Tulpa.info - metaphysics

Brains give rise to consciousness, and consciousness gives rise to brains

8:06 PM

But that latter point is rarely even considered, much less accepted as possible (edited)

8:07 PM

Which is honestly sort of baffling given that consciousness is the only way for us to experience the world, and that all experience "arises" (or happens in) consciousness

8:07 PM

For all we KNOW (experientially), there might be ONLY consciousness

8:08 PM

However the "objective world" we experience in waking life is consistent and believable enough that it seems at least likely that it's not just "imagined" but also in some sense "real"

8:09 PM

But just to state it clearly once more, for all we KNOW, experientially, our experience happens in consciousness, and in this respect can be considered "imagined", or "illusion", including, say, experiences of "past lives"

8:09 PM

@Reguile

The reason I tend to stop talking when you mention the sort of idea were consciousness creates the universe is because I have no functional words to say regarding it. I wish I could have some sort of response therefore you, but nothing of real value to say comes to mind when I consider it. The foundation of reality as we live in it and experience it is that it exists, to say consciousness creates the reality tears apart so much of that foundation that there is no longer an operational system I have to say anything with

yeah we kind of have to work with some kind of model that makes sense to us and has worked so far. otherwise we can tear any argument down by saying that reality doesn't exist and we just imagine it because we're high on the oxygen within it

It's not really necessary to speculate whether consciousness "creates the universe"

8:23 PM

What I'm talking about is the much more graspable concept that consciousness "creates" our (individual) life experience and is, in some sense, synonymous with it

8:24 PM

All you've ever "known" has been consciousness

8:24 PM

Everything else you "know" about the world is really inferred

8:25 PM

Which really brings me back to my original point of "sure, past life experiences may be illusion, but for all it's worth, so might be everything else you've experienced"

8:25 PM

Your life COULD be both "imagined in consciousness" and "real"

8:25 PM

They are not mutually exclusive perspectives

8:29 PM

(love these conversations btw lol, thanks for indulging me)

Like I mention, this whole deal goes beyond me a bit where my main concern and point of discussion is the "physical" shared reality. Suggestions or discussion of how consciousness is the measure from which you experience reality and that this opens up for "another reality" to be just as real are beyond capacity/desire for me to discuss.

Fair enough

well the thing about that, is that it's just drawing a line on which information we accept as true. We're observing some kind of physical reality, but then we decide that we're going to say we don't know if what we're observing is there or not. And if we do that, then we could also assume that we never observe anything at all. And that may sound silly and disjointed at first, but you will find that it's just as unprovable as the other. It's like a state variable lowpass where we decide first that we don't know if there is truly a signal at all, and then we decide that we don't know if there is actually more than one state or frame that exists other than the current value of the internal variable.

Hopefully at least I've made clear why it's so funny to me that people who in some sense create a "shared consciousness" so easily dismiss other unfalsifiable phenomena related to the nature of consciousness (edited)

8:34 PM

beebee, as far as I can grasp your message, I would say "yes" hahaha

8:35 PM

state variable lowpass

is there an easy way of explaining this term to a rookie?

are you familiar with a capacitor?

I only know my twenty-five-year-old 8-track recorder uses them and that I'm due to replace them, lol, but not so much what they actually "do"

8:38 PM

the only reason why I entertain the idea that consciousness is a phenomenon that pervades the universe independent of brains is because of DMT and psilocybin

Psilocybin is also what kickstarted this process of inquiring deeper into the nature of consciousness for me, but while I certainly agree that entheogenic experiences FEEL as if "consciousness pervades everything", the takeaway only really need be as concrete as "all I can ever know for certain about my life experience is that I am conscious"

simple lowpass output = (1-t)(lastOutput) + t(input); lastOutput = output where t is from 0 to 1. lastOutput would be internal state of the filter. essentially t is a slider between the incoming sample and the last sample. 100% last sample means no movement, 0% last sample means full movement

Tbh now I understand less than before haha

8:45 PM

In any case, if taking this part out of context is valid, I agree with it, haha - "we decide first that we don't know if there is truly a signal at all, and then we decide that we don't know if there is actually more than one state or frame that exists"

yeah I think you can take that out of context and it'll be fine

phew lol

hi

Hi

Eyyyyyyo!

Haha hey

Hiya GerSHAK!

Would be v happy to continue the above conversation with anyone interested in sharing their perspective on the "matter" ;P

11:22 PM

(weird nerd joke about mind vs matter)

There is currently no mechanism known (outside of the tulpamancy community) to create a second person that shares your body and mind

@Maharani I think tulpas fit within what is known about the mind in psychology. We have self-schemas, and we have theory of mind, where we can model the behaviour of other people. If you create a detailed model of another person and then train it to respond in various ways, it develops it's own set of self-schemas, combine that with a visualized form, treat them like another person... well, that's a tulpa imo, you don't need supernatural forces to explain them. And then the brain can use those self-schemas to think and act instead of just the host's set of self-schemas

Yuka, I would agree with all of that

11:28 PM

you don't need supernatural forces to explain them

My point (which started this discussion) is that tulpamancers tend to dismiss any other commonly described weird but unfalsifiable "consciousness" phenomena as "supernatural", which is a bit funny to me (edited)

11:29 PM

Like okay tulpas are sort of "easy to understand"

11:29 PM

As for how they can be created and why they "work" as they do, I mean

11:31 PM

But just because, say, "past life experiences" or "non-human entheogenic entities" can't currently described according to how science currently understands the world, doesn't mean they're any less "real" than anything else in our life experience

11:32 PM

Tulpas, or singlets for that matter, are just as "imagined" as anything else in our consciousness experience

11:32 PM

If you uh, get what I'm driving at, I'm probably being too wordy about it

If it's beyond what is known about the physical world, then what can we reliably say about it? Past life experiences haven't been proven, so all we can say is "people had such and such experiences"

I mean yeah that's right, and I mean it's not like I don't "get" what people mean when they describe past lives as illusions and human beings as real

And some things can be tested to see if they are true or not. If someone says their tulpa manifests physically in reality and can knock objects over or be seen by other people. That's a big claim, that hasn't been held up by evidence, and so people don't believe it

11:36 PM

Like, there isn't a good reason to believe it

I just kinda wanna somehow poke people's noses into the "recognition" that can happen where we understand that ALL of our experience is simultaneously "happening in a real world" AND "an experience in consciousness"

I kind of have a compartment in my mind where I store "meta things I think are interesting and I'm considering" (edited)

11:39 PM

But if it's not scientifically proven, I can't go around as if it is

The standard "tenet" of tulpamancy IMO is unfalsifiable, namely that an independent second person is created by the "first" person who then shares their body and mind (which could be suspected from the outside to be a singlet exhibiting two distinct personalities, which mind you I'm not saying)

But just because, say, "past life experiences" or "non-human entheogenic entities" can't currently described according to how science currently understands the world, doesn't mean they're any less "real" than anything else in our life experience

@Maharani The difference is that with tulpas we can speculate about plausible mechanisms while "past life experiences" and such not only don't have any plasuble mechanism but actively contradict what we know about the universe

11:40 PM

At that point it is effectively indistinguishable from magic.

"actively contradict what we know about the universe" Please do elaborate

11:41 PM

(Btw just quick side note I hope I'm not coming across as hostile, for me these are pleasant conversations)

Yeah, past lives can fit within... say imagination or false memories. But there's no known mechanism for past lives to be real and verified at this time

And no mechanicanism for how they would be transmitted. We don't have even base sort of evidence about anything kind of like that sort of transmission, meanwhile tulpas at base can rely on the fact that we already know brains have to actively construct at least one sense of self (plus similar things like DID have been studied), and the principle that neurons that fire together, wire together.

Back to tulpamancy, there are other ideas from the early days about tulpas living in the wonderland even when the host is not paying them any attention. Followed by the idea that a host can switch places with their tulpa and live in the wonderland while the tulpa controls the body. People considered that this could be possible (even within a non meta approach) and they tried it. And most people found it just didn't work. I feel like I know only one person who consistently describes their system working this way.

What is the experience of most hosts while switched with their tulpa? Disassociation?

Maybe a handful of others who haven't given enough detail for me to draw a conclusion about

11:47 PM

Most hosts experience watching the world while their tulpa controls the body

11:47 PM

They can't really shut out the senses or focus on other things like a wonderland

I wouldn't call that stuff meta unless people say it's possible because magic

What other explanations do people give? Do any just straight up say it's confabulation? (edited)

People who don't believe it usually consider it confabulation

did I get a ping?

I feel like I know only one person who consistently describes their system working this way.

I know several systems who describe tulpas being active in the wonderland while inactive in the body

It could always be genuine parallel processing

I wouldn't say it's meta necessarily (unless someone claims the wonderland is in the astral plane)

I wish I could put into words how I 100 % understand what you guys are getting at, and that I don't really "disagree" with it

Here's a question I have regarding that. Is it at all possible for the subconscious to directly write memories without going through consciousness?

I gave it as an example of something you might expect vs what you'll learn via experience

11:54 PM

We can explore and experiment with different things and see what works, even if it's still pretty subjective and internal

11:56 PM

Like if you're not sure if tulpas are real, you can make one and have a better understanding of the subject (though I don't think it's good idea to make a tulpa as an experiment)

I agree with that 100 %

LILY, I don't know, sorry

My point is not so much whether "entheogenic entities" or "magick" etc are just as "physically real" as, say, trees and animals and human beings

12:04 AM

It's more along the lines of, experientially, the only thing we can know for certain is that our entire life experience, including waking life in an objectively real world as well as dreams, "past life experiences" and "non-human entities", happens inside our consciousness (edited)

12:05 AM

Consciousness and our life experience are in some sense synonymous

12:06 AM

It's the "deepest" aspect of the human being (in that it's there both in the waking state and dreams) and is just as "real" as the body/mind organism (edited)

12:07 AM

The body/mind is one aspect of our consciousness experience, they're interdependent

12:08 AM

Okay I hope all that doesn't sound too "abstract" because really the reason this framework is laid out that way is for a practical reason

12:10 AM

It describes that the fact that the consciousness aspect of the human being remains unrecognized is the source of all human unhappiness, which is never the result of physical or emotional pain, and instead arises as guilt, hatred, anxiety, regrets and expectations

12:10 AM

The misunderstanding that we are the "doers" of Life rather than instruments designed and grown and shaped and lived by life

12:10 AM

(lol I went way too far as usual I guess)

12:10 AM

(this has been on my mind for two years now)

All we experience happens in consciousness, yes, that blows my mind whenever I think about it. It's part of why tulpas can be imposed and experienced as if they are in the room

12:12 AM

Or why I can believe it's possible anyway

Exactly like! okay yes people don't describe their tulpas as being able to interact with physical reality but the fact that they do describe full-sensory imposition is astounding and not given enough credit if accepted as true!

I don't know that I agree with your philosophical conclusions about suffering, though

Hahaha fair enough

But I'm very happy that you pointed me at the essence of the point I was trying to make earlier (in my previous message)

g'evening

But yeah the possibility of full-blown voluntary omnisensory* hallucination, if true, should make us sort of question the nature of our experience in consciousness

12:15 AM

I might have made that word up

(edited)

12:18 AM

Btw just once more for the sake of completion, it's not necessary to experience "hallucinations" and "past life experiences" and God etc in order to "recognize" our "true nature" as conscious beings

12:18 AM

It's enough to really recognize that ever since the sperm and the egg came together and designed the organism, it's never been separate from Life, always shaped and grown and conditioned by it

12:19 AM

(wow that's a lot of quotation marks haha)