Tulpa.info - tulpa-discussion

and should be seen as such

and I think it would be better if we did

It depends on the definition. Winter would still exist because she was believed to exist subjectively, but winter would not be real because she couldn’t be measured objectively.

@Beckett DID and tulpamancy are hardly different. The difference with DID is a lack of reliable communication between systemmates, which can cause dysfunction for obvious reasons. Remove the issue of inconsistent communication and you have something identical to a tulpa system.

As well, criticizing suich subjective claims is pointless, because the entire concept of this community is a collection of subjective experiences.

@Sete Then we would have to alter our understanding of what a tulpa is.

12:22 AM

That's it.

12:22 AM

I exist - that in itself isn't disputable. What precisely I am is disputable.

Winter clearly does exist. She is interacting with us now.

this community is a collection of people with varying goals and ideals and thoughts and directions

Yes, winter

it does not have a single purpose or direction

[I don't see how it's relevant or important really. What matters is the experience @Reguile and keeping true to that part. Calling tulpas delusions for example gives the implication it's not a real experience because lots of babble about difference of objective and subjective stuff]

Angel/Harleen, can you oibjectively prove that she is? no, and that's sort of the point here. Tulpae are subjective, and therefore criticizing someone's claim for being based on a subjective experience within this community is entirely pointless.

12:24 AM

I do personally believe Winter exists as a tulpa.

@Sete Objective information has significant bearing on reality for literally everyone.

However, it's important to note that what we believe does not equal evidence especially when nothing backs up the evidence. It

Subjective information is important when it comes to psychology, but it is not the end-all.

I am not saying she exists as a tulpa or not, but she clearly exists in the same way anyone else does.

[For tulpas. It might as well be end-all]

That's insinuating a book character must exist as we all do, because they have written dialogue.

@Deleted User Hosts in the mental sense are also subjective. You can prove the the physical body is there, but know nothing about the truth of what's going on in the brain. You would need to literally be the person to prove they exist. owoblobshrug

(edited)

It is not. Winter has a physical body.

And by "exist", I mean "is conscious"

[Ah. But what is "conscious"? Easier to just stick with exist XD]

A person's subjective experience is unfalsifiable. Data is not.

Consciousness is required for the function of the body in daily life. People perform those functions. Simple.

Abvieon, it might be better to ask whether winter is a separate consciousness from her host.

And, quite frankly, unfalsifiable claims are not really useful in science.

Given that we can also measure brain activity during consciousness, we can prove that.

12:26 AM

Unfalsifiable claims are not useful.

12:26 AM

However, are tulpae not unfalsifiable?

I do agree that would be a better question.

[Don't really care about science. I just care about existing and being and growing as a person.]

*tulpas

A given definition is falsifiable, yes.

12:27 AM

If a 'tulpa' is equivalent to another phenomenon, then there is no reason to continue using the term - but I'm sure people will.

12:28 AM

@Deleted User So yes, tulpas are falsifiable.

Fine. Are fully interactive personalities produced from intense focus and meditation falsifiable?

12:28 AM

No.

12:28 AM

You can not measure them.

12:28 AM

There is no brain scan technology at this time capable of directly measuring a tulpa.

[Hehe. Forgot that. How do you define a tulpa? I define it as an ego, you know. The experience of being, thinking, having memories and a personality. Not really measurable stuff.]

You can not measure it. You can not prove it does not exist in any way because it is a subjective experience that can not be proven or observed objectively and externally. They are unfalsifiable subjective experiences.

sigh At the very least, I believe it will be possible to demonstrate if they are more similar to DID or acting - in other words, whether they can legitimately be called a fully separate personality or simply a delusion of the host.

Do I make my case?

It’s not possible to falsify the statement that tulpas are sentient and separate from their host because, if there are no differences in brain activity, tulpas’ sentience and separateness can’t be measured. They can neither be proved nor disproved, which makes them completely subjective.

I would think the fact that people can create their own tulpas, and we have guides to instruct them on how to do so, would serve as some kind of evidence that they can personally verify

You do make your case, yes.

if you create a tulpa, you have received evidence that tulpas exist

That's subjective.

12:29 AM

I have a tulpa, but we do recognize that the entire concept of a system is subjective.

^

[I believe I am a fully seperate personality no matter what some scientific study could say. I might also be a delusion according to some definitions. Not even mutually exclusive stuff XD]

Because it is not objectively measurable evidence, it's anecdotal.

But, again, we can get much closer to the nature of what that experience is - whether or not it is an advanced delusion or something more separate.

Silina, is you were an extension of Sete’s ego, would you still exist? (edited)

Perhaps, it may turn out that an advanced delusion is literally the same thing.

[Actually delusion is probably measurable according to some definitions but being a "fully separate personality" is not(well unless you have a really wonky definition).]

That said, in the end - going back to what started this... I do not believe that making demonstrably false claims is useful or helpful.

12:31 AM

And, stating subjective experience as equivalent to objective fact is similarly not helpful.

that's the thing, though. you're considering the claims objective in a community built on subjective ideas (given what we know and are capable of knowing)

[There are very few such claims involved in tulpamancy and tulpas though. Most by our nature are just not scientifically demonstrable at all.]

People can be much clearer in their language, quite easily.

Subjective ideas are often impossible to falsify, making them useful and helpful at times. They’re valid.

Your argument is fundamentally flawed when you're taking a subjective statement which exists in a subjective context about an entirely subjective phenomena and you're responding to it as objective.

12:32 AM

The problem here was not her wording, but your error in interpretation.

12:33 AM

Maybe her wording could have been improved, sure, but in this case, misinterpretation/misunderstanding is what caused the problem in the grand scheme of things.

...my apologies, @Deleted User. I generally consider discussions of "what the phenomenon actually is" to require more careful wording to be clear about claims, rather than not caring about objective vs subjective wording.

12:33 AM

In casual conversation, not an issue.

I think that this sort of language, as well, does a lot to exclude people. Imagine, for a moment, being a relatively new person who is encountering the "subjective" experiences while running into the "objective" roadblocks, surrounded by people speaking purely of the subjective and not of the objective. Imagine being someone unsure about if your tulpa is acting randomly because you feel your thoughts sort of becoming that of the tulpa, and being next to someone who feels the same way, but does their best to never actually make that clear in their language. In that case, the person who faces the doubts and the issues, is going to continually feel they have failed, let things down, or otherwise have not been successful. It may well drive them away from the community, and I think this occurrence is more common than one might first expect. It is possible these people lack real tulpa, and truly have failed, but honestly I do not believe that is the case from what I read and see from what others with tulpa, who speak and act and say they have tulpa, write.

In more specific discussion, yes. It is more of an issue.

12:34 AM

It also does help things be clearer to new people, who won't have the sense of what is typically claimed as subjective vs objective.

[Actually beyond possibly parallel processing I don't even see an objective definition of pretty much any tulpa-related phenomenon.]

I care about this because it can cause significant misunderstanding from new people, and quite frankly - people who do know it and are interested in clarifying subjective vs objective statements aren't always here to help clarify for new people.

Tbh "subjective" is just another "I don't want to listen to you" buzzword

anyways, i'm gonna go work on my new game now

12:37 AM

okay

12:37 AM

slowwww down

Subjective experiences can be quite interesting and helpful in some cases... and are quite a bit less helpful in others.

[Maybe you should just start with that feeling plural is a subjective experience XD]

Subjective/objective are real distinctions, not just buzzwords used to avoid listening to people. When they're used in that way, that's a problem.

12:37 AM

but yeah

Agreed.

That's a bit of a... reaching claim, Apollo

That's how people use them

Some people use them that way.

There's a problem with using it as ways to shut people out, Abvieon.

[No that's not how we have used it in for example this discussion...]

...and I would say that using them that way is absolutely a problem.

And there is a real distinction with them, which is helpful in some cases

It is often used that way, but it's not helpful to assume that they always are

oh jesus i'm sorry i thought you were replying to me, I use the name Apollo sometimes as an online handle and I got mixed up

12:39 AM

I thought you were saying I was making a reaching claim by saying they're real distinctions

12:39 AM

sorry

Lol

also helps that I'm using a custom client so I can't actually see nicknames until I click someone

12:41 AM

fucking love this thing but it's obnoxious sometimes

12:43 AM

Hm.