interstellars-syscourse-debates

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

I did not delete that person’s comments by the way, I’m assuming Tumblr did because replies on this post are restricted despite me not changing any settings.

If their comments were removed, it’s probably because they were hurtful and Tumblr itself didn’t want that kind of content in comments. I’m trying to figure out how to turn comments back on.

I’d consider myself endo neutral so I’m not debating rather than asking you a question which is a lot of the reason I’m not pro endo

So I’m not saying you can’t have a system form through other means or create themselves for the purpose of this question. If we assume you can create a system or have members form endogenically, would they not also form dissociative walls. Or emotional amnesia and stuff as well? Because that’s what in CDDs allows multiple people to exist in one brain in the first place, the emotional amnesia so that you’re able to be in one brain but have different emotions.

A lot of endos say they are not disordered have no amnesia grey outs or emotional amnesia, and if that’s true, how scientifically speaking are they plural? Without emotional amnesia and grey outs and all that where is the separation?

There are some endos who do have emotional amnesia ect and I’m not talking about those

- George

CDD systems are formed from trauma and trauma also causes dissociation, amnesia, etc. The theory of the way CDD systems form is that during childhood, there is so much trauma that the brain must split up into parts to protect itself. The amnesia between parts or alters is necessary to protect the parts/alters from the trauma.

So, for example, Part A is fronting when a traumatic event happens to them. The brain doesn't want the rest of the parts to know that a traumatic event happened to them, so it creates the amnesic barrier between Part A and the rest of the parts. That means that when Part B fronts, they're not 'burdened' with the memories of the trauma that Part A faced and Part B can function relatively well, while Part A may be so overcome by the trauma they can't function well.

If there was no amnesia between parts, the brain's coping mechanism of splitting would be useless as now there would just be many parts that are all traumatised, and the brain doesn't want that. It wants to make sure the trauma is put away where the absolute minimum amount of parts can know about it.

I kind of think of it like an infection, right? The trauma (or memories of the trauma) is the infection and if one part catches it, you want to isolate them to make sure that the rest of the 'population' (system) doesn't catch the same infection. If you just let the 'infected' part roam around, coughing and sneezing all over the rest of the system, then everyone will catch the infection, and that is very very bad because now the entire population is bedridden with illness.

Therapy is kind of like a vaccine, so you can more safely let the population catch the infection but the symptoms can be managed and after all the doses are given, the population may not experience any symptoms at all.

Endogenic systems who don't have any trauma do not have to isolate their infected parts because there are no infected parts. Their population is not at risk of becoming bedridden with illness because there is no illness. Their brain doesn't have to put up protective barriers because there's nothing to protect against.

As for your last point, most endogenic systems (and a lot of CDD systems) consider their headmates as whole separate people, which is how they have different names, ages, genders, emotions, etc etc. I don't think it's the dissociation or amnesia that makes headmates separate people, I believe it's the level of agency one headmate has over another's thoughts. If Headmate A thinks "I like pizza" and Headmate B HATES pizza, Headmate B is obviously not going to think that they thought "I like pizza", they are going to know it was someone else. There doesn't have to be dissociation for multiple streams of thought or multiple consciousnesses to inhabit one body. I referenced this study in my previous post but to keep it short, it's a study done on tulpamancers (who underwent a psychological evaluation and was found to have very little to no signs of having a CDD or having any kind of delusion or psychosis) and evangelical Christians and brain scans revealed that the level of agency of the tulpamancer's thoughts (and evangelical Christians reciting the Lord's prayer) was much, much higher than that of the tulpa's (and evangelical Christians while speaking in tongues). So their brains literally didn't recognise those thoughts as their own, despite there being no dissociation.

I hope this makes a bit of sense!

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

bro literally what are you on about? i never deleted your comments. if they got removed, not my problem. my asks are open.

but not for you anymore because you lost that privilege to being rude as fuck.

I’d consider myself endo neutral so I’m not debating rather than asking you a question which is a lot of the reason I’m not pro endo

So I’m not saying you can’t have a system form through other means or create themselves for the purpose of this question. If we assume you can create a system or have members form endogenically, would they not also form dissociative walls. Or emotional amnesia and stuff as well? Because that’s what in CDDs allows multiple people to exist in one brain in the first place, the emotional amnesia so that you’re able to be in one brain but have different emotions.

A lot of endos say they are not disordered have no amnesia grey outs or emotional amnesia, and if that’s true, how scientifically speaking are they plural? Without emotional amnesia and grey outs and all that where is the separation?

There are some endos who do have emotional amnesia ect and I’m not talking about those

- George

CDD systems are formed from trauma and trauma also causes dissociation, amnesia, etc. The theory of the way CDD systems form is that during childhood, there is so much trauma that the brain must split up into parts to protect itself. The amnesia between parts or alters is necessary to protect the parts/alters from the trauma.

So, for example, Part A is fronting when a traumatic event happens to them. The brain doesn't want the rest of the parts to know that a traumatic event happened to them, so it creates the amnesic barrier between Part A and the rest of the parts. That means that when Part B fronts, they're not 'burdened' with the memories of the trauma that Part A faced and Part B can function relatively well, while Part A may be so overcome by the trauma they can't function well.

If there was no amnesia between parts, the brain's coping mechanism of splitting would be useless as now there would just be many parts that are all traumatised, and the brain doesn't want that. It wants to make sure the trauma is put away where the absolute minimum amount of parts can know about it.

I kind of think of it like an infection, right? The trauma (or memories of the trauma) is the infection and if one part catches it, you want to isolate them to make sure that the rest of the 'population' (system) doesn't catch the same infection. If you just let the 'infected' part roam around, coughing and sneezing all over the rest of the system, then everyone will catch the infection, and that is very very bad because now the entire population is bedridden with illness.

Therapy is kind of like a vaccine, so you can more safely let the population catch the infection but the symptoms can be managed and after all the doses are given, the population may not experience any symptoms at all.

Endogenic systems who don't have any trauma do not have to isolate their infected parts because there are no infected parts. Their population is not at risk of becoming bedridden with illness because there is no illness. Their brain doesn't have to put up protective barriers because there's nothing to protect against.

As for your last point, most endogenic systems (and a lot of CDD systems) consider their headmates as whole separate people, which is how they have different names, ages, genders, emotions, etc etc. I don't think it's the dissociation or amnesia that makes headmates separate people, I believe it's the level of agency one headmate has over another's thoughts. If Headmate A thinks "I like pizza" and Headmate B HATES pizza, Headmate B is obviously not going to think that they thought "I like pizza", they are going to know it was someone else. There doesn't have to be dissociation for multiple streams of thought or multiple consciousnesses to inhabit one body. I referenced this study in my previous post but to keep it short, it's a study done on tulpamancers (who underwent a psychological evaluation and was found to have very little to no signs of having a CDD or having any kind of delusion or psychosis) and evangelical Christians and brain scans revealed that the level of agency of the tulpamancer's thoughts (and evangelical Christians reciting the Lord's prayer) was much, much higher than that of the tulpa's (and evangelical Christians while speaking in tongues). So their brains literally didn't recognise those thoughts as their own, despite there being no dissociation.

I hope this makes a bit of sense!

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

I can tell you didnt really read my post because you assume I called DID an “infection”. I did not. I called TRAUMA and MEMORIES OF TRAUMA an “infection” in an ANALOGY to make my point clearer. Instead of telling me to be better, you need to learn to read better.

You are disrespectful as fuck and I won’t be having this level of just plain nastiness on my blog. I’ve stated that once shit starts to get ugly, the debate ends. So, congrats @sysmedsaresexist, you are now removed from my blog and blocked.

Should’ve actually taken a look at my account instead of leading with your emotions riding high and using a swear word in EVERY FUCKING SENTENCE.

Be better.

I’d consider myself endo neutral so I’m not debating rather than asking you a question which is a lot of the reason I’m not pro endo

So I’m not saying you can’t have a system form through other means or create themselves for the purpose of this question. If we assume you can create a system or have members form endogenically, would they not also form dissociative walls. Or emotional amnesia and stuff as well? Because that’s what in CDDs allows multiple people to exist in one brain in the first place, the emotional amnesia so that you’re able to be in one brain but have different emotions.

A lot of endos say they are not disordered have no amnesia grey outs or emotional amnesia, and if that’s true, how scientifically speaking are they plural? Without emotional amnesia and grey outs and all that where is the separation?

There are some endos who do have emotional amnesia ect and I’m not talking about those

- George

CDD systems are formed from trauma and trauma also causes dissociation, amnesia, etc. The theory of the way CDD systems form is that during childhood, there is so much trauma that the brain must split up into parts to protect itself. The amnesia between parts or alters is necessary to protect the parts/alters from the trauma.

So, for example, Part A is fronting when a traumatic event happens to them. The brain doesn't want the rest of the parts to know that a traumatic event happened to them, so it creates the amnesic barrier between Part A and the rest of the parts. That means that when Part B fronts, they're not 'burdened' with the memories of the trauma that Part A faced and Part B can function relatively well, while Part A may be so overcome by the trauma they can't function well.

If there was no amnesia between parts, the brain's coping mechanism of splitting would be useless as now there would just be many parts that are all traumatised, and the brain doesn't want that. It wants to make sure the trauma is put away where the absolute minimum amount of parts can know about it.

I kind of think of it like an infection, right? The trauma (or memories of the trauma) is the infection and if one part catches it, you want to isolate them to make sure that the rest of the 'population' (system) doesn't catch the same infection. If you just let the 'infected' part roam around, coughing and sneezing all over the rest of the system, then everyone will catch the infection, and that is very very bad because now the entire population is bedridden with illness.

Therapy is kind of like a vaccine, so you can more safely let the population catch the infection but the symptoms can be managed and after all the doses are given, the population may not experience any symptoms at all.

Endogenic systems who don't have any trauma do not have to isolate their infected parts because there are no infected parts. Their population is not at risk of becoming bedridden with illness because there is no illness. Their brain doesn't have to put up protective barriers because there's nothing to protect against.

As for your last point, most endogenic systems (and a lot of CDD systems) consider their headmates as whole separate people, which is how they have different names, ages, genders, emotions, etc etc. I don't think it's the dissociation or amnesia that makes headmates separate people, I believe it's the level of agency one headmate has over another's thoughts. If Headmate A thinks "I like pizza" and Headmate B HATES pizza, Headmate B is obviously not going to think that they thought "I like pizza", they are going to know it was someone else. There doesn't have to be dissociation for multiple streams of thought or multiple consciousnesses to inhabit one body. I referenced this study in my previous post but to keep it short, it's a study done on tulpamancers (who underwent a psychological evaluation and was found to have very little to no signs of having a CDD or having any kind of delusion or psychosis) and evangelical Christians and brain scans revealed that the level of agency of the tulpamancer's thoughts (and evangelical Christians reciting the Lord's prayer) was much, much higher than that of the tulpa's (and evangelical Christians while speaking in tongues). So their brains literally didn't recognise those thoughts as their own, despite there being no dissociation.

I hope this makes a bit of sense!

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

I absolutely agree with all of this! I didn’t even think of your point about functional multiplicity so thank you for adding on to my post!

And I absolutely agree with your last point, like a system formed without trauma is not going to adhere to the theories developed to describe a system formed WITH trauma ^^’ they’re just… different. It’s kind of like saying “Why can’t I make crepes with a pancake recipe? You cook both in a pan, they should be the same” (not a perfect analogy but close enough)

I’d consider myself endo neutral so I’m not debating rather than asking you a question which is a lot of the reason I’m not pro endo

So I’m not saying you can’t have a system form through other means or create themselves for the purpose of this question. If we assume you can create a system or have members form endogenically, would they not also form dissociative walls. Or emotional amnesia and stuff as well? Because that’s what in CDDs allows multiple people to exist in one brain in the first place, the emotional amnesia so that you’re able to be in one brain but have different emotions.

A lot of endos say they are not disordered have no amnesia grey outs or emotional amnesia, and if that’s true, how scientifically speaking are they plural? Without emotional amnesia and grey outs and all that where is the separation?

There are some endos who do have emotional amnesia ect and I’m not talking about those

- George

CDD systems are formed from trauma and trauma also causes dissociation, amnesia, etc. The theory of the way CDD systems form is that during childhood, there is so much trauma that the brain must split up into parts to protect itself. The amnesia between parts or alters is necessary to protect the parts/alters from the trauma.

So, for example, Part A is fronting when a traumatic event happens to them. The brain doesn't want the rest of the parts to know that a traumatic event happened to them, so it creates the amnesic barrier between Part A and the rest of the parts. That means that when Part B fronts, they're not 'burdened' with the memories of the trauma that Part A faced and Part B can function relatively well, while Part A may be so overcome by the trauma they can't function well.

If there was no amnesia between parts, the brain's coping mechanism of splitting would be useless as now there would just be many parts that are all traumatised, and the brain doesn't want that. It wants to make sure the trauma is put away where the absolute minimum amount of parts can know about it.

I kind of think of it like an infection, right? The trauma (or memories of the trauma) is the infection and if one part catches it, you want to isolate them to make sure that the rest of the 'population' (system) doesn't catch the same infection. If you just let the 'infected' part roam around, coughing and sneezing all over the rest of the system, then everyone will catch the infection, and that is very very bad because now the entire population is bedridden with illness.

Therapy is kind of like a vaccine, so you can more safely let the population catch the infection but the symptoms can be managed and after all the doses are given, the population may not experience any symptoms at all.

Endogenic systems who don't have any trauma do not have to isolate their infected parts because there are no infected parts. Their population is not at risk of becoming bedridden with illness because there is no illness. Their brain doesn't have to put up protective barriers because there's nothing to protect against.

As for your last point, most endogenic systems (and a lot of CDD systems) consider their headmates as whole separate people, which is how they have different names, ages, genders, emotions, etc etc. I don't think it's the dissociation or amnesia that makes headmates separate people, I believe it's the level of agency one headmate has over another's thoughts. If Headmate A thinks "I like pizza" and Headmate B HATES pizza, Headmate B is obviously not going to think that they thought "I like pizza", they are going to know it was someone else. There doesn't have to be dissociation for multiple streams of thought or multiple consciousnesses to inhabit one body. I referenced this study in my previous post but to keep it short, it's a study done on tulpamancers (who underwent a psychological evaluation and was found to have very little to no signs of having a CDD or having any kind of delusion or psychosis) and evangelical Christians and brain scans revealed that the level of agency of the tulpamancer's thoughts (and evangelical Christians reciting the Lord's prayer) was much, much higher than that of the tulpa's (and evangelical Christians while speaking in tongues). So their brains literally didn't recognise those thoughts as their own, despite there being no dissociation.

I hope this makes a bit of sense!

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

I’d consider myself endo neutral so I’m not debating rather than asking you a question which is a lot of the reason I’m not pro endo

So I’m not saying you can’t have a system form through other means or create themselves for the purpose of this question. If we assume you can create a system or have members form endogenically, would they not also form dissociative walls. Or emotional amnesia and stuff as well? Because that’s what in CDDs allows multiple people to exist in one brain in the first place, the emotional amnesia so that you’re able to be in one brain but have different emotions.

A lot of endos say they are not disordered have no amnesia grey outs or emotional amnesia, and if that’s true, how scientifically speaking are they plural? Without emotional amnesia and grey outs and all that where is the separation?

There are some endos who do have emotional amnesia ect and I’m not talking about those

- George

CDD systems are formed from trauma and trauma also causes dissociation, amnesia, etc. The theory of the way CDD systems form is that during childhood, there is so much trauma that the brain must split up into parts to protect itself. The amnesia between parts or alters is necessary to protect the parts/alters from the trauma.

So, for example, Part A is fronting when a traumatic event happens to them. The brain doesn't want the rest of the parts to know that a traumatic event happened to them, so it creates the amnesic barrier between Part A and the rest of the parts. That means that when Part B fronts, they're not 'burdened' with the memories of the trauma that Part A faced and Part B can function relatively well, while Part A may be so overcome by the trauma they can't function well.

If there was no amnesia between parts, the brain's coping mechanism of splitting would be useless as now there would just be many parts that are all traumatised, and the brain doesn't want that. It wants to make sure the trauma is put away where the absolute minimum amount of parts can know about it.

I kind of think of it like an infection, right? The trauma (or memories of the trauma) is the infection and if one part catches it, you want to isolate them to make sure that the rest of the 'population' (system) doesn't catch the same infection. If you just let the 'infected' part roam around, coughing and sneezing all over the rest of the system, then everyone will catch the infection, and that is very very bad because now the entire population is bedridden with illness.

Therapy is kind of like a vaccine, so you can more safely let the population catch the infection but the symptoms can be managed and after all the doses are given, the population may not experience any symptoms at all.

Endogenic systems who don't have any trauma do not have to isolate their infected parts because there are no infected parts. Their population is not at risk of becoming bedridden with illness because there is no illness. Their brain doesn't have to put up protective barriers because there's nothing to protect against.

As for your last point, most endogenic systems (and a lot of CDD systems) consider their headmates as whole separate people, which is how they have different names, ages, genders, emotions, etc etc. I don't think it's the dissociation or amnesia that makes headmates separate people, I believe it's the level of agency one headmate has over another's thoughts. If Headmate A thinks "I like pizza" and Headmate B HATES pizza, Headmate B is obviously not going to think that they thought "I like pizza", they are going to know it was someone else. There doesn't have to be dissociation for multiple streams of thought or multiple consciousnesses to inhabit one body. I referenced this study in my previous post but to keep it short, it's a study done on tulpamancers (who underwent a psychological evaluation and was found to have very little to no signs of having a CDD or having any kind of delusion or psychosis) and evangelical Christians and brain scans revealed that the level of agency of the tulpamancer's thoughts (and evangelical Christians reciting the Lord's prayer) was much, much higher than that of the tulpa's (and evangelical Christians while speaking in tongues). So their brains literally didn't recognise those thoughts as their own, despite there being no dissociation.

I hope this makes a bit of sense!

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

PART THREE - FINAL PART

For this next part, I don't really know where to add it in (part one or two) but I wanted to add it anyway.

This study is the one I mentioned way above, it's a video about 40 minutes long and I would highly, highly encourage you to watch it. There is a transcript you could read but there are quite a few errors that make it hard to follow if you're not watching the video too. The focus of the study is on tulpamancy and it's similarities to evangelical prayer, because the methods of cultivating a relationship with god in evangelical Christianity is very very similar to the methods that tulpamancers use to form their tulpas. The people doing the study did actual preliminary brain scans on people while they were reciting prayers, improvising prayers, and speaking in tongues. The point of this was to show that the level of agency over who is actually doing these things decreases from reciting the Lord's prayer to speaking in tongues. So, people generally had a strong sense of agency when reciting the Lord's prayer because they knew it so well, they knew it was them talking. However, when the subjects were asked to speak in tongues, their level of agency drastically lowered, showing that in their mind, it literally was not them speaking but another entity, in these cases God. The subjects had very little agency over "their" thoughts while speaking in tongues.

They also did the same study on tulpamancers but in this video, I don't believe they show the brain scans. I'm fairly certain they'd be similar as Michael Lifshitz, the speaker in the video and I believe one of the leading people in the study, mentioned how evangelical prayer and tulpamancy are very very similar. So, this study kind of shows that people who have other "entities" in their mind, whether that be God, tulpas, or other endogenic headmates, genuinely do not believe these thoughts to be their own. Their brain doesn't recognise these thoughts as their own, and their agency over these thoughts was incredibly low.

Ending

Okay so that was a really long post, I hope it wasn't too wordy or boring. It took me a couple of days to get everything sorted but there may still be some grammar errors or weird formatting as I've been pretty tired lately but wanted to get this post out. 

I'm interested to hear what made you change your mind about endogenic systems though! Anything similar to what I said or completely different? 

Again, because I'm not very educated on the topics of delusions or evangelical prayer, please let me know if anything in this post is wrong or disrespectful, I will remove it immediately! Honestly this also goes for everything in this post. I do not wish to offend anyone, so please please please let me know if anything in this post is insensitive.

END OF PART THREE

I used to be anti endo so I want to see what you can say about these arguments I've heard:

Endogenics are either delusional or mistaking their symptoms of CDDs for endogenic plurality.

Endogenics are causing real life doctors to be even more sceptical of an already misunderstood disorder

PART ONE

Disclaimer: I'm not very educated on delusions or evangelical prayer (which I will be referencing later on) so if anything in this post is false or insensitive to people who suffer from delusions or to any evangelical Christians who may see this, please tell me and I will remove or reword the parts that need it. This post is not meant to offend or invalidate anyone. Please do not take anything in this post as an attack, it is not meant to be one. I have nothing against CDD systems or endogenic systems, delusional systems or people, or religious people. 

ALSO I have to make this into like, three parts LMFAO there's a character limit on tumblr posts. It's like 4,000 characters and this post is over 10,000 characters so I'll add the other parts in reblogs. 

Point one

Endogenic systems can very well be formed from delusions, but not always. That claim isn't entirely false, but claiming that ALL endogenic systems are delusional isn't true. I don't know a lot about delusions so I want to keep this section brief to prevent myself from saying something that is untrue and misleading about the condition. To my knowledge, delusions are typically distressing for the affected person. As I have written further on (I'm writing this section last), disorders cause distress and/or impairment in some way or another to the person affected. Without the distress or impairment, there isn't a disorder (not to be mistaken as me saying all delusions are part of a disorder, just bear with me).

Another thing with delusions is that they persist even when there is evidence against the delusion. There is no scientific research against endogenic plurality, and in fact there is some suggesting it is possible, which I'll talk about later on. With psychology, pretty much the first thing you'll learn is that there's often no way to prove something one way or another. Our brains are infinitely complex and expansive and we don't have the research to be able to understand every single thing that happens in the brain (yet). We can only have theories and suggestions. If those theories are shown over and over, they can be seen as a pattern that still has the possibility to be broken and then we can look at that odd one out and say, "Well, there may be a new reason this is happening that we haven't previously thought of" and then research can go into that. So, maybe endogenic systems are delusional. We just do not have the resources to prove that true or false and stating it definitively is a gross misunderstanding of how psychology works on a fundamental basis. By that same logic, CDD systems could be delusional too. There's no way to prove anything with absolute certainty, and so we must accept when we are talking about psychological issues that what we think is "true" or "fact" is just a theory. 

Also a note, the study that I'm going to talk about later on (conducted by Michael Lifshitz, a man with a PhD in Neuroscience from McGill University), when they were interacting with tulpamancers (the subjects of his study), they did psychological evaluations on them and found that they very rarely exhibited signs of psychosis or delusion, so the statement that all endogenic systems are delusional is absolutely redundant as a group of them were evaluated by psychological experts and were deemed to show no signs of distress, psychosis, or symptoms of DID.

END OF PART ONE

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

PART TWO

I also want to point out that in this study, there's a section (at 21mins and 38seconds in) where Michael talks about a tulpamancer who was deeply suicidal and had such despair, such a longing to no longer be in this world. They were certain they didn't even deserve to live. However, their tulpa was adamantly opposed to that, and the tulpamancer reported that that moment was when they started believing their tulpa was a separate, real person. Speaking from experience, the vast majority of deeply suicidal people do not have this totally defiant part of them that wants to make them believe they want to live. The stark difference in thoughts is odd in suicidal people, especially ones who are set in their decision they no longer want to live. That's what makes it seem like it's not a delusion. People living in a delusion experience that delusion as their reality. So, this person's reality was not wanting to live. The sudden opinion to live was not their reality nor was it what they experienced as reality, therefore cannot be attributed to a delusion.

For the CDD point, the thing that I mostly see around is that endogenic systems do not experience as much distress relating to their plurality as CDD systems do. With DID and OSDD, you have dissociation, involuntary switching, memory loss, etc etc all relating to the disorder and with being plural. If there's no distress, there's no disorder, right? That's literally the definition of a mental disorder: "a health condition characterized by significant disturbances in thinking, feeling, or behavior that can cause distress or impair daily functioning". DID and OSDD can cause significant distress and/or impairment to daily function. Without that, where's the disordered aspect of the plurality?

Of course, that's not to say that CDD systems can't function without impairment. That's absolutely not true; CDD systems can be perfectly functional with their plurality aspect of the disorder and with time, therapy and possibly medication symptoms can become manageable. However, to be diagnosed with a disorder, something must be causing the system distress. For some systems, it's the presence of alters. For others, it's the dissociation and time loss. Criterion C to be diagnosed with DID states: "The symptoms cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning". Without any distress over your symptoms at all, there can be no disorder.

Another criterion for DID, criterion D, states: "The disturbance is not a normal part of a broadly accepted cultural or religious practice". Tulpamancy, in it's original concept, was a highly spiritual practice and people today still practice it as such. Saying that these people, whose "systems" (for lack of a better word) were not formed from trauma, are delusional or mistaking their spiritual practice for a disorder is wildly inappropriate and extremely harmful. There are also other cultures who have practices similar to this and they should not be discredited either. This criterion also literally acknowledges that "systems" and "alters" as we would describe in the western world can be created through non-traumagenic ways, and to downright reject this proof that is in the DSM-5 that non-traumagenic systems can exist is just, well, stupid. I can't think of a kinder way to say it.

Point two 

For this one, really all I can say is I highly doubt doctors are scrolling on Tumblr getting in a huffy over people expressing themselves. Endogenic plurality is often not a cause of medical concern so urgent research is not a priority for medical professionals. That's not to say, however, that there is NO research. There is research being done on non-traumagenic systems as well as on traumagenic systems; just because there is time being put into one cause of plurality does not mean that the other is completely forgotten. It's not a "You like waffles so you hate pancakes" situation. Both can occur together, and the presence of one kind of plurality doesn't take away the presence of another. There are just different people working on researching different types of plurality.

END OF PART TWO

I used to be anti endo so I want to see what you can say about these arguments I've heard:

Endogenics are either delusional or mistaking their symptoms of CDDs for endogenic plurality.

Endogenics are causing real life doctors to be even more sceptical of an already misunderstood disorder

PART ONE

Disclaimer: I'm not very educated on delusions or evangelical prayer (which I will be referencing later on) so if anything in this post is false or insensitive to people who suffer from delusions or to any evangelical Christians who may see this, please tell me and I will remove or reword the parts that need it. This post is not meant to offend or invalidate anyone. Please do not take anything in this post as an attack, it is not meant to be one. I have nothing against CDD systems or endogenic systems, delusional systems or people, or religious people. 

ALSO I have to make this into like, three parts LMFAO there's a character limit on tumblr posts. It's like 4,000 characters and this post is over 10,000 characters so I'll add the other parts in reblogs. 

Point one

Endogenic systems can very well be formed from delusions, but not always. That claim isn't entirely false, but claiming that ALL endogenic systems are delusional isn't true. I don't know a lot about delusions so I want to keep this section brief to prevent myself from saying something that is untrue and misleading about the condition. To my knowledge, delusions are typically distressing for the affected person. As I have written further on (I'm writing this section last), disorders cause distress and/or impairment in some way or another to the person affected. Without the distress or impairment, there isn't a disorder (not to be mistaken as me saying all delusions are part of a disorder, just bear with me).

Another thing with delusions is that they persist even when there is evidence against the delusion. There is no scientific research against endogenic plurality, and in fact there is some suggesting it is possible, which I'll talk about later on. With psychology, pretty much the first thing you'll learn is that there's often no way to prove something one way or another. Our brains are infinitely complex and expansive and we don't have the research to be able to understand every single thing that happens in the brain (yet). We can only have theories and suggestions. If those theories are shown over and over, they can be seen as a pattern that still has the possibility to be broken and then we can look at that odd one out and say, "Well, there may be a new reason this is happening that we haven't previously thought of" and then research can go into that. So, maybe endogenic systems are delusional. We just do not have the resources to prove that true or false and stating it definitively is a gross misunderstanding of how psychology works on a fundamental basis. By that same logic, CDD systems could be delusional too. There's no way to prove anything with absolute certainty, and so we must accept when we are talking about psychological issues that what we think is "true" or "fact" is just a theory. 

Also a note, the study that I'm going to talk about later on (conducted by Michael Lifshitz, a man with a PhD in Neuroscience from McGill University), when they were interacting with tulpamancers (the subjects of his study), they did psychological evaluations on them and found that they very rarely exhibited signs of psychosis or delusion, so the statement that all endogenic systems are delusional is absolutely redundant as a group of them were evaluated by psychological experts and were deemed to show no signs of distress, psychosis, or symptoms of DID.

END OF PART ONE

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

I used to be anti endo so I want to see what you can say about these arguments I've heard:

Endogenics are either delusional or mistaking their symptoms of CDDs for endogenic plurality.

Endogenics are causing real life doctors to be even more sceptical of an already misunderstood disorder

PART ONE

Disclaimer: I'm not very educated on delusions or evangelical prayer (which I will be referencing later on) so if anything in this post is false or insensitive to people who suffer from delusions or to any evangelical Christians who may see this, please tell me and I will remove or reword the parts that need it. This post is not meant to offend or invalidate anyone. Please do not take anything in this post as an attack, it is not meant to be one. I have nothing against CDD systems or endogenic systems, delusional systems or people, or religious people. 

ALSO I have to make this into like, three parts LMFAO there's a character limit on tumblr posts. It's like 4,000 characters and this post is over 10,000 characters so I'll add the other parts in reblogs. 

Point one

Endogenic systems can very well be formed from delusions, but not always. That claim isn't entirely false, but claiming that ALL endogenic systems are delusional isn't true. I don't know a lot about delusions so I want to keep this section brief to prevent myself from saying something that is untrue and misleading about the condition. To my knowledge, delusions are typically distressing for the affected person. As I have written further on (I'm writing this section last), disorders cause distress and/or impairment in some way or another to the person affected. Without the distress or impairment, there isn't a disorder (not to be mistaken as me saying all delusions are part of a disorder, just bear with me).

Another thing with delusions is that they persist even when there is evidence against the delusion. There is no scientific research against endogenic plurality, and in fact there is some suggesting it is possible, which I'll talk about later on. With psychology, pretty much the first thing you'll learn is that there's often no way to prove something one way or another. Our brains are infinitely complex and expansive and we don't have the research to be able to understand every single thing that happens in the brain (yet). We can only have theories and suggestions. If those theories are shown over and over, they can be seen as a pattern that still has the possibility to be broken and then we can look at that odd one out and say, "Well, there may be a new reason this is happening that we haven't previously thought of" and then research can go into that. So, maybe endogenic systems are delusional. We just do not have the resources to prove that true or false and stating it definitively is a gross misunderstanding of how psychology works on a fundamental basis. By that same logic, CDD systems could be delusional too. There's no way to prove anything with absolute certainty, and so we must accept when we are talking about psychological issues that what we think is "true" or "fact" is just a theory. 

Also a note, the study that I'm going to talk about later on (conducted by Michael Lifshitz, a man with a PhD in Neuroscience from McGill University), when they were interacting with tulpamancers (the subjects of his study), they did psychological evaluations on them and found that they very rarely exhibited signs of psychosis or delusion, so the statement that all endogenic systems are delusional is absolutely redundant as a group of them were evaluated by psychological experts and were deemed to show no signs of distress, psychosis, or symptoms of DID.

END OF PART ONE

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

not a debate, you guys are just doing awesome

aw thank you! i appreciate that ^^

we haven’t gotten any asks yet, i’m a little disappointed /hj

but i did say in my first post that only the bravest of the brave will debate me without anon asks lmfao so it may take a while

[interstellars-syscourse-debates]

calling all anti-endos

i am the host of the interstellar cluster and i am opening my asks to everyone who wants to debate me on the topic of non-traumagenic systems.

anon asks will be off so only the bravest of the brave of you will come forward.

non-debating asks will be deleted. you must be respectful and you must actually give me a chance to explain my side just as i will give you the chance to explain your side.

the second anyone starts throwing insults or becomes the slightest bit disrespectful towards me as a person, the debate is off and you’ll be blocked. you have the right to do the same to me. no questions asked, no block evading.

so, send me your debate