Existing proof/logic in favor of Tulpae being real

[stealthyduckling]

I'm definitely no expert in tulpae, and I even just found out about them about a week ago. I'm by no means a scholar, but I have some basic knowledge of psychology, so I'll list all of the things I can think up that suggest Tulpae are real.

 

The first thing is that if people are all just lying, which is a reason for skeptics to turn away from these, that's a lot (5,000+) people lying about the same thing. I find it hard to believe that so many people would feel the need to lie about them existing especially considering the historical records of this dealing with Buddhist monks. Another reason which makes it difficult everyone is in cahoots to lie about Tulpae is that people ask questions regarding them as if they're having trouble. If people were to lie about something like this, they would create a story about their Tulpa and claim that they are done with it.

 

The next reason is that it is 100% psychologically possible for this to occur. Chances are, many of us have heard of the Ganzfeld experiment, seeing as how this is a forum dedicated to sentient hallucinations. People were deprived of almost all of their senses in this experiment and almost all of them reported vivid hallucinations, and they all had average minds without pre-existing mental illness. The mind can't comprehend the sheer nothingness of being deprived of your senses, so it sees things because it assumes something must be there. Very similarly, the reason the process of making your very own Tulpa is so time-consuming is because of how the brain works. "If you spend so much time thinking about your Tulpa, then it must be real" is what your brain deduces, so your brain creates the Tulpa to understand why you're thinking about it so often. The mind also stitches together almost all of what we perceive as reality. Your eyes are useless without your mind. Because the mind is what truly allows us to see, it's completely possible for it to create something that isn't there.

 

It's very unfortunate that so little people have Tulpae, because pretty much all we have for proof is anecdotal evidence, which does not hold up well in the world of science. I want more people to know about these and believe it's possible, and even though I'm nowhere near having a complete one, I know the numerous benefits of having one (one such benefit being that it's very hard to be bored with one around). It's also a way into your subconscious, and the only way to do that before Tulpae was lucid dreaming, which you can only do during sleep and it can't help you out in the daytime. I also want this to be scientifically proven so that people can tell other humans that they have one and not be considered "insane" or "schizofrenic".

[Luminesce]

It's a soft science. People want proof, but all they'll get is anecdotes and the fact that many people say the phenomenon is real to them.

 

I personally don't believe there's anything "fake" OR "real" about tulpas. Is an imaginary friend fake or real? Neither, it's simply there. The person is experiencing them. There's nothing real or fake about it, it is what it is. Same with tulpas. Is the tulpa "real" or "fake"? Well, they're there. The person is experiencing them. There is no real or fake. Everyone on this forum probably has a unique tulpa. There's no hidden path of tulpamancy to discover. It's imagination and creativity, though the forum serves as a conglomeration of what others have previously imagined and created to guide newcomers. But it's a common misconception that there's any right or wrong, real or fake. It is what it is, your own personal experience.

 

 

So, my tulpas "think" without bias from me. I know this because they've had countless thoughts that conflicted or had nothing to do with what I would've thought. Are those thoughts "real"? What the heck is real or fake about it? Are those thoughts really theirs, or am I just subconsciously making them up? What the heck is "theirs"? The thoughts are credited to them. And their thoughts have to come from somewhere, sharing a physical brain with me. What would be fake about their thoughts being made by my subconscious, using their personality/beliefs to shape them?

 

What's real or fake about it? This is a soft science because it's a phenomenon of the mind which we are trying to understand with a scientific approach. But there is no right or wrong or real or fake. Your tulpa is fake if you think it is. Your tulpa is "real" if you think it is. But a tulpa isn't just "a tulpa". It's different for everyone. "Tulpa" is a massive umbrella term covering a huge range of thoughtforms, though it has loosely defined enough specifications for those thoughtforms that we can call our unique ones "tulpas" without too much conflict. But it's just a label for ease of grouping. There is no point at which you have a 100% complete legitimate tulpa that's just as tulpa as any other tulpa. That's not how it works. They are what they are. And this is a soft science without solid answers because we are as of yet unable to isolate and measure the phenomenon outside of anecdotes. People seem to think different types of brain scans can "prove tulpas are real", but all those do is show possibly unusual activity in the mind. What they're thinking of is called mind reading. And we don't have that technology yet. When we do we can come back to this "are tulpas real" and "is your tulpa as tulpa as my tulpa?" stuff. Until then, take the phenomenon for what it is. Subjective.

[sushi]

Well, people only call it schizophrenia out of ignorance. Anyone educated about schizophrenia will be able to recognize the differences. Actually I (and several others here) am ADHD, which I've just recently learned is almost the opposite of schizophrenia. To grossly oversimplify both conditions, with ADHD the brain doesn't produce enough dopamine, and with schizophrenia the brain produces too much.

 

But to add to what you said, Charles Bonnet Syndrome also produces hallucinations in the sane. And auditory hallucinations are also on the rise, thanks to the popularity of MP3 players.

[Yakumo]

I generally agree with Reisen and sushi but also want to add that it isn't as simple as saying 'my tulpa is real' and therefore it is.

I'd say a tulpa is real if it feels real to you and is able to act on its own like a distinct sentient being.

 

Also I would not rule out brain scans that hastily. Technology advances at an unsettling rate and I am pretty convinced in let's say 10 years it will be technically possible to visualize how thought processes are formed on a neuronal level and distinguish a multiple from an actor with ease. The same should go for tulpas providing someone is crazy enough to invest the necessary time and money in such experiments. It is already possible to roughly visualize a person's thoughts which is beyond scary in my opinion.

 

I foresee a grim future where you are screened for tulpas at all entrances and will have to buy a ticket for each one of them. Sock will not be happy about this.

[faxityrunlax]

I created an account just so I could answer this.

I once read before that it's definitely possible to prove that tulpae are real, using what I call the 'eye-stuttering test'. Try to imagine an object (NOT your tulpa). Now imagine that you're moving said object across the room you are in. Try to follow that object with your eyes. Your eyes would be 'stuttering' whilst moving because it's not really focused on anything 'real'.

(By stuttering I mean that your eyes would be moving roughly instead of smoothly)

 

Now take your hand and wave it slowly in front of you. Focus on the hand, and you'll find that your eyes are moving fluently (because your eyes are focused on an 'actual' object) in contrast to the object you imagined earlier.

 

After that, ask your tulpa to walk around the room you're in and try to follow him/her with your eyes. You'll discover that your eyes will be moving fluently this time. Just tell your friend to look at your eyes while you're doing this, and you have your proof.

I know it's not much, but I think it's the closest/best way possible to prove that tulpae are real.

[TulpaFox]

I created an account just so I could answer this.

I once read before that it's definitely possible to prove that tulpae are real, using what I call the 'eye-stuttering test'. Try to imagine an object (NOT your tulpa). Now imagine that you're moving said object across the room you are in. Try to follow that object with your eyes. Your eyes would be 'stuttering' whilst moving because it's not really focused on anything 'real'.

(By stuttering I mean that your eyes would be moving roughly instead of smoothly)

 

Now take your hand and wave it slowly in front of you. Focus on the hand, and you'll find that your eyes are moving fluently (because your eyes are focused on an 'actual' object) in contrast to the object you imagined earlier.

 

After that, ask your tulpa to walk around the room you're in and try to follow him/her with your eyes. You'll discover that your eyes will be moving fluently this time. Just tell your friend to look at your eyes while you're doing this, and you have your proof.

I know it's not much, but I think it's the closest/best way possible to prove that tulpae are real.

 

I truthfully can't say I am in agreement with that being proof. It only means that you can see tulpas as a fixed point in your vision. Someone could hallucinate anything and see it as a fixed point in their vision, and have the exact same results.

 

As far as tulpa's being "real", I think they are a real psychic (in the psychological use of the term) phenomenon. However they are not a real physical phenomenon, unless you believe in the myths where monks use them to guard temples and snatch things. Even if that were the case, realistically a layman isn't going to develop their mind enough to do that.

 

Tulpas are as real as any entirely psychic experience is, which accounts for all of our feelings and perceptions as well as our understanding of the external world. Is the love you feel for friends, family, and lover real? Are any of your thoughts real? Is your personality real? Those are philosophical questions, and what people think about them varies. Tulpas are real to us, real in our inner world. There have been enough people using these methods to say that it really works for people, I as new as I am, have experienced my tulpa say things to me that didn't seem like they were my own thoughts. This is possible because of the fact that the subconscious part of the brain we are not aware of is much larger than the conscious part. Through our methods we allow a new personality to form in that vast space in our minds, then converse and interact with it. My tulpa is as real as anything I experience, as someone whose only experience with the external world is through trying to process and understand it in my internal world.

[Luminesce]

I completely agree with everything you just said. Also, in the case of not-quite-tulpas, intent and belief are the differentiating factors. A tulpa is just as possible as an enhanced imaginary friend as both phenomenon take place in your mind - real is subjective, and that means if you can experience it then it's real to you. And for the sake of the wider phenomenon, it certainly seems to be possible to instruct others on how to make it real for themselves, too. So I point back to my original statement - tulpas are neither "real" nor "fake", they simply are (or aren't) to each person. However unlike most self-delusions they seem relatively easy to relate to others with as a learned or adapted practice. So if you care about that aspect of "realness", it's there too.