- 22,681
- 23,229
She can make Meta-Hierarchies (High 1-A structures). So the cosmology would back up that rating in this circumstance.
-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Logical problems with DKD High 1-A+ [Staff Votes: 3 - 0] [ACCEPTED]
- Thread starter ExcelsisBerny
- Start date
-
- Tags
- demon king daimao
- Status
BoastJr
He/Him- 2,746
- 3,965
Am I ineffable
ArgentDragonPluto
He/Him- 2,518
- 3,003
I think the CRT is far from cleared up to rush its closing. In fact, after skimming it, Nova's post alone has more issues than what Berny has said in her entirety in this thread, and it's a long one, so I will have to take a while to respond. (And even then it will be after work, which I still have hours left of.)
ExcelsisBerny
She/Her- 1,663
- 2,939
- Thread starter
- #84
No one is going to wait for you to regurgitate what we have already addressed. Learn to take the loss; this thread was accepted and the debate has already lasted a week. We are not obligated to keep wasting time.
ArgentDragonPluto
He/Him- 2,518
- 3,003
Except I called out your faulty arguments more directly since letting you continue with head-canon and false premises that I exposed, and alluded to the same faulty arguments more passively, wasn't enough for people to see the issues you create.
Oh, and this CRT has only been open for 5 days with me being the only major defendant so far. But now that I showed things more bluntly, I guess I understand why you'd want to rush this ASAP.
ExcelsisBerny
She/Her- 1,663
- 2,939
- Thread starter
- #86
Lmfao.
ScrollerGNL
He/Him- 51
- 35
This is vsbattle.com, relax buddy.
- 5,463
- 6,528
vsbattles.com, actually.
ScrollerGNL
He/Him- 51
- 35
This is why you got nuked off of discord.com.
- 3,238
- 1,781
Go to all-purpose and ask staffs about open profiles and close this CRT
All-purpose request thread (New forum)
I need these profiles to be unlocked so I can apply the changes from this revision, which was accepted except enhanced accelerated development, thank you. https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Ayanokouji_Kiyotaka
Last edited:
ArgentDragonPluto
He/Him- 2,518
- 3,003
Hello. Now I'll be breaking down Nova's response from earlier. It's late and took a while to complete so I'm going to sleep. (work tomorrow) If this CRT doesn't get rushed to closing, then tomorrow I'll respond to older replies that I see need to be responded to. However, if this post gets replied to, I will prioritize it.
For starters, finite space is only referring to how the world is before possibilities, and Akuto making it finite, and not how it actually can be. Afterlife is a world of desire which is primarily most influenced by Akuto:
You're also falsely applying a metaphysical principle from analytic philosophy to a fictional linguistic ontology where “possibility = describability.” So, saying “finite space = atomic finitude” is basically a false equivalence. The text uses “finite” narratively (limited set of signifiers), not as an ontological absolute. Since it then states the space is endless.
Meanwhile, the light novel explicitly describes as to why this isn't hyperbolic:
You want people accept your assumption that the statement fails in some possible worlds, but it wouldn't even matter if it does, since that too would be a possible world, IMO. (Though, I'll explain it better than that later instead of just using this "another possible world" part.) Again, we are dealing with all possible worlds here, and nothing indicates it's hyperbolic.
Overall, not only are you trying to ignore the statement because it goes against you and the CRT, but so far you have only created head-canon and use out-of-context statements to prove your points, which the light novel debunks.
This makes “finite space” a previous descriptor of Akuto’s earlier creation that doesn't apply even the slightest and is pure manipulation of context. Additionally, this whole attempt to once again use “atomic facts” from philosophy doesn't work on a malleable fictional world where we can work with what's given by the text. Otherwise, you fabricate a limitation the text never brings forward and one that I have debunked before.
In short, the LN itself debunks this interpretation both narratively (Akuto warping space to be infinite) and conceptually (possibility = linguistic describability, not atomic finitude in a way applied here)
The blog is still misinterpret and everything so far holds as I have, in fact, explained why High 1-A+ works from the start. I guess a problem might be simply not reading into what I say.
So...I hate to break it to you, but using out of context quotes isn't helping you.
1. They arrive in the Afterlife which is reality warped based on desires and perceptions of people, and Akuto himself, from their Main Story.
2. The Afterlife is finite because it was built with the image of the old world, and until all possible stories and the walls of Akuto being broken down.
3. Once possible worlds and story creation is on-going the Afterlife is used as infinite.
Alright, so the comparison to Lewis mr and Wittgenstein’s ls isn’t analogous to DKD’s structure. AFAIK those frameworks describe analytic systems constrained by shared ontological laws. DKD’s Afterlife doesn’t. Its “logical space” isn’t spatiotemporally confined; it’s the total linguistic field that determines what can exist through describability.
Calling it “finite” because it uses finite characters or data is once more category mistake. The ln itself describes those finite units as capable of infinite combination, and thus fictional recursion, forming a qualitative hierarchy.
And invoking the quote “Anything that can be put into writing can happen here” as a limitation contradicts its own function in the story. It’s not a boundary condition but it’s what allows Akuto to manifest every logically possible world, including ones with infinite hierarchies. Bern’s interpretation would still commit a category error: conflating the epistemic scope of description within the Afterlife with the ontological limit of the Afterlife itself.
You are once again forcing this argument into a shape the novel never had. sigh
You keep trying to frame my point as if I’m trying to squeeze “High 1-A+” out of two random lines, when I’m literally quoting the LN’s own statements. (Not to mention, kind of weird being nitpicky about the statement count while then also not letting the CRT stay longer and be discussed.)
Possible worlds in DKD aren’t speculative hypotheticals, but rather tehy are the mechanics of the Afterlife itself. They are stories and those stories are explicitly said to contain other stories, up to any number of recursion. That’s not “assuming maximality,” that’s taking what the light novel gives and not ignoring it.
And yes, this includes mixing two different things: ontological containment and modal expressivity. The Afterlife doesn’t contain the Anti-Universe or the Law of Identity. Otherwise I've already explained this part before. You can’t demand “explicit naming of infinite hierarchy” in a narrative that already gives you the structure and then pretend it’s not there. (And, in fact, technically there being stories with any given number of individuals outside ("These stories can be called stories of higher story density and can form infinite hierarchies.") is quite explicit that it makes no sense for it being baseline 1-A.)
The strict definition of "possible worlds", and later inclusion of “story density” spectrum within the afterlife means these are all consistent, repeated demonstrations of recursive stories within the Afterlife. You can call that “philosophical inflation” if you want, idc, but it’s really just the LN’s own metaphysics being inconvenient for a minimal reading you do. I’m not pulling logic out of thin air, I’m following the text’s internal logic where it leads, while youre the one trying to confine it to an analytic model it doesn’t follow.
Also, the claim that [“anything that can be written can happen” is hyperbole] ignores that the text treats this as a metaphysical axiom, reaffirmed by multiple scenes describing recursive story density. Calling the argument based on “two statements” oversimplifies the consistent structure and strict definition shown in the LN while pretending out of context scenes and head-canon of one or two scenes is better.
Lastly, by applying seemiongly Wittgensteinian or Lewisian logic to a fictional modal system, qualitative recursion gets mixed into quantitative constraint which is never established. The position contradicts itself: admitting infinite combinations while insisting the system is bounded. (no less in a way that straight up isn't stated.) In short, this framework misreads DKD’s internal logic, which portrays the Afterlife as a qualitatively infinite modal space, not a closed logical structure, when you actually know that a story goes Chapter 1 > Chapter 2 > Chapter 3.
Nothing I say is wrong if you've paid attention, just the truth. Me using the light novel itself, and giving back the same energy I've received from the start. The supporting side doesn't use the textual references to back itself up, rather, it uses things that don't apply to the work itself, take things out of context as we'll see in this response, and then goes into circles pretending not to see my points.
It does. As to disprove you, we first have to understand the Afterlife. It is a seemingly finite space due to earlier chapters and doesn't remain that way due to progression.
For starters, finite space is only referring to how the world is before possibilities, and Akuto making it finite, and not how it actually can be. Afterlife is a world of desire which is primarily most influenced by Akuto:
It is finite only because the inhabitants and Akuto had made it like this before, and before breaking down the walls of what might have been in chapter 4. After Akuto reality warps it and release all possible worlds, it's infinite:
So, this already debunks your claim that finite space conditions possible worlds and everything there after when trying to, once again, miss-apply atomic facts. (Not to mention, all possible worlds of different sizes requires an infinite space.) Also, the novel explicitly defines its “building blocks” linguistically as "characters," “stories,” and “tools”. (BTW, just to note, neither of your out of context quotes about finite Afterlife work, since once again, those sentences get directly contradicted later, such as them being broken down + what I quoted about it being endless. Really, it's lack of understanding when it comes to the story's progression.)
You're also falsely applying a metaphysical principle from analytic philosophy to a fictional linguistic ontology where “possibility = describability.” So, saying “finite space = atomic finitude” is basically a false equivalence. The text uses “finite” narratively (limited set of signifiers), not as an ontological absolute. Since it then states the space is endless.
You are dismissing the light novel’s statement as hyperbolic simply based of your own narrative, not context. The LN explicitly says and uses the Afterlife’s “anything that can be written” statement as literal within its metaphysical rules. (rooted in the modality of fiction and linguistic actualization) By calling it "obviously hyperbolic" without real justification you're just trying to ignore the intended meaning of the text to basically rewrite the ontology of the verse to fit your narrative.
Meanwhile, the light novel explicitly describes as to why this isn't hyperbolic:
You want people accept your assumption that the statement fails in some possible worlds, but it wouldn't even matter if it does, since that too would be a possible world, IMO. (Though, I'll explain it better than that later instead of just using this "another possible world" part.) Again, we are dealing with all possible worlds here, and nothing indicates it's hyperbolic.
Overall, not only are you trying to ignore the statement because it goes against you and the CRT, but so far you have only created head-canon and use out-of-context statements to prove your points, which the light novel debunks.
So, your entire “finite space = atomic constraint” idea doesn't work once you account for the actual progression of the Light Novel. The “space is finite” line describes not only an initial, but also malleable state of the Afterlife. This isn't a fixed metaphysical rule like you're trying to push forward. Akuto explicitly alters it into an endless flat plane like I showed before.
This makes “finite space” a previous descriptor of Akuto’s earlier creation that doesn't apply even the slightest and is pure manipulation of context. Additionally, this whole attempt to once again use “atomic facts” from philosophy doesn't work on a malleable fictional world where we can work with what's given by the text. Otherwise, you fabricate a limitation the text never brings forward and one that I have debunked before.
In short, the LN itself debunks this interpretation both narratively (Akuto warping space to be infinite) and conceptually (possibility = linguistic describability, not atomic finitude in a way applied here)
No, what I said still applies and so far you've been miss-applying things that don't work the same way she does. Explained above and will be continued down.
You’re forcing philosophical modal distinctions onto a setting that doesn’t use them in that way, and one where we can discuss based on the text. So, no wonder you're confused. I mean, once again, I'm admitting that I'm not familiar with philosophy, but from a quick search Erzatzist modal realism doesn't fit since while the stories are lies from inside and truth from outside, they are actually there and treated as with real people, while the one you mention is abstract and not like an actual world we'd live in.
Thus unjustified...what? To me this feels like a weird cut-off. I explained how Berny's reasoning is circular and then you just say she thinks its unjustified. Anyway, the Afterlife has concrete possible worlds statement which then would apply to TLOI as that world is just a singular fictional setting within an infinite meta-qualitative layers. So, she scales to possible worlds and encompasses the entirety of fiction mentioned in-story due to being the only real storyteller and her nature.
Fair, but you're misusing this to try and smuggle in a burden shift either way. The clarification is valid, but the argumentative conclusion of “there’s no burden shift, just prove High 1-A+”, is false as I explain anyway.
The blog is still misinterpret and everything so far holds as I have, in fact, explained why High 1-A+ works from the start. I guess a problem might be simply not reading into what I say.
And I debunked above.
You're also committing a false binary here, "either radically true or fails for some," neither case applying to mine btw. As I said, the data and information would be used within the Afterlife for the stories, not once going on about including the literal layers above it as possible worlds. Available information and linguistics allow for story hierarchies within the Afterlife as a baseline where the next views the last as fiction.
You can't miss the Afterlife being reality warped and infinite unless you're purposefully ignoring progression of the story, or maybe you haven't fully read it. But, I included scans above so you should be up to date with the timeline. (Considering you only cite Chapter 3 where it benefits, yeah I think I'm right.)
So...I hate to break it to you, but using out of context quotes isn't helping you.
1. They arrive in the Afterlife which is reality warped based on desires and perceptions of people, and Akuto himself, from their Main Story.
2. The Afterlife is finite because it was built with the image of the old world, and until all possible stories and the walls of Akuto being broken down.
3. Once possible worlds and story creation is on-going the Afterlife is used as infinite.
You’re using a false binary that doesn’t apply to DKD’s structure. Akuto can only write representations of the Law of Identity within the Afterlife, not the real principle itself, which the text establishes as the ground of all describable realities. I think that's what you are missing. “Possible worlds” in DKD are defined linguistically after all. As DontTalkDT already noted in and older CRT, the Law of Identity transcends all logically describable stories. It exists beyond the framework Akuto can manipulate. So even if he writes “TLOI fails,” that’s only a failure within fiction, not of the foundation itself. Your argument misses that distinction entirely.
You’re still forcing DKD’s linguistic system into something that doesn't fit as I explained above. In DKD the “finite characters” aren’t metaphysical atoms but rather they are signifiers that define and expand what can be described. When Akuto opens all possibilities he isn't just permuting finite facts, but he’s breaking the bounds of description itself, which is what the text literally calls “breaking down the walls of the worlds within him.” Infinite combinations here means expansion of logical space and beginning the process of possible worlds, not mere recombination within it. Treating that as a bounded logical system just misses how DKD’s is described to work.
You’re still confusing the defined linguistic possibilities with miss-applied logical atomism. The LN isn’t talking about spatial aggregates or decomposable atomic facts. The “finite space” and “characters” are linguistic constraints and not ontological ones. The “infinite combinations” would be self-generating descriptions that expand the scope of what can be, and gets written. In DKD language creates new describable worlds, yes? So, it doesn’t permute finite atoms inside a fixed logical grid. So your analogy doesn’t apply here at all.
Hmmm...kind of falling into a circle here, IMO. You think the “anything that can be written” statement is hyperbolic just because it contradicts your outcome The light novel treats it literally as a rule due to its strict definition. Its entire logic of “possible worlds” depends on linguistic describability, not metaphoric overstatement. “Finite” in DKD isn’t an ontological limit but a temporary state before Akuto breaks the barriers of the world (one which was set up by the desires of its inhabitants), explicitly creating an endless one. And the Scholastic analogy to contingent beings doesn’t apply here at all. DKD’s "finitude" is narrative-linguistic, not metaphysical.
Youre just restating your conclusion her: “it’s not High 1-A+ because it’s not High 1-A+.” That’s circular. The Afterlife’s logical closure already defines an infinite field of describable possibilities, and the Anti-Universe, as its negation, is beyond all describable propositions, which is precisely what the High 1-A+ range entails.
I'll just respond to all three here so I can focus on the last part.
Alright, so the comparison to Lewis mr and Wittgenstein’s ls isn’t analogous to DKD’s structure. AFAIK those frameworks describe analytic systems constrained by shared ontological laws. DKD’s Afterlife doesn’t. Its “logical space” isn’t spatiotemporally confined; it’s the total linguistic field that determines what can exist through describability.
Calling it “finite” because it uses finite characters or data is once more category mistake. The ln itself describes those finite units as capable of infinite combination, and thus fictional recursion, forming a qualitative hierarchy.
And invoking the quote “Anything that can be put into writing can happen here” as a limitation contradicts its own function in the story. It’s not a boundary condition but it’s what allows Akuto to manifest every logically possible world, including ones with infinite hierarchies. Bern’s interpretation would still commit a category error: conflating the epistemic scope of description within the Afterlife with the ontological limit of the Afterlife itself.
You are once again forcing this argument into a shape the novel never had. sigh
You keep trying to frame my point as if I’m trying to squeeze “High 1-A+” out of two random lines, when I’m literally quoting the LN’s own statements. (Not to mention, kind of weird being nitpicky about the statement count while then also not letting the CRT stay longer and be discussed.)
Possible worlds in DKD aren’t speculative hypotheticals, but rather tehy are the mechanics of the Afterlife itself. They are stories and those stories are explicitly said to contain other stories, up to any number of recursion. That’s not “assuming maximality,” that’s taking what the light novel gives and not ignoring it.
And yes, this includes mixing two different things: ontological containment and modal expressivity. The Afterlife doesn’t contain the Anti-Universe or the Law of Identity. Otherwise I've already explained this part before. You can’t demand “explicit naming of infinite hierarchy” in a narrative that already gives you the structure and then pretend it’s not there. (And, in fact, technically there being stories with any given number of individuals outside ("These stories can be called stories of higher story density and can form infinite hierarchies.") is quite explicit that it makes no sense for it being baseline 1-A.)
The strict definition of "possible worlds", and later inclusion of “story density” spectrum within the afterlife means these are all consistent, repeated demonstrations of recursive stories within the Afterlife. You can call that “philosophical inflation” if you want, idc, but it’s really just the LN’s own metaphysics being inconvenient for a minimal reading you do. I’m not pulling logic out of thin air, I’m following the text’s internal logic where it leads, while youre the one trying to confine it to an analytic model it doesn’t follow.
TL;DR
This whole response attempt mistakes daimaos linguistic ontology for a closed logical system in a way that isn't portrayed or impacts current tiering. The series explicitly defines “possible worlds” as stories actualized by language, not as bounded atomic facts. This whole thing just treats “finite logical space” as literal limitation, even though the narrative shows Akuto expanding those limits to create an unbounded field as it was finite at start because of it's malleable nature.Also, the claim that [“anything that can be written can happen” is hyperbole] ignores that the text treats this as a metaphysical axiom, reaffirmed by multiple scenes describing recursive story density. Calling the argument based on “two statements” oversimplifies the consistent structure and strict definition shown in the LN while pretending out of context scenes and head-canon of one or two scenes is better.
Lastly, by applying seemiongly Wittgensteinian or Lewisian logic to a fictional modal system, qualitative recursion gets mixed into quantitative constraint which is never established. The position contradicts itself: admitting infinite combinations while insisting the system is bounded. (no less in a way that straight up isn't stated.) In short, this framework misreads DKD’s internal logic, which portrays the Afterlife as a qualitatively infinite modal space, not a closed logical structure, when you actually know that a story goes Chapter 1 > Chapter 2 > Chapter 3.
- 5,463
- 6,528
Damn, I read everything. Luckily the response doesn't look meaningful, looks like I'll be heading to sleep today woohoo. Of course the staff team is welcome to re-evaluate all of this, well if it makes you feel better. Doubt it'll change much but kk.
ExcelsisBerny
She/Her- 1,663
- 2,939
- Thread starter
- #93
Changes applied to the profiles. Thank you all for participating in the thread. Have a good day or night.
- 14,997
- 10,333
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
