Tulpa.info - tulpa-discussion

and a tulpa is something you can dissipate with no, or little, consequence, in most cases.

3:35 AM

few ever get to the point that the above is not the case

3:35 AM

it takes literal years

We disagree on that. The framework needs a personality to run. If no personality exists, one is constructed.

According to the initial definitions you had used, the 'framework' is the person. "you", and any other tulpas there, are "original identities" - seeing as 'you' and any tulpas are intrinsically the same things.

Usually from memories.

You can call them identities, you can call them people, but they are in essence the same thing.

A host can dissipate and it would have no more impact on the brain than a tulpa dissipating would provided the tulpa(s) in that host's syetem were well developed

by my original definitions I called the host the person, and you asked what "the host" would be called by my thoughts, so I said "original identity".

3:36 AM

the host does not change, but learns to identify itself as multiple "people".

I see. Then, to be clear, are you saying that tulpas are all merely roleplaying - where an individual pretends to be multiple people long enough that it is automatic?

I’d say the original personality construct builds more personality constructs, not that one underlying host does what you say.

it is not merely roleplaying

3:38 AM

it is more in depth and structured than that, you have to do a lot of fiddling and farting about with how things work

3:38 AM

you have to make yourself delusional, to a degree

3:39 AM

calling it automatic is a disservice, it's something out of your control that you inspire to happen through forcing

3:39 AM

like an emotion or a association between memory and smell

I submit to you the following graphic for the concept that is the base idea of what tulpas are.

3:39 AM

I don’t think any of us actually know how it works tbh, everything Misaka and I have said is guesswork

3:40 AM

An algorithm can’t come to understand itself

3:40 AM

If it can think

3:40 AM

It’s too complex to ever be able to grasp its true nature

3:40 AM

Without external help

even with external help

It's almost like hosts and their tulpas live in the same brain

Reguile - am I correct in saying that you are replacing "host" with "original identity" and "underlying framework" with "host" in the above graphic?

it would be like trying to emulate a 2 ghz processor... on a 2 ghz processor

3:41 AM

the graphic is distracting and lacks nuance and points, I can't work with it to any real degree.

What we do know is that hosts and Tulpas act basically the same... most of the time?

sorry, I don't know if you took time to draw it

3:42 AM

it's a good graph

Depends on the brain.

...I took roughly 30 seconds to draw it as a way of visualizing the most basic idea.

still, more than most would do

Because, the basic concept isn't that difficult to grasp.

Functionally they're the exact same. Everything a person can do a tulpa can do and vice versa. Regardless of what you believe tulpas to be, this is true

That’s it. We know somehow, you can make something happen that makes part of your brain talk back to you

3:43 AM

Which means that the part of your brain that makes you talk isn’t necessarily unique

@Abvieon {Alex} I'm not sure what about that concept is so difficult for Reguile to acknowledge.

because it's misleading

3:44 AM

looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, in the brain, most likely isn't a duck. (edited)

3:44 AM

if you're going to talk pure morality, I could give you my whole spheal about who should treat who how and why

3:45 AM

but I don't have the time right now

so tl;dr, tulpas don't real, its all in your head

Basically, our wild guess into the dark is that Tulpas, hosts, and other thoughtforms, are made of memories, and we guess that such thoughtforms are run on the same infrastructure no matter what origin

tl;dr tulpas =/= people

But that’s just WMG

there are lots of similarities

In the end, I think the important point is that this needs to be explainable to other people in a coherent way.

but there are differences as well

Reguile: Are you saying there is a difference between the original identity and any tulpas that come to exist?

if tulpas aren't people, then what are you debating with

As in, a functional difference.

No differences. The underlying framework creates personality on the fly

I am saying there's a difference between the differences between you and the person sitting next to you

From memories

and the differences between you and the tulpa in your head

3:47 AM

and that difference of differences is different enough that you shouldn't consider the gaps the same way (edited)

do you have anything substantive to say or does everything come down to some definition of the word "person"?

...what.

the mindset of tulpamancy generally doesn't place personhood upon the body, but instead upon the personality

This is why egocide is so difficult, the framework can run memories to reconstruct shit

then that's totally insane, because a personality is not a person

Reguile, please. I remember you as somebody that tried to have conversation in a way that encouraged communication, not obfuscation of meaning.

The “person” is the combination of personalities and framework at any given moment

so by your definition, is the host the person, or is the system the person?

I sincerely hope that the "difference of differences" sentence was an unfortunate phrasing and not the aforementioned discouragement of clarity.

hah, that was kinda me having fun with using the word different a lot of times

3:50 AM

sorry, probably at expense of readability

I see consciousness as a sort of "hub" that exists to take in and organize sensory input. A tulpa is a second "hub" that you create by directing sensory input (in the form of narration and forcing) towards something you assign the label of "not me". If you keep directing this input at something you don't see as yourself, a new "hub" will form around that input you keep throwing out

the broad point is that a tulpa and a host are connected as one "thinking" "well interconnected" thing

3:51 AM

and independent people are not

so the host and his/her tulpas collectively make up the person?

Insofar as there is one brain doing the thinking, yes.

not one brain, but one "stream of thought"

Brains are not binary systems.

they are not, but they are very interconnected systems where all the parts lean on each other and effect each other

3:52 AM

people can't process two complex tasks at once

When it comes to focused tasks, such as solving complicated math problems that involve juggling larger amounts of active memory, it is absolutely one stream of thought.

3:52 AM

Yes.

thought is a complex task

3:52 AM

and simple tasks are also impacted by multitasking

S y s t e m

However, it is similarly possible for there to be many streams of thought that aren't involving direct focus on a specific task.

3:53 AM

The brain does do quite a few things simultaneously, not all in sequence like a computer.

3:53 AM

...or a CPU more specifically, I suppose.

a CPU is doing many things simultaniously

3:53 AM

but to accomplish a single line of tasks

An individual CPU core is not processing more than one thing at any individual moment.

what we see, everywhere that we observe human multitasking, we find a failure to properly multitask.

3:54 AM

or almost everywhere (edited)

Instead of seeing tulpas as streams of thought, it might be helpful to see them as "observation points", aka the "hub" thing I mentioned earlier. They don't necessarily need to be thinking in conjunction with the host to exist. Thinking and observing/experiencing are not the same thing

3:54 AM

This observation and experience is what makes up consciousness.

That said, again, none of this indicates that a tulpa and host aren't the same intrinsic thing, since they can do the same general tasks that indicate they are people. They can't override the capability of the brain, but they do absolutely exist as separate identities that can directly communicate, disagree, and otherwise act like two people would if they were chatting without physical contact and had access to the same information.

you're getting caught up on tulpa vs host

You're getting caught up in one brain being the end-all.

I'm thinking of the significance of tulpa/host vs the significance of a person

We can oversimplify each other's points all day.

3:56 AM

The significance of tulpa vs host is nil.