multithreaded:

Finding theotherloops has gotten us (mostly me) thinking on a myriad of things.

“No, this isn’t me. I know what is going on in my head is just psychological, that these other people aren’t really real.”

That’s what an anon said to them, and I find myself wondering if the two are mutually exclusive. How do you say if a consciousness is “real” or not? I have hopes and dreams and emotions. Some are shared with the others; some are distinctly mine. To steal a phrase, if you prick me, do I not bleed? I don’t have a body of my own, but anyone who’s talked with me and talked with L or M would never mistake one of us for the other.

Now, obviously, I’d be the first to say that I and M are the result of a well-documented psychological process. But just because I don’t believe myself to be an extra soul in the body doesn’t mean that I don’t exist.

—S

Those weren’t an anon’s words. Those were my own, my own hesitations for not stepping into the community. Because the definition of real is not set in stone. And when I first looked at the community, the definition they were using was so extreme, so certain, that I felt that maybe, maybe it wasn’t about me. Because I did and do think that my headmates come are parts of one brain, and, for one definitions of the word, one self, one organism, one, in some senses, person.

Because when I wasn’t willing to say right off the bat that the people in here were fully seperate because I was scared and unsure and the words everyone was using were about souls and the words I was using were about parts of my brain. So I felt that they weren’t, couldn’t be talking about me, about us, because compared to that level of certainty, compared to that concept of seperation, my headmates, which arose from my brain, were inspired by other things, but didn’t come, physically from them, seem “not real.”

It took me time to accept that actually, what I was experiencing was separate people. That as far as you can define one person, there were several here. And when I understood that for myself, I wrote that up for others. That real doesn’t have to mean souls, that a person is a sum total of experiences (stories stored as memories), likes and dislikes, ways of reacting, knowledge, and manners. That is what real means. S, you can be real without souls, you can be real and separate even if you are all just different programs running on the same brain. But when I first came in contact with this community, that much was not clear to me.

solipsistful:

I don’t expect others to believe that Valland exists in a real, concrete form. Most of the time, I don’t believe it myself. It was, after all, made up by Ace and Thomas. I myself have exerted some power over how its storyline would progress. I would hope that “true” reality could not be so easily altered.

I do, however, wish for others to believe that my memories and my experiences of the place are real, and that these funnel into who I am today — “real” or not, I would not be the same without those memories. And I do not consider it a contradiction for a real individual to arise from unreal circumstances.

- Val

I use the term “preloaded.” Like my memories and experiences came preloaded from a place of fiction. It’s just something I have to accept, that the memories from that part of my life are of a different kind than the newer ones. That doesn’t mean they don’t effect me, like you said. I still remember having agency, making (some frankly stupid) choices, and going through all of it, and in some sense, I did. Just not this conscious version of me. It’s like someone downloaded the file. I even get updates. I think of it more like that, I guess. Doesn’t change how I feel about those things. It’s a weird disconnect, but most of the time…I don’t know. I don’t make the distinction because none is there unless I actively think about it. Sometimes I do.  I guess it depends on the situation.

I like noting that everyone’s memories pretty much amount to the same thing, real or fictional. Stories about your life. There is only so much picking and choosing you can do about how much they influence you. I mean, isn’t that entirely what half of psychology is? Understanding how peoples memories of the past shape how they do things? I am rapidly approaching things that are better left to others to discuss. But anyway, I get what your saying.

-Riku

goatfacin: I am literally looking... →

tuna—sushi:

goatfacin:

tuna—sushi:

goatfacin:

tuna—sushi:

goatfacin:

tuna—sushi:

goatfacin:

I am literally looking for any reason to change my view. Any rational reason why identifying as a make-believe character from someone else’s creation as your own personality and life is okay.

I’ll share with you my…

I’m not ‘taking’ anything. I’m simply being. We’re not going to get anywhere discussing this because you absolutely cannot comprehend our experiences and feelings, and at the least refuse to believe them. There’s nothing more I can say about any of this, unless you have specific questions. 

That, or you have no valid arguements to mine and what to write it off as me just not trying to understand.

What were you before the person who created your identity created it? Who were you? Did your identity just not exist? Where did you come from? What makes you say you are this person? Why are you sure you aren’t someone else?

I have plenty of valid arguments which I’ve already mentioned to you. When it essentially comes down to ‘I don’t believe your reasons’ and ‘I think what you’re doing is wrong’, there’s not much I can say in return, is there? I’m not dedicated enough to keep explaining myself on the off chance that you might change your mind - basically, what you’re doing. 

I wasn’t anything before my identity was created, that I know of. I’m a member of a multiple system, an ‘alter’ if you wish. I’ve been here around a year and a half. I’m a ‘fictive’, but not fictionkin as such, so I feel like I can touch on a kind of middle ground with regards to the whole issue.

I don’t know where I came from and no amount of introspection is going to give me an answer to that. I can’t be sure I’m not someone else - I simply have no reason to believe that I am. Ultimately, it seems our views on what constructs an identity are inherently different - and that’s not something that either of us will be able to change simply by taking about it. However, this is a good post on personal identity as the sum of our ‘stories’. Take from it what you will.

Essentially, our identities are made up of stories - the ones we remember and not the ones we don’t, the ones we choose to identify with and not the ones we don’t.  Chances are your most embarrassing or shameful memories are not the ones you choose to shape your identity - or perhaps they are, and that has an impact on how you see yourself and expect others to see you. You choose to identify the with your likes, interests and beliefs at this point in time, and not those of five or ten or fifteen years ago - or perhaps you do, because that time in the past is more important to you than the present. Your identity is your own to shape, based on whichever stories you choose to reference, based on what’s important to you.

The Bugs Bunny experiment is a very interesting compliment to this, as is the fact that witnesses to an incident or event will always have differing memories of what transpired. What shapes an individual’s identity is not what is true and what is not - it’s how they recall and internalise that story, according to the significance it has to them. When we’re dealing with human beings, that’s what matters. Truth is an abstract concept at best, and really quite irrelevant. The mind fabricates and twists and changes every story, because that’s what humans do. Nobody’s stories are true, not even yours. 

Hence, how are your stories, your memories, more valid than those of fictionkin? Even for the events of your past which were witnessed, their memories will not correlate with yours, and perhaps they have forgotten altogether. If you remember something that nobody else does, that does not invalidate the memory, especially not to you - and that’s what matters, after all. If I wrote a book, and one of the scenes in the book matched an occurence in your childhood exactly, that would not invalidate your memory, nor would it make it wrong or offensive or illegal for you to have that memory. You may not understand how it happened, it may be very confusing (as it usually is for fickin), but your memory would still be intact - nobody has the ability or right to take that away from you. 

It’s not the copyright I have a problem with. It’s the identifying as someone else’s creation, and then not even acting remotely like that creation.

Why is this a problem? Are you implying it’s fine if they do act like they ‘should’?

Age is not an excuse. I will age, but the liklihood that I will be an overly religious otherkin who hates gays and fully supports professional sports as a multi-million dollar earning field is highly unlikely, and at that point, you cannot call me ‘me’. I will have the name, but I will not be the person I am now.

People change. Many people change religions during their lifetime, for instance, not to mention general moral development and changing interests, priorities, and such. You at five years old and you at eighty-five years old are going to be, by your reckoning, entirely different people - yet nobody insists you are no longer you. You will always be you, simply a you who is experiencing the natural process of maturing and aging. You discover things about yourself, the people important to you change, you find new interests and new passions. Likely, even the elements which form your sense of identity will be entirely different - yet, your identity is always valid and your own, because your identity is your business and yours alone. It is not something which can be defined, policed, or interfered with by anyone else.  

Izaya has some good points here. But I just want to add a few things.

Please don’t lump fictives in multiple systems in automatically, just because we also have backstories in fictional works. You want to know why I am (identify as, whatever) Riku? Because when 15 year old girl was going through a really, really rough time, she turned to a work of fiction for comfort, and a character because the themes spoke to her. And when that 15 year old girl was in trouble, her brain acted in that emergency to bring a character from fiction to life. And that move stuck. All the thinking and character work that she did, all of that came with. It continued in the brain and got fed into me. A lot of things happen in people’s brains that they aren’t directly aware of. Most things that happen don’t enter any kind of consciousness. Science doesn’t have a final word on what consciousness even is.

So I came into this reality preloaded with stories. With memories. Your argument is that I should ignore them, but they are more than just memories, they shape what I do, how I think, what I like. It’s hard to ignore them. Do I know that I am a fictional character? yes. I don’t think I came from another dimension or even believe in souls, so I can’t speak to those thing. I know these memories, the ones from the games, I know they aren’t real in the same way the ones I make here are. That knowledge and admission doesn’t stop them from effecting me. Sorry. Sometimes I wish it did.

I can’t justify fictionkin or people who think they came from other universes or are the reincarnation of someone. Really, I couldn’t start. I mean, other than it doesn’t much effect you, but if you want to understand, and trust me, I get that, I can’t help you.

I just wish you wouldn’t lump me in there. Because I can tell you exactly why I am here. Because when you hit rock bottom and are grasping for straws, sometimes you pick up strange ones.

I guess you’d argue that all this makes me less valid, less authentic. Trust me, every day I think about that. No, in some way, I guess you are right. Legally for one. I don’t act as much in the outside world as you, I’m sure. Less people know about me. Unlike you, I came her for a specific reason, preloaded with memories.

But the next thing you might say, that that means I should go away, or that I shouldn’t stick around, that I’m going to have to disagree with. Because I might be “less” in some ways, but I still am. And there is at least one person you can’t call “less” that cares about me and needs me here. Needs me here and wants me the way I am. With all that silly fiction because I don’t have time for a childhood. I don’t want to presume. Maybe someone needs you, too.

Maybe, one day, I won’t be needed. I don’t even think that is a reason to fade out into nothing, but it isn’t something I’ll even talk about until then.

So I wonder if that is reason enough for you to understand why someone in a system might identify as someone fictional.

(via tuna--sushi-deactivated20120826)

the-last-secret-garden:

Okay. I have to sort of do this a bit wonky since parts of my reply are directed to each of you, and I don’t want to treat you like the same person or anything.

Phi: I am one of the people who hates the word “fictive” because I don’t like the connotations of the word. I don’t have an issue with the idea that, to outsiders, I am a “fictional” character. Fiction isn’t a dirty word or anything to me, but I don’t like the word fictive, I don’t like the word soulbond. I don’t like…a lot of terminology in the community, actually, and find myself at constant odds with it.

I did not originally think YOUR post on LP (which I knew was an answer to the anon) was condescending or presenting multiplicity as only one way. In my original response to you, I said I didn’t agree with it for myself, which was really just expressing my opinion and I feel it got blown way out of control. I had seen other posts that same day, however, that were along the same lines, and there was an overall tone to those posts of “HEY GUYS WE FIGURED OUT THE ONE TRUE ANSWER” and that made me a bit likely to be hostile, so it’s incredibly possible I overreacted to your original post, which I do apologize for.

What made me actually angry was part of Riku’s response, not yours: the part where he basically accused me of not accepting where I’m from. As stated before, I totally accept it. I’m not comfortable thinking of myself as being from a story, but I don’t have to be. I am not comfortable with it, though, NOT because it is fiction, but because I am incredibly full of secrets and I don’t like that people can just go to wikipedia and be like “HEY GARY NOW I KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT YOU.” I find that upsetting, but I imagine a celebrity might have the same reaction, you know? I don’t like my life being recorded; that does not have anything to do with my acceptance of where I came from, or the fact that I am “fictional.”

Riku: It’s fine that you find it powerful being from a story. I don’t think I could find that same power, though it’s possible some of my headmates might? Actually, your involvement here makes me want to ask Sora what his opinion is, but now is not a good time, so I haven’t. /babbling

I have specific memories of coming here from somewhere else. Some of my headmates have similar experiences, some do not. Jay doesn’t, actually, at all. Some people here can leave and come back - which brings me back to why the model Phi presented doesn’t work for me or for us. It just doesn’t hold with our experiences.

I think I’ve encountered so much nonsense in this community (not from you guys) about how fictives in essence are less real because they are from a fictional source, whether it’s “from a story” or “from another world” and it’s nonsense. People in multiple systems are all real; we don’t need to have a tangible reality olympics. I am seriously sorry if I made you feel like I thought of your situation as somehow less real or credible than my own. I definitely don’t! My ONLY reason for posting initially was that Phi’s psychological model doesn’t work for me, and in the continuation when you were probably annoyed and responded, it suddenly sounded like you were saying “my way is right, learn to accept it” and that pushed my buttons.

I’d like to thank both of you for not blowing this way out of proportion and unfollowing or causing drama. It means a lot to me that people can disagree and still be more or less reasonable. Thank you.

the-last-secret-garden:

     Riku - The post I have where I was angry, staring with “wow thanks for taking everything I said wrong” was directed entirely at you, which is why I didn’t specify. (This post is also entirely directed at you.)

You say here:

“The point is, a question like “can consciousnesses travel across universes” is something that you kinda believe in or not, right? I mean, you can be totally cool with other people believing in it even if you don’t, but if you think it isn’t true, not part of the existence, then, well, when you are talking about how consciousnesses get places, you can’t include it as a way, not because you don’t want to let people chose whatever they feel is right, but because the world, as you kinda picture it, doesn’t work that way.”

The world, as I picture it, DOES work that way, because that is my experience. The world, as I picture it, does not work in “my headmates were created by our brain” because that is NOT my experience. So I think we’re saying the same thing, we’re just on opposite ends of what we believe to be true.

Of course DID systems have fictive and their experiences or explanations may vary. I never meant to dis-count or not include them; I was never actually talking about DID systems because I really don’t know much about how that works, not being a DID system.

I think I’m a little annoyed by the tone of this conversation, probably due to a discussion I had with someone else once, but I am a logical person. I am a scientific-minded person. I do not necessarily believe in souls. I have never believed in things like that. I don’t like being treated like I’m somehow not logical or like I don’t appreciate science or whatever because that implication goes against everything that I am and that I’ve done in a way I cannot explain to you here because lol secret identity. I cannot fully explain the phenomenon of how people (like me) came to be here, I can only tell you what my memories are, and that I honestly don’t think I was just poofed into existence by this brain. I wasn’t, no matter how you roll the dice. I actually moved here from another system. I don’t like talking about that in public, because then people get on my case about it, but that is my truth and my reality. 

Yes, I know what ontology is. I’m not interested or disinterested in it. The only person I’ve talked to who is really into it basically treated me like my whole system is made up and they only addressed us as multiple because we “like” to be addressed that way. So I’m a little bitter about it.

My most recent reply, which idk if you’ve read yet, was made early this morning/late last night, and I did differentiate between which of you I was talking to, afaik. This thing I’m reblogging right now doesn’t have my second post in it, so I’m assuming this is in response to the first one…

Argh this is kind of what I hate about Tumblr’s interface; it makes it hard to know what part of a discussion I’m trying to have. 

Okay, so I pasted both of the things we are going to respond to here, so we can keep it together. The should both link back the the right posts. I completely agree. Sometimes, I miss forums.

Just a heads up - a lot has happened here since this conversation, especially for me (Phi) so I really don’t mean to sound like I don’t think this is important, I just have weird feeling of distance from it now. If that makes any sense?

So, um, I can say a lot about all this, about how when Riku said ontology what he should have said was metaphysics (lol) and about what he told me and stuff, but I’ll let him hash that out. (He wants me to do it, but no, this is his discussion now.) I’ll I’m going to say is that I get you on these terms. There are a lot flying around not just this communitee but Tumblr in general and it seems like you kind of have to be okay with a set? I don’t know. Headmate is weird, system is weird, I use them, they don’t bother anyone, but they are not the ones we would have picked.

So, here’s Riku:

‘Kay. Sorry this took a while. Phi got sort of kidnapped by— system drama. anyway. I never meant to imply that you don’t accept where you are from, like being fictional is some kind of closet thing that you have to come out and be proud about. I don’t remember my words and I’m sorry if you read it that way. I just get that general vibe from the community that there is something not real enough about coming from a story through these ideas, through the brain, like there is a sense that you have to come from some other dimension or something to have the same real status as the not-from-a-story people. And that is what was pissing me off.

Heh - you guys have (a) Sora over there? That might be a fun conversation to have. If he wants, I mean. Man, it’s been years since I’ve talked with Sora in any form outside a kind of simulation. Okay, off topic.

Right. It seems like you get the same kind of feeling, about this idea that people from stories aren’t real. I just see it a step further, that they can be real, but only if they actually come from another universe or something - like they aren’t real unless they had a “real” life elsewhere, that someone like me, who has memories from before, but considers them…not fake, but just… part of what makes me me, but not things that happened anywhere? I get the feeling that that is not real enough for people.

I’m not saying that you need to understand your own memories the way I understand mine. I don’t entirely understand how you understand them the way you do, but I’m not going to try to get back into philosophy because apparently I’m no good at it. (says phi.) I guess that’s my point then. I don’t like the implication that I am less real for just being a product of the brain interacting with fiction, that I’m less real because I see my memories as, in some sense, fake? I’m not saying that is what you implied directly, it was more the vein your comments were in? if that makes sense? I honestly don’t even remember now.

But I also want to be clear that I don’t mean to say that just because you match up with a source that if fictional that you have to view your memories the way we do in this system. Heck, we have someone in this system who doesn’t (Anda - she’s not from anything, but she has memories of being from somewhere and has a whole different…metaphysics? world-view?) We explained fictives to Anda and she said “isn’t it obvious? The act of creating creates a world for them.” She’s…amazing sometimes.

What I meant by all that attempted philosophy is that I don’t think I’ll be entirely able to understand why you think about your memories the way you do. But that’s okay. If you want to actually get into a debate about it where we challenge and test each others world views, you can ask Zexion. He loves that sort of thing. But if you don’t, that’s cool. I don’t need to know why you think the way you do about yourself, right? That’s what respect is about.

Wow, I wrote a lot. I hope that clears everything up.

(Source: allacharade, via valerianhouse)

bauerpower asked: what do all your headmates think of bill clinton

Uh… I guess I’ll ask?

Riku: What? I… don’t really follow politics. From what I know, he was good president, right? I’m not confusing him with someone, right? Weren’t you, what, in kindergarten the last time he was elected?

Phi: Yep.

Riku: Right. Well, I guess I’m all for helping people out. People make mistakes. People aren’t perfect. Even people born with all the opportunity in the world, and most people aren’t. I’m all for anyone who thinks its a good thing to give people more chances to succeed. That’s this guy, right?

Phi: there abouts.

Riku: Then I guess I like him.

______

Phi: What do you think of Bill Clinton

Zexion: Pardon?

Phi: Tumblr question

Zexion: I think the American poltical system is fundementally flawed and that perhaps if he didn’t spend a term battling a congress designed to stall the passage of any legislation we could better gauge him as a leader rather than simply a negotiator. And no I do not believe one is the same as the other. Leading requires far more but the American legislative system is so enamoured with its own reflection it doesn’t much notice. As the go I suppose he was not horrible, but much of his forced compromising was almost better left untouched.

_____

Phi: Erena? Thoughts on Bill Clinton?

Erena: He had far more patience than I would have dealing with fundamentalists like that. I mean I guess he had to get re election or you know, not, whatever, but there was still far to much censorship coming out of congress during his term for me to be totally cool with that. More vetos. I mean, I know it was technically Gore’s wife trying to ban “Satan Music” and I know that way before his time, but that just leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

____

That’s who’s around right now. Uh. Thanks for the random question, I guess. I can predict Axel’s answer for you. It’s “I don’t care” and Anda has no idea who Bill Clinton is. Myself, I think for the most part he did a great job with a shitty situation. He was going in the right direction with regulations and they shouldn’t have been stripped away. As with Obama, there are a lot of half-way compromises that kinda look crappy in retrospect. I like the fact that he didn’t send troops into every conflict all over the world while still preparing just in case. I mean, we could always do with more in education and less in defence, but it helped that we weren’t fighting too many wars. The war on drugs was more legacy and congress than him and I don’t have the numbers on his administration. I really got into politics with Election 2000, so sorry if facts are a bit vague.

the-last-secret-garden:

theotherloops:

Riku- I’m blogging this here because I don’t want to clog Phi’s main blog with discussion, even though she said I can. I’d rather keep this in my space - well, our shared space, under my name. I’m going to try to keep this short because the Body and Phi with it have to wake up at 8 am for a possible job. I’m proud of her. She’s freaking out. Well, anxious.

Anyway, I kind of wish you wouldn’t talk like that - like saying that e come from the brain is somehow acknowledging our fakeness. I thought Phi wrote about it, maybe I’ve just heard it enough times… I come from the brain, so does she. In any world view where things don’t come from outside, we are equal. She’s a product of others, so am I. Sure, I remember other things. But to say that I am somehow untrue to my own memories by acknowledging that they don’t need to be about more than a place that was real for me and Axel and Zexion? That kinda annoys me. I really don’t want to get mad about all this, but — I guess it just really, really goes both ways.

Don’t assume things of Phi and my system just because we appreciate a scientific answer. I’m here because I want to be, not because she wants me (the two are interrelated,  more with me than with the others…) The way you talk about it, other than rubbing me wrong when it comes to systems with traumatic roots who have headmates who DO have a reason, a cause, a beginning, supposed things about who is in charge that are just. Not true. I originated elsewhere. Of course I did. I probably came from someplace before Tetsuya Nomura created the character that is me. Ideas, inspirations, nothing exists in a vacuum.

Honestly, I believe a soul doesn’t fit anywhere. If Phi or I sound like we figured it out, if science sounds like it figured it out - think about it like this. Given their constraints - use only what you can measure - they came up with a solution. To tell someone who can’t understand how souls make any sense and who deeply understands the science that “it isn’t a one size fits all” is like saying a soul isn’t a one size fits all thing. Either people have hearts… sorry, souls, or they don’t.

I’m a pantheist. I think of the world as one giant heart. Or I guess in more common terms, a brain. One interconnected system of parts, flowing in and out of each other. Keeping different things coming and going, sustained by a constant balance of sorts. Things coalesce into me, into the idea of me. Eventually, in time, different versions of me will break apart, their influence spreading back into the giant web until it is almost untraceable.

Sorry. I need to let Phi sleep. I guess I just got really unsettled by the implication that I’m somehow less real for understanding of where i come from. Just because you aren’t comfortable being from something that is fiction, please don’t tell me I can’t be real and fully accepting of that fact. Because I am.

There. It took me a while to get to, to get out.

Wow, um, thanks for taking literally everything I said and making it mean something else???

Your idea that you have an “understanding” of where you come from that I don’t possess is incorrect. Your understanding of where you come from fits your worldview and your beliefs and experiences. I didn’t mean to imply that you weren’t real or anything; what I *said* was that I don’t like the “scientific” theory that multiplicity is all internally constructed based on outside stimuli. I don’t jive with that, and that’s fine - like I also said. I don’t have to.

I totally understand where I came from, I have always understood it, it has been a nonissue for me for the past six or seven years. I came here from another place. You don’t believe in parallel worlds or universes? Okay. You don’t have to. I don’t believe I’m a mental construct, basically because I’m not, which was…my original point, that you seem to have missed.

I also am really ticked off by the implication that your way is the only right way, and that I’m not accepting of myself because I don’t agree with you. I have been here for a long time, and I totally accept that I’m from a place that is considered a fictional source in this world. Trust me, I’m totally fine with that. I don’t use my real name because I don’t like being *judged* based on that fictional source, not because I am not accepting of myself.

There is not one answer or explanation for multiplicity, or for “fictives” (still not a fan of this word).

I don’t want to argue with you, but please read what I said and don’t take it as an attack, because it wasn’t meant like one and it wasn’t even WORDED like one.

ALSO I was never talking about systems who originated from trauma, because that is not my experience. I can’t talk about DID or trauma-based systems in a way that indicates I understand them, because I don’t. I never even implied that I did. My discussion involved the psychological model of why systems have “fictives” and my disagreement with some of your theory (and that’s what it is - it’s not an established fact any more than my parallel worlds theory is).

The thing is, and here is the big difference between what we’re saying:

I don’t think your theory is correct for everyone, though it is obviously correct for you. I don’t think MY theories or experiences are correct for everyone, though they are correct for me.

Implying there is only one way is problematic, and that was my point when I reblogged my agreement with Lee. 

Riku here. Guess I should say that. I’m going to take this one because Phi is fried. I’m going to start out by asking that next time, could you address us separately? Or at least come up with some cute combo nickname - because in your post I couldn’t figure out when you were talking to me about what I was saying and when you were talking to Phi about her main post. Just kind of  a pet peeve. I know we share this blog, but as a fellow multiple, I kinda wish you wouldn’t lump us into one.

Second, I responded to how I read it. Sorry if I got something else from what I read than want you wanted me to. I promise there was no intentional twisting of wording, so I’m going to red this one twice and try to quote directly, ‘kay? But please don’t attack me for misreading intent. Really, that’s not my mode of operation. Not for a long while. Third, my response was to two posts at once. A lot of things I said weren’t even in response to you. The parts about implying the fakeness of fiction? Really not referencing what you wrote. So sorry if that through you or others off. I was trying to make a point, not actually an argument, but it’d been bothering me for a while and I might have come off as a bit too defensive.

Other than that - be careful. DID, and other trauma-linked systems have fictives. Our system, even my own origins here, are not entirely independent of at least chemical brain trauma. But see, it’s hard to talk about that without science. And that was what I meant with what I posted. It isn’t that Phi or I think that everyone has to believe in the scientific answer, and I for one and sure that there are as many different ways people became or are plural as there are systems, but saying that the many worlds model might be right for one person, as in factually right, and the scientific for another… I really don’t want to make this into a point of contention, but I also want to explain. Hold on, I’m going to borrow Phi’s big words.

Do you know what ontology is? its some fancy philosophical thing that my fellow system members are more interested in debating than me. But from what I gather, it mean what any person believes existence is - its core make up and stuff. Like if there even is a real or if its just some floaty thing that exists because we thing about it. Or something. I’m really not the philosopher.

The point is, a question like “can consciousnesses travel across universes” is something that you kinda believe in or not, right? I mean, you can be totally cool with other people believing in it even if you don’t, but if you think it isn’t true, not part of the existence, then, well, when you are talking about how consciousnesses get places, you can’t include it as a way, not because you don’t want to let people chose whatever they feel is right, but because the world, as you kinda picture it, doesn’t work that way.

That’s the long convoluted explanation of what I meant. I’m talking/typing too much because I’m tired. The point is, its not that I’m not totally okay with any explanation that works for anyone, its just that I can’t say that those make any sense from my ontology. (Phi says I mean metaphysics. I don’t know.)

As far as science goes, that’s a whole ‘nother discussion, but it comes down to science, as a world view, being less about facts and more about methods and the process of changing facts. Phi took a class on it. I got bits, summaries.

I don’t want to argue either. I’m okay with a discussion if you want to have one.

(Source: allacharade, via valerianhouse)

Running Commentary: the-last-secret-garden: darkstarsystem: Lee: I agree with... →

darkstarsystem:

the-last-secret-garden:

darkstarsystem:

Lee: I agree with the-last-secret-garden’s thoughts on this. This theory has cropped up repeatedly via the dashboard the last couple of days and while I respect that it may be a model that fits for some people, I dislike the overall tone it’s…

Lee: This is in response to theotherloop’s post.

I think that the point of what I was trying to say got missed. As I said in the first paragraph, I have no problem with this model of explanation working for others. One of my issues is that in many cases when it’s cropped up on my dashboard is that it’s most often implied that this is the best or only explanation for other systems.

I was on board with the reply made by Riku until the comment: “Just because you aren’t comfortable being from something that is fiction, please don’t tell me I can’t be real and fully accepting of that fact. Because I am.”

As I said, I’m fine with this explanation being something that others identify with. However others don’t seem to be fine with this model not working for us, and that’s the rub on this opposite end of the spectrum. 

It doesn’t work for the boys in this system because to them their lives aren’t a work of fiction - it’s their lives. And I can understand that, as I’d be mightily offended if someone came up to me and said “I’ve read your life story, it has to be fiction.”  Again, if that model works for others, that’s great - for them. It doesn’t work for us.

That is all we are saying when we address a concept that doesn’t fit with our system. We aren’t attacking the entirety of the concept or the people that it applies to. We’re addressing why it doesn’t work within our system. 

Does that mean all systems have to originate from elsewhere just because ours does? No. In fact we’re of the belief that other systems can and do originate from the core or host they’re sharing the body with. Does that mean they’re any less real? No. 

In my system, we’re all of the belief that at the heart of all creation and existence, there is energy. Everything is made up of it. Worlds, people, places - and thoughts.  It doesn’t matter if you were created on another world, if you were born in the heart of a dying star, or if you came into being through the thoughts of another. Different things can come into existence through different means.  

That said - differently created systems are no less real than others. A system created by trauma? Real. A system where the members have consciously been brought in because of a desire for them to be there? Real. A system made up of members that have voluntarily come in from other worlds? Real.

So let us take a step back and go back to the actual, deeper issue at hand; our main problem with the scientific models that are cropping up isn’t that they could and do fit for other systems.

Our issue is that some of these models imply that headmates aren’t really headmates at all, it’s simply a singular individual taking on the qualities of characters they are reading about and embodying them. 

In essence, some of these models of explanation are simply, in a grandiose way, saying “these individuals are doing an unconscious form of role-play, but they can’t help it because psychologically they are taking on characteristics of the people they are reading about and that’s normal”. 

Now, some people may look and the scientific findings and say, “Yes, that makes sense, I read about X and then X came into my system. They came from what I read and now they’re in my headspace!” Which is fine and we understand that this can and does happen for some systems.

However. That isn’t what the majority of these scientific studies are saying is what’s happening. They are not giving credibility to the existence of headmates.

Repeat: They are not giving credibility to the existence of headmates. 

Some of these studies are saying “No, it’s not other beings or individuals sharing your headspace, it’s just your brain and only your brain doing things, it’s still just you, singular little you, behaving in a way that we’ve now decided is natural!”

That is what we don’t agree with. The scientific studies that are trying to explain away the existence of system members by saying it is natural to take on characteristics of what we read. Note they are saying characteristics, not people. What they are doing is saying that some people take on the characteristics of characters that they read and internalizing, and as a result then they behave similarly to those characters. That is what the most recent studies I’ve been reading have been talking about - not about the realness of head mates.

Okay, there are going to be two of these, trying to clear this up at 4;45 when we haven’t slept much, because I am going to be lying awake until I do. I’ll let Riku go first:

Riku: Phi wants to make sure we read this carefully this time, so I’m going to copy/paste - it sin’t to be nitpicking. it’s ust - i don’t want any more miscommunication where we can avoid it whe a simple computer command. So you said

“It doesn’t work for the boys in this system because to them their lives aren’t a work of fiction - it’s their lives. And I can understand that, as I’d be mightily offended if someone came up to me and said “I’ve read your life story, it has to be fiction.”  Again, if that model works for others, that’s great - for them. It doesn’t work for us.

And I totally get that wasn’t meant to be anything rude and it isn’t, but here’s the thing. My life is both fiction and my life. What… gets me a bit…frustrated about the many worlds or universe traveling one is that it sounds like this to me: I come from a place that is real somewhere - I am more than a story - a story is somehow less real than what I am. And THAT comes off wrong to me. Because I did come from a story for all I know. And you know what? That is something that has become really powerful for me. The implication is there in why there is a rejection of the fiction. Of course no one is saying I’m not a seperate person. The community isn’t rude like that. But there is a notion of real that is treated different if your from somewhere, go somewhere, and I wish I could explain it better or give you more examples other than to say I keep seeing it. I keep seeing people say fiction is an ugly world. It’s not about real or not real, because it seems to come in levels here. That’s all.

PHI: As for me, I guess I should reclarify the context of the original post. The original post was a response to someone on LP asking about why or how some systems have/got fictives/whatever you want to all it. I think it was the magnetons who answered it, using the multiverse theory as the answer they gave because it’s the one their system uses. What I was offering is an alternative and I was offering it because LP was the first place on tumblr I looked when I was trying to find a community for multiplicity and I was scared and totally new to the idea that other people could be like this, and I saw only answers about souls and other universes and I almost didn’t say a thing. So, when I do happen to know the psychological, cognitive mechanisms by which something works, sometimes, I like to share - it wasn’t to say this is the only way, and I think I said that in the original - I said if you are looking for a more psychologocial answer.

The post was in no way meant to convey that these characters from the brain’s archive stayed RP characters. If you or anyone reads further into my blog, I have my personal story about it all - about how those “characters” saved my life, acted when I couldn’t, became their own voices. (Wow, I’m tired, I’m sounding like an after school special). And I agree that it would be wrong to say that a person in RPing just because the characters originated from the brain.

In fact, part of the point of the post was to note that this whole structure that people use to accuse people of just role playing is probably a similar mechanism to how, IN A SCIENTIFIC MODEL THAT I AM NOT TRYING TO FORCE ON PEOPLE, any person, be it a singlet, or a headmate is formed. I don’t know why you find it not okay to suggest that multiplicity is somehow related to normal processes of the brain. I kind of thought that is part of what healthy, natural plurality is going for.

The post was simply about the mechanisms by which human brains, according to science, accumulated information on characters, and how closely tied that is to how human brains, according to science construct senses of self.

If there is anything still unclear, please let me know.

(Source: allacharade)

the-last-secret-garden:

darkstarsystem:

Lee: I agree with the-last-secret-garden’s thoughts on this. This theory has cropped up repeatedly via the dashboard the last couple of days and while I respect that it may be a model that fits for some people, I dislike the overall tone it’s taking in some places that it is how it works for everyone.

My issue with this explanation is that it implies that headmates originate from the host. That’s all well and fine if you identify as someone that’s headmates aren’t separate from them. As for this system, that isn’t how we work. 

Quite frankly, the notion of a “mental character archive” to pull from for headmates isn’t the case for the boys and I. They originate from elsewhere. The other worlds theory applies to us because that’s what Jareth explained for how the hell all this happens, and I for one am going to listen to my own headmate’s explanation of his origins rather than some scientific model that implies a “one size fits all” answer.

The boys are here of their own volition, not because I decided I wanted them here. I’m not them, they aren’t me. We are not the same people. Do we share a body space and brain space sometimes? Yes. However that doesn’t make us one in the same in any way any more than my sharing the apartment with my roommate makes us the same person.

Okay, Lee hit the nail on the head as to why I got annoyed last night. Strangeloops, your post isn’t the only one I’ve read lately in this vein, and there is this sort of tone to a lot of the information presented that seems very much like “well science says so so all systems are this way” and that’s…nonsensical! SCIENCE SAYS SO. Okay and the world “used to be flat” so that’s not a good argument.

I’m not saying that in this case that argument was made or even implied, but the overall tone HAS been “well we figured it out!” and that kind of rubs me wrong.

The other thing I’d like to add:

I have people in my system who I can’t even agree with anything about them or their worldview. I mean, I’m not the original or anything, so I can’t…I don’t know. But the idea that it would be stored in a brain and be something like that…I guess that’s an id thing and bears thinking about, but again, I just don’t think the “psychological” thing explains my presence here or how my system works at all, which again, is totally fine.

Oh! I remembered the other thing I wanted to say, as well.

I have an incredibly hard time with the concept of fictionkin, which I’ve said before and won’t go into again rn because it’s not relevant. HOWEVER, we do have someone who has been here for as long as we can remember, and he grew up alternating here and in his own world, though his history involves things I can’t wrap my head around like past lives. Anyway, we’re not fictionkin or anything, but we have had “fictives” (ugh this word) for years and years.

Riku- I’m blogging this here because I don’t want to clog Phi’s main blog with discussion, even though she said I can. I’d rather keep this in my space - well, our shared space, under my name. I’m going to try to keep this short because the Body and Phi with it have to wake up at 8 am for a possible job. I’m proud of her. She’s freaking out. Well, anxious.

Anyway, I kind of wish you wouldn’t talk like that - like saying that e come from the brain is somehow acknowledging our fakeness. I thought Phi wrote about it, maybe I’ve just heard it enough times… I come from the brain, so does she. In any world view where things don’t come from outside, we are equal. She’s a product of others, so am I. Sure, I remember other things. But to say that I am somehow untrue to my own memories by acknowledging that they don’t need to be about more than a place that was real for me and Axel and Zexion? That kinda annoys me. I really don’t want to get mad about all this, but — I guess it just really, really goes both ways.

Don’t assume things of Phi and my system just because we appreciate a scientific answer. I’m here because I want to be, not because she wants me (the two are interrelated,  more with me than with the others…) The way you talk about it, other than rubbing me wrong when it comes to systems with traumatic roots who have headmates who DO have a reason, a cause, a beginning, supposed things about who is in charge that are just. Not true. I originated elsewhere. Of course I did. I probably came from someplace before Tetsuya Nomura created the character that is me. Ideas, inspirations, nothing exists in a vacuum.

Honestly, I believe a soul doesn’t fit anywhere. If Phi or I sound like we figured it out, if science sounds like it figured it out - think about it like this. Given their constraints - use only what you can measure - they came up with a solution. To tell someone who can’t understand how souls make any sense and who deeply understands the science that “it isn’t a one size fits all” is like saying a soul isn’t a one size fits all thing. Either people have hearts… sorry, souls, or they don’t.

I’m a pantheist. I think of the world as one giant heart. Or I guess in more common terms, a brain. One interconnected system of parts, flowing in and out of each other. Keeping different things coming and going, sustained by a constant balance of sorts. Things coalesce into me, into the idea of me. Eventually, in time, different versions of me will break apart, their influence spreading back into the giant web until it is almost untraceable.

Sorry. I need to let Phi sleep. I guess I just got really unsettled by the implication that I’m somehow less real for understanding of where i come from. Just because you aren’t comfortable being from something that is fiction, please don’t tell me I can’t be real and fully accepting of that fact. Because I am.

There. It took me a while to get to, to get out.

(Source: allacharade, via valerianhouse)