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.