"New" way to work on personality

[motorheadlk]

Every person that I know that have made a tulpa by accident was making a character for a history or something like that. Given that, I wondered if the method that they used was similar to the ones in the guides we know, and there is a difference that consists on a simple thing: while working on personality, most people say that you should explain to your tulpa what her personality is, but people who had worked on characters would not do that, but would rather imagine their characters interacting in a way in particular situations.

 

For example, they would imagine their character in a scenario like a forest and in a situation like seeing something, a bear for example. If the tulpa is brave, then she would fight the bear, if she's not, then she would run. So you demonstrate to your tulpa what being brave is, or what being fearful is. That seems to me like a better method than simply describing to your tulpa, since demonstrating seems better than explaining. And of course, there is the possibility of making both.

 

What do you think about it? Anyone here ever tried that? If this is really a better way to handle the personality stage of the tulpa, then maybe we could create a series of situations like the above mentioned that we could imagine our tulpa in, and how she would fit in this situation. This could speed up the process of making the personality of the tulpa, and consequently speed up the process of making a tulpa, and could be useful for people who tried to make a tulpa like X and it turned Y, something completely different. I do accept that a tulpa can change on her on, but how much of this deviation could be simply because she misinterpreted your words? Maybe it's not because she didn't like the way she was supposed to be, but rather that she didn't understood what you really wanted her to be.

 

That is, of course, a supposition, and as such, I don't believe there will be anyone that decides to try this method just because it seems to work, and as such I am willing, for science, to try it. But it seems that I have a trouble on making up scenarios and situations in which I could demonstrate to my tulpa what a trait would be, even if I know that there should be scenarios and situations for every trait there is. So I'm here not only to ask what you think of it, but to ask if you could help me imagine scenarios to demonstrate to my tulpa what X trait is and what is the opposite of it.

 

Here is a list of traits I'm going to work for my tulpa (though I'm only working in the form right now).

 

Optimist: Believe on favorable possibilities.

Responsible: Thinks before acting, feels bad if made something bad or made someone feel bad.

Loyal: Would never betray me or my trust.

Respectful: May disagree, but will accept others opinions as valid, except when she does not understand them.

Caring: Tries to be kind and friendly, never wants to hurt people feelings.

Intelligent: Great mathematical, imagination and logic capacities and a perfect memory recording.

Empathic: If makes someone happy, she feels happy, if makes someone sad, she feels sad.

Proud: Don't like people doubting her skills, appreciates herself, doesn't let people get the best side of her.

Cooperative: Likes to help.

Stable: Doesn't change her mood suddenly, doesn't get sad too long.

Creative: With her imaginative skills she has great musical talent, drawing talent and talent for arts in general.

Hardworking: Doesn't care to spend too much time in something that isn't instantly benefical, foresees the future benefits of the action.

Trustworthy: Hates to lie and does her best not to do it.

Sincere: Tells the truth independant of the results.

Critic: When she doesn't like something, says and describes why.

Objective: Does not base her opinions on subjective things, analyse it by the effort it was given (and by the effort it was not).

Has a sense of humor: Sees when something is a joke and feels it's funny, also likes to make jokes about things even I don't notice.

And the last one that I couldn't give a name to: "Accepts her limitations, but tries to improve herself".

 

Sorry about my english (I'm brazilian), if you didn't understand something I wrote, then just point it and I'l try to say it another way.

[Oguigi]

This is interesting and different.

 

But i would not recommend that beginners use this method, if i read what you posted correctly then it would require significantly more time and effort to make it work, each trait would almost be an entire session.

 

What I did during the personality stage is merely visualized orbs each with a trait and with these traits i've infused my own memories of what these traits means and feels. Other people done similar things, or even skiped this step entirely. I believe it's impossible to miss up in this stage; everyone still came out with a tulpa that they love and care for with all their being.

 

Perhaps this method can be use if you want to Enforce certain Traits. for example if you really do not want your tulpa to be shy then you can use this method to make sure that the tulpa is Bold/Brave/Out going.

[Guest Anonymous]

BIG WALL OF TEXT GET IT AWAY!!!!

 

 

But in all seriousness, isn't this discussed in faq's personality trqit template?

[motorheadlk]

@koomer

Well, I just thought it would be useful for beginners because they are a better way of measuring the time it takes to make a tulpa, I know it varies a lot from person to person, but if you see the time people who made a second tulpa took, it's just so little that we would not be able to tell if the variation comes from using one or other method or the other or simply because of something else.

But of course, to see how much of the deviation comes from not demonstrating what a trait is and rather just say it is a question that could be answered by someone who has a tulpa and tries to use this method to make another one.

And, well, I personally don't think it would take more time to demonstrate something rather than explaining it, but even if it does, it would just point that the method that is being currently used of explaining a trait is what causes a deviation, since it would take less time and the quality of the time would even be worse.

 

@Jimmy

Haven't seem it there, will search though.

[QB2]

Seems pretty standard, I imagine it's being done (at the very least subconsciously) all the time.

[Lolimancer]

The way i see it, this "way" to work on personality, taken to its logical extreme, leads to parroting and puppeting. Which is the way i'd personally recommend, and not entirely new either. I personally think it makes much more sense than working on personality like it's something that can be defined by simple "traits". As for the personality narration part, i never really understood how talking to someone about their personality could influence it. Maybe that's just me. Also, doing no personality doesn't exactly hurt either, speaking from personal experience (skipping a step sounds like a way to make things faster to me, unless you really want some kind of specific personality; in which case, well, good luck with deviation and all).

[motorheadlk]

@QB2

You see, way down inside of me, I have but one desire, and that one desire is to help this community, and I know, nobody else ain't gonna do.

Anyway, if that's the case, it's even better. What you think you're saying to your tulpa and what your subconscious might make of it might be a huuuge deviation, so if this is the case, it's better to consciously demonstrate what you mean.

 

@Lolimanecer

Yes but no. It doesn't need be your tulpa, it would be like a representation of your tulpa, and doesn't even require to be a representation of her. Look, see it as a educational film that instead of showing why you shouldn't do drugs is telling what X trait is and how a person with X trait reacts to it. Of course puppeting might be able to cut it, but as people here seem to be paranoid about puppeting and parroting, this would do the trick the same way. I actually believe that better, because if you're consciously making your tulpa to do something that she's not familiar with, she might get it wrong, and even believe that it's not "her" that is doing it, while demonstrating you would be clearly telling it's not her, but that's how she would do if it were. If you puppet her this won't happen because she won't understand that if she's moving and all, why she isn't controlling, therefore must not be herself. You can say "She'll understand that I'm just training her but she won't, at this point she's not sentient to understand everything you say. If anything, she would understand only the emotions that you send with your words and how your brain reacts to this emotion, and then she would begin to relate words with emotions and the understand them, but first she will have to know emotion and have a personality. That's why I say to make it as simple as possible. Like a educational film about drugs, they are simple, they are clear, and they are annoying, but they can easily pass the message because they are direct about it.

[Guest Albatross_]

Hey look, your method!

 

faqmans_trait_template.png

 

---

How the trait impacts the interpretation of situations: (one tulpa might see adventure as fun, if it's brave, where as another could see it as completely fucking horrendous and oh god we left the car open on the side of the road and I think I just saw a person in the brush over there can we please go back)

[motorheadlk]

Hey look, your method!

 

faqmans_trait_template.png

 

---

 

 

Sorry, don't get what you mean, mate.

[Kadoh]

He's saying its pretty much what FAQ_man said to do, then he quoted the post he made.