A different essay for Ascended Athena????? (God of War)

[Deagonx]

Thanks but no, because I don't want this to be closed and opened again due to a simple misunderstanding.

What is the simple misunderstanding? You seem to recognize that our official definition for QS and your personal definition are mismatched.

It's not my problem that you don't know exactly what QS means

We have a FAQ that provides the official definition. If you want to add a new meaning to the term, that will be a staff revision. Your personal definition of the term doesn't have any significance unless it is codified in an official page, which would need to be a staff revision.

The only meaning of QS that the wiki recognizes is uncountably infinite difference. Any other definition is a private personally held opinion that isn't a part of our official standards.

 

[Georredannea15]

What is the simple misunderstanding? You seem to recognize that our official definition for QS and your personal definition are mismatched.

Simple misunderstanding = using a term like "uncountable infinite difference" used in dimensional layering and mathematics to be the same in an abstract concept that you can't count in any way, or even worse claiming that QS just means uncountable infinite difference

We have a FAQ that provides the official definition. If you want to add a new meaning to the term, that will be a staff revision. Your personal definition of the term doesn't have any significance unless it is codified in an official page, which would need to be a staff revision.

The only meaning of QS that the wiki recognizes is uncountably infinite difference. Any other definition is a private personally held opinion that isn't a part of our official standards.

So answer this, why don't we give TDs N+1?

Because any uncountable infinite difference in such dimensional planes means +1 dimension. And considering what you said, we should give them N+1! But... One minute. Why don't we give?

Just by looking at this and other revisions of how the wiki gives TD, you can see that your claim is wrong.

 

[Deagonx]

Simple misunderstanding = using a term like "uncountable infinite difference" used in dimensional layering and mathematics to be the same in an abstract concept that you can't count in any way,

If you want to change the TD standards so that this is no longer the case, go ahead. But those are the standards.

even worse claiming that QS just means uncountable infinite difference

Qualitative Superiority is an imaginary term invented by this wiki. The idea that it has a valid meaning beyond what the people that invented it assigned to it is pretty weird. But if you want to add your unofficial meaning and try to make it official that'd also be a staff revision.

Just by looking at this and other revisions of how the wiki gives TD, you can see that your claim is wrong.

Then we should revise those, as well, for violating our standards. Not sure what verses you're referring to. But whataboutism isn't a good argument.

 

[Georredannea15]

If you want to change the TD standards so that this is no longer the case, go ahead. But those are the standards.

Qualitative Superiority is an imaginary term invented by this wiki. The idea that it has a valid meaning beyond what the people that invented it assigned to it is pretty weird. But if you want to add your unofficial meaning and try to make it official that'd also be a staff revision.

Qualitative and quantitative concepts are things that are also used outside the wiki, and qualitative superiority basically means being superior to all the quantities it covers or transcends this is what the qualitative superiority found in wiki is based on.

Then we should revise those, as well, for violating our standards. Not sure what verses you're referring to. But whataboutism isn't a good argument.

What I'm talking about is not a matter of whataboutism, it's how the Wiki approaches TD.

Btw, how can this be denied when a character is shown to completely beyond the dualities and non-dual beings in reality due to his transcendent and higher existence and to be non-interactive towards them? I really don't know. Because no one mentioned the situation of the verse

Do not think that these are personal comments because they are all explained and showned with feats. If that's not still a clear superiority/transcends, then I don't know what it will be for you.

 

[Vietthai96]

Ehhh.......i don't have opinion on the topic of this thread. But i want to point out that, you can't really apply something as "infinite power jump" or "uncountable infinite difference" into esoteric power like Nonduality, they do not possesses mathematical and physical attributes for you to applies those term, unless you talking about some very specific nonduality, but they are just rare cases that do not respresent the whole. Also to be fair here, infinite is quantilative term, not qualitative, we currently just equate quantilative to qualitative

 

[Dereck03]

Ehhh.......i don't have opinion on the topic of this thread. But i want to point out that, you can't really apply something as "infinite power jump" or "uncountable infinite difference" into esoteric power like Nonduality, they do not possesses mathematical and physical attributes for you to applies those term. Also to be fair here, infinite is quantilative term, not qualitative, we currently just equate quantilative to qualitative

Yeah, that's why is planned to revise the standards about that QS stuffs as i pointed out multiple times that QS doesn't correlate at all with TD.

 

[Deagonx]

Qualitative and quantitative concepts are things that are also used outside the wiki,

Of course the words exist, but the phrase "qualitative superiority" has a very precise definition on this wiki that you will not be able to change without a revision.

If that's not still a clear superiority/transcends, then I don't know what it will be for you.

It's superiority, just not "qualitative superiority" as the wiki defines it, which is necessary per our TD standards.

It'd be ideal if you stopped stonewalling this. We already know you disagree with the standards.

 

[Vietthai96]

Scratch that, the only verses i can see some physical attributes in a dual system is verse have space and time as opposite dual system, mathematic is mental ideas, abstract concepts used by us to describe physical reality, so math isn't really physical

But anyway @Deagonx and @Dereck03 is right, this talk is in the territory of standard, which we need to change first before we continue this talk.

Anyway @Georredannea15 right now Deagonx just doing his job at expressing how the standard is currently, so i think back and forth isn't doing anything noteworthy at this point

 

[Georredannea15]

It's superiority, just not "qualitative superiority" as the wiki defines it, which is necessary per our TD standards.

So how exactly should QS be expressed for you? (for Td)

With which statements, feats and contexts?

It'd be ideal if you stopped stonewalling this. We already know you disagree with the standards.

It's not a case of I disagree with the standards, it's that I disagree with your misinterpretation for the standards. But i also fint it normal.

Ehhh.......i don't have opinion on the topic of this thread. But i want to point out that, you can't really apply something as "infinite power jump" or "uncountable infinite difference" into esoteric power like Nonduality, they do not possesses mathematical and physical attributes for you to applies those term, unless you talking about some very specific nonduality, but they are just rare cases that do not respresent the whole. Also to be fair here, infinite is quantilative term, not qualitative, we currently just equate quantilative to qualitative

I mentioned this too, but the real problem is that they put all QS under the same roof and think that the QS used for dimensional layering is the same as here.

QS= Being superior to the all quantities of what you include or transcends.

 

[Georredannea15]

Scratch that, the only verses i can see some physical attributes in a dual system is verse have space and time as opposite dual system, mathematic is mental ideas, abstract concepts used by us to describe physical reality, so math isn't really physical

In fact, neither type of concept is even taken to be physical or spatial in any way.

Especially after the recent "beyond the concepts of dimensions revision", if there is no context for it things such as "dimension concepts" will just be an abstract concept without context that it is physical or spatial. Without context, even this concept will be just an abstract concept and will not yield anything on a spatial or physical scale

But anyway @Deagonx and @Dereck03 is right, this talk is in the territory of standard, which we need to change first before we continue this talk.

Anyway @Georredannea15 right now Deagonx just doing his job at expressing how the standard is currently, so i think back and forth isn't doing anything noteworthy at this point

Also, I find it natural that Deagon interprets it this way, but if he looks at other TD threads, he will understand that what he says is not necessary.

 

[Deagonx]

It's not a case of I disagree with the standards, it's that I disagree with your misinterpretation for the standards.

Then you haven't read the FAQ, which is our standard for QS.

Q: What is qualitative superiority?
A: Qualitative superiority, also sometimes called being qualitatively greater, is a term colloquially used to mean that something is superior to an extend that it justifies being on a higher tier of infinity in terms of our Tiering System than the thing they are superior to.

That is the standard for QS. There is no other meaning in our standard for QS. It'd be ideal if you stop stonewalling this, now that you've been proven wrong.

I mentioned this too, but the real problem is that they put all QS under the same roof and think that the QS used for dimensional layering is the same as here.

QS= Being superior to the all quantities of what you include or transcends.

Our standards only recognize QS as meaning "higher tier of infinity" and "more than countably infinite times greater in power or size."
If you want to use the term in any other way, you are disagreeing with the standards and must pursue a staff revision.

but if he looks at other TD threads, he will understand that what he says is not necessary.

Your claim that other TD threads were passed without true QS as our wiki defines it doesn't mean it isn't necessary, it just means those threads were passed erroneously. Our standards are clear. Refer to the Q&A if you get confused again.

 

[Vietthai96]

Sigh, can we settle with Nondual, this standard talk is getting in circle, it is 6 pages already

 

[Deagonx]

Sigh, can we settle with Nondual, this standard talk is getting in circle, it is 6 pages already

Yes, all the staff are aware this is just ND Type 2, that is what our standards dictate. Georr just won't accept it because he disagrees with our standards but believes incorrectly that it is due to some kind of misunderstanding on the staff's part. Not sure why. The alternative definitions for QS he has in mind aren't found anywhere on our wiki, he just seems to think they are pseudo-standards because at some point -- according to him -- TD threads were passed without true QS.

 

[Georredannea15]

I don't want to talk more but you still haven't given me an example of how to actually provide QS for TD and the uncountable infinite difference against dualities and what kinds of statements would cause this, which statements and contexts actually provide QS against dualities in your opinion? @Deagonx

I mean... just your opinion.

If this is the case in our standards, give an example or an example of some type of statement; Is there an example or a statement that would have TD with an uncountable infinite difference from the QS you mentioned?

Or maybe I'll open a thread for it in a few days and you'll realize that. But I'll say it again, it's very normal to get confused.

 

[Deagonx]

I don't want to talk more but you still haven't given me an example of how to actually provide QS for TD and the uncountable infinite difference against dualities and what kinds of statements would cause this

That would be derailing. I understand you disagree with our standards already. Do not derail this any further.

 

[Georredannea15]

That would be derailing. I understand you disagree with our standards already. Do not derail this any further.

Again, I disagree with your interpretation and saying that any type of QS needs an "uncountable infinite difference" as in dimensional jump/superiority.

I'm not against standards. And yes, I need to sleep right now. If this discussion continues back and forth tomorrow like this, I'll open a thread for make more clear.

Take care of yourself

 

[Deagonx]

Again, I disagree with your interpretation

It's not a matter of interpretation, unfortunately. You do not understand our standard for "qualitative superiority" as it is defined on our wiki, as specified in our FAQ.

saying that any type of QS needs an "uncountable infinite difference" as in dimensional jump/superiority.

That is the only definition of QS officially accepted on our wiki. Any revision passed with some alternative definition was done so erroneously.

I'm not against standards. And yes, I need to sleep right now. If this discussion continues back and forth tomorrow like this, I'll open a thread for make more clear.

You are indeed.

However, this thread has reached its conclusion. Athena does not have QS over these concepts and thus only qualifies for Nonduality Type 2, per our standards. You may attempt to change those standards in another thread, but that would require staff input. Since all three mods that have participated have agreed on this, I will close this now, and you may apply Nonduality Type 2 to Athena's profile.