• 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.

Questuon on Type 1 Conceptual Abstract Existence

TheUnshakableOne

TheUnshakableOne

She/Her
VS Battles
Retired
Messages
6,498
Reaction score
1,712
Been reading some staff comments on concepts and what qualifies for type 1

I just want to make sure I have the right train of thought

Type 2 conceptual manipulation involves manipulating all objects participating in the concept which consequently affects the immaterial concept.

Type 1 is regardless of all objects being manipulated and altered. The immaterial concept remains unchanged.

Do I got this right?
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
Been reading some staff comments on concepts and what qualifies for type 1

I just want to make sure I have the right train of thought

Type 2 conceptual manipulation involves manipulating all objects participating in the concept which consequently affects the immaterial concept.

Type 1 is regardless of all objects being manipulated and altered. The immaterial concept remains unchanged.

Do I got this right?
Click to expand...
Type 2:
You change all the objects? Then the concept changes as well.
You change the concept? Then all the objects change as well.


Type 1:
You change all the objects? The concept doesn't change.
You change the concept? All the objects change as well.

Type 1 is also different by size, you need a reality as big as a universe at least. Acommon example of indipendency of type 1 concept is the concept being fine after the destruction of that reality.
 
^Mostly what they said, except you don't actually need a reality as big as a universe.

It should additionally be noted that manipulating all objects participating in the concept to change a type 2 concept is not considered concept manipulation at all. You need to manipulate the concept.

Where Type 1 is Universals, Type 2 is more like Trope resemblence classes, I suppose.
 
DontTalkDT said:
except you don't actually need a reality as big as a universe.
Click to expand...
How about the "entire reality" of what the concept of rock govern are just 1 rock in entirety of world, i mean there are literally just exist 1 rock in the world. Are it will become Concept type 3 because it is "personal" concept
 
There is a difference between "you govern a reality that is a 30cm pocket dimension containing a single rock" and "you govern a rock".
And there is a difference between "the concept is tied to the rock" and "the concept could instantiate any number of rocks, but happens to only do 1 right now".
 
whether the character can be conceptually omnipotent, if is the only being who created and controls all forms and aspects of concepts including meta-concept?.
 
DontTalkDT said:
It should additionally be noted that manipulating all objects participating in the concept to change a type 2 concept is not considered concept manipulation at all. You need to manipulate the concept.

Where Type 1 is Universals, Type 2 is more like Trope resemblence classes, I suppose.
Click to expand...
How do you prove a concept is type 1 without any universal destruction?
 
DontTalkDT said:
And there is a difference between "the concept is tied to the rock" and "the concept could instantiate any number of rocks, but happens to only do 1 right now".
Click to expand...
I mean the latter. The world just literally have 1 rock or just can have 1 rock
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
How do you prove a concept is type 1 without any universal destruction?
Click to expand...
existing before reality/universe, I suppose.
Fixxed said:
I mean the latter. The world just literally have 1 rock or just can have 1 rock
Click to expand...
I don't think the size of the world about "just can have 1 rock" matters here since conceptuality is essentially separate from physicality.
Quoting Ultima's page, we consider an independent universal to encompass all extensions of its respective element even if those elements do not physically exist in reality in a concrete way, and are merely potentialities.
If they subsist independently of the particulars, and aren't conditioned by them (Instead they are the source and basis of the particulars to begin with), then that gets a lot more interesting. In that case, the concept "Space" would obviously encompass all extensions of time, and the same goes for "Time." So it can't really be lower than Low 1-A at the least. I think it could vary between 1-A and High 1-A+ depending on the context.- Source
Click to expand...
 
Astral_Trinity439 said:
existing before reality/universe, I suppose.
Click to expand...
What I'm most particularly looking for is how can you prove a type 1 of concept if it comes after the universe/realities creation when there is no universal destruction.

Predating or existing after universal destruction is pretty obvious in some cases imo
 
Berga14 said:
Type 1 is also different by size, you need a reality as big as a universe at least. Acommon example of indipendency of type 1 concept is the concept being fine after the destruction of that reality.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, the concept of a specific planet can exist even after the destruction of the material self, but is more hard
 
Can statements of like "beyond existence..." or "beyond space and time..." for a concept can help it get Type 1?
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
Are there any examples that you know of? That don't involve any nuking of a reality
Click to expand...
Preceding Reality: God of War and its primordials are conceptual beings that existed before reality and shaped it

Existing Independently of Reality: Mictlan is a "micro-universe" (I say micro but the structure is infinite, simply the universes in DW are massive due to dimensionality), which exists completely isolated from reality on the surface of the universe and the void, this is because its nature is very corrosive and it was designed to survive even if the timeline (not the timeline of the universe but their personal timeline) of its ancestors was aborted
 
Oliver_de_jesus said:
Preceding Reality: God of War and its primordials are conceptual beings that existed before reality and shaped it

Existing Independently of Reality: Mictlan is a "micro-universe" (I say micro but the structure is infinite, simply the universes in DW are massive due to dimensionality), which exists completely isolated from reality on the surface of the universe and the void, this is because its nature is very corrosive and it was designed to survive even if the timeline (not the timeline of the universe but their personal timeline) of its ancestors was aborted
Click to expand...
I was hoping for examples that involve "existing beyond" instead of predating or reality nuking 😢
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
I was hoping for examples that involve "existing beyond" instead of predating or reality nuking 😢
Click to expand...
Well, there is the Land of fiction which exist as a structureless, yet infinite dimension of imagination/ideas/stories/memes outside the influence of Time Vortex and N-Space beyond of sciences and temporal knowledge, and unrestrained by the laws of physics.
 
Astral_Trinity439 said:
I don't think the size of the world about "just can have 1 rock" matters here since conceptuality is essentially separate from physicality.
Quoting Ultima's page, we consider an independent universal to encompass all extensions of its respective element even if those elements do not physically exist in reality in a concrete way, and are merely potentialities.
Click to expand...
Yeah the size doesnt matters at all. Well it not about not physically exist, you can have concept of soul or death that what it govern are not physical. The thing that the concept govern are counted if it have substance by it own, the concept doesnt need to govern a mere potentiality but if it get "materialized" the universal concept must govern it. If rock A have substance and rock B are mere potentiality, then it is enough for just govern rock A, but if rock B gaining substance and the concept doesnt govern it then it is CM 3 or personal concept but if the concept still govern it then it is CM 1/2 or universal concept
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
I was hoping for examples that involve "existing beyond" instead of predating or reality nuking 😢
Click to expand...
Look at lord of mystery 1A upgrade then, their concept literally exist in higher realm beyond physical realm, make the concept unchangeable even if the world get destroyed or change in any way possible
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
What I'm most particularly looking for is how can you prove a type 1 of concept if it comes after the universe/realities creation when there is no universal destruction.
Click to expand...
Something like it stated of being independent of said universe/reality. Statements like the concept possessing immutability or unchangeability also qualifies. Same goes for it it's stated to be "Beyond Space and Time" or "Outside Space and Time" or the like, since that essentially means it won't be affected by spatio-temporal destruction.

Those are some of the ways I can think of at the moment.
 
Fixxed said:
Yeah the size doesnt matters at all. Well it not about not physically exist, you can have concept of soul or death that what it govern are not physical. The thing that the concept govern are counted if it have substance by it own, the concept doesnt need to govern a mere potentiality but if it get "materialized" the universal concept must govern it. If rock A have substance and rock B are mere potentiality, then it is enough for just govern rock A, but if rock B gaining substance and the concept doesnt govern it then it is CM 3 or personal concept but if the concept still govern it then it is CM 1/2 or universal concept
Click to expand...
If it gets "materialized", that materialization essentially counts as an object or particular bound to said concept.
So yes, if that said object is somehow outside the governing range of the concept, or it's not affected by effecting the concept itself, then the concept would be a personal concept limited to a specific scale of reality rather then governing "all of reality".

However, if the reason for why the object/particular is outside and not governed by the concept is elaborated upon, and deemed to be sufficient enough, then it should still be fine to classify the concept as Type 2 or 1. For example, someone within Non 1-A reality is essentially bound to the concepts governing said reality, but if an external 1-A power makes them "ascend" to a higher reality, they'll essentially be unbound by said concept that governed them previously, insofar as being outside the reality itself that the concept governs and that which they were a part of initially.
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
How do you prove a concept is type 1 without any universal destruction?
Click to expand...
DonttalkDT iirc made an example of this.

But the gist of it is the fact that the concept persist to exist and applies it concept regardless if there is an object to govern or not.

Take for example

If someone exerts the concept of life to his domain say a size of a room
Outside this room the concept of life does not exist thus everything is robots or inanimate objects.

Now if you put these in anime object inside the empty room
They will gain life as per the concepts mandate.

Two things to notice

Nothing is actually alive within the room as it is completely devoid of anything
But the concept of life still persist
This is independence one of the key feature

Another thing is it is only a size of a room and anything outside it the concept is not applicable but we have proven its independence and existence irregardless of the objects governed.

Most of the time type 1 are universal because of the fact that with how concept works they are often universal in within reality and exerts them as long as there is objects it can govern and not exist simply by belief

But these does not prove their independence to reality only when their independence is proven they become type 1
 
So what if a series has a multiverse? A concept is spread across the multiverse instead of concentrated on a single universe?
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
So what if a series has a multiverse? A concept is spread across the multiverse instead of concentrated on a single universe?
Click to expand...
That'll also just be a type 2. For type 1, they have to be independent of whatever reality they govern. It's not about the range of the reality, but rather about their independence and about the concept's own existence outranging the range of existence they govern.

So for a concept governing a multiverse, it'll have to show to be independent of that multiverse as a whole in one way or another.
 
Astral_Trinity439 said:
That'll also just be a type 2. For type 1, they have to be independent of whatever reality they govern. It's not about the range of the reality, but rather about their independence and about the concept's own existence outranging the range of existence they govern.

So for a concept governing a multiverse, it'll have to show to be independent of that multiverse as a whole in one way or another.
Click to expand...
That does make sense
 
Hmm does this example qualify as type 1? This is just a random example.

No statement of them being a concept.

It's stars. Think of like astrology how zodiac signs dictate peoples lives and control them

Even when all the stars in the universe are erased from reality, the immaterial aspect of them still exist and maintain control over reality.


When this immaterial aspect is erased everything they govern and control is erased along with them.

Changes to the immaterial aspect of these stars changes the objects they govern also change

Changes to the physical aspects doesn't do anything.

Is this type 1?
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
Hmm does this example qualify as type 1? This is just a random example.

No statement of them being a concept.

It's stars. Think of like astrology how zodiac signs dictate peoples lives and control them

Even when all the stars in the universe are erased from reality, the immaterial aspect of them still exist and maintain control over reality.


When this immaterial aspect is erased everything they govern and control is erased along with them.

Changes to the immaterial aspect of these stars changes the objects they govern also change

Changes to the physical aspects doesn't do anything.

Is this type 1?
Click to expand...
Seems like a clear type 1 to me, yeah.
It not only follows the definition and standard page word to word, but also serves as a good example for "Independence" for others.

And that, my friend, is 1-A according to a post from Ultima as long as it doesn't have any other anti-feats.
 
Astral_Trinity439 said:
Seems like a clear type 1 to me, yeah.
It not only follows the definition and standard page word to word, but also serves as a good example for "Independence" for others.

And that, my friend, is 1-A according to a post from Ultima as long as it doesn't have any other anti-feats.
Click to expand...
What if the were created alongside the universe?

Edit: The immaterial and material aspects*
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
What if the were created alongside the universe?

Edit: The immaterial and material aspects*
Click to expand...
That doesn't change anything. The matter here is of independence. Preceding the governed object's existence is merely one of the ways to prove independence, but not the only one.
Even if they were created[by someone else] at the same time as the creation of everything else, as long as they're independent of the reality they govern, it's fine.
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
Hmm does this example qualify as type 1? This is just a random example.

No statement of them being a concept.

It's stars. Think of like astrology how zodiac signs dictate peoples lives and control them

Even when all the stars in the universe are erased from reality, the immaterial aspect of them still exist and maintain control over reality.


When this immaterial aspect is erased everything they govern and control is erased along with them.

Changes to the immaterial aspect of these stars changes the objects they govern also change

Changes to the physical aspects doesn't do anything.

Is this type 1?
Click to expand...
Ultima say he will revise CM when all this 1A H1A and 0 upgrade are done

For now this is CM 1, but after the revision just some immaterial force that govern something doesnt even count as concept anymore
 
Fixxed said:
Ultima say he will revise CM when all this 1A H1A and 0 upgrade are done

For now this is CM 1, but after the revision just some immaterial force that govern something doesnt even count as concept anymore
Click to expand...
Then how can you prove something is a concept without a statement that it is a concept?
 
TheUnshakableOne said:
Then how can you prove something is a concept without a statement that it is a concept?
Click to expand...
Being the quidity or whatness of something
Even if it literally stated concept, it will not count, you must eleborate further about the essence of that. And yeah ultima say he will rename CM, it will not "concept" anymore
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ar1216789
CM Type 1 Question
Replies
2
Views
389
TheUnshakableOne
TheUnshakableOne
Aaaaa11112222
Can 4D AP bypass Type 2 Conceptual Manipulation?
Replies
23
Views
2K
TheOrangeGuy09
TheOrangeGuy09
Ar1216789
  • Locked
Some questions about 1-A, Timelines, Conceptual Manip, as well as other stuff
Replies
4
Views
472
Astral_Trinity439
Astral_Trinity439
Rez
Why is fire force concept manip not type 1?
Replies
4
Views
1K
ActuallySpaceMan42
ActuallySpaceMan42
Nekobako
Regeneration from Concept type 2 destruction
Replies
5
Views
1K
Nekobako
Nekobako
Back
Top