if you want to call it that then sure, but the difference with a tulpa is your attributing it to another mind entity, which exists because you believe it exists
theres no difference between something being made up in your mind and it existing in your mind, pretty much everything in your mind is made up
you cant just make something up and be like okay this works!
berockly (TTG)
if you want to call it that then sure, but the difference with a tulpa is your attributing it to another mind entity, which exists because you believe it exists
theres no difference between something being made up in your mind and it existing in your mind, pretty much everything in your mind is made up
ok here's the thing:
you create an experience
it feels real
it is exactly what you wanted it to be
does it matter if there is an explanation to it? what would it add to it?
ok here's the thing:
you create an experience
it feels real
it is exactly what you wanted it to be
does it matter if there is an explanation to it? what would it add to it?
heres an explanation, unsure how good it is but it is one
7:49 PM
Tulpa: A secondary train of thought you create through practice and training that has its own identity and its responses are autonomous and created subconsciously. Meaning the thoughts seem as if they were from another being and entirely unintentional from you. This is possible because basically you're associating a particular line of thought to something external and as the association gets deeper the process becomes automatic and you can keep making more associations to flesh out the identity of those thoughts more, which becomes a Tulpa.
when you are raised, your environment and parents build your identity.
you might have separate identities for separate group of friends.
in my view tulpa or any headmate is an identity like this, separated or dissociated from you to the point that it doesn't feel like you at all
and by external, it means external from you, not necasarily something physical
berockly (TTG)
Tulpa: A secondary train of thought you create through practice and training that has its own identity and its responses are autonomous and created subconsciously. Meaning the thoughts seem as if they were from another being and entirely unintentional from you. This is possible because basically you're associating a particular line of thought to something external and as the association gets deeper the process becomes automatic and you can keep making more associations to flesh out the identity of those thoughts more, which becomes a Tulpa.
you can look at it as training your mind to think from a different lense, while associating the thinking from the different lense as a separate thing from you
KIZO!
So if you consider your subconscious you then the tulpa would just be a facet of yourself depending on how you all see it and perceive it right?
Tulpa: A secondary train of thought you create through practice and training that has its own identity and its responses are autonomous and created subconsciously. Meaning the thoughts seem as if they were from another being and entirely unintentional from you. This is possible because basically you're associating a particular line of thought to something external and as the association gets deeper the process becomes automatic and you can keep making more associations to flesh out the identity of those thoughts more, which becomes a Tulpa.
@KIZO! - jump
ok so let me tell you something from my treatment of DID that you might find relevant
you start as a few people feeling separate in your head
then you work towards feeling they are all part of one person
then you work towards those people being one person
at none of those points you could say "those are actually separate people" o "they are all part of the same person" or "it is one person"
there is no objectivity to it, for an observer it is all semantics and a perspective they choose to pick
but, from the person being treated, those experiences are >real< and that's all that matters
@KIZO! - jump
ok so let me tell you something from my treatment of DID that you might find relevant
you start as a few people feeling separate in your head
then you work towards feeling they are all part of one person
then you work towards those people being one person
at none of those points you could say "those are actually separate people" o "they are all part of the same person" or "it is one person"
there is no objectivity to it, for an observer it is all semantics and a perspective they choose to pick
but, from the person being treated, those experiences are >real< and that's all that matters