1-A Imaginary & Metaphysics

[Antvasima]

Weaver himself has admitted that "forms" in Honkai don't actually fit with Plato's theory of forms, and on top of that, I've given evidence and reasons as to why the "allegory of the cave" passage cannot be used as evidence for upwards R>F (or 1-A by extension). In light of that, are you still neutral about the thread, or do you disagree? Your input would be appreciated.

Hats off to you for going above and beyond to research this.

@Everything12

 

[Antvasima]

I request this thread to be staff discussion to prevent further derailment.

Well, maybe, but it would convolute the procedure to determine which regular members that are allowed to participate at this point, and this suggestion seems to likely become rejected anyway.

 

[Weaver261]

this suggestion seems to likely become rejected anyway.

How much disagree votes are necessary for that btw? Given this is a rather important verse (which has a lot of controversies), I wish to get more staff exposure for fair and objective evaluation. Also, Telomera's arguments are also getting keep shoot down one by one with proofs.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, hasn't this 1-A Honkai suggestion been rejected previously within other content revision threads in our forum? That would likely lessen the threshold, and we cannot reasonably argue here forever. Spamming posts will usually only greatly lessen the chance of staff members having the time and energy to read through and evaluate all of it.

 

[Weaver261]

Well, hasn't this 1-A Honkai suggestion been rejected previously within other content revision threads in our forum?

I don't recall one. Not from this perspective at least. This scaling should be the most balance one so far only giving high end characters 1-A lore accurately. We are also not arguing forever as we have been proving telomera's arguments properly with proofs. I will make a summary addressing every problems Telomera and others had for easier evaluation for staffs

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for helping out.

Are you willing to do the same for your arguments, Telomera?

 

[Minophen]

Okay. Thank you for helping out.

Should I do the same?

 

[Weaver261]

Summary for staff evaluation

1. Star Dream's Dream Universe isn't R>F indicator since that Universe wasn't created by Star Dream. And it's also not unreal to her. She also has no power.

Ans - As per vsb standard, lower reality doesn't necessarily need to be created by higher entity as quoted here.

The concept is most commonly used to apply to author avatars and other beings in the 'real world'. However, it can also be applied to any character who authors a lower world of existence or even a 'player' who simply consumes the media rather than authors it.

What's important here is Star Dream viewing an actual universe as a dream and maintaining it showing clear R>F. She is one of the godheads whose power could rival Will of Honkai who can manipulate all Honkai. So the arguments of Star Dream having no power is wrong

2. Plato's cave theory mentioned in Honkai doesn't fit with actual theory and forms in honkai changes which would disqualify immutability. Thus, R>F is invalid. And "Shadow" mentioned in cave theory doesn't indicate shadow of theory of forms as "shadow" term is also used for other meanings in other parts of story showing inconsistency.

Ans - Honkai series drew clear inspiration from Plato's theory of forms to explain that Stigmata are all true thing outside the cave while humanity is shadow. If qualitative superiority is proven, mutability by itself shouldn't be a problem since 1-A isn't 0. About "Shadow" part, this user explained that very well.

Spoiler: Explanation

Because the shadows in the cave analogy are specifically referring to Plato's theory of forms. And if you want further proof, there's the Tree being the origin of everything, including laws and truth. Since ontologies are a thing in HI3, then the tree by extension must be thus also be the origin of all possible ontologies. Furthermore, the tree is said to treat the worlds within it as if it were data in a server, which heavily suggests R>F. As for the term 'shadow' not being used in the R>F way. I'll just put it bluntly. What else could 'shadow' mean while being used in the context of Plato's cave. In the other cases, the shadows had other possible meanings that wouldn't contradict with the Plato's cave analogy
The observers (I'm guessing you mean the prisoners) are completely irrelevant when only talking about what's 'real' and what isn't. The fire is the 'form of the good', the objects casting the shadows are 'forms', and the shadows are 'particulars'. There is no need for the prisoners. The reason Plato added it was to show how people will reject ideas that conflict with their world view. In fact, that was the main point of the entire 'theory of forms'. The observers were never given a discrete ranking in the analogy of 'forms'. The 'contradictory' statements were also given by two people under two very different contexts

3. Since Honkai Energy is filled in Earth (Reality), Imaginary would need to qualitatively transcend itself (cuz Honkai is imaginary internal energy) and it wouldn't make sense.

Spoiler: Answer

We all are taught this in chapter 2

Fu Hua : You'll be fighting more than Honkai Beasts. The Honkai manifests itself in many ways.

Honkai manifest itself in many ways. Honkai is a force of chaos that will destroy civilization. As civilization grew and become more advanced (having more order = negative entropy), the balance must be made somewhere to rise the entropy which is Honkai Energy.

The concept of "anti-space", or "imaginary space", is akin to these pillars that defy existence in reality: it fundamentally opposes our physical constants, our "real world". Phenomena impossible in reality might be commonplace on that side. In connection to the hypothesis regarding the Great Eruption, as our civilisation continues to evolve, accumulating negative entropy within its internal cycle, the corresponding "Imaginary Internal Energy", or Honkai energy, also rises in tandem.

So, Honkai energy != Honkai. Honkai energy is generated through the development of negative entropy.

To clarify this, only those who have access to Honkai or Imaginary will have 1-A. Using Honkai or Imaginary energy (like path energy) will not result in 1-A.

If I am missing anything, feel free to let me know.

 

[Antvasima]

Are you willing to do the same for your arguments, Telomera?

@Telomera

 

[Weaver261]

Bump

 

[Weaver261]

Bump

 

[Telomera]

@Telomera

A reoccurring theme in my refutation of OP's arguments is my pointing out that OP takes an overly-specific, hyper-literal interpretation of anything that vaguely seems to imply R>F, even when there is no indication of such a relationship actually existing. Our standards (rightfully) specify that mere comparisons or analogies of dreamers and dreams and the like are insufficient evidence for R>F.

RE: 1-A Star Dream
The fact that the universe that Star Dream sees in her dreams existed before she ever dreamed of it and continues to exist even outside of her dreams when she awakens quite clearly shows that at the very least, the universe Star Dream dreams of is not literally just a dream of hers. Of course, it's still "possible" that she has R>F over them even if they exist independently from her or even if she didn't create them, but that's just a possibility. It's nothing more than headcanon as there is no proof that she has actual, literal R>F over the universe she experiences in her dreams. The only other evidence brought up showing that Star Dream has R>F is that she is "maintaining the operation of" that universe, but this still isn't evidence of R>F. Obviously, sustaining a universe isn't a 1-A feat. And of course, our standards (rightfully) point out that simply viewing another world as a dream or some other sort of medium that is usually used to depict fiction is not enough to prove R>F. There must be actual context that shows that the "higher world" literally views the "lower world" as literally "not really real" or insubstantial compared to itself, and the issue is that Honkai Impact lacks such context.

RE: Plato's allegory of the cave being referenced in Honkai
The analogy in Honkai is obviously inspired by Plato, but a verse being "inspired" by something doesn't actually entail scaling to it, nor does it indicate that that verse accurately reproduces that "something." It's quite clear that Honkai diverges quite greatly from Plato's theory of Forms, and even Weaver admits that. As a result, we can't actually scale anything in Honkai to Plato's theory of Forms unless we have evidence proving otherwise. It would be nothing more than special pleading to try to say that Platonism's R>F is somehow an exception that is valid to scale Honkai to for no reason. All we have is an analogy that's somewhat inspired by Plato, which, as I pointed out above, is not nearly enough to qualify for R>F

RE: Honkai energy =/ Honkai itself
The argument that R>F isn't contradictory because there's a difference between Honkai energy and "Honkai proper" only works if one can somehow show a qualitative difference between the supposed 1-A Honkai and Honkai energy in general. The issue is that this distinction just doesn't make any sense. Even the difference between something like Earth and the Imaginary Tree itself is merely a quantitative difference between different transfinite magnitudes.

RE: Imaginary is the "true essence" of the cosmos
This just isn't 1-A. Pretty simple.

 

[Everything12]

I think that getting the opinions of other staff is more important, as otherwise we aren't getting anywhere in either direction. My opinion also might change again depend on the input of other staff so stating anything now is rather pointless.

 

[Weaver261]

RE: Honkai energy =/ Honkai itself
The argument that R>F isn't contradictory because there's a difference between Honkai energy and "Honkai proper" only works if one can somehow show a qualitative difference between the supposed 1-A Honkai and Honkai energy in general. The issue is that this distinction just doesn't make any sense. Even the difference between something like Earth and the Imaginary Tree itself is merely a quantitative difference between different transfinite magnitudes.

I want to give better context on this for the staff to understand why this argument is wrong. Telomera is saying Honkai on earth and Honkai in imaginary tree has quantitative difference.

What Einstein saying there was completely metaphorical and not a fact. She is just saying that Honkai can't be completely removed from existence. So they will refuse projects stigma which is to transform humanity into a higher existence like Honkai (also losing humanity in the process). And let the earth adapt to Honkai.

Tesla: Our way of artificially creating the Herrscher of the End is to emulate its authority so that we gain control of the power of Finality.
Tesla: Humans will not adapt to the environment, but transform the environment to adapt to humans.
Bronya: Which is to say… one of us needs to step up, seize the authority of Finality, and become the Herrscher of the End?
Einstein: That’s the plan.

Kiana ends up staying on the moon and keeping Honkai energies at bay for earth and humanity adapt.

Kiana: Before the newborn Earth is able to withstand the power of Finality, I will remain on the moon and do my best to reduce the impact of the Honkai on the world.

Kiana: We will make the Honkai a real tool for humanity… like how past humans conquered fire and electricity.
Kiana: When that time comes, all humans will be as powerful as Herrschers, and just as free… without losing the purity and beauty of their originality.

Kiana: (And, compared to the past, the Herrscher of Sentience might need more care.)
Kiana: (We cannot be sure what will happen, but there will definitely be much less Honkai energy compared to the past).

So Einstein is clearly talking about Honkai energy in that scan and how it's impossible to remove all. Since I have proved Honkai energy != Honkai, the argument of quantitative difference fall short here.

Finally, it's more of a will than a measurable power. It's a natural process of the universe.

Honkai is a will that grows with civilization and aims at destroying humanity.
—Kevin Kaslana, The Honkai-verse Retrospect

 

[Telomera]

What Einstein saying there was completely metaphorical and not a fact. She is just saying that Honkai can't be completely removed from existence. So they will refuse projects stigma which is to transform humanity into a higher existence like Honkai (also losing humanity in the process). And let the earth adapt to Honkai.

I won't make a full-fledged debunk or anything, but that's such a crazy argument tbh. I urge any staff evaluating this to keep in mind that there's no reason for Einstein to bring up such specific terminology about transfinite numbers if it were just a metaphor. What symbolic meaning could such terminology even have in the first place?

 

[Telomera]

I think that getting the opinions of other staff is more important, as otherwise we aren't getting anywhere in either direction. My opinion also might change again depend on the input of other staff so stating anything now is rather pointless.

Do you think you could ping some staff please?

 

[Huesito88]

Do you think you could ping some staff please?

Which ones? (All the 1-A gang?)

 

[Telomera]

Which ones? (All the 1-A gang?)

I guess. As many as would be appropriate for this thread.

 

[Weaver261]

I won't make a full-fledged debunk or anything, but that's such a crazy argument tbh. I urge any staff evaluating this to keep in mind that there's no reason for Einstein to bring up such specific terminology about transfinite numbers if it were just a metaphor. What symbolic meaning could such terminology even have in the first place?

What Einstein was saying there refers back to this. This dialogues are before Einstein start saying transfinite stuffs.

Durandal: I remember that the original Project Selene was about mass-producing a device that can convert Honkai energy into normal energy to render Honkai energy harmless.

Welt Yang: Yes. Assuming there’s a linear relation between the Honkai and civilisation, it would’ve been the perfect industrial solution.

Welt Yang: But Anti-Entropy later realised that the Herrscher of the End exists beyond the world. It’s intrinsically different from the other Herrschers.

Welt Yang: This is what caused the Selene to fail in the Previous Era. In the face of a transcendent being, no amount of time or production capacity was enough.

Welt Yang: Therefore, the 2nd version of the plan is no longer an industrial solution, but a special operation.

Mei: Special operation?

Kiana: It’s similar to the situation with the Herrscher of Domination and Otto in that we need to fundamentally change how our enemies exist..

So there are two context going on in current conversation. First is 2nd gen selene project which is to emulate Finality herrscher to convert Honkai energy to usable energy since exhausting Honkai energy on earth won't make any difference. Second is how all herrschers are linked to finality so they must gather other authorities to emulate this. So, the game plan is to artificially create Kiana as Herrscher of Finality and let Kiana acts a converter and humanity to adapt to it.

In previous era, Selene depleted 3% of Herrscher of the end's Honkai energy and made her lose control of 30%. But even so, she recovered all Honkai energy within 12 hours showing Honkai energy is basically unremovable because it's even infinite in transfinite set. Since Einstein is talking about the energy, quantitative difference make sense. (Don't argue me saying Einstein is saying "Honkai", not Honkai energy. Honkai and Honkai energy are sometimes interchangeable in some contexts. Not to even mention that Einstein is kinda eccentric.

Einstein: Even if we exhaust the Honkai on Earth, we’re still wandering around the lowest cardinal number and far from seeing the Imaginary Tree that’s also infinite in scale in a transfinite sense.
Mei: …?
Tesla: …Forget it, if you keep asking her, she might start explaining transfinite numbers.

 

[Weaver261]

Bump

 

[Weaver261]

Bump

 

[Antvasima]

Summary for staff evaluation

1. Star Dream's Dream Universe isn't R>F indicator since that Universe wasn't created by Star Dream. And it's also not unreal to her. She also has no power.

Ans - As per vsb standard, lower reality doesn't necessarily need to be created by higher entity as quoted here.

What's important here is Star Dream viewing an actual universe as a dream and maintaining it showing clear R>F. She is one of the godheads whose power could rival Will of Honkai who can manipulate all Honkai. So the arguments of Star Dream having no power is wrong

2. Plato's cave theory mentioned in Honkai doesn't fit with actual theory and forms in honkai changes which would disqualify immutability. Thus, R>F is invalid. And "Shadow" mentioned in cave theory doesn't indicate shadow of theory of forms as "shadow" term is also used for other meanings in other parts of story showing inconsistency.

Ans - Honkai series drew clear inspiration from Plato's theory of forms to explain that Stigmata are all true thing outside the cave while humanity is shadow. If qualitative superiority is proven, mutability by itself shouldn't be a problem since 1-A isn't 0. About "Shadow" part, this user explained that very well.

Spoiler: Explanation

Because the shadows in the cave analogy are specifically referring to Plato's theory of forms. And if you want further proof, there's the Tree being the origin of everything, including laws and truth. Since ontologies are a thing in HI3, then the tree by extension must be thus also be the origin of all possible ontologies. Furthermore, the tree is said to treat the worlds within it as if it were data in a server, which heavily suggests R>F. As for the term 'shadow' not being used in the R>F way. I'll just put it bluntly. What else could 'shadow' mean while being used in the context of Plato's cave. In the other cases, the shadows had other possible meanings that wouldn't contradict with the Plato's cave analogy
The observers (I'm guessing you mean the prisoners) are completely irrelevant when only talking about what's 'real' and what isn't. The fire is the 'form of the good', the objects casting the shadows are 'forms', and the shadows are 'particulars'. There is no need for the prisoners. The reason Plato added it was to show how people will reject ideas that conflict with their world view. In fact, that was the main point of the entire 'theory of forms'. The observers were never given a discrete ranking in the analogy of 'forms'. The 'contradictory' statements were also given by two people under two very different contexts

3. Since Honkai Energy is filled in Earth (Reality), Imaginary would need to qualitatively transcend itself (cuz Honkai is imaginary internal energy) and it wouldn't make sense.

Spoiler: Answer

We all are taught this in chapter 2

Honkai manifest itself in many ways. Honkai is a force of chaos that will destroy civilization. As civilization grew and become more advanced (having more order = negative entropy), the balance must be made somewhere to rise the entropy which is Honkai Energy.

So, Honkai energy != Honkai. Honkai energy is generated through the development of negative entropy.

To clarify this, only those who have access to Honkai or Imaginary will have 1-A. Using Honkai or Imaginary energy (like path energy) will not result in 1-A.

If I am missing anything, feel free to let me know.

A reoccurring theme in my refutation of OP's arguments is my pointing out that OP takes an overly-specific, hyper-literal interpretation of anything that vaguely seems to imply R>F, even when there is no indication of such a relationship actually existing. Our standards (rightfully) specify that mere comparisons or analogies of dreamers and dreams and the like are insufficient evidence for R>F.

RE: 1-A Star Dream
The fact that the universe that Star Dream sees in her dreams existed before she ever dreamed of it and continues to exist even outside of her dreams when she awakens quite clearly shows that at the very least, the universe Star Dream dreams of is not literally just a dream of hers. Of course, it's still "possible" that she has R>F over them even if they exist independently from her or even if she didn't create them, but that's just a possibility. It's nothing more than headcanon as there is no proof that she has actual, literal R>F over the universe she experiences in her dreams. The only other evidence brought up showing that Star Dream has R>F is that she is "maintaining the operation of" that universe, but this still isn't evidence of R>F. Obviously, sustaining a universe isn't a 1-A feat. And of course, our standards (rightfully) point out that simply viewing another world as a dream or some other sort of medium that is usually used to depict fiction is not enough to prove R>F. There must be actual context that shows that the "higher world" literally views the "lower world" as literally "not really real" or insubstantial compared to itself, and the issue is that Honkai Impact lacks such context.

RE: Plato's allegory of the cave being referenced in Honkai
The analogy in Honkai is obviously inspired by Plato, but a verse being "inspired" by something doesn't actually entail scaling to it, nor does it indicate that that verse accurately reproduces that "something." It's quite clear that Honkai diverges quite greatly from Plato's theory of Forms, and even Weaver admits that. As a result, we can't actually scale anything in Honkai to Plato's theory of Forms unless we have evidence proving otherwise. It would be nothing more than special pleading to try to say that Platonism's R>F is somehow an exception that is valid to scale Honkai to for no reason. All we have is an analogy that's somewhat inspired by Plato, which, as I pointed out above, is not nearly enough to qualify for R>F

RE: Honkai energy =/ Honkai itself
The argument that R>F isn't contradictory because there's a difference between Honkai energy and "Honkai proper" only works if one can somehow show a qualitative difference between the supposed 1-A Honkai and Honkai energy in general. The issue is that this distinction just doesn't make any sense. Even the difference between something like Earth and the Imaginary Tree itself is merely a quantitative difference between different transfinite magnitudes.

RE: Imaginary is the "true essence" of the cosmos
This just isn't 1-A. Pretty simple.

@Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Agnaa @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @Planck69 @Everything12 @Ovy7 @Rakih_Elyan @IdiosyncraticLawyer @RatherClueless @GrathOfLux @Udlmaster @VeryGoofyToddler2

Are any of you willing to help evaluate this please?

 

[Udlmaster]

@Udlmaster

Are any of you willing to help evaluate this please?

Yeah, from what I've seen, it's still rooted in the same foundation, which I already said I disagree with and addressed before.

My view hasn't really changed since then.

 

[Antvasima]

Yes, I also think that this seems unreliable.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

@Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Agnaa @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @Planck69 @Everything12 @Ovy7 @Rakih_Elyan @IdiosyncraticLawyer @RatherClueless @GrathOfLux @Udlmaster @VeryGoofyToddler2

Are any of you willing to help evaluate this please?

Yeah, I overall think Telomera makes good sense here. Don't believe I have anything to add in that respect.

 

[Weaver261]

Yeah, I overall thinks Telomera makes good sense here. Don't believe I have anything to add in that respect.

Did u read the OP or just the summary? Summary doesn't include everything for 1-A.
Also, I have proved why Telomera's wrong with in game context properly. Unless my scans are wrong, there shouldn't be any problem with 1-A. Can you elaborate why you disagree as well?

 

[VeryGoofyToddler2]

@Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Agnaa @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @Planck69 @Everything12 @Ovy7 @Rakih_Elyan @IdiosyncraticLawyer @RatherClueless @GrathOfLux @Udlmaster @VeryGoofyToddler2

Are any of you willing to help evaluate this please?

I liked Udl argumentation on top of Telomera.

 

[Antvasima]

It seems like this suggested revision has been rejected then.

 

[Weaver261]

It seems like this suggested revision has been rejected then.

I just think it's really unfair when I have proved why Telomera and Uld are wrong with proper scans and current vsb standards. Unless you can prove why I am wrong, this shouldn't get rejected. If u gonna say staffs have no obligation to do so, well what can I do. But I really question the reliability of the system because everything I have proposed so far is within the accepted range of current standards. Do point me out if I was wrong

 

[Minophen]

I would like to bring in a new direction to look at things from.

First, Plato's analogy of the cave.
He referred to the shadows as the particulars, the objects casting the shadows as the real world/true world, and the sun/flame as the 'form of the good'. One thing I would like to mention is that another word for 'form' would be the 'idea' of something.

Now, I don't believe it has been brought up yet, but the stigma space is also referred to as 'the world of ideas', which would correspond to the 'real world' in Plato's analogy.



It also makes sense in lore, as the goal of Project stigma was to move humanity to the stigma space, however, in doing so, it would also cause humanity to lose its individuality, living on as one single consciousness. This aligns with Plato's theory of forms, as there can only be one perfect 'form' of 'humanity'.

Due to the above, I believe that the cave analogy does hold up quite well, especially since it later mentions that the goal of Project Stigma was to transfer the humans, who were compared to the shadows on the wall, to the real 'true world', the Stigma space.



To go even a bit further, the imaginary tree is said to be the origin of all laws and truth.



Since the tree is the origin of truth, it can be seen as the sun/flame in the cave analogy since another term for 'form' would be 'truth'. It also means that ???'s assumption that Kevin sees himself as the flame is more valid than previously assumed, since If I remember correctly, he had already taken a piece of the Finality authority which is at least equal to the tree in terms of 'rank'.

And finally, there's the game server analogy of the tree.



Of course, this analogy could be purely metaphorical, but if my argument about the tree representing 'the form of good' holds up, this would be incredibly strong evidence for R>F transcendence.

I am aware that Telomera did "debunk" this, so I want to address that beforehand.

They said that this does not prove any quantitative or qualitative superiority in relation to the universes/leaves. However, that is only the case if you ignore the various other statements about the imaginary tree such as:


The tree having infinite universe and futures

https://imgur.com/a/7sHNCWt
The size of the tree (since the original was comparing the amount of honkai in one world vs the tree) being infinite in the sense of the transfinite, which would be either Aleph-1, Aleph-ω (not absolute infinity, which is denoted Ω) or an inaccessible cardinal, depending on how you interpret it.

Another way to look at the size of the tree compared to the universes would be likening number of base universes in the tree to the amount of natural numbers/integers (Aleph-0), and the amount of all possible futures at all possible times of those worlds to the amount of real numbers (Aleph-1).

Any way you slice it, there is at least an uncoutably infinite amount of leaves on the tree.

As for qualitative superiority, while it is true that a game server might not see the data it has as fiction, the person accessing the server would (ie. Cocoon, Otto) and you wouldn't say that a person is more real than a server. Not being able to alter save files also isn't an anti feat, because you wouldn't be able to alter a save file in real life. You can go back to the last save point, but everything afterwards would be a new save file, not an altered version of the original. Even if you delete the original and replace it, it still wouldn't be altering the original.

So in short, yes, this is valid evidence for R>F transcendence, even if it is not enough on its own, which is also why I specified that this is only strong evidence only when you believe that the tree is akin to 'the form of good'.

I'd also like to add that this entire comment was completely ignored. If there are issues with my logic, I'd at least like to know where I went wrong

 

[PedjaTarzan]

2 votes and rejected? aint tier 1 crts require 3 agreements/disagreements?

 

[Antvasima]

No, I think they require at least 3 or 4 agreements, including from administrators or bureaucrats, and preferably also from members knowledgeable about our higher tiers.

 

[Telomera]

I just think it's really unfair when I have proved why Telomera and Uld are wrong with proper scans and current vsb standards. Unless you can prove why I am wrong, this shouldn't get rejected. If u gonna say staffs have no obligation to do so, well what can I do. But I really question the reliability of the system because everything I have proposed so far is within the accepted range of current standards. Do point me out if I was wrong

I mean it really does come down to how strong you think the implications are that Imaginary is literally "more real" than baseline reality. You admitted yourself the analogies aren't enough to prove R>F by themselves, so you needed to actually find context showing that Imaginary is literally "more real" than the baseline reality.

Since there were no such statements explicitly saying any of that, you tried to provide context that implied that Imaginary is literally "more real" than baseline reality. The issue is that this is is extremely subjective since the mere implications of a text are very open to interpretation. The staff simply thought that the context you brought up did not imply that Imaginary is literally "more real" than baseline reality strongly enough.

 

[Telomera]

I'd also like to add that this entire comment was completely ignored. If there are issues with my logic, I'd at least like to know where I went wrong

That was responded to though. The issue was that the cave analogy and game server analogy simply did not have strong enough implications that they actually indicated a literal R>F relationship between Imaginary and baseline reality. Even Weaver admitted that the Platonism connection is weak at best. That just leaves the game server analogy which straight-up isn't enough for R>F on its own.

Btw you do realize that the fact that the Imaginary Tree is just quantitatively bigger than one world proves that it's not R>F right? R>F cannot be reduced to a transfinite quantitative difference by our standards. The fact that Einstein does reduce the difference between the Tree and a world to a transfinite quantitative difference shows that it's not qualitative nor is it R>F.

You can disagree with my counterarguments here all you want btw, the point of this post is to show that your arguments HAVE been addressed, they were not ignored. All of the arguments I put forward here (except for maybe the game server thing, but the fact that it's not enough for R>F is pretty straightforward) have already been made in some form in this thread.

 

[Weaver261]

You admitted yourself the analogies aren't enough to prove R>F by themselves, so you needed to actually find context showing that Imaginary is literally "more real" than the baseline reality

Yeah but I have showed context of R>F too. About Star Dream, Spiritual Adam and many more. These aren't analogies. There's no anti feat either. It's also acceptable in vsb standards.

Even Weaver admitted that the Platonism connection is weak at best.

Please don't twist my words. I just say we don't really need exact copy paste of Theory of forms for 1-A as long as qualitative superiority is proven.

Btw you do realize that the fact that the Imaginary Tree is just quantitatively bigger than one world proves that it's not R>F right? R>F cannot be reduced to a transfinite quantitative difference by our standards. The fact that Einstein does reduce the difference between the Tree and a world to a transfinite quantitative difference shows that it's not qualitative nor is it R>F.

I also showed u that Einstein is talking about Honkai Energy with full context. Einstein said "Honkai on earth" but Earth only has Honkai's manifestations like Honkai beasts, herrschers and Honkai energy. Einstein is not talking about dimensional difference or existence level difference here. Einstein is saying how much Honkai on earth vs how much Honkai on imaginary tree. It's weird how you just ignored my whole explanation.

I think we need in depth evaluation to have fair and objective judgements on this thread. Also more staff exposure and debating with staffs would be necessary.

 

[Minophen]

That was responded to though. The issue was that the cave analogy and game server analogy simply did not have strong enough implications that they actually indicated a literal R>F relationship between Imaginary and baseline reality. Even Weaver admitted that the Platonism connection is weak at best.

First of all, he never said it's 'weak at best'. All he said was that it wasn't and doesn't need to be a copy and paste of the theory of forms to be relevant.

Second, why are you treating it like it's fact? When he says it's strong evidence you say that his opinion is incorrect, but when he says it's weak evidence his opinion is suddenly correct?

Third, it's an opinion of a single person. I'm also arguing about this topic and I'm saying it's good evidence. Is his opinion supposed to be more correct than mine?

I'd also like to add that I have no problem with you having this opinion. The issue lies with the fact that you're basically telling the mods that Weaver themself is saying that the point can be disregarded when they have said no such thing.

Btw you do realize that the fact that the Imaginary Tree is just quantitatively bigger than one world proves that it's not R>F right? R>F cannot be reduced to a transfinite quantitative difference by our standards. The fact that Einstein does reduce the difference between the Tree and a world to a transfinite quantitative difference shows that it's not qualitative nor is it R>F.

I literally said that the quantitative section was to address your 'debunk' that you made in one of your other downgrade threads. I never said that the size is what makes is qualitatively superior.

In fact, I purposefully split my argument between the quantitative 'debunk' and the qualitative 'proof', and you have yet to say anything regarding why the game server analogy isn't evidence for R>F beyond saying "It's not R>F".

And while I'm at it, I may as well address the honkai on earth topic.

(Disclaimer, there is quite a bit of context that I need to provide regarding energy in general, so just bear with me for a bit)

Energy isn't 'real' in the same sense that matter is. First, you can't measure the energy in an object, you can only measure the difference in activity or potential activity between two systems. Second, the famous E=mc² isn't saying that matter and energy are the same, it's saying that energy can be treated as mass at the quantum scale, and is used to explain how three quarks can come together to produce a proton/neutron that is magnitudes larger than their combined mass. In other words, most of the mass in the universe is simply the kinetic energy of quarks and the potential energy between quarks. In nuclear processes, mass isn't converted to energy, it's simply the nuclear energy between quarks being converted to light and heat energy. This then means that energy is a more fundamental aspect of the universe compared to 'matter'. Now with that in mind, let's apply this to scaling and R>F.

Energy as a concept transcends all levels of reality. Electric energy is something that is real, but it's also something that exists in many works of fiction. The same goes for light energy, heat energy, kinetic energy, potential energy, etc. The point is that the existence of honkai energy in a 'less real' world doesn't affect its possible existence in a 'more real' world. There is also no possible way to distinguish between how 'real' energy is represented vs how 'fake' energy is represented, so it is incredibly unreasonable for an energy existing in both a 'real' and 'fictional' world to be a disqualifier for 1-A.

As for being indivisible, remember that the tree is an abstract existence, it's not a literal tree. The tree will exist even if all the leaves are destroyed. Furthermore, nothing that happens inside the tree can actually affect the tree. The only beings seen affecting the tree itself and Aeons, Finality, and Otto, all of whom either exist on the same level or exist completely independently from the tree.

Furthermore, the imaginary tree is the origin of all laws and truth, and exists in the Imaginary Space where the laws that govern the leaves do not apply. This is also evidence for R>F due to the fact that if the existed on the same level of existence as its leaves, it would have to follow the same universal laws as them. And no, dimensionality has nothing to do with this. Adding more dimensions doesn't change the laws of the world, it only adds more vectors/axis. In a space that transcends all dimensions, vectors and directions would cease to exist.

However, the imaginary space clearly has laws of some sort, since entities have been able to move in it (Otto, Aeons). There are only two possibilities in which two worlds can be governed by completely different laws.

1. They are completely seperate, equally real worlds.

2. One is more real than the other.

Option one can be excluded since the Imaginary tree literally encompasses all possible leaves. This leaves only option two, being that the laws are different since one is more 'real' than the other.

 

[Theglassman12]

Not exactly sold with the R>F stuff either, so count me for disagreeing too.

 

[Weaver261]

Not exactly sold with the R>F stuff either, so count me for disagreeing too.

Sure but which part you find problematic with 1-A? Also what about "possibly" if you are not too sure about it?

 

[Theglassman12]

I never said I’m fine with a possibly 1-A so don’t make assumptions on what I think. Telomera’s points make more sense to me so I don’t really see why this should pass.

 

[Weaver261]

I never said I’m fine with a possibly 1-A so don’t make assumptions on what I think. Telomera’s points make more sense to me so I don’t really see why this should pass.

I also have never made assumption by myself on what u think. I am just saying would it be possible for that. To be honest, Telomera's the wrong side in here factually in lore context and I have proved why he is wrong with valid scans. Well if vsb system is all about better arguments over facts, what can I say? Staffs always say "context matters", but when I provided context, nobody read it and say Telomera makes sense when he is just taking out one line from the whole context to prove his points.