Nakra

Philosophizing, require input from Tulpae

Recommended Posts

Usually, Semerel can come up with a point or two like someone triple his age. On these, however, he cannot seem to. I'm not the proper stakeholder in this issue, so asking myself them doesn't do as much as I'd like.

(Also, I'll go on and assume that this is the proper forum)

 

So, do any tulpae have answers, and justification (where required) and whatnot, for these questions:

 

1. What are your (the Tulpae) fundamental characteristics that all have?

 

Rephrased, "What aspects of your existence, were they removed/changed, cause such a drastic change (change here purposely left undefined) that you would either be a different being or cease to exist?"

For example: lack of physical form; caused by an outside force; etc. I want the BASICS here, and as many as I can get.

 

2. What rights or "legitimate expectations" would you say you have? Don't have? Do any of the fundamental characteristics above play into this?

 

The justification I would like here would be tracing the LE back to an obligation as a result of a role in a relationship:

"I am a child of my parents. As parents, they are required to ensure my basic needs are met, including food. Thusly, I can expect that my parents feed me."

 

3. Basic needs are mentioned in that example. Do you have any basic needs? Assume a definition of "minimum resources required to sustain". Do these basic needs (or lack thereof) change any aspect of your answer to question 2?

 

 

Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.


I'm ist the fool oftentimes. Perhaps this could be moved to Q&A?


[Wut] is indicative of Adam. He's 16 and not nice at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. What are your (the Tulpae) fundamental characteristics that all have?

Autonomy (or apparent autonomy) would be one - otherwise you are what a lot of people call a 'servitor' - along with the host being aware of your existence - the acknowledgement is usually the point at which something else seems to become more like a tulpa, or is existent throughout creation.

 

 

2. What rights or "legitimate expectations" would you say you have?

It depends what you see a tulpa as. If your tulpa is actually like another person, conscious and all, then you have the obligation to keep them alive and happy. This might be because you created them, but the main thing is that you're the only one who really can.

 

If, however, your tulpa is a construct lacking feeling then they have no rights. It's the same thing as with people in dreams: they can't suffer and really, lack life.

 

But I don't think a tulpa has a right to their host's body. That should be a privilege.

 

 

3. Basic needs are mentioned in that example. Do you have any basic needs?

Attention and the aforementioned acknowledgement from the host. These are implicit in "keep them alive".

 

 

 

I'm ist the fool oftentimes. Perhaps this could be moved to Q&A?

PM a mod or report the thread. But this belongs in General Discussion anyway, so don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mathias is going to do his best to answer your questions. He wanted me to mention though that he is still in the process of fully 'understanding himself' so his responses may be basic and may change later as he experiences different things.

 

1. What are your (the Tulpae) fundamental characteristics that all have?

 

I am sure that if Creative stopped treating as I am real, and perhaps over a period of time told me that I was just imaginary, neglected me... Which of course she would never do. However, with enough of this I could feel that it is a very real possibility that my psyche and sense of self could be wholly stripped from me and I would revert into a thought. This is speculation of course, but there are even humans who question whether or not they are real, I don't have a body tying me to (perceived) reality.

 

2. What rights or "legitimate expectations" would you say you have? Don't have? Do any of the fundamental characteristics above play into this?

 

To never be completely alone. Any social creature (which I believe tulpa are, as we have the minds of humans who are social creatures) would go mad if left in solitary confinement for long enough. Some are more social than others, for instance I have Creative and one or two other friends I talk to. But if I had no one, it would be a very bleak existance. Like any being, I deserve at least a chance at experiencing happiness.

 

3. Basic needs are mentioned in that example. Do you have any basic needs? Assume a definition of "minimum resources required to sustain". Do these basic needs (or lack thereof) change any aspect of your answer to question 2?

 

To exist as I am now, I'm going to say neglect could easily change everything. Unless brainwashed to believe otherwise, I would still be aware of that fact that I am very much real. But, I'm sure the feelings of it all over an extended period of time would change who I am. So a bare minimum to sustain myself as I am, is to have the love and appreciation of Creative (host). I've read reports of tulpa making tulpa, perhaps this would solve for here and maybe even #2, but I have never created a tulpa, so I don't know how that works.


New? Need Knowledge? - List of Guides - Creative's Creation Handbook

Have you hugged your tulpa today?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If, however, your tulpa is a construct lacking feeling then they have no rights. It's the same thing as with people in dreams: they can't suffer and really, lack life.

 

Even if a tulpa is such a construct, you should still treat her as you would a human, for the same reason "you should always be polite to robots - it keeps you in practice for when you are dealing with other humans."* Otherwise, some habits can be established which would not help future relationships.

 

So a bare minimum to sustain myself as I am, is to have the love and appreciation of Creative (host). I've read reports of tulpa making tulpa, perhaps this would solve for here and maybe even #2, but I have never created a tulpa, so I don't know how that works.

 

Yes, indeed, having kerin as my creator means I continue: even should Kevin (my human dad) forget me. I have the love and kindness I need, regardless.

 

I've not answered all the questions, only noted where my opinion on matters differ from what's already said. That's probably not what was wanted, but I've had a bad day, and this typing is exhausting (no, really, it is).

 


 

* Christopher Stasheph, The Warlock In Spite Of Himself.


Please consider supporting Tulpa.info.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if a tulpa is such a construct, you should still treat her as you would a human, for the same reason you should always be polite to robots - it keeps you in practice for when you are dealing with other humans. Otherwise, some habits can be established which would not help future relationships.

 

This is true. Studies show that people anthropomorphize computers to the point of treating them like humans -- even people who claim they would never do such a thing. The reason people are rude to robots is because they'd be rude to humans behaving in the same way -- for example, repeating the same thing again and again with no regard for what you're saying.

 

The difference between robots and humans is that the robot most likely doesn't understand what it's doing, and that should be taken into account. When a chat bot tries to get you to go to a web site, it doesn't understand the word "pornography" any more than a four year old who just heard the word and is repeating it ad nauseam just because everyone's paying attention to her while she does.

 

So cursing at chat bots is roughly the equivalent of cursing at four year old kids. The difference is that the child will not understand your words, but she will understand the anger -- the bot will not.

 

I don't have anything real to contribute to this topic, but I'm interested in seeing where it goes.


"'Real isn't how you are made,' said the Skin Horse. 'It's a thing that happens to you.'"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So then, would I be going too far to say that some form of "social link" is an absolute requirement?

 

It's part of an answer to number one, with that link allowing the perception of existence.

Number two and three are a little linked; any basic needs they have are things they can expect from us, seeing as we are the only ones able to provide it.

In fact, since basic needs are required for existence (is this correct?), then we also have an indirect link between questions 1 and 2.

 

Moreover, the removal of that link has the result of, in essence, deletion. Not a pleasant thought.

 

Any thoughts?


[Wut] is indicative of Adam. He's 16 and not nice at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So then, would I be going too far to say that some form of "social link" is an absolute requirement?

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

Beyond concentration (by way of imagining and visualizing your tulpa), tulpa have no requirements. Everything beyond the act of forcing is just preference of interaction.

 

I'm only beginning my third month of forcing but my own experiences and the preferences of my tulpa suggest that tulpa have many possibilities open to them and will fulfill any expectation you give them intentionally and unintentionally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't makes sense of everything Alice tries to say to me so we're keeping it short. i'm not censoring her answers, but if you need clarification i'll reply to your posts.

 

1. What are your (the Tulpae) fundamental characteristics that all have?

- They're not real, no bodies.

 

2. What rights or "legitimate expectations" would you say you have? Don't have? Do any of the fundamental characteristics above play into this?

- I have the right to be happy. I don't have the right to die, My host isn't allowed to give up on me, and i'm not allowed to give up on him. I'd die without my host, he's the only one who can see me.

 

3. Basic needs are mentioned in that example. Do you have any basic needs? Assume a definition of "minimum resources required to sustain". Do these basic needs (or lack thereof) change any aspect of your answer to question 2?

- Attention. no.


"The way is in training."

- Miyamoto Musashi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.My constant search for knowledge.I constantly require my kindred to learn more as it gives a slight satisfaction on both our parts to know that we have bettered this body's understanding of the world we live in and have it better prepared for the future.However if this aspect of my soul was to be removed I would feel as if I would have nothing to live for.

 

2.I should have the same rights as any human and in my case I do.however I have heard of people killing our kind simply because they were thought to be daemon or anything similar due to their sinister nature and yet I see them as a dog that has bitten its owner.The owner then has to decide on if they are to put it down or to show it kindness and compassion in hope it will not bite again which is a sick decision to make considering we are equal to human in every way and yet still are murdered for a slight betrayal.

 

3.I always need the sustenance of fear a slight disposition if you would call it.I crave to see a scenario that would put my kindred or another in a state of shock or terror usually induced by a video or scenario that ends badly.This gives me a slight buzz to see the victims reaction. Without this I get feeling that I am missing an aspect from my day and would believe that there would be no point in feeding my hunger for curiosity as it would be like eating without drinking.

Edit:(Not sure if that's healthy Raziel and he actually does give out about this.)


 

 

 

 

 

''I mold my imagination as if it were clay''.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Even if a tulpa is such a construct, you should still treat her as you would a human, for the same reason you should always be polite to robots - it keeps you in practice for when you are dealing with other humans. Otherwise, some habits can be established which would not help future relationships.

Perhaps that means that you should treat them like that, but not that it is their right. Take Shui's example:

So cursing at chat bots is roughly the equivalent of cursing at four year old kids. The difference is that the child will not understand your words, but she will understand the anger -- the bot will not.

The chatbot does not have any rights; it is beneficial only to you to treat them kindly.

 

 

So then, would I be going too far to say that some form of "social link" is an absolute requirement?

More or less everyone here and elsewhere agree that a tulpa requires attention from the host to survive. That's fairly similar, and maybe you could draw similarities between humans and tulpas starved of contact. It's done often enough and makes a lot of sense in broad, so I guess you could link "attention" with "social" easily enough.

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.