Tulpa.info - tulpa-discussion

Even if you're occupied by things that aren't very intellectual, you all still have the same access to the same mental functions

Anyway, Heraclitus seems maybe not omniscient, but to have extrasensory perception

Or confabulating

8:56 PM

Like a lot of tulpas

8:56 PM

Whose hosts have impossible expectations

it's highly unlikely anybody tulpa, host or singlet is gonna have omniscience

Word. Agreed.

although someone with a different but effective form of thinking could appear to

But definitely has capacity to model reality in a more holistic manner than host. I think this is because of how I've oriented his vision.

And how do you measure that?

Awareness of things host isn't aware of

Like?

Things going on outside the house, things going on outside of senses.

And why do you expect it from a tulpa?

that might be a result of spending time thinking in different ways

Expect?

9:00 PM

Just observing

And what did you observe exactly? That your tulpa was able to guess things?

Pretty much.

that could be a result of receiving different anticipated socialization

9:02 PM

they could've been thought better how to predict things and react to those predications (edited)

Heraclitus sees the world through a bubble, where the entire 3-d environment is refracted in the bubble, so behind below and above are all perceived at once.

9:03 PM

Versus 180° degree field of vision of host

may I ask how that's even possible?

Imagination

How do you know that?

I'm talking about a fucking tulpa. 0f course it's all imaginary. But it's bizarre. Like he has extensions on my usual senses. Perhaps there are things the body and brain can map in the environment that our conscious attention isn't designed to perceive

9:06 PM

Heat, movement, air pressure. Things we pay no mind to.

And @Allun , although possibilities like you suppose his tulpa may have might not be supernatural but are still very unlikely to be true. It's not really proven that tulpas can have better capabilities and if they even think in the background.

Host has spent previous years of his life doing 40 hours of meditation a week for many years. Host is familiar with very strange phenomena, some seemingly to do with perceiving outside the limitations of the senses.

9:09 PM

But lives pretty much a normal life now with very little interest in esotericism. Tulpa seems to still have access to that mode of being.

9:10 PM

Basically I think it's cool and weird af.

brains are designed to perceive things they don't acutely see (move your eyes back and forth in front of a mirror to observe this (doesn't work with cameras)) but it still seems odd that you could observe in all directions, I don't doubt that beyond senses detection could be possible to a degree but not an all directs at once degree

So, host is crazy? Explains a lot.

9:12 PM

@Allun, what the eyes cannot provide brain can make up.

we tend to underestimate what exactly we can detect with our senses by ignoring a huge chunk of what we do detect until trained not to

9:12 PM

indeed I know that

9:12 PM

but the brain still needs some reference

9:13 PM

photographic memory I guess could work along with cues from other senses

People genuinely experience going outside their bodies. Of course it doesn't mean that they they really go outside their bodies. But they experience their first person perspective shifting and can see realistic image of the world.

I suppose yeah, I've done that myself

Which of course, is not consistent with reality in general

yeah thinking about that makes sense I was thinking of it as properly seeing in all directions with full (or as close to full as our brains provide) consistency with reality

Besides, there is also a difference between something being possible and true. Tulpa having something like obe seems to be unlikely to me. It's rather the same kind of confabulation as tulpas claiming they were in another head show.

Seeing a theme in how you model the world Luna. I've found four separate discussion threads in 10 minutes where you're playing "objectivist" and drawing others into your orbit.

9:34 PM

You seem to piss people off, so do a favor and piss off.

9:37 PM

Silly for you to be in a discussion group about imaginary entities and yet pretending you're in physics class with concrete data and concrete answers.

I'd argue that physics doesn't have concrete data either but yeah totally assuming we know everything is wrong sorry if I also came off that way

@shino sure we don't have concrete data, but based on what is generally known to be possible we can guess. also don't insult people, that's just mean, if you don't want to have your ideas challenged then nobody is judging you, but don't go to a place with descussion in the name and expect that everyone will agree with you

I'm kinda with @shino in that Luna does seem to oftentimes just dismiss things as confabulating or something else rather than trying to explore other possibilities

1

9:46 PM

they seem to try to jump to conclusions instead of fully exploring and discussing something and it can atleast come off as unproductive to discussion

9:47 PM

maybe I'm wrong

9:48 PM

but I can see where they're coming from (not that's it ok to be insulting to people or telling them to piss off)

Luna seems pretty reasonable with what she says, and it may seem dissmisisive, but I think she is probably just more sceptical than most people

yeah just looking back on how she words a lot of it, it can come off with a "your wrong, I'm right end of discussion" vibe

9:52 PM

anyways we should probably move on

What a jerk. Well, gone to sleep anyway

Seeing a theme in how you model the world Luna. yeh it's called being scientific and super skeptical

12:06 PM

it's no less fair to choose that as your belief system than one with beliefs not supported by logic 'n science

12:06 PM

in fact, logic 'n science is by default the best thing to go by when trying to learn about something

12:07 PM

Luna definitely brings skepticism to conversations people didn't want it in, but at least this time around Luna was being totally reasonable and you (Allun) were the instigator imo

12:08 PM

Tulpa.info does focus on the scientific part of tulpas from time to time y'know, it helps us understand them better and so we can teach people about them better

12:08 PM

you're as free to claim your experiences as legitimate phenomena as others are to take them apart

I think scientific is a bad word here. We are not really doing science.

and if ya think they're being overly rude about it, tell a mod

12:09 PM

yeah yeah yeah

But we try to be rational.

how would you put it though? "Tulpa.info does focus on the X part of tulpas from time to time"

12:10 PM

the rational part just sounds.. rude

If everyone considers themselves rational, ye, it's hard not to be rude

I think the broad cause of these issues is that a lot of people have experiences, and put a lot of weight in those experiences. People who get into tulpamancy for a friend, for example, are going to bear a lot of emotional burden if your words serve to invalidate or "make less of' that friend.

12:12 PM

To focus on science, then, is to focus on a system that can and will invalidate a lot of those experiences, and to do that is going to cause friction, drama, dislike, and distaste between people.

well we try'n balance it and I think we do that well

Well, I think being rational and loving your tulpas don't exclude each other

My thoughts on the best resolution to this is to support a sort of intentional cognative dissonance, where we do admit and freely discuss that these experiences may be false, and are indicated to be false, but we also hold the a strong stance in our wording and attention which states that these experiences are valid and functional even if they aren't necessarily rooted in absolute truth.

12:15 PM

I like to use the word "abstraction" or "construct". We build these abstractions atop the minds capabilities in order to create experiences that are otherwise impossible.

12:15 PM

I don't know if that all sounds like crazy talk or not, though.

It sounds a bit weird

the best resolution to this is to support a sort of intentional cognative dissonance tulpamancy in a nutshell? tupperware

I'm not sure about it

I'm not 100% sure what "objectivist" means but focusing entirely on being as objective as possible is totally unnecessary for humans

12:22 PM

so maybe that's being objectivist idk

12:22 PM

fact is, experiencing things makes them subjective

12:22 PM

science and trying to explain things objectively furthers understanding, but outside of trying to learn, subjective is fine

12:23 PM

you can believe what you want about tulpas (as long as it doesn't cause trouble) and everything's fine

12:23 PM

our community is a mix of trying to learn about tulpas (for the sake of teaching about'em), and also a community of hosts and tulpas who just wanna interact with people they can actually talk to about this stuff

12:24 PM

so we (should) try to balance being rational and explaining tulpas with, y'know, being okay with the experiences people claim to have

12:24 PM

there's no point in explaining tulpas if we scared away all the people with tulpas

12:24 PM

and we don't wanna be seen as occult either

12:25 PM

stay in the middle to help as many people as possible

12:26 PM

so.. for the point of this conversation

12:26 PM

you don't gotta tell people their experiences don't make logical sense for no reason

12:26 PM

unless they're doing that in a conversation meant to like, explain things

12:27 PM

hi thegeht your name is a palindrome

Well, I think every experience of other systems should be taken with a grain of salt ^^ better make your own experiences :D

12:28 PM

And yes, it is on purpose :P

And remember that experience and interpretation are 2 different things.

People can have their own personalized thoughts and experiences without it being the literal case of what happened.

Well yeah... And perception of reality... And filtering of the senses... And yadayada xD

What we experience, we do experience for sure. But our and other's experiences can have other explanations than we think they have