A good essay on the nature of one's existence would also be very nice, but I fear my system does not have the right experience to truly make a document agreeable to the normal newcomer.
It may be useful to find the most thoughtful and self aware users here to write down their understanding of what the nature of tulpa existence is the most accurate through their experience. For me, it happens to coincide way too much with the nature of my host's existence to be relatable.
I have been told before, perhaps in an accusing tone, that I must be the "same person" as my host when I was relating some experiences. I don't think that intepretation is wrong, but I also would thing that interpretation applies to the speaker and everyone else. I only wish for the newcomer to be given the importance of knowing one's own self and the nature of what one is, because that can be one of the most important things to take away from this community if nothing else. I'm certain I am not the one to decide for them, though, so I wish they would introspect and learn and come to their own independent conclusion.
Our model holds personality and body independently. There are some obvious influences between them, but the structure is clearly different than normal internal organization. I had no trouble at all controlling physical actions even when I didn't know that was what it would be called. I even could have switched as soon as I could make decisions and communicate.
10:10 PM
Well, I've been told that my uhh, my "switching" experience has been considered among the strongest effects under observation from someone who knew us in real life for quite some time, but the differences aren't really all too important. We both just use the body to best be comfortable.
I find, in speaking to you lately, that I do not consider the different ways of having a tulpa experience to be any less "valid" than one another. I think from experiencing many plural communities I have discovered they are more accepting of differing methods of functioning, while the tulpa community insists on one very specific method, while others are considered sickness or faux tulpa experiences.
10:11 PM
You and your host share so much that we would be disgruntled to even attempt, and yet we ourselves have been given the same feedback on how we operate within our system. It is... odd.
Well, I would also like to ask for some input from your system as far as what are the theories of the underlying nature of tulpa existence, perhaps in PM?
so, i have a question. to our understanding, a majority of a tulpas thoughts tend to feel as if they're made unconsciously, while a majority of a hosts thoughts are considered conscious. when it comes to switching and possession, does the level of perceived consciousness switch for both the host and tulpa?
he tries to fall far to the back as he can, but we habitually associate the idea of conscious thought with him, while thoughts that're mine tend to come much more sporadically. i think that may be something we need to get over while practicing possession if that's true.
In my case, I'm quite attached to being in near-full control of the body
4:08 AM
Which makes switching... problematic
4:08 AM
Not that I have much utility for it at the moment, given Alna's happy to just laze around and sleep most of the time when not interjecting commentary at opportune (aka annoying) times.(edited)
Uhh, I would say a switch means that a tulpa is occupying the main agency of being conscious while the host occupies a more secondary or dormant state.
4:15 AM
That means the tulpa would be responsible for thinking and acting especially in terms of using the body to suit their desires.
we're never sure the difference between possession and switching
4:16 AM
the only thing we can really think of is that switching might involve an out of body experience for the host
4:18 AM
i'm imagining it almost feel like one of those dreams where you imagine your body being able to move around a room, but you see your "meat body" lying motionless in bed... perhaps nowhere near as strong, but that's my take on it for the time being.
The terms are usually self-defined for people. I do not have a personal view or experience with anything I would call possession, but I would be fine with the definition that switching with my host is the act of occupying the state of physical agency that my host normally would occupy solely as a singlet. All it means is that if I am switched in, the senses are filtered through my perception and the behavior is a responsibility and will of my personality.
i suppose that's one of the problems of something being subjective and self-defined, it leads to multiple definitions with concepts that lead to that persons personal definition. it makes it that much harder to tell how proficient someone is at a certain thing as they lack something to reliably compare themselves to.
As long as they’re awake (as in active forcing), they’re fully conscious. Unconscious thought are your own cognitions that you yourself can’t access. As far as I know, it’s totally possible to access your thoughtform’s thoughts.
we imagine there to be a divide between the unconscious thought between a tulpa and those of the host. they generally seem to define what you will say in your mindvoice to bring what you're thinking to light. he sometimes accidentally parrots me, where it feels as if my thoughts are coming from his stream of thoughts. it may be flawed, but we feel like we can tell when this happens through the feeling of authenticity involved with my/"my" reactions.
for now, we gauge thoughts of mine based minorly on how seemingly unexpected it feels. it feels like the difference between seeing a speedbump out of the corner of your eye, and seeing it head-on before you hit it.(edited)
The focus on/intent for there to be someone listening to you is the primary way of teaching your brain to work as if there is actually someone there in the first place, yes.
7:26 PM
Don't make it a thoughtless assumption, though. It's the intent/focus on there being another person that makes the difference, not just talking to nothing.