/sci/ - Science & Math

>rape

nothing like a fresh new thread

Can we use tuplae to stop peak oil?

How can we prove that tuplae exist when they are just qualia?

Can I make a tupla of Jacob Barnett?

>(Thanks to FAQ_Man for the info)

This is neither an experiment nor is it psychology.

>>4655879
>Looks like you are using drugs of terrible quality DUDE

>>4655884
It's pseudoscience, however, we'd like to design experiments to test the claims of those who supposedly have tulpa and investigate the common experiences of multiple people who are currently attempting to create one.

I keep telling you guys, don't even try to make Tulpa threads on /sci/, it just cannot be done correctly.

So, /sci/ is the destination of the exodus from /mlp/? I'm not sure I'm okay with that.

>>4655897
It's this or /r9k/.

Or worse, /soc/.

...or we could go crawling back to /x/ and deal with that.

>>4655901
Or we could just let it go...

>>4655901
You shouldn't let on that we have anything to do with ponyfags. Hell, half of us don't even like you people.

>>4655910
>>>/v/

>psychology
>hard science

>>4655901
There's also /v/.

>>4655912
> hard sciences
> /sci/

>>4655915
>>4655916
I don't have another hahaha, no image...

>>4655919
what

Someone call qookie or something. Other wise we're not going to have much intelligent debate.

>>4655912
Is that a picture of— Costanza?

I has a question.

Why would you want to "smell" or "touch" an imaginary being?
Hearing it is enough, and seeing it is more than enough. Smelling it is stupid, and touching it can be confusing at best, and dangerous at worst (example: you are in the kitchen and you feel something in your arm. you think it's the tulpa, but it turns out you just got a third degree burn).

/sci/ is for Physics, Chemistry, Neuroscience, and Mathematics.

Biology belongs in >>>/an/

If you guys want to discuss neuroscience (a hard science), we're fine with that.

If it's psychology, fuck off to >>>/x/

>>4655928
>>4655928
You're not able to differentiate between different temperatures on your skin?

>>4655927
it looks like a dick

>>4655927
you_must_be_new_here.jpg

>>4655928
Smell is strongly connected to memory and will help you remember your tulpa

>>4655930

Ha, I wouldn't fuck with mathematics that biologists worth their weight have to deal with, let alone the crap they have to memorize.

Also, possible troll detected.

>>4655930
Doesn't acknowledge psychology at all.

>>4655942
>possible

>>4655928
> just got a third degree burn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_reflex
A tulpa can't have any effect on spinal reflexes.

>>4655943
>psychology
>not a science

It might be soft, but it's still science.

>>4655933
During that first fraction of a second, it's impossible to tell the difference between normal body temperature and 130º C.

I once tried to move an all-metal saucepan I thought was at room temperature.

>>4655945

Well he might be an idiot. Or perhaps he just doesn't like ethology and zoology, and just couched that hatred in the word biology. Also, this "psychology" thread is... pretty out there. Far from the kind of science that proves things beyond all opinion... like... VERRY FAR AWAY.

>>4655926
I'm here and have been here for a while.

>>4655930
We are actually interested in the neuroscience of tulpa; I'd love to see a brainscan of someone who claims to have an active tulpa.

DOWNLOAD MY SHIT.

Normal: www.mediafire.com/download.php?w5aa4shr1p6po7y
No white noise: www.mediafire.com/download.php?8ietahydgxmgukd

Good job /sci/

You get the pony fags over here and expect them to understand all of the memes

Stay classy

>>4655959
INTELLIGENT WALLS OF TEXT NOW

>>4655962
Fede, you could at least explain why.

These are isotone files, supposedly designed to aid concentration, and apparently particularly condusive to the focused sessions of concentration/meditation we call tulpaforcing. Is there any scientific support for brainwave entrainment via white noise and stable frequencies?

>>4655966
No

Interesting read while keeping tulpas in mind:

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/april/conversations-with-god-041212.html

Another related thing:


http://pastebin.com/4R98sLr1

>>4655949
Other than that psychoanalysis/hypnotic crap I think psychology is pretty much a branch of brain studies

>>4655966
Little meditation tip:

Its better not to use any kind of aid because after a while you won't be able to meditate without it.

>>4655966
Okay.

Specific frequencies play over and over again can stimulate specific thought patterns in the brain. This has been known since the 1800s. My file is a mashup of several frequencies played at the same time to add up to a greater effect.

Like I said, download it. It's been downloaded like 200 times for the past couple of days and I've received very good feedback on it.

Use it while tulpaforcing. It's only going to help you.

Normal: www.mediafire.com/download.php?w5aa4shr1p6po7y
No white noise: www.mediafire.com/download.php?8ietahydgxmgukd

>>4655980
>It's only going to help you.
In what way? concentration? creativity?

>>4655962
I prefer it when the frequency spectrum varies, otherwise the sound will dull specific frequency ranges, which will make your hearing messed up for a couple of minutes afterwards.

>>4655980
>Specific frequencies play over and over again can stimulate specific thought patterns in the brain
COOL
GIVE ME ONE THAT ALLOWS ME TO ADD NUMBERS VERY FAST
I SHALL BE KNOWN AS "THE HUMAN CALCULATOR".

>>4655963
No. I'm hungry, thirsty, and it's 7am.

However, I would like the genuinely skeptical and curious to look at tulpa.info, read the guides, roll your eyes at the pseudoscience and metaphysics on display, and then ask: what could be the actual cause and purpose of this be? Does the mind have any reason to be able to simulate companionship? What testimonies to that effect are there?

Also, that Stanford article >>4655970 is really interesting and worth looking at. Daily prayer to a conceptualised fictional entity resulting in a stable audio hallucination is a near-identical process to that described by those of us who claim to have tulpa.

>>4655987
>Does the mind have any reason to be able to simulate companionship?

I dont think you have to go that far and even wonder why the brain has the ability to make up and simulate a fictional person as if it was a separate feature of our minds that exists for some reason. I think it very clearly is required for us to interact with real people.

The same processes that take all the sensory input you collect about another person, both direct information about them and assumptions you make about them, which allow you to perceive them as a singular separate individual you then interact with, could probably also be made to allow you to perceive a singular separate individual who doesn't actually exist, whos based on data you make up instead of gather, with a little bit of messing with your head.

Do any of you guys use models? I'm having trouble imagining its jaw line.

>>4656009
ask irc. I remember someone on there right now talking about exactly that a little while ago

>>4656011
But I'm banned for my own good ;_;

Does this necessarily have to be full blown in all sensory details?

Is it possible to create a tulpa which is just auditory, for example?

>>4656016
Evade.

>>4656018
Yes. It'd literally be a voice in your head at that point.

>>4656020
If I get on at all I won't be able to force. I reall shouldn't even be here right now.

>>4656018
Yes, it is possible to develop a tulpa to the point of apparent autonomy without the imposition part where it becomes a daylight hallucination. However, I'm certain it helps to have a visual form to focus on when you close your eyes.

>>4656018
>Is it possible to create a tulpa which is just auditory, for example?
Yep! Just narrate to yourself and don't parrot.

>>4656024
You have some serious procrastination issues. Go see a therapist.

>>4656033
>Go see a therapist.
You can do that? Too bad I'm poor.

>>4656034
Actually, I can't, because such creatures don't live in the backward corner of the globe, where I currently am.
And you should stop being poor; it's not good for you either.

>Psychology
>real science
Pick one

>>4656039
You know what I meant.

>>4656039
It has a known correlation with poor health and low life expectancy.

>>4656040
See pic

>>4656044
That makes me feel a whole lot better...

>>4656011
Well?

I thought the word for this was schizophrenia?

Like how I was diagnosed

Seriously, I've always had a physical representation of my subconscious that I could see and hear, represented through, basically another me, sitting next to me.

I know it's not real but I've always found it comforting and it helps me tap into a more analytical side that I've noticed most people don't use.

That's just my perception of it though, really and when I told a therapist about it, she wanted to prescribe me dozens of meds. I'm not crazy, I just... well okay I may be crazy but I'm a high functioning psychopath, thank you very much.

>>4656062
Interesting. If you read what is a tulpa and the reaches of the tulpa, could you co[are those to what you experience?

>>4656033
Yeah, I'll go see one eventually.

>>4656062
Crazy is subjective man.

>>4656065
He wasn't talking to you.

>>4656071
Anon wasn't talking to anon.

>>4656071
You didn't see what I did there.

>>4656062
From what I've read, yes it's what I experience.

However, the difference being that I never had to focus to see mine or hear it. It was just... there.
The only explanation I have for that is that I was extremely lonely as a child.

Typical for 4chan, most likely but I was always the loner/weird kid in school. Never had any friends, save one or two odd ones and when I eventually graduated (I graduated high school at 14, due to advanced study) I was left entirely without anyone around me.

My only social life came from what I was forced in at school, so without that, my mind began racing, I guess. I had seen what most people would call an imaginary friend earlier in my life. Like, maybe 7 or 8 at the earliest. I knew it wasn't real but I just liked to pretend.

Then, when I got a bit older (before graduating), I started seeing myself. It was me but a different version that was more intuitive to societal surroundings and in that sense, I became more intuitive.

Since then, it's just been there. I don't have to focus to see it and I never really have. I know it isn't real and sometimes, I don't see it at all. I just acknowledge it and feel a presence of sorts.

Goddamn it, I sound like a fucking crazy person. :/

Just skimming the concept, it looks like a form of selfsuggestion. A mental technique akin to mnemonics or meditation or lucid dreaming.

>>4656080
You sound fucking cool to me. Its all subjective.

>>4656082
You mean auto suggestion? I have a copy pasta around here somewhere...

>>4656088
Here it is.

Mr. G.H. Estabrooks in his book "Hypnotism" writes of his attempts to create a self-hypnotic pet polar bear. "The technique of autosuggestion is difficult, but it can be mastered. Once the subject has obtained this mastery he will find that not only can he produce, say, hallucinations in the trance itself but can actually suggest posthypnotic hallucinations to himself. It does sound weird but it can be done. . . . Auto suggestion gives us an excellent device with which to study many strange things. The writer had a 'pet' polar bear which he was able to call up merely be counting to five. This animal would parade around the hospital ward in most convincing fashion, over and under the beds, kiss the nurses and bit the doctors. It was very curious to note how obedient he was to 'mental' commands, even jumping off a three story window on demand. But auto suggestion has a certain menace which this phantom bear illustrated. He became so familiar that he refused to go away. He would turn up in the most unexpected places and without being sent for. The writer was playing bridge one evening and almost through his hosts into hysterics by suddenly remarking, 'There's that damn bear again. I wish someone would shoot the beast.' He also had a nasty habit of turning up in dark corners at night, all very well when one realized he was just made of ghoststuff but rather hard on ones' nerves for all that. So he was banished and told never to return. It was fully a month before the writer felt quit sure that his ghostly form would not be grinning at him over the foot of his bed during a thunderstorm. "

>>4656085
Heh, thanks I guess.
You're right, it is and to some, I may seem entirely normal or as more enlightened to things around me.
I'm not sure but the few people I have told (parents and my aunt) have thought I was insane, so they sent me to the therapist... who then also diagnosed me with schizophrenia and possible DID.

I don't really care though, it's not like I can control it or that it's making me kill people

>>4656088
>>4656089
I mean you can imagine absolutely anything and some of the things you imagine have utility. Such as numbers.

>>4656082
>>4656088
Thank you, this sounds just like the concept; a niche of self-suggestion with the intent of creating an autonomous mental companion.

>>4656089

Would that be this book here?
http://www.amazon.com/Hypnotism-Estabrooks/dp/0525470387/
I may have to acquire it and read about this pet polar bear; it sounds, to me at least, to be functionally equivalent to what we are calling a tulpa.

>>4656117
>implying anyone gives a shit about the next generation

So this is exactly the same as having an imaginary friend right?

>>4656134
nope. read "what is a tulpa" and "the reaches of a tulpa" in the guides link in the OP

>>4656137
is a faggot

>>4656134
they are like imaginary friends but with schizophrenia, and they can kill/possess you

>>4656140

Saved for later:

http://archive.installgentoo.net/sci/thread/4655868

>>4656148
But this thread is shit.

Can I make a tulpa of my waifu? Is it bad to be in love with your tulpa? Can I have sex with my tulpa?

I can't into jaw lines dammit!

>>4656153
You can have sex with your tulpa while lucid dreaming

>>4656155
What do you mean?

>>4656155
Just download a book about drawing anatomy, you double nigger.

>>4656153
Probably to all three, although the lattermost is just creative and over-complex masturbation.

>>4656157
He means that he's a faggot and not using anime characters, which would be easy to visualise jawlines since they are stylized

>>4656153
Yes, no, and yes.
>>4656157
This is the closest thing I have that looks like what I want. See how the jaw is that weird shape? Try imagining it from the side. Doesn't it look weird?
>>4656159
Okay.jpg
>>4656161
No its not! Its like an up side down house shape.

>>4656171
Wait that doesn't make sense... Its like a spade or... A shovel?

>>4656171
Think about it like this: The ponyfuckers generally don't have a pure cartoon horse as their tulpa. They have a slightly realistic version. Take the idea of that chin/jawline and translate it to how it would look on a human. Then translate it back to the anime style (presumably you are making a 3d anime style verson of the character). Look up pointy chin on google images for inspiration.

>>4656180
I think the ponyfags have 3D models (and the actual toys) to help them with visualization

New thread:
>>4656178

>>4656180
>Take the idea of that chin/jawline and translate it to how it would look on a human. Then translate it back to the anime style
That's what I'm trying to do. Its a huge pain in the ass.
>(presumably you are making a 3d anime style verson of the character)
I'm going for cell shaded.
>Look up pointy chin on google images for inspiration.
Okay.

>>4656185
hashbrony's 3D pony designs are pretty good for visual tulpa inspiration. Look up the videos on YouTube.

Let these fucking threads die.

>>4656225
But they make sense to be here.

>>4656227
so the tulpa community can whore itself out more on 4chan? Because that's what you guys want. To just spread this shit around far and wide. Leave your manifest destiny off /Sci/

>>4656232
no i mean it makes more sense to have these on /sci/ or even /x/ than /mlp/

>>4656236
it makes more sense not to have them at all. Stop prolonging the misery.

>>4656236
Psychology isn't even a hard science fuckwit.

>>4656242
>/sci/
>hard science
>not pseudophilosophy

"hurr durr does "cup" refer to the cup?"

>>4656227
>tulpa thread
>makes sense
>tulpa thread in /sci/
>makes sense
Are you a bodhisattva?

>>4656252
if that's another word for fuckwit, yes he is.

>>4656254
it actually means "heroic-minded one for enlightenment", which I suppose could be a rather elaborate way of telling him to go become an hero.

>>4656291
I know what it means.

Here's a good article from Scientific American about hypnosis. Whether or not hypnosis is directly relevant to this tulpa stuff, it's worth reading to see how people have gone about trying to answer the "are they faking" question.

>>4655971
I believe that psychology will become a bigger form of science in the next few decades.

>>4656242
If biology threads have a place on /sci/, I don't see why not this.

>>4656662
Because on a scale of shit to ten, you have to draw the line at least between one and shit.

What would you do if your tupla turned blue, started to swell with juice, and within minutes was nothing more than a gigantic blueberry? Huge, eight feet in diameter, plump and ripe with juice. Still growing slowly, she'll explode any minute from the pressure... Would you roll the young lady down to the juicing room at once, please? She has to be squeezed <span class="math">\mathbf{immediately}[/spoiler] before she EXPLODES. What a mess...

What do?

>>4656884

>>4656884

>>4656884
>bold

wat

>>4657010
>bold
doubleclick on it
learn how to do it

>>4657010
> you must be new here
/sci/ uses jsMath.

>OP's picture
So Irish never worked on personality? How does that work? It seems to me like you would have to work on personality.

What the fuck is this thread?

This is shitty even for /sci/ standards.

>>4657606
Are you fucking idiot?

>>4657606
He assumed the personality traits beforehand and narrated a lot. Personality work is just narration with the purpose of informing your tulpa about what traits you assume it has. Supposedly working on personality gets your tulpa speaking faster, some 20 hours faster than Irish in FAQ_Man's case (40 hours vs 60 hours for their second tulpa, their first one took a lot longer, but neither knew exactly what they were doing when they started), but it's hard to say how much this differs per individual.

>Then, we also have the danger of external and internal influences through imperative suicide attempts. In other words, the Tulpa orders to kill yourself. You cannot and will NOT withstand this urge.
I never asked for this.

>>4657707
As far as we know right now tulpas can't control you.

As a psychologist I find this entire thread insulting.
What /sci/ thinks psych research is =/= what actual psych research is.

>>4657802

>>4657802
Obviously what OP is doing is not real psychology. Would you consider clever tricks to figure out whether these faggots are actually hallucinating to be legitimate research?

>>4657802
Well, insults aside, what do you think of this phenomenon?

>>4657815
Not the same guy, but as a psych major myself I think this is very interesting and I do believe that it is possible to do. Whether it is healthy or not is arguable. It certainly has its pros, but self inflicting a relatively permanent hallucination onto yourself...

>>4657802
>>4657827
Help me with my procrastination~

>>4657855
Sure, that'll be $50.00 an hour, two sessions a month.

>>4657867
;_;

Can tulpas eat? Like, could they taste what I'm eating?

>>4657996
If you know what the food tastes like, you could probably get them to "eat" with you. Though, obviously, they wouldn't actually be eating the food. They would taste it in their mouths, though.

>>4658003
Re-reading this, it could lead to a misunderstanding. When I say that they aren't actually eating, I mean that they aren't actually taking in any of the food. You could hold food up to their mouths and "feed" them, though.
I didn't mean you taste it and the taste transfers (though I guess you could do that too, but feeding them seems more enjoyable)

>>4657996
Yes, they can recall any memory you want to share with them or any memory you had, if you allow them to.
They could also piece-meal (pun intended?) together a taste or a memory just like we do when we dream (have you ever had a dream where you ate and could recall the taste?).

They would only be doing it for the novelty of tasting food, not for any other reason. I wonder if doing so too much would result in a host that is feeling hungry for no reason (from the host's perspective).

>>4658035
I think irish's tulpa eats. I wonder if she ever feels hungry.

bump

>>4658166
counterbump

>>4658184
I don't think it works that way.

How do I give my tulpa qualia? Can I give my tulpa gf? What would happen if a wonderland made out of lava collided with a wonderland made out of ice?

Does this mean I can have a pony inside my head?

>>4658226
It's not limited to ponies.

>>4658226
>Wasting 100+ hours for a tulpa of a pony
I don't understand /mlp/. That's the biggest waste of time I've ever heard of.

>>4658239
Okay, then what are you doing?

Your math professor?

>>4658239
Not to mention that they'll have it for the rest of their lives

>>4658241
>Your math professor?
...M-Maybe...

No, I'm doing my waifu. I guess you could argue that it's still making a tulpa of a cartoon, but at least she's a humanoid. And I love her. Doing one of a pony just seems like regret waiting to happen.

>>4658247
If you implant a kill switch into it (you shouldn't because then they'll be afraid 24/7) you can kill it. Also, if you ignore it for about a month it will "starve" and disappear. It's only relatively permanent.

>>4658251
A few guys on the irc think its weird to make human tulpas. Who's your waifu btw?

>>4658251
>dedicating part of your frontal lobe to a sentient cartoon girlfriend
I seriously hope yo-

Oh wait.

>>4658266
>dedicating part of your frontal lobe

>>4658264
>Weird to make human tulpas
O-Ok, I guess to each their own. I think it's weird to make anything but a humanoid tulpa.
Usami Haru.

How can you know these "tupla" hallucinations are actually conscious and experience qualia?

How do you know they are not just heuristic abstractions of your subconscious (some sort of psuedo p-zombie) from compounding emotion and personality together while talking to yourself?

>>4658285
We don't.

>>4658271
The frontal lobes are the executive center and home to the working memory of the human brain. They produce sentience and the illusion of "free will".

http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Models_of_thalamocortical_system

>>4658285
If it's a manifestation of your subconscious, then wouldn't it be conscious it its own way?
Anyway, I don't think it matters. It's like questioning if anybody but you actually exists, or if they're just hallucinations.

>>4658289
Exactly. So what is the point of this inane garbage if they are just an extension of yourself?

>>4658291
> They produce sentience and are responsible for decision making among many other cognitive processes
ftfy

>>4658291

>>4658297

>>4658297
"We don't know" doesn't mean "we're sure they they aren't sentient."

Entertainment is one point I can think of.

>>4658303
No. The frontal lobe is the executive center of the brain. Although it is obviously not solely responsible for perception (which is the entire thalmocortical system), it is the only region free from the burden of sensory processing.

This is a great text that you might find an interesting read
http://www.amazon.com/Principles-Frontal-Function-Donald-Stuss/dp/0195134974

Also see:
http://books.google.com/books?id=QAo2EPXbR8kC&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=consciousness+in+fro
ntal+lobe&source=bl&ots=gfb1peUv5T&sig=8WdPQYCJF8R4w9jr4TDB2lUIGPU&hl=en&sa=X&am
p;ei=wIROT4zXO8agiQKIiP2mCw&ved=0CGIQ6AEwCjgK#v=onepage&q=consciousness%20in%20frontal%20lob
e&f=false

And these lecture notes, which outline major functions of the frontal lobe:
http://users.phhp.ufl.edu/rbauer/Human_HCF_06/frontal_HCF_06.pdf

>>4658266
>Oh wait.
Wait what? I need to know.

>>4658210
> How do I give my tulpa qualia?
If you made a tulpa, not a servitor (puppet imaginary friend), it should have it by default, but obviously, we can't know that any more than I know that you have them. Self-aware beings claim to have them and *know* what it's like to be conscious, but that isn't communicable. If you make a tulpa (lots of open-ended narration), it will end up claiming to have memories of its own, experiences of its own and so on. It makes sense to assume philosophical zombies are a non-sense concept which cannot exist (if you don't want to go full solipsist), thus tulpae are as conscious as we are - as informational processes implemented in our brains.
> Can I give my tulpa gf?
gf? What do you mean by this? You want to make a tulpa waifu, or you want to make a girlfriend tulpa for your own tulpa? Both are possible, but in the latter case, you would have to work on your second tulpa with a bit of help from your first tulpa.

Is it possible to create true artificial intelligence ?

>>4658356
> continued
> What would happen if a wonderland made out of lava collided with a wonderland made out of ice?
Haha. Whatever you want to happen. Mental/imaginary "worlds" are not limited by anything except your own expectations. If you don't expect some rough physical laws to affect your wonderland, they won't, if you do, they will, in a rough manner (not like our brain can run accurate physical simulations, but it can predict rough outcomes based on our own experiences).
>>4658285
See previous response. If they report having complex experiences and memories that you didn't have and always surprise you in unusual ways that only real conscious beings can, you might as well assume it's conscious. I don't have one yet, but given the few chats I've had with those that claim to have tulpae, I'm inclined to consider they have qualia just like we do, they're far beyond passing the Turing test...
I also sort of consider tulpae as a parallel process running in the brain, similar to our own decision process, like DID, but in parallel. Unlike qualia, my hypothesis should be testable scientifically.

>>4658362
>they're far beyond passing the Turing test...
Ah, but has this ever actually been tested? To do it properly, the person deciding tulpa or human would have to be unaware of whether it was their tulpa talking or a human talking.

It would be interesting enough to merely determine if being unaware of whether a voice was real or from the tulpa was even possible.

>tulpae

m(

>>4658395
I hate that shit too man. Blame faq man.

>>4658384
> Ah, but has this ever actually been tested? To do it properly, the person deciding tulpa or human would have to be unaware of whether it was their tulpa talking or a human talking.
Obviously I can't tell if someone is roleplaying or not, however if I do assume that the person isn't roleplaying, that is, that they are truthful about their claims of what experiences they had (so that they transcribe correctly what their tulpa tells them).
Given the reports I've read so far, a tulpa's experiences seem to similar to a human's in some ways, but in other ways they're very different. My current working theory is that their experiences are similar to a human with a derealization disorder, sort of like being in a constant lucid dream, while also having access to the host's senses indirectly. Aside from that, the differences seem to be larger, in one case, someone's tulpa claimed to do mental arithmetic at autist savant levels of speed (while the host reported some reasonably low IQ around 100), while in another case it was rather regular human thinking speed, another person reported that a tulpa has much direct access to certain physiological senses that they weren't thinking about consciously, while another person's tulpa could hold in a lot more items in their short term memory than the host could. The actual experiences seem to vary a lot in some regards, but almost all have enough parts in common that sets apart regular human experience from a tulpa's experience, although it's not clear to me if a human couldn't train itself to attain similar experiences as a tulpa (I suspect it's possible, but to what extent?).

>>4658427
> continued
> It would be interesting enough to merely determine if being unaware of whether a voice was real or from the tulpa was even possible.
If you're schizophrenic, it's probably not possible. If you're not, you can usually tell apart imagination from sensed reality - I pretty much always know if I'm subvocalizing something or if I'm sensing it for real. From reports of those with imposed tulpae, one claims that they can forcefully just sense through the imposed hallucination if they really have to, while another claims they can't. Probably a matter of neurophysiology, but I don't know enough yet to tell.

bump

hmm

How does making a 2d character a tulpa work?

>>4655877
>>4655933
>>4655966
>>4656011
>>4656033
>>4656044
>>4656088
>>4656144
>>4656155
>>4656188
>>4656600
>>4657033
>>4657855
>>4658166
>>4658266
>>4658400

Hmm. So if the tulpa is just projected from the host's human brain, would it even be possible to have a tulpa that acts and thinks like another animal? Like a tulpa that acts entirely like a cat, with no talking or anything. Granted, it's pretty much pointless, but it's still an interesting thought.

>>4659232
I don't think you can make them stupider, because they share your own brain/knowledge, but if your tulpa has an unusual body, they may have unusual preferences. I think tulpae could be used to test how much of our biases are social and how much they are inherently biological, I'm willing to bet lot of those that we think are biological, are merely social with a bit of biological bootstrapping (example: evolution probably coded for you to like those that look similar enough to you, as a form of imprinting, it would be unlikely for specific image/patterns to be encoded into the DNA directly).

>>4659246
>>4659232
This brings up the thought of how a tulpa would react upon finding out it was created entirely for experiments.

>>4659232
>>4659246
You can make a tulpa more stupid than you, but never more smart than you

>>4659276
How do you know this?
If your tulpa has better heuristics and goals than you, it could reach better conclusions.
A tulpa also may have better access to memories, again granting it some advantage.
Some tulpae do mental arithmetic faster than the host.
Thirdly, in the case where someone was asked to do an IQ test, his tulpa scored 10 points higher. In another case, there was hardly any deviation.
Fourthly, in one case, the host is an atheist while the tulpa is half a religious magical thinker who thinks that because she was "created" that there would be a creator for the host, said host then went to make another tulpa which ended up having a different position on that issue (the host reported observing his two tulpae having this conversation).

A lot more testing would be required to see how more or less intelligent a tulpa could be than the host, but as far as people have reported, differences exist, be they positive.

>>4659331
> be they positive or negative.
fixed.

>>4659331
http://pastebin.com/4R98sLr1
This is the referenced conversation.

>>4659331
The basic idea is that because a tulpa is a product of your brain, it can't do anything your brain can't do.

This doesn't contradict what you claimed though.

>>4659346
Yes, but if some information is accessible to your brain does not mean that you would be using that information in your final decision. Regardless what one thinks a tulpa is (separate decision process with its own consciouness or just a subconscious projection), if it offers more information than you would normally have without a tulpa, it could lead to more intelligent (or sometimes less, depending on what the tulpa is/does) decisions and results.

Tulpas are supposed to be malevolent spirits that drain you of chi. Why would you want to create one?

Fuck off with this psueodscientific fringe BULLSHIT.

THIS IS NOT SCIENCE

>>>/x/
>>>/x/
>>>/x/
>>>/x/
>>>/x/
>>>/x/
>>>/x/
>>>/x/
>>>/x/


REPORTED.

>>4659390
>mfw we've had intelligent discussion throughout this and last threads.

>>4659393
It still is not science.

>>4659395
> manipulated/applied psychology
>not science

hah

>>4659397
>A thoughtform is a manifestation of mental energy, also known as a tulpa in Tibetan mysticism. Its concept is related to the Western philosophy and practice of magic.

>>4659401
>implying we use that version

Can my tulpa create its own tulpa

>>4659403
>implying there's any other "version"
Where is the empiricism in this? Where is the science? It's focused on creating some pseudoscientific "entity" in your head that's most likely a hallucination from the mushrooms you had an hour ago.

>>4659409
It's a discussed/debated subject, and has never been attempted before. It'd be interesting to see, though.

>>4659411
> never been attempted
Couldn't one's tulpa create a tulpa without telling one? Would the host have to know?

>>4659420
You should ask the forums (on tulpa.info) or the irc.

>>4659406
Permanent hallucinations in previously sane people are a bit different. Science? If tulpae are what people claim them to be, it would lead to some major changes in some psychological theories/models. So far too few people have them to make this into a viable science, but more and more people are working on them, with most that started 2-3 months ago getting solid results by now (check IRC, the blogs and the google docs). Whatever it is, it's a psychological phenomena with some useful applications to say the least.

>>4659420
Some people claim it's impossible. I don't see why it would be. When asked about this question, someone's tulpa claimed that it would probably work the same way as how the host did it, but most tulpae don't seem interested in making their own tulpa.
If the tulpa would be accessible to the host is unclear - in the cases where the tulpa reports that their memories can be made accessible to the host (2 reports so far), it would likely mean that the tulpa they'd create would also be accessible to the host; in the cases where the tulpa reports their memories cannot be made accessible to the host (2 reports again, one less credible), it would probably be possible without the host knowing it.
Myself, given my own personal experiences, I'm assuming a tulpae's memories could be made accessible to me, but I probably won't know for sure for another month or less.

>>4659425
I don't want to have to join a whole new site just to troll weak-minded fucknuggets, so I'll stay here thanks.

>>4659276
Yes you can, in a roundabout way. It's already been stated, but your tulpa can have a much better eye for detail, a better memory, and the like. It could have hidden potential that you never decided to use. With those combined, it can feign a higher intelligence than the host.

>>4659375
>>4659401
That's the supernatural perspective. I'm pretty sure everybody in this thread is following the psychological perspective.

>>4659406
Honestly if these are actually hallucinations that makes them a bit interesting. But as far as I can tell, no one has demonstrated that there's anything to this beyond visualizing an imaginary friend. They design this character, and when they imagine a conversation in their head, they imagine the other participant looking like the character.

>>4659477
After imposition, it is truly a hallucination. Like the tulpa could walk in front of something and the host couldn't see it.

>>4659331
your tulpa is you, so your tulpa isn't smarter than you.
it's you. you're the one with the 10 points higuer
(you are smarter than you think)

>>4659477
The difference between a regular imaginary friend (typically called a "servitor" around this community) and a tulpa is that with a tulpa, you don't imagine conversations with it at all, you do your best to feed it sensory information, but you never imagine forcing it to do anything. After sufficient time (about a month to two months, if you visualize for about 2-3 hours a day and narrate to it daily), the tulpa would start talking back and moving the body you imagined for it. At that point in time, you would be unable to move its body forcefully, nor would you know what it does and it will surprise you - it will appear independent of your will and thoughts, despite being part of your own perception/imagination. At that point, you can start moving that part of the imagination into your sensed reality by imagining it with your eyes open, this would be much easier as it can remain a stable piece of your imagination without you forcing it to be so, after a few months, the slightly unstable see-through imagination that you have with eyes open would gradually change into a full-blown hallucination, not unlike your inner voice. However it seems like it's possible, at least for some people, to just "see through" the hallucination if they have to and they would be aware it's not part of sensed reality - the closest I can imagine explaining this would be like how you can both hear what's going on and think in your head and how you could have your eyes looking at 2 distinct points such that you don't form a coherent "3D" picture in your head, but see from both eyes at once (different pictures).

>>4659517
>(you are smarter than you think)
Precisely. The tulpa helps the host along the way towards this.

>>4659527
your tulpa cannot be smarter than you.

>>4659517
I don't consider myself my brain. I consider myself as an informational process running on a physical platform (a brain). If another informational process running on the same physical platform could make better decisions than me, they would be more intelligent by definitions.
Next up we nitpick on the definition of selfhood and intelligence (not going to end well).

>>4659534
in your subjective definition of you, then your tulpa is smarter

>>4659534
Yeah, let's not get into debate club.

>>4659482
>>4659521
Are these firsthand accounts delivered in the second person or things you heard from other people?

>>4659542
It could be, but it also might not be. As was said before, there were cases where the tulpa performs better than the host and cases where the tulpa performs worse than the host. It's basically: try and see. Want it to be more intelligent no matter what? Work on that personality in a way that would result better decisions than you (I can think of some ways I could improve myself, but I don't do them because I find it annoying.)

>>4659547
For me (small post), it's multiple reports from others.

>>4659556
your tulpa: Oh you're an idiot, youu're doing it wrong!!!

What the fuck arre you doing!, is this way

And your tulpa it's always right

>>4659547
It's what's written in the guides and what was reported by those that did the imposition part, you can talk to all these people, they lurk IRC, forums, blogs, and sometimes /mlp/ threads (although they also come here occasionally).
I'm not even at the stage where my tulpa can talk (currently she just shows a some independence when moving in my imagination/"wonderland", and the usual dual emotions that would be similar to bipolar disorder (reported by all people that have attempted to make a tulpa, even those that haven't completed ones) - sort of like having emotions of your own which you understand where they come from and random emotions which are either unrelated during unrelated times and emotions which one could recognize as likely being the tulpa's when one imagines it during the usual meditation/"tulpaforcing" sessions).

>>4659577
So who are you, assuming you post on the irc or forums

Is there any sense of how many people have actually gone through the full process?

>>4659581
Anonymous gonna Anonymous.

>>4659585
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlmHucQaUeJPdEpUQWhwVzV5U1lmeDNGcENJUHU5YXc#gid=0
Incomplete list of complete and in-progress tulpae (missing at least one person with a completed tulpa: FAQ_Man, missing many with partial, but more than half-way tulpae).

>>4659591
we're legion

Are you guys really linking /mlp/ and /x/ here?

Is this really the new tulpa thread?

>>4659604
Tulpa investigationism

>>4659604
>mfw psychology discussion

>/sci/ not liking psychology
I don't understand this. How do you otherwise attempt to make sense of human behaviour and correlate it with neurological evidence in a Scientific manner? The difficulties arise where we find our evidence on shaky ground, due to subjectivity of experience usually, and this presents us with a major problem in psychology. However with brain imaging technology progressing rapidly I wouldn't be surprised if neurology completely absorbs psychology in a decade or so. With Tulpae the easiest way to know if they're bullshit or not is to use one of these neurological instruments, the issue being that no-one fucking has access to one. If a neurologist was to conduct an investigation into this you'd find that we'd have complete confidence that this is true or all just one big troll, but since we don't have confirmation, we can't actually say it isn't true. The biggest piece of evidence now we have is the correlation of consistent completely independent individual accounts. The spectrum of these accounts is far to wide to just pass it off as /x/ faggotry. If it's all some wide-reaching elaborate troll then well done. If people psychologically trick themselves into believing they have tulpae to the point where their brain actually believes they do and they start seeing things, then that is our current definition of a tulpae, we're not going by psuedo-magic.

>>4659661
/sci/ is more neurology

>>4659667
Psychology is applied neurology.

>>4659667
Steal medical scanner, kidnap tulpafag, perform experiments.

>>4659688
>implying we couldn't apply to the neurology society to get a research grant

>>4659411
How many discussed/debated subjects do we have so far?

I know of:
>can a tulpa make a tulpa?
>can a tulpa posses you?
>can you completely trade places with your tulpa?
>can you sex your tulpa?
>if you don't will it become a succubus?

>>4659810
Do*

>>4659810
Can your brain damage 'cause of you having a tulpa?
no joke intended

>>4659824
>Can your brain damage 'cause of you having a tulpa?

>>4659810
>can a tulpa make a tulpa?
Maybe, nobody tried, unknown.
>can a tulpa posses you?
DID-like possession with time lapses was never reported by anyone so far. Possession as in letting your tulpa control your body? Very few people tried this and few want to. 2 people claim it's possible. 1 tried with no success so far. Many don't want to try.
>can you completely trade places with your tulpa?
I want to find out this. Don't know. Suspect it's possible if possession is possible, like if you try to go into a trance while the tulpa controls the body. Probability of this being possible is less than the probability of possession being possible is less than the probability of tulpae being a real psychological phenomena (not roleplayers the lot of them).
>can you sex your tulpa?
Yes, just don't do this until its personality has matured, lest you want a nympho.
>if you don't will it become a succubus?
Only if you expect it to, or want it to from the start.
> Can your brain damage 'cause of you having a tulpa?
I laughed. No more than you can cause yourself brain damage by functioning normally, maybe even less as they don't control the physical body without your permission.

>>4659860
>Many don't want to try.
I guess I'm the minority.

bump

why does this fucking /x/ bullshit keep getting posted on /sci/

>>4660142
A psychological phenomena first encountered by delusional religious people does not make the it any less a real psycholgical phenomena. It at least warrants some investigation/scientific testing.

Question, how does one perceive a tulpa? Because this sounds a lot like something I have.

>>4660142
People apparently deem it interesting or even fascinating.

>>4660163
Don't have one myself, but from what people have said:
1) Initially you imagine your tulpa, it's just your regular imagination. It has to get detailed and vivid enough through many meditation/visualization sessions, to the point where you can recall it at any time.
2) Once your tulpa is sentient, you may optionally impose it as a hallucination. This is just trying to imagine something with your eyes open until you can do this consistently, it is easier if your tulpa is sentient and considered harmful to do if it's not (won't end up with a real tulpa, but maybe with a hologram or an non-sentient vivid imaginary friend). This process takes a while (1-2 months). How is it seen? From transparent/vague to solid. Can you see through/perceive what's really there? Some say they can forcefully look, others say they can't. I suppose someone with schizophrenia might be incapable of doing the see-through thing, but that's unclear, at least the person that said they can't do it doesn't claim to have that.

>>4660221
Hmm, I see. I may have created one accidentally when I was really young. Long story short, I was traumatized and wanted to stop living. It sounds really silly saying this, but I had an imaginary friend who told me that'd be a bad idea and opted for live my life for me for a few years. From ten to eighteen. Eight years of my life blinked away, I can still recall everything "I" did but it wasn't me. Am I schizophrenic/have DID?

>>4660229
Wow, interesting, I've heard a similar story someplace else, but I don't know if true.

Sounds DIDish.

Tulpae are not schizophrenia as you can just ignore them into non-existence if you really wanted to, they're just imagination taken to its natural limits.

I always wonder if a tulpa can switch places with the host, and do plan on trying it out if possession is possible, if only temporarily.

Mind describing your experience?
> Eight years of my life blinked away
Do you recall experiencing it? What did you do in all those 8 years? Dream? Watch absentmindedly each day as your alter lived your life? Did you two interact while this was going on? What made you two switch places back?

>>4660248
I won't be able to stay on long since I have class in five hours and I need sleep, but I can answer some questions.

It's kinda hard explaining it, it sorta felt like a dream. I was watching him act for me, like I was sitting in the back seat of a car as he drove my body around. Except the backseat was more like a movie theater seat, where it's dark, kinda like that atmosphere. I should state this out plainly, he has prioritized my existence to the fullest, going as far as to almost kill a few people who threatened to hurt me or endanger my environment. He considered himself a fake and felt that if I died he would too.

He talked to me and I talked to him too, but I don't recall about what. To be honest my memory has become incredibly bad, like I can't remember what I did yesterday but important facts stick out photographically. This includes dreams I've had years and years ago.

I switched back because I fell in love with someone, and even though he warned me I didn't listen and begged to switch back. I did and have been back ever since, should probably be noted that relationship never started and I cried for the first time in eight years.

I think that answers your questions currently? If it was DID, he was a very strange personality. He didn't care that he was fake, but he wanted to live. As such now I have this weird obsession with wanting to be immortal.

>>4660272
Say hello to your instinctual side that you never let out.
Like fight club, but irl.

>>4660272
Oh, forgot to add on to the whole backseat thing, but it was very cold. Not as in ice cold on the skin, but a cold feeling inside of my body. Like I was empty.

If you guys want I can come back and answer some more questions. I'm still unsure if it was actually a different personality or me not accepting it was me that lived those eight years. He repeatedly confused me saying he was a fake person who was created solely for the task of allowing me to escape, and that I was in a sense the real one controlling myself.

>>4660272
We don't really know how different are tulpae and DID, they might actually be quite similar in some respect, except DID is developed through trauma and not deliberately. How did your imaginary friend first come to you? I'm very interested to hear more from you, so please come by these threads when you have the time!

> I should state this out plainly, he has prioritized my existence to the fullest, going as far as to almost kill a few people who threatened to hurt me or endanger my environment.
What do you mean by this? Your existence or the existence of the body?

Do you still talk to him after you switched?

I also want to ask questions about this like sleeping schedule of yours and his and all other kinds of things, so as to better compare it with tulpae, but I'll leave you alone if you're busy for today, maybe come by IRC if you want?

> As such now I have this weird obsession with wanting to be immortal.
Don't worry, we all do, although maybe not as much.

>>4660286
I'll answer this quickly since the sleep schedule was kinda funny. Me and him slept at the same time, and let me tell you it was chaos. If I was tired and he wasn't, I had to stay up watching him do whatever, likewise if he was tired and I wasn't he had to stay up because of it. The only way we slept was by passing out. In fact it's how I sleep now, I'll only be able to get four hours of sleep before getting up for another twenty hours of being awake. Wash, rinse, repeat.

>>4660295
Quite interesting. Tulpae seem to be able to sleep when the host is awake and vice versa, but there's few detailed reports about sleeping schedules so far.

Was it impossible for you to pass out while he stayed awake?

>>4660301
Dammit, now I can't sleep. Yes, it felt like it was impossible. Because of that sleeping schedule I now have permanent shadows under my eyes. Honestly I think it's very distinguishable and stylish.

Also not that it has anything to do with my experience(I think), but I originally looked in this thread because I wanted to try and create a tulpa; to act as a liaison between me and my memories.

>>4660321
Since you're not sleeping, mind answering the other questions:

>> I should state this out plainly, he has prioritized my existence to the fullest, going as far as to almost kill a few people who threatened to hurt me or endanger my environment.
> What do you mean by this? Your existence or the existence of the body?

> Do you still talk to him after you switched?

I'll add a few more to them:
While you were in that dissociative state of mind, did you just sit by and watch things as they progressed or did you try to imagine new stuff in your mind like when people visualize things?
What about lucid dreams, or not nearly enough sleep to get to that point?

Tulpae seem to be a lot more internal-oriented personalities, while DID seems to be very external/environment oriented (due to how they are caused).

Are your memories from those 8 years very faded?
What about your perception of time in those 8 years?

pic related.

>>4660328
I believe he meant both. My mind and my body, the former so he can live and the latter to act as a vessel to allow him to move.

I did for a short bit, but I one day told him I didn't need him anymore.

I watched things as they progressed, and I did day dream at times too. To continue, he told me I had a very unique and talented imagination. If you give me a description of something I can fully visualize it to the details you tell me, like painting a picture. As such I can interact with it, this impacted my dreams a lot.

Now, lucid dreams. There are two types of dreams I encountered, one of which were lucid and the other were the standard movie ones. They both however were not standard in the same sense as dreams are, I believe? I could feel the things in my dreams, not like a passing feeling, I could FEEL the things. In one dream I was being chased by government agents or something anyway, and I decided I wouldn't give them my body so I jumped from a window...high up. Not only did I crash land on top of a car, but I felt my spine crack and my bones break. I felt blood seep out of me and I couldn't breath. It didn't end there, I was still in that dream until I had finally died.

Of course, that may just be how other people feel dreams. I wouldn't know, since I'm not other people.

The memories of eight years ago are very faded. And my perception of time was incredibly fast, even now my perception of time is fast. I attribute that to my terrible memory though, still, it feels like minutes are seconds, hours are minutes, and days are hours.

>>4660350
> the former so he can live
Why would your own personality be required for him to live?
> I did for a short bit, but I one day told him I didn't need him anymore.
Sounds a bit mean to do that, but it's your own choice!
> and I did day dream at times too
Could you daydream while he was doing other things with your body?
> If you give me a description of something I can fully visualize it to the details you tell me,
Great. You might have an easy time making a tulpa.
I don't know if making a tulpa would actually give you access to your memories from those 8 years from your perspective. I think that's not as likely, but if you still can access your other imaginary friend, it might be possible.

> I could feel the things in my dreams, not like a passing feeling, I could FEEL the things.
I've been getting a lot of these ever since I started working on my tulpa, far more than usual.
> And my perception of time was incredibly fast, even now my perception of time is fast.
Can you look at a clock and see the seconds move by fast, or is it something like you merely not remembering anything that you don't care about?

>>4660350
So how did you get your imaginary friend?
Did you just have it as a kid and once you had that traumatic experience it asked you if you wanted to switch or did it just happen after the experience? Did you have to put any effort into making that imaginary friend or did it happen naturally without any effort on your part?

Is there actually any concrete proof that tulpas actually existed?

Maybe this is just an extensive and overdone trolling attempt.

Remember that girl who believed Sephiroth was real?

To me, that's what these people sound like, difference being they know bigger words than her.

>>4655912
>/sci/
>science

>>4660491
The sheer amount of people who have succeeded and who are all getting similar experiences and reports is just too large for it to be just a troll.

I'm trying it myself and so far my expectations have mostly been filled. I still haven't reached the stage where it talks to me, so I don't know for sure if tulpae are real, but I'll find out soon enough.

Just self-experiment if you want to find out bad enough and don't have any other way of testing the hypothesis.

>>4660491
> maybe

>>4660491
There has been scientifically studies about monks that can change their body's temperature just by meditating

>>4660533
But in fairness, 100/10 to the troller.

>>4660491
Maybe it's a ploy to gain global domination.

http://notwithoutwill.tumblr.com/
... what the hell?

>>4660491
The closest thing I've ever heard of was if one has his two lobes severed (or something not as extreme, but still involving having part of the brain severed) one may end up having his/her second personality show up. Well, it's a bit more stranger than that. You see, people who have had such a condition find themselves being attacked by their own hand. A study had found that while a person with this condition may see and perceive things normally, their other side of the brain may not. So, in the case of this, the subjects find themselves committing actions they had no idea they were doing with the hand that seemingly had a mind of it's own. Even when seemingly seeing their hands in front of them. What's stranger still is when seeing with one eye, one side may be able to read while the other does. The reason being is that that part of the brain does not process language.

>>4660561
>Doesn't

>ctrl+f "self-delusion"
>0 results

I'm disappointed in you /sci/.

>>4660622
I haven't bothered to take the time to criticise it in that much detail. I'm just hurling abuse from the sidelines.

>>4660528
>That religious logic

>>4660636
Better offer a real argument against my post.
Either it's a real phenomena and it works from my perspective after I perform the self-experiment, or it doesn't and I know it.
If it's religious thinking to accept other's claims of subjective experiences at face value, then all of psychology is filled with this.

>>4660491
>>4660643
Here you go:
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/april/conversations-with-god-041212.html

>>4660643
*phenomenon

>>4660643
I'm also doing a self-experiment to prove or disprove this, it will be finished by the end of the summer.

I'm keeping a detailed, dated, and page-numbered lab notebook, recording the whole thing.

You guys are wasting potential. Instead of letting some weak creation that you made into your mind, let in some stronger elements from the outer world.

1. Try to practice what I call "pure meditation". Pure meditation is that space that occurs between two thoughts in your mind. Think about what that means, and strive to simulate that pure emptiness in your mind while sitting in a common meditative posture. Most importantly, you must suppress mental imagery as must as possible. This is a key factor in being successful.
2. You have to do this for at least an entire waking day. This clears the mind of impressions, making you a blank slate. A tabula rasa. Fasting is optional but will definitely improve your results.
3. After you feel that your mind is clear of impressions, its time to let them in. Do pure meditation at night, in pure darkness, and begin chanting, "Welcome. Welcome. Welcome. Welcome". Nonstop. You must keep chanting this to let Them know that you are welcoming them.
4. Now, continue your meditation and your chanting, but unlock the visual in your mind: imagine your mind is like a little house floating in a space of pure darkness. Make the doors fly open, and welcome creatures from that absolute darkness into your abode. Do NOT intentionally think of specific forms, but think of just the basics of all forms: Think of fur, of flesh, of hard carapaces of bugs, think of scales, think of shiny, greasy skin. Now, imagine THEM lining up to get inside your house. They cannot wait, and you are still welcoming them in.

And there you have it. This tulpa is nothing but an imaginary friend, but "these" are creatures outside of your creation...they come from nothingness rather than the somethingness of your mind. I will warn you though...if a particularly vile beast lines up to enter your home, you may want to shut the doors.

>>4660655
>>>/x/

>>4660671
Reposting it here...because Meditation is something a /sci/ poster would be more likely to try than your average "random xD" /x/ user.

I've seen alot of talk about Tulpas on here. You guys are wasting potential. Instead of letting some weak creation that you made into your mind, let in some stronger elements from the outer world.

1. Try to practice what I call "pure meditation". Pure meditation is that space that occurs between two thoughts in your mind. Think about what that means, and strive to simulate that pure emptiness in your mind while sitting in a common meditative posture. Most importantly, you must suppress mental imagery as must as possible. This is a key factor in being successful.
2. You have to do this for at least an entire waking day. This clears the mind of impressions, making you a blank slate. A tabula rasa. Fasting is optional but will definitely improve your results.
3. After you feel that your mind is clear of impressions, its time to let them in. Do pure meditation at night, in pure darkness, and begin chanting, "Welcome. Welcome. Welcome. Welcome". Nonstop. You must keep chanting this to let them know that you are welcoming them. For at least a good 20 minutes, keep your mental imagery suppressed.

>>4660673
4. Now, continue your meditation and your chanting, but unlock the visual in your mind: imagine your mind is like a little house floating in a space of pure darkness. Make the doors fly open, and welcome creatures from that absolute darkness into your abode. Now, imagine THEM flying into your house like gusts of wind, and all you can see is their flesh, fur, hard carapaces, scales, think of shiny, greasy skin of various colors. Imagine these all swirling around inside the house you have welcomed them...still formless....
5. Finally, bring the swirling of their baseless forms to a halt and give them existence in your mind. Imagine they were spinning around as clothes in a dryer, and now, they are completely motionless and will grow into true forms. Look at them. Love them. Now start chanting, "You may stay. You may stay." Keep this up until they are all smiling and dancing in your mind. If you invite them and don't tell them they may stay, then they may place their control over YOU rather than you controlling them, so you must assert that you are the host of this house, and that they may stay.

>>4660674
If you have done this correctly, then these creatures will be ones which came from nothingness, not from your own mind. You will have given them life, but you did not "create" them. They were waiting for someone like you to give life to them out of the pure nothingness which they resided in, and they will be eternally grateful for your hospitality. This is why meditating in pure nothingness is of key importance...because otherwise, you will just be pulling out imagery from your own mind, as one can remember people, pets, places, etc, from experience. These creatures are not from any experience you will have ever seen, and you should recognize this immediately if you are successful.

Think of it as a scientific experiment. Why not give it a shot?

>>4660673
Meditation? Fine with that.
Your new age shit? Get out of this thread.

>>4660677
New age? This knowledge I'm offering is very old wisdom. I learned of it from a man in Tibet.

>>4660673
>>4660674
>>4660676

>something from nothing

This doesn't belong in /sci/ faggot.

>>4660677
> implying these threads aren't entirely filled with identical bullshit

>>4659599
>Chupi and Biotech have the same tulpa


SLUUUUUUUUT!

>implying Jesus Christ isn't the best Tulpa

Why haven't you accepted Jesus as your personal lord and savior yet /sci/?

these always creep me out

if you're going to make a tulpa to access your memory or do math for you, make it something harmless or sensical. don't make your waifu or something

for instance, if i were crazy enough to try this, i'd just make Jarvis. slightly snarky, mostly consistent, and he's just rattle off information as i need it. of course the key would be to make him not have a body or anything, that's just asking for problems

So a tulpa is like a stand? Fucking amazing

>>4656040
>>4656242
>>4656600
>>4659661
>>4659670
>>4660643
The ignorance,... it hurts.

- Therapy, dealing with disorders, psychoanalysis,... Basically the popular view (and /sci/'s view) of psychology = clinical psychology. This is (or should be) the applied side of psychology. These psychologists are usually not scientists, they don't do science and they're not properly taught to do science (not enough math/stats).

- Research on attention, learning, categorization of visual stimuli, language acquisition, cognitive control, working memory, brain connectivity, neural correlates of human behavior,... = psychological research. Most people I know always thought that this was only done by neurologists or neuroscientists. Yet when you open a neurosci journal, a high number of articles will be by psychologists or psych departments or have them involved, just check it for yourself if you don't believe me.

- social/personality psychology research, therapy effectiveness studies,etc... are also legitimate areas of study, but these tend to vary more strongly in rigor.

Psychology has become one of the most interdisciplinary fields of science yet people here still seem to think it's just about disorders and therapy while neuroscience handles everything else.

>>4660765
therapist
the rapist
lolololo

>>4660768

That joke is old.

>>4660728
>Male tulpa

Enjoy never being able to fap again without having the presence of a dude staring at you.

Guys i'd like to know. It seems that in order to create your tulpa you need to talk a lot with him, but does this mean talking out loud or you can do it in your mind and he will hear you?

>>4660799
my tulpa is jelly of my big dick and voluminous semen production

>>4660803
Either.
Some suspect that if you do narration only outloud your tulpa would have a harder time reading your mind, but would develop voice easier.
No idea if that hypothesis true, someone needs to test it.
I just narrate in my mind by changing my inner speech to be directed at my tulpa. I don't have any reasons I would want to keep secrets from it.

Some questions I couldn't find in the FAQ

1. Can I teach my tulpa how to create its own tulpa?

2. Could I somehow convince my tulpa that _I_ was a figment of _its_ imagination?

3. How many of you virgins are just doing this so you can have your own Caprica from Battlestar Galactica?

>>4660799
fine, maybe a nicer, less insane version of SHODAN

>>4660820
I'm a virgin so what

>>4660820
>Caprica from Battlestar Galactica?
none of them are nearly so tame.
the ponyfags are making tulpas of their pony waifus, complete with heavily detailed horse vaginas

>>4660835
WTF

>>4660835
>>4660837
It's true.

>>4660835
That is quite possibly the most beta/omega thing I have ever heard of.
They have the ultimate luck of being born in the Western World and this is how they use their life.

>>4660820

1 - No, it's just a figment of your imaginatio.

2 - See above. Your tulpa probably knows what it is already.

3 - No, not really.

>>4660820
> 1. Can I teach my tulpa how to create its own tulpa?
If your tulpa can imagine stuff directly into its "wonderland" (imaginary world/space), it might be possible. Reported to be possible by at least one person, but the dude that wrote the FAQs doesn't think it's possible. I suspect that that's just due to his own expectations as to what a tulpa is.
The real problem is that most tulpae don't seem to have any interest in making another one by themselves. Eventually we'll see if such a situation arises where this can be tested.
> 2. Could I somehow convince my tulpa that _I_ was a figment of _its_ imagination?
Depends on your tulpa's philosophy of mind. If your tulpa becomes a solipsist, sure. I don't see why it would be like this as the a tulpa's and a host's minds are entangled quite a bit due to the shared physical substrate. Like many silly religious beliefs this seems plausible, but not likely.
> 3. How many of you virgins are just doing this so you can have your own Caprica from Battlestar Galactica?
I am making a female and I don't know what would happen. I can't say I'm not open to the idea, but that would depend on how my tulpa turns out, if she's into me and if I'm into her. I don't even know how many of the personality traits that I hope she'll have would stick, much less how compatible we would be in that regard.

The tullpa makes a tulpa from a tulp from a tulpa froma tulpa

Tulpaception

I have a a question for people who created their Tulpa from 2D characters, a pony or your waifu, How does it end up looking in real life? Will it be 3D but still nice and pretty like his original 2D self?

>>4660852
we're drawfags
does that answer your question?

Let me make sure that I understand the narration step. Do you just narrate what you are doing and what your tulpa would be doing based off its personality? Do you narrate what it would say as well, even though the guide clearly states not to parrot?
T-minus 3 days until I begin my trek.

>>4660847
>If your tulpa becomes a solipsist, sure. I don't see why it would be like this as the a tulpa's and a host's minds are entangled quite a bit due to the shared physical substrate

What if the host was a solipsist?

why the fuck is this even on /sci/?

>>4660863
science

>>4660852
I'm doing a 2D character. I plan to visualize all of its sides, so I imagine it will be 3D but it will still look like it did when it was 2D. For example, it won't be like Paper Mario when it turns from left to right. It'll be more like a game post Ocarina of Time and Mario 64. I hate using games as examples, but it's the best I can do.
No, I will not alter her appearances to that of a real person.

>>4660860
If the host doesn't believe that anyone but him is conscious then the tulpa would probably be a bit exasperated by the host claiming the tulpa has no experiences when it knows it has them. I've read one case, maybe real or maybe fake (posted in another thread) where the host and the tulpa ended up fighting over such a topic and the host ended up destroying the tulpa because it didn't fit his philosophy.
Maybe you shouldn't make a tulpa or interact with people in general if you think they're all philosophical zombies?

>>4660863
I admit, it's not very related to science, but some of us apparently find it intriguing.

>>4660867
only it isn't.
i can't believe people would actually invest over 100 hours into this. this is excapism at it's most pathetic

>>4660854

Not him, but I'm perplexed by this too. That question remains unanswered by your post.

>>4660871
>perform calculations faster than normal.
>memorize everything,
>never being alone at all

ok whatever

>>4660869
>Maybe you shouldn't make a tulpa or interact with people in general if you think they're all philosophical zombies?

That;'s a pretty childish way to interpret solipsism.

>>4660852
something like this, probably

>>4660871
Your problem is that it offends your moral prejudices, not on it being science or not. Same issue as in other boards, some people just have trouble with people wanting to have a less dull mental world.

>>4660875
Unfortunately, you won't have direct access to those abilities.

>>4660875
>perform calculations faster than normal.
>memorize everything,
why do you want to become a calculator?

>never being alone at all
I have no idea why anyone would want that

>>4660854
kinda, but not really

>>4660876
What is your interpretation of solipsism then?
I'm fine with mini-solipsisms where only the set of all experiential realities exist, but that's closer to an idealist or neutral monist philosophy and I have no problem with that because they don't make others into philosophical zombies, nor do they deny our own subjective experiences.

>>4660880
I really don't understand how you see this as offending my morality. I fail to see how this is a question of morals at all.

This isn't science.

>>4660890
prove it!

>>4660878

So what are we talking about here, making yourself schizophrenic and imagining you have invisible friends or about actual manifestations which other people can purportedly also see? I'm just wondering where we are on the scale of retarded, that's all.

>>4660894
0/10

>>4660894
Just invisible friends, no magic is involved.

>>4660894

Well, TBH this seems to be an interesting experiment to carry out.

>>4660887
A solipsist can appreciate that how it interacts with its environment and the people that inhabit it will have major repercussions on their own existence. Through these interactions they can even discover more about themselves and their existence.

>>4660863
Because there are hardly any trolls here, and the community is fairly open-minded.

>>4660905
That is a really good impression of an idiot.
9/10

>>4660890
Really now? There's an entire psychological phenomenon which people report to exist and which can be induced in a normal person, yet it's not yet very known scientifically, beyond inexact matches like: imaginary friends (most are non-sentient and typically only expected in children), DID (rarely works in parallel like tulpae do), schizophrenia (can't be ignored/wished away, mostly biological in origin).
Now with regards to this phenomenon, we have a lot of claims about the new abilities such as memory recall or some number crunching abilities that the host doesn't have in normal states of consciousness.

If this is a real psychological phenomenon as claimed, it would offer some very interesting insights into how our brain works and our psychology.

It may be that for most of us we just want to experience it ourselves and the science would come after that, but that doesn't mean it's not science.

>>4660900
>>4660899
double dubs

>>4660908
Pardon?

>>4660910

Ignore it, just a troll.

>>4660907
Yes really.
This is just people who think they are intelligent giving themselves imaginary friends.

oh no... ours are different! ours are sentient... honest! they can count and calculate and stuff!

but hey, feel free to invest 100+hours into whatever you like. i'll stick to investing mine into learning

>>4660914

>not wanting to learn from a hidden subconscious mind

>>4660916
what exactly are you expecting to learn? how to pleasure an imaginary pony vagina?

cool story.

>>4660914
your tulpa can learn for you

>>4660920
>hey tulps, can you read through these journals for me whilst i play some vidya and sleep? thanks bro

>>4660914
> not wanting near perfect recall
Enjoy grinding the repetitive data that you need to know 3 times.
>>4660918
I'm not making a pony, but you sound jelly.

>>4660918

Hold on there, not everyone is a creepy ponyfag.

>>4660918
no. only imaginary dolphin vigirgina.

>>4660925
there are already successful and researched techniques to improve memory recall. i have a pretty good memory as is and don't deem it necessary to improve it any further, it really won't help my work that much.

>>4660922
> implying it can't as long as you have consciously processed the text, even if the text hasn't been understood
Yet any such understanding would belong to your tulpa, not you.
> mfw your tulpa teaches you SCIENCE

>>4660922
You can read and play simultaneously?

>>4660934
derpy can

>>4660933
I don't understand why you think you need an imaginary friend to do this.

What if your pony 'decides' in its sentient mind that it doesn't want to process this text that you've 'consciously processed'. Or it doesn't understand it. I'd be pretty screwed then.

>>4660934
>that's the point

>>4660937
Oh, you were being sarcastic.
> my autism strikes again

>>4660937
Obviously you don't. Doesn't make it a non-possibility.

> What if your pony 'decides' in its sentient mind that it doesn't want to process this text that you've 'consciously processed'.
It might, just like you might decide to not be interested in some subject.
> Or it doesn't understand it.
If the prerequisites to understanding it would also be learned, it would, if not, it wouldn't.
> I'd be pretty screwed then.
Sure.

I do think an alternate perspective/look on things would be great, but if you don't think so, good for you.
I still don't see why you're trying to rain on other's parade here. Most people that have tulpae seem to be better off with it. I've thought about it and I can see plenty of benefits for myself, but I'll only know if it ends up like that when I have my own. If you ignore all the emotional benefits, it would still be useful at least as a teaching assistant, for the improved memory recall/visualization skills and the alternate look on things.

I can't decide if to give my tulpa emtions or not

>>4660951
It'll very likely develop them even if you don't /give/ it any.

>>4660946
>I still don't see why you're trying to rain on other's parade here.
This is a science discussion board not a circlejerk. You post some waffley imaginary friend chat then you better be able to defend it rationally.

This is just escapism, self-delusion even. I find the kind of people that would do this far more interesting than what they are actually doing.

>>4660954
I don't follow

>>4660963
then you lead?

>>4660954
> This is a science discussion board not a circlejerk.
I don't see any circlejerking here.
> You post some waffley imaginary friend chat then you better be able to defend it rationally.
Is this about the IRC channel? It's just for people that are interested in making tulpae.

> This is just escapism, self-delusion even.
I'm not so sure about the self-delusion part (where is the delusion?), but I have no problem with escapism. Humanity has been into escapism since its dawn and will be even much more into the future, it's one of those things that make life worth living.

> I find the kind of people that would do this far more interesting than what they are actually doing.
You find the people interested in such things interesting? Maybe you're just interested in people that have very different values from your own.

sounds like people defending tulpas are trying to justify their escapism and total abandonment of all social contact. Good luck maintaining any kind of relationship with an entity only you can see interfering.

>>4660954
Not the same guy you are replying to, nor am I a person who is going to try it (at least yet), but I do find the entire idea pretty interesting.

Yes it can help the lonely basement dwells that you hate so much (you are on 4chan by the way) but it can, according to some reports help in other ways like having a different perceptive on things, helping you learn etc.

When i'll have my tulpa, i will find others people with Tulpa and we'll make them fight and i will organize a Tulpa batlle and become rich

>>4660966
>You find the people interested in such things interesting? Maybe you're just interested in people that have very different values from your own
Values? I don't see how this is indicative of our values. As an aside, I do find those with a different set of values interesting.

What I find interesting is how there is a demographic who cloaks their own social inadequacies in a veil of pseudoscience to justify their crippling need for companionship in the form of an imaginary friend. To the point of self-delusion as well, genuinely believing that this is a scientific endeavor.

>>4660976
The funny thing in your post is that the first guys that made tulpae were actually quite social guys.

Myself, I don't have a huge lot of social contact these days. Getting a tulpa would increase such social contact if I were to indulge its whims and socialize more.

>>4660980
I don't hate them

>>4660987
Did you not read the part where these guys found a way to induce something akin to DID which interacts through an imagined body?
I find this rather new.
Most imaginary friends just don't work like this.

>>4660987
Again, not the same guy.

It sounds like you really don't belong on 4chan... And since when is escapism so bad? You play video games, watch TV or whatever, right? That is a type of escapism you know...

>>4660995
new? isn't this ancient?

>>4661002
I never said escapism was bad.

>>4661003
It is, but its been all but forgotten by most modern society. I ask you to give me some actual citations on studies done on this. I'd be very interested.

>>4661011
me? i don't have any studies.. i know nothing about this, just heard of it ages ago and always assumed it was some kind of ancient mysticism. was just pointing out that it isn't new.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulpa

>See Also
> Imaginary Friend
> String Theory

>String Theory
lol which one of you put that there?

>>4661013
If you're going to go that way, you might as well claim that the neocortex is old stuff too, after all, its existed for millions of years.
Old or new matters not, what matters is if we understand it or not, and currently there is a gap of understanding here and it's science's job to figure it out.

>>4661021
>being facetious

anyways, I don't really see it as a big gap in scientific understanding that urgently needs filling. there have been studies into sub conscious learning and memory tricks that are very similar to this.

>>4661025
If you insist that the gap isn't there, mind explaining how tulpae work?

>>4661029
Science!

>>4661029
Firstly, I didn't insist anything.
My exact words were
> I don't really see
As in, I'm not 100% sure ...

Second, I never said there might not be a gap
My exact words were
> I don't really see it as a big gap
As in, there may be a gap there, but I don't see it as a very big one or one that will enlighten our understanding of the brain

Third, I'm not a qualified psychologist so I cannot give you such an explanation. I would say there are probably some out there who have worked in related subfields that could give a pretty good and thorough attempt at answering it though.

For me I feel that this isn't all that amazing.. Just some memory tricks and subconscious trickery akin to meditation.

If you want me to break down what I've said so it makes more sense please ask.

>>4661037
>implying we're on 4chan

>>4661037
So you don't find the bit about how your brain is capable of instantiating more than 2 ego-like decision processes?
Just the other day some psychologist came by swearing that it wasn't possible and he ended up taking up the experiment on himself as he just couldn't believe it is possible.
I can see how this would be compatible with some models, but to actually make the claim that we do have a working model of the human mind which could explain this in full detail is just silly, because we don't. We just have some very incomplete models which could be fit in a way that this works.

>>4661049
>So you don't find the bit about how your brain is capable of instantiating more than 2 ego-like decision processes?
Did you miss a word off the end of that sentence?

Was this psychologist and undergrad or an ACTUAL psychologist? What was his field of research if the latter? I fail to see how a qualified psychologist would be so dumbstruck by the idea of alter-ego

>but to actually make the claim that we do have a working model of the human mind which could explain this in full detail is just silly
I agree. I never said otherwise.

>>4661066
> Did you miss a word off the end of that sentence?
* rather new/unusual?

> Was this psychologist and undergrad or an ACTUAL psychologist? What was his field of research if the latter? I fail to see how a qualified psychologist would be so dumbstruck by the idea of alter-ego
Actual psychologist. Claimed to have had patients with DID and that this was too different from DID, to the point where he claimed that it wasn't possible. Eventually he decided to do the smart thing and just undertake this as a self-experiment to see for himself if it really is possible or not.
This would be a lot easier to test in real life, but unfortunately there's no way to avoid faking tests over the Internet, so for most people which are just curious about facts in this situation will just have to self-experiment.

>>4661084
Oh OK.
No sorry, personally I do not see it as all that new or unusual. I just see it as an amalgam or exaggeration of other techniques.

So the guy was a therapist? That's interesting. A therapist that comes on 4chan probably needs therapy himself, but still, I would be interested to see his 'results' if this were legit.

>>4661098
The actual opinions seem to be mixed though.
Someone mailed some professor that specialized in subconscious-related topics and he said it might work, while the practitioner one said it wasn't possible.

>>4661019
> A Tulpa is when you make yourself go fucking looney in the head, yo. It's like a gay sandwich with gay on top, and the bread is two slices of wheat gayness, with a side helping of gay, and a nice glass of gay to wash it all down.

>>4661130
>A tulpa is when you make yourself go fucking looney in the head
I don't see the problem. It's not like you're making yourself paranoid.

>>4660894
> about actual manifestations which other people can purportedly also see

Well, you're definetly way up in the retard scale.

>>4660984
Godspeed, anon.

>>4660984
How will the tulpa see the other tulpa?

>>4661261
Maybe he could make use of a BCI (Brain Computer Interface) to allow a tulpa to more efficiently communicate with the outside world.

Has anyone considered the risk that you might actually end up seriously mentally unwell as a result of this? What if your tulpa hates you?

>>4661451
>Has anyone considered the risk that you might actually end up seriously mentally unwell as a result of this?
I think we all agree that we're giving ourselves some form of mental illness (hallucinating). But it's not that bad as long as it isn't paired up with extreme paranoia and delusions.

>What if your tulpa hates you?
It probably won't but if you ignore it for about a month it is said to die of starvation, in the sense that it needs attention to live.

So I've seriously considered creating a tulpa, but I don't like the idea of using my subconscious for socialization. Is there a way to pick parts of a tulpa and create just those? I.e. memory recall, looking at things differently, mental math, etc.

>>4661545
You could always just train in those areas.
You can make a servitor, a tulpa without any emotion or conscious. It would just be there to serve you. Kind of dull in my eyes, but no reason why you shouldn't be allowed to make one.

>>4661545

You're too immature to meddle in this sort of thing. Go somewhere else.

>>4661562
I don't really want a servitor. What would happen if I created it but never tried to force it as an hallucination? Could I call upon it when needed?

>>4661575
Forcing it as a hallucination is part of the creation process. You can give it the power to sink into your shadow (just an example, as long as it disappears) until you need it, but you have to give it that power during the creation process.
I don't understand you. You said you don't want a tulpa because you don't want to have to socialize with it, but you don't want a servitor either. If you make a tulpa and don't plan on caring about it, it's going to die.

>>4661545
Yes, it's called a servitor, or using more regular language, just a purposeful imaginary friend. it would work for memory recall and some other things that are easy to train.
You won't be getting some very high cognitive functions out of it though, not without effort on your part.
Half of the appeal of the tulpa is that unlike regular imaginary friends they don't drain your attention. A regular imaginary friend requires your constant attention to sustain, thus it also tires you out more.
A tulpa is far more independent and won't drain your attention like that. A good analogy is sequential vs parallel, a servitor is sequential with respect to your own conscious stream of thought, while a tulpa is parallel. A tulpa will also have an independent sleep schedule from you, although they can align it to match yours if you want, but you won't be disturbed by their functioning in the least, nor will you get tired by it (as opposed to the regular imaginary friend kind). Exceptions to this include the initial headaches people seem to get during the formation stage and some strange "pressure" feeling for some time after that (it passes). The headaches are probably due to increase in bloodflow initially as one develops their visualization skills and their tulpa. The pressure seems to happen during narration and before the tulpa is vocal, to the point where the tulpa may even attempt to send messages with it. I'm curious if the pressure thing is physiological and common to the tulpa creation process or if it's merely something we all ended up expecting to happen and thus it happened (no, it's not possible to create that feeling by yourself, it's quite unique (like a localized headaches, but not quite, it's far too mild to be called a headache), but what is it with so many tulpae using it to send messages before they can talk).

This just keeps getting better and worse at the same time.

>>4661575
Everything would be fine, but it would be limited in some ways as far as interacting with you. You'd have to close your eye(s) or meditate each time you wanted to interact with it directly beyond just voice.
There's no harm in having a non-imposed tulpa. Their form(s) would be more flexible and some tulpae might not even want to be imposed straight away.

>>4661594
>>4661582
I don't want a servitor. The parallel thought process is part of the appeal. I'd care about it enough and pay enough attention to it, but only when I have a non-social purpose for it. I feel like this should be possible, but not sure how. I would most certainly want to go past the point of parroting.

>>4661612
It's going to have a very hateful relationship with you. Imagine if your parents forced you to learn how to be a detective at an early age, through tutors, then locked you up in a cell and only let you out when they needed a case to be solved for money.
It's certainly possible, but I'm not going to partake in helping you do this.

>>4661612
Just make a "wonderland" (Irish's guide) and pick some decent personality traits for your tulpa so it won't be an ass. It can mind its own business (dream/sleep, watch old memories, whatever) whenever you're busy.
If the personality isn't fucked up, they'll just leave you alone whenever you need them to. Some of them might play some minor pranks when they first get started, but should be fine afterwards.
If you're really afraid, you could just save imposing until their personality is matured. Imposing does come with a various benefits, but it's hardly something which is absolutely required.

>>4661625
What types of benefits are there in imposing?

>>4661630
sex

>>4661630
You would be able to see your tulpa more clearly and much more detailed.
No need to meditate or close your eyes each time you want to see your tulpa.
Your tulpa can interact with your directly in your sensed reality, through all your 5 senses.
Some interesting ideas that were thrown around were about sharing your memories as seen from the tulpa's perspective through a display (as an example), which you could hallucinate with your eyes open and wouldn't have to get into a meditative trance each time you wanted to visualize something in detail.
Some tulpae, especially those made without a wonderland, are essentially "stuck" in your mind if you don't impose them.
There's probably others I'm not thinking of right now, but it seems to be both beneficial both from your point of view and from the point of view of the tulpa.

Of course, if you did make a non-visual/non-interacting tulpa (just personality+narration), imposition would make no sense (nor a wonderland), but then, I'm not sure what such a tulpa's limitations would be as it'd just be a voice in your head.

Imposition supposedly also has one downside: your tulpa's form becomes far more solid and harder to change. This hasn't been confirmed as I don't know of anyone anyone who tried changing their tulpa's based appearance too much after imposing. Without it, change is considerably easier as it's just in your imagination, not a more "permanent" imagination (that's what the hallucination is: persistent, stable imagination, not unlike what you do when you subvocalize).

>>4661605
For me, the headaches were most likely caused by squinting and furrowing my brows and forehead due to strenuous concentration. I don't do that anymore, because concentrating has become much easier.
And regarding those strange sensations and pressures in the head: I've seen a couple of people report that a tulpa can inflict a headache and one or two claim that their tulpa can dispel a headache. This is interesting, because it might indicate that a tulpa can somehow access and manipulate the trigeminal nerve nuclei, which receives sensory information from the head, but is /too peripheral/, and therefore not controllable by the subconscious, in my opinion, or rather it can access the overlying structures such as the thalamus or the sensory cortex.

>>4661678
On one hand that seems possible, since your tulpa is connected to you via subconscious it could make some types of pain or discomfort "go away", but on the other hand I'm skeptical and want to just call what is happening to those hosts a placebo effect.

> they can give you headaches at will

>>4661717
And those feelings of pressure could be just some kind of conditioned response.

>>4661717
The other day on IRC, someone asked their tulpa to scratch an itch they had and their itch just went away.

>>4661724
You read it wrong, but Jesus Christ that would be horrifying.
How about this, though
>Standing in line at a cash register
>Tulpa starts stroking you

>>4661724
Yeah, you'd better be nice to them, because they can use headaches to punish you.

>>4661732
Irish's tulpa can supposedly do that. She can give him a headache if he pisses her off.

>>4661717
If this placebo effect can occur consistently and seemingly independently of the host's will, then it doesn't really matter whether it's "real" or not, does it? In the end, the effect is the same.

>>4661724
>They can give you blowjobs at will

Did I convince you now?

>>4661920
Uh, you're trying to convince me to start making a tulpa?

>>4661920

Enjoy having a horny hallucination and getting forcibly ejaculated all the time.

I'm going to make a pony tulpa, they are better than humans