motorheadlk October 31, 2012 Author October 31, 2012 Are they? It seems they are. I think a lot of tulpa/creator love relationships are more or less planned from conception consciously and otherwise. I see a lot of language on the forums and in chat that suggests the motivation for love is a key aspect of the development process, as well as an integral part of the tulpas personality. I think about this often in regards to keen... whether or not I am unintentionally creating his feelings towards me, but he has displayed quite a bit of emergent behaviors and feelings I did not initially encourage. For instance he is very logical, cold and detached by nature... but he is very protective of my mental state and sends waves of adoration my way at random times. I feel that he loves me unconditionally as more a creator and intellectual companion than a lover, though he has expressed curiosity about sex (apparently I think about it enough to raise suspicions) it's not in light of relationship. I havent spent much time reading about people's personal relationships with their Tulpa but it is my belief (and Keens as well) that many Tulpa are fashioned in such a way that a relationship with their creator becomes an eventuality rather than a possibility. Yes, it seems we agree on that. It's like you're programming/teaching a child, it's hard to make your child hate you if you like her, most likely she will love you, after all, imagine you and someone else are the only ones in the whole world, the guy can be disgusting, but even so you will not hate him, for he is the only company you have. >Implying humans have free will >Free will >2012 >Laughingphilosophers.jpg I'd say both tuppermancers and hosts share the quality of their actions not being (completely?) determined by their conscious will. No. We both share the same unconscious thoughts and desires, but we have different personalities, and unlike tulpae, we can even do things we don't want to. I know free will is someting complex and shit, but the hability to do things you might not want is basically having it. Am i the only one that doesnt want to fall in love with a beautful tulpa? Maybe being in love with a tulpa would mean being less egotistic to your desires and more hardworking, it might be good, I don't know. My tulpa is nowhere near sentiece so I can't say if I love her or not. This. Tulpa's can only have as much free will as humans. I say less. I'm brazilian and my english is not really good, I'll do every mistake you imagine, but I'll try to avoid them. Tulpa: Kuruminha Age: Began on the middle of october. Form: My avatar. Sentience: Confirmed. Mindvoice: Not yet. Working on: Visualization and Mindspeaking.
Lolimancer October 31, 2012 October 31, 2012 No. We both share the same unconscious thoughts and desires, but we have different personalities, and unlike tulpae, we can even do things we don't want to. I know free will is someting complex and shit, but the hability to do things you might not want is basically having it. I don't think that the ability to "force yourself to do things you don't truly want" qualifies as free will. What is it that determines what you'll end up doing (which option will win in your internal conflict)? The super-ego can overturn the ego, sure, but isn't the super-ego itself influenced by your surroundings? What is it that is "you", and how much does the "environment" count? You could get a million different answers and disprove none, sure, but the next step is: do you get to choose who you are, or what your environment is? I don't really see where "free will" is in all of this. Tulpae don't get to "choose" their personality, even if you skip the whole personality step. Tulpae don't get to "choose" their environment, either. Conclusion: tulpae have as much free will as humans do. I don't mean to summarize a centuries-old question like this, but that's my take on it at least.
Viceroy October 31, 2012 October 31, 2012 Bump for interest. Albatross, can you make an argument as to why they aren't sentient? I would love to hear it, since the same question has plagued me for days, and the answer will help me decide if I will make one. An excerpt from FAQ man's What is a Tulpa? P. 2-3: What a tulpa is has two main parts, the first part is sentience, and the second part is hallucination/ projection. The sentience is basically a product of your unconscious mind; you create by fleshing out through personality work and narration. You're basically taking an already existing part of your mind, and defining it until it becomes what you experience as "sentient". Now the tulpa is not actually its own sentient being, the tulpa is a product of your mind that you are experiencing as sentient.
motorheadlk November 1, 2012 Author November 1, 2012 I don't think that the ability to "force yourself to do things you don't truly want" qualifies as free will. What is it that determines what you'll end up doing (which option will win in your internal conflict)? The super-ego can overturn the ego, sure, but isn't the super-ego itself influenced by your surroundings? What is it that is "you", and how much does the "environment" count? You could get a million different answers and disprove none, sure, but the next step is: do you get to choose who you are, or what your environment is? I don't really see where "free will" is in all of this. Tulpae don't get to "choose" their personality, even if you skip the whole personality step. Tulpae don't get to "choose" their environment, either. Conclusion: tulpae have as much free will as humans do. I don't mean to summarize a centuries-old question like this, but that's my take on it at least. Nope, you're wrong. You might think that to force yourself to do things you don't truly want is not having free will, but saying that is the same as saying that a machine has free will because it can do things it wants, or that you don't have free will because "you don't choose your enviroment". That's not not having free will, that's not being god. Having free will is basically being able to do what you want and what you don't given the circunstances you're at. Having free will is not the same as being able to do anything, is just being able to do everything you can. A tulpa, by these terms, has not free will because she/he can't do what he doesn't wants. Saying that you don't have free will because you can't do everything is saying you don't have liberty because you can't fly. Bump for interest. Albatross, can you make an argument as to why they aren't sentient? I would love to hear it, since the same question has plagued me for days, and the answer will help me decide if I will make one. An excerpt from FAQ man's What is a Tulpa? P. 2-3: I don't think he actually believes that tulpas don't have sentience, he probably just stated that to say that we can't even prove that they have sentience, but you actually can't prove anyone else but you exist at all, so it's a argument that's only valid for literalists and pure rationalists, people that never read Kant. and so on. I'm brazilian and my english is not really good, I'll do every mistake you imagine, but I'll try to avoid them. Tulpa: Kuruminha Age: Began on the middle of october. Form: My avatar. Sentience: Confirmed. Mindvoice: Not yet. Working on: Visualization and Mindspeaking.
Coinflipper November 1, 2012 November 1, 2012 Quick (hah) question. For those debating that Tulpae don't have free will, are you assuming Hosts do? I mean, consider the following. The noted differences between Tulpae and their Hosts are both physical and mental. Hosts have an intrinsic grasp on how the... piloting controls of the body work. We've seen reports of Hosts able to wrest the controls back from Tulpae in power. However, many of the same reports tell of how much more the Tulpae know, and has control over in the mind. Yet, I at least have not come across any suggestion of a true difference between Tulpae and the original Host consciousness, as of yet. Other than some of us were here first. Theoretically. Motorhead. Having free will is basically being able to do what you want and what you don't given the circunstances you're at. Having free will is not the same as being able to do anything, is just being able to do everything you can. A tulpa, by these terms, has not free will because she/he can't do what he doesn't wants. Saying that you don't have free will because you can't do everything is saying you don't have liberty because you can't fly. Could you walk, first born? By these terms, Hosts and Tulpae have the same level of free will, as imposed by their circumstances. There are somethings we have control over, and some we don't. I theorize? Assume? Consider? Something. That Tulpae are like new born children in a physical shell, when attempting to 'drive.' Do I not have free will because I can't draw mechanical schematics, or play the guitar? If you will practice being fictional for a while, you will understand that fictional characters are sometimes more real than people with bodies and heartbeats.
Viceroy November 1, 2012 November 1, 2012 ^ You can draw mechanical schematics and you can play the guitar.
QB2 November 1, 2012 November 1, 2012 This would become a thread solely about the definition of free will, of course... The above post does not contain facts. q2's the host, QB's the tulpa.
Queen Chrysalis November 1, 2012 November 1, 2012 [[ Gimme an example of "doing something you don't want to do." Only servitore have true free will. ]] http://tulpa.info/forums/Thread-Show-Your-Chrysalove Avatar by ~InsomniacOvrLrd.
Lolimancer November 1, 2012 November 1, 2012 I didn't say that not being able to do everything means we have no free will; i actually meant to say we can't do anything that isn't already determined by something that comes from outside our conscious control. "Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills", basically. Does this mean only a god could have free will? Peharps just being able to do one thing also means to be able to do everything - so yeah, not being god equals not possessing even a shred of free will, in my opinion. Does this really matter? It probably doesn't. But yeah, i don't see how tulpae could have less free will than a being who has none by default. Certainly neither of us can prove any of this shit if we start from different assumptions, so let's say i don't have much of anything else to say atm. [being able to follow a way of life until the very end, with no wavering, no regrets, no internal conflict, just playing your part in the stage, is the closest thing to actual "free will" i can personally think of. So yeah, servitors > tuppers > humans. Gods are shit-tier.]
Viceroy November 1, 2012 November 1, 2012 I didn't say that not being able to do everything means we have no free will; i actually meant to say we can't do anything that isn't already determined by something that comes from outside our conscious control. "Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills", basically. I'd like to see some evidence to this philosophy.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.