So if somebody simply says "Cool, I agree" as Vader said here - you add his vote, but if somebody says "I disagree" - it needs explanation, right?
"Nice" double standards.
Of course, that's how it should be. It's actually simple logic: if someone doesn't accept it, there is a reason why they don't. But if someone does accept it, that means they accepted it because the blog I wrote received their approval. So those who accept it don't really have anything extra they need to do—at most, what are they supposed to do anyway?
Add my vote to the category of people who disagree. The existence of
a ton of anti-feats is enough for it.
Actually, even before opening the CRT, I was thinking of automatically adding you to the disagreeing section, because I already knew you were going to say this anyway.
2.1) ...to prove that "The Final Other" and Gan are different characters, if he thinks so. "The Final Other" originates from IT (novel), which is not a direct part of the Dark Tower books.
Bro... The novel It doesn't have a direct narrative connection to the Dark Tower series, but all of Stephen King's stories take place in the same universe anyway. So there is no cosmological difference between the It novel and the Dark Tower novels.
Jockey, the main reason I haven't wanted to debate with you is that you tend to treat your own arguments as if they were absolute facts, while consistently ignoring mine. But it's fine—when opening a content revision, I already took these kinds of things into account. Since there's no issue with you using arguments you've previously used in other CRTs, then I'll do the same. Because nothing has changed in your previous arguments, I will present again the points I previously offered to you as counterarguments.
2.2) ...to prove that "The Final Other" is stronger than Gan.
Good luck, especially in these attempts, because:
"The Final Other is author" is an in-universe title.
"Gan can control authors" is an in-universe ability.
"He was flying past the Turtle now, and even at his tremendous skidding speed, the Turtle's plated side seemed to go on and on to his right. He thought dimly of riding in a train and passing one going in the other direction, a train that was so long it seemed eventually to stand still or even move backward. He could still hear It, yammering and buzzing, Its voice high and angry, not human, full of mad hate. But when the Turtle spoke, Its voice was blanked out utterly. The Turtle spoke in Bill's head, and Bill understood somehow that there was yet Another, and that Final Other dwelt in a void beyond this one. This Final Other was, perhaps, the creator of the Turtle, which only watched, and It, which only ate. This Other was a force beyond the universe, a power beyond all other power, the author of all there was."
- Source: It (Novel)
"He looked at Stephen King’s unnaturally
twisted body beneath the left front wheel of the blue vehicle and thought Good!
with unthinking savagery. Good! If someone has to die here, let it be you!
To hell with Gan’s navel, to hell with the stories that come out of it, to hell
with the Tower, let it be you and not my boy!"
- The Dark Tower, book #7.
"No writer is Gan - no painter, no sculptor, no maker of music. We are kas-ka Gan.......The prophets of Gan." - The Dark Tower
Conclusion: Gan > TFO. Easy, by in-universe standards.
Honestly, this is a
False Equivalence fallacy. There is a serious logical inconsistency here. The first issue is this: the only writer we clearly see serving Kas-Ka in the series is Stephen King, and Stephen King is a character who can get into an accident and be severely injured, rather than a divine omnipotent figure like the Final Other. In that case, based on what logic are you placing a human writer like King and an omnipotent figure like the Final Other within the same logical framework? This is a serious case of equivocation and false equivalence.
For Stephen King:
"Drive," he said. His hands caressed the steering wheel as if he longed to be gone immediately. Roland supposed he did. "Wake up. little by little. When I get to a house or store, tell them Stephen King's. hurt side o' the road and he needs help. I know he's still alive because he talked to me. It was an accident." He paused. "It wasn't my fault. He was walking in the road." A pause. "Probably." —Dark Tower VII
For The Final Other:
This Final Other was, perhaps, the creator of the Turtle, which only watched, and It, which only ate. This Other was a force beyond the universe, a power beyond all other power, the author of all there was.
2.3) ...to prove that "The Final Other" transcends the Crimson King.
Good luck, because the Crimson King has the highest degree of in-universe metahax:
"And the Dark Tower? Stephen King’s version of
the Dark Tower? Or Gan’s version, or the Prim’s version? Lost forever,
all of them. And that sound you hear? Why, that must be the Crimson King,
laughing and laughing and laughing from somewhere deep in the Discordia. And
maybe Mordred the Spider-Boy, laughing along with him."
- The Dark Tower, book #7.
To be honest, the Crimson King never managed to do this. Moreover, you have your own
arguments that show how weak he is. Even if we completely dismiss these arguments, the Crimson King never managed to achieve what he desired. This cannot be considered a serious argument. Moreover, I can swear that you haven’t read my blog, because you’re telling me things I’ve already addressed there: White’s power encompasses both good and evil (Crimson King’s power).
2.4) Even if we ignore all previously mentioned anti-feats, there is the final and also important one - the Final Other dwells in a higher dimension.
"He was flying past the Turtle now, and even at his tremendous skidding speed, the Turtle's plated side seemed to go on and on to his right. He thought dimly of riding in a train and passing one going in the other direction, a train that was so long it seemed eventually to stand still or even move backward. He could still hear It, yammering and buzzing, Its voice high and angry, not human, full of mad hate. But when the Turtle spoke, Its voice was blanked out utterly. The Turtle spoke in Bill's head, and Bill understood somehow that there was yet Another, and that Final Other dwelt in a void beyond this one. This Final Other was, perhaps, the creator of the Turtle, which only watched, and It, which only ate. This Other was a force beyond the universe, a power beyond all other power, the author of all there was."
- Source: It (Novel)
I think you’re committing a
Strawman Fallacy here. The original text doesn’t mention that he lives in a higher dimension, not even the slightest hint of it. Ah Jockey, you usually insist that arguments lacking certainty should not be taken seriously, yet somehow you ignore this when it comes to the Other being Tier 0. Anyway, there is nothing that definitively proves the Other exists in a separate location. Anyone reading that passage in the book would understand that it is highly ambiguous. While the text mentions that the Final Other “dwelt in a void beyond this one,” this description occurs in a rapid, surreal sequence that Bill cannot fully comprehend and is never mentioned again. This passage does not imply that the Other resides in a specific, definite location like the gods in the Lovecraftian universe who are known to dwell in the Ultimate Void, or Eru in Tolkien’s Timeless Halls. Instead, the text conveys an ambiguous, incorporeal presence beyond the known void (the void in which Maturin exists). Therefore, for Tier 0 classification, the Final Other is not tied to any particular location. The text does not even suggest what the Other is doing in that space, nor whether it is bound to it; it only refers to a being that Bill senses.
Listen Jockey, if you detail this void for me and actually prove convincingly that it is a definite, real place just like Eru’s residence in the Timeless Halls, I will concede that the Dark Tower is not Tier 0. On the other hand, my view remains that this void stems from Bill’s mind, a vague and unconscious expression.
(That is what he says everywhere)
