• 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.

A Certain Llama Wants In On The Low 1-C club; Pokemon Low 1-C Upgrade for True Form Arceus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Define "a lot" because literally only like 2 or 3 people here dont understand it while most of us who actually paid attention to the thread understand it nicely.
Don't ask questions =/= Understood perfectly (especially when its an FRA CHAIN)

It was a very confusing narrative you tried to spin, sure my opinion is subjective but i feel like you could have handled your rhetoric in that regard alot better. But nice dissing me and Everything, who have both actively tried to understand your stance, something you really can't say for most of the people who agreed.
 
But nice dissing me and Everything, who have both actively tried to understand your stance, something you really can't say for most of the people who agreed.
you have to be kidding me…

What’s your point here, that we should disregard the ridiculous amount of people, including heavy numbers of staff, that agree because… you personally think you wield a better understanding of the topic than them?
 
Looking at some of these replies this is going nowhere fast unless you have anything constructive to add to the purpose of this CRT, in the nicest way possible just shut it!

At this point any further whataboutism, circular reasoning, argumentum ad verbosium and general derailment should be taken to the walls or else sent to RVR.

Keep in mind staff and other users have to look through the above arguments in order to help make an informed opinion. Snarky remarks and sarcastic tones won't help prove a point one way or another.

It's already controversial enough when a popular verse goes through major upgrades or downgrades but adding fuel to the fire benefits no-one.

Anyway I'm done rambling on, I won't speak any further on this CRT. Try to keep the drama to a minimum please?
 
Who on EARTH said that????

who have both actively tried to understand your stance, something you really can't say for most of the people who agreed.
you bragged about how you were a loud minority and that most people who agreed “haven’t actively tried to understand your stance” (aka the CRT’s premise and reasoning)

you literally accused the people who agree of going “hurr durr FRA” which is in every way an attempt to delegitimise the fact the vote is against you

can we please just stop this and move onto something constructive… anything else I’m just moving to Private Convos from here on out
 
you bragged about how you were a loud minority and that most people who agreed “haven’t actively tried to understand your stance” (aka the CRT’s premise and reasoning)

you literally accused the people who agree of going “hurr durr FRA” which is in every way an attempt to delegitimise the fact the vote is against you

can we please just stop this and move onto something constructive… anything else I’m just moving to Private Convos from here on out
I'm sorry but you are so utterly confused about what i said you should really just sit tight and be quiet.
 
I never once called his arguments wrong, i just said that the Hoopa rhetoric was hard to follow. And that just because people FRA chained the thread doesn't delegitimize the notion that it WAS confusing. Stop misinterpreting my arguments to be me putting myself on a pedestal and disagreeing. I never once brought that up. I only ever mentioned the fact we were actively trying to understand the argument, as we were being belittled for no reason kek
 
regardless, im fine with a possibly or likely rating, iffy on a solid rating being applied
 
I have no idea how this got into something like this, but, something that I think can help.

First of all, the idea of cosmology that is being used for Arceus is that of a transcendental God that created the world by manifestations of itself. You have this one heart that is everything in a state of "nothing is different, everything is the same" that starts to "think" and results in the manifestation (Not really creation in the most literal sense of the world) of Bunshins of Time, Space and Anti-Matter and later of Knowledge, Willpower and Emotion in order to "enrich" the inner "heart" of those who would be released later, as the world remains a product of cognition.

In this system, everything was a part of the original heart only to be "released" as their individual selves, this includes even things like the Creation Trio as they are literally called "Arceu's Bunshins", they are a part of Arceus in the same way all of creation is. Therefore, there's really no reason to compare any instance of an Arceus avatar compared to that of the "Heart", since the heart is everything, everywhere, and beyond. Things like the Plates are really useless for the Heart when in order to be omnipresent, the Heart already needs to be in the plates as well, they are more of the inner-workings of one of Arceus' bunshins (Such as the one that you get in Legends Arceus, that I mentioned in this tweet). The same is valid for "avatars" fighting against the creation trio or anything like that, nothing like that has any influence on the Heart for logical reasons, they are still manifestations of the heart, it's no different than an omnipresent god that is everyone and everything, but still has the people that are a part of it fighting, they are not the god, only a part of it.

In a way, any plot related to "Arceus" can have no negative effects on the "Heart" for those same logical reasons. This is why in more recent material the Arceus is used more as a god that teaches lessons and tests the morals of the mortals than anything else. Even in "HG/SS" manga the plot, in the end, was said to be really of Arceus testing to see if humans were still trustworthy. In Hoopa Movie's Novelization it's explained that the reason why the creation trio couldn't stop the collapse of Space-time was that a "power of a higher-order" was stopping them from doing so, basically stating that the reason why everything happened the way it did was that the whole point of the conflict was for Arceus to test Hoopa in order to teach Hoopa a lesson. And that became the point of the character even since with Legends Arceus basically being the MC doing tasks in order to prove its worth to Arceus.

In the context of the "Heart", that is basically the most logical answer to anything that "limits" it compared to the avatars or similar things, it makes no sense for those limitations to apply to the "Heart" when the whole point of the "Heart" is that it's omnipresent and the source of everything that exists. Palkia is the Heart, Dialga is the Heart, Giratina is the Heart, the protagonists are the Heart, and everyone is the heart. That is how it works, when we are talking about the Heart, it exists as its own thing and what happens with the bunshins is irrelevant.

Now, going to talk about cosmology. First, my comment on it being Low 1-C was on the idea that since we have the "world" a space (right-left, up-down, all directions plus parallel spaces) and time (past to the future, as put in the kanjis for Sekai and Uchu that Pokémon is actively using) and since the Heart both encompasses both time and space, while still being beyond them, seems like a very common description of superiority/higher-order that fits with the essence of Low 1-C in a more metaphysical sense instead of the whole "infinitely higher" thing that isn't really a necessity, more like a very clear example of it.

The Time-Space Axis seen in the 12th movie really isn't a good representation of this. First of all, basically, any cosmological map that showcases more than just the Outerspace of a universe is just a metaphorical representation, no map that represents something with more than 2 dimensions can be faithfully represented in 2 dimensions (That is why we have many different maps that show the Earth, some with a very distorted appearance in some ways in order to compensate to something else), so there's no way that a 3D machine can represent something that is 4 dimensional or higher in a faithful way, even more, when... it in no way represents the realms of the creation pokémon.

In that machine you have the "Real World" in the base, spheres for Palkia's space, Dialga's Space, Giratina's Reverse World, and Arceus' space... that is not how it should look like.

Palkia's space is the between spaces, it's the realm that lies between parallel spaces/parallel dimensions as said in the 10th movie. You could even say that Palkia in the 4th spatial exists between the three-dimensional axis of right-left, up-down, and back-forth.

Dialga is most likely the between time, the timestream between the moments in time.

Giratina's space is the "other side of the world", it's the backside, outside of time and space that exists to balance time and space within "this side of the world".

And Arceus' space is the one that lies beyond time and space, encompassing all worlds as a single thing since this is what the "Heart" is, everything and nothing at once.

There's just no way that the Time-Space axis represents this, it's a metaphorical representation of space-time in order to be able to pinpoint distortions in the fabric of space-time, not a full demonstration of what the cosmology looks like unless we think it has been retconned to fit with what was stated before and after the movie.

So, the ways that I can see Arceus as Low 1-C are:
1) I think that the statements of superiority beyond time and space as the parallel universes and spatial axis and time, present, and future does fit with what is commonly accepted as Low 1-C
2) If we only talk about encompassing all of time and space, if one would consider Palkia's "between space" as akin to a perpendicular dimension across parallel 3D spaces (As it's explained in Legends and is in the etymology of Uchu/Sekai), then we have a cosmology that is 4D+1D in a non-insignificant sense that I remember as being valid for Low 1-C.
3) The space-time cosmology is a result of cognition manifesting from inside the Heart and does complement the notion of superiority over/being beyond the structure of space-time in point 1).
 
Dialga is most likely the between time, the timestream between the moments in time.
Just gonna add that this is basically confirmed in Pokemon: Mystery Dungeon, DIalga's realm exists in-between the "fractions of split seconds". Of course it's depicted very differently visually but the same idea should carry over.

Aside from this, the derailing messages have to stop. That includes meme posts and any posts that solely complain about other members/other verses (Archie Sonic in particular). That's not the place for this, and I'll be deleting any such messages on sight from now on.
 
Just gonna add that this is basically confirmed in Pokemon: Mystery Dungeon, DIalga's realm exists in-between the "fractions of split seconds". Of course it's depicted very differently visually but the same idea should carry over.

Aside from this, the derailing messages have to stop. That includes meme posts and any posts that solely complain about other members/other verses (Archie Sonic in particular). That's not the place for this, and I'll be deleting any such messages on sight from now on.
I just mentioned Arceus Vs Archie sonic
 
Ok, but what's the question about what is written there?
Basically the thing is if is needed a statement of infinite transcendence of space-time to get Low 1-C, as the FAQ says is not needed, but Tiering page yes. Thanks to the FAQ Archie Verse got Low 1-C as it fits the FAQ, which just asks superiority in nature to 4D space-time, without the need of the infinite transcendence statement.
 
So if I got it right, one page says that you need explicit evidence that it has an infinite superiority of space-time, while another allows for one to use evidence that points towards it but doesn't explicitly say it? Or do I misunderstand the issue?
 
Basically the thing is if is needed a statement of infinite transcendence of space-time to get Low 1-C, as the FAQ says is not needed, but Tiering page yes. Thanks to the FAQ Archie Verse got Low 1-C as it fits the FAQ, which just asks superiority in nature to 4D space-time, without the need of the infinite transcendence statement.
It needs "superiority in nature", not just superiority alone, as the page states. That, IMO as just one of the people who wrote on that page, is probably to be taken to mean qualitative superiority. See the last paragraph of the "what is transcendent"-section as for what qualitative superiority means.
Actually, pretty sure we wanted to do clarifications regarding that stuff in this thread (reformulating it to qualitative superiority in particular), but just never finished it because... too much stuff is going on at once, I guess.
 
It needs "superiority in nature", not just superiority alone, as the page states. That, IMO as just one of the people who wrote on that page, is probably to be taken to mean qualitative superiority. See the last paragraph of the "what is transcendent"-section as for what qualitative superiority means.
Actually, pretty sure we wanted to do clarifications regarding that stuff in this thread (reformulating it to qualitative superiority in particular), but just never finished it because... too much stuff is going on at once, I guess.
I guess the issue is solved then.
So if I got it right, one page says that you need explicit evidence that it has an infinite superiority of space-time, while another allows for one to use evidence that points towards it but doesn't explicitly say it? Or do I misunderstand the issue?
It caused confusions, but here I read again:

Characters who can affect, create and/or destroy the entirety of spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model (Low 2-C structures, in plain English.) In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 5 and 6-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 5 to R ^ 6)

It says "correspond", not that infinite statements are needed.
 
Hmmm... while heavy semantics are at play, I think the reasonings for Low 1-C Arceus (the true form) are fine.
 
It needs "superiority in nature", not just superiority alone, as the page states. That, IMO as just one of the people who wrote on that page, is probably to be taken to mean qualitative superiority. See the last paragraph of the "what is transcendent"-section as for what qualitative superiority means.
Actually, pretty sure we wanted to do clarifications regarding that stuff in this thread (reformulating it to qualitative superiority in particular), but just never finished it because... too much stuff is going on at once, I guess.
Thank you for helping out. I responded to the other thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top