- 6,605
- 4,143
I litteraly am the guy who proposed the changes and made the current CM page justifications (except for once sentence in type 3). So I can guarantee it wasn't just merging.Type 1 and 2 concepts were merged with the revision. That's just what happened. You'd have to have never read both the actual page itself or the thread that revised it to believe otherwise.
Kinda hard to not read what one's writing. So I think there's only one of us who can be wrong there.
It really isn't tho. What gives one type 5 instead of 4 is just arbitrary.Also, acausality type 5 is very much a thing in fiction. Ever heard of Destiny, TES, the Cthulhu Mythos, or any number of other verses? Type 4 is just not a good explanation for the sheer degree of acausality present in these characters, plain and simple.
That was the old type 1/2. Any independent concept fits, and they don't have to be platonic, transcendent, or anything.As for the OP. the idea is that the concepts themselves, type 1 or old type 2 for clarification, are acausal, being "outside" and "above" the forms of such things we experience due to their nature.