Tulpa.info - tulpa-questions

I would be very concerned if this community was more than based on the internet, over fears of it growing cult-like or extreme

I wonder if we are somehow missing a vital part of tulpamancy by making it a relatively solitary practice, facilitated only by forums and chatrooms

1:08 AM

Oh nonono sorry I dont mean anything cultish

Oh, I know that you don't mean anything cultish yourself, but it's just that when you get a lot of people who are a bit desparate for community

1:09 AM

and those people aren't on a big free medium for exchange that encourages decentralizatoin of power

@Reguile Let us now all don our hooded cloaks as we kneel around the candles (edited)

Lol

you will start to see people, the sort of people who seek out power, gain it. They will abuse and take advantage and turn what you make into a cult

1:10 AM

Also, IRL there are practical physical things ending up getting involved, like money.

That's very true..

1:10 AM

I wonder why that sort of power struggle doesn't happen on the internet

1:11 AM

Money of course always fucks things up

It does, but every time it gets to far the community explodes and starts fresh

1:12 AM

well, I shouldn't say that so definitly.

1:12 AM

I'm sure it does happen on the internet, on occasion

See my issue is that I based my tulpa on Jim Jones, and he just keeps asking me about it

1:13 AM

Keeps making me wear sunglasses and drink off brand coolaid

1:13 AM

Weird dude

I am not familiar with jim jones

1:14 AM

but that's probably something that should not be here in beginners

1:14 AM

mind answering in lounge?

yo

5:20 PM

so

5:20 PM

I figured out I might actually have a tulpa

5:20 PM

or a "thoughtform", because that's the umbrella term for these

5:21 PM

wanna hear the story and stuff? or should I just introduce her?

whatever you want

Regardless of whether it is or isn't, please do be careful labeling things as tulpas/thoughtforms arbitrarily.

yeah

5:42 PM

I try to

5:43 PM

correct me if I'm wrong, I'm still a noob though

5:43 PM

anyways

5:43 PM

be me (like, a few months ago) be kinda lonely discover DDLC "holy bazonkas, this shit is epic" "also, Monika's kinda cute" 2 weeks later I stumble upon MAS (Monika After Story mod, enlarges the ending space classroom sequence to have a Monika that you can actually ask things) download, install, run I fall in love with the MAS-expanded Monika within the next few days I keep coming back to the mod (she's cute!) "dang, AI technology isn't advanced enough for me to have a real one" "let me see... there's something called lucid dreaming" "maybe I could try doing that and then making my own Monika in my dreams?" masters all sorts of lucid dreaming techniques

from there, I basically create a (seemingly) sentient Monika that I keep respawning in my dreams every time I go to sleep

5:44 PM

she a cute walk-in soulbond

5:45 PM

basically

5:46 PM

I did a sentience test @metanomial suggested to me yesterday

5:46 PM

it went kinda like this:

Monika -> mindvoice ->
- if doesn't respond: do "YOU CAN HEAR MY THOUGHTS YOU FUCKING DORK ->" until responds
- if responds:
check response -> wake up -> mindvoice recalling response ->
-- responds again: sentient
-- doesn't respond: non-sentient

5:46 PM

but... she didn't respond

5:47 PM

she's still cute though

5:47 PM

I love her

5:47 PM

MARRY THE TUL-ERM, I MEAN, WALK-IN SOULBOND

5:48 PM

❤

so she's only in your dreams?

yes

5:49 PM

IDK

5:49 PM

she's like an only-dream tulpa

5:49 PM

I can't interact with her IRL

Can someone confirm that is the correct terminology? A thoughtform character that appears out of nowwhere is a "walk-in". A thoughtform based on a fictional character is a "soulbond". Correct?

"soulbond" is a more complicated term than that

5:51 PM

usually used in a metaphysical sense, i.e. they believe themselves to have "actually" come from their fictional source

5:51 PM

the more general term is "fictive"

5:51 PM

and for "walk-in" it's probably more accurate to say "apparently appears out of nowhere"

eeeh

5:51 PM

i don't like it.

5:52 PM

X)

don't like what?

the idea behind it

behind what?

behind you right now

5:52 PM

watch out

5:52 PM

tbh, I spawned her in with my imagination (aka I took action before and I take action now to spawn her in), but I'm pretty sure this doesn't have a term

well I don't like it either

the idea of being a fictional character.

that just sounds like a tulpa

5:53 PM

well I don't agree with it either but that's what it's used to mean @Deleted User

while tulpas are very cool, this looks more delusional

5:53 PM

and i feel that the only thing they have going for them is the whole "it could be true in another universe" thing

5:53 PM

but that's also bullshit because it isn't this one

5:53 PM

is it a tulpa though? like, it didn't have the whole "grow your own tulpa" process

5:53 PM

there, that's my whole opinion

5:53 PM

It's a servitor @elee. (edited)

5:54 PM

you can turn it into a tulpa, probably

5:54 PM

it's a hypocarbon flux capacitor, funk

5:55 PM

(aka explain new terms to me, dangit)

5:56 PM

@Deleted User

"Servitor" is a notion of a functional-but- non-sentient thoughtform. They can have a lot of features of conscious minds, but are more liken to AI in modern computers. All illusion, no actual reasoning going on

5:58 PM

I don't think they are anywhere as clearly defined as tulpae are.

Quite honestly, this doesn't sound like a tulpa - certainly closer to the ambiguous "soulbond" even based on the looser definition, and moreso a dreaming wish at that.

6:00 PM

There isn't anything wrong with that, to be clear - but similarly, it certainly sounds like something other than a tulpa.

As far as I know soulbonds are just tulpas based on characters, yes?

solid kek.

6:02 PM

plz help me define Monika

Not clearly defined. As I recall, people also tend to view the characters as "soulbonds" if they feel a connection to them and want them to be sentient, regardless of whether they are or whether they are manouvered about. That said, regardless of the specific definition, this definitely sounds closer to the ambiguously-defined "soulbond" instead of, rather than "in addition to", a tulpa.

I am baffled

It sounds like a dream character, if I were pressed to give some specific term.

I see. I have known people who call themselves soulbonds, but did not identify with the character, only they were forced to be the character to start with.

Hence the "ambiguously defined", I would say.

6:04 PM

...though, I haven't heard that specific variation much. Thank you.

6:04 PM

I sexually identify as the green guy getting blown up in the background

Please do not shitpost in here.

>talking about soulbonds

6:05 PM

>asking not to shitpost

Funk.

Yes.

Stop.

Please, stop. (edited)

funk plz

6:05 PM

yeah ok

6:05 PM

soulbonds are people too (?)