Im insane

[Silverhoof 2,844]

And if you want to REALLY talk about unhealthy, I could go extensively into detail about how unhealthy sex (coital and non-coital alike) is.

 

Not on MLP, please.

This forum is a few steps above the rest of the internet. We can disagree on a higher level than that.

Thank you

[KakeiTheWolf 652]

Not on MLP, please.

This forum is a few steps above the rest of the internet. We can disagree on a higher level than that.

Thank you

 

Congress: The greatest way to destroy social progress.

 

Sorry for that Latin I pun. Puerile as it was, I couldn't resist that perfect shot at wordplay.

[Cupcake Ice Cream 436]

And your definition of unhealthy is subjective. A psychologist would think nothing of a situation like this, unless it led to extraneous issues.

 

I gotta say...I disagree with you...like most of the time but as an actual therapist I would have to somewhat back this up. I wouldn't say we'd think nothing of it..rather exploration would have to lead to a maladaptive pattern for us to believe it was unhealthy. And in order for a pattern to be maladaptive it has to harm the person or someone else or it has to significantly impair occupational, social or academic functioning. Now in this case, we aren't the OP...so the OP is the only person who knows whether or not it is harming them and the OP only knows whether or not it is impairing their functioning.

 

And as far as this being schizophrenia...schizophrenia is a whole different world. I have hospitalized, treated and assessed schizophrenia and other than it possibly being a hallucination, this is not schizophrenia

 

http://counsellingresource.com/lib/distress/schizophrenic/schizophrenia-dsm/schizophrenia-symptoms/

[KakeiTheWolf 652]

I gotta say...I disagree with you...like most of the time but as an actual therapist I would have to somewhat back this up. I wouldn't say we'd think nothing of it..rather exploration would have to lead to a maladaptive pattern for us to believe it was unhealthy. And in order for a pattern to be maladaptive it has to harm the person or someone else or it has to significantly impair occupational, social or academic functioning. Now in this case, we aren't the OP...so the OP is the only person who knows whether or not it is harming them and the OP only knows whether or not it is impairing their functioning.

 

And as far as this being schizophrenia...schizophrenia is a whole different world. I have hospitalized, treated and assessed schizophrenia and other than it possibly being a hallucination, this is not schizophrenia

 

http://counsellingre...renia-symptoms/

 

By "think nothing of it", I meant not see it as a mental illness. I mean, you couldn't really call something like maladaptive daydreaming a mental illness, as it is voluntary. Things aren't generally unhealthy (as long as there aren't extraneous problems) if they are the voluntary products of the mind. As for whether or not it tends to form maladaptive patterns, I'd consider that fairly low, as I was even further engrossed in my own very similar relationship with a tulpa, and no area of performance in my life changed at all.

 

Tulpae are more relatable to maladaptive daydreaming than mental illness, but even maladaptive daydreaming can be controlled enough where there is no noticeable impact on the person's life.

[Cupcake Ice Cream 436]

By "think nothing of it", I meant not see it as a mental illness. I mean, you couldn't really call something like maladaptive daydreaming a mental illness, as it is voluntary. Things aren't generally unhealthy (as long as there aren't extraneous problems) if they are the voluntary products of the mind. As for whether or not it tends to form maladaptive patterns, I'd consider that fairly low, as I was even further engrossed in my own very similar relationship with a tulpa, and no area of performance in my life changed at all.

 

Tulpae are more relatable to maladaptive daydreaming than mental illness, but even maladaptive daydreaming can be controlled enough where there is no noticeable impact on the person's life.

 

That's what I was getting at...I was backing you up on that one

 

A tulpa does not equal maladaptive behavior and certainly does not equal schizophrenia. I find this tulpa situation to be normal to be honest. I don't see a bad pattern here. If the OP explains that this is not harming him then I say go for it

[KakeiTheWolf 652]

That's what I was getting at...I was backing you up on that one

 

A tulpa does not equal maladaptive behavior and certainly does not equal schizophrenia. I find this tulpa situation to be normal to be honest. I don't see a bad pattern here. If the OP explains that this is not harming him then I say go for it

 

Now, if only all that held true for MY situation... But that would be a story for another day and sure as hell a different site, indeed.

[Guest]

So long as this doesn't get into a fight, or a nasty debate. OK.

 

I plan on remaining civil, so that lies on your shoulders.

 

On the contrary, there is a great deal of proof. Magic does not exist. As much as we may want it to be, no one can perform real magic on stage. There are those who claim this, but it always turns out to be a trick.

---No has ever mentally altered a losing lotto ticket into a winning one.

 

And what proof is that, I'd love to see your definitive proof, since there is no definitive proof on anything. Everything is conjecture, and guessing, to say you fully understand something, and can entirely prove or disprove it is a fallacy. I don't give two craps about stage magic, that is clearly, and as stage magicians themselves have said, its a sham run by mirrors. There may be actual magic out there, that most people wouldn't recognize as "magic." You don't know, and I doubt humanity will every fully understand it. If you do happen to have 100% irrefutable evidence, I'd love to see it.

 

Also, this isn't magic, so using magic as an example is a bit far-fetched. This is psychology, which is far greater than any theoretical magic anyway, in my opinion. I never stated that simply believing in something could change a result, but the way one thinks alters how they perceive things, which allows them to change the world, without altering it. If I believe I won the lottery, even though I didn't, I won anyway. I might not have the money, but in my head I won, no one can tell me otherwise.

 

Anyway, reality is a very fragile thing.

 

Science builds on the rules of reality. These rules are how we measure the universe. The burden of proof is not on the unbeliever, but on the believer. You can say, "I have a cow in my barn and people are likely to believe you.

IF you say, "I have a dinosaur in my barn." people are gonna want to see some sort of proof.

The burden of "proof" is on you.

 

There are no rules of reality, for all you know, a giant snot baby could fly through space and destroy earth tomorrow, you don't know jack-shit, and I don't know jack-shit (pardon my french). Our rules are made up little toys we humans like to play with so we don't have to cry ourselves to sleep at night, because the universe is so big and scary and we know almost nothing about it. If we didn't set up some sort of rules, we'd feel utterly lost, even if the rules are just lies we tell ourselves over and over until we believe them, oh look psychology at work again. Proof is never 100%, the burden of proof lies wherever it wants to, and half the time it lies nowhere at all. Science is just a new type of religion, feeding us new rules and regulations that let us sleep at night. Mankind enjoys its comforts, and that includes believing we understand this messed up universe.

 

And why exactly is the burden of proof on me, you keep telling me there is proof that what I believe is wrong, and that your science is correct? Where is your proof? My proof happens to be Arya, who you happened to be very rude to, if you don't want to believe that she really is the one talking, that's your problem, not mine.

 

So you say. Imagination is a marvelous thing. I've dreamed things I never saw before. I've been so shocked at events in my dream that I woke up. My dream did not seem to be under my control.

--It's easy to make any claim you want when no one but you can see your tulpa.

 

So, I don't see your point here? Your subconscious showed you some crazy stuff, and.... that proves what exactly? If anything, it just shows the subconscious is already autonomous.

 

Marriage? To an imaginary creation of your own making? Shutting out all other possible REAL partners? and a very young age?

I don't think I need to explain unhealthy. It should be self evident.

 

Who cares if it ends up making him happy? If worst comes to worst, it isn't like he can't ever move on. Some people would have said the similar things as to what you are saying about 100 years ago in relation to same-sex marriage, some people still do. Who are you to rule over the marriage choices of another? Will it affect you? Will it through your world that off-balance if this happens?

 

As for Arya...I'm under no obligation to answer to pretend people. But just for fun...

 

My reality is not for you to accept or deny. I'm real enough to pay taxes, vote, be physically born and die. These are all things you cannot do. You cannot demand equal rights on your own, except through a proxy. You can't even speak out without a real human to translate or type for you. Whatever you claim matters not to me. reality simply cannot be altered by imagination.

 

"Well thank you very much for being quite rude. So because I'm different than you, because I'm not like you, I don't deserve to be treated with respect!? The way you even addressed me is as though I am an inferior being! Don't even say you didn't mean any disrespect, the "But just for fun..." blew that crap right out of the water! What makes you so great?! Because you can do some things I can't, that makes you better? So, because I can't speak directly for myself, that makes me less than real? How about someone like Stephen Hawkings then, would you discriminate against him because he needs a computer as his proxy to speak? If you say no, you're a hypocrite, if you say yes, shame on you. You are altering reality right now by what you think, you say that because you won't believe me, I am not real, thus you just altered your perception of reality through thought. You just contradicted yourself, even if you don't realize it, and won't believe it. Any real reason you believe I can't be real, other than that it goes against your precious pre-conceived notions of how things work?

 

Flip it right back at you, my reality is not for you to accept or deny, but at least show me some respect."

 

 

Imagining a log cabin and building one is not the same as a tulpa.

everyone can see my cabin. Physical=reality=proof.

 

But if I say, "FiFi the invisible poodle girl is my wife?" people may well question my sanity. No proof is possible.

 

Demanding that others accept imaginary wives is a bizarre thing to ask. I'm surprised that so few have come out and said this may be unhealthy.

 

Physical, does most definitely not equal reality, and does most definitely not equal proof. There is no proof of ANYTHING, for, or against anything. Also, can everyone see your log cabin? How about blind people, or those who cannot feel "touch." Couldn't they claim your log cabin isn't there, because they cannot sense it? A blind, deaf, mute person, incapable of smell, taste, and touch has a very different concept of reality than you or I, and they do exist. They don't have to give two bits about "your reality" or your cabin, and there is nothing that makes it anymore real to them than the darkness inside of their minds, or the things they manage to conjure up.

 

In the end, as in all things, no one has to care what others think, that's their own decision, so as long as you don't actually attempt to hinder OP, or continue to criticize them, we'll gladly agree to disagree since you seem rather hell-bent on believing a whole group of beings are lesser, and you even point considerable fun at their existence. I'd rather not be a racist (or whatever you would call it in this situation), thank you very much. And that's what you are to me, a racist.

[Sugarcube 213]

I don't fully understand what a tulpa is, and I would like to know more so I can understand better but what i have to say is this. It is important you don't devote all your time to Brandy, this is true of every relationship of any type. I can't just spend time with my boyfriend I have to foster and nurture friendships outside of it in order for it to be a healthy and functioning relationship, same goes for you and Brandy, as long as you have hobbies and friendships outside of Brandy then I don't see a problem. Like I said I don't fully understand but if you are happy and are living a healthy life then I see no problem. It isn't my place to pass judgement, there are many things in this world that don't have clear cut explanations. Wishing you and Brandy many happy years together

[Silverhoof 2,844]

I'd rather not be a racist (or whatever you would call it in this situation), thank you very much. And that's what you are to me, a racist.

 

Wait a minute. So you are saying that not believing in your imaginary friend makes me....racist?

ROFLOL...No other statement could so well encapsulate the ridiculous argument we are having.

[Gone for good 1,593]

I can't quite remember how to properly do the mention thing, so I'm just gonna post this in hopes that you read it. Nevermore and Arya, I really think that you should take a chill pill. I understand that you don't like having your beliefs insulted but trying to call Silver out for bigotry and writing all that really contradicts what you said earlier about remaining civil.

 

Anyway, I will say that I find this entire predicament confusing. I personally don't like it at all, because relationships with other life forms are just overall better. I used to be like you guys; I didn't call my friends tulpas, but I did have imaginary friends that I would play with and would talk to and I even had an imaginary girlfriend, who I think I proposed to on a couple occassions. From my own memory, this was extremely abnormal and only set me back rather than propelling me forward. I didn't learn anything from these people, I could relate but I literally controlled everything that they did. The only reason these people even existed is because I was in a really crappy environment and was scared to socialize with anybody. The moment I realized that me participating in this was bonkers I just started socializing. I haven't had any regrets telling these creatures off.

 

I understand that this is really just my own opinion on this whole Tulpa thing, but living creatures offer better relationships than psychological ones, anyway. These people in your mind are perfect, will say what you want them to say and when you want them to say it. Sure you may think that you didn't want them to say it, but somewhere deep down in your mind you are directing them. What's the fun in this? Part of the fun of relationships, in my opinion, is that there is usually something new in each person you meet, never the same old boring stuff. With psychological relationships, they are all based on your past experiences and understandings.

 

I understand that I actually insulted you guys, but if you really like doing this then hey keep on at it. I myself would hate doing such a thing, but if it makes you happy then so be it. You all seem intelligent enough, so maybe I am the truly stupid one here. By the way sorry for any spelling mistakes or anythign I am quickly typing this up in my school's library and I wanna go get some lunch lol

Edited September 10, 2012 by Lord Bababa

[Gekoncze 327]

Calm down everypony

This discusion reminds me thoese in my country between politicians. You should try to understand the other side.

 

# This imaginary friend may actually be preventing you from having a real relationship.

The important word is MAY. For me it is the oposite - they try to help me as much as possible to get some friends and a girlfriend. Thanks to them I am not as shy as I was before.

 

 

# Imagination doesn't create reality. No mater how much you may want it to be that way.

It does not create reality itself, but I think it isn't what you meant. In fact imagination do create informations, and what is the world all over us made from? Everything is just an information (that is my view, you can have different of course, but respect others belives... they may turn out real in the future... you have no proof of it ).

 

# On the contrary, there is a great deal of proof. Magic does not exist.

Pleeeeaaaaaaaaasssssseeeeeeee tell me Don't keep it as secret I want to know the proof too.

... I think that even magic will be explained by science one day... Look on what you are stearing now - it is a computer - for people in medieval it would be 100% magic. That is just how you understand the word "magic".

Edited September 10, 2012 by Gekoncze

[KakeiTheWolf 652]

Wait a minute. So you are saying that not believing in your imaginary friend makes me....racist?

ROFLOL...No other statement could so well encapsulate the ridiculous argument we are having.

 

 

rac·ism [rey-siz-uhm]

 

noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

 

The description of a racist would fit your argument. Tulpae are a race of the sentient intangible formed of the reallocation of parts of the mind. Your argument is based on the supremist attitude that more credit is due to the tangible than the intangible. Science would call you an idiot for such a belief.

 

I cannot touch, taste, smell, feel, see, hear, or measure gravitational force (Nor do I even know if it is a wave or a particle system), yet I blindly believe in the existence of gravity because of some man who got hit on the head with an apple about 400 years ago. I cannot touch, taste, smell, feel, see, or hear atoms (Nor do I even know its real structure, but rather a 80 year old stab in the dark), but I blindly believe they exist because of some man about 400 years ago who believed the universe was made of little tiny balls.

 

Science hinges on blind belief of the intangible, based off of theories by ancient men, We have no more chance of touching, tasting, smelling, feeling, or hearing atoms or gravity, but we believe with blind faith they are absolutely real. Are tulpae really any different?

[Smokin'HotRarity 182]

You said you did not make your tulpa on purpose. But I am wondering, did you already know the steps on how to make a tulpa beforehand?

[Silverhoof 2,844]

rac·ism [rey-siz-uhm]

 

noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

 

The description of a racist would fit your argument. Tulpae are a race of the sentient intangible formed of the reallocation of parts of the mind. Your argument is based on the supremist attitude that more credit is due to the tangible than the intangible. Science would call you an idiot for such a belief.

 

I cannot touch, taste, smell, feel, see, hear, or measure gravitational force (Nor do I even know if it is a wave or a particle system), yet I blindly believe in the existence of gravity because of some man who got hit on the head with an apple about 400 years ago. I cannot touch, taste, smell, feel, see, or hear atoms (Nor do I even know its real structure, but rather a 80 year old stab in the dark), but I blindly believe they exist because of some man about 400 years ago who believed the universe was made of little tiny balls.

 

Science hinges on blind belief of the intangible, based off of theories by ancient men, We have no more chance of touching, tasting, smelling, feeling, or hearing atoms or gravity, but we believe with blind faith they are absolutely real. Are tulpae really any different?

 

I'm sorry, but its not racist to disbelieve your imaginary friends.

Further science would not laugh at me, they would support me.

If you want a board where everyone is forced to believe imaginary people exist, you will need to start your own.

 

I am not wrong if I don't recognize a marriage between a kid and his imaginary wolf.

Nor am I wrong to say it is unhealthy.

Humans were made for real relationships, not pretend ones.

 

Bottom line. Its ridiculous to call me racist over this. Racism doesn't apply here, no matter how you try to twist the meaning.

Stop calling names. Let this argument die.

--People are allowed to disagree with you.

 

Frankly I think the mods should lock this.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Silverhoof

[Whiteshade 1,426]

I'm sorry, but its not racist to disbelieve your imaginary friends.

Further science would not laugh at me, they would support me.

If you want a board where everyone is forced to believe imaginary people exist, you will need to start your own.

 

I am not wrong if I don't recognize a marriage between a kid and his imaginary wolf.

Nor am I wrong to say it is unhealthy.

Humans were made for real relationships, not pretend ones.

 

Bottom line. Its ridiculous to call me racist over this. Racism doesn't apply here, no matter how you try to twist the meaning.

Stop calling names. Let this argument die.

--People are allowed to disagree with you.

 

Amusing. Have you ever considered a career in the military?

 

Also its amusing how you say science would support you and you are right, since neither morals nor science play loyalties. As well, both concepts are relative, not absolute. Science appears to be absolute, but the whole premise of it, as @@KakeiTheWolf pointed out, is based on the ASSUMPTION of proof. As well, you seem pretty confident that you are not wrong, yet this is all inconsequential in the overall scheme. As long as you possess no means to actually stop, intimidate, dissaude, other descriptors etc, people from making tulpae, then all this is is an amusing chat. Also, if you want a board where everyone is forced to believe that tulpae don't exist, you will need to start your own, Mr. Condescending.

[FedoraMemes 582]

Dude, that's pretty awesome.

 

I've never had a Tulpa or an Imaginary Friend for that matter, but I totally respect your feelings for her, and as long as you realise that she isn't real, that's fine (I'm not saying you shouldn't have Brady, but just as long as you can tell the difference between reality and what is not).

 

Sorry if I sound a little weird, I don't know anything on Tulpa's, and I think it's great that you're having a good time with Brandy. Whatever makes you happy dude.

[Mushy Giant Friend 206]

You're definitely not insane! If you're insane, I'm insane. Practically. Anyway, I don't know much about Tuplas (Practically nothing.), but I'm a Dæmian, which basically means I have a little transforming companion everywhere I go. It's fun. I wouldn't go as far as marrying him though!

Dæmians: http://daemianandproud.webs.com/ If you were wondering.

 

EDIT;; His name is Sachiel, by the way. He's the opposite of me, as he is rude and sarcastic. He can be good fun at times, though.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Hufflepuff

[Silverhoof 2,844]

Amusing. Have you ever considered a career in the military?

 

Also its amusing how you say science would support you and you are right, since neither morals nor science play loyalties. As well, both concepts are relative, not absolute. Science appears to be absolute, but the whole premise of it, as @@KakeiTheWolf pointed out, is based on the ASSUMPTION of proof. As well, you seem pretty confident that you are not wrong, yet this is all inconsequential in the overall scheme. As long as you possess no means to actually stop, intimidate, dissaude, other descriptors etc, people from making tulpae, then all this is is an amusing chat. Also, if you want a board where everyone is forced to believe that tulpae don't exist, you will need to start your own, Mr. Condescending.

 

You misinterpret my point. I'm not here to intimidate, Most of my time was spent responding to those who got angry at the disbelief of others. People with imaginary friends should expect people to disbelieve. Anger solves nothing. Nor should they call names like "racist."

 

The part about getting another board was aimed at that anger. You really shouldn't be surprised at this reaction when you inject imaginary friends into general forums.

 

When I said this marriage with an imaginary wolf girl was not healthy...I said that out of love and tolerance.

Love an tolerance doesn't mean you have to agree with every crazy thing that comes along. Sometimes it means you have to point out things that can harm other people.

[Smokin'HotRarity 182]

 

 

Not everybody's built the same...humans are built to eat food yet some are allergic to certain food. It's only unhealthy if it is unhealthy, have you met him in person if not I don't think that qualifies you to determine whether or not it's unhealthy. Your post has come off as a little harsh. If it makes him happy I don't think its unhealthy.

Edited September 12, 2012 by glitterlicious

[KakeiTheWolf 652]

I'm sorry, but its not racist to disbelieve your imaginary friends.

Further science would not laugh at me, they would support me.

If you want a board where everyone is forced to believe imaginary people exist, you will need to start your own.

 

I am not wrong if I don't recognize a marriage between a kid and his imaginary wolf.

Nor am I wrong to say it is unhealthy.

Humans were made for real relationships, not pretend ones.

 

Bottom line. Its ridiculous to call me racist over this. Racism doesn't apply here, no matter how you try to twist the meaning.

Stop calling names. Let this argument die.

--People are allowed to disagree with you.

 

Frankly I think the mods should lock this.

 

I simply defined racism. You have a problem with it, fuss at an etymologist.

 

I'm using facts. You are using ambiguous statements based on opinion with no examples to back up your argument. As well, "Further science" not only wouldn't support you, but would indicate that you are relying on "science of the gaps" as a logical basis, a fallacious concept based on the assumption that what has not been explained by current or previous observations (Ones rendered from the fallible perspectives of people) in the scientific field is explained by as-of-yet unobserved physical laws in science (This is an example of petitio principii, "begging the question", in which the validity of the conclusion of an argument is implied implicitly or explicitly in the premise or the statements of the proposer). You also have used fallacies such as argumentum ad ignorantiam, onus probandi, cum hoc ergo propter hoc, and circular logic.

 

Also, boards of the type you mentioned do exist. Not only did you exemplify poisoning the well, and ad hominem, in a veiled coercive threat (which is impotent, as you do not have power over where I go or stay, as you do not have the power to influence thought), you showed how clearly little research you did when proposing this arguement (which mostly is made of opinions).

 

As for the topic of recognizing marriages, I can very easily argue recognizing gay marriage is equally pointless and stupid. It doesn't result in progeny without outlying help (And that still leaves the person born with only one father and only one mother), it doesn't benefit anyone enough to compensate for the funds it takes to get it legalized, and it simply doesn't make anything any different. Marriage with tulpae is different, but it provides no more benefits. The only argument gays have that makes sense is that they do it for love (Which is a bloody stupid argument, as you don't need to be married to love someone), and that same concept is the only reason for marrying a tulpa. Gays are fighting a losing battle for something of relatively little worth that doesn't even benefit anyone (If anything, the marriage benefits would hurt the government, as they'd have a massive influx of marriages upon legalization), and the only reason they are doing it is because they believe it will make them happy (Spoiler alert: They will almost immediately regret it. Marriage sucks). What reason would someone marry a tulpa for unless they felt they were getting happiness out of it?

 

And whilst you could say that tulpa relationships are unhealthy, I could say the same thing (To an even greater extent) about gays. Myriads of STDs (Note: Death by AIDS is horrible), encourages the instability of the aberrant psychosexual mind, can significantly hinder social progress (In some cases, this especially goes for those of the same sex), increases the likelihood of being the target of hate crime, and the list can go on for some time. Actually, tulpa relations are MORE healthy, as it eliminates the chance of death for your partner, eliminates the possibility of AIDS, doesn't automatically hinder you socially, and is cheap as hell to live with.

 

If humans were made for real relations and not pretend ones, explain mastubation.

 

I didn't twist the meaning. I took the entirety of your argument and compared it to the etymology. Now, if the OP never told it was a wolf, it could have been a black woman as a tulpa. THEN you could be called racist easily.

 

You keep talking, so you apparently don't want to stop. We can keep talking until we fling you through the whole sodding Kubler-Ross model, you know.

 

Yeah, people can disagree with me. Depending on who I choose to bang, I can sue them for it, too. What's your bloody point, kid?

 

Lock a thread... because you don't like to be wrong? Incredibly mature, sir.

[Guest]

When I said this marriage with an imaginary wolf girl was not healthy...I said that out of love and tolerance.

Love an tolerance doesn't mean you have to agree with every crazy thing that comes along. Sometimes it means you have to point out things that can harm other people.

 

Love and tolerance is never based out of prejudice and ignorance, it means trying to understand where someone is coming from to the greatest degree without letting your own opinions muddle the issue. You have yet to do that, so no, you have not been practicing tolerance. No you don't have to agree with everything, but the point of tolerance, is, if the issue at hand is not harming anyone, you let it be.

 

Kakei said everything else that needs saying for now.

[JeanHover 326]

This is really interesting... I've never known what a tulpa is until now, but I don't think you are insane. You were in a hospital without companionship for a while and you made an imaginary companion. I can't say that would mean you are crazy, it just means you are lonely.

[Evilshy 5,090]

@@Silverhoof

Just thought I should point out that science wouldn't support you Silverhoof. Nor would it support Tulpa proponents. A tulpa, by definition, cannot be perceived by anyone but it's creator, and therefore cannot be tested objectively. Science doesn't get anywhere near Tulpae because something that, by definition cannot be perceived except by it's creator, cannot be confirmed or denied by experiment, and in fact can't even be experimented on.

 

So yes, you can not believe in Tulpae based on the fact that you can't see them, and that's all good and well. But don't claim to have science on your side, because science takes no side in an argument like this.

 

 

Also, we don't know how the human brain works. We are barely scratching the surface of neuroscience. We don't know how sentience is achieved, when a fetal brain is developed enough to be considered sentient, and many other things. Is it so hard to believe that a brain may possibly contain two sentients rather than one?

Edited September 13, 2012 by Possibly Evilshy

[Somebody 570]

In response to the OP......

 

I have a tulpa / imaginary friend, myself. Her name is Amy, and she is a very sweet creature who fine-tuned herself from a framework I built her off of. Just because I'm the only one who can see her, doesn't mean she isn't real to me. The human mind is so unfathomably complex that it's very posssible to give one's subconscious a personification or form. I like to think of it as two souls living in one mind and body. In fact, everyone already has two parts to them: the conscious and the subconscious. I just gave my "other half" a form.

 

Yes, it's very possible to develop feelings for your tulpa. Before this thread, I was a bit wary to reveal it, but I see now that I'm not the only one who has developed a form of love for his internal friend. Amy loves me very much, and I love her equally. Let's just say that I designed her to be a very loving creature (moreso than I realized at the time), and I know her on an extremely personal level. I see nothing wrong with this, since I am the only one she can socialize with--I put her there, and I'm the only one who can provide for her, so who am I to deprive her of what she wants?

 

She and I have an understanding that I will find a human being to have a long-term relationship with, and she has no problem with this. She knows that to me at least, a tulpa is not the same thing as a marriage partner. A tulpa is basically an imaginary friend from Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends, you get out of them exactly what you put into them. They are created out of a need for companionship, and they mold themselves into whatever their creator needs most from them. They don't just have access to your mind, they are your subconscious itself. So whatever they offer you is, in all probability, exactly what you need to stay sane. Not only would you be hurtful to not accept it, but it would be downright foolish to do what boils down to arguing with yourself.

 

In short, you're not insane, at least not dangerously so. And if you are insane, who cares? Don't let haters get you down. I've come to a realization that I have what I call "controlled insanity." I've always believed that you need to have some level of insanity just to keep from going totally nuts! Anyone who claims to be 100% sane is either lying (or they don't realize), or through their misguided efforts to stay completely sane, they have actually become dangerous. Yes, this is possible.

 

Accept yourself for who you are! If that means you're in love with an imaginary friend, so be it! You're not hurting anyone, so who cares? I would only suggest that you discuss with Brandy the possibility of you finding a physical human companion at some point. To totally write off the possibility is perhaps unwise, because it could lead to disastrous problems if you do find someone--you definitely don't want your own mind to be angry with you.

Edited September 13, 2012 by Questio

[KakeiTheWolf 652]

@@Silverhoof

Just thought I should point out that science wouldn't support you Silverhoof. Nor would it support Tulpa proponents. A tulpa, by definition, cannot be perceived by anyone but it's creator, and therefore cannot be tested objectively. Science doesn't get anywhere near Tulpae because something that, by definition cannot be perceived except by it's creator, cannot be confirmed or denied by experiment, and in fact can't even be experimented on.

 

So yes, you can not believe in Tulpae based on the fact that you can't see them, and that's all good and well. But don't claim to have science on your side, because science takes no side in an argument like this.

 

 

Also, we don't know how the human brain works. We are barely scratching the surface of neuroscience. We don't know how sentience is achieved, when a fetal brain is developed enough to be considered sentient, and many other things. Is it so hard to believe that a brain may possibly contain two sentients rather than one?

 

Actually, a brain can possess two separate sentient consciousnesses. Various disorders in the brain can cause separate development in the two lobes of the brain. Each side can, in essence, form the equivalent of two functioning brains, each with a separate personality.

 

SCIENCE!