Reminder that like parroting, puppeting is the same mental action as a fully developed tulpa consciously controlling themselves
I disagree, but I think the interpretation of this depends on how you define "host".
If the "host" is the stream of consciousness (SOC), that feeling of being alive, seeing through the eyes, etc., then yes, parroting could be the same as a tulpa controlling themself.
However, we believe that the SOC is a thing, not a person. Gray and I are identities and the SOC just exists as a thing that "houses" identities. In that sense, Gray parroting me would be him either consciously influencing me (direct expectation) or unconsciously influencing me (indirect expectation). I can tell the difference between myself talking and Gray influencing me because I would say "Hey wait a second, this doesn't feel like me" or "Hey wait a second, that doesn't seem like something I would do, I don't like that". If Gray is making the choice of my actions for me, I would detect that and not like it.
What about young tulpas then? I don't think worrying about conscious or unconscious parroting matters because they haven't figured out the difference between themself and you yet. It takes time to build up a personality, and only a more developed personality would be able to recognize what they do and don't like.
However, all of this assumes that the SOC is not a person, tulpas and hosts have their own unconscious trains of thought, and it is possible to distinguish unconscious thoughts between headmates. All of these assumptions are a byproduct of our conscious experiences
the only difference between parroting and full tulpa vocality is that someone who 'parrots' isn't good at disentangling their identity from willful actions
how can a tulpa tell if something is not them, or is just something they didn't know about themselves? People sometimes find out things about themselves they aren't comfy with, so do tulpas operate differently?
I was just reading the posts above and it sounds like tulpas can tell if something is themselves or not, so it made me wonder if tulpas don't operate the same way as normal people
8:59 PM
as in, do tulpas just never find out stuff about themselves that they didn't know before?
About tulpas saying if something is themselves or not, you mean tulpas deciding if their action while puppeted or during the dream are considered canon or not?
I was just reading the posts above and it sounds like tulpas can tell if something is themselves or not, so it made me wonder if tulpas don't operate the same way as normal people
@HvllBlau - jump
I operate like a person, I think we have awareness of who thinks what.
Gray can sometimes pick out where his ideas come from. Like he'll hear MatPat's voice or even a friend's voice if it's an opinion he associates with them. I doubt this always happens but it's pretty nifty.
As for me, if I hear something in Gray's voice or at least it doesn't sound like mine, that's usually a sign the thought wasn't mine to begin with.
We are very verbal with our communication though. If it's non-verbal, a thought can have a vibe or a feeling and that can give away who dun it.
Also for tulpas, I think they take the time to notice themself from host and that's something a tulpa has to worry about a singlet doesn't- you do have an entire other person in your head after all, you gotta say what's you or not somehow!
If the brain doesn't know something, none of the headmates will know it either. But they may feel they did the thing and claim they did it. Maybe there's some subconscious belief about it and that will get voiced one way or another
HvllBlau
so tulpas just know if something is them or not? Does that mean tulpas can't find out things about themselves they don't already know?
I don't think we're discovering anything of objective value- we're not doing actual science yet. Hopefully the Stanford study can shine some light on that and more research will come.
As for if we're making it up or not- tulpamancy is so weird you can make a tulpa successfully just by roleplaying. At its core, the point is to convince yourself you can have another person in your head. This either works or it doesn't, it doesn't require knowledge a certain region of the brain or anything fancy like that because it's about what one is willing to believe or at least suspend their belief for. What I do know is a lot of people report they have created a tulpa and have a variety of experiences that are different from the norm.
Are they faking, roleplaying? Even if they were they could still have a real tulpa at the end of the day(edited)
so I guess I could choose what I discover about myself by imagining what I want to be? But are there limits to this? So for example, could I imagine being a different gender to my host and that would be the case? Could I imagine I'm more confident and then it would be so?
11:15 PM
another way to ask it; is there a limit to imagining things making them real?
there isn't really a limit, but it's important to stay grounded and remember that it is imagination and doesn't necessarily reflect anything about physical reality.
11:18 PM
And there will also be parallel discoveries about how these imaginings make you feel
11:18 PM
as in, you can find that being a lovecraftian horror doesn't really make your mind very comfortable
11:19 PM
(you can imagine yourself to have different feelings but that brings you further out from physical reality i.e. your mind)
I'm quite surprised to see others struggling with blending or losing the front during roleplaying similar to D&D too. I didn't think other systems would also have this problem, but it's definitely a problem I had before in the past.
First, I want to point out that it's okay to have multiple definitions for switching and to have different types of switching. Everyone's switching is ultimately different and that's okay. It's not fair to assume switching must be possession just by looking at it, to really understand it you need to get a lot of the nuance behind it. It is possible to learn multiple types of switching.
Anyway, if anyone is interested, I can go over what I know on how to achieve sensory switching. This is what I call our switching experience, as it allows me to play D&D, take classes, etc. without losing the front.
===
7:31 PM
However, there's something that troubles me.
I have a deep fear that teaching switching in general early can be harmful to the system. I can establish that this fear is unreasonable. If the system can switch early, this does not affect them in a negative way. However, there's a problem with this.
What if this doesn't apply to sensory switching? If a younger system learns sensory switching early, would they not have any issues either? I understand that switching where the tulpa can still lose the front is very safe since like possession the host can step in whenever trust is violated. However, with sensory switching, would this also be the case?
1