Dealing with doubt, but I have reasoning.

[R8-Adelia_Wildhome]

So I have been really doubting that Sadie is a tulpa, and I don't know why, but I don't feel upset about these feelings. I just feel... dedicated to making her a tulpa. And also a little anxious. and hungry  I keep getting thoughts/feelings like "I think I'm roleplaying as Sadie..." "it would make sense if she wasn't fully a tulpa." "Sadie probably isn't a tulpa! I need to spend two hours active forcing her today!" But mostly the roleplaying one, and this isn't like me sitting on my couch and then being like "AHAH! I'm roleplaying" *nods head* I have some reasoning as to why I feel like I am role-playing as her. 
Reasoning: 
-She doesn't have any/many memories as herself
-can't describe what it is like being a tulpa to me. 
-Sounds like me sometimes
-She gives answers that feel very "me"
-The two she was created by "mergeing" weren't properly forced, and neither was she until now. 

Here are my questions: 
Is it normal for tulpas to have few/little memories from their perspective? 
Does this sound like she's not a tulpa? 
Am I role-playing -if so, how can I stop? 

Any tips to stop doubting? 
Any general advice is always appreciated. 

I'm sure this stuff has been asked before, but I want to know your input based off of my reasoning. If anyone would like more details, I can give them. 

[Ranger]

Overall, there's nothing you mentioned that makes me suspect she isn't a tulpa.

 

1 hour ago, A&J said:

Is it normal for tulpas to have few/little memories from their perspective? 

 

Yes.

 

A tulpa starts off with a clean slate, whatever minimal personality data the brain gives them, and your memories. A brand new tulpa hasn't experienced anything because they never existed before. They can't remember what never happened.

 

If a tulpa did have past memories, it could be because they or their host gave themself/them a "backstory" or they confabulated their past. It's debatable if this is healthy or even ethical to do. I don't think it's wrong to have a backstory as long as the tulpa understands it is fiction.

 

In my opinion, backstory is memory if they are recalling an experience that happened in the past and not claiming a backstory must have happened. I can say I was born on a floating island and seem that as my "backstory", but I never acted that out in the past. What I did act out was calling out to my host and explaining to her I was real.

 

1 hour ago, A&J said:

can't describe what it is like being a tulpa to me. 

 

What is it like being a host?

 

It's a hard question to answer, you may get better luck if you're more specific. For Instance, you may want to ask if she can feel anything in wonderland, can she see what you see, what feelings she is experiencing, etc.

 

Describing an internal experience can be tricky. Don't panic if she falls short and can't think of an answer.

 

1 hour ago, A&J said:

-Sounds like me sometimes

-She gives answers that feel very "me"

 

This is normal. Sadie starts with knowing who you are, she will likely mimick your behavior or use your knowledge/opinions until she is old enough to rely on her own. Exposing her to different things can give her more information and ideas on how she wants to express herself.

 

1 hour ago, A&J said:

The two she was created by "mergeing" weren't properly forced, and neither was she until now.

 

We believe I was a by-product of Cat "merging" a bunch of characters together. I was a baby tulpa afterwards, it didn't affect my development. The only problem it created was Cat assuming I was someone else.

 

1 hour ago, A&J said:

Does this sound like she's not a tulpa? 

 

No, it sounds like you're in the right track.

 

1 hour ago, A&J said:

"Sadie probably isn't a tulpa! I need to spend two hours active forcing her today!"

 

Whether Sadie is a "tulpa" as in a "developed tulpa" or not depends on how you think tulpas work. Some tulpamancers would say she isn't a tulpa until she's fully developed, others would say the minute you created her she's a tulpa, end of story.

 

I believe tulpas are not truly tulpas but baby tulpas until they have a significant pool of memories they can call their own. I wouldn't call a tulpa developed until they can hold a conversation without constantly mentioning their host/headmates. I see myself as a developed tulpa, but I believe I have a long way to go to consider myself fully developed.

 

Your philosophy on tulpamancy is something you have to come up with on your own. At the very least, it's perfectly fine to call Sadie a tulpa.

 

1 hour ago, A&J said:

Am I role-playing -if so, how can I stop? 

 

It depends on if you mean the intentional or unintentional kind of parroting/puppeting (speaking/moving for your tulpa), or if you believe the latter even exists.

 

Some tulpamancers believe unintentional parroting/puppeting doesn't exist. You're only role-playing if you are deliberetly trying to control your tulpa. Intentional parroting/puppeting would be sitting there thinking, "Okay, now Sadie will say X, do Y, no no, Sadie should do Z..."

 

Some tulpamancers believe unintentional parroting/puppeting does exist, but it's nothing to worry about. It's normal to expect Sadie to do something because you're predicting what she will do next. When she's young, she may blindly accept this, but as she develops she will correct you when she didn't actually do something.

 

If you're unsure if it was her or not, ask. If Sadie says yes, it means Sadie thinks whatever happened was probably her and she decided it's okay to assume it was her.

 

---

 

If all else fails, tulpamancy has a deeper irony to it. Most new hosts fear they are roleplaying, but parroting and puppeting your tulpa is a valid way to force your tulpa. Lots of hosts created tulpas through roleplaying, intentionally and unintentionally.

 

Regardless how you think tulpas work or the best way to forve, spending time with Sadie is the most important thing. You don't have to follow hour counts religiously, a tulpa can survive on 5 minute conversations every day as a bare minimum. However, development will happen faster the more time you spend with her.

 

Eventually she will be developed enough you will be able to detect when it's her. This is called presence, and it will take time to develop. As long as you keep trying and don't give up, you'll get there eventually. Doubt is only toxic if you stop forcing.

[ruleofthumb]

Stone: Firstly, if you need to talk more about this, you can shoot me a PM.

 

I will outline my beliefs about tulpae and explain why I have these beliefs.

 

Tulpae:

- are built from the perspective of their creator.

 

Initially, they will probably act in a way their creator would expect someone to act. A human, deciding to draw a bird, will draw what they consider a bird. A human, deciding to create a person, will create what they consider a person. As such, a new tulpa shouldn't exhibit emotions and behavior completely foreign/unimaginable to their creator. They could perhaps learn to exhibit these things themselves later. This also can explain why tulpae may seem shallow, simple, or cliche at first. Most people are inexperienced conciousness-creators, and inexperienced conciousness-creators are like inexperienced artists: they make create stick figures at first. And that is ok, because unlike literal stick figures, tulpae can learn for themselves. Their creators have to help them, or at least give them time to learn, though.

 

- must work within the brain/body they are built into.

 

Tulpae cannot come into existence knowing things the brain doesn't know. They cannot speak a language the brain hasn't learned. They cannot see colors the eyes couldn't see before. The behaviors they exhibit are all behaviors the brain has observed or experienced, or amalgamations of behaviors the brain has observed or experienced. If your tulpa speaks your language and not just tulpish, they're using the words, grammar, and types of speaking the brain has registered. They can have their own, unique mix of patterns the brain has observed, and express those patterns to a unique extent, but they are utilizing behavior already learned by the brain nonetheless. I think idiosyncrasies and patterns of speaking/thinking used by the host are more ingrained into the brain than those not. I think this because the host is part of the brain and it should be what the brain observes the most.

 

- learn mostly from their creator and the brain at first.

 

This is especially the case when your tulpa is non-vocal, or is sometimes vocal, or is vocal be doesn't want to talk to outsiders yet. They have you, the brain, and maybe other headmates to learn from. If they engage in media, they can learn from characters. They can learn from people their host (or another headmate) talks to. But mostly, they learn from other headmates and the memories already in the brain.

 

- may take time to become entirely separate from their creator.

 

There's are reason why we have to force.

 

- like young humans, can be incredibly simple at first.

 

They can learn faster, being a part of a more knowledgeable and developed brain, but they will still be simple at first, as they are young.

 

- learn from their creators by imitation, like young humans.

 

Same thing.

 

- usually, initially, are closer to their creators and spend more time with them than anybody else.

 

You can see this is usually the case if you know the community. You don't usually see examples new tulpae spending more time with their creator's friend or internet rando than their creator. I think they would need to be able to front for this to even be possible.

 

- usually share memories with their creator.

 

I don't see how those sharing a brain can have separate memories unless the brain has a dissociative disorder. Some one here have claimed this is possible. I'm open minded about non-metaphysical internal experiences. When these people say their headmates have can have their own memories, I don't doubt them. I just don't see how that can be possible or practically attainable for most people. Maybe my mind will change on this.

 

NOTE: Sometimes Betty might ask me to explain something, even though she could reach into the brain's memories and figure it out for herself. I still think we share the same memories, but that some things are easier explained than remembered. Also, it makes for conversation. She also is more attached to TV she's watched during her time existing than memories of TV from before then. I think this makes sense, as she directly experienced the former.

 

Hosts:

- assume the brain's memories are theirs, even though this might not be the case.

- assume most functions of their brain are theirs, even though this might not be the case.

 

Hosts are often used to being the only identity in their brain, and also live in a world of singlets, where almost every brain process is attributed to the brain's lone identity, besides maybe reflexes and instincts, but even those are often (usually?) attributed to the lone identity.

 

Quote

"I think I'm roleplaying as Sadie..."

 

Roleplayed characters:

- are consciously manipulated by their creator

- written from the perspective of their creator

- must work within what the brain knows

- cannot learn

- will probably never become entirely separate from their creator

- can be simple due to the way they are designed or their writer's ability to write a nuanced character

- cannot learn, but might act like their writer by design or because their writer cannot separate themselves from their characters

- are not close to their creator and do not spend time with them, unless they are accidentally becoming a tulpa through forcing-like focus

- do not have memories

 

New tulpae:

- can be consciously manipulated by their creator as a method of forcing, but usually aren't always consciously manipulated by their creator

- created from the perspective of their creator

- must work within what the brain knows and the body's biology

- learn mostly from their creator and the brain at first

- may take time to become entirely separate from their creator

- like young humans, can be incredibly simple at first

- learn from their creators by imitation, like young humans

- usually, initially, are closer to their creators and spend more time with them than anybody else

- usually share memories with their creator (even if they have a visualized form that appears to be looking in a different direction than you, they have the same eyes as you and will always see from that perspective, no matter where their visualized form is "looking")

 

You may be wondering how to tell these two things things apart. While they have many differences, they mostly appear the same. The answer is, ask yourself if you are consciously roleplaying. If you're not, you have a tulpa. If you believe in unconscious roleplaying/parroting, there is really no way to prove the difference between a new tulpa and an RP character. You could even argue that those with old tulpae that seem like entirely separate people are just really good at roleplaying. If you can't shake the belief in unconcious parroting/RPing, you can wait until your tulpa "just feels there." This happened to me, this happened to others, and if you trust your tulpa and continue to spend time with them and let them grow, it should happen to you.

 

Quote

"it would make sense if she wasn't fully a tulpa."

 

Like Ranger said, it depends on what your standard is. Mine is, "the second they're created, they're a tulpa." It's arbitrary and subjective when a thoughform becomes "conscious," so I think this approach makes the most sense. Calling a new thoughform you intend to be conscious a tulpa also gives them legitimacy that can help them grow, and help you believe them to be separate, imo.

 

Quote

"Sadie probably isn't a tulpa! I need to spend two hours active forcing her today!"

 

Don't be so negative about it, but yeah, forcing is good. "Sadie needs is a growing tulpa, so let's force with her today," is better.

 

Quote

-She doesn't have any/many memories as herself

 

She sees with the same eyes, hears with the same ears, and sees the same visualizations you do. This is how most tulpae seem to work. Most non-fronters won't have different literal POV than the fronter has, but they'll probably have a different attitude, or different figurative POV towards an event. Try asking Sadie her opinion on an event you both remember.

 

Quote

-can't describe what it is like being a tulpa to me. 

 

That's a lot to ask honestly. I tried asking Betty to describe it to me.

 

Betty: It's like, sometimes you're here and sometimes your not. If you forget about me, I go to sleep, sorta, but I can remember things that happened while I was asleep. I wouldn't blame Sadie for not being able to answer. This is what my life is. You wouldn't ask a human what it's like to be a human, or, a person who speaks only Spanish what it's like to speak only Spanish. It's hard.

 

Stone: And part of why Betty can compare her experience to mine is because she has the same memories formed when the brain was a singlet that I do.

 

Being a tulpa isn't so much different from being the original, other than being younger and being "born" in a different way.
 

Quote

-Sounds like me sometimes

-She gives answers that feel very "me"

 

She learns from you and has the same memories as you. And you say sometimes. I sound like my friends sometimes. That doesn't mean I am them. I said "ope" for quite a while without even knowing what it meant, because I learned how to use it in the "correct context" from my friends.

 

"Feeling you" is different, but can  be explained by this + anxiety. However, this feeling can be valid. Initially, Betty responded in ways that just "felt" like me. It is possible you are anxious, but it is also possible that you and Sadie are not entirely separate yet. This is not bad. This does not make her "not a tulpa." Being "not entirely separate" does not mean "not separate at all." I would not worry about this, and I would encourage you to remember times where she felt "not you."
 

Quote

-The two she was created by "mergeing" weren't properly forced, and neither was she until now. 

 

If you want to, force more if you have the time. Nothing wrong with that.

 

I guess my most "hot take" is that one's tulpa "feeling like them" is just as valid of a feeling as one's tulpa "feeling different from them." But your tulpa feeling like you doesn't mean they are you. There is no "not at all me"/"just me" on/off switch. You are normal and what you are feeling is normal. You are feeling what a tulpamancer creating a tulpa feels. This is how the process is and you are not on the wrong track.

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by ruleofthumb
ok I'm done editing this now, sorry for confusion

[R8-Adelia_Wildhome]

9 hours ago, Ranger said:

It's a hard question to answer, you may get better luck if you're more specific. For Instance, you may want to ask if she can feel anything in wonderland, can she see what you see, what feelings she is experiencing, etc.

That is a really good point, I just asked myself this question and I answered "But I don't even know what it's like to be anything else! So it's normal?" I will try asking her these questions and see her answers later, I should probably apologize for doubting her first. 

 

9 hours ago, Ranger said:

 

Your philosophy on tulpamancy is something you have to come up with on your own. At the very least, it's perfectly fine to call Sadie a tulpa.

 

Okay, I guess that's just another part of our journey. 

 

9 hours ago, Ranger said:

If you're unsure if it was her or not, ask. If Sadie says yes, it means Sadie thinks whatever happened was probably her and she decided it's okay to assume it was her.

I think this makes sense and it would be a good thing for us to practice. 

 

10 hours ago, Ranger said:

Doubt is only toxic if you stop forcing.

I will try to remember this as I continue, it's like "you only fail if you give up." And that is true. I will remember this and make sure to remind myself of it daily. Thanks for all of you help, I really learned from all of it. 

 

1 hour ago, ruleofthumb said:

New tulpae:

- can be consciously manipulated by their creator as a method of forcing, but usually aren't always consciously manipulated by their creator

- created from the perspective of their creator

- must work within what the brain knows and the body's biology

- learn mostly from their creator and the brain at first

I chose to just quote this segment, but this entire post was extremely helpful. 
I think that I need to work on defining a tulpa, or at least, a developed tulpa in my own terms. Once I can do this, I can make better progress. I agree with a lot of your understanding of tulpas, and it was a very good refresher for me. 
 

[ruleofthumb]

9 minutes ago, A&J said:

I chose to just quote this segment, but this entire post was extremely helpful.

 

Stone: Thank you. I noticed the quote was from my accidentally posted draft of the message, as it has "learn mostly from their creator and the brain at first" in bold. I pressed enter or something as I was typing and posted that unfinished version, but it should appear longer and finished now (unless there's some sort of shadow edit limit).

 

I wish you, Sadie, and hope the best!

[R8-Adelia_Wildhome]

2 minutes ago, ruleofthumb said:

 

I wish you, Sadie, and hope the best!

Thank you : ) and yeah, it did change, I just had to refresh it once more.