- 14,956
- 1,831
Jus tlike others have said I am not sure what makes Taboo a concept, I whole heartedly agree with law manipulation that is how it has seemed all the while but I dont see conceptual manip anywhere.
-
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.
CONCEPTUAL MANIPULATION AND LAW MANIPULATION FOR MORI JIN.
- Thread starter EinelRendezvous
- Start date
- Status
- 16,000
- 9,238
The original argument for type 3 Taboo was that it was an intangible law placed upon every human in existence. As such, for someone like R to break it by "consuming" it, it would have had to have been a concept. I'm perfectly fine with removing type 3 for everyone if that's not how concepts work.
- 14,956
- 1,831
I am not an expert o this but that is not exactly what I would call a concept a law can be just the same, I think it gives R a high level of NPI being capable of eating something intangible that applies as a universal law but I dont think it make the law itself a concept, but I suggest asking like Ultima or something I believe he is the type of person to know more about this sort of stuff.
- 1,204
- 1,052
I won't recall that as a concept either.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #45
Okay, I'm back and it can be assumed that 4 people disagree, I can tolerate it. Come to think of it, I was also a bit skeptical but my idea of this Taboo remains the same with a slightly different view. After I retraced the Manhwa on this subject, Taboo is not a "Power Null" but a "Limiter" or "Restriction" to the potential of power, knowledge, and wisdom of a being that descends to the level of genetics. In Power Nullification, it refers to the ability to simply nullify the powers and abilities of others, negating their effects. Meanwhile, the Taboo here is an "invisible limiter" or what is often referred to as an "inviolable rule" which works as both a law and a concept, as stated in the Ultio R profile which says Taboo is a form of conceptual law applied by Gods to Humans.
Besides that, the reason why Taboo is not Power Null is when the Taboo was released by R, Sujin said "I'm overflowing with power ... it feels like something that 'was constricting' my body has completely dissapeared". After that Mubong or Mujin also mentions this Taboo as said by Sujin, and this indicates that Taboo has a meaning as a "restriction" compared to the Power Null form, this is the form of misinterpretation that I previously mentioned.
And that's why I previously said that the application of this Taboo can act as Conceptual Manipulation as well as Law Manipulation. And if we take a concept definition based on a dictionary, the concept is said to be a form of "principle" or "idea" and the definition of the principle here is "a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning". Principle also has a meaning in a law which sounds "In law, it is a rule that has to be or usually is to be followed, or can be desirably followed, or is an inevitable consequence of something, such as the laws observed in nature or the way that a system is constructed. The principles of such a system are understood by its users as the essential characteristics of the system, or reflecting system's designed purpose, and the effective operation or use of which would be impossible if any one of the principles was to be ignored."
That's how Taboo works. And in the Taboo case there is an absolute inviolable rule that is applied to a law or an existential system. In the Taboo case, it also has a fundamental truth or one that is fundamental in the restriction system, namely "the inviolabe rule that limits the potential of humans based on power, knowledge, and wisdom compared to the gods" < This truth works as a principle into the system to effect up to scale between genetics. If this isn't a form of concept, when the Taboo is a God-given human “life principle” then what do you want to say? Power Null? it is very imprecise because Taboo means a limitation.
So in my view Taboo is a legitemate a conceptual and law manipulation.
Besides that, the reason why Taboo is not Power Null is when the Taboo was released by R, Sujin said "I'm overflowing with power ... it feels like something that 'was constricting' my body has completely dissapeared". After that Mubong or Mujin also mentions this Taboo as said by Sujin, and this indicates that Taboo has a meaning as a "restriction" compared to the Power Null form, this is the form of misinterpretation that I previously mentioned.
And that's why I previously said that the application of this Taboo can act as Conceptual Manipulation as well as Law Manipulation. And if we take a concept definition based on a dictionary, the concept is said to be a form of "principle" or "idea" and the definition of the principle here is "a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning". Principle also has a meaning in a law which sounds "In law, it is a rule that has to be or usually is to be followed, or can be desirably followed, or is an inevitable consequence of something, such as the laws observed in nature or the way that a system is constructed. The principles of such a system are understood by its users as the essential characteristics of the system, or reflecting system's designed purpose, and the effective operation or use of which would be impossible if any one of the principles was to be ignored."
That's how Taboo works. And in the Taboo case there is an absolute inviolable rule that is applied to a law or an existential system. In the Taboo case, it also has a fundamental truth or one that is fundamental in the restriction system, namely "the inviolabe rule that limits the potential of humans based on power, knowledge, and wisdom compared to the gods" < This truth works as a principle into the system to effect up to scale between genetics. If this isn't a form of concept, when the Taboo is a God-given human “life principle” then what do you want to say? Power Null? it is very imprecise because Taboo means a limitation.
So in my view Taboo is a legitemate a conceptual and law manipulation.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #46
I have explain that in a better way, sorry if before my explaination kinda bad and misleading.
Well, I have explained the conceptual explanation of the Taboo above, and it's not a power null. Althought the scans that I brought were just right, what was not right on the previous occasion was how I interpreted this matter with minimal and complicated diction. Regarding the Inviolable Rule, it could be the principle regarding the basic principles of the Taboo, which is definitively the Taboo is the restriction of Gods to Humans. It's something fundamental, why it doesn't? You know right fundamental means a central or primary rule or principle on which something is based, and this inviolable rule works as a fundamental rule to humans.
Eh actually it is, there's a misinterpretation in here and I have explained as above.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #47
You are right, but this fundamental things can work as an idea like a concept works. And the fundamental things is an aspect that motivates the principle, so I guess my statement before was right.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #48
What? So nevermind about this.
I don't need to prove it either, because the basics explanation and the logics way can be applied in here just as I explained above with a reliable sources.
You know you are out of context right now by mentioning this Gurren Laggan that we don't talk about. My scans actually fine, it just how my way interpretating it before. Also why would I thought that? That just ashine. My current view is more better than before, I guess even it's can be elaborate with a simple way.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #49
Okay but we don't really need that as long the context is fine with the scans, and I began to understand why the previous crt make this "Taboo" as conceptual and law manipulation and my view explain this.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #50
Okay dare to explain why?
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #51
What do you mean about this? There are quite a lot of misconceptions about this, since Mori ate Samjang he has been confirmed that he is no longer the same mortal. Even this has been mentioned by Odin many times, that Mori Jin after eating Samjang he was able to defeat Tathaghata and was called a being from a higher dimension. And the comparison of Jade Emperor's strength with Mori Jin is far away even if you want to compare post-ragnarok Mori Jin Jaecheondaeseong with Daewi Han as Jade Emperor or even the prime Okhwang. Mori was clearly much stronger than them, especially regarding "The Supreme Gods", it was stated that Mori Jin became a divine being with higher dimensions which indicated that the status he had was not just status. And since when did Mori only sign with Odin and the Satan you say is only capable of making such a contract? In the previous scans, I gave evidence that the reason Odin suggested this was so that Mori could spare his life by applying the Taboo and creating a law of nonaggression that placed the 3 races from absolutely no fight against each other. You can check it between chapters 280-304.
Well your statement makes sense here and I can understand the reasons why you could disagree. However, when the Taboo is applied to Gods and the law of nonaggression is made it implies that Mori Jin has the capability to make conceptual laws that bind the three races. And the thing to remember is that Mori Jin is also referred to as "The Supreme Gods" which then it is known that whoever holds this status will have the ability as a Supreme God, and he can create the laws that he want. In the case of Mori Jin, he made the law of nonaggression openly and by consensus, but if we look back at the past when Tathaghata was still in power, he made inviolable rules to humans in wrongdoing like a slave contract which made them have differences.
Last edited:
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #52
Yes it because Sujin is the "key" a being that made to fulfill her main task of breaking the contract made by Gods. And this Ultio capable to break the Taboo because he consume the greed, it's actually with another's power just not him.
He actually has thought but his feats is indeed minim. Why we called it as headcanon? There's many stuff out there that use scaling that makes hax applicable from one to another.
Why thought it's dumb? Is this about the realm structure in there? Well the safest thing is about their verse are Universe+, and possibly Low Multiversal because any realm indicates it has it's own space and time. Thought the low multiversal is arguable in here.
Fine.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #53
That's fine because in the upcoming issue it seems that Mori will regain his original power back. But actually Mori has shown a bit abillities in this state, it just minim.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #54
Yeah and then? It is not just a 'title' because any beings that deserves this 'title' is a being that has an existence from higher dimensions (as Odin said about Mori Jin), and a being that can recreate the universe like in the Maitreya's lore.
But we have proof that this Moniker of Supreme God can make the new one and by scaling default he can do like anyothers.
Altought there's a chance Mori will regain his original power back.
Fine, but the things that you have said earlier is nonsense.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #55
I have elaborated it in my current view is more understandable, so your thoughts?
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #56
It may sound like that, but in reality it is different. I have explained as above.
Well nope, they actually move linear with the concept definition so I disagree.
- 1,204
- 1,052
And you are yet to prove it and being a fundamental rule to humans doesn't make it a concept.
But, you are the one who propose stuffs so proving stuffs is your obligatory or it'd be a burden of proofs. The reliable sources you gave, aka the given scans above, has nothing indicates that it is a concept. I need, a direct scans regarding it being equal as an abstract form, or something that govern reality rather than just being an aspect of humans as an intangible/invisible rule. I'm not gonna hear "it is abstract because it is a concept!" since it is being a concept is the thing that need to be proven at the first place.
It's a direct comparison on X which is more impressive than Y does not qualify as Z hence via common sense Y shouldn't qualifies as well.
But your context does not indicate that Taboo is a concept.
And for addition, I'd rather careless regarding your point of few, if you continue this without even to bring something new and choose the way of circular asinine debate, I won't gonna take you seriously at that point.
Last edited:
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #58
Yeah and I have provided scans that are important and necessary besides that if I only give scans without arguing with logical reasons, of course I will always be on the defensive side who will always be the one who provides and obeys the words of the opponent to meet his expectations, otherwise the explanation that I am giving is more relevant than the accusations made by the opposition. My scans meet the criteria, it remains only for the opposition to digest the context I have given them or not. Especially the discussion of fiction must be detailed in more deeply by the supporters, who obviously you also know.
There is no need to mention that some of them have misinterpreted the Taboo here, besides that I did not explain that the abstract Taboo immediately becomes a concept, but what I explained above is that Taboo is a form of conceptual law. It is clear here that you are ignoring the explanation I am giving and are only looking at the rough scans that are there to create a misinterpretation. I will repeat and explain why the Taboo was included in the concept.
Based on the dictionary for the concept definition, the concept is said to be a form of "principle" or "idea" and the definition of the principle here is a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning. Principle also has a meaning in a law which sounds "it is a rule that has to be or usually is to be followed", or can be desirably followed, or "is an inevitable consequence of something", such as the laws observed in nature or the way that a system is constructed. The principles of such a system are understood by its users as the essential characteristics of the system, or reflecting system's designed purpose, and the "effective operation or use of which would be impossible if any one of the principles was to be ignored".
That's how Taboo works. Because in Taboo there is a fundamental principle or truth in which there is an absolute inviolable rule that is applied to a law or an existential system that is applied to a being. Namely the inviolabe rule that limits the potential of humans based on power, knowledge, and wisdom compared to the gods. <This truth works as a principle into the system to effect up to scale between genetics. Why are you forcing me to prove things the way you want to? Even though if you pay close attention and understand the context, it can be in line with the basic definition, even this is quite simple. On the other hand, if you still think this is a form of power nullification or whatever then the thing you are thinking about is wrong. And remember the Taboo being a form of "conceptual law".
What do you mean about that? The analogy you give is irrelevant and sounds complicated, if the requirement to achieve Z is to exceed the variable Y then if X is able to do this then it should be able to have the same capability. And that sounds complicated.
How does it not? Based on the definition of a concept which is a form of principle, and principles can be applied to laws which are inevitable for adaptation. This is the same as how Taboo works together as I explained above but in brief, the context that makes Taboo is the concept:
• Concept is a form of idea or principle.
• Principle means the principle or basis of a truth.
• Principles can be applied to law.
• Taboo has a fundamental principle or principle, which is about inviolable rules that make humans unable to match gods in terms of strength, knowledge, and wisdom.
• The Taboo Principle works like a system down to the genetic level.
And there are many other contexts that are in line. In fact, your accusation in no way proves that the argument I am giving is wrong, it shows that you did not read my explanation.
Huh what? It doesn't make sense. The explanations and contexts I provide can fit the basic definition and be consistently adapted. You're claiming I'm in the burden of proof fallacy, right? It seems that you are that in the fallacy here, burden of proof fallacy is like: A claims something but without evidence and argumentation and B asks for evidence for it but A replies with B who must prove it.
Whereas the reality here, I am giving here is that I give relateable scans and provide arguments that match common sense without making personal attacks on the opponent. It's fine if you will ignore this, it seems like that condition is more right for me.
- 4,942
- 1,316
- 1,204
- 1,052
A rant. I'll skip.
No, they don't.
You can make 9 paragraphs of argument with only 3 image of scans being presented, but if most of your elaborations are never explained in said scans and solely based on self-interpretation or analysis then that's what we can call as a burden of proof. You need something more than an essay to win a CRT, solid evidences are needed or at least, a very good reasonings, which none of them are here right now.
Correct.
And funnily enough, none of your scans suggests something related to fundamental principle or truth, it's even never being explicited as an abstract form which governs all reality. All scans that have presented here only explained about an intangible law which limits humans capabilities to impossible of achieving something and become one of the human's aspects like soul for instance, which doesn't make it a concept at all. Preventing ones to reach something literally is what a power nullification ability is, even for knowledge and wisdom. A concept can be applied as law but the vice versa is not necessarily true.
Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidences, I like your way of acting like the Taboo being a conceptual law being already established, which in fact, it is not, or we won't even debate this at the first place and the other people in this CRT would not be so undoubtful.
It was a counter analogy since you kept bringing stuffs like knowledge, power, and wisdom in order to make your arguments looks more valid, feelings and emotions which have been described as purely abstractions sounds a lot more impressive than things you kept mentioned above, and that doesn't make them concepts.
But none of these are presented in your scans, but I can see that you will say " It is clear here that you are ignoring the explanation I am giving and are only looking at the rough scans that are there to create a misinterpretation" part 2. Tell me a reason why I shouldn't call these headcanons if the stuffs you were brought on are never explained in the primary sources. In addition, it works like a system down to the genetic level nowhere proves it as a concept, embarassing.
Another rant, I'll skip.
I'm literally on the negative side which supposed to refute your claims so the burden of proof isn't really on me, besides, half of your explanations are non-existent in the context of scans.
Another rant, I'll skip.
Last edited:
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #61
Fine. Hmm rant? Why is it 'rant'? I didn't even say blunt words in front of but I did put aside some form of sarcasm. I feel like you are ignorant here.
Yes they are actually.
You know I wouldn't dare to explain and expose the above thoughts if this concept was not previously approved, the thing that became my basis was about the previous CRT who even believed that this Taboo was a form of conceptual and law manipulation. And the profile of Ultio R is clear about this. How can that be "self-interpretation"? The scans I brought were indeed minimal, but they are scans that are relevant and in context. You're here asking me time and time again to bring out a scene that says it's equivalent to an abstract form (more or less) right? Then I would say that your thinking which demands this is untrue, because if a phenomenon can be logically explained and it is consistently adapted then it is legitimate to think of it as such. My evidence are actually solids, and you also need critical objective thinking rather than acting ignorant that sometimes leads to misinterpretations to properly refute your oppositional arguments.
Then we can agreed in here.
Are you serious about saying that? My arguments only clarify the scans I carry and make correlations that can be elaborated consistently among each other in order to create the right form of solution.
This returns to the definition of the fundamental itself which is briefly the "existential principle" or which is the basis of an object, the principle applied by the Taboo in which a being is bound by inviolable rules which are absolute and shackled in the aspects of knowledge, power, and wisdom. < This can be considered as the fundamental form underlying the Taboo.
The fundamentals I am talking about are definitive terms from the dictionary. Why does it have to be like that? If you ask for something like that then, Taboo itself when post-ragnarok is applied to be a law of nonaggression which regulates all races from all realms not to interfere with each other. This can be the basis for this. Well that's "intangible law" is also referred to as "inviolable rule" which is absolute and is applied according to the system up to the genetic scale with the "limiter" principle, which means that it becomes a form of concept as well as law. Again about soul or whatever you bring is not in line with what I explain, you are here as if you are making your own wrong interpretation. Because in short, the reason is called a concept because it becomes a conceptual law that binds humans, and there is no doubt that it is absolute and abstract.
And regarding Taboo, it is not like the context of Power Nullification literally because this Taboo is more of a limiter as I explained above. Yes you are right for this, and the Taboo here can be categorized as both.
Why not? In terms of this Taboo it was previously approved on a previous CRT and as I said above I would dare say such a thing on this basis. So that's actually fine.
Are you still bringing this up? This indicates that you are misinterpreting my reasoning that the Taboo is a form of conceptual law. For the previous view I did say that, but my recent view has corrected this into a more definitive to dictionary and a fit vocabulary with a relevant context. And regarding feelings or whatever, you didn't mention that before and this goes into out of context.
I mean a phenomenon can be logically explained and it is consistently adapted then it is legitimate to think of it as such, there is no antifeats for this and as I explained above I just make it more clear in a logical way.
It proves that you are ignorant.
And not on me too.
Fine.
- 550
- 256
Their power for breaking taboo is not by their own but sujin and ultio is capable to Directly changed it, and it's already been explained about sujin relationship with taboo and Tam nature and how it's can devour taboo
meanwhile mori jin can't do exactly like people who I'm mentioned above
It's called headcanon if we use it for crt, know the rules
It's hasn't been explained about each realm being casually disconected or not and it's size also it's nature, law and all
It's argueable for low multiversal but it's still dumb af for me
Understandable
- 360
- 239
I disagree
- 550
- 256
Tbh i never see taboo as a universal concept that govern reality or equalivent to it
It's just an invincible rules which is can be applied to every being including gods
Law manipulation should be works for this
And greatzulkarnain has Brought up decent argument in this thread
(*waking up in the morning and also proceed to Reading all the argument above alone is equal to Reading Chinese novel ngl)
It's just an invincible rules which is can be applied to every being including gods
Law manipulation should be works for this
And greatzulkarnain has Brought up decent argument in this thread
(*waking up in the morning and also proceed to Reading all the argument above alone is equal to Reading Chinese novel ngl)
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #67
Nope their reasons are a form of a misintepretation to the Taboo itself. I have explained as above this Taboo can be applied to the both conceptual and law manipulation.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #68
Dare to explain why?
- 360
- 239
I don't like GOH upgrade
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #70
I know that's shouldn't be a problem in here.
Let's said that it's possibly because I sure Mori will regain his power back to defeat Maitreya.
It actually has thought, well about nature if I remember correctly it's also been explained. The things that is not is the size.
Ok.
K.
- 550
- 256
Based
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #72
Well if you read my explanation above this Taboo can be applied as a conceptual law to any beings in there including gods, you are kinda right in the last sentence.
Yes it is, and also the conceptual one.
Agreed, but he's predictable and has many wrong assumption that leading to misinterpretation but that doesn't mean I'm not. So it's fine.
- 550
- 256
And not much to explain for justified low multiversal goh cosmology
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #74
Who cares about personal opinion, brings out your objective one here.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #75
"Arguable".
- 18,549
- 18,599
I've read their reasoning, you don't need to tell me about it. It makes more sense anyway, which is why I agree with them.
- 436
- 509
- Thread starter
- #79
Okay, but in my perspective they are not. Especially the one that misconceptions about Mori Jin that become the Supreme Gods.
- 550
- 256
There's no such thing for conceptual law or any kind of this if the explanation alone Couldn't proven much about how it's being fundamental aspect that shapes the reality, the explanation above is 70% using the dictionary as base argument which is can't be overused to reach the conclusion
Give another scan is very good rather than like that
Law manipulation should be works
His assumptipn are based on how tiering system works , he's not Entirely wrong as someone who doesn't follow tgoh
Giving more proof to your argument is very good move than "misinterpration this misinterpration that"
- Status
Similar threads
