Guest Anonymous

"Subselves"

Recommended Posts

As far as you know.

OooooOoooOoOoo~


"If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the way the wikipedia page is set up, it could give him that opinion. I'd suggest laying out the similarities in the email.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not based in psychology. It is, in this case, approached from a psychological standpoint. Which is a completely different thing.


"If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point taken. I'm just trying to think of an intelligent way we could present out case that we aren't a bunch of occultists sitting around a spirit board trying to contact imaginary friends from "the other side". I mean, some of are, respectively, but still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think my previous ignored question was well-founded.

 

If I were writing an email to a psychologist (I'm not new to this kind of communication)...

  • I would preface it with a solid explanation as to why I was contacting them.
  • Once I was sure I had established a clear purpose, I would launch into a brief description of this community's founding goal, or at least its collective interest.
  • From there, I would close with a couple questions to satisfy curiosity and invite further discourse.

 

As I've said elsewhere, the term 'tulpa' is not one I particularly like to use for any reason other than experiences that align with the so-called historical "mystical" manifestations. Using an analogous term, and explaining that 'tulpa' is a convenient stand-in word, might also get better results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

I think my previous ignored question was well-founded.

 

My apologies.

 

If I were writing an email to a psychologist (I'm not new to this kind of communication)...

  • I would preface it with a solid explanation as to why I was contacting them.
  • Once I was sure I had established a clear purpose, I would launch into a brief description of this community's founding goal, or at least its collective interest.
  • From there, I would close with a couple questions to satisfy curiosity and invite further discourse.

 

By all means, suggest a response to his message. Mind, my intent was to keep it concise and be a curiosity spark more than anything else; mostly due to the informality of both the contact button (its intent is more site-feedback oriented) and that I was just searching for his thoughts.

 

As for a specific reason for contacting him, no, none particularly, outside the slight similarities between his suggested subself ideas and tulpas.

 

As I've said elsewhere, the term 'tulpa' is not one I particularly like to use for any reason other than experiences that align with the so-called historical "mystical" manifestations. Using an analogous term, and explaining that 'tulpa' is a convenient stand-in word, might also get better results.

 

So, multiplicity then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion it sounds like this man is a genius, why?

 

Because hes taken the idea of tulpa, and put it in a way which people would not dismiss it as fast, and give it more thought,

 

Example,

"Heyy, did you know that u can make a super imaginary friend with its own sentience called a tulpa" "freak"

 

Or

 

"Did you know there are subselves within our mind that in part each govens our personality as a whole, and that you can learn to differentiate between them and so on so forth"

 

GENIUS

 

That guy is talking about tulpa without directly talking about tulpa, and putting it in a more understandle way for close minded idiots


Tulpa - Yukai Shi (Yuka) しゆかい (ゆか)

Form - Shapeshifter

Working on viualization and vocalization

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That guy is talking about tulpa without directly talking about tulpa, and putting it in a more understandle way for close minded idiots

 

With all due respect, it generally takes more openness and intellect to grasp the concepts of 'subselves' and 'archetypes' than it does to understand "super imaginary friend".

 

And as previously stated, Gerlach is actually just modifying existing hypotheses set forth by other psychologists.

 

My apologies.

 

No problem. Didn't think you were even around.

 

By all means, suggest a response to his message. Mind, my intent was to keep it concise and be a curiosity spark more than anything else; mostly due to the informality of both the contact button (its intent is more site-feedback oriented) and that I was just searching for his thoughts.

 

I'll definitely throw some ideas out there as soon as I get the free time.

 

So, multiplicity then?

 

Actually, that's is a great suggestion.

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.