Jesus being the most well-known Tulpa, so why do religious people pretend that meditation is evil?

[oxult]

I wish horrible grad school papers like this wouldn't be published https://gradschool.psu.edu/sites/GradSchool/McNairJournals/mcnair_jrnl2016/files/Gardner.pdf especially since nearly all churches have their Tulpas (Jesus being the most well-known one). Or is the education of PSU so bad, that they call an ancient meditation technique a "recent socially deviant practice", where "a relatively new online community of mainly adults who partake in creating seemingly sentient, autonomous hallucinations", and then goes on describing a church where "an imaginary friend can be perceived in reality". And that's just the beginning of this grad paper, not my words but it's published on a university's website, sooo... I figured that since Abrahamic religions change the prefrontal cortex and as well cause huge amounts of cognitive dissociation, even the writer didn't understand what he's been doing on all those 24 pages ...! Critical thinking skills: limx zero. Fear mongering: absolutely. Self-reflection: limx zero. Misinformation: absolutely. Research skills: limx zero. Witch hunt: absolutely.

[Autumn Ren]

Tulpamancy may be considered a dark art of the occult because tulpas are also associated to summoning demons. There's a negative connotation to it. Religious dogmatics wouldn't think twice to disparage Tulpamancy, call its practitioners mentally ill or evil witch occultists and private colleges would have no problem supporting that. 

 

To us it's a brilliant way to accomplish mind hacks, self-healing, meditation and a cure for loneliness.

 

I wonder what the author would think about AI companions and corporations taking advantage of people through AI.

[Pleeb]

I moved this out of the guides section. Not sure where it should go, but this board seems most likely

[ringgggg]

4 hours ago, oxult said:

Critical thinking skills: limx zero. Fear mongering: absolutely. Self-reflection: limx zero. Misinformation: absolutely. Research skills: limx zero. Witch hunt: absolutely.

I can see where you're coming from. No need to be so pedantic, though. Outside of the weird supremacist analogy, I don't see any substantial biased language that could tip the balance off the ethics scale. The commentary is mainly coming from an observer's point of view, so it's understandable that the researcher was naturally going to have some implicit bias going into the study

 

I can't expect every person looking at tulpamancy to fully tolerate it, nor can I do much to force them to like it, so we might as well just live and let live

 

The study looks pretty normal to me, though judging from the data it looks pretty outdated lol. Still pretty cool to see out in the wild like this

 

4 hours ago, oxult said:

"recent socially deviant practice"

Demographics-wise, they're not wrong

Edited May 3, 2024 by ringgggg