• 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.

Kingdom Hearts: Re:Minder of the Conceptual CRTs

GiverOfThePeace said:
I literally just explained later down my comment what he meant. What he meant was the darkness from the hearts forms them. He even starts by saying it's a hypothesis and later on starts seeing they go based off darkness, which is even backed up by what Yen Sid said.
Click to expand...
It still wasn't an implication on Ansem SoD's part. He really thought that at the moment of writing that report and outright stated it with him even saying that he is confident in it. You can't get much more direct than that regardless of whether or not you retain that opinion later on.
 
Last edited:
Nehz_XZX said:
It still wasn't an implication on Ansem SoD's part. He really thought that at the moment of writing that report and outright stated it with him even saying that he is confident in it. You can't get much more direct than that regardless of whether or not you retain that opinion later on.
Click to expand...
What part of he further clarifies it's the darkness of one's heart that is backed up by sources such as Yen Sid did you miss? I could care less how confident he was on it he later clarifies what he means and Yen Sid further backs up that it's the darkness of one's heart that forms them, and Princesses of Heart cannot become heartless purely because they lack darkness.
 
"He has an uncertain belief of his thing being completely correct hence why he's theorizing how it works. If he's going over a hypothetical scenario he's forming a theory out of it or else why would he randomly just do a hypothetical scenario for no reason especially when it's related to his study of the heart if he's not trying to gain an answer from it, and thus a theory. So no, there is a theory."

Well, that report was written at a time where Ansem was in the Realm of Darkness where he got banished to by Xehanort and had yet to gain the ability to open a dark corridor which allowed him to escape. All of this definitely didn't put him in a good mood for research or experiments. His experiments of the heart where conducted before he got banished to that realm since he most likely didn't have the proper tools for research there and was afterwards focused on revenge as DiZ after escaping so I doubt that this hypothetical scenario was for research purposes. He also believed that he would eventually lose his heart if he stayed too long in that realm so he definitely had a reason to wonder about it even if he wasn't really able to come up with an idea or theory from that scenario. Aside from that, people do sometimes wonder about something without thinking up an answer. At the very least, I'm someone who is doing that sometimes. Even if Ansem did come up with a theory, he didn't really write that theory down in that report so we have no idea what it might have been and how that theory differs from what he has thought as the DiZ who escaped from that realm.

"A massive core of energy lay beyond the door sought by the Heartless. It may be the ultimate goal of the Heartless. But what is that energy? I have devised a hypothesis, based upon my observations of the Heartless. The Heartless feed on other's hearts, and they yearn for that energy core. That thing beyond the door must be a heart, too--the heart of this world. There is no proof, but, having felt that immense energy, I am certain. That was the heart of the world. The Heartless are trying to take hearts not only from all living creatures, but from the planet itself. But what do they mean to do with the heart of the world?"

This is Ansem SoD describing how he concluded through the fact that Heartless feed on hearts that the core of energy that he found is the heart of the world. He doesn't elaborate their origin, creation process or composition there as far as I can tell.

"Nobodies formed from the body and soul is incorrect also since what's directly explained in their creation is that they're formed from someone with a strong heart allowing their empty shell to have a "will of it's own" which is further elaborated on by Xemnas' reveal that it's them re-creating their own heart allowing them to act, feel, have emotions, etc."

What are Nobodies recreating their hearts for if they themselves are supposedly the hearts? If they are the hearts and it therefore never got lost, how could Xemnas dupe them into believing that they have no hearts and therefore no emotions, and then have them be desperate enough to go through all the work to create an artificial Kingdom Hearts?

GiverOfThePeace said:
What part of he further clarifies it's the darkness of one's heart that is backed up by sources such as Yen Sid did you miss? I could care less how confident he was on it he later clarifies what he means and Yen Sid further backs up that it's the darkness of one's heart that forms them, and Princesses of Heart cannot become heartless purely because they lack darkness.
Click to expand...
He quite literally said that the hearts the Heartless are taking are becoming Heartless. He doesn't say that they emerge from these hearts or that something from these hearts is turning into Heartless. I also don't see where he is further elaborating it. He definitely doesn't do that in your quotes if I'm understanding them right. The only quote in your comment after that doesn't mention anything about what part of a person it is that is actually turning into a Heartless.
 
Last edited:
I don't see how him being pissed off and not having tools for research suddenly means he's not trying to form a theory. You can form theories w/o tools or being in a calm state of mind, especially since he has a lot of time to himself. Theories don't need to be written down you can form a theory within your head. This is literally nitpicking. He's coming up with a hypothetical answer to a belief he's forming, that's objectively a theory.

He's explaining there further what he meant by the process of taking hearts, which was that they yearn for energy of the world's heart.

Quote where I said Nobodies are the hearts themselves, I said they're reformed from hearts. Being reformed from =/= being the thing reforming you itself, so this is a blatant strawman. Also for your other question, that's legitimately an intelligence anti feat for the entire organization because I don't know how any of them didn't realize they they truly didn't lack emotions and had hearts just because a guy told them so.

You repeated yourself and I already refuted this. Frankly I don't care what he said, it's further backed up in lore and by the existence of princess of hearts that it's the darkness in one's heart that creates them, not the heart itself and I directly showed you Yen Sid's explanation of it and lore itself says a Princess of Heart can't become a heartless because they lack any darkness. If you want to continue on the train of invincible ignorance go ahead.

You're once again uselessly derailing this thread. I have no reason to reply to this anymore as you've shown to repeat yourself and misconstrue my points and again, it's not even relevant to the subject matter of this thread, either Bob should finally make his reply he said he was going to make since Friday or this thread should be closed since it's been disagreed upon by staff, knowledgeable members, and others alike.
 
GiverOfThePeace said:
I don't see how him being pissed off and not having tools for research suddenly means he's not trying to form a theory. You can form theories w/o tools or being in a calm state of mind, especially since he has a lot of time to himself. Theories don't need to be written down you can form a theory within your head. This is literally nitpicking. He's coming up with a hypothetical answer to a belief he's forming, that's objectively a theory.

He's explaining there further what he meant by the process of taking hearts, which was that they yearn for energy of the world's heart.

Quote where I said Nobodies are the hearts themselves, I said they're reformed from hearts. Being reformed from =/= being the thing reforming you itself, so this is a blatant strawman. Also for your other question, that's legitimately an intelligence anti feat for the entire organization because I don't know how any of them didn't realize they they truly didn't lack emotions and had hearts just because a guy told them so.

You repeated yourself and I already refuted this. Frankly I don't care what he said, it's further backed up in lore and by the existence of princess of hearts that it's the darkness in one's heart that creates them, not the heart itself and I directly showed you Yen Sid's explanation of it and lore itself says a Princess of Heart can't become a heartless because they lack any darkness. If you want to continue on the train of invincible ignorance go ahead.

You're once again uselessly derailing this thread. I have no reason to reply to this anymore as you've shown to repeat yourself and misconstrue my points and again, it's not even relevant to the subject matter of this thread, either Bob should finally make his reply he said he was going to make since Friday or this thread should be closed since it's been disagreed upon by staff, knowledgeable members, and others alike.
Click to expand...
He didn't write down the theory he came up with if he came up with something before he found out about Nobodies. Therefore, we don't have much to say about said theory. What do you think is that theory anyways?

What does the process of Heartless taking hearts and them yearning for the energy of the world's heart have to do with them being made from darkness and not from hearts like Ansem apparently thought in the quote prior to that?

Okay, so what you are arguing for is that Nobodies are reformed using the heart as basis and not that they are the heart. In that case, I have legitimately misunderstood you. That being said, it didn't give you the right to accuse me of using a dishonest argumentation strategy. All I want is to discuss with you about something that we disagree on and in that case I want the one who is actually right to prevail regardless of whether or not that is me. Therefore, I would never actually resort to a strawman on a deliberate basis and I'm very offended by you assuming that.

I'm not sure if that is your intent but you come off straight up as hostile to me with you saying that I'm strawmanning, derailing or misconstruing you. Are you that angry about someone not agreeing to you or is it something else I'm doing? If I'm actually misconstruing your points, then that means that I have simply not understood them well enough. At the very least, I really do want to understand what your position and your arguments for it are and debate this to the very end. If coming across as hostile isn't your intent, you might want to rethink for your future comments how you come off to other people. If you think that I handled this debate badly, then you can tell me that. If it's something with a reasoning that makes it understandable to me why it is bad and I can actually fix it, I'll do exactly that.
 
Last edited:
Idk why you're taking what I said so personally, it's a conversation about fictional characters and a fictional verse that itself doesn't take itself that seriously, calm yourself. I'm not in anyway, shape, or form "angry" that you're disagreeing with me on a topic my friend @PlozAlcachaz disagrees with me on some topics regarding KH yet I could care less, if anything I'm moreso exasperated that you keep going on a topic that's derail. I don't know what exactly was "hostile" about my comment you've seemed to greatly read too deeply into what I said. You can unintenionally strawman someone and nothing in my comment at all implied I said you were intentionally doing it. I said I see no reason to continue this because it's not at all relevant to the main subject of the thread and is, this doesn't prove hearts are conceptual or not and one part of the argument literally derives on whether or not he was doing a hypothetical scenario or a theory which doesn't at all amp either side's point. I'm pretty sure there are direct rules on threads too for derailing them.
 
GiverOfThePeace said:
Idk why you're taking what I said so personally, it's a conversation about fictional characters and a fictional verse that itself doesn't take itself that seriously, calm yourself. I'm not in anyway, shape, or form "angry" that you're disagreeing with me on a topic my friend @PlozAlcachaz disagrees with me on some topics regarding KH yet I could care less, if anything I'm moreso exasperated that you keep going on a topic that's derail. I don't know what exactly was "hostile" about my comment you've seemed to greatly read too deeply into what I said. You can unintenionally strawman someone and nothing in my comment at all implied I said you were intentionally doing it. I said I see no reason to continue this because it's not at all relevant to the main subject of the thread and is, this doesn't prove hearts are conceptual or not and one part of the argument literally derives on whether or not he was doing a hypothetical scenario or a theory which doesn't at all amp either side's point. I'm pretty sure there are direct rules on threads too for derailing them.
Click to expand...
A strawman is something that one sets up in order to have something to easily confute. Saying that someone is strawmanning is therefore a pretty easy way to come across as hostile especially if that wasn't that person's intention. I'm also pretty sure that the words strawmanning, derailing and misconstruing are something that one would rather associate with a malicious troublemaker than someone who is actually trying to debate so why are you actually using that so often in something that is supposed to be a civil debate?
 
@GiverOfThePeace

"As such, as long as it’s reasonable to do so, when responding to a strawman you should begin your response by asking your opponent to justify their use of the strawman, instead of just attacking them for their fallacious reasoning.

Doing this is beneficial not only because it promotes more friendly discourse, but also because it also increases the likelihood that the other person will see the problem with their reasoning and accept their mistake."

As far as I can tell, you straight up failed that part. You just claimed that I used a strawman without asking for a justification as to why I apparently used one and you quite definitely didn't promote a more friendly discourse from my perspective. Did you really try to make me see the problem with my reasoning that you saw and make me accept that mistake?

By the way, since you've said that Bobsican should make his reply I asked him to do that via Discord. He would like you to summarise your arguments before he responds so that he can have an easier overview.
 
GiverOfThePeace said:
I also haven't seen anyone else on this site when being called out for a strawman getting a hostile intent from the person.
Click to expand...
Well, what I was saying was more based on the meaning of strawman then actual experience from seeing people use it but I still find it to be a pretty significant matter.
 
I sent the link to show that an unintentional strawman can exist I care less what they give as a moral principle for it.

He can read the response above again since he implied he read it.
 
Nehz_XZX said:
Well, what I was saying was more based on the meaning of strawman then actual experience from seeing people use it but I still find it to be a pretty significant matter.
Click to expand...
Then once again you need to calm down, it's a fictional topic about fictional characters.
 
GiverOfThePeace said:
I sent the link to show that an unintentional strawman can exist I care less what they give as a moral principle for it.

He can read the response above again since he implied he read it.
Click to expand...
I'd still say that the advice from that is something that you should take to heart.
 
GiverOfThePeace said:
K I won't, anyways when is Bob writing his reply since he said he was apparently doing it back during Friday.
Click to expand...
As I said, he wants to reply after you made a summary of your arguments. Our debate spans across a large part of this page and made the thread rather confusing so he'd like to have a summary in order to have a more solid basis for a reply.
 
Almost like I said for the past entire couple of days to stop derailing, but someone didn't want to listen, hm oh well. He can read up and find it.
 
"He can read up and find it."

Could you please elaborate your reasoning for not making a summary? I wouldn't be opposed to making one if someone asked me and in this case it would be specifically for the reply that you said Bobsican should make. Giving someone a summary of your arguments so that they have a clear idea of what they are is hardly a bad thing. It would probably help prevent people from misconstruing your arguments as well. So, why not?
 
"Also for your other question, that's legitimately an intelligence anti feat for the entire organization because I don't know how any of them didn't realize they they truly didn't lack emotions and had hearts just because a guy told them so."

I'm not sure if I can support a position that requires you to assume that a bunch of characters were dumb enough to fall for an incredibly obvious and rather unbelievable lie despite the fact that they are generally not portrayed in the series like that and that them being Ansem's disciples and having conducted research on the heart actually suggests a rather high amount of intelligence. That's all I have to say to that specific point.
 
@GiverOfThePeace

I'm not sure what you are waiting for when it comes to giving me a reply but if you don't want to continue discussing with me, you can just post your reasons here and we can be done with it. I'd really hate it if you just stopped without giving a reason, though having to abandon a debate would also be something that I'd hate. I would still prefer it that way though.

"Where does the body go when it separates from the heart? If the soul remains within the body, is it still considered to be deceased? When the heart returns to the Heartless, the physical form disappears. But that is merely true in this world. Perhaps the body exists in another form in another world. If that is the case, then it is possible for one to exist in two worlds. A being that is neither darkness nor light; belonging nowhere; abandoned by its heart; a mere shell of its former self. The relation between the heart and body is complex. However, I am certain that if your self exists here, then by definition, the other cannot truly "exist." The other, the one which does not exist, shall be dubbed, "Nobody.""

Ansem's Report 13 seems to define Nobodies as bodies which got abandoned by their heart which isn't really helping your case with Nobodies being formed from their hearts and Heartless being solely made from the darkness from people's heart especially since this report seems to have been made after Ansem SoD became a Heartless himself.
 
Since GiverOfThePeace isn't giving any sort of answer I decided to make a summary of his arguments for Bobsican. GiverOfThePeace, if you believe that I'm misconstruing your arguments in this summary, then just make you own summary for an accurate depiction of them.


My summary for GiverOfThePeace's arguments:

The mind isn’t a sort of life essence, the heart is. As stated by Xehanort when describing the heart, he calls it his “very essence”.

It's called essence by Kairi:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/522251946124640268/669829358558380052/20200123_010219.jpg

And one’s heart leaving makes them fade.


Nobodies lacking hearts and not existing has been a concept proven wrong in series:

It’s been revealed that the entire spill was all a lie made by Xemnas to give Organization XIII a false motive.

“There's also the fact that all hearts in existence make up KH, the literal embodiment of light, and there's also Mickey directly stating stuff supporting this.”
>That scan states light and darkness make up everything, nothing about hearts.

“And beings who don't have light/darkness at all are literally nonexistent as we all know, anything”
>Nobodies are beings of darkness, they fade when they lose, use dark powers, etc. The person who stated they don’t have either was Xemnas, who revealed he was lying the entire time.


When someone uses conceptually they’re referring to the idea context of concepts, not the abstraction context. Sora’s in pieces on a scale above the physical one is basically what is said.

“Sora literally states that hearts are all around us.”
>Sora is being metaphorical here. He states right after “you only have to see them for them to become real” so what he’s saying is that the bonds can create a heart.

“- The heart is made up of light and darkness, both making up existence.”
>I would hope that the heart is made up of a concept that you early claimed makes up everything,

“- Nomura himself (aka, Word of God) states that everything in KH has a heart”
>What he specifically was referring to was that everything alive has a heart.


If we define essence, it can have a few different interpretations between like soul and concepts.

es·sence /ˈesəns/ the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character.

Even if you use other dictionaries, they quite closely make similar remarks on essence being an indispensable quality of something such as Oxford and Cambridge

Given how this is, the heart's existence has already been established as being qualitatively superior to the body, the mind, and the soul.

Essence can also refer to concepts such as life force. Which is actually supported by how the heart is seen as a source of life in KH.



"This also supports the fact that the Conceptual Manipulation via strikes should stay because in that instance, the fact the heart is the essence of someone from Xehanort's own words and the game says it was essence being destroyed is enough to show it's literally the heart.”
>This is a huge stretch. Especially when it broke the heart into pieces which caused Kairi’s lifeforce to disappear.


Nobodies have been shown to have hearts so them being destroyed and coming back doesn’t prove abstraction nor a reliancy on said abstraction.


The statement does not say higher dimensional clash, it says a high dimensional clash. These are actually two very different terms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher-dimensional_algebra
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-dimensional_statistics
https://www.statisticshowto.com/dimensionality/
It’s a completely different kind of dimensionality from the physics kind.


Under context Xehanort transcends space-time by releasing his heart and time traveling, so you can say the heart itself is under certain condition,s 4D but the only people able to affect it are doing it via hax I.E. Xehanort.


Nothing here provides proof for hearts being abstract, just because you have an object composed of concepts does not mean the object itself is conceptual.


Heartless are tied to the darkness in the fact that they represent it but they do not conceptually embody it. Purebloods are almost never fought in their true forms because they have hearts in them.


What the scene is likely better stating is that there's different laws for those not of that world, so they're still bound by laws, just that the laws have it so specifically one's born from the PoTC world can only be affected by the curse, this is further proven by the fact that Olympus Coliseum entire plot is that Sora is affected by a curse.


Ansem basically confirms he's learned truly nothing about the hearts. Mind you I'm not saying he can't be used as a source but he's clearly admitted his research taught him nothing about the nature of the heart.


What in context Xemnas is saying is that the way Nobodies are formed, which is lack of hearts, is incorrect because they do indeed have hearts that's what I'm talking about, yes they are formed from hearts leaving them but they are not formed from body and soul like Ansem assumed, they're formed from one's heart, look at Roxas and Namine as the core examples of that. Roxas takes the appearance of Ventus due to his heart within Sora and Namine was birthed from Kairi's heart within Sora.

The heart does not form the Heartless, it's the darkness in them that forms them. That's the entire reason Princesses of Light cannot be turned into Heartless. Because they have no inch of darkness on them.

Nobodies formed from the body and soul is incorrect also since what's directly explained in their creation is that they're formed from someone with a strong heart allowing their empty shell to have a "will of it's own" which is further elaborated on by Xemnas' reveal that it's them re-creating their own heart allowing them to act, feel, have emotions, etc.

The "replacements" in context are also their own hearts, the only true exemptions are Roxas, Xion, and Namine since they're under a special group.
 
Last edited:
Doubly adding on that general consensus of the thread thusfar is that the heart is just the emotions and self, while the soul is life and the body is the husk, which would be an easier explanation then conceptual.
 
GiverOfThePeace said:
Doubly adding on that general consensus of the thread thusfar is that the heart is just the emotions, while the soul is life and the body is the husk, which would be an easier explanation then conceptual.
Click to expand...
I was already wondering if you were still watching the thread. Guess that this comment answers that.
 
GiverOfThePeace said:
Doubly adding on that general consensus of the thread thusfar is that the heart is just the emotions and self, while the soul is life and the body is the husk, which would be an easier explanation then conceptual.
Click to expand...
Considering that the heart is called essence on multiple occasions and the various effects losing it can have, saying that it is just the emotions is quite a bit too simplifying regardless of whether or not it is a concept.
 
Stupits said:
so what happened here?
Click to expand...
There are quite a number of people who disagree with the idea of the heart being conceptual, I and GiverOfThePeace had an extended discussion over one of his arguments and now we are waiting for Bobsican to make a reply to GiverOfThePeace's arguments that I summarised for him.
 
Last edited:
The heart should be higher than a mind/soul, but it really shouldn't be a concept. It should fall under Essence Manipulation (basically an advanced Info Manip).
 
PlozAlcachaz said:
The heart should be higher than a mind/soul, but it really shouldn't be a concept. It should fall under Essence Manipulation (basically an advanced Info Manip).
Click to expand...
I don't agree with it being higher in this case as all 3 pieces are required to complete a person, the heart, soul, and body all put an equal effort into it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ayewale
  • Locked
2-B KH is a bit bad
2
Replies
63
Views
6K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
ThatBoiRick
Transduality type 1 for True Kingdom Hearts
2
Replies
67
Views
4K
ThanatosX
ThanatosX
Bobsican
Kingdom Hearts Low 1-C Ocean Between Re:Evaluation
2
Replies
79
Views
6K
Eseseso
Eseseso
ThanatosX
Kingdom Hearts: Light and Darkness CRT
Replies
15
Views
2K
ThanatosX
ThanatosX
Bobsican
  • Locked
Kingdom Hearts Tier 11 Cosmology
2 3
Replies
101
Views
8K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top