Confessions of a Poorly Trained Tulpa

[Guest Anonymous]

If anyone is wondering what my thoughtform Melian looks like in my mind, she looks very much (almost identical) to actress Sondra Dee from the 1950s, when she was a teenager. Sondra Dee could almost be Melian's twin sister. By coincidence, Sandra Dee married singer Bobby Darin, who did the famous song "Dream Lover"

 

 

 

 

http://img04.deviantart.net/e52c/i/2014/200/4/6/sandra_dee_one_of_the_origins_of_melian_by_melianofmist-d7rdowu.png[/img]

[AracnidsGrip/Rick]

Vriska: She is very beautiful!!! You are very beautiful, Mel!!

[Guest Anonymous]

Awww, thank you! I know right? Okay, not to be mean to Sondra Dee, but I am even cuter than she was. My cheeks are rounder, just a little, and my eyes bigger, just a little. Also, I have "permanent special effects." Like, for instance, my eyes always sparkle like there is a movie set lighting on my eyes all the time. Yeah, stuff like that and stuff. So I am even cuter than she was.

[Guest Anonymous]

 

I love me so much! :-)

[Lacquer]

On that spectrum, which seems more like developmental stages of a tulpa rather than what is or isn't a tulpa, you seem significantly above a level that would constitute being a tulpa.

[Guest Anonymous]

That depends, I think, on who is looking at the chart I guess. Some think tulpas are not tulpas until they are at the very end at imposition. That's okay if they think that. I don't think there is a clear cut category of "totally a tulpa" and there probably will never be. BTW, I will probably stay right where I am on this chart. I don't really feel like I need to be anything but what I have always been.

[Guest Anonymous]

In this thread about being a skeptic, https://community.tulpa.info/thread-general-skepticism, Sea wrote "I'm assuming "Melian" is one of your Tulpas and if so I can't imagine that they have been around since your childhood, maybe it's an imaginary friend that you haven't let go of but it's not relevant to disproving my point. Your experiences are unfalsifiable, I can't prove that Melian exists no more than you can prove he/she/they do."

 

Then he promptly closed the thread from further discussions. Well, he can't stop us from talking to each other about what he had to say and what he didn't grasp. By his last comment about Melian, he proved that he did not read my responses to his OP very well at all and totally misinterpreted what I was saying. He also ignored FadingSpectrum completely.

 

I hate it when these supposedly science minded people drop in to announce our illegitimacy after barely reading anything. He was right about Melian being an "imaginary friend I haven't let go of." So what? That doesn't mean she isn't a tulpa or that she didn't develop into something most people have not experienced. Also, I wasn't claiming that Melian has been around since birth, as she wasn't, I was responding to FadingSpectrum, but he totally missed that.

---

He also ignored my point about lucid dreaming.

[Lacquer]

He only heard what he wanted to hear, and that's okay. Can't win every battle.

[NoneFromHell]

The thread got reopened after discussing this situation. Feel free to go back to discuss in it.

[Guest Anonymous]

I have always found extreme realists/skeptics to be cynical, close minded and arrogant. He didn't take the time it would require to be even close to fully informed about tulpamancy and all its nuances. He dismissed Melian without looking deeper into it, without asking me any questions about her or asking what I think in general about tulpas. It is obvious he had his mind set from the get go and came in with a bias and foregone conclusion. He had no interest in learning anything at all or he would have spent more time on it. It came off like this: "You are all not as informed/intelligent about empirical science and logic as I am and only imagining things and making it all up. I don't need to read more or hear more goodbye." He has no idea of the mind power here behind tulpamancy. It is an insult to you guys and to me.