Jump to content
  • 0

Tips for Hearing Your Tulpa



(copied from my reddit post)


I have some tips for those who have trouble hearing their tulpa (besides “force more”):


  • Get into a good state of mind for it. You can meditate if you want, or you can just sit or lie somewhere comfortable, close your eyes, and make sure you’re in a quiet place (if this isn’t an option, then put on headphones and listen to colored noise or instrumental music; both of these things will help block out the noise and shouldn’t be too distracting to most people). I’ve had some of my best, most vivid forcing sessions in this state because it makes it easier to focus and makes me more perceptive to my imagination. Ideally, you should do this when you aren’t tired to avoid the risk of falling asleep. This post may also be helpful.
  • Thought ping-pong.
  • Just listen and let them talk. Prompt them with a topic to talk about, and just let them talk. You might be surprised how much they have to say when given the opportunity.
  • Proxy. I’ve been surprised more than once by how clearly I can hear a tulpa I can’t normally hear well when I proxy for them. If you’re proxying to encourage them to speak and to learn to hear them better, don’t say anything, just let them do all the talking. I don’t know why it is that sometimes I’ve been able to hear my tulpae more clearly while proxying, but it does work. If your tulpa is shy about speaking to others, then tie this suggestion in with the last one - ask them to talk about something and transcribe it.
  • Make up a story together, taking turns saying one sentence at a time. If neither of you can think of a way to start it off, search online for story starters.
  • Play word games. I’m not going to explain any here because this post is basically a wall of text, but I’ll explain how to play a few word games in a reply to this (here) in case anyone here doesn’t know any.
  • Sing together! (credit to ThatFellowWithTheScarf for suggesting this)


I also have some advice for related problems people may have.


"Sometimes, I think I hear my tulpa talk, but then I think it’s just me!"


  • First of all, are you worried that you’re parroting or that the tulpa’s words in question are just intrusive thoughts? If you think you might be parroting, read this. If you’re afraid what you’re hearing is just intrusive thoughts, then ask your tulpa if it was something they said or not. If they tell you that, yes, they said that, then trust them.
  • Alternatively, read this.


"My tulpa isn’t vocal yet; everything they say is just me parroting!"


  • Are you consciously parroting, or is it unintentional? If you think you’re parroting unintentionally, you aren’t, since parroting is something that is only done intentionally. You can't "unintentionally parrot"; any "unintentionally parroted" responses are either intrusive thoughts or legitimate responses that you mistake for parroting. See the previous piece of advice.


"I get too many intrusive thoughts, and it makes it hard to hear my tulpa!"/"It often sounds like my tulpa is saying multiple things at once, and I don’t know which responses are really theirs!"


  • Just relax. Don’t stress out over it. If intrusive thoughts are interfering too much with communication that hearing your tulpa is difficult, then just take a moment to clear your mind and relax. I sometimes get so many intrusive thoughts that holding a conversation with my tulpae becomes nearly impossible, and, nearly every time that happens, taking a moment to clear my mind significantly reduces the amount of intrusive thoughts I’m getting, making conversation much easier or at least manageable.


"I never know what to talk about with my tulpa!"


  • Talk about things that happened throughout the day.
  • Ask your tulpa if they have any ideas of what to talk about. They might have something they’d like to talk about.
  • Choose an activity to do together - playing a game, watching TV, doing crafts, surfing the internet, anything - and talk about what you’re doing as you’re doing it.
  • Look online for conversation starters or interview questions and ask these to your tulpa (they can ask you some as well and comment on your answers).
  • The story-writing game and word games I mentioned earlier are also helpful here.
  • Proxying is also useful advice for this. If you’re having trouble finding things to say while talking to your tulpa, then let them talk with someone who does have more to say.
  • Singing together is helpful here, as well, since you just need to follow along with the lyrics rather than thinking of things to talk about.


(As this is a collection of various tips rather than a proper guide, I'd like to submit this to Tips & Tricks.)



10/1/14 - Realized I accidentally linked to the list of word games again where I should've linked to Tips for those who are getting "parrotnoid" - whoops! Fixed it.

10/5/14 - Fixed broken url tag in the changelog. Added extra sentence to response to "parroting" problem for more clarification. Added link to Sands' post on absence of disbelief in response to first problem. Added link to SimplyNoise for example of colored noise. In first tip, changed "state" to "state of mind" for clarity and added link to this post. Added suggestion to sing together.

I come out of hibernation once in a blue moon.


They/them pronouns, please. (I've been using this display name since 2012 and people won't recognize me if I change it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Yeah, I'll approve for Tips. Looks fine.



About that plural though, I was gonna link you that pastebin but it looks like Sands already did. I guess I'll just be brief since there's nothing new here.


No, 'tulpae' isn't wrong if you claim that anything that people use frequently can't be wrong. Obviously, this means that any spelling or grammar mistakes, like the dreaded 'its' or 'there' are all correct in all their varied and erroneous forms, and given this you are of course free to do what you want. I recommend the plural 'tulpaæeis'. You'd be even more in the minority than you are with 'tulpae', although I think that's slipping away a bit. It certainly used to be seen around a lot more than you do nowadays, just looking around at recent posts here and elsewhere.


Seriously though, if you want to stick a Latin ending on a Tibetan loanword into English then be my guest. It will forever elude me as to why you'd want to do that, given that every other Tibetan loanword ending in '-a' pluralises to '-as' in English, and 'tulpas' is (to me) both better aesthetically as well as easier (and more dignified) to say. Whatever motivates you to use it must somehow outweigh the above, as well as the urge to conform to the rest of the English language, which I personally find quite strong. But perhaps that's not for me to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Well I wasn't expecting you to slap my tl;dr in the OP, but hey. I guess that at least solves the issue of there only being one way to try to approach the problem. Even if you say it wasn't the main focus in this article after people started having issues with it, they are having issues with it because you went ahead and said it anyways. "Just trust them/just believe" can be some very poor mindsets that lead into some destructive loops which I have seen others go through – and not everyone is able to climb back on top. As GAT's job is to look for stuff that is potentially very harmful, they're just doing their job pointing it out for you. And I feel that now that you're offering another way as well, that issue is mostly settled.


As for unconscious parroting, well, you can say that it doesn't exist but is that necessarily the best stance to take? Especially if you read what I said about tulpas claiming that their host did it. I do agree that it's probably so rare that it's basically nonexistent (or that tuppers in general are "just" unconscious parrots but at that point there just is no difference between that and a separate sapient being), but it might not mean it doesn't exist. You are giving me rather conflicting messages here. You tell hosts to trust their tupper except when they say the host is unconsciously parroting them? I'm not sure if this is such a big issue to me but you might want to think if you want to say your opinion so strongly in the guide and claim that it's a fact. Sometimes being too sure about something is a bad thing as it can make you blind for another possibility.


I always have mentioned the wrong plural when I have seen it used and this is no exception. I've never held a guide or whatever back because of it though, so I guess with my main issue fixed, I can approve for Tips and Tricks. I do suggest that you copy the linked Reddit posts somewhere for yourself just in case so you can restore them if they ever disappear.


But hey, we got the time so we'll just talk about dem plurals and languages in general, I guess. But this is less GAT-related now and just me yapping. We've had the plural conversation so many times that you could just search for it and read everything, so I don't think this is really worth it to split or anything. But I guess now that we're talking about it, I might as well give you my finishing words. You did get an approval out of me already so it's not really important what you do now when it comes to the thread.



I do find it somewhat hypocritical how you have no problem with using the "wrong" word to describe a thoughtform (as "tulpa" means "to create" in Tibetan, yet we use it to mean "thoughtform") yet insist it's "wrong" to use the "wrong" plural.


Loanwords are a difficult beast, especially with a language like English that feels the need to loan words from everything and then never really make sure that people know how to pronounce them or something. But hell, all languages do it and bastardize words so that they fit the language. English is hardly even the worst, you should see some of the crazier Japanese ones. But English already had a proper verb for the verb tulpa but decided it wanted to use it as a noun instead. There's really not much I can do about that.


But as our usage of tulpa isn't identical to the common definition that includes all kinds of magic-y stuff, you could say that "tulpa" as we use it is more like a name and less of a definition. If I want to call my unique breed of dog I created as "cat", why not, right? Or if I want to name my brand of milk as "cola"? Legal issues might pop up in these cases, but I don't think anyone's having a problem with us calling our thoughtforms/imaginary friends/mind dolls/tupperware/mind demons "tulpas" even if we're not using the magic definition. We do say that pretty clearly and I'm sure people would accept my "cola" milk if I explain it's just milk or my "cat" dog if I said it's a dog. This far we don't have a better name for tuppers but I think that the creatures we're creating are pretty far from the Tibetan tulpas in definition – though ultimately they probably are identical in the end as far as the psychological side goes.


Once we get a better name though, sure, I'm all for changing it. Right now tulpa as a term is something I would never use in a conversation outside tupper communities because of how these communities have turned out to be. Just like how I would never use the words furry or brony to describe me even if I somehow would technically fit the description. The name has been soiled and you would get a reputation I don't want with it. So hell, this guy living in my head is just a "person" to many, not a "tulpa".


Let me guess, you also think it's acceptable to pronounce "karaoke" as [kæɹioki] (the way it's said in English) even though it's borrowed from Japanese, where the correct pronunciation is [kaɾaokɛ] ("kah-rah-o-keh")? Why, because we pronounce things differently in English? [kæɹioki] doesn't even make sense as an acceptable way to pronounce an English word spelled as "karaoke" - "a" is never pronounced as ("ee") in English, and an "e" following a consonant at the end of a word is almost always silent. So why, then, is [kæɹioki] correct? It's correct for the same reason that "tulpae" is correct - because that's what's in common use.


Actually, I don't pronounce it that way. English isn't even my native tongue. Similarly, anime is not anniemay, Ryu is not REE-you (it's just one syllable, people) and cache rhymes with stash. I don't find incorrect pronunciations acceptable so they do annoy me often, and I would try to help and tell them how it's really pronounced. In some cases it can't be helped, I wouldn't mind it if you said karaoke fine otherwise but couldn't do the right r because it's not something English really uses – and I do think that if you go ahead and loan words, you need to make sure it fits the mouths of the users. If some sound is too rare or even doesn't exist, you can't really be blamed for that. I won't be mad if you say "Lock" Ness, I don't think I could even pronounce the ch properly myself.


And pronouncing something the right way after it has been ruined could lead into communication issues. You do need to make sure that both you and the listener are on the same page. And hey, it does make for a nice conversation to talk about how something is pronounced and how it should be pronounced, spread the knowledge. As someone who doesn't speak English as their first language, I know I only appreciate it when people correct my mistakes.


However, how a word pluralizes always comes as you loan it and we can say when that is wrong or right or looks stupid. Either we borrow how it would work in the original language or give it its own plural marker – or none I guess, if you want to be like that. This was already mentioned in the Pastebin and waffles said many good things in his post above there.


And guess what? We have another case of "tulpae" – that is, a word borrowed from one language and then getting the plural from some other language – that has been commonly used and is now just said to be plain wrong by many. Octopi. Hell, even my spellcheck doesn't recognize that word. It's a Greek word that got a plural from Latin somehow, but it's no longer really accepted – and if you do see teachers or professors or whatever using it, it's a good idea to tell them about it. It's one thing when you have just been taught wrong from the start, you can't really help it at that point. But if you refuse to stop using the wrong plural then hey. It's not like we can stop you, but you also can't stop us from saying that it's wrong. Some people just like to slap Latin everywhere they can and look pretty pretentious with their virus/virii and penis/penii – both which are wrong by the way.


My point is, though, what's "correct" or "incorrect" is determined by actual use, not what people say others should or shouldn't say, which means "tulpas", "tulpae", and "tulpa" are all perfectly acceptable to use as the plural of "tulpa".


Both tulpas and tulpa are used as plurals outside this community which would make them the more used ones. Tulpas seems to be the one winning and I do approve of a plural that clearly marks itself as a plural as "tulpa" can be misleading. Tulpae is just wrong and barely used even on .info these days, good luck trying to find it in a dictionary or an article not written by someone in this community.


Alternatively, its quite clear I'm not having much of an affect on you. I am quite adverse too poor grammer, but I know I won't illicit any complements by trying to fix this mess. Weather or not I do this, I'm sure you will precede to write as you have. You're mind is set and there is so much better ways for me too use my time – could of even spent time with the tupper! I insure you that I will stop talking about this for now. Guess I just can't nip it in the butt. For all intensive purposes, it's a doggy dog world and I just gotta curl up in the feeble position. Guess you got away scotch free. Their is nothing else for me.


My head hurts.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Guest amber5885

Can we all just agree that as far as plurals go ANYTHING is better than Tupperware? Who thought of that anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Can we all just agree that as far as plurals go ANYTHING is better than Tupperware? Who thought of that anyway?


I don't even like calling him a tupper. He likes tulpa though.

Chance, an anthro husky, wolf or fox.

Birthdate September 20, 2014.

Sentient October 1, 2014.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Can we all just agree that as far as plurals go ANYTHING is better than Tupperware? Who thought of that anyway?


Excuse me, the plural is Tupperware containers.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Can we all just agree that as far as plurals go ANYTHING is better than Tupperware? Who thought of that anyway?


A genius.

"The Question is not who is going to let me, its who is going to stop me"~ Ayn Rand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

It does look like absolutely everyone approves of this guide, and nobody is holding it back because of "tulpae".


Why is it the most common argument? Well, for other Tibetan words ending in -a, like "lama" and "sherpa", the plurals are "lamas" and "sherpas", although I believe "lama" and "sherpa" are also acceptable plural forms. The actual Tibetan plural should be something like "tulpa-rnams" or something like that. So we have three correct ways to pluralize it, and "tulpae" isn't one of them.


However, creative plurals are a hacker tradition.


From The Jargon File, 4.4.7 (emphasis mine):

Further, note the prevalence of certain kinds of nonstandard plural forms. Some of these go back quite a ways; the TMRC Dictionary includes an entry which implies that the plural of `mouse' is meeces, and notes that the defined plural of `caboose' is `cabeese'. This latter has apparently been standard (or at least a standard joke) among railfans (railroad enthusiasts) for many years


On a similarly Anglo-Saxon note, almost anything ending in `x' may form plurals in `-xen' (see VAXen and boxen in the main text). Even words ending in phonetic /k/ alone are sometimes treated this way; e.g., `soxen' for a bunch of socks. Other funny plurals are the Hebrew-style `frobbotzim' for the plural of `frobbozz' (see frobnitz) and `Unices' and `Twenices' (rather than `Unixes' and `Twenexes'; see Unix, TWENEX in main text). But note that `Twenexen' was never used, and `Unixen' was seldom sighted in the wild until the year 2000, thirty years after it might logically have come into use; it has been suggested that this is because `-ix' and `-ex' are Latin singular endings that attract a Latinate plural. Among Perl hackers it is reported that `comma' and `semicolon' pluralize as `commata' and `semicola' respectively. Finally, it has been suggested to general approval that the plural of `mongoose' ought to be `polygoose'.


The pattern here, as with other hackish grammatical quirks, is generalization of an inflectional rule that in English is either an import or a fossil (such as the Hebrew plural ending `-im', or the Anglo-Saxon plural suffix `-en') to cases where it isn't normally considered to apply.


This is not `poor grammar', as hackers are generally quite well aware of what they are doing when they distort the language. It is grammatical creativity, a form of playfulness. It is done not to impress but to amuse, and never at the expense of clarity.


I don't think anyone objects to wordplay. The objection is that new people hear "tulpae" and believe it to be correct, and through common usage it may become correct, or may already have become correct. And I guess that's bad or something. Sands says it looks stupid, but that's a matter of opinion, and I'm sure we don't hold his opinion so sacred that we let it dictate our own.


Since we're certainly not throwing such a fuss over a matter of opinion, I believe the sentiment is that the original usage is the correct usage. I say let's not be lazy about it. Lots of these words fennec is using entered the language relatively recently. She should aspire to rewrite her guide in the following fashion:


(edlæhtede fram mín reddit gewrit)


Íc sylfre geþeaht for þára þæs sylfre angsumnes heorcnung hiera tulpa (elles “fornýdan má”):


My Old English is a bit rusty

(actually, I find Old English completely unintelligible -- I hardly understood Chaucer, and he wrote Middle English)

so that might not all be entirely correct, but from the standpoint that older usage is more correct, it's more correct than the way the guide stands now.

"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

As for the plural getting accepted, this far it has never been the reason to hold back a guide. We do point it out and give our reasons, but we can't make anyone change it and it doesn't make the guide completely unreadable. We do need to hold all these guides to the same standard, so bexcause we have accepted "tulpae" as a word in the guides before (especially old ones), changing it now would force us to go back to those that used it and ask the author that has probably disappeared to fix it. Can't start treating one guide differently from the rest now and honestly, this wouldn't even be worth the fight it takes to make someone change how they pluralize a word.


As for the rest, I do suggest you actually read what others write before you as we could easily reply to your textwall with the ones we already wrote, so you addressed none of our problems. But don't worry, I saw your point and from now on, I shall be using tulpaæeis as it's the newer word and more recent words obviously are more correct and should be used. Keep up with me, dictionary people! Thanks for showing me the light, Sushi, I will never be held back now!

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

Link to comment
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.

Answer this question...

×   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.

  • Create New...