My own character hates me

[Rainbows]

What was the book? I want to look it up.

[Twilight Rose]

Just look up Alexandra David-Neel.
Part of her reasoning in destroying her tulpa was that it "developed a mind of its own" and may have been a "hallucination." I want to say phrases not allowed on this forum to her, because that's utterly asinine. The entire point is to create a separate consciousness, to see it and feel it. Of COURSE it developed a mind of its own and was a hallucination.


Also, if you read the guides on the site to improve the strength and presence of your mind-people, you should know not to worry about forcing time, puppeting, or parroting. Several of the guides are old, and while still very useful, a lot of stuff has since been clarified, improved upon, or tossed out the window.

[anoni]

  Thought has been conclusively resolved to come from the brain, how exactly it does this is still uncertain but it is widely agreed upon that thought originates from the brain. So, if you have a separate consciousness it's either a 'switch' of an original consciousness in the brain OR it's a parallel consciousness (the former would mean you can be either/or consciousnesses, the latter suggests you can be both characters at the same time). This would be interesting, but ultimately is an abnormality in the brain usually likened to some form of psychotic disorder, such as schizophrenia (I'm not meaning to offend at all, I'm just saying the classifications).

  Now the question is, is the proposed separate consciousness a true separate consciousness or a 'lesser' second consciousness. The former suggests that your body can be controlled by the second consciousness just as well as the first, that both consciousnesses are interchangeable and there is no real 'primary' person but you are multiple people in the same body. You don't know the feelings and possibly memories of the second consciousness and the second consciousness doesn't know the feelings of the first (Neither consciousness has any control on each other). 'You' could be equally and correctly defined as either consciousness, no one consciousness is 'primary' and 'alternate' but all consciousnesses in your head are equal. As in, there is no "character", you are as much of a "character" as that "character" is to you. This is likened usually to multiple-personality disorder. The latter suggests you have some form of control over the second consciousness and the second consciousness usually influences the primary, but don't exist as separate characters. IE: You exist and the second consciousness doesn't, you may still not have much control over the second consciousness but it simply influences you indirectly, in reality it's a formation of the primary consciousness. That is, you created the secondary consciousness, willingly or not (as opposed to both existing independently in the previous scenario). SO that would be more defined as schizophrenia.

  It sounds like you're referring to the second in which case it's unlikely it has a mind of it's own, but it's "mind" is simply a creation of your consciousness that is affected by unconscious parameters (maybe malfunctions) in the brain. It doesn't really exist, but it's more just a hologram of something that does.


Just thought I'd ramble on a bit xD
 

[Rainbows]

Awesome, I'll look it up c:
...my knee jerk reaction is to reject everything and say you're wrong, but it's not. It probably is the second case and I find that upsetting. What parts of myself did I scream at then?

[Vulpatrino]

Anoni, while what you've said makes perfect, logical sense, there is something you forgot to take into account:

Tulpas and the like are created on purpose, usually with a lot of time and effort.

In my mind, this would make it less of a disorder and more like a... a "customization," if you will. You've purposely altered something to better fit your liking. It certainly isn't negative (unless you're doing it wrong), it hasn't affected anything other that what goes on in our imaginations.
And even if it is a disorder, it doesn't concern me. It hasn't affected my social life, or stopped me from functioning properly. I wouldn't be too concerned about labelling it unless it becomes a problem.


In any case, the last paragraph is pretty much what we're talking about. An almost separate consciousness that operates on the same subconscious. I suppose it's not a true consciousness, but giving it the benefit of the doubt helps it to behave like one, thus achieving the goal.
Some of my characters have exhibited traits such as a tulpa, so my conclusion is that tulpas are a mentally reinforced character that resides in the imagination.

Rambling right back at you, Anoni.

[Twilight Rose]

Yes, anoni, it IS possible to switch and allow the tulpa to control your body. It takes a LOT of work for it to happen though, and you can be entirely willing. If I remember correctly, it's a form of parallel processing; I suppose it would be more correct to call it a customized, surfaced part of the subconscious. I will say this, too: if you go on that site, you can find an insane amount of threads discussing why tulpas=/= schizophrenia. The most base argument is that with schizophrenia, you have no control over the hallucinations and such, whereas with tulpas, you know it's all in your head and you're in total control.

[anoni]

Sorry, I do need to confirm. I didn't mean to come off as saying that it was necessarily a mental disorder, I meant that to come off as saying "It could be CAUSED by a mental disorder". As in, it could be but it doesn't have to be (though, honestly, it USUALLY is likened to somekind of mental disorder, whether that be misunderstanding from a societies definition or actual medical evidence is beyond me). Sorry for any misunderstanding!

  I do think it's really interesting what the brain is capable off.

[Twilight Rose]

It does often get likened to schizophrenia, because there's a lot of people who don't get that this sort of thing is possible. Believe it or not, the phantom tail syndrome we so love here in the fandom is related to the tulpa phenomenon.

[Drakos]

My fursona is basically a representation of myself, so no self-hate here sorry.

[Twilight Rose]

That's what I (re)made Twilight for. My sonas developed so much on their own that none of them really represented me as I am anymore.

[George]

^every time I'd make a fursona that'd happen.

That's why I'm stuck with my fluffy, flightless, harmless-looking self.

I think if I had the choice I'd be a sergal or skunk or something. 0r at least something that didn't have tiny, basically useless wings.

[Twilight Rose]

Twilight was kinda a background figure in my stories for a while, almost a godlike figure, though Tezca would beg to differ... He kinda manipulated a lot from the background, so it kinda fit my role, so I adapted him.