- 106
- 49
I don't believe you noticed the scan I replied to you with.
-
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.
Dark Tower: Gan tier 0
- Thread starter Jason_Voorhees1986
- Start date
-
- Tags
- gan the dark tower
- Status
ExcelsisBerny
She/Her- 1,674
- 3,021
Yeah. I mantain my vote against both proposals.
- 7,417
- 7,875
I'm seeing Avatar Creation, if we're assuming the One is the Final Other. Having a bunch of religious figures as a part of yourself doesn't matter to Tier 0, since it's not a tier based on the things below it.
As for the Mystery line, I'll need more context.
- 1,718
- 273
I want to keep this short. A few days ago, I upgraded Dark Tower to High 1-A; we're now in the final stages of the process. This will probably be the last content revision I'll make for Dark Tower. I hope the community isn't mad at me for the joke I made yesterday. Anyway, here's a quick summary I put together for Gan. I've done my best to keep the text and quotes as concise as possible. All I want now is for this CRT to be done quickly.
Gan: Tier 0 Revizion
vsbattles.fandom.com
Agree:
@FinePoint (mod)
@Elyartaker
@Kairach
@Gewsbumpz_dude
@LordVader30
@Shiedaisthepeak
@Apex_Predator_GX
@Monsters_fight
@Re5yh
Disagree:
@VeryGoofyToddler2
@Jockey-1337
@ExcelsisBerny
^ @Jason_Voorhees1986 may I know why you are adding people who agree but continue to ignore to add people who disagree? I asked to fix the list a few hours ago. Your latest edit was 30 minutes ago.
Do you agree with the tier 0 proposal or not? The anti-feats topic is still a debatable one.
- 106
- 49
It doesn't create avatars; the scan states that people's belief creates functions of it, which means that any form of viewing it would only show what the person believes it to be.
In a sense, yes, but we can understand the entity not only transcends simple ideas of gods, but also complex ones.
It's a character stating about the beliefs of all different types of religions create conflicting ideas of what god is, and ultimately coming to the conclusion that god is a mystery.
I agree that the "Other" in context seems to be just Gan, and wish to suggest, after this revision, a complete overhaul of the information about the story. But I think there is already good context for a "God figure" in the story, but it isn't Gan.
- 7,417
- 7,875
Avatar Creation isn't limited to creating avatars; it includes having multiple facets of your existence.
God in Christianity, or Buddha in Buddhism, can be Tier 0, purely because they're the only beings in their setting of that nature. The moment there are multiple of them, their tiers fall sharply, and really aren't good evidence for Tier 0.
Also, we still need evidence that this One/God is the Final Other.
If there are more details about God, their nature, then Tier 0 might be discussable.
- 106
- 49
Yeah, and each "facet" is based on personal belief of the viewer, which is the most on-the-dot definition of character being unknowable.
I didn't mean to allude that because they are tier 0, therefore the character in question is. I meant to say that not only simplistic ideas (gods of certain emotions/feelings) become "facets" of its existence, but also complex ones (such as the ones listed).
Also, gods seem to be not bound by dualistic existence, as the "creator of humanity" is described as "women" whilst being the creator before humanity.
Not exactly what I'm discussing, I also stated that I believe the "Final Other" to just be Gan within different context. Different universes/multiverses function on different narratives, and different center forces (rather than the Dark Tower), which is why the Essence of the Dark Tower isn't actually, well the Dark Tower, it's more about the belief and understanding of the one who creates the narrative or believes in the "god".
- 337
- 138
- Thread starter
- #168
I'll be back in a few days. Because honestly this crt looks promising.
- 1,718
- 273
Care to elaborate?
Ok, I also need time to research some stuff and prepare more arguments.
And I think I already found something interesting:
"Before the dawn of time and the formation of the multiverse, there was nothing but the magical Prim, the primordial soup of creation that stretched across all existence like a chaotic sea. This was the case until Gan, the Spirit of the Dark Tower, emerged from the formless Prim and gave birth to the entire multiverse. As Gan slowly expanded, the Prim receded into nothingness. Soon all that remained of the Prim were assorted demons stranded on Gan's earth who once called the Prim their home.
- The Dark Tower - End-World Almanac 01 (2008)"
Facts:
1) "there was nothing but the magical Prim" - Todash space is not necessary bigger than the Prim. The Prim was everywhere before the creation of the multiverse.
2) "Gan emerged" and "Gan slowly expanded" - these 2 facts can be counted as anti-feats for Gan (and I mean true Gan, because Gan and the Tower are 2 different things here.), because a proper tier 0 character should be changeless:
3) Gan is made of the Prim. He is not the very first and the very fundamental source of everything.
4) Dark Tower verse cannot reach High 1-A+ level, because the Prim and the multiverse cannot exist at the same "time". A long time ago we had the Prim only. But now we have the multiverse and todash space (empty void between universes and outside the multiverse).
"Although the Dark Tower appears to be constructed from gray stone, legend has it that this stone is actually hardened flesh, and that the Tower, Beams, and roses are but one living, self-sustaining entity. Just as the Tower is believed to be the body of Gan, the first being to rise out of the primordial Prim, so the roses and Beams are believed to be a living, singing force field that emanates from his body.
- The Dark Tower - End-World Almanac 01 (2008)"
^ According to it, the Tower is Gan's body. True Gan doesn't have R>F transcendence over it.
Gan has R>F transcendence over the Macroverse. But Macroverse is only a part of the Tower. The Tower itself has a ton of different levels of existence and higher dimensions. The Macroverse exists somewhere there.
The destruction of the Tower would also destroy the Macroverse:
EDIT: Day 2, I found some extra info that may be useful for the discussion.
From The Dark Tower - Guide to Gilead (2009) (Digital):
1) Gan has a wife, a character who stays in the same weight category, we may say.
2) Another source confirms, that "In the beginning there was only the Prim". So the Prim was older and more fundamental than Gan.
3) Minds of people are a well-protected source. Even the Crimson King cannot enter it so easily. (An anti-feat for the Crimson King).
4) Another source says, that the Old Ones/the Imperium made mechanical Guardians. And this fact shows once more, that the Guardians are not big players in the verse. They are fodder, so there is no need to powerscale Gan from them, it is useless.
Also, "On his shell he holds the earth" is not an impressive feat for a character, who borrows the "High-1A" tier at this moment.
From The Dark Tower - Gunslinger's Guidebook (2007) (digital):
1) The "beams with technological replicas" have been mentioned once more.
2) The Crimson King wants to destroy the Tower, and it was mentioned in this source, too.
3a) "In the beginning, there was nothing but the Prim, the primordial force of chaotic magic which ate away at the nothingness in the universe"
3b) "Gan, the spirit of the Dark Tower, was the first to erupt from the Prim" - so Gan was just the biggest fish of the Prim.
3c) "...the demon-infested Prim began to recede" - another confirmation that even the Prim itself is not changeless.
Last edited:
- 1,425
- 1,235
This isn’t the type of unknowability that’s being used for tier 0. What you’re describing is more so a symbolic or psychological unknowability, where a character by nature of defying interpretation, needs to step down into faces/expressions to be properly comprehended on an individual level. This is a pretty basic quality found in Jungian styled archetypes. However, that is not the same as being unknowable in the absolute sense like a tier 0, as a character who can simply perceive all forms of the archetype at once, would have an awareness that’s unbound by individual interpretation as well, and thus be capable of knowing the archetype.
For tier 0, unknowable is used in a more metaphysical sense, being that a character cannot be know by virtue of absolutely transcending all conceptual thought and being. And it does this by representing the very ground or source from which all thought and being emerge, as the source of all cannot be a part of the all, and must come ontologically prior. So you’d need much more evidence than having expressions or lower forms.
Last edited:
- 7,417
- 7,875
Having avatars for each different system of belief can be a feat, depending on how we're scaling the avatars. However the simple mention of religion isn't enough to scale to the whole religion. Otherwise, every God mentioned in a verse based on Christianity would be Tier 0, and every Buddha could scale to every sutra written.
Basically, we would need either scans on these different facets, or more scans of God.
I see.
- 106
- 49
Sorry if I make worse arguments, just getting a response out before I sleep.
Firstly, the scan provided seems to alludes to gods being real, grounded entities, as shown with characters like Gan. If we try to look into it more, the part stating: "costumes tailored to fit the needs of the individuals", we can come to the conclusion that either "all gods are born from human experience" or all gods naturally exist, in the same way numbers like 1 exist, so that they will always exist no matter if an "entity" believes in them. I would argue that it's not based on psychological concepts, but more likely how reality itself works.
Throughout my research of Jung I have never seen him describe them as that, actually Archetypes are more likely to be knowable as they have definitions, Self, Shadow, Hero, and such.
This kind of simplifies the idea that the scan was trying to state. Example being: "Similarly the Tower is an essence and a force whose form changes from world to world.", the concept really isn't "different expressions or lower forms", they are real, foundational parts of reality. This probably won't be enough of a rebuttal, but whatever.
- 106
- 49
I've already talked about why the religion part was more to show complexity within the idea, if every sentence were to create another god for example, then logically you wouldn't be able to define nor capture it within words. This idea isn't far off from what is already described within the scan, as belief and understanding can be almost be inseparable.
Gan can already be written off as an "avatar" (I would more likely call him an extension of reality), in which we already have evidence of Gan creating all stories within his part of reality, in that people can never actually "create" things that Gan hasn't already created.
"No writer is Gan - no painter, no sculptor, no maker of music. We are kas-ka Gan... The prophets of Gan."
This isn't including the theoretical possibility of what "other gods" could create.
- 1,425
- 1,235
Being “real” doesn’t conflict with being born or shaped out of belief. For example, in DC comics, the Gods are both real and conceptual entities shaped by belief. Ares and Orion are both the concept of war, just looked at from a differently from the preference of one belief system over another.
On top of that, what you quoted doesn’t really leave any room for the former interpretation that Gods would exist independent like numbers(this is a contested belief IRL btw). The entire metaphor about them being costumes tailored to the needs of individuals, is literally just saying that they exist as a necessary side effect of individual experience. And this is why I brought up the example involving DC comics because being real and being a byproduct of belief, is not something mutually exclusive. It just means that there is a force in reality that manifest that belief into something that is real on a certain level of reality. And in this case that force would just be the power of belief.
Also saying it’s “more like how reality works” unnecessarily obfuscates the point being made in the quote and beats around the bush of what I’m already saying.
You’re kind of misrepresenting my point here. I specifically used the term “symbolic unknowability” to differentiate from the absolute type of unknowability used in tier 0 which as you’ve stated, would be without definition. I digress, the point was more so that jungian archetypes are known through subjective experience via their expressions, which mirrors the exact relationship this “Final Other” character has with Gods.
Why can’t a lower expression also be real? This is a line that honestly doesn’t have to be drawn as these things are not mutually exclusive.
Last edited:
- 106
- 49
Again, we have Gan and Oriza that exists not as a by product of belief, so why would we have two be a "special" case whiles others not, your arguments just seems to hinge on specific words rather than context of the series.
This is not how Archetypes work at all, this is more in line with Platonic forms
"With a little self-criticism one can see through the shadow—so far as its nature is personal. But when it appears as an archetype, one encounters the same difficulties as with anima and animus. In other words, it is quite within the bounds of possibility for a man to recognize the relative evil of his nature, but it is a rare and shattering experience for him to gaze into the face of absolute evil." - Aion
This doesn't have anything to do with "subjectivity".
I didn't say they were physical, I said they were apart of reality and they exist as necessity, which is why they are compared to the Tower in the same scan, as the Tower binds its reality together and reason why human life can even exist.
- 1,425
- 1,235
Gan is a special case because he’s literally the one true God behind all the faces that we’re talking about. Oriza on the other hand doesn’t transcend interpretation, so I don’t know why you’re using her as an example. The one statement you posted about her supports the opposite of what you’re claiming, since she is established as a creator of humanity and all the worlds, only within legend(myth) which are considered versions on top of the ancient true origin involving Gan. This implies that not only are the Gods faces of Gan, but that their creation myths are just tales woven over the origin involving Gan.
This is also pretty much a mirror of how the Sphere of Gods in DC comics works, so my analogy given earlier involving DC is only stronger now.
Brother, I’m afraid to say but this literally just supports my point.
Here, Carl Jung is distinguishing the archetype of the shadow on a personal level from a collective level. On a personal level, evil has a face because its relative, but on an archetypal level(beyond the personal), the face of evil is no longer something you recognize, but rather something that confronts you, since it’s more than just a specific face, but rather an experience that goes beyond your personal understanding.
The Gods are compared to the Tower because the Tower takes on many forms and shapes while remaining undiminished within its essence, similarly to how God(Gan) takes on many forms and shapes(Gods) while remaining ultimately true and undiminished in its essence. And we all know the tower is the body of Gan so it also having lesser expressions like Gan, only reinforces my stance. One could even say that creation in the story involving Oriza, is an example of one of these lesser towers, as if Oriza is already a lesser face given to the Gan, it would make sense for there to be a lesser tower as well.
All in all, this just seems like another case similar to the Leviathan of Stories but worse. The Leviathan at least has the comparison to things like Anselm’s perfect being, where God is the greatest being conceivable and is necessary by virtue of its own perfection. However, not even that is enough for tier 0 and could probably reach High 1-A+ at best. Gan is in the same predicament but with worse evidence and likely more anti feats, so pushing for tier 0 here just seems inaccurate and a waste of time.
- 106
- 49
No, we can understand that he is just another identity of how life could be.
Because she created human life, unless you're trying to say that Gan is somehow the "special" one, also the writer didn't say "Gan" in the scan, rather he said "One" to make the distinction, even though paragraphs before it used Gan multiple times.
Which Gan is the same through "legend and myth" by your interpretation, you haven't proven how he should somehow be different.
"Personal understanding" has nothing to do with it, instead we can understand that Archetypes reflect human nature, while in Platonism it exists independently of what humans do or don't do, which seems to be a lot more of what is happening in the scan. People don't imagine towers or imagine gods, they are just different ways the world could have been.
Overall I think you should reevaluate the information rather than tell me what you personally think it means, I've already argued against multiple of the points that you've brought up, so look at those posts instead of making me repeat myself.
- 1,425
- 1,235
Huh? What does this sentence even mean? Do you actually think Gan is not the God behind all the facets being talked about lol?
She created humanity “in legend” which is explicitly mentioned in the scan before what you’re claiming to distinguish her origin from Gans which is the actual one. The usage of the word “version” and “legend” as descriptors implies that relative to Gan’s origin, hers is what would be called a creation myth.
And yeah Gan is the special case, I kind of clarified that when I said he’s the one true God. I think the scan is alluding to Gan, as evident from how the one True Gods relation with other Gods is compared to how the Tower relates to every world, which as we all know is the body of Gan. And so since that metaphor relates to Gan’s existence, this one true god is equivalent to Gan.
You can read above for the reply to this^
Uh hello, it definitely does? The quote you just pulled from Carl Jung literally uses a distinction between the shadow as it exists on an archetypal level and personal level to explain how the archetypes confront as an experience versus directly relate in their expression.
Also people do image gods what the heck are you talking about? If you believe in (insert God) the world was created this way, but if you believe in (insert other God) the world was created that way and might look a little different. If belief had nothing to do with this then the metaphor wouldn’t say that each costume(Gods) is tailored to the individual. The same way these Gods are all shapings of Gan who represent the one true God, each world is a shaping of the tower, which is likely representing the one true world, that being the world as it exist, independent of individual interpretation.
This is a projection. I am referencing the evidence, you just refuse to engage with my arguments the moment I point out something that conflicts with your interpretation of said evidence. Literally everything you’ve posted so far supports my point more than it could support yours, so much so that all the evidence is saying the literal opposite of what you’re claiming. And you’ve been avidly resistant in this conversation to explain why your interpretations make more sense. Instead you’ve just been dismissing my arguments and reasons so you can avoid engaging with what I’m saying. And so It’s easy to say you’re repeating yourself when you’re also no longer actually trying to argue.
Last edited:
- 106
- 49
I never once said he was, you decided that I did think he was. If Gan was the "One", then it dumbs down and ruins the theme of the series.
Yeah, and Gan's has the same point to it.
With what evidence and proof can you back up this claim with?
I'm saying that gods will exist even when a human doesn't believe in them, meaning they are wholly different from individual or collective experience. Man within the context doesn't create a whole new reality just because he believes in the god of love, nor does the "One" just create another face because someone believed that the "One" is entirely different from the context of other "gods", it's called reading between the lines and understanding why the author described it like that.
You ever thought that the reason I haven't engaged with your arguments is because I see them as either fluff for your central arguments or I have no way of arguing against them as they don't have a basis within the series? I wonder why I don't engage with an argument that bases its idea off interpretation when we can understand why the author of the comic made the distinction between "Gan" and "One" when if they were the same entity they would've just said "Gan". Some self reflection and accountability go far.
- 1,718
- 273
A new day - a new collection of anti-feats and limits:
From The Dark Tower - The Gunslinger - Sheemie's Tale 01 (of 02) (2013) (Digital):
1) "Centuries" vs eternal(?) structure. Centuries are winning. #1
2) People with some supernatural abilities - the Breakers. Have a look athow powerful they are how weak the Tower is. #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, and an anti-feat of the Crimson King in the end #7.
A lot of stuff from part 2 is coming soon...
From The Dark Tower - The Gunslinger - Sheemie's Tale 01 (of 02) (2013) (Digital):
1) "Centuries" vs eternal(?) structure. Centuries are winning. #1
2) People with some supernatural abilities - the Breakers. Have a look at
A lot of stuff from part 2 is coming soon...
- 1,425
- 1,235
I disagree, but if that’s your stance you can address my counter argument for why it would be Gan.
No, her origin is established as a version of his, meaning his has to be the original in which hers was based on. Her story being described as a legend, further supports the idea that Gods have their own creation myth woven over Gan’s origin.
No, they are directly said to be tailored to individuals which implies that they are symbolic expressions of Gan through the lens of individual experience. However, that is not to say they wholly illusionary but rather that they filtered in reality through human experience. Without interpretation, “they” don’t really exist, it’s only Gan who is all encompassing truth.
I don’t need to do any reading between the lines. The text states quite blatantly that the Gods are shaped by individual need.
- “The faces of the multiple divinities are but masks worn by the One; they are costumes tailored to fit the needs of individual worshippers.”
And this is not to say they were literally invented by humans, rather that they are expressions which reflect humanity in some way. Each expression is a new face of Gan who functions as the underlying God behind all of their experiences. Additionally, this is not to say that belief just creates some whole new reality, but that instead, reality through the tower and Gan expresses itself in a form that’s meaningful to the observer. In this manner, each world and God is a sort of filter given to the underlying totality that is Gan and the Dark Tower itself. In this way, the Tower and Gan remain whole and undiminished, even as they are present in each of their facets, as each one is a reflection of the whole.
Once again this is another projection. Your entire argument up this point has been a cluster of attempts to either ignore or editorialize the text into saying what it is not all so you can misrepresent the Gods as platonic forms despite the information presented thus far aligning them entirely with Jungian archetypes. And obviously, you’re pushing so hard for the Gods to be platonic forms so you can try to correlate the title of “One” given to Gan, with the Ennead One or the Good from Neoplatonism which would allow you to jump start a tier 0 argument despite the clear lack of evidence.
For sure bro, because these types of stories are definitely known to be written by authors with a strong desire to be clear and precise at all moments of time, right? I definitely couldn't imagine a single reason as to why Gan, the character with multiple names and faces, wouldn’t be addressed as Gan throughout the entire series. I thought it could be an attempt to stir symbolic tension but naaaah that’s stupid. I’ll just pray for the next 30 days that I get bestowed with your God-given gift to read between the lines so I can figure this all out.
Last edited:
- 106
- 49
Proof?
Again, the gods are compared to the Tower, which has different "functions" within each reality, described in the same scan, so unless you want to say humans created "concepts" such as "Size" then you would need to prove that yourself.
Unless you can prove, with evidence, that Gan is not an avatar, then I'll agree with you, but as it stands you're putting words in my mouth, I never said they are "Platonic" I said they work in a similar vein as Platonic forms.
Not only can we understand the Gan is limited to some functions (rather encompassing all), that means we can reasonably come to the conclusion that gods can and will have similar if not the same status as Gan, which is why the scan relates different gods to different towers, as Gan IS the Dark Tower, not THE TOWER.
You say projection but you respond to a single sentence with a full paragraph of things I've never done. Will we argue in good faith?
- 492
- 174
Is this guy fr?
- 1,718
- 273
Part 2: The Dark Tower - The Gunslinger - Sheemie's Tale 02 (of 02) (2013) (Digital):
It is not difficult to enter "the Devil's Arse" #1. (Common info about the Devil's Arse, from End-World Almanac 01 (2008))
"the waters of the Prim covered the earth" #2 - it is a serious anti-feat for the Prim. It shows that the Prim is not very hostile to normal laws of physics and even our planet.
"But then came our enemy" #3 - it sounds like Gan is a player of the same weight category in comparison with other creatures of the Prim. So Gan doesn't have SCPversal/WODversal/SREversal/Backroomsversal/
Ineffability is a "must have" quality for tier 0, btw:
The monsters could destroy the Tower with the powers of Sheemie, and caused some damage: #4, #5, #6.
So the feats of the monsters (with "help" of a Breaker) are comparable to feats of Gan himself.
Btw, it also shows that a Breaker doesn't need the Imperium's tech/NCP tech to damage a Beam and the Tower.
Last edited:
- 492
- 174
I don't think you know much, and if you did, it would be a comedy to make this comment.
I explained the philosophy of God, didn't I? What do you use to explain a god? You look at cosmology and creation to explain the power of God, and even though I've said this many times, I still don't think you understand it.
B-b-b-b-b-ut this is a normal beyond thing i don't give a tier 0 for that
Well then let's look at the feats again
God's power is already stated to be outside the cosmos, that is, literally outside reality, which is a great feat for the transcendence of God.
| And yet there was a thought that insinuated itself no matter how strongly It tried to push the thought away. It was simply this: if all things flowed from It (as they surely had done since the Turtle sicked up the universe and then fainted inside its shell), how could any creature of this or any other world fool It or hurt It, no matter how briefly or triflingly? How was that possible? And so a last new thing had come to It, this not an emotion but a cold speculation: suppose It had not been alone, as It had always believed? Suppose there was Another? And suppose further that these children were agents of that Other? Suppose . . . suppose . . . It began to tremble. Hate was new. Hurt was new. Being crossed in Its purpose was new. But the most terrible new thing was this fear. Not fear of the children, that had passed, but the fear of not being alone. |
| Something had happened which was totally unexpected, utterly unthought of, and there had been pain, pain, great roaring pain all through the shape it had taken, and for one moment there had also been fear, because the only thing It had in common with the stupid old Turtle and the cosmology of the macroverse outside the puny egg of this universe was just this: all living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit. |
| Suddenly he thought he understood: It meant to hrust him through some wall at the end of the universe and into some other place (what that old Turtle called the macroverse) where It really lived; where It existed as a titanic, glowing core which might be no more than the smallest mote in that Other's mind. |
- 1,425
- 1,235
It’s in the scan you sent about Oriza.
You’re are severely either misreading or missing the points within the very text that you like to reference. The relationship between Gan and the Gods is compared to the Tower and the worlds within it. It’s not making trying to establish that the Gods are ontological the same as a world. However, if you were to question how the Gods relate to the worlds within the tower, the answer is simply through creation myth, which is what I explained earlier. The Gods provide a sort of origin for the worlds within the tower just like how different religions provide a unique origin for the world in real life. Gans origin is the true origin since it’s beyond interpretation, as the tower in a sense, is the unity all worlds.
Ah yes, my mistake, they’re not platonic forms, they just exist like them, this is a big difference that I will take strong note of going forward. Also I haven’t seen any evidence that Gan is an avatar of a greater being, so I don’t really see what there is to disprove. Not to say it’s impossible since he literally emerges from Prim, but I just haven’t seen any evidence for it.
Yeah, everything you just said here is not supported at all by the text. The Gods being limited and Gan being limited doesn’t mean Gan’s a regular God. It just means Gan and the Gods are both limited beings. This frail argument won’t help justify your twisted and backwards interpretation of the story.
- 1,425
- 1,235
I know the creator of this thread is gone but count me to the disagrees. There is absolutely no evidence or reason to say there is a higher being above Gan, unless you include Prim. All the arguments presented so far have just been massive leaps in logic and extrapolations without any given reason, or just flat out editorializations of the text, driven solely to fulfill a power scaling agenda that disregards the narrative for big tiers. I don’t mind a 1-A or a High 1-A tier, but there is not anywhere near enough evidence to substantiate even High 1-A+, let alone 0.
Last edited:
- 1,718
- 273
I think that ActuallySpaceMan42 makes good sense here.
Antvasima, may we ask Ultima to join this discussion? I'm sure he would also disagree with High 1-A+ and 0.
- 106
- 49
Towers aren't confined within each other, well the "Tower" that you're proposing within this sentence isn't like that.
Maybe take accountability for being wrong and making false claims.
Because One is "One", Gan's identity denotes separation from One, same with Bessa, same with Oriza, they are stories that can be understood and defined within language, One cannot be.
I didn't know VSBW had more miserable people than reddit, no accountability, extremely contrarian, and can't even hold a debate in good faith, I would honestly hate being like that.
Re5yh
He/Him- 1,526
- 668
Ultima is very busy with his assignment. maybe you shouldn't ask him in like 2 months
- 9,640
- 6,507
Oof, that's a lot of time.
- 1,718
- 273
- 337
- 138
- Thread starter
- #194
Good day, everyone. I know it's taken a while, but I wanted to let you know that I'm very busy today and have to go to a lot of different places. So, I won't be able to look at this CRT for a while. I'll be back soon. 
- 1,425
- 1,235
Sorry but I have no clue what you’re trying to say here.
I don’t have to take accountability for your irrelevant syntactical nitpick. The Gods aren’t platonic forms. They don’t exist like platonic forms. So far, I haven’t even seen evidence that supports them getting described like platonic forms. If anyone is making false claims, it’s you, because none of your evidence so far supports this.
This is a nominal fallacy. Just because Gan is called the “One” doesn’t mean he transcends all duality and description. This only works if we relate it back to Neoplatonism, which is what you’re obviously trying to do despite the 0 evidence for such a thing.
Miserable? Lmao, dude get out of your feelings this character just isn’t tier 0. And I don’t know how I could be a contrarian when your view of Gan as this non-dual, ineffable, ultimate ground of being is definitely less popular than mine.
Last edited:
- 7,812
- 11,696
- 177,450
- 90,375
Jockey-1337 seems to have provided quite a lot of anti-"feats" that delegitimise tier 0 here, and Xearesay also seems to have provided good counterarguments against that tiering.
What tiers do you thInk seem warranted here?
What tiers do you thInk seem warranted here?
- 1,718
- 273
Jockey-1337 seems to have provided quite a lot of anti-"feats" that delegitimise tier 0 here, and Xearesay also seems to have provided good counterarguments against that tiering.
What tiers do you thInk seem warranted here?
Thanks for the answer.
I think Gan is somewhere in 1-A, but it is just my subjective opinion. The existing versions of the profiles (High 1-A profiles) are also good.
- 534
- 471
Didn't think DT could get this intense, but to be honest there are some pretty compelling arguments on both sides, but I think there may be some missing context for certain interpretations..
- Status
Similar threads
