Tulpa.info - tulpa-discussion

Congradulations!

And how do you know that?

She confirmed it herself, I heard her say "I am sentient."

Wow. Such an evidence

Plus she also said "I am extremely pleased with my existence." so that's a good thing.

Apollo proved his sentience with strong emotion. Do you feel Kundrul's emotions?

Not yet

2:17 PM

She's currently asleep rn, and I don't wanna bug her.

It's kind of a poetic story, Apollo first showing sentience. It was seven days after Lyra first started forcing. She was narrating to him about something bad that happened to her when she was little, and how it affected her. She suddenly felt this strong wave of an emotion that was a mixture of love and sadness overcome her, and she knew it was from him. She went to sleep and had a lucid dream with him, that he controlled. He took her to this Christmas town (since it was December) and he changed his form to wear a green sweater (the same color as the Christmas tree her family put up that day). After, they went into a car, and he drove her "towards the future." After she woke up, he was still wearing that green sweater. She was very happy she then knew her tulpa was real. (edited)

Wow.

Kundrul is awake

@Deleted User what would you consider appropriate or legitmate evidence?

The problem is, you can't reliably prove it.

At some point, "proof" does become more an issue of probability than it does of full, clearly demonstrable evidence.

@2dimensionalrodent The larger overarching phenomenon is called plurality. A body with multiple "people" in it is generally called a system. Tulpamancy has some differences, although are often similar to, other forms of plurality. The vague term is you're plural/a plural system. Tulpa terms is you're a host with a tulpa(s). Author thing tends to be associated with soulbonding, but as far as we're concerned it's generally the same as tulpamancy yes. The term isn't being multiple. That term's not as favorable as plural, and even offensive to some people, so I would avoid it.

In fact, I would personally go so far as to say that is the only genuinely honest way to go about it, given the flaws and biases in human perception.

5:25 PM

(not that such probability needs to be brought up in casual conversation, merely if someone asks about whether one is sure and certainly in terms of trying to determine the accuracy for one's self)

Still, it's quite naive to be 100% sure that your tulpa is a sentient being based on you losing control of your fantasies. I'm not surprised though, I still remember how it looked like in our case.

Well. Yes.

5:27 PM

I can't say I'm ever surprised by it either, hah.

What I can say about young tulpas is that they can give you a lot of... joy. Regardless of them being just imaginary friends seeming to act like independent agents or real sentient beings functioning similar to host.

How is the term "multiple" offensive?

Indeed.

5:30 PM

People get excited when they feel they are making progress.

That excitement can frequently be blinding.

At which point you measure the strength of the proof by consistency of results repeated across a wide array of people in measurable enough ways to have numerical significance when compared to the alternative understanding

@Felight Used to be here. https://i.imgur.com/is8dZNn.png

Wait, I thought I was scrolled down all the way

They've since reworked their definition, it seems. It used to say "Never call a system multiple until you've asked them" or something like that.

Aw, that was just a response to "proof is more of a probability"

Edit your message to have proof is more of a probability at the top of it.

I've never heard if that term being offensive until now, lol

Either way, seems it's falling out of use.

.io always seemed a lot more SJWish than other communities

It was more of a tumblr term, so the fact that someone was offended by it is unsurprising.

5:41 PM

.io's terminologies list also includes 2 to 3 times one of .info's would.

I know

It's practically my only source of information on said terms.

If terms are "offensive" in a community, you best avoid that community like the plague.

I'd certainly consider giving them some distance, for sure

When the community in question is on Tumblr, yes. All of the above.

I'm in a lot of different places and I've never heard anyone take offense to "multiple".

I believe it was with context of tumblr plurality communities where "traumagenic" is a frequently used term, if that means anything to you.

7:30 PM

Assuming someone was multiple was probably similar to assuming their gender, I don't know. But okay, so it's not offensive.

I only take offense to "multiple" because it sounds like a stupid new term.

but the term has been around for a while

i remember when people in the tulpa community got mad when people used the term "system"

looking for some help and trying something new, assuming I've been doing most things "wrong" for the last couple years how do YOU guys visualize what does it feel, what does it "look" like when you start(it may be different if your doing open vs closed eye). I think I may be focusing on the back of my eyelids too much... maybe

what do you mean?

I'm looking into that I may be visualizing "wrong" or at least less effectively and had chat open so I thought maybe I'll start here and get to the guides when I have more time. (edited)

you mean visualizing your tulpa specifically, a mindscape, or what?

in general I guess I've looked into tulpa specific visualization but not general maybe I'm missing something

well what exactly is the problem you're having? is the image fuzzy or hard to focus on?

though that was a good while ago too so maybe some new guides are around, sure would be nice if this wasn't such a (lost the word to vary from parson to person")

subjective?

ya I think that's it I was close think "abjective"

9:23 PM

it can be very hard to get an image going and often it turns into like watching a video that has nothing to do with forcing (edited)

unfortunately visualization isn't exactly my forte, either; in fact, my wonderland consists of one room still that i can't walk around in -.- I can shift perspectives, though. I mean, as far as i can tell, really all you can do is keep on keeping on. I can finally consistently bring the room to "view," though, but i don't have any proper advice. i'm sure there are loads of people around who can give better advice, but they seem to be absent (edited)

I'll look into the guides later maybe I missed something small but important

9:31 PM

I haven't noticed till now that you're right I almost never visualize walking around could be a decent place to start

it's a pain -.-

9:32 PM

never been able to manage it

one thing that helped me(for a little while at least) was visualizing walking barefoot on soft warm grass try to bring together as many sense as possible to make feel more real, for a while it was the best way for me to get "into" my wonderland but it stopped helping a while back before that it was focusing on how a few individual strand of hairs, looking at them move gleam in the sunlight, make them as real as possible then pull back your vision to see you whole tulpa. most recently it was something simple like holding hands but again it seems to have lost effectiveness.

i'll have to give that a try

What do you think is so bad about FAQ man's giude? I personally do not see there being that much harm in things like hour counts and form imagined in a certain way.

That form thing is a meme for me

11:02 PM

But it's obviously bullshit what is written about it

11:02 PM

And also about hour count

It's certainly not something that is necessarily true, but the assertion that a form is important to be imagined naked at first is not necessarily more or less substantiated than a lot of things various guides say. I think there comes a point at which you start to say that no concrete statements may be made about tulpamancy at all.

11:03 PM

hour counts, and so on, aren't necessarily harmful. They are one of many possible systems and interpretations of how to create a tulpa or drive what's going on in the mind. They can, in fact, be very beneficial, I believe.

It's easier to reject something that is obviously wrong than write something 100% right

Namely, they give tulpamancy weight and legitimacy. Saying you have to force X hours makes it feel like you're doing something.

We have plenty of tulpas that are able to change clothes (and more than that) easily despite not being imagined naked.

Problem is that it isn't obviously wrong. It may well be the case for some that imagining the tulpa naked at first will help with visualization down the line. It isn't totally right, either, but not to be dismissed and disregarded, I think (edited)

And we have plenty of tulpas that started to talk to their host in time of several hours (edited)

I think the best basis for tulpamancy is a core assumption that the brain is powerful and can produce arbitrary rules. FAQ mans guide self perpetuates. If a person reads and believes it, the guide itself becomes the ruleset, rather than being a description of the ruleset (edited)

11:06 PM

I think it should be introduced and treated that way, not as an objective thing, but as a possible ruleset that many will find more solid and reasonable than other rulesets

One thing regarding passive forcing

11:42 PM

Is it fine to rehearse old material? Something we've talked about before but I have nothing interesting to say (edited)

Yep

Fair enough. That will keep it going for a while

A little late here, but something is that is not harmful and has worked for multiple people is not "obviously wrong"

12:27 AM

if it has worked for even 2 unrelated people and doesn't carry any risks, it is worth exposing a new tulpamancer to

12:27 AM

that's why, I presume, it is emphasized so strongly that people read multiple guides

12:27 AM

read what worked for a bunch of different people, read what could be harmful, and do what feels right

12:28 AM

I guess you could say that the specific line "your tulpa will struggle with changing appearance if you don't force naked" is wrong because others didn't do that and could change

12:28 AM

but more broadly, I think we should not be so quick to dismiss what people have written, especially if it has been shown to work in multiple cases

12:33 AM

*my opinion

theres solid reasoning behind faqmans ideas tho

12:50 AM

while one doesnt /have to/ do the imagine naked thing or the hour counts to achieve desired results

12:51 AM

theres still a logic to going from what is essentially the ground up with the naked thing

12:52 AM

and the hour counts were meant as a method to help keep track of progress and have something to compare off of, as well as to get people in the mentality of taking the time to work for the desired result rather than get upset if it doesnt happen quickly

12:53 AM

but since everyone went "AH fuck hour counts" nobody really knows the actual average forcing time to achieve x result

12:55 AM

and i might add that i have doubts that anyone has never imagined their tulpa naked at least once

12:56 AM

well at least anyone that has had one for a decent period of time

listen to jordan peterson and you'll have the most well adjusted tulpa

Hahaha.

as well as to get people in the mentality of taking the time to work for the desired result Yes, the true benefit of hour counts was making you feel bad if you didn't force often enough. Too-infrequent forcing is still and always will be a problem.

3:45 AM

i have doubts that anyone has never imagined their tulpa naked at least once Depends on the scale we're talking about, here. Like in detail, or just quick mental flashes? The latter can happen even as I write something like this. But the former is not the case for Lucilyn or I. They're not forms you should be imagining naked, generally speaking.

I have officially proven myself as the worst host ever