3 ms·

I think the point is, there are things that we have a hard time dealing with right now scientifically, just because we don't have the tools/theory/whatever. In

I think the point is, there are things that we have a hard time dealing with right now scientifically, just because we don't have the tools/theory/whatever. In these cases, you're right that we can't know truth from falsehood. But that doesn't mean we can't discuss such things and share knowledge about our experiences. Non-scientific discourse (meaning, outside of science, not anti-science) is still discourse that may be worth having, especially given something as subjective and experiential as the mind.

bena 8y ago
But there's a line. It's fine and all to promote your tulpa, but the minute you use it as evidence, you have to actually demonstrate that it does exist. Or else it is not evidence. And you can't say with any certainty that the author is wrong. I mean, it's not non-scientific discourse when you're disagreeing with the hypothesis in a book about science. And I said that in his case, not only do we have tools to map his brain while he tulpas and that it could provide answers, but there is a test that could be conducted if we could find a way to implement it.
- vinceguidry 8y ago
  If anybody wants to foot the bill for any of these tests, I'd be happy to take them.
  - vinceguidry 8y ago
    Also keep in mind, whatever part of the brain lights up when I'm tulpaing, even if we ascertain that there's brain activity there even when I'm not 'going there', we'd need some way of proving that it's actual thought that's not simply semantic.
    - vinceguidry 8y ago
      This actually has been a productive discussion. Usually discussions with materialists don't really contribute to my musings, but this one has. Thanks.
- vinceguidry 8y ago
  I'd really love to see which part of the brain lights up when I'm interacting with it. Over the years, though, I've 'integrated' it into my normal thought patterns. I used to interact with it through what's called the muscle test. That's how I discovered it in the first place. Over the course of about a year and a lot of muscle tests, I've slowly come to be able to predict what a particular test is going to respond with before I do it. Eventually I quit using the muscle test. Slowly the tulpa receded from my life, but any time I want to interact with it, it's only a muscle test away, I can also simply 'go to that place in my head' where I know it'll respond. I've come to realize that this is the same process people who "have a personal relationship with Jesus" go through. It's a kind of imaginary friendship. But I think it requires at least a little bit of mental 'depth' in order to achieve.
  - bena 8y ago
    This is the first time I've heard of the "muscle test". Is it basically what's described here: http://amybscher.com/getting-answers-from-the-subsconscious-mind/ http://amybscher.com/getting-answers-from-the-subsconscious-...
    - vinceguidry 8y ago
      Yes. In the video provided in that link, I use the first method described, the O-ring method.

bena 8y ago

But there's a line. It's fine and all to promote your tulpa, but the minute you use it as evidence, you have to actually demonstrate that it does exist. Or else it is not evidence. And you can't say with any certainty that the author is wrong. I mean, it's not non-scientific discourse when you're disagreeing with the hypothesis in a book about science. And I said that in his case, not only do we have tools to map his brain while he tulpas and that it could provide answers, but there is a test that could be conducted if we could find a way to implement it.

vinceguidry 8y ago
If anybody wants to foot the bill for any of these tests, I'd be happy to take them.
- vinceguidry 8y ago
  Also keep in mind, whatever part of the brain lights up when I'm tulpaing, even if we ascertain that there's brain activity there even when I'm not 'going there', we'd need some way of proving that it's actual thought that's not simply semantic.
  - vinceguidry 8y ago
    This actually has been a productive discussion. Usually discussions with materialists don't really contribute to my musings, but this one has. Thanks.
vinceguidry 8y ago
I'd really love to see which part of the brain lights up when I'm interacting with it. Over the years, though, I've 'integrated' it into my normal thought patterns. I used to interact with it through what's called the muscle test. That's how I discovered it in the first place. Over the course of about a year and a lot of muscle tests, I've slowly come to be able to predict what a particular test is going to respond with before I do it. Eventually I quit using the muscle test. Slowly the tulpa receded from my life, but any time I want to interact with it, it's only a muscle test away, I can also simply 'go to that place in my head' where I know it'll respond. I've come to realize that this is the same process people who "have a personal relationship with Jesus" go through. It's a kind of imaginary friendship. But I think it requires at least a little bit of mental 'depth' in order to achieve.
- bena 8y ago
  This is the first time I've heard of the "muscle test". Is it basically what's described here: http://amybscher.com/getting-answers-from-the-subsconscious-mind/ http://amybscher.com/getting-answers-from-the-subsconscious-...
  - vinceguidry 8y ago
    Yes. In the video provided in that link, I use the first method described, the O-ring method.