-Linkzelda: In general, this gets my approval in pending, but with how you seem to shift to the idea that it’s information (useful information mind you), it’s a matter of disposition on those that would see this as a method. Without a doubt, ideologies/conceptual schemes/thoughts/etc. on tulpas is subjective, and people should take the advice as supplementary to their own development of understanding the concept of tulpas.
So it would be more pragmatic to place this as [General], but with how GAT seems to approach most guide submissions (currently) as general overviews/tips and tricks/compilation of useful advice, I’m not sure where this can be fitted. However, based on what you posted in your original post, it’s presumed that it’s left as a rough-draft wording, though I think that’s an understatement for you to have there since the advice you’re given is clearly laid out. But with how most attempts to cover a lot of concepts and advice will have to progressively update over time, maybe other GAT members can give a better insight than I can on things that are rough-draft. Since I’m sure that from past experiences, people who consider things a rough-draft doesn’t follow with whether or not the person was confident that they would get their thoughts stated and finalized.
Maybe you just didn’t want to change that, or to inform others than any guide/compilation of advice that aims to cover all concepts (or most in the realistic sense), the creator of the guide/advice/overview of concepts has the privilege to change the guide accordingly. However, because of this privilege, this means that in the near future, if you do make revisions, it would obviously need a review, and that wouldn’t be consistent in keeping this useful information intact in a section. And since it’s aimed to be “absolute,” since you have to update accordingly based on how the community in general conceptualizes tulpas, the implication is that there’s going to probably be more sections to cover in the future. Which is why maybe GAT, Staff of Tulpa.info, and Pleeb also needs to incorporate sections for articles that are more than just [Tips] instead of the forum itself having articles that are completely separate from it.
Which means that it would be considered more of an article/compilation of advice of topics related to the tulpa phenomenon and such. It seemed the information had the intention to revolve around what newcomers may experience when:
Before going through the tulpa creation process Going through the tulpa creation process Mindset (before and after the tulpa has been made) Overview of concepts (possession, vocality, sentience, etc.) Reasons why not to make a tulpa and the level of seriousness that comes with committing to having a tulpa for life if one presumably has one that clearly becomes sentient
And other useful information for any newcomer to take into consideration
But with any useful information, it doesn’t mean it’s absolved from getting a critique. This guide/compilation of advice is not something to take lightly, and I’m just going through the concepts for GAT-review here. The critique is not aimed to shun the information down since I already approve of this information in the first place (in pending).
Which means I’ll have to go down section by section based on the current information you have in the Google link (As of November 19th, 2013). As for the other languages, I’m presuming they’re following strictly into translating the English version, so having that said, let’s get started. Since I can’t use “quote” formatting on a PDF file, anything that’s stated in bold and italics will be the content in your guide/article/compilation of advice and suggestion. Anything stated in this format will just be my response to it.
How do you create a tulpa?: This is largely explained in a later part of the guide, but I will give a brief overview of the process.
This seems to be a tautological statement since you’ve explained the process throughout this article. Maybe you thought the concepts were a general overview, and had the intention to expand on them, but you took a different direction with the concepts and the actual creation process.
Because you’ve given your own explanation of the process and linked to other guides, and presuming those guides are actually approved or not by GAT and the community, maybe it would be better to have one section devoted to a list of suggested guides.
Because the recommendations you gave within the article will have newcomers presuming things such as:
After acknowledging your explanations, the links are a follow-up to a process you personally recommend. And although you’ve stated that people should take the information as supplementary to their own progress, the recommendations (and whether or not the guides will be approved or not) may have to be updated.
Why should you create a tulpa?:
I guess when it comes to giving a list of reasons why a person should create tulpa, the possibilities are endless, like you’ve stated. But it seemed you were adding that small tidbit there to prevent people from getting implication that you didn’t want people to create a tulpa. Of course, like you’ve stated in the disclaimer, these are merely your suggestions, but if you’re giving reasons not to make a tulpa (which is just as subjective as reasons why a person should make a tulpa), it’ll become too complicated for me to explain what I would like to get addressed for the information in general. So I’ll explain that more through the sections.
Why you should NOT create a tulpa, and things to consider: Overall, this section was going good on how most of the anecdotal cases of worst case scenarios with tulpas (i.e. possession and/or switching), and how people shouldn’t take those contingent events as having the potential to happen to everyone.
But here’s the part where a newcomer might question on how you interpreted JDBar’s quote, and I guess how people interpret his quote is open for debate of course. Anyway, before I go into detail on what you specified in this section, here’s the general connotation from this:
You’re informing mostly through a younger audience, and mentioned how adults are people you can’t stop from making an informed choice. Although you are definitely right that it’s best to take measures with informing the naiveté of the youth before they end up making mistakes, you’re now merely presenting a list of do’s and don’ts pertaining to maturity.
This seems to be because you used JDBar’s quote on maturity that he addressed very well, but how you interpreted it and mixed your own views on how people experience tulpas in the most repulsive and disgusting manner (i.e. treating them as sex slaves), it’s inevitable that these things will happen. This is why your explanations ends up on what you morally and ethically feel is pragmatic when having at tulpa, and when it comes to people garnering their own set of philosophies into this tulpa phenomenon, I’ll have to disagree with some points you’ve mentioned in this section
The first is this: I don’t believe anyone of that age should be creating a tulpa, honestly, but I can’t stop you. Also, just because you’re not a little kid doesn’t mean that you’re in the clear.
I can understand your sentiment here, but it’s giving a condescending overtone where you either presume people wouldn’t question whether you have any authority to state this or not. Especially when you’ve mentioned that you still regret your decision in your initial stages of finding out about tulpas and creating one.
To people who just glance over the information, this wouldn’t really be anything they’ll care about since they’ll take what they need out of the advice you’re giving and filter out what’s not needed. And since you’ve stated that you couldn’t stop adults or anyone older than you (I don’t know how old you are though), it seems you’re still trying to give advice to anyone of any age. So if you’re wanting to address that to all ages, there’s no need to mention how you can’t stop the adults, and yet you can stop the naïve youth, but then mention people older than that again that you’ve admitted you can’t stop.
Because this gives the presumption that anyone of any age can be just as gullible and passive about considering whether or not to make a tulpa. That’s an obvious probability, since maturity is completely subjective, and anyone can make mistakes. However, the overtone that older individuals would have that same incompetence as younger people have with decision making seems to be you giving your own disposition, which means that’s up for debate.
Especially when you’ve tried to give a “test” (which ends up being futile and an impasse logic in the first place to promote your urge to everyone to not make a tulpa), people will have further questioning on whether or not you’re credible to take heed to your advice. Then there’s this: There are people running around in the tulpa community who make tulpas as sex slaves--or kill them off impulsively when they get bored, or they don't turn out exactly as they want. These kind of people absolutely disgust me. Some of them justify their actions based on the fact that there is no proof that they are actual living beings with feelings. How sick can you get? They are perfectly fine with "killing" something, because there's a chance that they might not be alive. This implies that people who may have to resort to this are innate psychopaths that will do anything that will ethically satisfy their egos. This also presumes that the person would be perfectly fine (without having their conscience nagging at them over killing the tulpa) with the death of the tulpa, but this is merely a worst case scenario to ward off people who actually are innate psychopaths/sociopaths that have no feelings whatsoever. So using this to convince the general audience (in which your overtone assumes they’re naïve and innocent, and not innate and manipulative psychopaths/sociopaths), it doesn’t really seem to be compatible in the first place. Nor does it promote a professional and pragmatic mindset for the article/compendium of the process and such.
Other than that, how a person decides to keep a tulpa or kill/dissipate them is a matter of disposition. This is presuming that a person can actually think things out with their tulpa without having to worry of worst case scenarios (i.e. those same anecdotal evidence), and you’re presuming that if a person kills a tulpa, that they shouldn’t be seen anywhere in the community.
Everyone has the capacity to do evil in relation to the tulpa phenomenon, but how people define what is really “evil, “repulsive,” “disgusting,” depends on the set of morals and ethics they want to apply to this. And since people have their own unique twists and turns with accumulating life-affirming philosophies, they may end up disagreeing with your statement of how they treat a tulpa.
And because you know people shouldn’t gravitate solely to your guide/article of information, if you want to present them information that will allow them to make an informed choice on creating a tulpa or not, the negative disposition towards worst case scenarios (i.e. those who have no feelings of guilt if they end up killing a tulpa) isn’t necessary.
Part of what allows people to make an informed decision is giving both the good and bad, though you seem to garner favoritism on the worst case scenarios. And since you’re aiming for a younger audience (and yet are still grabbing the older individuals that you said you couldn’t stop), they may take your statements as something that will happen to them.
What I mean by this is that they’ll focus on the worst case scenario, and it ends up creating paranoia on their end. Children, at least how you referred the younger audience, will take anything that’s negative at any level and magnify it.
Doing this isn’t consistent to how you don’t believe in the beginning of the anecdotal claims of the horror story with tulpas (or worst case scenarios). In fact, people may end up going through worst case scenarios if they interpret your dispositional statements on the worst that may happen with tulpas.
If you are the kind of person who is capable of that, walk away now. I don't want to see you anywhere near this community.
This is making presumptions what the community (presuming this is only for tulpa.info you’re referring to) will turn out to be in the near future. It’s useless to add this sentiment if you’re trying to aim to give newcomers a chance to make an informed decision about tulpas.
It seems more like a threat to the naïve, and an immature sentiment to those who may be trying to critically see the tulpa phenomenon to people who can give a more professional and mature overtone. So in the short term, this little scare tactic can work, but in the long-term, people will see how you presented the information in a completely different perspective…and it may not be a perspective that has a positive intentions for your views.
And since you’ve revolved most of what JDBar’s stated with your own beliefs in this section, you kind of tarnished the whole point he was trying to get at, and here’s why.
Like I’ve mentioned in the bullet points before going into detail, how you’re presenting the information in this section is merely a list of “do’s and don’ts” in relation to the tulpa phenomenon and labeling it as “being mature about it.”
“Being mature about this” is a matter of disposition and cannot be condensed to a simple list of what you feel is and isn’t pragmatic for people to follow. Maturity isn’t just about preventing the worst case scenarios from happening, it’s also learning how to take ownership of your responsibilities if negative events and circumstances do happen despite of a person’s age/competence/ability to talk themselves into calming down in overwhelming situations/etc.
Whether the person is young or old, maturity in relation to the tulpa phenomenon isn’t only restricted based on age, conceptual schemes, upbringing, and such. It’s now based on mental maturity, or to put it in better words, how a person learns to deal with planning for as many probable events (for better and for worse), and learning how to adjust accordingly to those circumstances. Your list of what a person shouldn’t and should do for tulpas is useful for the naïve, but it will end up in people feeling guilty about themselves. And when they’re trying to see things in a new perspective, if they take your information seriously, they might go through a cognitive dissonance with how most of your negative emotivism within your list for this section isn't going to be real to them (because they’ll realize if they decided to go through their capacity of becoming an innate psychopath/sociopath, they wouldn’t be able to function, flourish, and have a sense of well-being). I don't care if you think tulpas aren't separate beings or not. You should give them the benefit of the doubt. If you don’t care what they think, then you should remove this, especially if you’re trying to give a comprehensive overview.
So now you need to make the decision. If you decide that you're not mature enough, and or you can't handle it, then I respect that greatly. If you decide that you can do it... Well then, good luck to you. I hope you know yourself well enough.
Remember that “test” you wanted the naïve youth to take (and the adults as well)? How you ended things off here isn’t consistent whatsoever since you seem to garner more respect to those who may end up with the conclusion that they’re not mature or capable enough to make a tulpa.
I hope you know yourself well enough.
This isn’t needed since it just adds on to the condescending overtone that people aren’t mature about this. They’ll want to question more on whether or not you’re mature about this, or if you changed your disposition of occasionally regretting making a tulpa in the first place. Because it’s obvious that what you would consider “know yourself well enough” is merely how the person analyzes their own self-schema. And since you have the belief that the tulpa has the capacity to do whatever the host is capable of doing, you would realize why the quote I referred to above is inconsistent. People may find some aspect within their tulpa that they (the host) were unable to find in themselves. Which means that the tulpa’s existence overall adds on to one of many desires for the host to understand themselves in their (and their tulpas’) path of self-discovery.
To branch off of the above reason, you should not create a tulpa to be used as a tool of any kind. That includes as a sex slave.
With how you presented the topic of “sex slave,” people will presume that any acts of sexual nature with tulpa would be like treating them as sex slaves. This is because they’ll get the implication that if you’re suggesting to them that they aren’t capable or mature enough to make a tulpa, what hope do they have if they wanted to have a mature discussion in advance with their tulpas on more controversial aspects (e.g. sex, death, purpose in life)?
Of course, it goes without saying that people will obviously consider other people’s perspective on tulpas, but with how you ended things for this section, it’s not something presented maturely and professionally. It’s just being condescending, and I understand some people need a reality check for this, but it can be explained in a more noble way.
Overall for this section in particular:
If you’re giving the general audience a test to somehow be reflective about things objectively without their egos getting the better of them…and then saying they still won’t be capable or mature enough to make one, they’ll question if you’re just being condescending or thinking you’re an exception to this impasse logic you’re giving them.
If you don’t care what people think about certain things in relation to tulpa, just remove them completely. Showing how much you don't care about it shows that you do care about it. People who don’t care (and showing little to no effort) will never mention their dispositional statements in the first place.
The list of do’s and don’ts and labeling it as being “mature” about things, but then ending to how even if a person contemplates on them, them not being competent or mature about it tarnishes the whole point JDBar was trying to address. It’s not giving enough justice to the integrity of his quote, and your interpretation is immature rather than being professional or noble about things.
If you’re geared towards people you feel would be naïve and young to understand the “seriousness” of this, it should go without saying that the worst case scenario of them having the capacity of being innate psychopaths/sociopaths with no feelings of guilt from their conscience is highly improbable.
How long will it take to finish making your tulpa?: It’s nice that you gave a small introduction on how long the finality of making a tulpa is subjective, but when you stated this: As long as you don’t make the same mistakes as I, and many others have, it will not take you as long as a year
This really doesn’t add much to affecting how the process can be finalized more efficiently since you’ve stated that it’s entirely up the person and their disposition on the matter. And how people define what would be considered “finished” is very subjective. So the time frame with over a year and how you try to give the assurance to newcomers that they won’t take as long as a year is leading to a false hope. Because the concepts below are what would presumably explain what adds on to what a tulpa is, or in a better set of words, how one would ontologically explain the essence/nature/existence of a tulpa. And with posts that you’ve made here , several here , people may see how you gave an authoritative tonality for the guide/article and question how you’ve went through the same mistakes as most people did in the past. The reason why I’m mentioning this is because they wouldn’t go for the “Oh, I understand that he had to go through the same struggles as everyone,” but instead it will be more likely that they won’t see you as someone that may be more empathetic and vicarious of newcomers 25 days into the process. Tonality matters a lot when trying to give people a general overview of things.
And this doesn’t mean that everything has to be positive, giddy, or overly optimistic about things, but just something you may want to take into consideration to fit the standard of guides and/or articles/tips and tricks having a positive and professional mindset into this. Your tulpa’s sentience Good overview on with more conflicting matters between assuming sentience from the start vs. treating them as sentient and sapient beings. Though I feel it’s best to provide some links on those same conflicts like here: http://community.tulpa.info/thread-misinterpretation-of-%E2%80%9Cassuming-sentience-fromstart%E2%80%9D-philosophy And http://community.tulpa.info/thread-regarding-the-sentience-from-the-start-method That might help with people seeing why you’ve mentioned that in the first place. Maybe you should also take into consideration that the treating tulpas as sentient beings is essentially a self-fulfilling prophecy, and there’s many fallacies that can be brought about with that. Not that it will really affect anything you’re wanting to present though As for what I personally believe; I don’t care. Then there’s no need for you to state this then, unless you’re worried people might interpret the connotation behind your words. But since you’re giving a comprehensive overview on the process, mindset, and such, these personal statements aren’t needed. Your tulpa being sentient does not mean you can half-ass it in any way. I’m not sure how GAT deals with language, but it’s not like you’re saying anything too vulgar. But just in case for whatever plans/rules/etc. that may be updated for GAT-standards for professionalism and such, maybe it’s best to use another word instead of “half-ass.” Forcing:
Forcing is the term we use for doing things involving your tulpa. Narration in itself is not always considered forcing, and I’m not entirely sure I consider it forcing either, but some do. But, without fail, visualization, symbolism, and imposition of any kind is considered forcing.
Any activity in which the host have the tulpa involved in some way (e.g. having them in their thoughts, visualizing them) is considered an aspect of forcing. Especially when you mentioned previously on “Narration” where the person should direct their thoughts to their tulpas, which would be deemed as using symbolism and going through the implications that they’ll take in what was being stated.
So whether or not you think narration isn’t an aspect of forcing for all circumstances should be eliminated to prevent inconsistences with how you’re explaining it. Especially if you’re going by the tulpa.info wiki that would deem narration as a part of forcing in some way. And later on in the section with “Active and Passive Forcing,” you mentioned narration again, which implies that you would agree it’s considered being part of forcing in general here: As for “what to do” during passive forcing, it’s actually quite simple. For the narration aspect of it, it’s a good idea to try to always direct all of your thoughts to your tulpa. When you’re reading something, read it to them. When you’re thinking about what you read, think it to them. Same with when you’re thinking about what you’re doing, or what you need to do next. You will very often find yourself forgetting to direct it towards them, but you will get used to it.
And there is a thing as actively narrating where the host and tulpa are developing their overall cognition through intense focus instead of only through passive manners. This is just to portray how narration is a frequent aspect of forcing, at least for the initial stages for newcomers developing aspects such as vocality, sentience, and such...and even for anyone in the intermediate or highly experienced with having a tulpa.
Deviation: This is because, as we have hypothesized, deviation occurs based on your subconscious’ desires. That way, they may turn out with a trait that you didn’t even know you wanted, but you did. This would be something people will take lightly if they were used to the tulpa.info community, but to people who may want to see more vindication in how you stated “how we have hypothesized,” your wording should be provided with some links on the matter. Maybe a better format would be something like “This is because deviation presumably occurs based on your subconscious’ desires.” This would prevent the need for people wanting more vindication to how you worded “we,” because “we” is dependent on which community would seem more plausible. Your Tulpa’s Essence So I do not consider this a step in creation, as it is something that will just happen, if you look out for it. If it’s not considered a step in the creation process since it’s something that is inevitable, you might have to reassess that the creation process is subjective and not really chronological. I know you don’t think it’s a step by step process that everyone must follow of course, it’s just something for the sake of newcomers getting the general idea. But with that said, there are individual that might take how you stated “this a step in creation” more seriously. So maybe it’s best that you could word that differently, but other than that, it’s not something
that will affect the overall message of the content. But with how you’ve promoted that it’s a matter of disposition on how to create a tulpa, these small things can mean the world to newcomers who are completely oblivious to the process. And if you’re going to cite Bluesleeve’s essence guide, maybe you should actually cite it with a link to those who may be curious on anything else he may have expanded on (if it’s still existent). Same with JDBar’s statement on maturity in relation to tulpas as well.
Getting your tulpa’s attention: The best way I have personally found to get my tulpa’s attention is to think hard about him. I think about, and try to feel his essence, and that tends to get his attention pretty quickly. That, followed by a quick “are you there?” works wonders for me. But experiment with this yourself. So essentially, a self-fulfilling prophecy, implications of them hearing you, and usage of symbolism. The presumption with your tulpa will not be paying attention to you, and what you’re doing at all times…this raises questions on what a newcomer is really supposed to do until they read that they just have to think hard about them. So maybe Your tulpa will not be paying attention to you, and what you’re doing at all times. Therefore, when you want to say something to him, he may not always be readily available. Should be stripped out here because you’ve mentioned before in your article/compilation of advice that whatever the host believes their tulpa is/may be doing/etc. will most likely end up with that disposition becoming true. This is to save the probability of newcomers taking this part too seriously and leading to incongruent thoughts in the future (i.e. being paranoid on whether or not they’re actually there despite thinking hard about). Giving your tulpa access to your memories, and subconscious: And even if you don’t give them access to your subconscious, they can still technically go there. Your best bet is not to just symbolically block their access, but to actually ask them not to, and explain to them why. This would seem plausible at first glance, but from a psychological standpoint, at least since you’re focused on the creation process here (or giving a slight overview before explaining it more in detail) most aspects of treating the tulpa as sentient is merely a disposition that leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy. And talking to them (in the initial stages) would in theory from a psychological standpoint be part of the mind making symbolic meaning through language. So either you were trying to give a euphemistic approach to how talking to them doesn’t fall under the category of symbolism or something else entirely. But for the initial stages of creation, some may argue that it is part of the symbolism. Not that this devalues the tulpa’s existence or anything, just something to point out to you.
People who may be more critical with this presumption of yours might bring up a debate between false dichotomies. Not something that you’ll have to worry about for the time being, but just something to keep in mind as a contingency plan from future criticism and critique.
Emotional Responses: Keep in mind that if you don't receive any emotional responses, it doesn't mean that your tulpa is not sentient, or anything like that. Not all tulpas do it. In all our time, I've only gotten one emotional response that I was aware of. It depends on the tulpa how they want to communicate, if at all.
This was good except for the last part, the last part is most likely the host wanting to feel that the tulpa is trying to find a way to communicate. But from a psychological standpoint, one may presume it’s the mind still trying to find connections to have the tulpa communicate to the host. It’s not really a big deal though for the initial stages of creation since self-fulfilling prophecies and such are inevitable to aid in creating a tulpa in the first place.
Creating a tulpa of an existing character, or person: Overall, I agree with what you’ve stated here that a person shouldn’t gravitate solely on creating a tulpa being the absolute totality of an existing character or person. However, the matter on identity crisis being initiated is fairly debatable since it would only become a problem if the host or tulpa have deep attachments and expectations that it will affect them. Maybe inform to the newcomers that some people use a form from existing characters and a person as transient way that will inevitably lead to deviation. This might ease the burden for most newcomers because as long as they know they should be accepting of the tulpa deviating, it’s highly improbable for an identity crisis to occur. As for an existential crisis, it may be part of that, but it’s mostly just issues with their self-schema or them trying to build an identity of themselves. Other than that, the probability of an identity crisis gets higher mostly due to the extreme attachment to those thoughts of it leading to that route. Switching: I agree with most of what you’ve stated, though I believe that switching may be more pragmatic the more the tulpa is more than competent enough to acknowledge how the host has certain obligations and responsibilities to abide to. So for the initial process of creating a tulpa and having one that’s still developing sentience, I’m against switching as well. But for the long term when the tulpa can be just as understanding of how a host has their duties and expectations to live by, anything’s fair game at this point.
I know you’re giving a very good overview to prevent those who may be more naïve and think switching is just fine, but with something like: The fact of the matter is, this is the life you've been given. It's your doing that you've ended up where you have. There is no one else to blame. You need to deal with life like everyone else does. You can't expect life to be spoon-fed to you. It's a harsh, cruel bitch, and it's not any different for anyone else. Spending your life by running away is just pathetic. I can empathize for your sentiment on life being a cruel “bitch,” but the word doesn’t need to be mentioned if GAT standards doesn’t promote the use of cursing and such from guides/articles/compilation of advice and processes to consider. And for the part on: And it's even more pathetic to be okay with putting all of your hardships on your tulpa, instead of dealing with it yourself. I agree with your statement here (somewhat), though it could be presented in a noble manner. Because in the end, it’s the host’s and the tulpa’s responsibility to heavily consider how they go about with interacting with each other’s existence. Especially since there are cases (although few) of people who’ve had tulpas for decades and switched for a decent amount of time and didn’t really have escapism issues. And this is only suggested because you seem to be directing more to the general audience rather than what you would presume to be the naïve and younger audience. It’s more of how you presented and worded it that might have people harboring disagreement to what you’ve stated. How to switch:
I personally have no experience when it comes to switching, as I've never tried it. This is the only guide on switching that I've seen that seems to have any possible credibility: Switching Guide Keep in mind, like I said, I've never tried switching before, so I have no idea how useful this guide is. But it sounds half credible. I agree that there are few guides on switching and possession (since most wouldn’t go into great detail like the one you linked), but to state that it sounds “half credible” is something to heavily review over again. Especially since you’ve stated in past posts and threads that nothing anyone says (at least on tulpa.info) is credible. They’re merely ad hoc claims unless there can be rigorous scientific study and application for those theories and hypothesis. Just something to consider if you want people to get the impression that you’re consistent to your beliefs and what you state on the forums. Belief: I think I’ve ranted about that enough. I’d like to think you understand what I’m saying at this point.
Depending on how GAT reviews aspects that seem more like rants or ramblings of personal anecdotes, this section can be shortened down to how the newcomer will have a cognitive dissonance (i.e. incongruence with several thoughts), and how that a person shouldn’t validate their progress through the anecdotes and progress of others. It’s still a useful anecdote nonetheless, but just something that may have different opinions from GAT members and the community itself. Application: For this section, it would be better to state that a person should presume it was their tulpa within reason. “OH MY GOD, MY TULPA MUST BE LIKE TURKEY SANDWICHES, AND IS TRYING TO TELL ME” This can be taken away since what you’ve stated outside is more than enough. This is only because this was a similar pattern that Zero used to incorporate in his tips and tricks in relation to narration and mind voice of tulpa. And I’m only suggesting this based on how GAT and staff may interpret the above quote. Don’ts: Basically, the consensus now is that there is almost nothing you can do that will “mess up” your tulpa. Remember that part where you stated “we have hypothesize” from the previous section? The same applies for this one, you should be careful with how you state “the consensus” since most are just ad hoc claims and aren’t really credible in the first place. It’s more pragmatic to state the tulpa being “messed up” isn’t likely rather than gathering a presumption that people would agree with you. Because again, it’s about which community you’re referring to, and it’s unpredictable to presume that tulpa.info will still be in existence in the future. Your tulpa should be a tulpa first, and a form second: Every day, I see people who are flaunting their tulpas--making them as sex objects, or lewd anime characters just to fulfill their sexual, or fanboy desires. They seem to care primarily what their tulpa's form is, and not so much about the fact that they are supposed to be a companion, or that they are their own being. I agree to this that some people care more about the form than actually having a tulpa as a companion, but with how you’re stating “everyday” you’re seeing that…it’s more of making a dispositional statement based on a few circumstances and magnifying it into a greater problem than it should be. Especially the part with personality, logic follows that the tulpa will eventually learn how to validate themselves through their own way without the constant need of the host doing things like personality forcing. Maybe inform newcomers that may want to do this as seeing it as a transient process, and they shouldn’t focus too much on it for the long-term.
The Creation Process
You’ve made it clear that people shouldn’t gravitate on seeing the process as sequential process that has to have certain parameters met before the other, and I’m glad you’ve done so. The part where you stated: It’s been asked so many times, in fact, that it really starts to get on my nerves. There’s no need to have this stated. Yes, I agree it can get on a person’s nerves, but for the presentation for this guide, it’s just random noise at this point. The whole ~~symbolism~~ can be just do just fine without the ~~ Personality: That might seem to go against what I just said, but it really doesn’t. It is going against what you’ve stated, and since you’ve stated that deviation will occur either way, it’s best to state that the host can have a specific personality or set of attributes for a personality in mind as a transient stage to get themselves into acknowledging their tulpa. And that they should keep in the back of their mind that deviation is going to occur for many reasons. Imposition: By that, I mean he said that your brain wouldn’t allow you to move your hand any further, once you met their surface, simulating the likeness of your tulpa actually being there. This is NOT TRUE. He, like many others on the IRC, was a whack job. >inb4 he’s reading this guide
This part, and everything you’ve mentioned about that particular individual can be stripped out. There’s a lot of negative dispositional statements over what you presume others are on the IRC: whack jobs. And the >inb4 he’s reading this guide, he’s not really someone you should worry about for criticism or critique in the future. Just something to consider if a broader audience reads this in the future (especially any group of scientific authority looking to gather anecdotes to conceptualize the tulpa phenomenon). As for the recommendations for the guides you’re using on the follow-up that would actually be methods instead of an overview. Depending on how GAT reviews “Mary & M’s Starting Imposition Guide,” the actual efficacy of the guide for newcomers may not really be something reliable. Simply because the guide itself you linked has the author implying that the tulpa is the one that does the imposition. This is inconsistent to how you explained the process, so take this into consideration if you don’t want incongruent recommendations from yours. As for q2’s guide, the same logic follows with how GAT and staff might review it. There are certainly other imposition guides out there, but I don’t think it’s necessary to post any more than these two, because they get my view across pretty well. This is just personal statements on what you prefer, which is fine and dandy, but when you end it off with
If you are looking for something different, just look around more in the guide section, where you could have found these in the first place.
It just add on to the condescending overtone which is something that can be mentioned more maturely and professionally. Like I said in the imposition section, this guide is already stupid long, and I will therefore save the space and simply cite a couple guides that I agree with. If people really think your information is “stupid long,” then they really need to re-evaluate how this one of the most useful and insightful advice in relation to overviewing the tulpa creation process. I feel the “stupid long” isn’t needed since the time and effort you put into this is admirable without a doubt. Conclusion: This guide is meant to be "absolute", and it will therefore likely never be finished. If that’s the case, especially when concepts, theories, and explanations of the tulpa phenomenon will invariably change, this doesn’t seem to be a justified reason to use “absolute.” It’s more of it being meant to be progressively updated for as long as the author can have time to do so and/or still exist in the community.
Overall, the information in general is definitely useful and anyone stating that it’s not is making one of the biggest understatements. Personal dispositions aside of my favoritism for this information you’ve provided, there were some mistakes here and there, but it’s mostly by the presentation rather than the underlying content you were trying to address. You were going well with explaining the creation process, but for things like possession and switching, especially when you were against it, I guess you felt it was necessary to consider it being “absolute,” at least to newcomers trying to get a good overview on things.
The personal statements of that particular individual and how you view people on IRC as whack jobs can be removed
Stating that the information is “stupid long” isn’t something needed to mention since you’ve concisely explained nearly all aspects a newcomer should take into consideration for the tulpa creation process and a little bit of mindset to apply before and after
The part with using JDBar’s quote on maturity and how you interpreted while combining your own insight with the matter… you seemed to have made things a list of “do’s and don’ts,” which is completely a matter of personal disposition on how a person thinks they’re being “mature” about having a tulpa.
It’s good that you’ve provided insight that people seriously need to consider options and plan for dealing with the worst case scenarios, but it seemed it was more of gravitating towards those extreme scenarios with a condescending overtone and personal rants and ramblings of what you deem as “sick and disgusting.”
And since this guide/article is aimed to be absolute, or in better words, to progressively update based on how the trend goes with the tulpa phenomenon, this would be a useful for the newcomer’s section since it’s essentially referring to other links of guides (and those separate guides will have to go into review) and giving an overview that’s common for most guides in the first place. But this doesn’t mean the overview shouldn’t have been mentioned obviously since all guides/articles/advice will derive from the communal knowledge and such.
Things like “the consensus,” “we have hypothesize,” and “half-credible,” shouldn’t be taken lightly and should be removed to prevent it from being a [citation needed]
Other than that, I approve of this in pending if it can be presented differently if this would be placed in the main guide sections or whatever sub-forum that may be created since some aspects may not fit the model of whatever professionalism GAT and the staff wants for the overall impression of tulpa.info. Other than that, the rest will be up to GAT and the communal vote on where to actually categorize this information. Thank you for taking the time and effort you put into making this, Kiahdaj.
