Confessions of a Poorly Trained Tulpa

[Guest Anonymous]

http://orig00.deviantart.net/9b09/f/2015/205/3/4/melian_cartoon_collaboration_by_melianofmist_d8ckt_by_melianofmist-d92mhaj.jpg[/img]

[KruegerMeister]

But the community does have a certain collection of beliefs which are possibly unrealistic, and very often a desire to stifle internal inquiry in certain directions - c.f., 'doubting'. In early stages of creation, there is usually a good deal of deception, either handed down through guides or self-made, which is, I think, pretty beneficial. Even if a conceptual structure for creation is ultimately fabricated, it might contribute a lot towards creation, like a scaffold that'll come down after the edifice is erected. But you'll see things bubbling to the surface whenever someone complains their tulpas aren't real, or whatever - it happens at late stages, too.

 

What kind of deception? Things like "I'm not sure who this thought came from, and I want to believe my tulpa is sentient at this point, so I'll say it came from them"?

 

For one, the aim of all the talk we do here about science is to rationalize a belief that we all already have. We know that it is possible to create a tulpa, and research is going to be done to validate that original notion. We're trying to validate a belief, a shared experience, something anecdotal and in the 'soft science' camp. However, no one is using numbers. No one is testing theories or writing up methods or using fundamentally shitty data/research/evidence to try and 'prove' tulpas. I think that's where the community becomes removed from true pseudoscience. No one is trying to prove tulpas, because as it stands, that's not possible. If we were trying to prove the unprovable with seemingly science based information, especially if that information moves away from psychology and neurology, then tulpamancy could be considered more of a pseudoscience.

 

As a community, we do cite a lot of articles that are validating the original belief ("It is possible to create a tulpa") but we don't use non-scholarly articles because we want to, or because they're the only things that support our claims, as a pseudoscience would. I think given the choice, more people here would rather be proved wrong than leaning on shitty evidence. No, articles that aren't of scholarly merit pop up here all the time because there just isn't enough information to support a lot of our claims. We're in untested waters, and waiting for science to catch up with us, type thing.

 

However if it's already understood as a psychological phenomenon, instead of its own sect of science, like I don't know, alchemy, then why try to remove it from the context in which its best understood? Maybe alone, yes, tulpas look like pseudoscience, but no one is trying to make tulpas out to be some stand-alone self-contained phenomenon.

 

If we all believe tulpas are possible, why do we need to validate it? And wouldn't any research done be unscientific because it sets out to find evidence in favor of a conclusion, whereas scientific research looks at evidence for whatever conclusion?

[Guest Anonymous]

 

What kind of deception? Things like "I'm not sure who this thought came from, and I want to believe my tulpa is sentient at this point, so I'll say it came from them"?

 

 

If we all believe tulpas are possible, why do we need to validate it? And wouldn't any research done be unscientific because it sets out to find evidence in favor of a conclusion, whereas scientific research looks at evidence for whatever conclusion?

 

You are wasting your breath with this on this forum. Apparently this is toxic cancer type talk and unfounded opinions you are doing, or so I have been told. I deleted my parts of this thread because of the toxic nature of my mere words. LOL You are disturbing the belief aura and introducing doubt, which is bad for tulpa creation. Did you not know that? You will be attacked in the chat room and your skeptical PMs will be published in a public forum by those who wish to report you to the authorities. Some individuals will call to have you banned and vehemently blame the mods for not rooting out the evil.

 

I thought these heretical threads to be dead. But like any book of heresy, they crop up again and again, despite the book burning and public hangings. My evil legacy just won't die. My gods, it is cancer! I am so sorry!

 

EDIT: This discussion was actually civil. You want real drama, read my piece about Tulpa Heresy (not deleted, but all there in its original glory) https://community.tulpa.info/thread-tulpa-heresy

 

Oh and if you end up with stress from reading my toxic cancerous posts you can go vent here: https://community.tulpa.info/thread-need-to-bash-mistgod-melian-self-therapy-thread

[Luminesce]

What kind of deception? Things like "I'm not sure who this thought came from, and I want to believe my tulpa is sentient at this point, so I'll say it came from them"?

 

Something like that. We try and maintain that there are no rules, but it's hard when more and more people come here asking for rules. Some people just want to be told what to do and don't want to think for themselves, so for them there are "rules" or guidelines to follow, made of things that have worked for many other tulpamancers. However the free-thinkers will outgrow those things like a scaffold is taken down once they more thoroughly understand the subject and can create their own truths.

 

If we all believe tulpas are possible, why do we need to validate it? And wouldn't any research done be unscientific because it sets out to find evidence in favor of a conclusion, whereas scientific research looks at evidence for whatever conclusion?

 

In a community of a phenomenon for advanced imaginary friends we claim are sentient, the want for proof is pretty much unavoidable. It should be enough to say they're real to you and that's what matters, but when it comes to telling others about them - and then explaining away their doubt - validation becomes a bit more important. And that's what people attempt to do, make up reasons for why tulpas exist and how to defend their existence.

 

And I don't know what to say about the science thing. Semantics. There's a goal and a purpose, no reason to debate whether it's science or not, because it isn't. You can take a scientific mindset to a soft science like this (at absolute best in controlled environments of other science-minded individuals, which this is certainly not), but you can't do hard science with it. Logic works, but answers are still subjective in the end. You can never prove without a doubt to someone who doesn't want to believe without concrete proof. But you can prove to yourself without too much difficulty, and that really is what matters.

 

*drama*

 

No drama here, just productive discussion. Let go of the past and continue on with your understanding, not your ego, and all will be fine.

[Guest Anonymous]

Sometimes I can't seem to help myself. LOL These dark Mistgod threads are like ancient books of evil, hiding to be found by those who would be corrupted by their sinister nature. They are alluring with their sexy titles.

[Guest Anonymous]

Mistgod's final Tulpa Info hypothesis (For Science!):

 

Tulpas are realistic imaginary friends created by using belief, intense visualization and role playing to stimulate the unconscious imagination. Melian, my enhanced imaginary companion, is identical in nature to a tulpa. I simply choose not to call her a tulpa.

 

Super short verson --> Tulpas are hallucinatory make believe. So is Melian.

[GlassJustice]

[bull,fucking,shit,I dream,I imagine,I love,I cry,I think therefore I am.]

[glitchthe3rd]

And because just posting a reaction image makes me literally worse than Fede, I'll ask what it is you hope to do with this hypothesis. Will you be writing a thesis on how tulpas are just illusions, as you mentioned in the IRC? Or will you be doing actual research on the subject, instead of surveys over pointless things like eye color.

[Nobillis]

Tulpas are hallucinatory make believe. So is Melian.

 

It matters not whether I am real or illusion. What matters is that I have real effects. Electronic money is an illusion, but you can buy stuff with it.

 

What you say, is a basic statement that is what the old Tibetan tulpas were intended to teach. The next intended step being for you to realize that this world is also an illusion. I leave that to the theologists to debate.

[Guest Anonymous]

[bull,fucking,shit,I dream,I imagine,I love,I cry,I think therefore I am.]

 

So does Melian. She does all those things. She thinks, therefore I am convincing myself some of my thoughts are actually hers. She thinks, therefore I am.

---

Do You have a single fact to back that up?

 

I have nor more facts to back it up than anyone has for tulpa sentience. My hypothesis has the same level of plausibility and is equally valid.

---

 

It matters not whether I am real or illusion. What matters is that I have real effects. Electronic money is an illusion, but you can buy stuff with it.

 

What you say, is a basic statement that is what the old Tibetan tulpas were intended to teach. The next intended step being for you to realize that this world is also an illusion. I leave that to the theologists to debate.

 

Totally agree! I don't think it matters if Melian is an illusion or not either. Not to me. But I want to be able to freely have my own hypothesis and viewpoints on the forum. They are totally plausible and as valid as the prevailing belief most tulpamancers here. No one can really prove me wrong and are just demanded I present evidence that they themselves do not have for their own perspective.

 

Competing hypothesis are basis of scientific debate are they not? For Science!

 

Presenting things like parallel processing tests and EEGs and things like that does not prove sentience of a tulpa. Presenting arguments from psychology that tulpa sentience is plausible does not prove that they are real sentience, just that sentience is plausible. I am not arguing that the idea is not plausible anyway. I agree that it is plausible. It am saying it is equally plausible tulpas are not sentient at all, but just humans convincing themselves that they are.

---

 

It matters not whether I am real or illusion. What matters is that I have real effects. Electronic money is an illusion, but you can buy stuff with it.

 

 

That precisely reflects my concept of a form of existence I call "pseudo-real." Melian is pseudo-real.