

The aim of this method is to allow the host's complete awareness of the tulpa to be turned on and off (this includes visualization, sentience, etc.; complete awareness) like a light switch - hence binary. However other applications of the classical conditioning concept may be used in general tulpaforcing.

 

Reasons for wanting this may be that the host does not want his tulpa around him all the time for reasons such as work and other situations that would prove hindering. It could also be used if the host does not want the tulpa anymore.

 

Ethical issues:

-Tulpa do not wish to annoy the host and their company is pleasant - why would you want to 'turn them off' ?

-'Turning off' the Tulpa is essentially the same as killing it for a short period of time.

-Counterargument: only the host's AWARENESS of the tulpa is turned off. When the host becomes aware of the tulpa again the mind 'fills in the gaps', ie. the tulpa assumes it was alive during the time it was in the off state.

-But still 'Turning off' the Tulpa may offend or annoy it - Tulpa need attention otherwise emit negative emotions that could be psychologically hazardous.

 

Operant Tulpaforcing

The reinforcement or punishment of behavior can be used to allow the individual learn wanted behaviors and unlearn unwanted behaviors.

Possible applications in tulpaforcing:

eg. Higher accuracy in shaping characteristics of tulpa.

While tulpaforcing, if conversing with your tulpa or ascribing it an attribute in a manner undesired, apply punishment. If the opposite is true, and a desire trait is ascribed, then apply positive reinforcement. The reinforcement may apply to the host rather than the Tulpa, as punishment on the Tulpa will subtract your mind's desired 'behaviour', ie. forming the desired Tulpa won't take place as the Tulpa will undergo punishment.

Example host-reinforcements/punishment: (+) Cookies, money, watch an episode of anime, fap

(-) Do some push-ups, slap self in face, don't fap for a day.

 

Possible benefits of this method include a more active and dynamic rather than meditative role of the host during the tulpaforcing process that can be supplemented with more ease into the host's daily life and schedule.

___________________________________

TL;DR: I want to see what happens when transposing classical conditioning and operant conditioning concepts to tulpaforcing.

 

I might experiment with this later if I ever get around to making a tulpa. Let me know if this is stupid or at least somewhat worth testing.

 

Also note that this isn't applying actual classical/operant conditioning to the tulpaforcing process per se, rather, it's just applying similar concepts.

[Phi]

You're making it too complicated with the classical conditioning. Why snap your fingers if you can just say the tulpa's name? The association also has to be strong, and if you snap your fingers too soon without the CS then you could ruin it. You're also making it more likely that you'll just visualize the picture and not the tulpa. You'll only be able to see it clearly in that position. Also, the amount of time that the visualization remains easier is up for debate. And extinction of the CR will happen fairly quickly, so it almost isn't even worth it. I also don't understand what you mean by turning off your tulpa. Do you mean that snapping your fingers is like an on/off button? That won't work. The most you could do is actually ask your tulpa to come/leave whenever you do snap your fingers, and it's up to them to follow that suggestion or not.

 

Your operant conditioning makes it sound like you are disallowing for deviation, which isn't a good thing. I do use operant conditioning on myself in order to make myself force more, though. Positive reinforcement works better than positive punishment. Give yourself pudding or something if you force for 2 hours that day. You don't want to punish your tulpa because punishing causes disliking.