Applying Sentience to an External Object

[Chris-One]

I got another question. Is it possible for the tulpa to leave and re-enter the external object anytime?

[tulpa001]

Oh, looks like I never responded to this thread.

 

Scientific: No but yes. You can't bind anything to anything without glue. Though you can mentally bind anything to anything then use psychological tricks to lock yourself out of violating your own rule.

 

Also, you can use any physical object as a focus, and create a tulpa that way, or use it to symbolically empower yourself or catalyse a change in your tulpa.

 

Metaphysical: I have no idea.

[Mermaid and AI]

So hypothetically, would it be possible to focus on an object during creation/narration periods, and once the tupper is sentient then begin visualization? Or would it be too hard to transition the sentience?

[tulpa001]

Not hard at all to transition the sentience. Given the evidence of everyone's accounts of the creation process so far, I don't think we can rule out that if people have trouble with a stage, it's because they were always going to have trouble with a stage, and not because of the way they forced earlier.

 

I've been seeing people put the theory forward that doing various things like puppeting or imagining your tulpa behind you or whatever creates problems later. But this is never clearly supported by the evidence.

[Chris-One]

I got another question. Is it possible for the tulpa to leave and re-enter the external object anytime?

Well?

[Lucilyn]

Whatever you want man, it's all in your head. If you believe that's possible then it is, I can't think of a reason on Earth anyone could say "No, that's not possible, they have to stay there once they're there"

[tulpa001]

Well, there are a few metaphysical theories concerning bound objects. Like what is bound can only be released with fire or something.

 

Also, not sure it is all in your head. That implies a certain level of imaginariness. I base my identity on the idea that there are things my host cannot do to me. Like get rid of me. So, not everything is possible.

[Lucilyn]

everything is obviously possible because you made up your own rules on what is possible, you think everything just objectively fell into place like this?

[tulpa001]

Fell from where. Objectively, things are the way they are. Objectively, this is how they ended up.

 

I don't mean to be all literal minded here, but I know what you are saying, and I need to see an argument in support of it.

 

Everything is obviously possible because it is all in your mind == hand wave. Plus, what does all in your mind mean? And how do we know that for sure?

 

By some definitions of all in your mind, I don't see how it could be true. By the obvious definition that tulpas are mental phenomenon, it is obviously true. But by this definition, it is all in your mind is too weak a statement to support a conclusion as unlikely as everything is possible.

[Lucilyn]

it's all in your mind as in "your perception of reality takes place in the subjective space that is your brain, not an objective perception of reality where everything is just-so", and also naturally is only referring to the things that are only in your mind, the stuff under your control (as to how you perceive it). Which is most tulpamancy stuff and, you know, like everything else. Probably. It's a scientific/logical view so if you're talking metaphysical stuff it doesn't really need to apply, but then it's also a view that's totally OK with metaphysical beliefs anyway.

 

so yeah I guess when I say "it's all in your head" I'm referring to tulpamancy stuff that is totally subjective not objective in the first place, like you could believe tulpas were aliendemons in training to take over the lives of their "hosts" or that they're just imaginary friends and either way it's just your perception yeah? probably, unless we really are aliendemons idk but I'm going on the assumption I'm not