-
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.
Implied ontological transcendence
- Thread starter Livinaa
- Start date
- 176
- 66
Character B transcends the very hierarchy of Reality > Fiction
Digital_Franz
He/Him- 1,372
- 607
The fact that character B is so superior that character A can't even grasp/understand his existence or a small fraction of his existence.
- 398
- 139
nope
- 176
- 66
Honestly I don't even know anymore how to get High 1-A atp (considering what happened in Umineko's thread)
When The Revision Cries - Episode 3: Banquet of the New Tiering System
I’m going to ignore the Creator section. Based on what I’ve seen people bringing up some controversial things, I don’t think it qualifies for 0. With that being said, reading the portion for High 1-A isn’t enough. It’s seems more akin to additional layers in 1-A. The rest seems fine. Why dont...
- 3,647
- 2,038
Honestly I don't even know anymore how to get High 1-A atp (considering what happened in Umineko's thread)
When The Revision Cries - Episode 3: Banquet of the New Tiering System
I’m going to ignore the Creator section. Based on what I’ve seen people bringing up some controversial things, I don’t think it qualifies for 0. With that being said, reading the portion for High 1-A isn’t enough. It’s seems more akin to additional layers in 1-A. The rest seems fine. Why dont...vsbattles.com
I dont what happen to umineko, but if their structure still use R>F hierarchy till the end, i think it just will be consider as continues hierarchy
- 176
- 66
Yeah that's why imo it's still 1-A+
If feat like that only gets 1-A+, idk how to get H1-A tbh considering it was like the best example yet it's flawed
- 95
- 27
- Thread starter
- #9
I know...
What I'm asking is, what kind of statements imply character B is in a different, ontologically superior framework than the framework of 1-A.
The statement needed to imply 1-A is to see a world/realm/reality below it as nothing/imagination/fiction.
Then, what is the statement needed to imply High 1-A?
- 176
- 66
The same way how Low 1-A sees High 1-B+ at this point
Digital_Franz
He/Him- 1,372
- 607
Dragon Talisman's CRT has a similar stuff.
- 398
- 139
It got high 1A due to transcerding duality of 1A and non 1A
- 95
- 27
- Thread starter
- #13
Dragon Talisman reached High 1-A through specific statements (transcending the duality of non 1-A and 1-A). What I'm asking is the general statement needed to imply High 1-A.
As i already said above, the general statement needed to imply 1-A is to see a world/realm/reality below it as nothing/imagination/fiction. As for specific statements, there's R>F transcendence, BDE 2nd type 2, type 1 concept like in the LOTM CRT, and probably others I don't know.
- 3,647
- 2,038
Any kinds that imply different nature/essence of hierarchy, it will make the hierarchy completely seperate. For example if you have R>F hierarchy then just make the transcendence hierarchy something like conceptual or information hierarchy, it impossible for say the transcendence hierarchy are continueous hierarchy because the very nature of hierarchy are different
- 538
- 275
it doesnt, i proved that wrong.
- 176
- 66
It should also be stated that the same hierarchy that was different, well it transcends the previous hierarchy themselves and they're not restricted by another hierarchy so they're not just independent from that hierarchy
Though I don't know how meta-meta-qualitative would work tho if infinite^infinite (or infinite x infinite) R>F actually equals High 1-A
- 538
- 275
- 176
- 66
Honestly I don't know anymore, I'll just let Ultima decide but yeah he's just dipping from the wiki atm
It's not even clear, like based on High 1-A description it should fit that but somehow SweetDao still argues it being only 1-A+ based on what Ultima said so..
Can't really say much
- 538
- 275
Yea I’m not sure why ultima said it’s 1-A+, or if it’s just being misconstrued
(The third domain hierarchy is measured by your ontological closeness to a creator, rather than a strict r>f thing)
- 95
- 27
- Thread starter
- #20
You still didn't answer what kind of general statement is needed...
Alright, i will just ask directly.
Character A is baseline 1-A, and exist in 1-A framework. Since character A is 1-A and is in 1-A framework, it naturally can understand, describe, and imagine it's own framework (1-A framework).
Character B, on the other hand, exist in a higher state that character A can't describe and imagine character B, implying that the framework which character A exist in isn't enough to describe character B. Character A can only describe and imagine character B's framework if it reaches the same state as character B.
Would that make character B baseline High 1-A?
- 176
- 66
No, you can be independent from the hierarchy without having any superiority over it and also having this kind of description.
That kind of statement is just too vague, imo
- 1,048
- 1,389
Depend on how the 1-A character got there. You don't necessarily need a 1-A+ hierarchy to reach High 1-A, it all comes down to "how" the superior entity is "transcendent".
A word with a vast meaning so that you can use it as a framework for your own verses would be "transcendence". If Character A achieved 1-A thanks to transcendence or via transcending the lower plane to a higher one, then Character B needs to transcend the "very act" of transcendence.
You need to do this, because the specificities of transcendence would still fall into the vast meaning of "transcendence".
For example, if Character A is "+1" compared to the lower plane, you can't have Character B simply be "+2 / +100 / + infinity, ..." but it doesn't stop there. Even if you were to assume that Character B uses a different type of transcendence than Character A (for example, having BDE type 2 over the supposed 1-A world/hierarchy) it would still be within the framework of "Transcendence" and as such, wouldn't be enough to be High 1-A.
You need to be above the "general attribute", not the specific ones.
- 1,048
- 1,389
He said this because.
1 : He's more knowledgeable than me in Umineko, by far.
2 : As I explained to you, High 1-A is harder to achieve than what you think.
3 : I've given all the arguments that were present (and even more, technically) on the thread. If he doesn't see High 1-A, it's because, as he explained to me, Featherine wouldn't transcend the common genus, merely a specific attribute (here, the witch domain/hierarchy).
Unless you have some scans that he's unaware of and that aren't the one everyone knows, he'll probably not change his stance.
- 95
- 27
- Thread starter
- #24
What if it's clearly stated that character B, who can't be described nor imagined by character A, besides existing in a different framework, is also stronger and superior to character A's framework.
Would that be enough for character B to be High 1-A?
- 398
- 139
i will explain what ultima ment on this
Transcends the generic quality defining a hierarchy. Here, if it is R > F, it makes things much easier. If you got 1A because the lower reality is a dream and you are reality, you need a statement saying character B transcends all forms of reality and dream or anything similar. If you got 1A due to BDE 2, then transcending the duality of 1A and non-1A is a must.
Transcend potential hierarchy of qualitative layers. This one takes all statements of transcending any and all layers. For example, if you have a higher world, you need statements that imply you are above any and all higher worlds while the quality between the higher worlds is qualitative superiority . I find it hard if you only have one higher world. If you had two or more, it would make it easier. like they are talking about operating within a superior hierarchy that is transcerds the lower one works but needs some things from above
As you can see, most of this stuff depends on having two qualitative superiorities, R > F or more so pretty hard stuff to get while having zero layers above basline
Last edited:
- 538
- 275
By virtue of transcending the witch domain you
1. Are no longer technically classified as a witch, but as a god, and transcend the qualitative layers of the witch domain, making it impossible for beings of this domain to be compared in those metrics.
2. You lose any and all restriction, with the only one left being your sense of self, but even that will fade away as you ascend to a creator.
3. Your position in this domain is how ontologically close you are to a creator,rather than qualitative layers. You are now at the highest “extreme”,being able to create fate and control it at will. Witches are at the middle, and humans at the bottom.
- 538
- 275
It’s very clear the third domain isn’t just witch domain^2
- 1,048
- 1,389
Doesn't mean anything. Also, yeah sure, as I explained to you, it's exactly how an inaccessible cardinal work.
Doesn't change much.
Doesn't change much.
Everything you said is something I either stated to Ultima while asking for his opinion or that he knows because he's more knowledgeable than me. Before you might want to say "you don't know if he's aware of this", yes, he is, he debated on several Umineko thread over the years.
I never said it's the witch domain^2, especially since it wouldn't even amount to an inaccessible cardinal.
A math analogy would be (∞) +1. Infinity symbol being the domain of the witches and "+1" being Featherine domain. Just so we're clear, I'm not saying she's just "one layer" above the witch domain, I just used "+1" because it's easier to understand. You can replace "+1" by anything that makes it more comprehensible if you wish.
As you can see with this analogy (∞) +1, no matter how big the infinity grow (i.e, replace the infinity symbol by any aleph you want) it will never be "outside" the parentheses. Similarly, by virtue of being outside the parentheses (i.e hierarchy), "+1" would always be superior to whatever is outside.
Yet, you see the problem? They are both still inside the framework of "mathematics" despite the fact one is superior, no matter how the lower realm evolve.
The only thing that can make Featherine "High 1-A" would be a statement in which the Third Domain is stated as "above the very concept of realities/layers" or similarities. Yet, the only statement we have is "She sees the witch domain as the witch domain sees the Human Domain" which is enough to prove she's still within the common genus.
Digital_Franz
He/Him- 1,372
- 607
There's this stuff too. This is also a reason although the transcendence of duality is the main one. Never mind.
- 95
- 27
- Thread starter
- #30
That stuff is for higher High 1-A meta extension, not baseline High 1-A. Deathless Realms being a hierarchy of meta extensions is rejected by Ultima. This is also one of the reason why i made this thread, because Deathless Realms being only a hierarchy of High 1-A (meta-qualitative) doesn't feel right to me, considering that the way 10th Deathless transcends 9th Deathless is an ontological transcendence, and 11th Deathless transcends 10th Deathless the same way.
Digital_Franz
He/Him- 1,372
- 607
Oh I see.
- 538
- 275
Your ontological status as a “witch” confirms your presence within this hierarchy. The 2nd domain hierarchy is essentially just your progress as a witch.
Think of the layers being like (witch 1, witch 2,witch 3)
No matter how much they ascend in the standards of the witch domain, they are still a witch. This is exactly the same as the human domain, as even if you transcend it, you do not move on to the next domain unless you’re recgonized by someone in this domain.
If you’re in the Third Domain, you are being measured by an entirely different metric, one which I already explained.
mainly just to get the point that they are not bound by the constraints of the witch domain, as witches are subject to a variety of constraints.
How doesn’t it? If the hierarchy is both superior, and relies on an entirely different framework, that is high 1-A. The 3rd domain doesn’t run on r>f layers like the 2nd. There should be no reasonable contention for high 1-A.
But would it not hurt to make absolutely sure he has?
She sees the witch domain as the witch domain sees the human domain because witches are qualitatively superior to any and all extensions of the human domain. She has a similar relationship, being superior to any and all extensions of the witch domain’s qualitative layers. This isn’t a foreign concept. Especially since the 3rd domain has its own hierarchy with an entirely different framework.
If she wasn’t, she would still be regarded ontologically as a witch. By definition, you are saying Featherine is still on the level of a normal witch, which makes absolutely 0 sense.
- 1,048
- 1,389
See, that whole point is flawed by one major thing.
The Humain domain is a layer a reality, so is the witch domain, so is Featherine's domain. That the witch domain has its own internal layers doesn't change anything.
Sure, but that doesn't help High 1-A.
Because a hierarchy superior to another isn't inherently above the common genus.
Secondly, the third domain isn't "in a different framework" it's one of the "two extreme" of the cosmology. That it transcend the witch domain like the witch domain transcend the human domain and that it's still a "layer of reality" albeit "higher" than the rest of the cosmology makes it clear it's not above "level of realities" as a whole but only "above the hierarchy of witch", which is insufficient for High 1-A.
I'm sure of it, yes. Like I said, unless its new information that just got released or some obscure scan that no one knows, I'm pretty certain he knows the gist and specificities of Featherine's case.
I mean, beside the fact she's still pretty much called a witch here and there. (I mean, it's even in her title, technically)
The whole point here is that you think the whole "reality layers" suddenly spawn in existence within the witch domain, just like cardinality/size/maths exist solely inside the Human Domain. This is wrong. The "higher genus" of Umineko, the one above cardinality/size, is the one governing the layers of reality as a whole.
You need to prove that Featherine is above the very idea of "layers of reality" for her to get High 1-A. Being transcendent/superior over a hierarchy isn't enough.
- 398
- 139
LMAO there cooked
- 538
- 275
.
All that needs to happen is that the framework that these layers operate on is surpassed, such as size and dimensions for the human domain, and the journey of self evolution for the witch domain, which intrinsically relies on its layers of narrative superiority.
You do realize that everything in the tiering system, save for 0, operates on a layer of “reality”,in the sense of sharing the same cosmology. This makes 0 sense.
All that needs to happen is that the framework that these layers operate on is surpassed, such as size and dimensions for the human domain, and the journey of self evolution for the witch domain, which intrinsically relies on its layers of narrative superiority.
The witch hierarchy is pretty much the framework of the entire witch domain.
what would be the “common genus” in this scenario? Just like how the witch domain is above “size”, the third domain is above the witch hierarchy and narrative.
The “two extremes” aren’t a strict hierarchy. Just like you wouldn’t say the North Pole is superior to the South Pole. Or that cold is superior to hot.
not really relevant, as she has surpassed the ontological status of “witch”, it’s just simplification.
Yes, layers of reality not governed by size are not in the human domain.
See below.
The hierarchy is also intrinsic to the framework of the witch domain.
- 1,048
- 1,389
Yeah, but those qualities or "meta-realities" needs to be completely independent of each other. Here, the common genus of "layer of realities" is what defines them between each other. This is the same reason that a hierarchy of R>F where each layer above see the one below as fiction and another being seeing the whole reality as a dream (another form of R>F) including the whole hierarchy wouldn't necessarily be High 1-A without proper backup. (Although, in this case, it would be infinitely simpler, I'd say.)
No, it needs to be above the framework and not still bounded by it. Again, you assume that the whole genus begins and stop at the witch domain, which is false.
Let me try to explain it to you as best as I can.
We begin in the human domain. You're 3D, and can go as far as infinite dimensional (High 1-B, you can go more if you wish, even Low 1-A, but that's not useful here). Obviously, you agree that here the common genus is dimensionality/size/cardinality.
Now, you go into the meta world. The common genus of "dimensionality/cardinality" is surpassed and now useless. Therefore, you operate on a new, higher genus that is the level of realities.
You use the same process to get from "baseline level" to "infinite level" within this Genus, the same thing we did for the human domain, in short.
However, the third domain, despite being unreachable at your current level of reality, is still bound by the same genus. When you'll achieve it, you'll see the domain you were before (1-A+ hierarchy) as a lower reality while you'll be in a higher reality.
However. The Human Domain is also a level of reality, just like the Witch Domain and just like the Third Domain, you should also obviously agree with this. Therefore, while the inner common genus of the human domain (genus of size/cardinality) was obsolete and encompassing only one single domain, the new higher genus we're using now (level of realities) is not limited to the inner working of a single domain (hierarchy within the witch domain) but also encompass all the three domains.
Basically, while the witch domain operate on the specific genus (+1 compared to the last layer, to express this easily) of that common genus, the whole domain operates on a higher gap, but still within the same genus. You're smart, you know that the gap between two layers is different between the gap of two domain/hierarchies, but ultimately, those are just gaps in terms of "size" and not of quality.
This may not be the best explanation, but I did my best.
Obviously. I'm saying that, while your assertion here isn't incorrect, it still means that, one way or another, those three "places" within the cosmology are still bounded by the same common genus. (The Human Domain is the lower reality compared to the Witch domain which is the lower reality of the Third Domain).
I wouldn't say so, personally.
I'm not saying the human domain has within itself level of realities. I'm saying the Human Domain AS A WHOLE is a level of reality.
Unless you're, somehow, not equating the Human Domain to the "lower reality" compared to witches, it makes no sense to assume that the genus "begins and end" within the hierarchy.
- 538
- 275
Reality is typically defined as “all that exists.” Everything besides a tier 0 has an existence in some shape or form.
for example, using the “genus” analogy that ultima outlined, the state of “having existed” would be even less specific than the 3 kingdoms of life, and would be referring to all life.
This is pretty much saying cosmologies besides a tier 0 cap at 1-A+, due to “existing”.
the “genus” that defines the witch domain is the hierarchy as a witch. This is supported by the fact that even if you surpass the human domain, without recognition by a witch, you cannot take even that first step.
Each level of the domain is highlighted by progress as a witch.
I feel like I explained earlier in this comment why this line of thinking is fallacious. Reality is defined by everything that exists.
it’s made very clear how seperate featherine is from witches in general.
Yes, because the human domain embodies an entirely different framework.
- 1,048
- 1,389
Yeah, I don't have a problem with this, I suppose.
I didn't understand what you meant here.
Not really. Look at Dragon Talisman for example.
See? I told you. It's not because there is an inner, specific, genus within the hierarchy of witches that there isn't a higher, common genus, that encompass all three domain. You're fixated on, somehow, reality layers being solely about witches.
The very fact that "layers of reality" can exist is already breaking down your point.
I mean, yeah, she's extremely strong compared to more or less everyone in the verse.
So you're not seeing the Human Domain as the lower reality compared to the witch domain? Are you serious?
- 538
- 275
addressed this below.
Not familiar with that verse, elaborate. or link the CRT.
Because that’s what the witch domain relies on. That is the superiority outlined in this hierarchy.
“Layers of reality” in the absolute broadest sense, are just levels of existence. This is why you need to be specific. “Ha! This verse “exists”,so it isn’t high 1-A isn’t an anti feat.
It’s deeper than that,but alright
It is a lower state of reality,but in no way shape or form are they “alike”
