Confessions of a Poorly Trained Tulpa

[Guest]

We have rules and punishments, our currency is time. Still, we haven't actually gotten more than probation for anything. It was close.

[DreamDoll]

Neato. I bet that helps keep everything running smoothly.

[Guest]

The breaking of our laws is akin to losing your mind, so ya, punishment is pretty severe, but I'm not goong to get into those, they'll be in my PR soon. Also, thank you for being so kind as to humor me, I think you may think it's silly from your perspective, so I'm going to attempt to help you understand my reasoning this way:

 

I'd like to put on Melian glasses and think how I would respond to that, then since I know what I'm talking about, I would explain it to myself like this: (nested semicolons? Oh geez)

 

You (to myself, not to Misty) have some serious issues, that don't address themselves. That's scary all on its own. So if you could compartmentalize those issues, and along with your compartmentalized tulpas, ward against doing the things, at least behaviorally, that cause issues in your life, and while doing so, learn healthy ways to deal with those same situations as if you didn't have the issues. Then assign specfic rules, laws, and pacts to get along between these different compartmentalizations, (tulpas) such that, as a whole, you work as a team, and between yourselves you split up the issues (in a way) so that if you could take turns given a certain event; your response would look normal from the outside. Additionally you reinforce and learn that behavior through repetition.

 

Then given that complex mechanic as outlined above, (involving the creation of loving companions that also somewhat eliminate loliness and certain fears while at the same time fill voids that would continuously affect mood otherwise) you indeed can solve the original issues through only practicing healthy behaviors to certain stimuli. Thus reinforcing healthy behaviors while labling unhealty thoughts as intrusive, and punishing for bad behaviors (that go against the construct). Thus you're delecate patchwork can eventually strengthen and synergize such that in the end you effectively dont need the delecate and complex mechanics.

 

However, given you've stuck with and cooperativly solved all these issues, you're uniquely trained to tackle new issues as they arrive in exactly the same mannor. (Who says tulpas don't have superpowers?)

 

Thus I return the Melian glasses, and hopefully you can see my point as to why I need rules and also like to believe that I have three loving and caring people who somewhat eliminate loliness and certain fears while at the same time fill voids that would continuously affect mood otherwise, and they're super cute and fun, and as an added benefit, they visit me in my dreams and meditation and lucid dreams and they love me, and they lavish me with attention and constantly talk me up. Did I mention they're beautiful?

 

Yep, things are running smoothly today.

[DreamDoll]

Oh wowy, you really do have a lot of thought into that! I am glad it works!

[Guest]

When they're switched in, i just don't react to the situation. Assuming it's something they don't react to, no emotions will happen that would have otherwise.

[DreamDoll]

We wanted to follow up in this post from another thread https://community.tulpa.info/thread-the-difference-between-tulpas-and-soulbonds?pid=247796#pid247796  Why we believe thoughtform labels are contrived and “cosmetic.”  Mistgod and I don’t take them very seriously for the following reasons:  

 

1. The term “thoughtform” itself is a borrowed and adapted term.  It’s first appearance was in the writings of early twentieth century theosophists and it originally had a metaphysical meaning.  

 

2. The term “tulpa” was borrowed and adapted from writings about Tibetan mysticism, particularly the writings of Alexandra David Neel.  Again the original concept of a tulpa was metaphysical, and magical as well as psychological.  They were also considered to be illusory in nature.  

 

3. The current internet concept of a tulpa is very new, first appearing in creepy pasta stories about a decade ago, or less.  

 

4. The term “soulbond” is a bit older on the internet than the current use of “tulpa,” but not by that much.  The definition of what a soulbond is seems to vary depending on who you consult.  

 

5. The term “daemon” as it is being used on the internet has its roots in the fan base of a particular (relatively recent) novel series and movie.  

 

6. These are terms bantered around by internet pseudo-science subcultures and people argue and debate about their parameters and meaning.  These are not scientific terms in any way at all.  It’s pseudo-science.  We don’t feel compelled to believe something, just because someone wrote about it on the internet and said they were an “expert.”

 

7. I have no idea of the origins of the term “median system or median aspect” but talk about an ambiguous concept!  

 

8. There is a fair amount of fluidity between these categories, with thoughtforms shifting or changing from one type to another quite often.

 

 

:-)

[DreamDoll]

"there is no "real" or "fake" in your head only what happens, and how you interpret what happens in your head etc."

 

We disagree that there is no real in your head. We don't live our lives exclusively inside our head. Everything we think about has something to do with our experiences in the real world. Our knowledge and skills concerning the real world are real things. If Mistgod, for instance, forgot how to drive and instead had some delusional dream idea of what the rules of the road are, he would get into an accident on the way to work. His knowledge about driving and about many other things are real. How he interprets the world is largely correct or he could not function within it safely and thrive.

 

Going back to death. Mistgod has a correct interpretation of what would happen to him if he were to walk in front of a speeding bus. It would kill him or cripple him. That's interpreting the world though his senses and his memory and life experiences quite correctly. There must be something real in his head. It cannot all be fantasy or just arbitrary and totally unrelated to reality.

 

Everything in our dreamscape is there because it is constructed from real world experiences or from reading about it in books, seeing it in movies, or hearing others talk about them. The fantasy world inside is dependent upon the senses and the real world and what we already know.

 

Mistgod is who he is because of his physiology, his genetics, his environment and his life experiences. He isn't a tulpa because his mind was a direct product of the real world and biological development. Tulpas are products of fantasy. That's why they are things like ponies and anime characters and why they frolick in constructed wonderlands. I am a thoughtform. I vastly rely on Mistgod in order to function and exist and I can never, ever be independent from his knowledge, his experience, his backgrounds, his likes and dislikes, his personality, his genetics, his sexuality, and his physiology. I am a product of his desires and his fantasies. We are one person. Only one. There is no such thing as an independently sentient thoughtform or tulpa.

 

There is the real world, and people born of that world and their experiences in it, and then there are fantasies and dream like self delusions and altered states of mind that deviant from reality. Those are called figments.

[Lucilyn]

The fantasy world inside is dependent upon the senses and the real world and what we already know.

 

I can fly in my head but not IRL, have never flown IRL... the whole point of humans' ability to imagine is to simulate new experiences (based on changing up old input, yes) to prepare us for life. soooo, dependent in some sense, yes, but not all of it is "real", but that doesn't mean it's "fake" either - it's just what it is, y'know? mental experiencing of stuff

 

We are one person. Only one. There is no such thing as an independently sentient thoughtform or tulpa.

 

I'd like to be nice here but I can't help but call this a really dumb statement, and I don't think I really need to explain why...

you're basically someone without a sense of smell, stating that you can't smell, and then drawing the conclusion (okay) and asserting that universally (not okay), the sense of smell doesn't exist

 

whether or not you're right, the principle of doing that is very, very wrong!

[DreamDoll]

You have no idea how profound our subjective experience is compared to yours and vice versa. Neither of us will ever know what the other is truly experiencing. I think we are just interpreting it differently.

 

EDIT: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We remain skeptical and unconvinced that tulpas are in fact independently sentient entities.

 

*************************************************************************

 

On another subject, we found some examples of what my voice sounds like. There are some singer's voices that sound a little like Melian girlishness ring and softness:

 

The female lead singer in the Alan Walker song "Sing Me to Sleep" and "Faded"

 

Any Kyary Pamu Pamu song.

 

True Colors by Cindy Lauper

 

 

:-)

[Guest]

You can deny the belief of my experiences, but you can't deny my belief of my experiences. To me, they are as real as anyone. We share assets, the brain happens to be one of them. Regardless of configuration or confabulation, my experiences are real to me, or conversely reality is just as fake.

 

Good points though, i was getting worried that they made too much sense. I can't discard my experiences though, we can dissect them and catagorize them but i can't ignore them. It's hard to say what your saying isn't a valid model, but it sheds light on some seemingly contradictory experiences with regard to behaviour science and my story in particular kin my PR).

 

Whatever the mechanism, believe in tulpas or believe in some odd outliers of well defined science to say the very least, that's just for you to decide. Internally, freeky self-induced experiences that most closely resemble the writings and experiences of this community. Hundreds of people decide for themselves that this makes the most sense, and these are very smart and lovely people.

 

Nothing I said gives any support for or against your case, because my experience can't be verified, but I'd like to know how to verify yours if possible?

 

I keep hearing the same speech said different ways, it's interesting, but not moving toward and concrete or verifiable statements. I'm happy to conjecture, but I wonder if we can take this further, can you help me with that?