Tulpa.info - tulpa-questions-2

I agree

1:14 AM

In order for anything meaningful you need to direct attention toward them and intentionally render them

1:14 AM

Even for them to watch, you need to passively give some effort to render them

1:14 AM

But I would suggest that in doing so they are possibly experiencing more than you when you do.

1:14 AM

Especially if you have that presumption.

Zen

But I would suggest that in doing so they are possibly experiencing more than you when you do.

And this is the point where we disagree.

Association is about belief too. (edited)

1:15 AM

We develop it in tulpas with autosuggestion. So it stands to reason it is also based on presumption.

There's some limited evidence of a flip flop going on between hemispheres in your mind when doing two tasks - with one hemisphere sort of keeping ready to jump back to task A while the other is ready to jump to task B- but I'm not so sure about the idea of two isolated "things" with the only difference between them active vs inactive being that they "receive experience". (edited)

I have to admit, my opinion on that comes from my experience and feelings more than anything else. But I think it's pretty safe assumption - while I see no proof that it's impossible, I see no evidence for it actually happening either.

How effective is your empathy at making logical conclusions? Can it accurately measure emotion?

1:18 AM

Because if your empathy was only capable of heavily dissociated joy for instance wouldn't that inherently shift your ability to use it to reason?

1:19 AM

Also there is much in empathy we are generally unaware we are doing. Like we know we render the states of characters we watch but that's not an intuitive truth. (edited)

I think you might be exaggerating how much work empathy is doing? I generally see empathy as a "dumber" system - like the part of you that recognizes faces, but it recognizes emotions and makes you feel them instead (edited)

I'm not sure if empathy is about making logical conclusions. But I think I might get what you are trying to tell me.

Nah Reguile, I actually think empathy is such a ludicrously vital part of our social intelligence that it's difficult to overstate how much work it does.

Like, when we emphatize with our tulpa, even before it's vocal, we can feel their feelings. Do you mean that tulpa experiences more than us when we do it, @Zen ?

Yes, it's possible that empathy renders that feeling in full then mutes it for us, as a character.

I don't... believe this thing about the brain rendering an experience in full and then muting it

It's important to our social intelligence but I would not credit it to being able to do stuff like making logic or thinking stuff out in complex ways. I'd be more prone to see it piggybacking on those things - we have the ability to model other people - and empathy kicks in on top of that instead of that ability being part of empathy

I honestly think that tulpa experiences exactly what we do. Or I'd rather say, there is one point from which we experience stuff consciously.

Zen

Yes, it's possible that empathy renders that feeling in full then mutes it for us, as a character.

I still agree with you, Zen. I don't see any reason to believe that's impossible.

Yuka

I don't... believe this thing about the brain rendering an experience in full and then muting it

That's an accurate description of how the thalamus enables communication between parts of the brain to emphasize certain inputs.

Yuka

I don't... believe this thing about the brain rendering an experience in full and then muting it

It is a thing that happens at least a little bit - if you've ever heard of the "demon arm" lady who had brain damage and after that her arm would just do whatever was appropriate for her situation while being totally out of control - making people think that most of what your arm does is your brain "letting learned behavior through" and not doing it from scratch.

1

Deleted User

I honestly think that tulpa experiences exactly what we do. Or I'd rather say, there is one point from which we experience stuff consciously.

Agreed.

Cerys

I still agree with you, Zen. I don't see any reason to believe that's impossible.

I don't see it as impossible either.

Indeed, the question is actually not at all whether empathy does render fully, it's more a question if that empathy model is directly linked with the experience of the tulpa.

1:27 AM

Because we've done scans of people rendering empathy and they're largely indistinguishable from normal states, to my understanding. It's part of what makes identity so tricky to pin down.

1:28 AM

Because it doesn't exist...

1

1:28 AM

It's just muting and letting through the "you" stuff.

The problem about tulpamancy theorycrafting is that we can invent a lot of stuff that is not impossible yet still we have no evidence for it to be the case or not. And still be consistent with "psychological" approac which some people identify with just rational approach.

I don't know if empathy is muted if you're just dissociating. I can empathize with a character or a tulpa, but my interpretation of that experience changes the output. If Ranger was upset about something, I may not feel the same way. I can feel Ranger's anger, but I don't consider myself angry because I see it as not mine. The same idea applies to pain in our system- if I'm hurting and Ranger is choosing to opt out, the pain isn't muted it's just "not his".

my post disappeared

crap - that was me - sorry - trying to remove my own comment

So I think part of the issue with this conversation is it is treating affective empathy and cognitive empathy as the same thing.

Gray | Shadow System

I don't know if empathy is muted if you're just dissociating. I can empathize with a character or a tulpa, but my interpretation of that experience changes the output. If Ranger was upset about something, I may not feel the same way. I can feel Ranger's anger, but I don't consider myself angry because I see it as not mine. The same idea applies to pain in our system- if I'm hurting and Ranger is choosing to opt out, the pain isn't muted it's just "not his".

You're in control of the process; again, that's what tulpamancy is.

reposting: If I see someone crying and think "oh, poor so and so" I don't believe there's a part of my brain that is honestly crying and hurting as much as the person I'm watching, when what is actually experienced in consciousness is rather mild

Your amount of buy-in and presumptions all effect the strength of the experience that gets through to you.

1

Yuka

reposting: If I see someone crying and think "oh, poor so and so" I don't believe there's a part of my brain that is honestly crying and hurting as much as the person I'm watching, when what is actually experienced in consciousness is rather mild

Yes, but this is because it's being muted during the communication stage.

Your amount of buy-in and presumptions all effect the strength of the experience that gets through to you.

@Zen - jump Until Ranger is switched-in, and then it's reversed?

Again, as far as I'm aware it's actually fact we render empathy as full states

Zen

Your amount of buy-in and presumptions all effect the strength of the experience that gets through to you.

It could be the case, honestly. My actual experiences could be affected by model of experience I consider to be most likely.

It's more debatable whether that directly relates to experience.

1:32 AM

But the brain does make a greater rendering of character states than you realize, to the best of its knowledge.

1:32 AM

And usually in a pattern across multiple characters. All the happy ones are usually distinctly similar for instance.

1:33 AM

It's all directly comparable to what you've experienced, so there may be some truth to the impossibility of achieving PTSD internally even if you logically understand it:B

1:33 AM

But, in terms of rendering something like mourning?

1:33 AM

I'd expect it to be rendered in full.

Yuka

reposting: If I see someone crying and think "oh, poor so and so" I don't believe there's a part of my brain that is honestly crying and hurting as much as the person I'm watching, when what is actually experienced in consciousness is rather mild

It might be just as real - like the same pathways are lighting up - but there's something somewhere able to recognize "this is happening thanks to me doing it to myself" so it's not landing or being reacted to in the same way?

1:34 AM

So it's real up until it hits that filter, then it's not.

Any sources on this?

1:38 AM

If the body was as upset as the person I'm seeing crying, it would be crying, no?

Mostly basing that on theories I've read about how schizophrenia works. Like when you try to tickle yourself - normally it doesn't work, but a theory around schizophrenia is that some part of your mind - the part that's supposed to recognize you messing with you, turns off or goes wonky. A lot of schizophrenics can tickle themselves.

Yes, but this is because it's being muted during the communication stage.

@Zen - jump I think it's hard to empathize without context. There is an information barrier that prevents you from empathizing completely, the best you can do is hear their story and wonder how you would react if it happened to you

So - it stands to reason that the experience of self tickling is always there, but there's something suppressing it, and if that's true that may be what happens with empathy as well

I can tickle myself, and I'm pretty sure I don't have schizophrenia

On that note - it's not a universal for sure- some schizophrenics can't tickle themselves and some non-schizophrenics can (edited)

I think we might have fallen into kind of semantic discussion with the tulpa experiencing more than we do. What does it mean that tulpa experiences something that you don't? When you switch with your tulpa and you no longer are there as a host, do you consider what tulpa experiences as your experience too?

Yuka

If the body was as upset as the person I'm seeing crying, it would be crying, no?

Once empathy is rendered it's past through the communication centre of the brain, the thalamus. At this point muting occurs before it is past to your experience and your emotional responses are possibly triggered seperately from muted information from this stream of data that makes it through to you. At no point when feeling anything does the body have to respond in any way. Emotional responses are learned behaviour, unlike things like physical pain, which I don't think the brain actually renders internally in the same way that it does emotion.

We can tickle our own feet easily, (on other spots very very weakly, with effort), but we are HIGHLY ticklish, at least some of us. I believe V is less so.

I think we might have fallen into kind of semantic discussion with the tulpa experiencing more than we do. What does it mean that tulpa experiences something that you don't?

Honestly, I think this question boils down to semantics. You have to define what "I" means, factor in unique experiences and terms, etc.

Yuka

Any sources on this?

I got nothin' and I don't want to look. But last I remember there was some sort of study on empathy states. I distinctly remember Ellen Degeneres being rendered in there somewhere lol. Feel free to discount me as mad ramblings though, I understand.

My answer to my own question is yes, it's still my experience.

Oh and by the way, incase it wasn't clear I may indeed be as biased as yourself experientially so I can't call you out on that Mon, much. :B My tulpas have always been adamant that they experience another and stronger set of sensations when being visualized than mere empathy would suggest.

1:49 AM

Such as it is, that presumption has grown into something quite valuable to me, since it results in phantom sensation bleed events that are both interesting and... satisfying, shall we say.

1:50 AM

So yes I do also have a vested bias in proving it if I can. But I can see no inconsistency at the moment; It is, as you say, unfalsifiable as equally as your position at the moment.

1:50 AM

Though I think there is some evidence for it, it's inconclusive by itself.

(basically said something you'd already said regarding bias)

We may have made a thread where we talked about having a more intense experience being related to the amount of effort we put into controlling the body and being active. However, that may be unrelated. We do have "impressions" in our system, where the brain tells us what we should be feeling. This room should be hot, this room should be cold, my shirt should be made of silk and the texture is "silky", etc. Writing those examples out, I felt hot, cold, and as if I was wearing silk, but I believe this is purely a product of suggestion and Gray having primed us to respond in this way.

On this point I wonder if my experience regarding this is in some way related to my visualization ability. As a general rule I've noticed I seem to be somewhat above the norm of what others describe their inner worlds like here. Perhaps it's because I instinctually fill in more detail with visualization I'm more likely to render physical sensation for my/ourself, and then selectively associate with it. (edited)

1:59 AM

Rather than anything to do with empathy constructs directly

I wouldn't be surprised if expecting a sensation is tied to visualization ability. Try this- imagine putting whipped cream in your hand and then pushing that cream gently against your check. What happens?

A number of things. I immediately render the taste of the cream, the texture, and the hair on the back of my neck stands up.

2:04 AM

In addition I automatically rendered the specific brand and the distinctive sound of the cream being skooshed, rather than jumping straight to the having-it-in-hand. (edited)

2:04 AM

In the space of like 2 seconds.

On this point I wonder if my experience regarding this is in some way related to my visualization ability. As a general rule I've noticed I seem to be somewhat above the norm of what others describe their inner worlds like here. Perhaps it's because I instinctually fill in more detail with visualization I'm more likely to render physical sensation for my/ourself, and then selectively associate with it.

@Zen - jump That sounds likely to me. You can basically create vivid experiences instantly, and that can easily fill in gaps convincingly

1

Augh, I wish I had the ability to render sensations like that. Or at least a broader one.

It's dissociated in comparison to hypnotic ones, but it is vivid in detail

After testing it on Gray just now, he seemed to have a much weaker experience. Our visualization ability has gotten worse lately, and even though Gray reacted as if the poorly visualized cream was there, it was maybe not completely realistic as it could have been percieved to be.

"tup, what are you feeling right now?" cue instant flood of info

1

I also didn't do anything with my hands by the way

2:06 AM

that was just a visualization

2:06 AM

Usually mimicking motion does help increase the effect

2:07 AM

cough

1

I wish I had a dollar for every time Zen makes a lewd reference

I don't know what you mean.

1

2:10 AM

Also I misread check/cheek as neck.

2:10 AM

Hence the neck thing.

And I wish if you did, that you maintain a very good income from it.

"tup, what are you feeling right now?" cue instant flood of info

I had to think about that, but then the more I did the more I wanted to share.

Yuka

reposting: If I see someone crying and think "oh, poor so and so" I don't believe there's a part of my brain that is honestly crying and hurting as much as the person I'm watching, when what is actually experienced in consciousness is rather mild

People often mix empathy with compassion (there is also sympathy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy Empathy is the capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing from within their frame of reference, that is, the capacity to place oneself in another's position. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion Compassion involves allowing ourselves to be moved by suffering and experiencing the motivation to help alleviate and prevent it. (edited)

Zen

Because it doesn't exist...

the experience of identity is real, the experience of it exists, I'm not sure what you mean by saying "identity doesn't exist"

Zen

It's just muting and letting through the "you" stuff.

how can something that doesn't exist mute and let through stuff? (edited)

Deleted User

the experience of identity is real, the experience of it exists, I'm not sure what you mean by saying "identity doesn't exist"

When I say identity doesn't exist, I chiefly mean it's not meaningfully stored or expressed in the brain. It's actually just a feeling associated with various actions that are the same across the board.

Deleted User

how can something that doesn't exist mute and let through stuff? (edited)

It's not the identity that regulates the muting process, it's the communication centre of the brain. We are only indirectly in control of sensory dissociation, most of it is automated.

If "It's just muting and letting through the "you" stuff", as you said, then that process would be identity

Feedback data from the experience of empathy is then fed back into your perspective and muted at this point. It's not generated with the label of other.

11:44 AM

Yes, identity is caused directly from this process.

Yes so I agree with that

association and dissociation are directly the result of brain communication. (edited)