• 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.

Castlevania Thing

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ultima_Reality

?????????
VS Battles
Administrator
6,166
16,316
So:



To quote the Nonduality page:

For this ability, dualities refer to logical dualities where the duality is between "A" and "not A" where A is some object or attribute. For example, fire and water are not a duality; the duality of fire would be fire and not fire

Yeah, so, Nonduality strictly speaking isn't just not fitting in some pair of opposites. The opposites have to be logical negations of each other: Not "X and Y" but "X and not-X." In this case, it would not be "Life and Death" but "Life and not-Life" (In English: "Neither alive, nor not alive). It's a rather specific thing that, likewise, requires rather specific statements, and the scans provided aren't really enough, as it were, since nothing in them suggests that "Life and Death" are being treated as two exhaustive categories here, so, yeah.
 
If the definition of duality includes the literal categorical opposite, then yeah, life and death aren't categorical opposites.

They shouldn't be nondual.
That seems like arguing about semantics, death is the oposite of lie in the logical term, not as being the literal categorical oposite, and if nonduality requiered you to have categorical oposites, then a butch of characters shouldn't have nonduality to begin with.
 
I am just saying, that If I had to choose between believing some random dude in a wiki, or an schoolar, I would choose the latter
you do realize what you have linked proves absolutely nothing right??

you probably searched on google, "life and death is a duality scholar article" and hoped that it was relevant to this thread when it talks about something that is not relevant to this discussion at all

and i highly doubt you actually took the time to read that anyways
don't try to act all smart when the very thing you linked as evidence doesn't support your argument in the slightest. It's clear you're trying to sound informed without actually engaging with the material or understanding the topic at hand
 
Last edited:
How exactly is death not a natural opposite of life? Other fictional series when talking about dual natures use life and death as an example of such.
 
Death is not the logical negation of life. Inanimate objects are neither alive nor dead, for example, and there's nothing about this that defies two-valued logic.
To be fair, "death" can be used to mean the literal opposite of life, as it is fairly commonly applied to inanimate objects (Ex: "He's as dead as a doornail."), as well as simply the cession of life. But, it would depend on the context, and Castlevania seems pretty apparent on it just meaning someone living vs someone dead, which wouldn't qualify under our current definitions.
 
Tbh the current definition of nonduality on the wiki just makes zero sense. It's all about binary logic and truth values and shit which has next to no relevance to any actual depiction of the thing it's describing. Like, what the hell even is "not-life" if things which aren't alive don't count as "not-life"?

What the hell is "not-fire"? That's either complete nonsense or just referring to literally nothing at all.
 
I’m still not following you, being Life and Not Life doesn’t line up with you saying that Death is the opposite of life, which anyone can say not life is the same as death.
 
Tbh the current definition of nonduality on the wiki just makes zero sense. It's all about binary logic and truth values and shit which has next to no relevance to any actual depiction of the thing it's describing. Like, what the hell even is "not-life" if things which aren't alive don't count as "not-life"?
They do count as things falling under the umbrella "not-life." Fact of the matter, really, is that Nonduality involves falling under neither umbrella, as opposed to being just something else that falls under the same binary. So, to use color as an analogy: Nonduality isn't being "neither black nor white," but being "Neither black, nor not black." So the entire spectrum of things that are not black is something you don't fall under. Here, likewise, Nonduality would entail being "Neither alive, nor not alive," and "dead" doesn't exhaust "Not alive," so being neither dead nor alive doesn't really fit the bill.
 
Like others, No life=/=death feels too weird

So what would No death be?!

God, thanks that my verses use 1 and 0 as duality or more obviously things becuase dont get this Life and Not Life
 
Yeah, but calling that "nonduality" is incredibly misleading, even setting aside the real world philosophical concept. It's basically just saying that the concept of "x-ness" itself doesn't apply to a given being, rather than the dichotomy of "x and y" not applying.
 
I’m still not following you, being Life and Not Life doesn’t line up with you saying that Death is the opposite of life, which anyone can say not life is the same as death.
I'm not saying that life and death aren't distinct, to clarify, just that "Dead" isn't synonymous with "Not alive" (Because there are things that are not alive, but aren't dead, either), so it isn't the logical negation of life, even if it is obviously opposite to it.
 
Like others, No life=/=death feels too weird

So what would No death be?!

God, thanks that my verses use 1 and 0 as duality or more obviously things becuase dont get this Life and Not Life
I think using a doll is good to understand it.

A doll is not considered to be either alive or dead. So what, it is nondual? It doesn't make sense

But you can consider that doll as a non-living and in that way it is not outside of dual logic.
 
Last edited:
Kinda of confused about this. There are quite a few pages with nonduality with stuff that is basically similar to this (Ie life and death, fire and water, etc...)

About the whole "not alive", would the verse need to directly state that, say, Death is the opposite of Life, or would even that not be enough?
 
About the whole "not alive", would the verse need to directly state that, say, Death is the opposite of Life, or would even that not be enough?
Wouldn't be enough, no.

Kinda of confused about this. There are quite a few pages with nonduality with stuff that is basically similar to this (Ie life and death, fire and water, etc...)
I mean.

Whomp whomp.
 
Wouldn't be enough, no.
Do you have examples of characters that fit this criteria? Would love to see how verses that qualify for this go about it.
I mean.

Whomp whomp.
Counter too strong for me
tenor.gif


Anyways, if this is actually how we go about Non-duality, then I agree with the CRT.
 
They do count as things falling under the umbrella "not-life." Fact of the matter, really, is that Nonduality involves falling under neither umbrella, as opposed to being just something else that falls under the same binary. So, to use color as an analogy: Nonduality isn't being "neither black nor white," but being "Neither black, nor not black." So the entire spectrum of things that are not black is something you don't fall under. Here, likewise, Nonduality would entail being "Neither alive, nor not alive," and "dead" doesn't exhaust "Not alive," so being neither dead nor alive doesn't really fit the bill.
That seems like an easy way to wank MTL novels, because it is extremly common to see"it isn't neither X and not X", instead of "It isn't neither X or Z".
PD: Also the duality page still mentions duality and transduality (the latter was removed), and I don't think Transduality is of enough noterioty to be mentioned (and what does transduality even does in a void, or even the differences compared to Duality).
 
@Wesker018 problem is the doll isn’t even categorized as alive to begin with so you can’t really say it falls under the basic meaning of death since it’s not sentient unlike Vampires which either hover between or transcend life and death altogether.

@Ultima_Reality so what exactly does fictional franchises need to specify for life and death to even be a dual nature to transcend? Because none of this makes any sense to me.
 
What about fiction that uses life and death as a dichotomy? Again this seems like it’s being needlessly strict for the sake of it.
 
Depends on what you mean by "dichotomy." To be precise, it'd have to specifically define it in a way where "Everything that isn't alive, is dead, and everything that isn't dead, is alive." This isn't really being needlessly strict, it's just what the ability is.
 
Like they literally state how Life and Death are two sides of the same coin and they’re interconnected and one is needed for the other to thrive like dual relationship. Does that not count as a Duality at all? If so then why because series like ATLA uses the Yin Yang relationship to describe life and death.
 
Does that not count as a Duality at all? If so then why because series like ATLA uses the Yin Yang relationship to describe life and death.
Not really, no. We use an extremely specific idiosyncratic sense of "duality" for the purposes of the ability, so, most cosmic dualities you see in fiction aren't gonna qualify, truth be told.
 
problem is the doll isn’t even categorized as alive to begin with so you can’t really say it falls under the basic meaning of death since it’s not sentient unlike Vampires which either hover between or transcend life and death altogether.
What I tried to say was that the doll isn't in the duality of life and death since life and death isn't the logical duality to begin with. Instead, the living and non-living duality would be the correct one, and the doll would be part of that duality, in this case it would be non-living.
 
What I tried to say was that the doll isn't in the duality of life and death since life and death isn't the logical duality to begin with. Instead, the living and non-living duality would be the correct one, and the doll would be part of that duality, in this case it would be non-living.
I don't get it, Life and death is a duality, yet that doesn't make life and not life not a duality, both overlap but are still different.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top