Another Reid downgrade

[LordGinSama]

Atp I think we just need someone with actual say in this to give an opinion.

Lordgin I respect you for trying to answer everything but to be completely real with you it seems like you purposefully misunderstand what people are saying in order to strawman them.

I'm not trying to strawman anyone, so i'd appreciate it if you stopped trying to fit the narrative that me replying to arguments is a from of strawmaning. Phoenks, respectfully I think you should brush up on the meaning of the word. Strawmaning is replying to arguments and conclusions someone never made, which isn't something I've been doing.

Also, the only difference between Regulus' acausality and type 5 acausality is that he has no statements of transcending causality. That's the only difference.

And that's a big difference.

His "invulnerability" is a result of his acausality.

His invulnerability and Acausality are products of his time being halted. Again, Lion's Heart is not just Acausality, it's Acausality amongst various abilities.

It acts the exact same as type 5, which prevents you from being interacted with due to being outside of causality. Regulus is the same way.

Again acting the same =/= being the same.

The reason he doesn't have Type 5 is because that requires one to transcend causality. Which is pretty dumb imo.

Wiki moment.

It's pretty much the difference between nonduality and transduality. Both act the same way, but one requires you to transcend the dualities involved.

Yet both are completely different from one another and have different usages.

 

[Phoenks]

I'm not trying to strawman anyone, so i'd appreciate it if you stopped trying to fit the narrative that me replying to arguments is a from of strawmaning. Phoenks, respectfully I think you should brush up on the meaning of the word. Strawmaning is replying to arguments and conclusions someone never made, which isn't something I've been doing.

I mean a pretty blatant example of why I think you are strawmanning is you took him saying "Regulus' acausality acts like Type 5" as him saying that "Regulus has Type 5" when that was clearly not what he said. I also think that was pretty obvious, I mean he even tried to explain it to you and you kept not understanding.

And he even agreed with me on that.

I don't need a brushing up on the word, lol.




Anyways, yeah, this is pointless. You're just repeating the same things over and over without actually understanding why we are even bringing this up.

Affecting something that exists outside of causality with a conceptual ability is grounds for Type 2. As is affecting spatial dimensions. A type 3 concept of sword would not be capable of accomplishing that.

Now I am waiting for someone who actually knows the standards of this wiki to reply.

 

[LordGinSama]

I mean a pretty blatant example of why I think you are strawmanning is you took him saying "Regulus' acausality acts like Type 5" as him saying that "Regulus has Type 5"

You do realize i could say this is you strawmaning me correct? That's not what's happening here Phoenks and we both know that. Not sure why you'd purposely assume that's my argument whenever my argument is that abilities working similarly isn't evidence.

Just because two abilities work similarly doesn't make them the same, we have deviations for abilities for a reason.

when that was clearly not what he said.

I am aware of what he said, you're the one working off of assumptions then acting as if that was the intention of my argument whenever that clearly wasnt the case.

I also think that was pretty obvious, I mean he even tried to explain it to you and you kept not understanding.

Okay quite frankly YOU'RE the one strawmaning at this point. I'd appreciate if it you stopped saying I'm not understanding, I just don't agree with the conclusion he reached.

Me disagreeing with something =/= Me not understanding. Learn the difference between the two before throwing around accusations randomly (ones I'm sure that you intentionally made in an attempt to derail or discredit my argument.)

And he even agreed with me on that.

I don't care what he agrees with you on, I wasn't strawmaning anyone here.

I don't need a brushing up on the word, lol.

I'm gonna have to disagree there considering you were accusing me of strawmaning while also literally strawmaning yourself.

Anyways, yeah, this is pointless. You're just repeating the same things over and over without actually understanding why we are even bringing this up.

The feelings mutual and once again me not agreeing with you isn't the same as me not understanding. I find it hilarious that you say that I've been strawmaning whenever you're the actual one strawmaning here.

Affecting something that exists outside of causality with a conceptual ability is grounds for Type 2. As is affecting spatial dimensions.

Where? This isn't stated anywhere, either is effecting space evidence for Type 2 CM. Spacetime concepts are Type 3 as DT said unless it has further context.

A type 3 concept of sword would not be capable of accomplishing that.

Based on what?

Now I am waiting for someone who actually knows the standards of this wiki to reply.

Ditto. I'm not the one who thinks effecting Acausals is a standard for evidence of CM on the wiki.

 

[LordGinSama]

Anyway I'll wait for what DontTalk and Deceived have to say. With all due respect not gonna sit here and argue with someone that wants to throw around accusations of strawmaning while doing just that themselves for the sake of an attempt to discredit an argument.

 

[Phoenks]

If you don't want to be accused of strawmaning then you need to be aware of what your text sounds like. I mean, the very person you were arguing against agreed when I said it looked like you were strawmanning him. It isn't just me claiming something for the sake of claiming it. It is a genuine observation that at least one other person shared. You should be more mindful.

Also, trying to throw this back on me is just downright immature. Lol.

Btw while Deceived is a knowledgeable member he doesn't really have any say in what qualifies as Conceptual Manipulation Type 2.

I would say this thread needs a lot more traction from administrators specifically, since I think it's been established at this point that the concept page itself may be leading to a lot of confusion.

 

[LordGinSama]

If you don't want to be accused of strawmaning then you need to be aware of what your text sounds like.

It's the internet, news flash sometimes words can sound different because they arent being spoken.

Phoenks you've been on the internet long enough to know this.

I mean, the very person you were arguing against agreed when I said it looked like you were strawmanning him.

Read above. Again, I don't care what he agrees with because the evidence of me strawmaning doesn't exist. I never attacked or replied to an argument he never made and I fully understood what he was arguing hence why I brought up abilities acting similar isn't enough evidence for support. You can disagree with that sure, but don't sit here and try to paint it as if I were strawmaning.

It isn't just me claiming something for the sake of claiming it. It is a genuine observation that at least one other person shared. You should be more mindful.

Based on a misunderstanding that you yourself came to? Practice what you preach there.

Also, trying to throw this back on me is just downright immature. Lol.

It's not throwing it back, it's literally what happened. You made a false accusation and tried to say I was purposely strawmaning whenever I wasn't.

Btw while Deceived is a knowledgeable member he doesn't really have any say in what qualifies as Conceptual Manipulation Type 2.

He doesn't need to be a knowledgeable member in order to review things, and he's certainly knowledgeable enough on conceptual manipulation to be able to review what is and isn't CM. Anyone can, it's never been a rule that non knowledgeable members don't have say in CRT's .

I would say this thread needs a lot more traction from administrators specifically, since I think it's been established at this point that the concept page itself may be leading to a lot of confusion.

On the same page there.

 

[LordGinSama]

I must have Precognition because I foresaw this thread would die out lol

 

[Fezzih_007]

I accidentally died Sorry, i gonna bump this now.
Forever.

 

[Vietthai96]

Idk why there is a talk about Acausality type 5 here, but type 5 is more than just unchanging, anyone with their time being stopped will not experience change, that simple, and somehow it make them have something close to type 5, or even type 5 itself???. Not only that but also he need to "connect" to his wives hearts so if not due to time being stopped his hearts will cease to function which will lead to his death mean he still experience change naturally - death of the body due to the the heart do not beat

 

[Worthless]

Your argument would be more convincing if you simply stated that Type 5 is a character whose existence is entirely independent of cause and effect, existing outside of it. Regulus fails to fulfill this criterion because, instead of existing outside of causality, he simply stops it, preventing him from experiencing changes. The crucial point about Type 5 is that Regulus's invincibility is akin to it, as both share the inability to undergo changes, allowing them to disregard any form of attack, whether physical or spiritual. Also the argument that anyone whose time is stopped will not experience change is simply false.

 

[Vietthai96]

Also the argument that anyone whose time is stopped will not experience change is simply false.

Everyone with their time stopped have at least their age stopped progressing, if not then it is an anti feat for time being stopped

Also, Aca 5 isn't matter here anyway, idk why people keep bring it up

 

[Worthless]

Everyone with their time stopped have at least their age stopped progressing, if not then it is an anti feat for time being stopped.

The change in the context of the discussion encompasses not only aging but also other and all changes, physically and spiritually.

Also, Aca 5 isn't matter here anyway, idk why people keep bring it up

I just responded to Acausality type 4 mentioned by the OP. Tbh, I'm not fully aware of the context behind why Acausality type 4 was brought up in this thread.

 

[LordGinSama]

The change in the context of the discussion encompasses not only aging but also all other changes.

I just responded to Acausality type 4 mentioned by the OP. Tbh, I'm not fully aware of the context behind why Acausality type 4 was brought up in this thread.

I wasn't the who mentioned Acausality here, that was from Phoenks.

 

[Phoenks]

The reason I brought this up in the first place is to give more supporting evidence for why Reid's concept of sword is a Type 2 concept. Since, I am trying to prove why it isn't a personal concept.

It does seem that Reid's concept of "sword" governs the notion of slashing things down on a scale large enough to qualify for Type 2, and my reasoning for believing that is he's able to through slash dimensions, slash things not participating in causality (Regulus, whose Acausality is notable for this reason), slash intangible things like light and sound (also temporarily deleting them from the area), and essentially the whole idea of his power is that he can slash across anything through utilizing said concept.

Type 2 concepts are able to govern all of reality within their area of influence, which Reid's sword concept does seem to do based on that.

Idk how many times I have to explain that.

 

[LordGinSama]

Slashing through dimensions and interacting with Regulus isn't supportive evidence for Type 2 CM, that's never been a thing on this wiki as far as I'm aware. I do respect your perspective but I personally don't see the legitimacy within it.


You'd have an argument if it were Type 5 but it isn't accepted as such. Anyhow, like I said it's best to be patient and wait for DontTalk to review the "Concept of the sword." if he thinks it's applicable then I'll have this thread closed.

 

[Worthless]

The argument that he manifests the very notion of slashing objects itself is possibly the only thing that might be considered type 2, as the concepts of sound and light feats seem to only affect a small area.

 

[LordGinSama]

The argument that he manifests the very notion of slashing objects itself is possibly the only thing that might be considered type 2, as the concepts of sound and light feats seem to only affect a small area.

I'm aware what the argument is, as I said I just don't agree with them simply put. Not sure what the "concept of the sword." would really even cover.

 

[LordGinSama]

Also I personally see the statements of Reid effecting the "world" to be a much stronger form of supportive evidence due to sounding like Sukuna's World Cutter which is accepted as Type 2 CM. Although that's due to interacting with infinity and targeting both the "world." and "existence itself."


So to ask, does Reid have anything similar going on with effecting the World and existence itself simultaneously?

 

[Worthless]

I'm aware what the argument is, as I said I just don't agree with them simply put. Not sure what the "concept of the sword." would really even cover.

In my own interpretation,
it means he manipulates the type 2 concept, incorporating the very idea of a sword and the concept of a slashing object itself into his attacks.

 

[SatellaTheWoE]

Also I personally see the statements of Reid effecting the "world" to be a much stronger form of supportive evidence due to sounding like Sukuna's World Cutter which is accepted as Type 2 CM. Although that's due to interacting with infinity and targeting both the "world." and "existence itself."


So to ask, does Reid have anything similar going on with effecting the World and existence itself simultaneously?

Reinhard and reid do have statements of cutting the world with their sword slashes and it is very similar to what Sukuna's statement is

 

[Worthless]

Also I personally see the statements of Reid effecting the "world" to be a much stronger form of supportive evidence due to sounding like Sukuna's World Cutter which is accepted as Type 2 CM.

My uncool, mean ass wants to manifest after seeing this lmao. Seriously, hiis attack is considered Type 2 conceptual manipulation here?

 

[LordGinSama]

My uncool, mean ass wants to manifest after seeing this lmao. Seriously, hiis attack is considered Type 2 conceptual manipulation here?

Yessssir.

 

[Phoenks]

Idk how "world" is more justifying that cutting through Regulus Lion Heart.

Regulus' power explicitly ignores every rule in the world. And it still can't prevent him from being slashed by the sword concept.

But ok.

I mean, as said, he can cut through "the world," and he can cut through dimensions.

He can cut magic and authorities and negate them.

Anything cut by him remains permanent, btw. Since it's a conceptual wound. If he were to slice your arm off, it would remain that way for eternity.

I don't see why you can't see the main idea here, which is that his "Sword" affects everything in its area of influence like a Type 2 concept would. The idea is that it slashes down any object presented before it. Of course, that would be NLF if there wasn't any other context, so I provided some context of him affecting things like space, rule-negating beings, intangible objects, magic, abilities themselves, etc with his Sword concept.

 

[SatellaTheWoE]

Oh yeah, doesn't cutting ANY authority would be considered a huge scale thing since they directly oppose the system of the world to begin with?

 

[LordGinSama]

Regulus' power explicitly ignores every rule in the world. And it still can't prevent him from being slashed by the sword concept.

Which again has no connections to support CM Type 2. Lion's Heart isn't a Conceptual ability. You can still effect Regulus just fine with concept manipulation (obviously depends on the user and the type of course.)

He can cut magic and authorities and negate them.

Care to explain this further? As in what's the source of Authority and Magic in the verse.

 

[SatellaTheWoE]

Od Laguna is the source of all mana which is what allows a person to use magic, its also been implied thàt Od Laguna is the one who is holding the entire world together in the first place
Authorities are manifestations of a persons will coupled with an integrated witch factor that they have acquired. Authorities are direct oppositions to Od Laguna, if you had a divine blessing aka you were "loved" by the world/Od Laguna then you will lose it once you gain an authority as you have gone against the world and will now be hated by it and Authorities>Blessing according to WoG

 

[Phoenks]

Which again has no connections to support CM Type 2. Lion's Heart isn't a Conceptual ability. You can still effect Regulus just fine with concept manipulation (obviously depends on the user and the type of course.)

Care to explain this further? As in what's the source of Authority and Magic in the verse.

Od Laguna is the source of all magic in the universe which is pretty much the soul/will of the world itself. Said to materialize all life and the entire world through its power.

It should be noted that when it refers to the rules in the world, it is directly interfering with Od Laguna itself. Other Authorities were also able to interfere with Od Laguna and manipulate the rules of the world through it.

 

[Phoenks]

You can still effect Regulus just fine with concept manipulation (obviously depends on the user and the type of course.)

Also, no, you can't affect Regulus with concept manipulation unless you can interact with things that don't participate in cause and effect. You'd need more context than just having concept manipulation lol.

 

[LordGinSama]

Also, no, you can't affect Regulus with concept manipulation unless you can interact with things that don't participate in cause and effect.

Cause and Effect don't invole conceptual manipulation. They're two different abilities. Not participating in cause and effect doesnt render you resistant or immune to conceptual manipulation. But feel free to post some citation for your claims that Lion's Heart allows Regulus to ignore conceptual manipulation.


the fact that Reid could bypass Regulus's Lion's Heart is already with conceptual manipulation goes against that notion.

You'd need more context than just having concept manipulation lol.

Literally any Type 1 and 2 CM can effect Regulus just fine. Type 3 can also effect him but that would depend on the extent of said Type 3.


Anyhow going to bed I'll reply in the morning to the Authority and Magic stuff, which looks alright at first glance but I'd appreciate it if we dropped the Regulus shit as it doesn't have much to do with this thread.

 

[Worthless]

Also, no, you can't affect Regulus with concept manipulation unless you can interact with things that don't participate in cause and effect. You'd need more context than just having concept manipulation lol.

In your perspective, how is Acausality exactly going to counter an attack that operates on a conceptual level? I believe concepts, in general, are independent of cause and effect, as they operate on a level higher than causality. But, I'm not entirely sure about what I'm saying

 

[Phoenks]

Acausality at his level requires explicit feats of interaction. Similar to how things like NEP and Transduality require specific feats. The ability itself won't allow you to interact with him. That's not how it works.


Conceptual manipulation still operates through causality by default, and being able to induce change in Regulus is impossible unless you have specific feats that would allow you to do so..

 

[LordGinSama]

Acausality at his level requires explicit feats of interaction. Similar to how things like NEP and Transduality require specific feats. The ability itself won't allow you to interact with him. That's not how it works.

Pretty sure this is shifting the burden of proof. Your expecting others to prove a negative wherever you're the one that's making the claim that Regulus's Type 4 makes him untouchable by means of conceptual manipulation. In order for that he'd need feats of ignoring conceptual manipulation.

Conceptual manipulation still operates through causality by default, and being able to induce change in Regulus is impossible unless you have specific feats that would allow you to do so..

Also pretty sure that Concepts aren't tied to Causality but feel free to prove me wrong by linking threads where it was deemed as such. As far as I'm aware Concepts are independent of causality, operating on a much more complex level.

 

[Phoenks]

Ironic how you claim I am asking you to prove a negative, then you immediately ask me to prove a negative based on a claim that has no evidence.

You are looking at this from the angle that Concept Manipulation bypasses and doesn't operate within causality. You're the one that needs to prove that claim in the first place to even begin this argument.

By the logic you are using here any type 2 or type 1 concept would also be able to interact with Acausality Type 5.

 

[Worthless]

Ironic how you claim I am asking you to prove a negative, then you immediately ask me to prove a negative based on a claim that has no evidence.

You are looking at this from the angle that Concept Manipulation bypasses and doesn't operate within causality. You're the one that needs to prove that claim in the first place to even begin this argument.

By the logic you are using here any type 2 or type 1 concept would also be able to interact with Acausality Type 5.

I mean, to be fair, a concept is a mental construct, something that doesn't abide by physical constraints and exists in the realm of thought. While cause and effect can be relevant to understanding how certain concepts work, it doesn't necessarily mean that the concept itself is linked or relies on causality. I just can't see any connection between concepts and causality. However, if you could provide an in-depth explanation of how 'concepts' are tied to causality, maybe you could change the OP opinion and I. But at the moment, I really can't see it, and considering how fiction tends to show that concepts can exist before causality was created, it makes things even harder to agree on the idea that concepts rely on causality. Honestly, just thinking that causality precedes the concept in terms of importance makes me feel sick, to be honest.

 

[SatellaTheWoE]

Actually, what is a concept to begin with?
You can say gravity is a concept because its not exactly a tangible thing and rather depends on the mass of the object curving Space-time and Regulus is explicitly unaffected by gravity manipulation.

 

[Twisted_Little_Raven]

Actually, what is a concept to begin with?
You can say gravity is a concept because its not exactly a tangible thing and rather depends on the mass of the object curving Space-time and Regulus is explicitly unaffected by gravity manipulation.

An idea

 

[Vietthai96]

Actually, what is a concept to begin with?

Abstract Ideas that govern and influence aspects of physical reality or the entire physical reality itself

You can say gravity is a concept because its not exactly a tangible thing and rather depends on the mass of the object curving Space-time and Regulus is explicitly unaffected by gravity manipulation

Space-Time is actually physical entity, and Gravity is a physical force cause by its curvature

Acausality at his level requires explicit feats of interaction. Similar to how things like NEP and Transduality require specific feats. The ability itself won't allow you to interact with him. That's not how it works.


Conceptual manipulation still operates through causality by default, and being able to induce change in Regulus is impossible unless you have specific feats that would allow you to do so..

To be fair here, do you have anything to back-up these claim rather than just your own.........interpretation???.

Ngl, i feel like the debate went into completely different path. I'm not really agree or disagree with the thread, but this is my opinion

 

[Phoenks]

To be fair here, do you have anything to back-up these claim rather than just your own.........interpretation???.

To back up which claim exactly? The one about Conceptual Manipulation inherently being tied to cause and effect?

The entire act of "manipulating" a concept implies cause and effect. Being able to change and alter a concept, or project it onto objects, would require that.

How else are you supposed to change a concept? Or apply it to something to inflict change onto a specific target? Those actions imply causality.

Also, you know concepts themselves can change, right? Like, they do all the time. For example, the concept of "communication" has changed over the years of humanity's existence. It used to only encompass things like speech, talking, etc... but now in the digital age this can be mail, texts, images, etc. You can apply this same logic to things like the concept of "work," or the concept of "privacy." Ideas that have largely transformed in meaning over time, yet still remain universal in scope across reality.

Concepts aren't at all inherently outside of causality or anything of the sort. Unless you want to refer to Universals and specific kinds of Type 1 concepts.

Hell, the Conceptual Manipulation page even directly states that Type 2 concepts can be changed by altering the objects they are bound by.

So, no, just having conceptual manipulation abilities does not mean you can inherently affect something that doesn't participate in change.

The same way just having conceptual manipulation doesn't mean you can affect something nonexistent, or something that doesn't participate in certain dualities that your concept hax are reliant on. To say so would be No-Limits-Fallacy to the highest degree.

 

[SatellaTheWoE]

Reid has cm type 1 FRA
On a serious note, i think all the evidence hae already been presented.
Gin simply disgarees with the notion that the evidence is actually relevant to type 2 cm while others think it does
So, instead of going around in circles how about we call some mods and ask what they think of this?

 

[Vietthai96]

At this point idek wtf is being debated here

To back up which claim exactly? The one about Conceptual Manipulation inherently being tied to cause and effect?

Everything is default tied to cause and effect but well that isn't my question, my fault that i should me more specific, but i want to ask about the Acausality stuff, but whatever. Idk why you suddenly wrote a wall of texts but away, i already said that i not side with anyone in this thread, neutrality, what i want to say is why Acausality get brought up, it is comeplete unrelated to CM, you can have CM with feat interacting with Acausality 5, NEP Nature 2 and even Transdual Aspect 3 while the CM in question is type 3, so like i said before, the thread completely went into a different direction that do not really related with CM