Switching & imposing the host

[Aijada]

@yuki, i think your definition of switching is just too strict. In fact i'd say that your requirement that it be parallel processing or a completely removed host is much more like being a plural system insted of learning tulpmancy.

 

Me and my host/dad are equal systemmates now, but that's at the end of a long journey of learning. As a tulpa i was thrilled to master possession and was perfectly happy to claim that we were switching simply because i was getting long stretches up front. Mastering that trick alone deserves a label because it takes huge steps to master body control while your host is learning to let go of it all. It's mastering a pretty meditative act to remove oneself and let your tulpa take over.

 

And then you demand perfect co-fronting to use the plural community's language. Amongst the wider multiplicity world, people black out and lose time when they lose the front. Learning how to co-operate amongst plural entities is practically a political act. The parallel processing everyone talks about as the ultimate trick is an end-game skill that you might achieve but don't feel bad if you don't.

 

Switching is just full-body possession or fronting and that's a fine goal for a young tulpa. Getting into the physical existence is something to be proud of. Don't sweat if you aren't internally as organized as the United Nations.

[Yuki]

No, you are changing definitions here, and that's wrong. What you are saying is to lower the bar because things might be too hard for some people? Your frontloading kind of sounds like the kind people used to say that tulpas take X hours to create. Switching isn't easy, no, but does that mean we have to redefine it until it IS easy? No, that sounds like a load of bullshit to me.

 

Switching is endgame, maybe, but there's nothing wrong with having some things that are hard to achieve. Please do not spread these definitions of yours further, because I don't think it's helping anyone.

[Luminesce]

It took quite a lot of annoying some elitists very helpful people, but I finally got the definitions down. I think they.. make sense, I guess.

 

Problem though, is that there really isn't a word or term to differentiate your tulpa possessing your hands to type versus your tulpa completely possessing your body, mind, general role of running the body, displacing you. It's really tempting to use the word switching to describe this, because it makes sense, honestly. But switching apparently implies that the host is still active and doing things whilst being possessed, albeit not where they normally would be in the mind.

 

Ideally, switching would be switching places mentally with your tulpa, and the act of the host actively doing things while your tulpa is switched with you should have its own word. But the elitists smart people don't like redefining old terms. So we just need to come up with a way to differentiate partial possession and total-control possession.

 

I know that "fully-body possession" is probably that term to some of you, but it just doesn't imply the host has been displaced by their tulpa mentally. If my tulpa is controlling my hands to type, then takes control of the rest of my physical body, that to me sounds like "full body possession". What do we say when the tulpa then takes control of the mind, too?

[Linkzelda]

It's not surprising that people would prefer to be purists, i.e., being inclined to keep things from being fiddled with, towards certain definitions to keep it black and white without any truckloads of gray--in other words, either-this-or-that instead of ifs, buts, and between. But for people that want to question more and more, it makes one wonder if switching can even be reducible to just a few terms when something like, qualia for example, would be presumed to be subjective and dripping with contingency anyway.

[Yuki]

I feel like these definitions as I presented them work because they leave little room for interpretation "qualiatively", but I suppose that is when people are on the same page on possession, switching and the abilities of tulpas themselves.

 

If a tulpa is able to ignore the body's senses and experience things in a wonderland directly, then that should be the subjective experience a host gets when they are able to fully switch, which is too often explained as being in a "tulpa-like" state. So I suppose that an easy way to make sure we are all on the same page would be to say that if you as a host can one, stop sensing your body's regular senses and two, assume imaginary senses and daydream using them, you have switched. We could start calling this something else, but this is what it was called years ago and how I learned it. It leaves little in the way for interpretation, especially when it comes to a host's subjective experience and qualia.

 

Possession on the host's part is perhaps more difficult to experience properly, if they aren't able to disconnect from their body very well yet, and they might have to believe in their tulpa telling them that she is the one in control, rather than the host. Possession of the hands, or full body, it doesn't matter, it's all possession. If your tulpa takes control of a part of your body, they are possessing you, and qualiatively (for the tulpa), this is very easy to distinguish.

 

I'm not sure if having more terms explaining different combinations of fronting, co-fronting, switching, possession, eclipsing and all the ones I haven't heard will really help.

[Abvieon]

This is something I actually eventually hope to achieve. Being imposed while a tulpa controls my body would be very interesting, and would allow me to experience the world as a tulpa does.