DC Comics - Animal Man Cosmology Determination

[Antvasima]

From the Issues he is using
We have
Grant Morrison
Peter Milligan
Jamie Delano
I am not sure who wrote the 88th issue but I think Jerry Posser and Fred Harper

Okay. That is not so good then. We would likely have to use different statistics keys for different cosmologies that contradict each other, rather than stack them on top of each other.

 

[Xearsay]

This in it self is not a hierarchy there Is none here, it is still talking about a universe been the smallest part of a whole, that whole would be low 1-C.
Nothing here passes low 1-C

You’re getting close tbh. The universe is a part of a whole, but this whole is a part another whole, which is part of another whole, and another whole, etc, with the amount of wholes spiraling until our universe is like a cell in the entire system of wholes. I don’t know why you keep ignoring this significant part of the text.

What do you mean different context?
Literally the same issue next page

• While in the Implicate Order, The Writer would describe David Bohm’s Implicate Order theory as a vast and interconnected universe with every part containing the whole.(Animal Man #14)
• In an interconnected universe, who’s dreaming who?(Animal Man #14)

The scan that you said was of different context was the one that’s mentioned an interconnected universe as the implicate order theory then the other scan proceed to say in an interconnected universe, you wonder who is dreaming up who.

When I said it was a different context, I was talking about how the universe being a mirror reflecting itself isn’t related to the fact that beings in the interconnection of wholes are dreaming each other. Which was your main point.

Also what you are sayin Is that the implicate order that is supposed to high 1-A is what he is talking about here?
Also why was it used as a scan for low 2-C to 1-B??
Make it make sense

Also I still don’t see the hierarchy or a mention of one even

I wasn’t using these scans to scale the Implicate Order. I was using these scans to scale the hierarchy of universes.

The hierarchy is blatantly there. You’re just not addressing the most significant part of the text being that there is a system of these wholes.

 

[Xearsay]

Okay. That is not so good then. We would likely have to use different statistics keys for different cosmologies that contradict each other, rather than stack them on top of each other.

These aren’t different cosmologies. This is one cosmology that was worked on by multiple writers and it has no contradictions in it whatsoever. The same way Snyder’s cosmology is comprised of multiple writers, this would function similarly.

 

[Antvasima]

Unless Grant Morrison continued to refer to the concepts introduced by other writers in his continued DC Comics cosmology-building work during the following over three decades, we have to consider them as part of separate cosmologies in the same manner as for the hundreds of other writers that constantly do their own things in shared settings such as this one.

Also, as far as I recall from reading these stories long ago, the Animal Man writer directly following Morrison also quickly retconned Morrison's author avatar concept from his own run on the book, so similar principles likely applied in other areas.

 

[Transcending]

Also a doubt- Was the Cosmology/Writer split accepted? Iirc the CRT wasn't made.

 

[Antvasima]

We have been working on our cosmology revision thread for over 1.5 years. We are almost finished with our preparations, but need some further input first.

 

[Transcending]

Well if it wasn't accepted, doesn't it mean Comp Cosmology is still in place?

 

[Deagonx]

None of the incompatibilities between the CRT and the tiering criteria have been addressed.

 

[Antvasima]

Well if it wasn't accepted, doesn't it mean Comp Cosmology is still in place?

For the moment, but it will likely be scrapped after a few months, so this revision is ironically in a bit of a limbo.

 

[Transcending]

For the moment, but it will likely be scrapped after a few months, so this revision is ironically in a bit of a limbo.

Then for the moment, can't we use comp Animal Man and decide what to do if the Cosmology split gets accepted later?

 

[Xearsay]

Unless Grant Morrison continued to refer to the concepts introduced by other writers in his continued DC Comics cosmology-building work during the following over three decades, we have to consider them as part of separate cosmologies in the same manner as for the hundreds of other writers that constantly do their own things in shared settings such as this one.

The other writers didn’t introduce any new concepts besides the Multiverse, which is irrelevant. Morrison introduced the Red/Lifeweb, introduced Bohm theory, introduced the Great Light, and introduced Limbo.

Also, as far as I recall from reading these stories long ago, the Animal Man writer directly following Morrison also quickly retconned Morrison's author avatar concept from his own run on the book, so similar principles likely applied in other areas.

This never happened. All we got was some scene of a clay sculpted version of The Writer being crushed by a hammer. (Animal Man #33) None of that proves there was a Retcon. At most this proves the next author was aware of The Writer and is most likely another one of the avatars that The Writer was talking about who would take over for him.

 

[PrinceofPein]

You’re getting close tbh. The universe is a part of a whole, but this whole is a part another whole, which is part of another whole, and another whole, etc, with the amount of wholes spiraling until our universe is like a cell in the entire system of wholes. I don’t know why you keep ignoring this significant part of the text.

This is nice and all and yes spiraling up, And adding uncountable infinite amount of cells
Still low 1-C, that is not hard to comprehend

When I said it was a different context, I was talking about how the universe being a mirror reflecting itself isn’t related to the fact that beings in the interconnection of wholes are dreaming each other. Which was your main point.

Literally stated in the same context explaining how the universes are

I wasn’t using these scans to scale the Implicate Order. I was using these scans to scale the hierarchy of universes.

Now this is another incoherent thing
If one issue treated the implicate order and universe mirroring one another and another said it was above the universe,
Which do we follow?

The hierarchy is blatantly there. You’re just not addressing the most significant part of the text being that there is a system of these wholes.

I did and reading it again, I read it wrong “it said our individual minds” not universe is a cell.

So it was even talking about a single universe being made out of fractals.

Just like our actual universe fractal theory, the smallest atom is a fractal of a whole and deep down, an atom and a star are the same, one system is just more complex than another. But the bigger system when broken down, Is made up of a smaller system of the same fractals.

So In fact this will not be low 1-C but 3-A or low 2-C.

I take back my comment of it qualifying for low 1-C.

 

[Antvasima]

Then for the moment, can't we use comp Animal Man and decide what to do if the Cosmology split gets accepted later?

I suppose so, but it depends on what Deagonx thinks seems appropriate.

The other writers didn’t introduce any new concepts besides the Multiverse, which is irrelevant. Morrison introduced the Red/Lifeweb, introduced Bohm theory, introduced the Great Light, and introduced Limbo.

Okay. That seems more reliable then.

This never happened. All we got was some scene of a clay sculpted version of The Writer being crushed by a hammer. (Animal Man #33) None of that proves there was a Retcon. At most this proves the next author was aware of The Writer and is most likely another one of the avatars that The Writer was talking about who would take over for him.

That was likely the scene that I was thinking about. I think that there was some mention of the yellow aliens as well, but I may misremember.

 

[Transcending]

it depends on what Deagonx thinks seems appropriate

Why are we depending on Deagon alone though? Using a CRT that wasn't even made, let alone accepted, to judge another CRT is objectively not right.

 

[Swerzye29038]

None of the incompatibilities between the CRT and the tiering criteria have been addressed.

^

 

[Antvasima]

Why are we depending on Deagon alone though? Using a CRT that wasn't even made, let alone accepted, to judge another CRT is objectively not right.

Deagonx is simultaneously highly knowledgeable about DC Comics, active in this thread, and active in our cosmology revision project, so he is well-informed about the greater context.

 

[Xearsay]

This is nice and all and yes spiraling up, And adding uncountable infinite amount of cells
Still low 1-C, that is not hard to comprehend

You just misinterpreted what I said again. They didn’t add an uncountably infinite amount of “cells.” It’s the “wholes” that are spiraling until our universe is like a cell in the body of God.

Literally stated in the same context explaining how the universes are


Now this is another incoherent thing
If one issue treated the implicate order and universe mirroring one another and another said it was above the universe,
Which do we follow?

What you suggested is not stated anywhere and is a blatant misrepresentation of the text. And I can quote it over and over again to prove that you’re wrong.

The statement: “The universe is a mirror reflecting itself.”

What you said: “Each universe in the interconnection mirrors each other.”

Notice how these statements aren’t the same.

I did and reading it again, I read it wrong “it said our individual minds” not universe is a cell.

So it was even talking about a single universe being made out of fractals.

Just like our actual universe fractal theory, the smallest atom is a fractal of a whole and deep down, an atom and a star are the same, one system is just more complex than another. But the bigger system when broken down, Is made up of a smaller system of the same fractals.

So In fact this will not low 1-C but 3-A or low 2-C.

I take back my comment of it qualifying for low 1-C.

The text equated our individual minds with our world, the same way they equated the body of God with the physical universe. Also I really don’t know where you’re getting fractals from either as that’s not mentioned in the story.

 

[Deagonx]

I'm going to repost this since Xearsay seems eager to avoid it. The suggested tiers, and the evidence provide for them, are completely out of touch with the criteria. Xearsay doesn't seem to understand that simply being greater than a construct doesn't put you a tier above it. At one point he suggests the Lifeweb is 1-B, but from Low 1-C to 1-B is the difference between one to two levels of infinity, and "eight or more finite levels of infinity." There is literally no explanation whatsoever where these multiple levels of infinity come from, he simply argues that it's greater.


Simply put, until the evidence offered is explained in the context of the tiering system, there is simply no way to take these tiering suggestions seriously.

The cosmology, as presented starts at 2-C with the normal Spacetime Continuum, and somewhere along the way accomplishes 1-A, which is uncountably infinite infinities? Where?

Tiering System

The following is a comprehensive overview of the hierarchical system which this wiki utilizes in order to properly categorize and index fictional characters, entities, and objects based on the scale of their feats, and the varying scopes which they can affect or create/destroy. However, it...

vsbattles.fandom.com

2. The Space Beyond all Knowing I reasoned Low 1-C for being beyond the space of the dream (Animal Man #50) where our native 2-C universe was brought into existence by the Animal Masters. (Animal Man #50)

To reach Low 1-C from 2-C, the criteria says spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model.

I don't see in youre scans where it says the Space Beyond All Knowing is beyond the space of the dream, or where it says the space of the dream is where the universe is brought into existence. And further, what is the justification for saying that it is a higher level of infinity above it? You can be above/beyond/outside of a spacetime continuum without being infinitely above it.

The hierarchy of universes I suggested was low 2-C to high 1-B however I think low 2-C to 1-B could also work based off what Firestorm was suggesting earlier. The reasoning for these tiers was basically what I already said at the start of this comment. The physical universe is a system of wholes made up of smaller and smaller wholes that are spiraling down until our world/universe is like a cell in the body of God. (Animal Man #88) With the Body of God representing the entire system. If one whole is already a universe, then a system of wholes that spiral down until our native world/universe is like a cell, would create layered universes.

I don't see where this becomes a qualitatively greater infinity, and the exact text says "Lights in the sky attract the mind of God, like a moth to a flame. The physical universe, the very body of God, is a system of wholes consisting of smaller and smaller wholes, spiraling down until our world, our individual minds, are but single cells in the body of God."

I don't see where this implies that each smaller whole is a universe unto itself. It seems to be saying that our individual minds are single cells in the body of God, which is the universe.

And since we know that in the interconnection, beings are dreaming each other. (Animal Man #14) It stands within reason for us to conclude that system would qualify as a hierarchy. Our native universe would be just one level in this hierarchy as it's directly said that our universe is at the bottom. It is also very much possible that the space beyond all knowing is just a higher level in this hierarchy as it does follow the whole dreaming system.

I don't see how a literal question, which is never given an answer, is proof that beings are dreaming each other. I also do not see what your reasoning is for how this qualifies as a hierarchy, nor how this hierarchy would satisfy the requirements of a "greater infinity." Also, where does it say that our universe is at the bottom?

4. Now initially I reasoned that the peak of the Lifeweb is low 1-A however I believe that 1-B, possibly low 1-A would also make sense. The reasoning for the peak of the Lifeweb being this tier is because it spans not only space and time (Animal Man #86) which would make up the hierarchy of universes, but it also contains the imaginal worlds at it's top (Animal Man #89) which are higher and more fundamental and foundational realities (Animal Man #85) outside of space and time, (Animal Man #82) thus also outside of the hierarchy of universes but still above them. The relationship the Lifeweb has with the imaginal worlds is that it was spun across all the realms. (Animal Man #86) Now the Lifeweb does not stop here, the Lifeweb itself is also stretching into infinity. (Animal Man #80) Meaning the hierarchy of universes and the Imaginal Worlds are just parts of a structure that is stretching into infinity.

The criteria for 1-B states: spaces whose size corresponds from 8 to any higher finite number of levels of infinity above a standard universal model. In terms of "dimensional" size, this can be equated to 12-dimensional real coordinate spaces and up (R ^ 12 and up)

Where are these 8 or higher levels of infinity coming into play? The lifeweb spans space and time, and the imaginal worlds. You quote your scan as saying that Imagiinal Worlds are "higher and more fundamental and foundational realities" but your scan doesn't actually say that. It simply says "a realm of archetypes, images suspended in the mirror of some more basic reality." So even if we assume that this more basic reality is the spacetime continuum, that wouldn't necessarily be a greater infinity, but even if it was, that would only be a single infinity. Where are the other 7 coming from?

5. The World Soul should be low 1-A, possibly 1-A for multiple reasons. The first reason being that it conceptually encompasses the whole universe as the big idea. (Animal Man #86) Second it's considered a higher level consciousness to the imaginal worlds (Animal Man #86) which sit at the top of the Lifeweb, even going as far to be stated as the "whole amongst wholes in the mind and body of God." (Animal Man #88) Third it was found (Animal Man #87) in the Worlds Beyond the third Kingdom (Animal Man #87) which aren't listed as being a part of the Lifeweb and are also beyond it entirely. And since it's already greater than the Lifeweb which is potentially stretching into infinity, and residing in an even greater realm outside of and beyond the entirety of the Lifeweb, a possibly 1-A rating would make sense.

Low 1-A is defined as:
Objects with a number of dimensions greater than the set of natural numbers, meaning in simple terms that the number of dimensions is aleph-1 (An uncountably infinite number, assumed to be the cardinality of the real numbers themselves), and therefore that such objects fully exceed High 1-B structures, which have only a countably infinite number of dimensions. More information on the concept is available on this page.

Note that, if the High 1-B structure in question is a hierarchy of levels of existence, then simply being at the top of such a hierarchy does not qualify a character for this tier without more context, and an additional layer added on top of the "infinity-th" level of this hierarchy is likewise not enough. To qualify as an equivalent of the above description, they need to surpass the hierarchy as a whole, and not simply be on another level within it.

The first piece of evidence offered is that the World Soul "encompasses the whole Universe as the big idea." Yet the scan doesn't say anything like this. It says the Big Idea is the whole universe and that the Meme knew it would be a part of it, but it doesn't directly mention the world Soul, nor anything encompassing the Big Idea. It only references the Meme, a little idea, becoming a part of the Big Idea. So what aspect of this is the "World Soul" and where is the evidence that it "encompasses" the Big Idea, and how does that justify it being a higher spatial dimension or level of infinity?

The second piece of evidence is that it's a "higher level consciousness to the imaginal worlds that sits atop the Lifeweb." However, your scan does not mention the imaginal worlds, the world soul, nor the Lifeweb. In fact, it simply says that if the beings are similar to ant colonies, which form a higher level consciousness than any of the individual ants, he expects the see a hive. Is there evidence that these beings form the World Soul? Where is evidence of this idea of "higher level of consciousness" demonstrating superiority to the Imaginal Worlds, and further; evidence that it is atop the Lifeweb?

Your third piece of evidence is a scan that states the World Soul is "becoming aware of it's place, as a whole among wholes -- in the mind and body of god." I do not see how this supports the idea that the World Soul is superior to the Body of God, since your earlier scan suggests that the Body of God is a whole made up of smaller wholes. This scan seems to indicate that the World Soul is one of these wholes, since it is inside the Body of God.

Your last piece of evidence says it's found outside of the Third Kingdom, but that's not evidence of superiority.

6. Worlds Beyond the third Kingdom should be 1-A, as they're essentially not a part of the Lifeweb (Animal Man #86) and are beyond the third kingdom which is the peak of the Lifeweb. They also contain the World Soul which is already low 1-A, possibly 1-A, making these realms even greater in size than it. Creation(the Lifeweb in this context) and the darkness that surrounds it is also considered just a swirling vortex or pattern of life that forms in it's eternal sea of consciousness. (Animal Man #87) Making the worlds beyond the third kingdom function as some kind of consciousness from which creation emerges as a life form.

1-A is defined in the criteria as: objects with a number of dimensions equal to the cardinal aleph-2, which in practical terms also equals a level that completely exceeds Low 1-A structures to the same degree that they exceed High 1-B and below.

Your first piece of evidence states that the Worlds Beyond are not part of the Lifeweb. That does not mean they are superior to it, nor does it mean that it is an extra Aleph infinity greater than it.

Your second piece of evidence is that they contain the World Soul. However, containing an object or being doesn't scale a realm to that being. Lucifer Morningstar has entered normal Universes, but those Universes do not scale to his full power.

Your last piece of evidence is the scan that says the Shaman floated in the White Light of Consciousness, and then a swirling vortex of life pull him into the darkness of creation, 'along a mystic spiral -- past the worlds of spirit, imagination, and matter -- through the white hole at the center of time'. For some unexplained reason, you seem to believe this statement indicates a dimunitive relationship between creation and the Worlds Beyond, but the Worlds Beyond are not mentioned in this scan, and even if they were, I do not see how or why this description of creation would suggest that the Clear Light or the Worlds Beyond are greater than creation. Certainly not infinitely so. The scan separates the white light and the darkness of creation, but it doesn't say that one is lesser than the other.

7. I didn't want to tier this location, however I now think it does kind of deserve a tier. The tier of this realm would be 1-A due to not just being a middle ground between Limbo/The Implicate Order (Animal Man #24) but for also being a manifestation of the vast absence that lies behind reality. (Animal Man #12) And knowing Morrison this vast absence that the Great Light is a manifestation of is most likely in reference to the Overvoid. As Morrison considers it the infinite nothingness that underlies all of reality. The reason this realm is transcendent to the Worlds Beyond the three kingdoms and the Lifeweb is because it's a middle ground between the Implicate Order.

I do not see how "being a middle ground between Limbo" and the physical universe is remotely 1-A, nor how the phrase "manifestation of the absence behind reality" supports 1-A, with reference to the criteria.

8. Limbo/The Implicate Order would be High 1-A as it solidly stands beyond the framework that defines existence in the cosmology. With said framework being that everything is essentially a giant story or connected narrative (Animal Man #24) that Limbo is beyond and outside of. Even all ideal worlds imaginable are just attempts at trying to describe the Implicate Order, (Animal Man #19) which would include stuff like the imaginal worlds and the Worlds beyond the third kingdom, which are ideal worlds within the cosmology. Also this suggests there's a gap between a greater 1-A world that would see the Worlds Beyond the third kingdom as fiction and Limbo. As those should be covered in all ideal worlds imaginable.

The first scan very clearly indicates that Limbo is not superior to the multiverse in the way that you are suggesting. He is explaining to the inhabitants of Limbo that they are fictional characters written out of continuity, but that they live forever, and outlive their creators/gods (the writers). They are outside of the framework of story because they're now in Comic Book Limbo, for abandoned characters. They don't have superiority to the continuity, they are just outside of it. The creators/gods being referred to are the Writers, and they are the ones who are superior to the comic book.

Your second piece of evidence is a theory from Highwater, who was told by the Yellow Aliens that his theories were only partially correct. However, even if we accepted what he said at face value, why would this information suggest Limbo is infinitely greater than the worlds trying to describe it? I do not know of any underlying principle that says a world which is an attempt at describing another world must be infinitely lesser than it.

Likewise, the scan does not say "all ideal worlds imaginal." It just says "all our dreams of ideal worlds." This would only refer to those worlds which our dreams. I haven't seen any information that the Worlds Beyond are dreamed of, and I do not see where you are getting any R>F difference.

In my final assessment, I do not see how the evidence supports the tiering criteria. The scans seem to be described inaccurately, and in general it seems that you do not understand that to rise up in tiers it isn't enough to simply be "beyond" a structure, rather you must be infinitely greater than that structure.

 

[Antvasima]

So what tiers/statistics do you think seem warranted to apply for the different steps of the Animal Man cosmology, Deagonx?

 

[Deagonx]

So what tiers/statistics do you think seem warranted to apply for the different steps of the Animal Man cosmology, Deagonx?

I don't see any clear cut evidence of something being "infinitely greater" than a physical universe/infinite universes. There's a bad habit in this CRT of interpreting "beyond" which literally means "outside of" as "greater than/infinitely greater than." Which is just erroneous. The imaginal worlds are outside the Physical Universe, AKA beyond it, but there's no evidence that they represent a higher spatial dimensionality or level of infinity.

I think Animal Man could reasonably be given a Low 2-C, possibly higher rating for his feat of creating a Spacetime Continuum, but I've seen no evidence of this being a "dream" to him beyond vague unconnected scans that Xear hasn't been able to establish are relevant to Animal Man's feat.

The different levels beyond that are overrated to an extreme degree, with each level being arbitrarily assigned the next tier up with a wishy-washy explanation for why this construct is "greater than" the last, without acknowledging the fact that the rise up in tiers at the levels this thread addresses, you need a lot lot more than to simply "encompass" a structure or be "beyond it."

I am open to changing my mind, I honestly am, but saying this in the most literal way possible: I do not see a way to connect the evidence provided to the tiering criteria in a way that could justify these outrageous tiers. Numerous people have come to this thread to express their support. If not xearsay himself, I'd even accept an attempt at explaining it from other people who apparently read this thread and thought "yes, I can definitely see how the Lifeweb achieves uncountably infinite infinities from these scans."

The only aspect of this which stands out to me as being feasible for a rise in tiers is the alleged R>F difference, but the two instances of that are based on the idea of Dreams and Limbo. I do not see adequate evidence that truly establishes an R>F relationship between literally any of these levels. The only individual that should be considered as having an R>F power over any of this is the Writer himself, and I fully reject the assertion that Limbo should be considered on the same level as the Writer because he "lives there." I don't see how anyone could read this storyline and come away with the conclusion that the lost characters of Limbo are R>F Gods towering above the multiverse. The gods/creators with an R>F difference are clearly implied to be the writers and readers themselves, not the comic book characters.

TL;DR: Animal Man made a universe, there is solid evidence of infinite universes, so I agree with Low 2-C. I do not see how any of the structures meet the criteria of "infinite transcendence" let alone how somehow we transcendended 8 or more times, or infinite times, or multiple uncountably infinite times.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I suppose that seems to make sense.

 

[Deagonx]

I am open to a reply to my main post where I address the evidence specifically. I felt I painted a pretty clear picture of why the evidence provided doesn't align with the criteria. If there is other evidence or a way that it can be phrased/supported that can get us to Tier 1 level, then I am open to it, but it remains to be seen.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I suppose that we can wait a bit for the others then.

 

[PrinceofPein]

You just misinterpreted what I said again. They didn’t add an uncountably infinite amount of “cells.” It’s the “wholes” that are spiraling until our universe is like a cell in the body of God.

They did not have to and again it’s “our world” and not “universe”, they made those two worlds distinct in the text

What you suggested is not stated anywhere and is a blatant misrepresentation of the text. And I can quote it over and over again to prove that you’re wrong.

The statement: “The universe is a mirror reflecting itself.”

What you said: “Each universe in the interconnection mirrors each other.”

Notice how these statements aren’t the same.

They are literally made in the same context, the same issue, a page from each other from a guy explaining the universe.

The text equated our individual minds with our world, the same way they equated the body of God with the physical universe. Also I really don’t know where you’re getting fractals from either as that’s not mentioned in the story.

Fractals don’t have to be mentioned, when a system of whole are made up of a system of smaller ones, that’s fractals.

“.......This physical universe, the very body of god, is a system of whole consisting of smaller and smaller whole spiraling down until our world, our individual mind are but a single cell in the body of god”

This is literally the quote. From this we can get a few things
1. A single universe
2. The universe is the body of god
3. The body and its components are fractals
4. Our world can easily mean planet and would in fact mean planet
5. This is but a universe level cosmology

So I asked again, where is the hierarchy?
There is none here


Moving on to other feats, as this one for 1-B is blatantly wrong
So would you like to reconstruct your cosmology and adjust it according to this or I should just continue with the others down the line?

 

[Deagonx]

They did not have to and again it’s “our world” and not “universe”, they made those two worlds distinct in the text

Indeed. The entire notion of a hierarchy is based on interpreting "our world" as "universe" despite the fact that the statement itself directly and unambiguously equates the Body of God with the physical universe. So why would we interpret the phrase "worlds" to mean universes? Even if you argue it's a valid interpretation (and I'd argue the fact that they used the word "world" and not "universe" like earlier in the sentence is a clear indication that they are distinguishing two different things), it's certainly not a matter of fact. It's too unclear to use for tiering.

 

[Xearsay]

They did not have to and again it’s “our world” and not “universe”, they made those two worlds distinct in the text

I see where you’re getting confused now.

The word “world” is constantly used throughout Animal Man to reference either our spacetime continuum or the lower plane of existence that Animal Man lives in. Also the “physical universe” is just a title. Unless you have proof that this title is referring to only Buddy’s native 2-C reality (which you don’t because said evidence doesn’t exist) then you’re entire argument right now is basically built off an assumption.

They are literally made in the same context, the same issue, a page from each other from a guy explaining the universe.

And? What does that have to do with the fact that what you claimed the text said and what the text actually said weren’t the same?

You said this what the the text says, “each world is a mirror of another world.”

While the text actually says this “the universe is a mirror reflecting itself.”

Fractals don’t have to be mentioned, when a system of whole are made up of a system of smaller ones, that’s fractals.

“.......This physical universe, the very body of god, is a system of whole consisting of smaller and smaller whole spiraling down until our world, our individual mind are but a single cell in the body of god”

This is literally the quote. From this we can get a few things
1. A single universe
2. The universe is the body of god
3. The body and its components are fractals
4. Our world can easily mean planet and would in fact mean planet
5. This is but a universe level cosmology

So I asked again, where is the hierarchy?
There is none here.

Once again the physical universe is literally just a title. You’re assuming that because it is called the physical “universe” that it’s referring to a 3-A or low 2-C structure without any evidence. And the word “world” isn’t referring to a planet. It wouldn’t even make sense for the word world to be referring to a planet as “World” is already consistently used to refer to entire realities. With even the the writer of this part of the Animal Man run using the word world in comparison to lower planes of existence. As he would state that the Imaginal worlds/realities which are a higher plane of existence, are beyond Buddy’s world.

 

[Xearsay]

Also Deagonx please do not spam your comment in my thread. We already had an argument about this on the 2nd page and that argument has concluded. I’m not in anyway obligated to rehash that same argument with you over again. Especially since that argument was already going nowhere.

 

[Deagonx]

We already had an argument about this on the 2nd page and that argument has concluded.

This is an entirely separate argument based on new explanations for why you believe certain tiers are justified, and they were debunked almost top to bottom. That argument has not concluded whatsoever.

I’m not in anyway obligated to rehash that same argument with you over again.

Of course not, but my comment tears apart your tiering suggestions. If you aren't capable of supporting your claims or rebutting any of my arguments, you certainly don't have to, but that just means the CRT will not go forward with the tiers you suggested.

 

[Xearsay]

This is an entirely separate argument based on new explanations for why you believe certain tiers are justified, and they were debunked almost top to bottom. That argument has not concluded whatsoever.

I didn’t create any new explanations. I just paraphrased the ones I already had on the first page and added links to scans for the justifications.

Also that last argument on the second page did conclude, as I’m no longer interested in replying to it.

Of course not, but my comment tears apart your tiering suggestions. If you aren't capable of supporting your claims or rebutting any of my arguments, you certainly don't have to, but that just means the CRT will not go forward with the tiers you suggested.

Where did I say I wasn’t capable of supporting my claims? You’re equating me ignoring you with me being incapable of supporting my arguments. If I myself believed that I wasn’t capable of supporting my claims I wouldn’t be arguing with Pain.

I digress, are you going to stop spamming your comment in this thread or not?

 

[Deagonx]

I didn’t create any new explanations. I just paraphrased the ones I already had on the first page and added links to scans for the justifications.

Your new comment presented the information in a distinctly different fashion regarding why certain sections achieved certain tiers.

Also that last argument on the second page did conclude, as I’m no longer interested in replying to it.

If you refuse to engage with a post that completely debunks your thread, that's your choice, but that doesn't change the fact that it happened. Likewise, the argument never concluded.

If I wasn’t capable of supporting my claims I wouldn’t be arguing with Pain.

Pain's comment did not deconstruct each of your suggestions the way that mine did.

I digress, are you going to stop spamming your comment in this thread or not?

Since you've admitted you are unwilling/incapable of responding to the debunk, I don't see the need to post it further. I knew as soon as I posted it you weren't going to respond, since there's no way you can defend against what I said. You clearly do not have any real justification for the tiers you offered.

But again, in the absence of literally any explanation as to how your suggestions are compatible with the actual criteria or why you think that, there's no way it's going to be approved. So if you are waving the white flag, that's your call.

 

[Hasty12345]

I disagree with Deagonx

 

[Deagonx]

I disagree with Deagonx

Feel free to explain in detail. Otherwise this doesn't really matter. CRTs are not popularity contests.

 

[Hasty12345]

Feel free to explain in detail. Otherwise this doesn't really matter. CRTs are not popularity contests.

I'm not saying I agree with the OP

 

[Deagonx]

I'm not saying I agree with the OP

Again, feel free to explain in detail what your point is.

 

[Xearsay]

Your new comment presented the information in a distinctly different fashion regarding why certain sections achieved certain tiers.

Doesn’t matter. I still reused the same points that we already argued over on the second page of this thread.

If you refuse to engage with a post that completely debunks your thread, that's your choice, but that doesn't change the fact that it happened. Likewise, the argument never concluded.

“I said I debunked you so you’ve been debunked.”

Also an argument can’t continue with only one person. So as of right now, our argument about the tiers ended on the second page.

Pain's comment did not deconstruct each of your suggestions the way that mine did.

Since you've admitted you are unwilling/incapable of responding to the debunk, I don't see the need to post it further. I knew as soon as I posted it you weren't going to respond, since there's no way you can defend against what I said. You clearly do not have any real justification for the tiers you offered.

But again, in the absence of literally any explanation as to how your suggestions are compatible with the actual criteria or why you think that, there's no way it's going to be approved. So if you are waving the white flag, that's your call.

Pains arguments are actually better than yours, even if they’re still wrong. And I never admitted I was incapable of responding. However, if you have proof of me admitting I was incapable of responding you can post it.

 

[Deagonx]

“I said I debunked you so you’ve been debunked.”

"I laid out each of your tiering suggestions and compared them to the official criteria and demonstrated, thoroughly, that not only did none of your suggestions even tangientally address the requirements for those tiers, but many of your scans didn't even say what you claimed they did, so you've been debunked."

However, if you have proof of me admitting I was incapable of responding you can post it.

And if you have proof that any of these tiers meet the official criteria, you can post it. If you can't, then this CRT serves no further purpose. As demonstrated, your evidence doesn't support the tiers you suggested and you were unable to explain -- with reference to the official criteria -- how or why any of this evidence conjured a greater infinity for Space Beyond All Knowing, an additional 6+ levels of infinity for the Lifeweb, uncountably infinity infinities for the World Soul, etc. etc.

Not to mention failing to address the flaws in the evidence itself, in addition to completely unexplained tiering suggestions.

It's your life, your CRT. If you fail to address the flaws in your argument, no one can force you to. But like I said, my post completely shreds your argument top to bottom. Without fixing any of the gaping holes in your evidence and an actual explanation that references the tiering criteria, at best we are left with 2-C.

 

[Xearsay]

"I laid out each of your tiering suggestions and compared them to the official criteria and demonstrated, thoroughly, that not only did none of your suggestions even tangientally address the requirements for those tiers, but many of your scans didn't even say what you claimed they did, so you've been debunked.”

“I said I debunked you so you’ve been debunked” but with more words.

And if you have proof that any of these tiers meet the official criteria, you can post it. If you can't, then this CRT serves no further purpose. As demonstrated, your evidence doesn't support the tiers you suggested and you were unable to explain -- with reference to the official criteria -- how or why any of this evidence conjured a greater infinity for Space Beyond All Knowing, an additional 6+ levels of infinity for the Lifeweb, uncountably infinity infinities for the World Soul, etc. etc.

Not to mention failing to address the flaws in the evidence itself, in addition to completely unexplained tiering suggestions.

It's your life, your CRT. If you fail to address the flaws in your argument, no one can force you to. But like I said, my post completely shreds your argument top to bottom. Without fixing any of the gaping holes in your evidence and an actual explanation that references the tiering criteria, at best we are left with 2-C.

Nice deflection. Also this is a whole lotta typing amounting to a whole lotta nothing. I already argued with you on the second page about all of this and that debate has concluded. And I do not plan on rehashing it either. I’d much rather prefer to argue with Pain. As I told you before, just don’t spam my thread. That is all.

 

[Deagonx]

“I said I debunked you so you’ve been debunked” but with more words.

You can pretend it didn't happen if it suits you. But usually people just prove it with fair debate. It's clear you are either incapable or unwilling. Fine with me.

I already argued with you on the second page about all of this and that debate has concluded

No, you didn't. I presented new arguments and explanations that you dodged because you could not refute them. You never fully explained the tiering on page 2, and you never explained where many of your statements came from

As I told you before, just don’t spam my thread. That is all

I'll post what I feel is pertinent to the thread at large. I'm not concerned with what you think of it.

@Antvasima

Xearsay has decided he's not willing to refute what I said and insists on pretending it was already discussed on page 2. This is inaccurate, but I've debated with him enough times to know how steadfast he can be in a state of denial.

The evidence supports 2-C and nothing further. I've given Xear ample opportunity to draw a connection between the official criteria and his claims and he refuses. Last thread it was because he wanted to "determine if the evidence was sufficient" before deciding tiers. In this thread he's claiming we already argued about it. However, at no point on page 2 was any of the tiering criteria referenced in any of his arguments, and every attempt I've made at getting him to address the criteria has led to deflection.

 

[PrinceofPein]

I see where you’re getting confused now.

The word “world” is constantly used throughout Animal Man to reference either our spacetime continuum or the lower plane of existence that Animal Man lives in. Also the “physical universe” is just a title. Unless you have proof that this title is referring to only Buddy’s native 2-C reality (which you don’t because said evidence doesn’t exist) then you’re entire argument right now is basically built off an assumption.


And? What does that have to do with the fact that what you claimed the text said and what the text actually said weren’t the same?

You said this what the the text says, “each world is a mirror of another world.”

While the text actually says this “the universe is a mirror reflecting itself.”


Once again the physical universe is literally just a title. You’re assuming that because it is called the physical “universe” that it’s referring to a 3-A or low 2-C structure without any evidence. And the word “world” isn’t referring to a planet. It wouldn’t even make sense for the word world to be referring to a planet as “World” is already consistently used to refer to entire realities. With even the the writer of this part of the Animal Man run using the word world in comparison to lower planes of existence. As he would state that the Imaginal worlds/realities which are a higher plane of existence, are beyond Buddy’s world.

pretty sure I’ve explained how and why you are wrong to you
I’m not going to go roundabout cause of your denial without providing additional proof
So would you like to restructure your post accordingly or we should continue either way?

 

[Deagonx]

His argument hinges on the idea the term "Physical Universe" is just a title, but he has no evidence for that assertion.

He also claimed "the term world consistently has been used to refer to universes" but also provided no evidence.