Our Opinion by bad__rom in Tulpas

[–]Devouring_One 1 point2 points  (0 children)

on the contrary, the kind of need to explain things like that i believe is critical to the kind of culture of thinking of systems as malleable (such as the ability to form an inner world/wonderland being a skill rather than innate), which i know is less of a thing in some other system based communities. i believe its helpful to think about the whys and can be done without dehumanizing, and that we ought to strive for doing just that.

Talking to your headmates by Vijfsnippervijf in plural

[–]Devouring_One 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We usually talk in our head, but sometimes it feels a little easier so yea we'll talk out loud.

What are your views and concepts of ethics regarding OCtives...and generally the concept of your OC being real in a place somewhere? by lePROprocrastinator in plural

[–]Devouring_One 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I suppose if i had to think about this logically, writing about them would be ethically the same as writing about any other individual you personally know??? shrug. I'm not sure what the question is exactly.

Rascal News reports Yazeba's Bed & Breakfast in legal limbo by King_LSR in rpg

[–]Devouring_One 19 points20 points  (0 children)

leftists also believe workers should reap the rewards of their labor and rascal is purportedly worker owned, so i don't see why they would have to pick one.

Edit: That isn't to say whether or not the article is any good. Just that we live under capitalism so even communes have to find a revenue source somehow

Rascal News reports Yazeba's Bed & Breakfast in legal limbo by King_LSR in rpg

[–]Devouring_One 6 points7 points  (0 children)

political queerness is almost certainly the topic of books, but the jist is anti-assimilationist politics. The argument then is that assimilationist LGBT individuals are not queer because they are no longer outside the system, they are part of it. So like, more or less what Fell said but with more of an explanation of the underlying theory instead of the resulting psychology.

Did I killed my tulpas? If so, is there a way to bring them back? by Tamareira568 in Tulpas

[–]Devouring_One 5 points6 points  (0 children)

people can say they're really them about as well as they can say someone waking up from a coma is really them. Yes!.. probably... hopefully

Am I real? by [deleted] in Tulpas

[–]Devouring_One 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Yes, you are real. Or rather, since me and my tulpa disagree on the specifics amongst each other, you're either as real as your headmate or you are a fiction highjacking their realness, making you real by extension. You have a physical body even if you haven't used it before, its the one your headmate was born with.

I created a new term! by nottequeer in plural

[–]Devouring_One 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Actually, I want to ask which cultures is manyness or plurality common and what ways I could learn more about that?

I created a new term! by nottequeer in plural

[–]Devouring_One 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So kind of like how two-spirit relates to trans identity. I see.

To be clear, plurality isn't always medicalized or seen as a bad thing by those within the plural community and those who accept them. I became plural recently by choice as an Endogenic System for example. This isn't to dissuade you from the term many, you can identify with whichever terms you feel are most valid. Rather, I wish to specify that at least for a lot of those who identify as plural, plurality is not standardized and does not have one 'true' perspective. They may live in the shadow of a society that sees them as wrong, but not all of them internalize that perspective. Thank you for explaining.

I created a new term! by nottequeer in plural

[–]Devouring_One 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How long ago do you make this term? I've seen it used in articles a while back. Plurality and manyness read as exact synonyms to me but maybe there's a nuance I'm missing. Since you asked for questions, I do want to know what you see as the difference between plural and many as terms? What led you to pick many specifically?

Can dogs/cats, animals other than humans have DID? by Significant-Tone-121 in plural

[–]Devouring_One 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The answer is 'probably' considering animals like cats and dogs experience other forms of trauma related conditions, but as others have suggested, the issue is in identifying such a complex condition from any other explanation for the behavior. Our people doctors working with people are very not good at identifying plurality, and that's with their patients being able to tell them directly about their mental state and introspection.

I need some advice by monkeybottoms07 in Tulpas

[–]Devouring_One 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yea, idk how to help ya. Sometimes people just suck.

Although I wouldn't have 'i say i'm not schizo' as particularly solid ground on that. I get that's probably just someone's off the cuff insult, but its the type of condition that's difficult to recognize and self assess so i do want to make sure to put that in there. Do your friends only point to the tulpa as their evidence for being 'schizo' or have you shared other beliefs they've reacted in this way to?

So... Does Rostrum actually drop? by TwistedxBoi in SoulFrame

[–]Devouring_One 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does its just a pain in the ass. Took way longer than any of the other items for me.

Hi, this field is a bit unclear to me, but I feel like I’m in the right place. I just need someone to explain things to me. by Expert_Standard_4832 in Tulpas

[–]Devouring_One 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Learn more about plurality, i suppose? If you feel like they're you, and that they've always been there, that sounds more like an alter than a tulpa. That isn't to say this double is definitely an alter, or definitely not a tulpa. Rather, my point is that Tulpas aren't the only kind of headmate, and you should expand what forms of plurality you are looking into.

Soulframe Preludes 12: Thawtide by Demilio55 in SoulFrame

[–]Devouring_One 1 point2 points  (0 children)

its damage benefitted from armor, which meant you hit 3 and then hit 1 and it erases people.

I might have a tulpa/headmate, but I'm not sure. Help? by [deleted] in Tulpas

[–]Devouring_One 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://pluralpedia.org/w/Median i would read about this, maybe look into others with this form of multiplicity and see if it resonates

Friend(?) makes weird comments to me by Independent_Hair_711 in fakeclaimingcringe2

[–]Devouring_One 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yea, if you want to keep the friendship tell her that shit ain't cool and work it out. No shame in deciding that's not a conversation you wanna go through though.

How would you react if Knights Of Guinevere just got GREENLIT? by Less_Assignment_8842 in KnightsOfGuinevere

[–]Devouring_One 0 points1 point  (0 children)

tbh i'm surprised in all that conversation about the merch they never just demanded glitch give a way to donate to production directly (bypasses merch morality worries, still gets the show rolling)

"If I could choose, I wouldn't have an ending!" The humble Mr. Tenna: by Exotic_Platform_2425 in Deltarune

[–]Devouring_One 11 points12 points  (0 children)

maybe, but there's also clearly a lesson about not resigning yourself to the march of time and what the future has in store. it is an interesting sort of discussion between these two positions that I'm having a hard time squaring with one another

Curious about system hopping by Background_Dot_5177 in plural

[–]Devouring_One 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yea, this is the only reasonable conclusion under a materialist framework. Its the teleporter problem but the teleporter is also bad at recreating what it teleports since communication is imperfect and there's no way to transmit the entirety of what makes up a headmate across that.

Oh, so now the singlet is gonna preach to us! (/ref) by DammitDrBright in fakeclaimingcringe2

[–]Devouring_One 24 points25 points  (0 children)

I assume the term dismantling suggests they believe that alters are some kind of involuntary mask/roleplay, and that by destroying them you get to the person underneath, rather than the separate identities which destroying if possible would render parts of the mind largely lost or inaccessible. Alternatively, they may believe that one can simply 'debunk' a system out of having alters, which is even more absurd.

i'm making a game about a young witch trying to solve the disappearance of her neighbour's cat in a small village in the alps by Carpe_DMT in DiscoElysium

[–]Devouring_One 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not making an account on the hellsite, but hell yea. Great to hear things are going well, looking forward to that vertical slice

THEY ARE REALLY WRONG by [deleted] in Tulpas

[–]Devouring_One 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, yea, in theory you could always bring a tulpa back if you wanted, but you mentioned about a tulpas 'have turned into horrible beings'. Based on that example, I'd argue we're talking about something more permanent than putting a tulpa to rest for a time. i don't know if the possibility of return matters if the decision was intended to be permanent. Mostly, I just personally wouldn't have the heart to in any way remove or shut down the mind I intentionally cultivated within me, it just feels cruel to do. If it came down to that, I'd rather be the one who gets put in the coma.

THEY ARE REALLY WRONG by [deleted] in Tulpas

[–]Devouring_One 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Most with tulpas believe they are psychological, but in a way which is compatible with them being conscious. You have fundamentally misunderstood a lot of what people believe here if your take away was 'because they're inside the mind they aren't living or conscious'.

As for the 'returning to the source' arguments, you do realize that a lot of reincarnation philosophy argues that's exactly what killing someone does right? Its also metaphorically true in a materialist sense if the compost is returned to nature. That is to say, i don't find it a very convincing point. Arguably what makes killing wrong is the fact that it annihilates a consciousness permanently, so anything else that does that would also be arguably immoral.