Jump to content

Tulpa parallel thinking hability

Recommended Posts

I am currently in the process of creating my first Tulpa (about a week in).
Im pretty convinced of the validity of the phenomenon due to my inhability to otherwise explain so many people lying to each other with no reason or apparent benefit (which makes me believe that at least a good portion of the described experiences are truthful).

First i will explain my motives to ask this question.
My interpretation of tulpa is the following: You first define a roleplay character and then through suggestion you make yourself feel alienated towards your roleplayed thoughts.
I want to prove/disprove this theory, although it might not be currently possible because one might not be able to differentiate that from the alternative, which may effectively make them equivalent.
I also do not think tulpas have an independent sentience from yours although this is even harder to prove due to the lack of a strict and testable definition of sentience. I think their hability to surprise or subvert your expectations has nothing to do with sentiece. I do however think that tulpas should be treated like if they were sentient beeings.

To aproach a first step in this matter, first i need to better understand the phenomenon, and i think a good place to start is the following question: Do tulpa have fully parallel thought processes?
Meaning, are they an independent "thread" of reasoning. This could also be explained by tulpamancy increasing your hability of parallel thinking which makes it not a definite difference of my interpretation.
A different question that might be similar would be "Is a tulpa istill 'running' when you dont think about them". (I dont think this is the case, tho i might be completely wrong)

To test this question in a reliable way i formulated the following experiment:
A person with three or more tulpas would need to have a conversation with one of them while they listen to an unconnected, simultaneous conversation of their other 2 tulpas.
If its possible to do this without suffering a high mental load or lowering the "level" of the conversation, this could be a good indicator of my interpretation being incorrect (or a good indicator of tulpamancy increasing your hability of parallel thinking).

Any other evidence in favor/against my interpretation is very much welcome.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another experiment i just thought is tulpa knowledge encapsulation experiment, which only requires 1 tulpa.
Can you REALLY play a chess game against your tulpa (a good chess game) or will your tulpas thoughs bleed into you (and vice versa) and ruin your game?
This experiment can be flawed tho, im not a tulpamancer not a chess grandmaster yet :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, in my case as many as 12 thoughtforms were conversing before there was a significant and noticeable lag in processing. 


Keep in mind that I believe all parallel thinking is done subconsciously and the conscious mind is an illusion as in it is merely a linear recorder of events, a center for memory allocation and experiential coordination.


I officially have 7 including myself but there are countless others that are considered autonomous thoughtforms and the threshold for new in that catagory is nil.


What makes one thoughtform "sentient" vs just autonomous in my reckoning is self-forcing, both willful and independent thought. 


This can only be believed through experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

   It depends based on personal beliefs of the host on how the system works. Although it's likely that there is a correct explanation for how tulpas work, nobody can really know for sure which experience is the correct one, so I just accept however someone tells me their version of tulpamancy works, with very few exceptions. That being said, it took a lot of pondering for me and Mordecai to explain how the phenomenon worked in our own mind.


   Essentially, we're two sets of thoughts taking turns running on the same "sentience," however you choose to define that word. Sentience is pretty vague by definition. I would describe the act of making a tulpa, outside of direct directions, as covering part of your thoughts with a shroud and letting it do its own thing until it develops into something different than yourself. For example, when Mordecai thinks, I can feel it happening in my head, similarly to how I can feel my own thoughts. But I'm not exactly sure what he's thinking about, unless I "peek under the cover," so to speak, which is difficult to do at this point. Likewise, he can similarly tell what I'm thinking about, but not exactly.


   We have some form of parallel processing, but not to the degree you're describing. For starters, my tulpa is basically always present. For us, the tulpas having separate lives that go on while the host does other stuff was always hard to comprehend. We mostly have the same subconscious thoughts, but we can have separate, "active" thoughts where we develop ideas. I'm not sure how to describe it. Mordecai can't really solve complex problems on his own, as it takes more of our focus to do than he can manage alone. We have played chess a couple of times, although it gives us pretty intense headaches after a few minutes. We did have the bleeding-through issue, so we had to move quick to make it fair, which definitely affected our match. He beat me pretty bad the first time, but the second time I managed to win. We really need to do a tie-breaker!


   I think a lack of a defined definition of sentience causes some issues for people. But... tulpas are a part of your mind. You are sentient. So, at some level, tulpas are sentient, right? Even if they are "just" a part of you, they're still alive in a sense.

Slipper (cringelord host) and Mordecai (the brain gremlin).


Art Thread

Progress Report


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Experiencing their frolicking in wonderland while I simultaneously front is like watching a circus through the thick bottom of a Coke bottle.


They can describe what they did in detail but only as much as you can recall something you did.


Because this community labled it dogmatically as confabulation, there's no need to try to discuss it further other than it is my experience and by my own direct experience on both ends of it, it's possible and healthy for them.


Even if it's entirely made up, so are the lives of two in my system which have nothing else to draw from for their base experience (soulbonds). Saying it's made up doesn't detract from its efficacy or potency for them even if they themselves believe it's made up, which they do.


Given there has been much good work done by them in that parallel realm, there's no reason for me to believe it's made up nor would I have any contradictory evidence that it's not so why would I? 4&1/2 years later they still use it regularly and it's not only a source of comfort for me, a grounded interpretation of my experience, but also useful for us.

Link to comment
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.

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.

  • Create New...