How do I keep getting myself involved in GoW wank
I guess everyone already knows that GoW is an American video game series, and it is available natively in English, so there's not much room to debate about mistranslations or misinterpretations.
OP's Concerns
PoH Kratos and ascended Athena are currently placed at Low 1-C due to
these pieces of
evidence. However, looking at the
thread that this upgrade was based on, this is extremely flawed and is based on a terrible understanding of what qualitative superiority is.
However, these clips merely present Athena as being brought to
"a higher existence," "[ascending] to a higher realm/plane" with "more power," and "going to a place that is higher than everybody else."
Well let's see what the standards say about this :-
Quoting FAQ Q7.
Now, one of the most common scenarios where this question might arise is when dealing with cosmologies involving "higher planes of existence" or similar structures. In such cases, it's very important to note what exactly being a "higher plane" entails in the context of the setting: For instance, it's very common for Heaven and Hell to be defined as higher and lower planes of existence respectively in relation to the normal universe, in which case, "higher" and "lower" tends to simply indicate their position in a cosmology, as opposed to any kind of existential status, which is obviously not enough for anything remotely Tier 1.
They can qualify, however, if said "higher plane" is defined as having a relationship of qualitative superiority over lower realms in one way or another, such as by perceiving them as literal fiction/unreality (or being comparatively more "real" in nature), encompassing them in an infinitesimal portion of itself, residing in a higher state of being altogether, and etc.
"
In such cases, it's very important to note what exactly being a "higher plane" entails in the context of the setting": and in GoW it entails
a higher existence and a power that is greater than everybody else and obviously nothing to do with position in the cosmology.
Hmmmmmmmm, it seems like this is textbook qualitative superiority according to the wiki standards, to be more precise its ontological superiority.
Its almost word for word TBH. I don't really see what is the problem here.
These pieces of evidence were groundlessly interpreted as indicating qualitative superiority when they did no such thing
Qualitative superiority specifically refers to superiority that is "on a higher tier of infinity" or "more than countably infinite times greater in power or size" as opposed to "being 2 times, 100 times or even infinite times more powerful or greater". Or, in short, uncountably infinite superiority.
None of this indicates uncountably infinite superiority whatsoever. All it does is describe her power as being "higher" or "more" to some unspecified extent. Due to Occam's Razor, it is absolutely ridiculous to simply assume that these statements of "higher" power, existence, and planes specifically refer to uncountably infinite superiority as those who upgraded these characters to Low 1-C did. The people backing the upgrade in the thread even insisted that these clips indicated dimensional superiority despite there being absolutely nothing in these clips that mention dimensionality at all. Due to this, PoH Kratos and ascended Athena's Low 1-C ratings should be removed, with them going back down to their old 2-C ratings.
Ohh, I see. I understand now, what the problem is.
With the hyperfixation on terms like infinity and uncountablilty, it seems like we have an extreme edge case of semantics being used here.
To fix that issue, I'd recommend a mild reading of the Wiki's FAQ, it should alleviate it a bit.
Let's see what is qualitative superiority according to the wiki :-
Quoting FAQ Q14.
The reason it is called qualitative superiority is that, instead of quantitative terms such as being 2 times, 100 times or even infinite times more powerful or greater, this type of superiority is typically justified by the nature of the superiority. The most standard case is dimensionality, where a difference in the quality that is dimensionality, implies the necessary quantitative difference. Another typical example is reality-fiction differences. Those are cases like viewing a plane of reality as mere fiction, like for example writing on a sheet of paper or a dream. They are assumed to imply superiority of a similar scale.
Of course, the same levels of superiority can also be reached via sufficiently explicit quantitative statements, such as when cardinalities above countably infinite get involved in a manner that implies a corresponding difference in power/size.
As explained above,
- Qualitative superiority can be attained in many different ways, one of which is existing in a higher state of being which is what Athena is.
- Next, we learn that Qualitative Superiority such as dimensionality implies the necessary quantitative (uncountably infinite) difference. And this can also work the other way around meaning uncountably infinite stronger implies a higher dimensionality.
- We also learn that R>F difference, Higher plane of existence(or ontological superiority), Higher Dimensionality, Uncountably infinite power etc. are just different ways of achieving Qualitative Superiority and they are all standardized to +1 dimension in the wiki, unless more context is given for higher ratings.
- We can also infer that there is no particular requirement for Higher Dimensional, Higher Plane of Existence, R-F transcendence etc to be supplemented with statements of uncountably infinite power for it to be considered qualitative superiority at all. If there was please point me to it, otherwise I don't see what's the point of contention here.
Moreover, I am seeing this misconception being parroted a lot, but being a higher dimensional entity doesn't always mean you are stronger than lower dimensional beings:
Are higher-dimensional beings infinitely stronger than lower-dimensional equivalents?
Unintuitive as that may be: Not necessarily, as a number of characteristics through which we quantify the strength or power of a character can remain unchanged when transitioning between higher and lower dimensions. For example: Mass is a quantity that is detached from the dimension of the object which it is inherent to, and unlike volume is not divided in units corresponding to each particular dimension (1-volume [length], 2-volume [area], 3-volume, 4-volume...). It is singular in nature and its units equally apply to
all dimensions;
whether it is distributed over an area or a volume only tells us about the span of space in which it is spread, not about the quantity itself.
As a consequence of that, much of the calculation methods which are used to measure strength apply equally to both higher and lower dimensions, as they do not care about the extra variables and often work with a single one of them. Examples of this are kinetic energy (Ek=0.5*M*V^2), force (F=M*A), work (W=F*d), and etc.
An intuitive example of that is found in the general definition of Work as defined in physics: In essence, as work itself denotes the energy applied to an object as it is displaced along a given path, the basic formula for calculating it only takes into account a single variable, and the path itself is treated as an one-dimensional object, regardless of the dimension of the space in which the action itself takes place.
As we can see a Higher dimensional entity need not even be stronger than a lower dimensional one. The higher dimensional one can just hold more Higher D volume because of its extra dimension. It may be stronger but doesn't necessarily have to be.
For
Athena's case, if she was merely stated to be higher dimensional she needn't have to be stronger than lower dimensional ones, but she is stated to possess a state of being and power greater than everybody else, which obviously makes sense because of her existential or ontological superiority, hence no worries even on that front.
NOTE:
I would just like to point out that we are not obligated to provide evidence for claims that we haven't made, only for those that we have made, as some comments prior were heavily focusing on that.
We have made the claim for Athena's existential or ontological superiority, we have provided the evidence for such claims, in fact it matches our standards almost word for word.
Counter Arguments
Honestly, looking at this thread, the arguments were just hyperfixating on battleboarding terms like uncountably infinitely powerful etc as supplementary statements to infer such power for qualitative superiority. As I explained above such statements are nowhere needed for qualitative superiority, if you feel it does then you are free to change the standards. Until, then Athena qualifies for existential superiority.
The other arguments I found are literally just insufficient evidence or interpretations based on assumptions etc and back and forth regarding the same.
Considering the fact that we have reliable Word of God which literally goes in depth explaining about this existential superiority, where the character in question Athena is stated to be above everyone in terms of power and existence. By everyone meaning all the Pantheons and the characters from them in general, since, the Pantheons are roughly comparable to each other, and neither is overtly stronger than the other.
I don't see what is there to misinterpret, what is insufficient evidence if the Author itself implies what we claim. Moreover, this is an English language game and the author explains the stuff in English so there isn't even some deeper underlying context that could be missed because of language barrier.
They can qualify, however, if said "higher plane" is defined as having a relationship of qualitative superiority over lower realms in one way or another, such as by perceiving them as literal fiction/unreality (or being comparatively more "real" in nature), encompassing them in an infinitesimal portion of itself, residing in a higher state of being altogether, and etc.
It is exactly what we claim, Athena
has become "a higher existence," "[ascending] to a higher realm/plane" with "more power," and "going to a place that is higher than everybody else."
I am not at all interested in debating what is considered sufficient evidence, all I care about is if the evidence presented meet the standards to index it as what is claimed or not. If you have any other arguments to present please do.
P.S: I had written an entire essay prior to this but got lost during the outage. Now, I am too lazy and haven't bothered to write everything all over again. Just wrote the essential. I will probably get back to it maybe edit it with more sources and evidences perhaps when I am free. Also, apologies for just focusing primarily on the OP, as I didn't really find the other arguments relevant, and I generalized my answer without pointing or answering at anyone specific other than OP.
EDIT:
I updated the section above with some links to make the sources a tad more accessible.
I know it isn't a lot, and the formatting can be improved, but whatever.
So after looking at
@Deagonx comment I realized what was the missing context. I didn't even account for the fact that not everyone is Knowledgeable in the tiering system and concepts like qualitative superiority and elaboration on which qualitative superiority standard we are arguing for. I apologize for any confusion it may have caused. I will begin explaining in brief the concept that is the crux of the matter, which is
Existential superiority or more appropriately Ontological superiority.
Ontological Superiority
When we describe something as ontologically superior or a higher existence we consider it to have a higher or more fundamental form of existence or reality compared to another entity or concept. The entity or concept deemed ontologically superior possesses qualities or characteristics that make it more essential, abstract, fundamental, or significant in terms of its being. The most battleboarding way to describe this property would be the degree of abstractness of an entity. This is considered a form of qualitative superiority within the wiki as I have shown in the section above of this same comment.
Ontological superiority works in a very similar way to
R>F Transcendence. While Reality-Fiction Transcendence is a state where a being is
qualitatively superior to another world, as a
result of seeing the world as fiction and thus being more 'real' than said world, Ontological Superiority works in the sense that the superior entity is more abstract or fundamental, and completely unreachable by the entities of lower existence.
For example Platonism, argue that abstract entities, such as numbers, mathematical objects, and abstract concepts, have a higher level of reality or existence compared to physical entities. According to this view, these abstract entities are considered timeless, immutable, and universal, while physical entities are seen as transient and subject to change. Platonism suggests that abstract entities exist independently of human thought or perception and possess a higher ontological status. So, in short something like Platonic concepts which are abstract things are considered ontologically superior to physical entities.
The difference between power in both the cases above is completely unquantifiable, since no matter how strong a fictional character is it will never be able to affect the Real World and no matter how strong a character of lower existence is it cannot ever interact with a more abstract entity. Even if its infinite or even uncountably infinitely strong it won't be able to interact due to its abstractness. Normally, we can extrapolate this concept and reach very high tiers but in the wiki we obviously Low Ball it and consider a +1 dimension in both the cases as a safer assumption unless some extra context is given.
With the context above let's get on with Deagonx's
comment.
This, in fact, is not textbook qualitative superiority because of an extremely crucial detail. It is not enough to be a "higher existence/higher power" there needs to be a clear and concrete reason to believe that this realm is infinitely more powerful, not simply 10,000x more powerful. You don't need to have QS to have a realm so much more powerful than a lower one that any resistance would be futile, but that alone is not evidence of QS.
I am struggling to see where, exactly, we reach the conclusion that this higher realm is infinitely more powerful.
So, the TL;DR here is: Athena can be higher than everybody else on a higher plane without having qualitative superiority, so if this is the basis for that conclusion then we need to downgrade. It could just be that Athena went to some higher spiritual plane that was just 1,000x more powerful, rather than a plane with an additional spatial axis or one that was infinitely more powerful.
As we can see, he seems to be rather clueless on what I am describing, or maybe he misunderstood my stance or he didn't know that we tier higher existential status as a qualitative superiority. Anyways, his arguments are basically argument from incredulity as he is taking the higher existence and equating it to some arbitrary finite increase in power.
The obvious problem here is that the higher existential nature of Athena actually makes the power difference unquantifiable as I described above as to why, which is due to ontological superiority. In fact, she cannot even be interacted by Kratos normally, as we see in
this canon in-game cutscene. This intangibility of her isn't because of some hax of her, its literally cause she is a higher existential being that is abstract and not tangible to Kratos, which acts as further supportive evidence to her nature.
There is no quantitative superiority we can assign to Athena, 100x, 1000x, 10000x etc since the difference is completely unquantifiable and based on quality not quantity which Deagonx couldn't understand.
R>F difference, Higher plane of existence(or ontological superiority), Higher Dimensionality, Uncountably infinite power etc. are just different ways of achieving Qualitative Superiority and they are all standardized to +1 dimension and are just implied to have uncountably infinite difference in power in the wiki, they aren't necessarily the same, they are just considered equivalent unless extra context is given which could suggest higher ratings.
About Standards
I have seen this argument repeated more often than not that a certain thing doesn't meet our standard with another comment of an extra unsubstantiated requirement that isn't even referenced in the wiki anywhere. We should not just arbitrarily make up requirements to dismiss feats and overcomplicate stuff or overemphasize on extra evidence when the evidence that is provided meets the standard. If it meets the standard it qualifies else it doesn't, as simple as that.
The wiki defined requirements keep things objective while asking for unnecessary evidence just cos something is a higher tier is arbitrary and subjective. We should be avoiding such arguments at all costs and prevent unnecessary derailing.
Regarding this high standards requirement let's the take the example of say Acausality Type 5. We had numerous complaints of it being almost truly unattainable by any character and should be changed. What happened next tho as everyone could see, the standards didn't change any significantly, the requirements were basically character should be described above all causal systems in its level of reality and the characters require evidence of being unable to be changed by any effect that relies on a system of causality, meaning that interacting with them normally is impossible. And even if the character is completely Independent of causality to the point of being unaffected by any outside change, it will only extend to as far as evidence shows and not to things beyond it's feats. That's really it.
Many characters that met the standards qualified and many got their ratings removed since they didn't qualify. The standards are abundantly clear on what qualifies and what doesn't We don't have anyone arguing for extra evidence or new requirements other than what is already defined in the wiki.
Same thing with qualitative superiority. Cosmologies involving "higher planes of existence" or similar structures, can qualify,
if said "higher plane" is defined as having a relationship of qualitative superiority over lower realms in one way or another, such as by perceiving them as literal fiction/unreality (or being comparatively more "real" in nature), encompassing them in an infinitesimal portion of itself,
residing in a higher state of being altogether, and etc.
(the above is compiled from FAQ Q7.)
If the evidence qualifies the above standards then it gets qualitative superiority. It can be through different means such as uncountable infinite size difference, uncountably infinite power, higher spatial dimensions, R>F difference and existential or ontological superiority out of which we are arguing for the last one.
