Would anybody like to explain this "Tulpa" thing?

[Taviscratch 453]

Should I create a male or female Tulpa? I connect a heck of a lot more with females, although a female Tulpa might feel disgusted in my body (I'm overweight and I don't shave often and I'm not the cleanest person around). Also, if I ever get married and do what husbands and wives do, my Tulpa might hate me for it, while if I have a male Tulpa he might cheer me on xD

Maybe try something androgynous?

[Nine 707]

Bottom line, the argument goes "a proposition is true because my adversary fails to produce evidence to the contrary"

Also called 'appeal to ignorance'

Ah.

I could have looked that up.

But I didn't.

[Milky Jade 138]

Ah.

I could have looked that up.

But I didn't.

 

I can't prove you didn't

Therefore you looked it up

[Eloquence 2,076]

My but the human mind is fascinating. Everything this thread has elicited, from the concept of a forced and focused splintering of one's conscious mind, to the varied reactions to a concept that goes against yet strangely aligns with natural human instinct, to even something as simple as the ways people argue an idea that by its very nature cannot be truly proven or disproven. 

 

My apologies for posting without really having something to say on thoughtforms or "tulpas" (which appears to be the name this particular group has latched on to), but I am so excited every time I find a situation unique enough to elicit unusual reactions and "show their true colors", to an extent.

[Andaasonsan 3,205]

Well as far as un-falsifiable quasi mystical stuff, at least the tulpamancers (mostly) don't claim that this is a phenomena that exists outside their own heads.

 

Debunking this is largely pointless because you're essentially saying "that thing that you say you're imagining is not real" which is kind of obvious.

[Milky Jade 138]

My but the human mind is fascinating. Everything this thread has elicited, from the concept of a forced and focused splintering of one's conscious mind, to the varied reactions to a concept that goes against yet strangely aligns with natural human instinct, to even something as simple as the ways people argue an idea that by its very nature cannot be truly proven or disproven. 

 

My apologies for posting without really having something to say on thoughtforms or "tulpas" (which appears to be the name this particular group has latched on to), but I am so excited every time I find a situation unique enough to elicit unusual reactions and "show their true colors", to an extent.

 

Maybe I too should apologize, for derailing the thread, but after all these years, I sort of just.. go along with it..

Well as far as un-falsifiable quasi mystical stuff, at least the tulpamancers (mostly) don't claim that this is a phenomena that exists outside their own heads.

 

Debunking this is largely pointless because you're essentially saying "that thing that you say you're imagining is not real" which is kind of obvious.

 

But.. what if no one in their right mind actually uttered a platitude of that echelon?

 

I wondered: Is there any sense in arguing that there is a difference between a genuine self-imposed hallucination and the false belief that any such hallucination came into operation?

 

But: That shouldn't be the question.

The fact remains that it should be disincentivized if you put any stock in a sober mind.

 

If you really are that hurting for pony interaction, learn how to have lucid dreams. But for the life of yourself, don't wade through these murky, uncertain waters.

[Eloquence 2,076]

Maybe I too should apologize, for derailing the thread, but after all these years, I sort of just.. go along with it..

 

No worries dear. It's not really derailing, after all, this post was made to discuss opinions on the matter, distinguishing it from the discussion of the matter itself, a topic that has its own thread. You were merely giving your opinion and then got into a bit of a... debate, if that's what you would call it. If anything I'm the derailer here.

 

The thing is, this matter by its very nature cannot be proven or disproven, and in such cases I find that the best course of action is to leave it up to preference. As long as the person believing in such a thing does not use that belief to do harm in any way, well, I can't say I'm concerned. The way I see it, everyone believes in something that has no scientific foundation. Some peoples' beliefs are just less common than others.

 

Sorry, I'm rambling again aren't I? My point is, this is nothing worth ruffling feathers over for anyone, and we are all entitled to the opinions and beliefs that do no harm, something I can tell already that we agree on

[Adachi 772]

What I find fascinating is how people manage to not only have multiple Tulpas, but also, juggle all of their interests.

 

Also, I think I might make my Tulpa female, although I'm not sure if I want to make a pony Tulpa or not. Someone mentioned way back in 2012 that a pony Tulpa probably wouldn't be very comfortable in a human body, and would be sad that there is nobody around who looks like her. If that's the case, I definitely wouldn't want to make a living being suffer.

 

If it turns out I wouldn't be making her suffer after all, I would base her design on Fleur Dis Lee, with maybe Lyra's colours and I would make her a bit bold, and also intelligent and honest.

[Andaasonsan 3,205]

Maybe I too should apologize, for derailing the thread, but after all these years, I sort of just.. go along with it..

 

But.. what if no one in their right mind actually uttered a platitude of that echelon?

 

I wondered: Is there any sense in arguing that there is a difference between a genuine self-imposed hallucination and the false belief that any such hallucination came into operation?

 

But: That shouldn't be the question.

The fact remains that it should be disincentivized if you put any stock in a sober mind.

 

If you really are that hurting for pony interaction, learn how to have lucid dreams. But for the life of yourself, don't wade through these murky, uncertain waters.

I guess I would have to ask, why would lucid dreaming be okay but this isn't? They both come down to intentionally mentally conditioning yourself to produce a result. This would just be a more complicated form of it.

 

The better argument against this would be that it's not necessarily the best use of one's time and energies.

[Milky Jade 138]

No worries dear. It's not really derailing, after all, this post was made to discuss opinions on the matter, distinguishing it from the discussion of the matter itself, a topic that has its own thread. You were merely giving your opinion and then got into a bit of a... debate, if that's what you would call it. If anything I'm the derailer here.

 

The thing is, this matter by its very nature cannot be proven or disproven, and in such cases I find that the best course of action is to leave it up to preference. As long as the person believing in such a thing does not use that belief to do harm in any way, well, I can't say I'm concerned. The way I see it, everyone believes in something that has no scientific foundation. Some peoples' beliefs are just less common than others.

 

Sorry, I'm rambling again aren't I? My point is, this is nothing worth ruffling feathers over for anyone, and we are all entitled to the opinions and beliefs that do no harm, something I can tell already that we agree on

 

No verbal crime shall ever go unpunished under my watch!

 

I wish I could keep up a lofty attitude 24/7, but I can get feisty if someone's trying to spread their toxic garbage (read: opinions).

 

I've already thought of most of the, regrettably, obvious replies I had coming for me. Most of them are actually covered by the youtube link I posted a little further north, so no hard feelings, right?

I guess I would have to ask, why would lucid dreaming be okay but this isn't? They both come down to intentionally mentally conditioning yourself to produce a result. This would just be a more complicated form of it.

 

The better argument against this would be that it's not necessarily the best use of one's time and energies.

 

IDK, why should you run risk of mental disorders or permanent damage by means of additional hallucination if you already have daily hallucinations you can tinker safely with?

 

I'm actually appalled that this tulpa business is dealt with with this matter-of-factly, simpering attitude. It's like people are dying for their waifus or whatever and lose their sense of properness and psychological welfare.

 

Yeah, it's a textbook case of profligacy. I couldn't agree more.

[Eloquence 2,076]

No verbal crime shall ever go unpunished under my watch!

 

I wish I could keep up a lofty attitude 24/7, but I can get feisty if someone's trying to spread their toxic garbage (read: opinions).

 

I've already thought of most of the, regrettably, obvious replies I had coming for me. Most of them are actually covered by the youtube link I posted a little further north, so no hard feelings, right?

 

Hmm, I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say here. I did not look at your link, as I'm not terribly invested in this topic at this time, but I might return to it a bit later. And there are certainly no hard feelings. I mean, I can easily see where you are coming from. Your concern is that this practice is inherently harmful to the mind, and that the encouragement of it is encouraging the impressionable to do things that could cause psychological harm to themselves, if I'm not misunderstanding you horribly. Whether or not this is a valid concern, I'm not sure. I would need to research it, if research has in fact been done on this subject. I know that hypnosis-related accidents and psychological damage from the use of hallucinogens are both known to be possible, but both of those require an outside force (except for self-hypnosis, but I don't know of any examples of that going really wrong). Whether the same or similar issues can arise from strictly internal tampering with the mind, I don't know. I guess I just know that the thoughts of people are not easily changed through the internet, so I am content to allow people to come to their own (hopefully) informed decisions.

[Milky Jade 138]

Hmm, I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say here. I did not look at your link, as I'm not terribly invested in this topic at this time, but I might return to it a bit later. And there are certainly no hard feelings. I mean, I can easily see where you are coming from. Your concern is that this practice is inherently harmful to the mind, and that the encouragement of it is encouraging the impressionable to do things that could cause psychological harm to themselves, if I'm not misunderstanding you horribly. Whether or not this is a valid concern, I'm not sure. I would need to research it, if research has in fact been done on this subject. I know that hypnosis-related accidents and psychological damage from the use of hallucinogens are both known to be possible, but both of those require an outside force (except for self-hypnosis, but I don't know of any examples of that going really wrong). Whether the same or similar issues can arise from strictly internal tampering with the mind, I don't know. I guess I just know that the thoughts of people are not easily changed through the internet, so I am content to allow people to come to their own (hopefully) informed decisions.

 

I'll just repose my trust in you that you don't really think people are prepared with reliable and rigid information before they wade into the tulpa swamp.

 

I'm actually not all too interested in possible effects and risks. I just think that the proposition is false, end of story. I laid out my reasons why.

 

If anyone really burns to nitpick me about what manner of hallucination classifies as tulpa and which does not, I'll be elated to refer them to what I said a few posts back: It makes no difference. Neither qualitatively nor pertinent to this discussion.

 

If I had any concern to dole out, it would first and foremost be to the original state of mind of the average tulpa devotee. Clearly they should be able to sort it out on their own, but generally, they jump on it like a bitch in heat.

 

Otherwise, no, I'm not really concerned about what people do to further obstruct their psyche. At that point, you can only add insult to injury, anyway. Twist the knife, if you would rather me say.

[Eloquence 2,076]

I'll just repose my trust in you that you don't really think people are prepared with reliable and rigid information before they wade into the tulpa swamp.

 

I'm actually not all too interested in possible effects and risks. I just think that the proposition is false, end of story. I laid out my reasons why.

 

If anyone really burns to nitpick me about what manner of hallucination classifies as tulpa and which does not, I'll be elated to refer them to what I said a few posts back: It makes no difference. Neither qualitatively nor pertinent to this discussion.

 

If I had any concern to dole out, it would first and foremost be to the original state of mind of the average tulpa devotee. Clearly they should be able to sort it out on their own, but generally, they jump on it like a bitch in heat.

 

Otherwise, no, I'm not really concerned about what people do to further obstruct their psyche. At that point, you can only add insult to injury, anyway. Twist the knife, if you would rather me say.

 

In that case, I do believe our strange back-and-forth should now reach its end. It would seem that we have very different goals here, I am here simply on account of my fascination for the human tendency to conceptualize non-perceivable beings and how it applies to this particular situation, while you seem to be here to air your own views, not that there's anything wrong with that desire. I'm simply an impartial observer, an amateur anthropologist if you will, with no real desire to "take a side". I apologize for any trouble I may have caused, and will gladly fade back into the background where I don't cause any issues.

[Milky Jade 138]

conceptualize non-perceivable beings

Is that possible, though?

 

well hmmmm, I think that if you're an impartial observer, then shouldn't your goal be naturally different from anyone that engages in the topic actively?

 

Either way, I think I'm more or less out of things to add. It's there for anyone to read. If anything, I should be the one to withdraw and phase in/out if perchance something piques my curiosity. Until that time, feel free to join me in a cup of tea!

[Eloquence 2,076]

Is that possible, though?

 

well hmmmm, I think that if you're an impartial observer, then shouldn't your goal be naturally different from anyone that engages in the topic actively?

 

Either way, I think I'm more or less out of things to add. It's there for anyone to read. If anything, I should be the one to withdraw and phase in/out if perchance something piques my curiosity. Until that time, feel free to join me in a cup of tea!

 

Ok I guess I'll answer your question then go

 

I mean, conceptualizing non-perceivable beings is how every religion ever came into existence, so I'd say it's definitely a thing people do. And you're right, our goals would naturally be different. It just for a bit seemed like you were misinterpreting my reasons for being here, and that those misinterpretations seemed likely to lead to conflict.

 

Anyways, I'm glad there's no hard feelings, and I would gladly join you for a cup of tea   

[Milky Jade 138]

Ok I guess I'll answer your question then go

 

I mean, conceptualizing non-perceivable beings is how every religion ever came into existence, so I'd say it's definitely a thing people do. And you're right, our goals would naturally be different. It just for a bit seemed like you were misinterpreting my reasons for being here, and that those misinterpretations seemed likely to lead to conflict.

 

Anyways, I'm glad there's no hard feelings, and I would gladly join you for a cup of tea   

 

Oh, yeah, that's true. For some reason or other I thought "non-conceivable", which is definitely impossible.

Well, Dear, I didn't misinterpret or contemplate your reasons for being here. Since your first post I accepted them as valid and genuine, anyway. I really was more like.. talking -at- you, so sorry for the confusion.. You have any preferences?

[Eloquence 2,076]

Oh, yeah, that's true. For some reason or other I thought "non-conceivable", which is definitely impossible.

Well, Dear, I didn't misinterpret or contemplate your reasons for being here. Since your first post I accepted them as valid and genuine, anyway. I really was more like.. talking -at- you, so sorry for the confusion.. You have any preferences?

 

Well I might as well go against my word and keep responding now that we've clearly hijacked this thread. Oh well, it was kind of a copy thread anyways...

Haha, I can see how the way you read it it wouldn't make sense. And I am no longer confused, so yay

 

Um, preferences?

[Milky Jade 138]

Well I might as well go against my word and keep responding now that we've clearly hijacked this thread. Oh well, it was kind of a copy thread anyways...

Haha, I can see how the way you read it it wouldn't make sense. And I am no longer confused, so yay

 

Um, preferences?

 

Teaaaaa?

 

You know, that thing with hot water and leaves

[Dowlphin 459]

Otherwise, no, I'm not really concerned about what people do to further obstruct their psyche. At that point, you can only add insult to injury, anyway. Twist the knife, if you would rather me say.

 

 

 

I wish I could keep up a lofty attitude 24/7, but I can get feisty if someone's trying to spread their toxic garbage (read: opinions).

 

This arrogance that stems from zealous 'believers of the One True Reality' is what I sensed right away and why I didn't consider it worthy to further share my ideas. First and foremost, you think you are right, and you dislike me because I don't claim to be right and didn't make statements that are easy to (dis)prove like mathematical equations, so I didn't validate your perception of yourself and gave you nothing you could conveniently oppose with your beloved intellect.

 

I understand that at the core you are afraid of a 'bigger world', after all, the rational mind operates based on fear and opposition of harmful influences. But when you lose your calm like that, it means that the fear in your mind is overbearing and controlling you.

Pampering those fears will only brush them back under the carpet. Emotional healing rarely is smooth sailing.

 

Also, know that statements like

 

 

I'm willing to bet all my money that everyone claiming to successfully having created a tulpa is completely different from the next, for that reason.

 

betray your own reasoning, for it is an extremely vague and un(dis)provable and thus empty 'braggy' challenge. It is like saying: "I bet all my money that tomorrow will be an interesting day. (And I know I'm right because I'm so smart.)"

[Eloquence 2,076]

Teaaaaa?

 

You know, that thing with hot water and leaves

 

That's what I thought, but I'm pretty sure actually having a tea party on this thread is going to get me slapped with some warning points, so you'll have to excuse my hesitance

 

unless of course you happen to have a quality earl grey on hand. Or maybe something oolong.

[Milky Jade 138]

This arrogance that stems from zealous 'believers of the One True Reality' is what I sensed right away and why I didn't consider it worthy to further share my ideas.

 

Continues to share his ideas in 3..2..

 

First and foremost, you think you are right, and you dislike me because I don't claim to be right and didn't make statements that are easy to (dis)prove like mathematical equations, so I didn't validate your perception of yourself and gave you nothing you could conveniently oppose with your beloved intellect.

 

Is there anything which ought to lead me to believe otherwise?

 

Here you state that you're aware you made non-falsifiable propositions, but you still possess the bleeding arrogation to press the onus on me? I asked you to prove your case more than once. I'm really not keen on being told over and over again that I don't need that proof, and that I'm being arrogant for dismissing a claim asserted without evidence, without evidence.

 

The reason I'm not tolerating that sort of paltry exercise should be clear to anybody. Nice try taking this to personal grounds, though?

 

 

I understand that at the core you are afraid of a 'bigger world', after all, the rational mind operates based on fear and opposition of harmful influences. But when you lose your calm like that, it means that the fear in your mind is overbearing and controlling you.

Pampering those fears will only brush them back under the carpet. Emotional healing rarely is smooth sailing.

 

*sigh*

More grand claims? Did you study psychoanalysis at the psychology institute of zimbabwe?

 

"the rational mind operates based on fear and opposition of harmful influences"

I disagree, obviously, but why lay out my reasons?

You might as well have said "you're afraid of the truth, so you blinker your mind in order to live on in peace"

 

At some level or other this implies I've already accepted your proposition but compartmentalize it. I'm sorry, but.. do you really, really think it is appropriate to claim " I don't claim to be right "?

 

As far as I see, you've done nothing but. I'm still interested in where all of this is coming from. Still waiting for a shred of explanation.

 

I think of emotional reactions as that. Reactions. They operate in accordance with what you value. Rational fear, as a sense and reaction, is the emotional response to the jeopardy of your values. It can only come into operation if you are uncertain. Moreover, the way I see it, you're again accusing me of intellectual laziness (the non-acceptance of new ideas over the ones I've studied extensively), and I really burn to know where that is coming from.

 

I think the crux of this issue has always been this: How can you claim to know or have insight or possess knowledge of something to which I don't have the access to? Is it possible for me to make sense of the way things make sense inside -your- mind? If so, why are we still pussyfooting around the meat of the problem? Do you even care to talk to me beyond asserting I'm too stuck-up to understand, even though I'm asking you the quintbillionth time?

That's what I thought, but I'm pretty sure actually having a tea party on this thread is going to get me slapped with some warning points, so you'll have to excuse my hesitance

 

unless of course you happen to have a quality earl grey on hand. Or maybe something oolong.

 

Do you go in the tea thread? We can go there.

 

My name is actually a hint. Milky Jade Oolong is among my favourite cups of tea, but you can find out more there!

[Dowlphin 459]

@Milky Jade

Let me summarize the root of the issue in a little dialogue that concisely portrays what happened 'behind the stage curtain':

 

 

Milky Jade: "I think you're talking bullshit, but prove me otherwise if you can."

Dowlphin: "No thanks."

[Andaasonsan 3,205]

@Milky Jade

Let me summarize the root of the issue in a little dialogue that concisely portrays what happened 'behind the stage curtain':

 

 

Milky Jade: "I think you're talking bullshit, but prove me otherwise if you can."

Dowlphin: "No thanks."

And then you went on a big rant about "believers in the one true reality".

[Milky Jade 138]

@Milky Jade

Let me summarize the root of the issue in a little dialogue that concisely portrays what happened 'behind the stage curtain':

 

 

Milky Jade: "I think you're talking bullshit, but prove me otherwise if you can."

Dowlphin: "No thanks."

 

If you were to, at a specific time in history, tell me that the earth is round and not flat, I'd be nonplussed

 

But the crucial difference between ancient philosophers/astronomers and you was that they -actually- bothered to produce conclusive evidence.

 

If you want to "wow" me in the same way the shape of earth came as a surprise to anybody, it is incumbent upon you to show me how the earth is round and why you think the earth is round.

 

If you can't be arsed to, too bad. Just don't be surprised that I'll continue being nonplussed about a baseless theory.

[Dowlphin 459]

If you were to, at a specific time in history, tell me that the earth is round and not flat, I'd be nonplussed

 

But the crucial difference between ancient philosophers/astronomers and you was that they -actually- bothered to produce conclusive evidence.

 

If you want to "wow" me in the same way the shape of earth came as a surprise to anybody, it is incumbent upon you to show me how the earth is round and why you think the earth is round.

 

You wouldn't be nonplussed. You would react in the same way you are doing here and probably make those renowned astronomers marvel at your demanding diva attitude.

 

Don't you realize how comedically over-the-top your expectations towards people are?