Tulpa-ing someone else

[waffles]

The dictionary definition is like defining sleep as "lying motionless for prolonged periods". Technically somewhat true, but rather missing the point.

Sorry? Please don't leave me hanging like this; tell me how it misses the point because obviously if I endorsed the definition I'm not going to know.

 

I don't agree with every definition of hypnosis out there

Do you agree with any widely-used definition? There's only really one and that's the one that's in every dictionary as well as the one used by everyone except you and some pseudoscience writers as far as I can tell.

 

On the other hand, hypnosis does not require induction, deepening, swinging pocket watches, or spinning spirals. Hypnosis is about entering a suggestible state of mind and getting suggestions. And the suggestions don't need to be put into words. Visualization has long been a preferred form of hypnotic suggestion.

 

What you seem to be saying is that it's not hypnosis because nobody told you to visualize. That's like if you said it wasn't robbery because you just waved a gun and never actually told the teller to put the money in the bag. Visualization was suggestion enough.

What you seem to be saying is that by visualising my tulpa I am suggesting to myself that they are there and that this is therefore hypnotism somehow. Look, I can't tell exactly because you never made it clear but I'll work on that and you can tell me if I'm wrong in that assumption.

 

Firstly

Hypnosis is about entering a suggestible state of mind and getting suggestions.

Notice how that's more or less exactly what the dictionary definition is. And that's all there is to it, actually. I am not entering a state of mind where I am more suggestible - at least, not significantly more - nor do I enter a state of mind which resembles sleep when I force. On this second point I know you said that it's wrong because you can induce hypnosis from a waking state but that really misses the point. You induce sleep from a waking state too; the point is that the trance itself is like sleep.

 

Anyway, neither of these really happen when forcing, let alone both. Yes, you might suggest some things to yourself but that happens all the time. It seems to me like you have conflated forcing as a state wherein you suggest things to yourself and forcing as a state wherein you are highly suggestible. For clarity, the first is what you're suggesting with

Visualization has long been a preferred form of hypnotic suggestion.

while the second is what would qualify as being similar to hypnosis.

[Shui]

Sorry? Please don't leave me hanging like this; tell me how it misses the point because obviously if I endorsed the definition I'm not going to know.

The sleep-like state, as I said earlier.

 

Notice how that's more or less exactly what the dictionary definition is. And that's all there is to it, actually. I am not entering a state of mind where I am more suggestible - at least, not significantly more - nor do I enter a state of mind which resembles sleep when I force. On this second point I know you said that it's wrong because you can induce hypnosis from a waking state but that really misses the point. You induce sleep from a waking state too; the point is that the trance itself is like sleep.

 

Yes, trance is like sleep. But hypnosis does not have to involve trance. Trance can be helpful for certain deeper operations (and hallucination is as deep as you can go in hypnosis) but you can get the same results without trance -- it's just more difficult and it takes longer.

[waffles]

Yes, trance is like sleep. But hypnosis does not have to involve trance. Trance can be helpful for certain deeper operations (and hallucination is as deep as you can go in hypnosis) but you can get the same results without trance -- it's just more difficult and it takes longer.

Right so let's assume that non-state theorists are right and in fact, you don't need a trance. So how does that make it very similar to forcing? You said

Hypnosis is about entering a suggestible state of mind and getting suggestions.

yes? So do I enter this state of mind when forcing? You still haven't told me how forcing is similar to hypnosis in this regard? You keep telling me that I receive suggestions while forcing, and that's probably the case because doing more or less anything in my head involves autosuggestion. But like I said before, that's not the same thing as entering into a suggestible state of mind.

[Kiahdaj]

This is getting ridiculous.

But I think the most retarded part of it all is the fact that if hypnosis does = forcing, then you're still creating a tulpa by FORCING; not hypnosis. Unless you're suggesting all things you do with your tulpa ever is hypnosis which is even more ridiculous.

 

I just don't even...

[Linkzelda]

Alright, I guess when it comes to forcing = hypnosis, I admit that is a bit far-fetched now.

 

I guess we just have to realize hypnosis is just one of many processes to get into a trance or some form of concentration. It's not the only process leading towards concentration, but the community, at least those making a tulpa, mix around with some elements of hypnosis and meditation.

 

Now it becomes a concern on what tulpaforcing is. Since it's clear there's many definitions of it (from how other users define it)

 

Right from the community's definition itself:

 

"Any act relating to the host focusing on, developing, speaking with, etc. the tulpa. "

 

(But is mostly split into two obvious stages with the passive and active forcing, but there's even more obvious trends like below):

 

- The type of forcing (or what people would think of passive and active imagination) who are starting to create a tulpa. They go through methods in guides to get themselves into the mindset of what it would be like to visualize, hear, or other senses of their tulpa. They usually have to find ways to learn how to concentrate (i.e. get into a type of mode of thinking or trance, and trance itself has many levels) and consistently practice until what we consider makes a tulpa becomes apparent. Not in terms of having a full-fledged tulpa, but gradual signs that becomes an on-going process towards the tulpa having apparent autonomy from the conscious mind.

 

-The type of forcing where the person already has the initial stages ingrained in their minds and it's a phenomenon where it's second nature where they don't have to put much conscious effort into it, just like unconscious competence. These are the people who have a tulpa that is clearly autonomous from their conscious input, judgement, analysis, etc. and fits the models of the terms and concepts we theorize that makes a tulpa a tulpa.

 

 

Basically just like the four stages of competence, tulpaforcing has its own varying stages.

 

So the question now is:

 

After the host gains unconscious competence in these things, where they don't need to worry about putting as much conscious effort into tulpaforcing as they did in the initial stages, does this mean the community needs to make some effort in how the definition of tulpaforcing changes as the tulpa gains more sentience and sapience and the unconscious competence is established?

 

For me, things come by naturally now (at least in terms of visual and mind-voice interaction with elements from image streaming techniques) where it's an overstatement to say that I'm using Hypnosis. Hypnosis and other modes for concentration and doing methods in my opinion was just a catalyst in my initial stages that eventually allowed the unconscious mind to connect the dots to gain unconscious competence from the journey of the conscious mind gaining conscious competence.

[Kaz with a K]

"It was only [one post] how could it end up like this it was only [one post], it was only [one post]..."

I don't even know how this needed more than one single answers...

[waffles]

it's clear there's many definitions of it (from how other users define it)

No, it's not. In fact, the definition you linked is pretty much it. Same as what I said and what forcing undoubtedly is. Some people define it differently but they're thick.

 

After the host gains unconscious competence in these things, where they don't need to worry about putting as much conscious effort into tulpaforcing as they did in the initial stages, does this mean the community needs to make some effort in how the definition of tulpaforcing changes as the tulpa gains more sentience and sapience and the unconscious competence is established?

After I learn how to ride a bike and do it unconsciously, does this mean the cycling community needs to come up with a new term for this? It amazes me how people link to a Wikipedia page about learning and then assume that it applies to tulpas uniquely.

 

 

"It was only [one post] how could it end up like this

It shows you the value of using dictionary definitions. Because really, how was I supposed to figure out that

[Spartanelete]

It's not like you can mentally transmit thoughts. And the person on the receiving end would probably just be processing the taken information you give about the tulpa.

 

So it's pretty much just helping the said person make a tulpa (I guess it would help them believe in it more), like that one guy that "sells tulpas" with his recordings.