Purlox

Concern with the community

Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous

 

"While I agree that this is generally unproductive, someone (I'm unsure if they are comfortable being named) actually brought up a good point to me. If someone is genuinely role playing (whether it's for fun, shock value, or what have you), and claiming things about their 'tulpa' or having their 'tulpa' claim things about themselves, they are technically spreading misinformation that could be harmful to someone unaware.

 

That being said, in the end, there just is no proof to back up anyone's accusations, making them rather meaningless- save for maybe a sort of self-gratification that you 'called them out'. Just my two cents."

 

I don't mind being named. I'll stick by my opinions regardless of if they're against popular opinion.

 

While I agree blindly throwing out accusations of roleplaying are counterproductive, so is blindly accepting everything posted on the internet as fact. By the very nature of tulpa creation, it is impossible to prove, disprove, and otherwise effectively discern what's real and what's fake. The only surefire way to keep roleplayers and liars from tainting the forums with misinformation would be to ban anyone suspect of lying, which is effectively a tyrannic autocracy. But as of now, there is nothing stopping trolls, attention whores, and roleplayers from posting utter bullshit, which the vast majority of the forums lap up like dogs without second guessing because "xDD it`s expurementel and u do'nt no if it wurks or knot XDDD=P".

 

What we need is for everyone to use basic discretion, human logic, and a bit of disbelief when presented with radical new ideas. I think most of us are capable of weeding out the majority of roleplayers and trolls by actually analyzing their claims. While it's true there's no way to know for sure, it's certainly more effective than accepting everything as fact. It's the thin line that separates us from the pseudoscientific nonsense we're often grouped with. The only thing keeping us from becoming a community indiscernible from spirit aura Wiccans practicing black magick. The day we all stop scientifically analyzing information is the day we become a community of metaphysical bullshit-spouting nuts. And we're getting closer to that definition every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than the unlikely idea that these "RPers" may be trolling, what reason if any would people start posting on these forums? To learn and make, maintain, and gather info on this phenomenon.

 

As much as there might be risk of misinformation, we cannot prove or disprove it. If such claims are as radical as them taking an actual physical form sprouting wings and flying into the nearby cosmos. That's more of a workable issue. Otherwise id say leave things as is and ignore or speculate as much as possible.


Yuki Human Female

Vocalization

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider the time back in late March when Cyclone claimed to have possession working through what's now the meatglove method. It seemed outlandish because nobody had any idea that a tulpa could possibly do anything with the physical body. A huge number of people called him a roleplayer. FAQ_Man talked to him and determined her was a roleplayer too, since he couldn't elaborate on his method apart from the basic description of meatglove. I can't say whether or not he was, but I'm inclined to believe him, given that his exact method has worked for so many others, and they can't really elaborate on how it works much beyond that either.

 

Now we have a handful of people claiming switching, and one or two merging. I can't say for certain whether they're roleplaying, but I have no real reason not to believe them. It's honestly not that outlandish a claim. It's fairly common and accepted in the multiples community, and I believe at least those correctly making a tulpa are artificially creating healthy multiplicity. From a possession standpoint, I believe it's also quite plausible -- full body possession followed by disconnecting/ignoring/extremely dulling the physical senses in some way in order to feel like you're present only in the wonderland. Full body possession is fairly accepted here, and senses dulled to the point of practically not being there is something that comes with a really deep trance.

 

(As for merging, I don't really care whether it works or not. Either way it seems to be a horrible idea.)

 

If nobody believes these things are possible, nobody will put an earnest effort into trying them further. After all, wasn't FAQ_Man's and Irish's initial claim that you can create a sentient being in your head in mere months, and see them in real life, more outlandish than anything being claimed now?


Lyra: human female, ~17

Evan: boy, ~14, was an Eevee

Anera: anime-style girl, ~12; Lyra made her

My blog :: Time expectations are bad (forcing time targets are good though)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If nobody believes these things are possible, nobody will put an earnest effort into trying them further.

 

Real skepticism doesn't equate to disbelieving that something is possible; it's about being cautious until proven otherwise. I wasn't around then, but if people were accusing Cyclone of roleplaying, then it didn't even stop them from trying his method. When they did and as whole, found that it worked, then possession became more accepted. Granted, they shouldn't have been accusing him of anything if they were in fact being hostile, and I think that's what most people in this thread seem to be saying.

 

Impartiality is what scientific analysis is founded on, and there's nothing wrong with it. Like LucidAcid said: if, on this site, we really want to pride ourselves on being a scientific community, we have to be skeptical. Because all scientists are skeptics just by profession, and that can certainly be done without attacking anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because all scientists are skeptics just by profession, and that can certainly be done without attacking anyone.

 

I'm then wondering where we draw the line between healtly skepticisim and hostile attacks. Is this even possible given the nature of the subject? At least, without utilizing finite or even semi-finite time frames. (Oh, your tulpa is vocal way too early, etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Healthy skepticism is good. But being outright dismissive of claims because they conflict with what you already believe, is not.


Lyra: human female, ~17

Evan: boy, ~14, was an Eevee

Anera: anime-style girl, ~12; Lyra made her

My blog :: Time expectations are bad (forcing time targets are good though)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

 

I'm then wondering where we draw the line between healtly skepticisim and hostile attacks. Is this even possible given the nature of the subject? At least, without utilizing finite or even semi-finite time frames. (Oh, your tulpa is vocal way too early, etc.)

 

The issue is that it's impossible to regulate and set a standard for something as subjective and personal as skepticism. Attempting to do so would remove freedom of speech. The best thing we can do is dictate it similar to Jean Jacques Rousseau's philosophy, which is essentially encouraging skepticism, but not dictating it. Some people are bound to be more vehemently skeptic than others, and that's fine. Likewise, some people are going to believe literally every word that is spoken here despite encouragement not to, and we'll just have to deal with it. But if a method is going to become "official", the best way we can check it's validity is by making sure there are at least 5 active members who can attest to it. It's still relatively subjective, but without a way to provide evidence, it's the best thing we can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a few members who were worried of being accused of lying, so they weren't going to post their stuff on the forums (I must admit, I still encouraged them to, though the result was that they were, and still are, accused of roleplayers).

 

On the subject of Cyclone, if I recall correctly, it did stop them from trying his method. I don't recall many actually trying much else with possession until much later, when another member, also accused roleplayer, tried it out.

 

Another example, is a member who found out his tulpa could go into his subconscious and alter his memories, beliefs, and other things. After posting what he found out, the overall response was:

The amount of mad oozing out of my anus is unbearable. Please, go role-play on /x/ and fuck off!

To be fair, people already thought he was a roleplayer, from another thing he claimed his tulpa could do that Dane said it couldn't (we later found they could).

 

I actually can say, there are some really crazy and pretty amazing things that have happened to me these past few weeks that I have experienced for myself, first-hand; if you've checked my latest post in progress report, you've still not seen the tip of it...

 

However, I have already noted that I will not be sharing this (I only shared it with some very close colleagues in the community, and they're not going to share as well) right now because I don't feel like dealing with being called a roleplayer, and I know that I will, because what I've experienced could be arguably crazier than what most accused roleplayers have claimed.

 

So... I guess I can attest first-hand that fear of being accused of roleplaying can prevent people from posting things too far outside what's commonly accepted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to draw the line firmly between "take everything with a heap of salt" and "don't be a douchebag". The point is to pick apart the idea someone presents, not the person who said it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm honestly surprised that with some of the things I've posted, I haven't been accused of roleplay (or at least directly.) I figured that would be the response of at least a few people who read the 'Walking in Wonderland' article I wrote. Somehow nobody's accused me of such. Yet.

 

Granted, if anyone did, I wouldn't care - it wouldn't stop me from doing experiments like what I'm working on with Genesis, or my experience with Tabula Rasa (which I'll be posting about later) or exploring more ambitious theories like collective unconscious.

 

Be skeptical. It's a good thing. But don't be a douche about it.

 

I'd like to draw the line firmly between "take everything with a heap of salt" and "don't be a douchebag". The point is to pick apart the idea someone presents, not the person who said it.

 

This, exactly.


We don't get much in life. But we do have this.

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.