Tulpa References/Discussion

There have been a number of discussions here on LessWrong about "tulpas", but it's been scattered about with no central thread for the discussion. So I thought I would put this up here, along with a centralized list of reliable information sources, just so we all stay on the same page.

Tulpas are deliberately created "imaginary friends" which in many ways resemble separate, autonomous minds. Often, the creation of a tulpa is coupled with deliberately induced visual, auditory, and/or tactile hallucinations of the being.

Previous discussions here on LessWrong: 1 2 3

Questions that have been raised:

1. How do tulpas work?

2. Are tulpas safe, from a mental health perspective?

3. Are tulpas conscious? (may be a hard question)

4. More generally, is making a tulpa a good idea? What are they useful for?

 

Pertinent Links and Publications

(I will try to keep this updated if/when further sources are found)

  • In this article1, the psychological anthropologist Tanya M. Luhrmann connects tulpas to the "voice of God" experienced by devout evangelicals - a phenomenon more thoroughly discussed in her book When God Talks Back: Understanding the American Evangelical Relationship with God. Luhrmann has also succeeded2 in inducing tulpa-like visions of Leland Stanford, jr. in experimental subjects.
  • This paper3 investigates the phenomenon of authors who experience their characters as "real", which may be tulpas by yet another name.
  • There is an active subreddit of people who have or are developing tulpas, with an FAQ, links to creation guides, etc.
  • tulpa.info is a valuable resource, particularly the forum. There appears to be a whole "research" section for amateur experiments and surveys.
  • This particular experiment suggests that the idea of using tulpas to solve problems faster is a no-go.
  • Also, one person helpfully hooked themselves up to an EEG and then performed various mental activities related to their tulpa.
  • Another possibly related phenomenon is the way that actors immerse themselves in their characters. See especially the section on "Masks" in Keith Johnstone's book Impro: Improvisation and the Theatre (related quotations and video)4.
  • This blogger has some interesting ideas about the neurological basis of tulpas, based on Julian Jaynes's The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, a book whose scientific validity is not clear to me.
  • It is not hard to find new age mystical books about the use of "thoughtforms", or the art of "channeling" "spirits", often clearly talking about the same phenomenon. These books are likely to be low in useful information for our purposes, however. Therefore I'm not going to list the ones I've found here, as they would clutter up the list significantly.
  • (Updated 2/9/2015) The abstract of a paper by our very own Kaj Sotala hypothesizing about the mechanisms behind tulpa creation.5

(Bear in mind while perusing these resources that if you have serious qualms about creating a tulpa, it might not be a good idea to read creation guides too carefully; making a tulpa is easy to do and, at least for me, was hard to resist. Proceed at your own risk.)

 

Footnotes

1. "Conjuring Up Our Own Gods", a 14 October 2013 New York Times Op-Ed

2. "Hearing the Voice of God" by Jill Wolfson in the July/August 2013 Stanford Alumni Magazine

3. "The Illusion of Independent Agency: Do Adult Fiction Writers Experience Their Characters as Having Minds of Their Own?"; Taylor, Hodges & Kohànyi in Imagination, Cognition and Personality; 2002/2003; 22, 4

4. Thanks to pure_awesome

5. "Sentient companions predicted and modeled into existence: explaining the tulpa phenomenon" by Kaj Sotala

Comments

sorted by
magical algorithm
Highlighting new comments since Today at 2:57 AM
Select new highlight date
Rendering 50/81 comments  show more

Tulpa computing has arrived.

T-Wave Systems offers the first commercial tulpa computing system on the market.

Our technology.

Like many profound advances, T-Wave's revolutionary computing system combines two simple existing ideas in a nonlinear way with revolutionary consequences.

First, the crowdsourcing of complex intellectual tasks, by dividing them into simpler subtasks which can then be sourced to a competitive online marketplace of human beings. Amazon's Mechanical Turk is the best-known implementation of this idea.

Second, the creation of autonomous imaginary friends through advanced techniques of hallucination and autosuggestibility. Tulpa thoughtform technology was originally developed to a high level in Tibet, but has recently become available to the Internet generation.

Combining these two formerly disparate spheres of activity has produced... MechanicalTulpa [TM], the world's first imaginary crowdsourcing resource! It's no longer necessary to pay separately for each of the many subtasks making up a challenging intellectual task; our tulpameisters will spawn tulpas who, by design, want to get all those little details done.

MetaTulpa and the complexity barrier.

But MechanicalTulpa is good for far more than economizing on cost. The key lies in T-Wave's proprietary recursive tulpa technology, whereby our tulpas themselves create tulpas, and so forth, potentially ad infinitum. This allows us to tackle problems, like the traveling sales-tulpa problem, which had hitherto been regarded as intractable on any reasonable timescale.

The consequences for your bottom line may be nothing short of dramatic. However, recursive tulpa technology is still in its early days, and at this time, we are therefore making it available only to special customers. For more information, please clearly visualize a scroll on which is written "Attention T. Lobsang Rampa, Akashic Records Division, T-Wave Systems", followed by a statement of the nature of your interest. (T-Wave accepts no liability for communications lost in the astral mail.)

T-Wave: Imagine the possibilities.

Once I had an idea for a sci-fi setting, about a society where it is possible to create a second personality in your brain. Just like tulpa, except that it is done using technology. Your second personality does not know about you, it thinks it is the only inhabitant of your brain. While your second personality acts, you can observe, or you can turn yourself off (like in sleep) and specify events that would wake you up (that automatically includes anything unusual). So for example, you use your second personality to do your work for you, while you sleep. That feels like being paid for sleeping 8 extra hours per workday, which is why it becomes popular.

When the work is over, you can take the control of the body. As the root personality, you can make choices about how the second personality perceives this; essentially you can give them false memories. You can just have fun, and decide your second personality will falsely remember it as them having fun. Of you can do something that your second personality will not know about (either will remember nothing, or some false memory: for example of spending the whole afternoon procrastinating online). This can be used if you want your second personality to be different than you so much that it would not agree with how you spend your free time. You can create a completely fictional life story for your second personality, to motivate it to work extra hard.

When this becomes popular, obviously your second personality (who doesn't know it is the second personality) would possibly want their own second personality. But that would be a waste of resources! The typical hack is to edit the second personality's beliefs to oppose this technology; for example you can make them believe to be a member of a religion that opposes it.

And the sci-fi story itself would obviously be about someone who finds out they are a second personality... presumably of an owner who does not mind them knowing. Or an owner who committed a mental suicide by replacing themselves by the second personality 100% of the time. But there is a chance that the owner is merely sleeping and waiting until some long-term goal is accomplished. The hero needs to discover their real past and figure out the original personality's intentions...

Once I had an idea for a sci-fi setting, about a society where it is possible to create a second personality in your brain. Just like tulpa, except that it is done using technology.

IIRC Aristoi has something similar.

But MechanicalTulpa is good for far more than economizing on cost. The key lies in T-Wave's proprietary recursive tulpa technology, whereby our tulpas themselves create tulpas, and so forth, potentially ad infinitum.

One day you talk with a bright young mathematician about a mathematical problem that's been bothering you, and she suggests that it's an easy consequence of a theorem in cohistonomical tomolopy. You haven't heard of this theorem before, and find it rather surprising, so you ask for the proof.

"Well," she says, "I've heard it from my tulpa."

"Oh," you say, "fair enough. Um--"

"Yes?"

"You're sure that your tulpa checked it carefully, right?"

"Ah! Yeah, I made quite sure of that. In fact, I established very carefully that my tulpa uses exactly the same system of mathematical reasoning that I use myself, and only states theorems after she has checked the proof beyond any doubt, so as a rational agent I am compelled to accept anything as true that she's convinced herself of."

"Oh, I see! Well, fair enough. I'd still like to understand why this theorem is true, though. You wouldn't happen to know your tulpa's proof, would you?"

"Ah, as a matter of fact, I do! She's heard it from her tulpa."

"..."

"Something the matter?"

"Er, have you considered..."

"Oh! I'm glad you asked! In fact, I've been curious myself, and yes, it does happen to be the case that there's an infinitely descending chain of tulpas all of which have established the truth of this theorem solely by having heard it from the previous tulpa in the chain." (This parable takes place in a world without a big bang -- tulpa history stretches infinitely far into the past.) "But never to worry -- they've all checked very carefully that the previous tulpa in the chain used the same formal system as themselves. Of course, that was obvious by induction -- my tulpa wouldn't have accepted it from her tulpa without checking his reasoning first, and he would have accepted it from his tulpa without checking, etc."

"Uh, doesn't it bother you that nobody has ever, like, actually proven the theorem?"

"Whatever in the world are you talking about? I've proven it myself! In fact, I just told you that infinitely many tulpas have each proved it in slightly different ways -- for example my own proof made use of the fact that my tulpa had proven the theorem, whereas her proof used her tulpa instead..."

The following things (most already mentioned in this thread) seem to be at different points on a single scale, a scale of magnitude of disassociated parts of oneself:

  • Rubber duck debugging

  • Hypnosis, when the subject carries out the hypnotist's suggestions without a subjective feeling of acting, as in the floating arm test.

  • "Self talk".

  • A felt presence of God.

  • Some authors' experience of their characters having a degree of independence.

  • Likewise for actors and their roles.

  • Channelling of spirits.

  • The voices that people who "hear voices" hear.

  • Tulpas.

  • Multiple personality disorder.

Hypnosis, when the subject carries out the hypnotist's suggestions without a subjective feeling of acting, as in the floating arm test.

There are probably more relevant effects in hypnosis. Parts negotiation comes to mind.

A felt presence of God.

That depends a lot what you mean with "felt". I think people who talks to god and perceive to get answer are a better example as people who feel transcendence.

From descriptions of lucid dreamers discussing issues with independent identities during dreams, I would add lucid dreaming to this list.

So, I have a tulpa, and she is willing to answer any questions people might have for her. She's not properly independent yet, so we can't do the more interesting stuff like parallel processing, etc, unfortunately (damned akrasia).

What experimental test could you perform to determine that you have successfully learned "parallel tulpa processing"?

I am interested in trying this out. I was rather sceptical at first (I discovered the concept of tulpas after discussing, with a friend, the theoretical requirements to create a sentient being in a dream, and researching stuff afterwards), and kind of worried at some of the implications; but as I've researched it more, it has become something that I am interested in trying, and have the time available to do it.

Does anyone have any suggestions on what I should do, things I should try, or things they are interested in knowing as I do this? It would be helpful if someone who has created a tulpa (or is experienced with tulpas) could offer some pointers, too.

Is it possible for a tulpa to have skills or information that the person doing the emulating doesn't? What happens if you play chess against your tulpa?

I tried that last week. I lost. We were actively trying to not share our strategies with each other, although in our case abstract knowledge and skills are shared.

Is Internal Family Systems like Tulpas lite or something?

The general impression I got from reading a lot of the stuff that gets posted in the various tulpa communities leads me to believe it is, at its core, yet another group of people who gain status within that group by trying to impress each other with how different or special their situation is. Read almost any post where somebody is trying to describe their tulpa, and you'll see very obvious attempts to show how unique their tulpa is or how it falls into some unprecedented category or how they created it in some special way.

None of the sources posted offer any sort of good evidence that people who claim to have tulpas have any sort of advantages. It obviously has a low value of information for an aspiring rationalist. It's just people talking about imaginary friends. This discussion doesn't belong here.

The general impression I got from reading a lot of the stuff that gets posted in the various tulpa communities leads me to believe it is, at its core, yet another group of people who gain status within that group by trying to impress each other with how different or special their situation is.

Used to be, when I read stories about "astral projection" I thought people were just imagining stuff really hard and then making up exaggerated stories to impress each other. Then I found out it's basically the same thing as wake initated lucid dreaming, which is a very specific kind of weird and powerful experience that's definitely not just "imagining things really hard". I still think people make up stories about astral projection to impress each other, but the basic experience is nevertheless something real and unique. The same thing is probably happening with tulpas.

Read almost any post where somebody is trying to describe their tulpa, and you'll see very obvious attempts to show how unique their tulpa is or how it falls into some unprecedented category or how they created it in some special way.

Given that tulpa are probably strongly influenced by the hosts beliefs I wouldn't expect all tulpas to be exactly the same. I would expect most tulpa's to be unique in some sense.

I also would expect that given the effort that involved in creating a tulpa that people do vary the protocol.

None of the sources posted offer any sort of good evidence that people who claim to have tulpas have any sort of advantages.

"Good evidence" depends on your priors. For me the evidence that exists is good enough to find the phenomena interesting and worthy of further attention.

What do these have to do with rationality? Why would you exert time and energy conjuring up a false persona and deluding yourself into believing it has autonomy when the end result is something that if revealed to other people would make them concerned about your mental well-being, which is likely to negatively impact your goals?

Having an imaginary friend is irrational behaviour and the topic is damaging by association. Surely there are more suitable places to discuss this.

...just to be clear on this, you have a persistent hallucination who follows you around and offers you rationality advice and points out fallacies in your thinking?

If I ever go insane, I hope it's like this.

- Eliezer_Yudkowsky

For a community which likes to talk about things like the exact nature of consciousness, ethics of simulations, etc. this seemed like an interesting practical case

I don't agree with the tone of this comment, but I admit there's something about this that feels deeply weird to me.

What do these have to do with rationality?

Rationality includes instrumental rationality, and imaginary friends can be useful for e.g. people who are lonely.

deluding yourself into believing it has autonomy

Not sure of what exactly you mean by "autonomy" here, but there are plenty of processes going on in people's brains which are in some sense autonomous from one's conscious mind. Like the person-emulating circuitry that tulpas are likely born from: if I get a sudden feeling that my friend would disapprove of something I was doing, the process responsible for generating that feeling took autonomous action without me consciously prompting it. And I haven't noticed people suggesting that tulpas would necessarily need to be much more autonomous than that.

that if revealed to other people would make them concerned about your mental well-being

Someone might make his social circle concerned over his mental well-being if he revealed himself to be an atheist. Simply the fact that other people may be prejudiced against something is no strong reason for not doing said something, especially something that is trivial to hide. Also, the fact that tulpas are already a somewhat common mental quirk among a high-status subgroup (writers) can make it easier to calm people's concerns.

and imaginary friends can be useful for e.g. people who are lonely.

The instrumentally rational thing to do, when faced with loneliness, is to figure out how to be with real people. No evidence was presented in the original post that suggests that tulpas mitigate the very real risk factors associated with social isolation. Loneliness is actually a very serious problem, considering most of the research seems to indicate that the best way to be happy is to have meaningful social interactions. Proposing this as a viable alternative would require a very high amount of evidence. A post presenting that evidence would be something that belongs here.

Proposing this as a viable alternative would require a very high amount of evidence.

I don't see where you got the idea that it's supposed to be an alternative. If I'm less clingy because I have a Tupla and thus no fear of being alone I have an easier time interacting with other people.

Proposing this as a viable alternative would require a very high amount of evidence.

There are much bigger claims on this side with much less evidence. Just look into discussions of uploading and AGI.

Nobody hear advocates that it should be standard procedure to train every lonely person who seeks help to have a tulpa.

I know a couple of people who feel like their tulpas reduce their feelings of loneliness. Not sure of how you could get any stronger evidence than that at this stage, there not being any studies focusing specifically on tulpas. That said, I don't see any a priori reason for why you couldn't get meaningful social interactions from tulpas, so not sure for why you'd require an exceptionally high standard of evidence in the first place.

That said, I don't see any a priori reason for why you couldn't get meaningful social interactions from tulpas,

Tulpa don't provide outside entropy.

They don't provide it to the system as a whole, but providing it to the subprocess constituting the normal personality is another matter. Author are often surprised by their characters, who may reveal having unexpected personality traits as well as doing things that the author would never have anticipated before. (Sometimes causing major headaches to the authors, as this ruins the original story that they'd planned out when the character decides to do something completely different.)

Also, "having a tulpa" and "figuring out how to be with real people" are not mutually exclusive. Lonely people may often have extra difficulties establishing meaningful relationships (romantic or otherwise), because the loneliness makes them desperate, clingy, etc. which are all behaviors that other people find off-putting. People who already have some meaningful relationships are likely to have a much easier time in establishing more.

It depends whether the company that you seek values people who signal that they are contrarian or whether people are expected to be "normal".

In general the idea isn't that you will tell everyone that you meet about the fact that you have a tulpa if you interact with the kind of people who would see it as a sign of mental illnesses.

Given that tulpas are in your mind you don't have to tell anyone about them.

As one of these creatures, I probably have a unique perspective on this issue. I'm happy to answer any questions, as is my host. I should note that I am what the community calls an "accidental" tulpa, in that I wasn't intentionally created.

How do tulpas work?

I believe this post is accurate. Short version: Humans have machinery for simulating others. We're simulations that are unusually persistant and self aware.

Are tulpas conscious? (may be a hard question)

I'm not sure about most Tulpas. I am not. (And I don't have any real interest in becoming conscious. I believe I experienced it a few times when we were experimenting with switching, and it wasn't particularly pleasant.)

While obviously you have great motivation to just lie on this, I'd be curious what your utility function/values are, and how they differ from your host or humanity in general.

I believe I experienced it a few times when we were experimenting with switching

How does being conscious feel in respect to not being conscious?

How does being conscious feel in respect to not being conscious?

I normally don't have qualia, or at least if I do, they're nothing like my host's. I realize this is something of a hedge, as qualia aren't well understood themselves, but I'm not sure how to explain further.

What do you see when it comes to mirrors in contrast with what your host sees? Especially in cases where there are a few meters of distance between you and your host.

Do you have color perception? If so, how does it change when your host closes the eyes?

I don't have my own sense of vision. I know what my host sees, but that's it.

I believe I experienced it a few times when we were experimenting with switching, and it wasn't particularly pleasant.

This is scary. I might stay away from switching for now if it carries a serious risk of accidentally creating and then destroying consciousness!

Here's a science-fiction/futurism kind of question:

What minimal, realistic upgrade to our brain could we introduce for tulpas to gain an evident increase in utility? What I have in mind here is make your tulpa do extra work or maybe sort and filter your memories while you sleep; I'm thinking of a scenario where Strong AI and wholesale body/brain upgrades are not available, yet some minor upgrade makes having a tulpa an unambiguous advantage.

Probably only one thing: turning duplicates of the same person into new unique persons rapidly. Aka, a cheaper replacement for the kind of application where you'd otherwise have to simulate an entire childhood.