I just have my own personal terms for everything because I find comfort in labels and organization
6:10 PM
For me, the main thing that separates a character from a tulpa is the ability to tell you no. An OC can’t refuse to do something but a tulpa can. Of course you can do it anyway but that’s puppeting at that point and not really them. It feels extremely unnatural, at least in my experience.
Parroting an unwilling thoughtform has a resistant effect, but I think it's mostly self-suggestion. I had no trouble with it when I wished to dissipate my tulpa.
6:15 PM
I somewhat think anyone interacting with the front is capable of mentally doing anything to a visualization regardless of resistance.
If someone with a tulpa says they cannot resist parroting and another person says they can.
Doesn't that innately mean the resisting parroting has nothing to do with whether you're a tulpa or not? And more to do with your innate presumptions about what an identity can do to another identity?
When it comes to separating a character from a tulpa it’s going to be highly based off of what that person considers to be a tulpa and how their own mind works. I have a lot of characters and a lot of them have tulpa like traits, so I took a lot of time to figure out what traits are linked to tulpas and what isn’t. My list is going to be different than someone else’s.
Because I don’t want any more tulpas and I am at ‘high risk’ being that I am a writer my standards on what is a tulpa is very very high. The character would have to develop very far into a tulpa without me noticing for me to actually consider it to be a tulpa
I'm pretty sure we can give the hand to any parroting we don't like. The exception seems to be our other headmate, he likes it. It doesn't make much sense to me, but whateves.
When it comes to separating a character from a tulpa it’s going to be highly based off of what that person considers to be a tulpa and how their own mind works. I have a lot of characters and a lot of them have tulpa like traits, so I took a lot of time to figure out what traits are linked to tulpas and what isn’t. My list is going to be different than someone else’s.
Ultimately, yes. However, I don't think I was less sentient before. But then again by our more recent definition of "tulpa" I was one all along.
Oh for sure, Ink constantly toes the line between the two because he’s comfortable with the character version and his story. He simply doesn’t have a huge drive to separate himself from it or even interact with people outside of the system. However I still consider him to be a tulpa. He just goes back and forth.
In my system though, I couldn’t force a tulpa to act like a character if they did not want to. If I wanted to get rid of them entirely I could but the middle ground would cause a lot of resistance. It’s all or noting.
The way I personally categorize tulpas is just "identity that is intended to be a long term companion, typically given autonomy intentionally."
Which is remarkably strict considering I don't consider any well-developed identity a worthy companion and therefore do not grant them any purchase at all. Despite also writing myself as well.
6:25 PM
I have only thus far made two exceptions, one for science, and the other for function. And neither of them have developed into long-term companions anyway.
I'm hesitant to use the term headmate because it implies functional similarity. I wouldn't say an entity isn't a tulpa because it doesn't make your body's real world decisions and doesn't switch.
Companion implies some level or interaction or rapport. Which, I mean, some degree of is necessary for a healthy system, but not for them to be an equal.
These are the things that make me believe a character is now a tulpa within my own system.
Resistance to actions they do not want to take in the form of extreme stress, discomfort or anger usually done through emotion bleed or the complete lack of a reaction/leaving entirely to avoid it. (my characters have ‘emotion bleed’ as well and isn’t a sign of sentience on its own)
Reacting to/taking interest events or people outside of their story
Reacting in ways that are surprising or unintended within their story consistently (characters do this to and isn’t enough on its own but happening all the time along with other things is a sign)(edited)
This is just random speculation, but what if someone took two facets of themself and developed them into two separate people? To make a crude example, if someone went by john in a certain place and bob in another, and they acted differently in those two places- therefore these being two different facets of themself- and developed them, what are the chances that it would actually turn into two different people/system members?
Geez, it probably depends. Probably depends on how they define separate people in their system and if they treated the two parts like separate people.
8:45 PM
Like normally with separate people either of them could be at either place but I don't think that has to be. Some systems keep their lives pretty separate.
But to answer @Deleted User , the actual answer probably depends on how either of those facets views themselves, and their counterpart(s), over time. If either of them at some point develops a "that is not me" perspective towards their other counterparts, then I think so.
I exist roughly for this reason, though I was not bound to any particular context as in the example provided. I encompassed all aspects of our life but separate from the others. That is one of the things that gives me pause from drawing a direct comparison, aside from the fact it would also be possible for it to occur on a way that the facets do not develop strong senses regarding the others relationship relative to themselves, in which case I think the unitary perspective would probably be maintained.
Deleted User
This is just random speculation, but what if someone took two facets of themself and developed them into two separate people? To make a crude example, if someone went by john in a certain place and bob in another, and they acted differently in those two places- therefore these being two different facets of themself- and developed them, what are the chances that it would actually turn into two different people/system members?
Likely would have a lot to do with intent and the person's level of depersonalization and to what degree they naturally dissassociate. If the answer to those is "want a headmate", "lots of derealization" and "high degree of dissassociation", then I'd say the odds are pretty high. Every system is different tho and some brains have been trained to be more "locked down" to new headmates appearing through whatever means
10:15 PM
Basically, producing or calling up existing ego states, yes. And how much the brain can be convinced "this isn't me!" Matter. And for those of us with their brains already effortlessly doing that, in stressful enough or traumatic enough (which varies per system) moments, they can "solidify" as separate pretty quickly, if they are wanted or not.. -_-
right, i think so
i think what you were describing sounded a bit like a median system
take that with a grain of salt though, i don’t understand those very well
Deleted User
Likely would have a lot to do with intent and the person's level of depersonalization and to what degree they naturally dissassociate. If the answer to those is "want a headmate", "lots of derealization" and "high degree of dissassociation", then I'd say the odds are pretty high. Every system is different tho and some brains have been trained to be more "locked down" to new headmates appearing through whatever means
If someone did that, would it be like a fragment of the original person broke off, or would it be that the original person split into two parts, neither of which are wholly the original person? Or would it depend on how it was done?
I can't really tell you because my brain works differently. I'm not exactly sure where the "normal" ends and the neurodivergent begins
11:07 PM
But.. uhh.. I'm aware of at least 3 new alters appearing since I woke up and i have no way to know if they were lurking and just finally decided to say hi or were new splits.
they don't believe it can produce the same results
I don't believe there is any inherent reason one couldn't do it. They would have a leg up in some areas, perhaps a more difficult time with separation and identity issues as a trade-off, but that depends.
It seems like the conversation started a long time ago so I can't get a grasp of what this "instead of tulpamancy" thing is just by scrolling up some
Deleted User
This is just random speculation, but what if someone took two facets of themself and developed them into two separate people? To make a crude example, if someone went by john in a certain place and bob in another, and they acted differently in those two places- therefore these being two different facets of themself- and developed them, what are the chances that it would actually turn into two different people/system members?
Hmm, depending on how far you consider me to have taken it, I somewhat did this. Initially I wasn't aware of it and didn't consider it to be tulpamancy. And to be clear that had the effect of making it severely constrained in terms of the "realism" effect. Once I'd reached critical mass with tulpamancy though I'd realized that as a thoughtform it was really no different to a tulpa and our mind was more than willing to provide a highly realized, autonomous entity.
I suspect as a core presumption in order to have one of these entities and for it to reach a certain level of development I in particular need to have some level of belief in it. If it always remains a character as that thoughtform initially was, I don't think it will break free of that sense of dependence and unrealness by itself. Broadly speaking, I don't know if that's true for everyone, perhaps more suggestible people don't need as much convincing as my brain demands, but as conjecture I'd posit on some level they have to accept the entity's reality before it will display anything resembling tulpa-like behaviour.(edited)
A short question: If I decide to cook something, is it possible to "give"/"offer" it to your tulpa? Can he accept it and consume the energy the food contains?
We eat and cook together. They maintain they are able to taste visualized food, but naturally the only energy they would be receiving would be from a mixture of suggestion and attention.
Fel can use my senses anyway so as long as she's cofronting or brought to mind then we can share tastes. She sees with my eyes and hears with my ears so its not much different, afterall, even when imposed she is only able to experience the world percieved from my own inputs. Otherwise it would be very handy to have a tulpa during a game of poker.
@Reisen - asking here because it just feels more right to do so and #tulpa-discussion is busy - when you say that advice given here is off course, what sort of things do you have in mind and how/why do you believe they are incorrect?
Lucilyn: I don't have exact examples and we're not at all the types to complain about how people think about tulpamancy(edited)
4:14 AM
but, just from all the times we've looked at #tulpa-questions and sometimes #tulpa-discussion, we just get the overall feeling that there are a ton of people giving advice they're very sure of on the Discord that hasn't actually been pit against many other people's ideas about tulpamancy like the forum
4:15 AM
like, people can kinda just say whatever on the discord, and only if it's really off will someone say something against it (usually they just give their own opinion to the asker)
4:15 AM
I feel like the forum's been better at rounding out opinions and stuff, in that sense
4:16 AM
like, imagine people saying what they do in #tulpa-questions back in 2014 - people would've been straight up arguing every time something was said to be the case on the forum, lol
4:18 AM
now (though maybe it's getting a littttlle bit looser, nbd), the forum's had a general consensus on do's and don'ts and general best practice for years, and the Discord HAS that same feeling where people just give advice and it's probably fine without questioning it, but I don't actually know if advice given on the Discord is actually as... buffed out?
4:19 AM
again not that WE mind, since we're very "If you don't like something, change it yourself"
4:19 AM
but lots of old members do complain about it
4:24 AM
(also we haven't looked at #tulpa-questions in a couple weeks or so so idk if looking at it right this second applies)
Lucilyn: yeah I know but we really really don't(edited)
4:24 AM
like
4:25 AM
it's just not us to complain about stuff like that
4:25 AM
if we saw someone giving advice we thought was bad we would give our own, unlike all the old members who come back and complain, we don't hide back and just quietly be upset we don't like how things are(edited)
4:26 AM
so you don't have to worry about that with us at least
When I see a beginner give a response I feel is incomplete or not super accurate, I usually respond (but honestly, I don't always contribute to beginner questions. I have my limits.) My goal is to try and give praise/credit to what I believe is good advice and add/correct by giving my opinion(edited)
Ive not been terribly active on here but I can imagine that if someone has given the same advice over the course of many years they naturally begin to back off and let others carry that particular burden or else get a little snappy. Sometimes you arrive at a place were giving sound advice will set the room on fire because theres a collective oddity going on and people are patting each other on the back about ideas that perhaps arent that healthy - so leave it well alone and pick a different battle.
There are some places where I don't feel comfortable elaborating, but not here. I don't recall a specific moment where I set a room on fire because I gave my perspective after I felt the advice delt was unreasonable though.
I agree the weakness of Discord is you get less perspectives than the forum, but I disagree that the quality of advice is bad. I have seen a lot of people share both good advice and interesting ideas.(edited)