Author Topic: This makes two  (Read 213942 times)

Re: Chris makes two
« Reply #120 on: January 07, 2014, 08:04:09 PM »
Blanked

Wait wait wait...

Blanked

"Have to"? You "have to start somewhere"? Pretty much seems to me you're still having petty goals and overthinking (yep) about a random girl you barely even know at a game store. Reminds me of that almost exact same mindset you presented many posts earlier in this thread about how you seemed to be way more focused on the looks of Miriam and the personality assumed from her form, rather than how her personality was, regardless of her form, or voice, or anything like that. Colonel right now just presented the fact to you that the gender, looks, voice, or things of that sort are not proper grounds for judgement of peoples' character, but I feel you're ignoring this, even if you'll claim that you're not. You seem to be seeking this "pretty girl" based on very scarce information and many assumptions, or even mere hopes.

Note my use of "I feel" and "seem". I'm not trying to state facts here, but rather just present my refutable opinion.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2016, 02:06:23 PM by Sands »

MegaBusta

Re: This makes two
« Reply #121 on: January 07, 2014, 08:27:13 PM »
She looked me in the eyes she totes has the hots 4 me, dood.

Re: Chris makes two
« Reply #122 on: January 07, 2014, 09:23:26 PM »
Reminds me of that almost exact same mindset you presented many posts earlier in this thread about how you seemed to be way more focused on the looks of Miriam and the personality assumed from her form, rather than how her personality was, regardless of her form, or voice, or anything like that. Colonel right now just presented the fact to you that the gender, looks, voice, or things of that sort are not proper grounds for judgement of peoples' character, but I feel you're ignoring this, even if you'll claim that you're not. You seem to be seeking this "pretty girl" based on very scarce information and many assumptions, or even mere hopes.

Note my use of "I feel" and "seem". I'm not trying to state facts here, but rather just present my refutable opinion.

Is it truly possible for a personality to be entirely separate from the form/looks(be it a physical body or an imaginary one), voice, and other characteristics other people can perceive? It seems to me that a person may either try to mold their appearances to match their personality or mold their personality to match their appearances and it's rare for them to be in a complete mismatch. Even if that weren't possible, I would think an entirely formless person without a voice or body to identify with would have a harder time acquiring a personality than one which is embodied (even if we're talking about a virtual body like a tulpa's form).

MegaBusta

Re: This makes two
« Reply #123 on: January 07, 2014, 10:00:57 PM »
Fuck conversation, just give her the D regardless of how she feels about it.
If you do it enough she might even get Stockholm Syndrome!

MegaBusta

Re: This makes two
« Reply #124 on: January 07, 2014, 10:15:22 PM »
I expect payment in buttcoins/dogecoins.

Re: This farts two
« Reply #125 on: January 07, 2014, 10:43:49 PM »
Don't be so hard on MegaBusta. He's our local comic relief.

Is it truly possible for a personality to be entirely separate from the form/looks(be it a physical body or an imaginary one), voice, and other characteristics other people can perceive? It seems to me that a person may either try to mold their appearances to match their personality or mold their personality to match their appearances and it's rare for them to be in a complete mismatch. Even if that weren't possible, I would think an entirely formless person without a voice or body to identify with would have a harder time acquiring a personality than one which is embodied (even if we're talking about a virtual body like a tulpa's form).
I shall manually award myself the honour of finally making you post here.

Well, you're right about the whole representation-personality interconnection. How much people mold themselves into fitting with their form or personality differs, of course. What I meant was simply that despite how much one can assume or hope from a person's representative traits like form, voice, or whatever, one is still only assuming or hoping. The true personality is something one has to uncover through other means, like interaction with, or spectation of, the person in question. There are of course the cases where someone might look cute and they incidentally happen to be cute in most ways one imagined, but like I said, those would just be assumptions and/or hopes, and they'd just so happen to be correct.

Then, of course, there are also the various associations one may have about the representative traits of the person in question, here again being things like gender, form, or voice, for instance. Like Colonel pointed out, a female may for example be frequently seen as someone leaning more towards a nurturing personality, while a male may be seen as leaning towards a masculine-like personality. How biased people are by these internal associations differs, but as far as I can tell, Enny is being rather biased by how the "pretty girl" seems, despite not knowing a lot about her personality at all.

Blanked
Hence why I referred to the mindset as being many posts ago, in the past tense. I didn't mean to make any implication about whether to not you still carry this mindset.

Blanked
What I want to know, rather, is why you feel the need to "befriend" this "pretty girl" so badly. Why her? Is this like a friendship variant of "love at first sight"? There are so many other people in the world with whom you could have a much easier time getting to know the personality. As I point out in my response to Ruffle, you seem biased towards this girl based on many assumptious and/or hopeful things about her.

Blanked
You just gotta be more social. Of course, I'm not a big expert in the social department, as I, unlike you, don't feel the need to know certain people because of whatever representative traits they have. I see grills now and then that I think look cute, sound cute, seem cute, and just overall present themselves with a general sense of cuteness. That doesn't mean I want to get to know them, since they can be very different from what my mind assumes and hopes them to be, not to mention how different I'd be from them.

What you have to consider is that most friends are made based on common interests. So, for instance, if there's some place of her interest she attends regularly, like uhh, I dunno, a club, then you'd go to that club as well and immerse yourself in the interests she has, so you both have some common ground. You know, instead of you just thinking "Oh, she looks and seems nice. I'll just go ahead and be friends with her." How you'd discover her interests is much more tricky. I wouldn't say a game store is the best place to make friends, and stalking her elsewhere would probably be a little creepy. Moreover, you may not even be her type.

This is why making friends (or a significant other) is not just a simple pick-what-you-want process. There are many factors involved.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2016, 02:07:27 PM by Sands »

Re: Chris makes a lot
« Reply #126 on: January 07, 2014, 11:47:43 PM »
When Miriam one day is developed enough to be a satisfactory friend in all departments you feel empty in, maybe you'll think differently about friends in general, like me. Such is my hope either way, so that you may finally put an end to this desperate craving and start enjoying life with one that truly understands you like no one else ever would be able to.

MegaBusta

Re: This makes two
« Reply #127 on: January 08, 2014, 12:00:54 AM »
You might even be able to fuck 'em!

Re: Chris makes two
« Reply #128 on: January 08, 2014, 09:15:01 AM »
Is it truly possible for a personality to be entirely separate from the form/looks(be it a physical body or an imaginary one), voice, and other characteristics other people can perceive? It seems to me that a person may either try to mold their appearances to match their personality or mold their personality to match their appearances and it's rare for them to be in a complete mismatch. Even if that weren't possible, I would think an entirely formless person without a voice or body to identify with would have a harder time acquiring a personality than one which is embodied (even if we're talking about a virtual body like a tulpa's form).

Yes.

Don't mind me Enny, taking over your diary thing.

Re: This makes two
« Reply #129 on: January 09, 2014, 06:50:44 AM »
Well, not that I don't enjoy debates and such, and while helping others to realize things one way or another is a really good thing, this isn't a personal blog but one for tulpas. A little bit of something else is always fine, but right now I feel like the topic is quickly moving away from what it should be. I require more tupper progress to feed my hunger.

You can continue the conversation of course, but I'd suggest doing that somewhere else, if you want to. Like say, Off-Topic. I can move posts around if you think the thread would be easier to follow if it had everything in it.

MegaBusta

Re: This makes two
« Reply #130 on: January 10, 2014, 05:23:52 AM »
but the main thing that's kept me going has been everyone but Megabusta's feedback.

One day, you'll look back.

And you will regret this.

Re: This makes two
« Reply #131 on: January 10, 2014, 08:41:13 AM »
Right, it's obvious that you guys want to continue this, but this thread isn't the right place for it. Please, don't respond here, if you think you want to respond yet again, send me a PM so I know I should move the posts to a new thread made for you. Title ideas are welcome, right now it looks like Relationships and Behavior.

Edit: And move I did. New thread for the previous topic, feel free to continue it there and let's keep this one as a tupper diary, yeah?
« Last Edit: January 10, 2014, 09:05:53 AM by Sands »

Re: This massively farts twenty-seven dorfs
« Reply #132 on: January 10, 2014, 10:36:53 PM »
What do you mean by not being able to "get anything out of them"? If you at any point managed to create a consonant from the noise, then great. Keep doing that. If not, keep reading.

I don't remember how long it took me to master this technique, as it was more of a thing I randomly decided to try one day and worked, albeit at that time, I could only bring out single consonants, and only faintly. The mindset you should be having is that you're not necessarily imagining or hallucinating anything in the traditional sense. Rather, it's a willing illusion. For instance, in the same way when you're listening to a song and then willingly try to focus on just one instrument, eventually being able to hear that particular instrument much more clearly, you're willingly bringing out the "S" sound of the noise. Since it's static noise, it has all the frequencies you can think of. It's just a matter of you bringing out the frequencies that the "S" and "F" sounds (and all the other consonants) have. I hope this explains the mindset that I at least had well enough.

Of course, when you've done this for a long time like me, the noise ends up not being necessary as an aiding stimulus anymore, and I guess you could say it's not so much an illusion from that point on.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2014, 10:40:26 PM by Fede »

Re: This makes two
« Reply #133 on: January 12, 2014, 05:39:49 AM »
Sometimes a time-off can be really good. I hope we'll hear about you later.

Re: This makes two
« Reply #134 on: January 16, 2014, 05:23:10 PM »
How's that feel. Some of that independent parallel processing tupper magic.