The Tulpa Thread
(01-02-2017, 08:56 AM)Nefari Wrote: i don't think it's "megabad", but i think it's unhealthy and incredibly fucking stupid

generally people who believe that they have more than one person inside of their body are considered, y'know, mentally ill. if we're talking about disassociative identity disorder, that comes from the mind fragmenting itself due to intense childhood trauma, while this is of choice.
generally if you have to work for hours on end to convince yourself that something exists, it doesn't. if we're talking about the tulpa itself, then you're not convincing yourself it exists, you are developing it. it's like coding a game and calling that process "the process of believing the game is real". might be technically correct but in a weird way

if you're talking about imposition, then i don't think i've explained this but you and your tulpa know they aren't there for real, you're not convincing yourself of it, you're trying to see them despite the fact

you're not basing it off of anything scientific, don't expect the same from me. so you're not going to use the potential best way to disprove my arguments? that's your choice it's "oh it's there" vs "oh it's not there". provide an actual argument before demanding a counterargument. burden of proof matters less and less the more you dive into an argument. while it is true that this would generally fall under burden of proof, you've already provided counterarguments that have comprehensively failed to accurately oppose anything i've said and that's what should be addressed.

you're ignoring my point about the imposition, which is the fact that you're doing it. you're putting hours of effort into convincing your body into seeing what does not exist. that is a waste of time and energy. what is a waste of time and energy is massively up to your own priorities. whenever i do this it's usually while i'm doing other things, so it doesn't actually take time out of my day it's directly counterproductive against everything your body does to keep you conscious and aware of your surroundings. as i've explained you aren't unlocking your mind to all the hallucinations, which would be bad, you're trying to imagine one specific thing in your eyesight. you are not smashing the wall between reality and imagination, you are letting one person through
I don't care about you getting the consent of your imaginary friend. not relevant i'm questioning how relevant my bringing this up was tbh

"self-harm is intentional self-harm" -- oh, and is self-induced hallucination not intentional? you're harming your mind, a cutter is harming their skin. they both feel good from it, while they both suffer in the long term emotionally and with their (real) relationships. i don't think it's an unreasonable comparison. my point is that without cooperation you cannot do it. with training you'd only be able to see your tulpa and nothing else. how is this particularly unhealthy. distracting maybe, but you could make that case for any annoying friend.

i'm doing a new thing where my replies are in bold beside your text btw
i am NOT a swede;
Reply
(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: if we're talking about disassociative identity disorder, that comes from the mind fragmenting itself due to intense childhood trauma, while this is of choice.

cool, so you’re actively deciding to mimic a mental disorder. radical.

Quote:if we're talking about the tulpa itself, then you're not convincing yourself it exists, you are developing it. it's like coding a game and calling that process "the process of believing the game is real". might be technically correct but in a weird way

if you're talking about imposition, then i don't think i've explained this but you and your tulpa know they aren't there for real, you're not convincing yourself of it, you're trying to see them despite the fact

if you’re not convincing yourself that it actually exists, why bother trying to convince me that’s it real? you already know it isn’t.
you are forcing your eyes to see something that does not exist. you are forcing your mind to convince itself into believing that it is two separate, sentient beings. you are deceiving yourself, no matter how self aware you think you are. you’re tricking yourself into thinking your fictional game is real. that’s convincing yourself it exists.

(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: so you're not going to use the potential best way to disprove my arguments? that's your choice

so you’re going to respond with a passive aggressive jab instead of a legitimate point or argument? that’s your choice

(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: burden of proof matters less and less the more you dive into an argument.

sorry, but this isn’t true. if you want to argue with anything remotely resembling objectivity, you need some semblance of proof. i’m not going to take you seriously if you actually believe burden of proof doesn’t matter. instead of avoiding the question with the claim that it isn’t important, why not answer it?

(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: you've already provided counterarguments that have comprehensively failed to accurately oppose anything i've said and that's what should be addressed.

similarly, you have ignored nearly everything i have said about self-induced hallucinations. please, enlighten me on what i’m missing instead of merely scolding me and expecting me to figure it out on my own. clearly i lack the ability.

(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: as i've explained you aren't unlocking your mind to all the hallucinations, which would be bad, you're trying to imagine one specific thing in your eyesight. you are not smashing the wall between reality and imagination, you are letting one person through

irrelevant. i’m not going to repeat myself on this again. reread my points on self-induced hallucination and respond to them instead of insisting that it isn’t important.

(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: my point is that without cooperation you cannot do it. with training you'd only be able to see your tulpa and nothing else.

again, i don’t care about you cooperating with your imaginary friend. still not relevant.
and again i will ask you to reread what i have said earlier on the subject.
it is unhealthy and seriously misguided to prioritize first developing an imaginary person, then spending enough hours “communicating” with it to believe that it’s sentient, then forcing yourself to physically see it. the factors that led you to create a tulpa--loneliness, or simply “i thought it was cool”--could be solved within this time and are terrible reasons to create an allegedly sentient being, respectively.
[Image: Eg3lWTv.png][Image: tumblr_mcy2clswjj1qesb9j_by_homestuck__f...699rlh.png]
not a ship
Reply
(01-02-2017, 11:20 AM)Nefari Wrote:
(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: if we're talking about disassociative identity disorder, that comes from the mind fragmenting itself due to intense childhood trauma, while this is of choice.

cool, so you’re actively deciding to mimic a mental disorder. radical. not quite. with DID, there's a toooon of personalities, and who is when is very uncontrollable. with just 2 people things are pretty smooth, so the negative effects there are not relevant.

Quote:if we're talking about the tulpa itself, then you're not convincing yourself it exists, you are developing it. it's like coding a game and calling that process "the process of believing the game is real". might be technically correct but in a weird way

if you're talking about imposition, then i don't think i've explained this but you and your tulpa know they aren't there for real, you're not convincing yourself of it, you're trying to see them despite the fact

if you’re not convincing yourself that it actually exists, why bother trying to convince me that’s it real? you already know it isn’t. Again, are we talking about the tulpa themselves or imposition? kinda confusing
you are forcing your eyes to see something that does not exist. you are forcing your mind to convince itself into believing that it is two separate, sentient beings. the first is imposition, the second is the tulpa themselves. they former is optional to the latter. you are deceiving yourself, no matter how self aware you think you are. you’re tricking yourself into thinking your fictional game is real. that’s convincing yourself it exists.i think the problem here is that you are confused over the concepts

imposition is training yourself to see your tulpa irl, that's it.

the tulpa themselves, and the process of making one, seems to be the subject of your other arguments.


(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: so you're not going to use the potential best way to disprove my arguments? that's your choice

so you’re going to respond with a passive aggressive jab instead of a legitimate point or argument? that’s your choice these are my arguments. if you could bring in some hard science that would be good, at this point most of this comes from you not understanding the concepts

(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: burden of proof matters less and less the more you dive into an argument.

sorry, but this isn’t true. if you want to argue with anything remotely resembling objectivity, you need some semblance of proof. but we can at least get the concepts right beforehand, ok? i’m not going to take you seriously if you actually believe burden of proof doesn’t matter. doens't matter RIGHT NOW. instead of avoiding the question with the claim that it isn’t important, why not answer it? we can agree that when you have DID (or MPD), those are different personalities, correct?

(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: you've already provided counterarguments that have comprehensively failed to accurately oppose anything i've said and that's what should be addressed.

similarly, you have ignored nearly everything i have said about self-induced hallucinations. please, enlighten me on what i’m missing instead of merely scolding me and expecting me to figure it out on my own. clearly i lack the ability. i've highlighted the difference between what you are referencing and self-induced hallucinations. i'm not even sure if that's possible, and i've certainly never heard of anyone within the community who has gotten to self-induced hallucinations of anyone or anything except their tulpa.

(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: as i've explained you aren't unlocking your mind to all the hallucinations, which would be bad, you're trying to imagine one specific thing in your eyesight. you are not smashing the wall between reality and imagination, you are letting one person through

irrelevant. i’m not going to repeat myself on this again. reread my points on self-induced hallucination and respond to them instead of insisting that it isn’t important. how about a real response please. i want my ideas to be challenged and you're just sitting back and saying "no you do it". pretty unsatisfying

(01-02-2017, 10:08 AM)Ayaze Wrote: my point is that without cooperation you cannot do it. with training you'd only be able to see your tulpa and nothing else.

again, i don’t care about you cooperating with your imaginary friend. still not relevant.
and again i will ask you to reread what i have said earlier on the subject.
it is unhealthy and seriously misguided to prioritize first developing an imaginary person, then spending enough hours “communicating” with it to believe that it’s sentient, then forcing yourself to physically see it. why is it unhealthy. you have not backed this assertion. the factors that led you to create a tulpa--loneliness, or simply “i thought it was cool”--could be solved within this time and are terrible reasons to create an allegedly sentient being, respectively. there could definitely be some truth to this, i agree. but many a child are born for lesser reasons.
i am NOT a swede;
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)