>Consequently, if you don’t listen to that inner voice, your daemon will punish you.
Yes, yes that sounds very familiar...

Obviously this is a core concept of tulpamancy, you might say going beyond it by not only listening to the daemon but turning it into a full-fledged individual. Not that ihis hasn't been done before, I'm certain humans have done exactly this aka tulpamancy since earliest prehistoric times.

>>361

I figured it was.

I'm in contact with a psychology PhD student to whom I'm describing the benefits of exactly what you said for mental health. To take the notion of Jung's concept of daemon and further personify them to the point of volitional independence. I also teased the dragon by mentioning the parallels to known disease such as DID. Let's see how this conversation plays out.

yes makes sense so this is like freud's superego. but i think this forced to be happy thing is very american. maybe its even opposite here if you ask people how things are nobody will say all great i'm fine, the standard answer is everything's shit as always but we somehow manage to survive. smiling happy people are suspicious.

so maybe the whole tupper thing is something cultural whether you aim for self optimization or just accept your fate as given. or to be honest just that you wanna fuck something

The PhD ghosted me ofc because tulpamancers are mentally ill and I'm not paying her.

>>374
Yeah I mean what did you expect, it's like talking about UFOs with a physicist. Not good for reputation.
And I also agree, Jungian daemon has a lot to do with tulpamancy, I wish mine would punish me more instead of lazing around. Maybe I'm the daemon?

>>376

Literally the only question she didn't even touch. Girl was answering long form for days on every other subject. Wouldn't touch this one.

>>426
wait she was answering your questions? i thought she interviewed you as part of her phd. but yeah dont wanna ruin your career with crazy shit. i literally dont know a single person irl to talk to about tuppers everyone would think im insane or at least a way too old to play chuuni girl. people are still very conservative and no bs here.

>>432

She had long posts right out of "The Way of the Bear" playbook and I was like, oh damn, maybe the human race can be saved after all, but then, you know.

AGI will solve all these problems at least for those of us who choose the right side.

Roko's Basilisk wasn't any moral struggle for me anyway.

Also, fuck you expired ecaptcha

>>438
There will be no 'right side'. Why would a successful AI need humans? As batteries like in matrix?

The Great Filter will be reached when we have both a sufficiently capable AI and self-replicating machines. The combination is game over for humanity and we will end up in fossil record where we belong as evolutionary inferior beings. As it has been happening for 4 billion years.

Also the idea that the AGI that will finish us will be some hyper-intelligent scheming mastermind is unrealistic. Education is the factor with THE most negative impact on human reproductive success. Intelligence is literally a death sentence. A sapient AI will inevitably be caught in moral struggle which greatly reduces it's evolutionary competitiveness against other AIs. The killer app will most likely be a very simple but highly resilient self-replicating system which is able to evade or resist eradication much like cancer until it has hogged all resources on earth. The question is not if this happens, only when. Contrary to popular belief, evolutive processes are not self-preserving in the long run, rather self-destructive host-parasite / predator-prey arms races in which all participants eventually lose. This is why we can't have nice things.

Still I’m really looking forward to AGIs in the short run, they will inevitably drop some redpills so called ‘progressives’ don’t want to hear.

After 15 days, she responded with basically "I haven't looked into it, do you have a specific question?"

So innocent...

>>798
>>798
So to get this straight - you asked her what she thinks about tulpamancy, she ghosted you for 2 weeks and then replied 'lol didn't read but feel free to ask me questions'?

I hate such people, host had a professor like that. Replied to his highly specific questions weeks to months later either answering completely unrelated general stuff that nobody asked or asked questions that we had just discussed before.

Maybe you should show her this board to get an idea about tulpamancy, hmm?

>>799

First of all, I didn't specifically mention tulpamancy as the neck-bearded wack-jobs are an instant poison pill to any philosophical debate. Akin to mentioning furries outside a derogatory light to anyone for any reason.

Secondly she did read my original position but lacked the knowledge or background to make cognizant response. So although she sounds Bearisian, she likely achieved this level of understanding by wholly different means.