motorheadlk

Switching Hypothesis

Recommended Posts

 

Nothing was held or focused on. There is no need, stop the pain and go on with your life, haha. I am afraid we would rather not try something that would cause a lot of pain and possibly some worse damage, so I hope you understand. It doesn't matter if there is pain or not if something is broken, yes? If we do happen to get hurt by accident, we will report back.

 

As for differences... Well, there is nothing wrong with being different, but it would be rather foolish to say there are big differences if there are none, mh? I cannot say I have noticed such, at least.

 

Never said there are big differences, I'm just saying we shouldn't fully consider that there aren't (which seems to be the most frequent approach) since they might exist. And the purpose of the thread is nonetheless reinforce the belief that we might be different after all, since we can't determine it yet (I'm hoping to be able to in the future).

 

About the pain, that's nice to hear. If anything interesting comes up, remember me!


I thought about those "tulpa abilities" for a bit. There's nothing my tulpas can do that I am unable to do by myself. The difference is that after Shai had first used these abilities I knew that they were indeed possible. After that those were easy to recreate (removing pain, memory modification/deletion, self imposition, subconscious access.) but without tulpas it would have taken me several times longer to achieve any results at all.

 

Which once again demonstrates why tibetans had tulpas.

 

But I have some questions for you, about memory modification/deletion. How (and why) you are able to do it? You are able to do it in yourself, I believe? If so, how do you delete or modify a memory without thinking of what happens in it? How do you know that you are able to do it?

 

I mean, I know we should be able to modify memories from our tulpas since Pinkamena did this several times and that our tulpas should be able to do it in ourselves since it has been reported by some users in a research thread, but I can't see how it would be possible for me to delete a memory of mine.


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Never said there are big differences, I'm just saying we shouldn't fully consider that there aren't (which seems to be the most frequent approach) since they might exist. And the purpose of the thread is nonetheless reinforce the belief that we might be different after all, since we can't determine it yet (I'm hoping to be able to in the future).

 

 

Until proven otherwise I think that its better to think there are differences. Belief is a strong thing and if both the host/tulpa believe there are no differences things like a host not being able to take back control of a switch might become common. Or things like a host that is switched if ignored fades away.

 

Any test that proves or disproves tulps/host equality can have far reaching consequences. Good and Bad in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Until proven otherwise I think that its better to think there are differences. Belief is a strong thing and if both the host/tulpa believe there are no differences things like a host not being able to take back control of a switch might become common. Or things like a host that is switched if ignored fades away.

 

Any test that proves or disproves tulps/host equality can have far reaching consequences. Good and Bad in my opinion.

 

As far as possession goes, Oguigi said: "The connection of a host new to tulpamancing with the body is ridiculously strong", which means that the one that stays the longest in the body will most likely have more power over the other regarding possession, so if someone doesn't want to be possessed he will not. But of course, even believing in this makes the host resistance stronger, so of course belief is a strong factor here.

 

But I'm not into censoring knowledge, what I am saying is: "Hold your horses". We don't know yet. I want to prove it. So try too if you want it to be proved or don't if you don't want it. I personally wouldn't care if a host and a tulpa are, in potential, equally powerful. It just doesn't align with my current belief system and it seems less likely to be true, but that's almost subjective. What I'm completely against is what people often do, claiming around the forum that a tulpa is as powerful if not more powerful than the host and "everything we can do they can do better". That's why I'm saying hold your horses, we don't know yet. Wait until we do.


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I'm not into censoring knowledge, what I am saying is: "Hold your horses". We don't know yet. I want to prove it. So try too if you want it to be proved or don't if you don't want it. I personally wouldn't care if a host and a tulpa are, in potential, equally powerful. It just doesn't align with my current belief system and it seems less likely to be true, but that's almost subjective. What I'm completely against is what people often do, claiming around the forum that a tulpa is as powerful if not more powerful than the host and "everything we can do they can do better". That's why I'm saying hold your horses, we don't know yet. Wait until we do.

 

Don't you think it would be better to at least try to find what we can now instead of just waiting?

 

It's nice to hear that. Most people think that there is absolutely no differences between a tulpa and a host, but it sounds like an anti-racist propaganda or something, there is no need for us to be exactly the same, with or without the switching, since we are equal in almost everything already.

 

Whatever our differences are, I don't think we should deny the existence of our differences, but accept them as our differences most likely exist.

 

Never said there are big differences, I'm just saying we shouldn't fully consider that there aren't (which seems to be the most frequent approach) since they might exist. And the purpose of the thread is nonetheless reinforce the belief that we might be different after all, since we can't determine it yet (I'm hoping to be able to in the future).

 

 

 

What differences? please elaborate. We keep saying "there might be differences" , we never try to find any ourselves though do we?

 

But of course, even believing in this makes the host resistance stronger, so of course belief is a strong factor here.

 

is it really? For a new host and their tulpa this is most probably applicable but what happens when the host finally recognizes the tulpa as a completely separate person? The host wouldn't have a way of forcing the tulpa to do anything because belief wouldn't even be needed anymore to keep it there. The real question is if it is even possible to get to that point

 

also , we can't really define "new" here can we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Don't you think it would be better to at least try to find what we can now instead of just waiting?

 

If you care enough to reply, why don't you also read the thread? I said already that I'm trying to prove one or another, and that I'd like people to help me prove it. What I don't want is people jumping to conclusions.

 

 

What differences? please elaborate. We keep saying "there might be differences" , we never try to find any ourselves though do we?

Again, already said it. 2 differences that I notice. One that seems obvious: Origin. The host is born and grow independantly of any other consciousness. He's born with the body and the creation of his consciousness is attached to the body's reactions to the outside world. A tulpa, in the other hand, is created by second-hand experiences, memories and beliefs originated by the first consciousness to arise in the body, and purposely, not "accidentally" as it happens to us, hosts. This obviously mean that there should be differences, as the second consciousness seems to be, at some level, attached to the host not only physically since she can't leave the body, but mentally, as if the host didn't exist, so wouldn't the tulpa.

 

That only leads to the second difference, derivated from the first. Powerwise, the tulpa can't be more powerful than the host regarding the mind, since it is an extent of the hosts mind. It is separated, it is sentient, it is all you think it is, but it isn't fully independant of the existance of the host. Which means that a tulpa can't dissipate the host, maybe a tulpa could, but that would most likely mean suicide. If a tulpa is basically a solid conjecture of deep thoughts, ideas and beliefs formed into a person, and dissipating is basically returning this beliefs to wherever they came from, then how it would be possible to dissipate a host, that isn't formed with a bunch of thoughts, but with experiences? Even if it was, to dissipate years, decades of thoughts and experiences would mean that even then a host would be more powerful than a tulpa regarding dissipation.

 

 

is it really? For a new host and their tulpa this is most probably applicable but what happens when the host finally recognizes the tulpa as a completely separate person? The host wouldn't have a way of forcing the tulpa to do anything because belief wouldn't even be needed anymore to keep it there. The real question is if it is even possible to get to that point

 

also , we can't really define "new" here can we?

 

A tulpa is never a "fully" separate person, as that would mean having a body for herself and everything. Now, being a fully separate consciousness, that's up for debate, but just think, people get dumb after they have tulpas? So it shouldn't mean that they are a completely separate consciousness, they are their own consciousness, that is true, but they were created by us using our own thoughts and ideas, that can't simply leave this connection we have. They are always at some point attached to us. It's an umbilical cord that, if cut, starves the baby. The "attention starvation" is most likely what happens if suddenly a new tulpa stop being "fed" with our attention. But after they grow stronger, so does this analogical umbilical cord, and so they can have more independence, but it doesn't matter how strong and big a tulpa gets, the fact they were born from the food that this umbilical cord provided them and the fact that the host is the one that transfers this food has never changed, and something so simple and so true shouldn't even be possible to change. A tulpa, at this stage, even with food deprivation, would survive for years being ignored after they grew so much, but it would eventually grow weaker and fade into the oblivion of our subconscious, as any other thought and idea.

 

This is just what I see as more accurate right now. It might turn out that switching would mean that the tulpa provides the food for the host, but that would seem illogical, since it would revert entropy and make the creator the dependant and the dependant the provider, but it is only a body switching, not a "now I play host and you play tulpa" thing. In all truth, I just can say what I believe and tell you that I don't know it YET.


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need to read again what you quoted here, will edit it back in a few minutes.

What you quoted there is basically my answer to this:

That only leads to the second difference, derivated from the first. Powerwise, the tulpa can't be more powerful than the host regarding the mind, since it is an extent of the hosts mind. It is separated, it is sentient, it is all you think it is, but it isn't fully independant of the existance of the host. Which means that a tulpa can't dissipate the host, maybe a tulpa could, but that would most likely mean suicide. If a tulpa is basically a solid conjecture of deep thoughts, ideas and beliefs formed into a person, and dissipating is basically returning this beliefs to wherever they came from, then how it would be possible to dissipate a host, that isn't formed with a bunch of thoughts, but with experiences? Even if it was, to dissipate years, decades of thoughts and experiences would mean that even then a host would be more powerful than a tulpa regarding dissipation.

 

 

Anyway ,

If you care enough to reply, why don't you also read the thread? I said already that I'm trying to prove one or another, and that I'd like people to help me prove it. What I don't want is people jumping to conclusions.

would be nice if you acted on what you say though wouldn't it

 

Anyway , ok , my bad.

 

Again, already said it. 2 differences that I notice. One that seems obvious: Origin. The host is born and grow independantly of any other consciousness. He's born with the body and the creation of his consciousness is attached to the body's reactions to the outside world. A tulpa, in the other hand, is created by second-hand experiences, memories and beliefs originated by the first consciousness to arise in the body, and purposely, not "accidentally" as it happens to us, hosts. This obviously mean that there should be differences, as the second consciousness seems to be, at some level, attached to the host not only physically since she can't leave the body, but mentally, as if the host didn't exist, so wouldn't the tulpa.

True , though this basically leads to my previous quote again since once the tulpa has reached that stage origin or way of creation won't matter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 differences that I notice. One that seems obvious: Origin. The host is born and grow independantly of any other consciousness. He's born with the body and the creation of his consciousness is attached to the body's reactions to the outside world. A tulpa, in the other hand, is created by second-hand experiences, memories and beliefs originated by the first consciousness to arise in the body, and purposely, not "accidentally" as it happens to us, hosts.

Well, no. The tulpa could be said to be created primarily by first-hand experience from the host, i.e. narration, personality, form; every step of the creation process involves the host interacting with the tulpa, and none involve the tulpa digging into the host's memories. It's also incorrect to say that the host arises 'accidentally'. It could be viewed as purposeful (although unconsciously so) that the host's consciousness comes about - that's evolution for you. Next you will be telling me that embryonic humans acquiring a digestive system, or a brain at all is 'accidental', since they are equivalent suppositions. Finally, that's not a functional difference, is it? After the tulpa has been created, how they were created does not matter.

 

This obviously mean that there should be differences, as the second consciousness seems to be, at some level, attached to the host not only physically since she can't leave the body, but mentally, as if the host didn't exist, so wouldn't the tulpa.

But that's not at all proven or even demonstrated. Why are you saying that a tulpa couldn't exist without its host when there is not on instance of the host actually ceasing to exist, nor any comparative scenario.

 

That only leads to the second difference, derivated from the first. Powerwise, the tulpa can't be more powerful than the host regarding the mind, since it is an extent of the hosts mind. It is separated, it is sentient, it is all you think it is, but it isn't fully independant of the existance of the host.

What you would call 'the host's mind' is the question here. Because, or course, the tulpa will always be part of the host's brain, but then, so will the host. It's a little more contentious to say that the tulpa is part of the host's conscious mind, since that would entail the host being aware of everything about the tulpa etc. So then, you mean that the tulpa is part of the host's unconscious mind? But so is the host, possibly. At least, were this the case, the tulpa could still be equal to the host's conscious mind, which is all that matters here.

 

Which means that a tulpa can't dissipate the host, maybe a tulpa could, but that would most likely mean suicide. If a tulpa is basically a solid conjecture of deep thoughts, ideas and beliefs formed into a person, and dissipating is basically returning this beliefs to wherever they came from, then how it would be possible to dissipate a host, that isn't formed with a bunch of thoughts, but with experiences? Even if it was, to dissipate years, decades of thoughts and experiences would mean that even then a host would be more powerful than a tulpa regarding dissipation.

Err, no. If you are seriously claiming that a tulpa is both conscious and sentient, then it would need a base of neural structure to function. If not a dedicated structure then at least some portion of another structure. It has nothing to do with belief, in this case. The host definitely needs a dedicated neural structure to function. To say that the host is formed of experiences is wrong also. Experience is character-building, yes, but it doesn't create your consciousness. That's absurd.

So, a tulpa, by your previous definition, isn't just "a solid conjecture of deep thoughts, ideas and beliefs" because that wouldn't be sentient. It must have some proper neural basis. So then, if that can be 'dissolved', then a host could presumably be similarly 'dissolved'. Both actions (on a well-developed tulpa) would require suppression of neural structures. In fact, it's not all that unreasonable to say that a well-developed tulpa can't be dissolved as easily as you think; they would seem to be able to 'come back' after a long time, with or without the host's instigation. That would suggest that the difference in being able to be dissipated isn't there, or at least not so great.

And finally, why would a load of experiences and thoughts make you more powerful? More experienced doesn't necessarily mean that you are more powerful.

 

A tulpa is never a "fully" separate person, as that would mean having a body for herself and everything. Now, being a fully separate consciousness, that's up for debate, but just think, people get dumb after they have tulpas? So it shouldn't mean that they are a completely separate consciousness, they are their own consciousness, that is true, but they were created by us using our own thoughts and ideas, that can't simply leave this connection we have. They are always at some point attached to us. It's an umbilical cord that, if cut, starves the baby. The "attention starvation" is most likely what happens if suddenly a new tulpa stop being "fed" with our attention. But after they grow stronger, so does this analogical umbilical cord, and so they can have more independence, but it doesn't matter how strong and big a tulpa gets, the fact they were born from the food that this umbilical cord provided them and the fact that the host is the one that transfers this food has never changed, and something so simple and so true shouldn't even be possible to change. A tulpa, at this stage, even with food deprivation, would survive for years being ignored after they grew so much, but it would eventually grow weaker and fade into the oblivion of our subconscious, as any other thought and idea.

Your metaphor is rubbish. In human physiology, the umbilical cord is severed long, long before the human could be considered 'mature'. who is to say that the 'umbilical cord' is still present after the tulpa is well-developed? Bear in mind that attention starvation, the usual method for killing a tulpa, is not the same as simply losing attention. The host believes that they are killing the tulpa, and thus the tulpa is offensively harmed. You would come across somewhat less success if you didn't think it would work, likely. The point is that the host starving the tulpa of attention isn't the same as the host ceasing to exist, from the tulpa's point of view.

 

 

This is just what I see as more accurate right now. It might turn out that switching would mean that the tulpa provides the food for the host, but that would seem illogical, since it would revert entropy and make the creator the dependant and the dependant the provider, but it is only a body switching, not a "now I play host and you play tulpa" thing. In all truth, I just can say what I believe and tell you that I don't know it YET.

That's not what entropy is, not at all. It's not necessarily just about body control, either. Remember that many hosts report it as being different from full-body possession. There could still be potential for actual role switching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not what entropy is, not at all. It's not necessarily just about body control, either. Remember that many hosts report it as being different from full-body possession. There could still be potential for actual role switching.

 

But what is the role? Role of observer or the role of living in an imaginary world in an imaginary body? Or both?

 

As for the whole "feeding attention" thing, uh, I am kind of starting to feel like it's all about feeding yourself than it is about feeding the other. Probably much different with a new tupper, but it's not like either of us has to focus on the other to keep them alive. When you're stuck alone, it just gets boring, so passing out might be a good way to pass time if you're crazy. I guess I'm crazy enough now for it to happen by accident if I don't pay enough attention to what is happening, but say, if you passed out for a really long time and didn't come back... Wouldn't that be like dissipation, no matter if it's a tupper or host? Seeing that no one apparently has been able to kill a tupper in a way that didn't have them come back or something, I dunno. Maybe someone has. Or they just haven't come back yet. Aaaaa.

 

I'm not even sure how to explain what I've noticed any better, maybe I really did go crazy somewhere here in the process, fuck if I know. Can't say Roswell has ever complained about not being paid enough attention to once he got over being a ronery attentionwhore at the start where he baaws about being lonely and waiting for me to talk to him. Or said anything about feeling weaker or something. And I went in this with an open mind, not expecting much and certainly not having such strong opinions about anything before Roswell popped out. If anything, he believes in himself more than I do. Funny how confident he is in the end, because he's a pussy and a crybaby.

 

Rambling.


The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A tulpa is never a "fully" separate person, as that would mean having a body for herself and everything. Now, being a fully separate consciousness, that's up for debate, but just think, people get dumb after they have tulpas? So it shouldn't mean that they are a completely separate consciousness, they are their own consciousness, that is true, but they were created by us using our own thoughts and ideas, that can't simply leave this connection we have. They are always at some point attached to us. It's an umbilical cord that, if cut, starves the baby. The "attention starvation" is most likely what happens if suddenly a new tulpa stop being "fed" with our attention. But after they grow stronger, so does this analogical umbilical cord, and so they can have more independence, but it doesn't matter how strong and big a tulpa gets, the fact they were born from the food that this umbilical cord provided them and the fact that the host is the one that transfers this food has never changed, and something so simple and so true shouldn't even be possible to change. A tulpa, at this stage, even with food deprivation, would survive for years being ignored after they grew so much, but it would eventually grow weaker and fade into the oblivion of our subconscious, as any other thought and idea.

That would be if it wasn't a fully complete tulpa in the first place. Whether it's possible for the host to slowly loose its abilities is a different matter.

Anyway , yes , i meant consciousness , not person (as in body) , sorry about that.

 

About the being dumb part , i really can not understand your logic. Why would having a second consciousness make you dumber? Are people with DID less intelligent than people without it?


See what sands' post above for an elaboration on what i mean when i say "complete".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But I have some questions for you, about memory modification/deletion. How (and why) you are able to do it? You are able to do it in yourself, I believe? If so, how do you delete or modify a memory without thinking of what happens in it? How do you know that you are able to do it?

 

It was easy after getting a direct access to my unconsciousness (after a switch).

My first time deleting memories was when I had a mental breakdown after Shai had told my ex about tulpas and that she was a switched tulpa. She (the ex) didn't take it as good as Shai had hoped, and said something over the phone the next day that made me completely insane so I switched with Shai.

After a few hours of trying to dissolve myself and Shai doing everything she could to stop it, I visited the subconscious and found all my memories.

They looked like a huge pile of rocks but when I picked one up I knew what memory it represented. I then took all the memories that made me mad and crushed them one by one, after they broke into smaller pieces they just disappeared along with the memory and feelings connected to them. The size of the rocks vary on the amount of feelings connected with them.

 

I haven't remembered a bit of those memories after I destroyed them nearly three months ago and I can't seem to bring them back. This seems dangerous so I have experimented with Shai's computer that I gave her. Using it I can find my memory library and erase or modify memories if I want but it seems more safe because I can undo all the changes I've made with a click of a mouse.


Shai

Age: 420 days (6th Nov)

Form: Fluttershy minus the cutie mark and with yellow eyes

 

Telk

Age: 364 days

Form: Ninth Doctor or a Dalek

 

Cherry

Age: 231 days

Form: Human female, medium length dark violet hair, late teen/ young adult

 

http://onicron.tumblr.com/

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.