Maou Gakuin No Futekigousha Downgrade

[PrinceofPein]

Pein, listen.

when most people disagree with something. I’ll disagree because everyone else is disagreeing too

Aside the fact that when you sent the message, only two people have disagreed and majority agreed, so your definition of majority is flawed. Aside that, disagreeing or agreeing because everyone else is, is the main reason why normal users votes do not count, since it showed you formed no thoughts of your own about it

Your reading comprehension is something else.

The God was talking about there is no future exists where other characters can fly. He is telling the Materialised part as reference that futures are already materialised but there is no future other characters can fly.

It's just you can't understand what i am saying. So don't call others biased and what I am saying isn't Contradicting with Fixxed Statement. Futures are indeed Materialised/Constructed by order. The God one who made the statement couldn't have been able to see infinite futures because only NAFTA can do that. So stop trying to twist others words.



Possibilities is talking about future itself. What do you mean far cry from what i said? Scans literally states infinite possibilities. You are ignoring the context both materialized and Infinite possibilities statement comes from same chapter and exchange between both gods.

One god stated there is no materialised futures where you can fly to NAFTA and NAFTA denies that by saying there are infinite possibilities and she will grab a hold of one possibility.

Fixxed already explained it. It's just you have zero knowledge on the verse so couldn't comprehend how that possibility is a seperate reality.

https://vsbattles.com/threads/maou-gakuin-no-futekigousha-downgrade.151249/post-5591000

good to know we are saying same thing infinite possiblities exists but not as a reality in another timeline.
Also fixxed explanation for different timeline is wrong and makes no sense. but I guess you will understand it. Cause a blade that cuts through past, present and future is supposed to mean seperate realities, yes sure, also the ability he described is possiblity manipulation, just like his profiles said, so that is not flying here

That said, I am done replying you since you just tend to increase the number of messages and strawmann and add nothing of value

 

[KingNanaya]

when most people disagree with something. I’ll disagree because everyone else is disagreeing too

that ain't the best idea.

 

[Artorimachi_Meteoraft]

that ain't the best idea.

I like bandwagoning. Sorry but that’s me

 

[KingNanaya]

I like bandwagoning. Sorry but that’s me

that's fair. to each their own

 

[Quantu]

... you shouldn't "agree/disagree fra" based on what's the popular vote, that just kills the integrity of CRT's but I digress

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

good to know we are saying same thing infinite possiblities exists but not as a reality in another timeline.
Also fixxed explanation for different timeline is wrong and makes no sense. but I guess you will understand it. Cause a blade that cuts through past, present and future is supposed to mean seperate realities, yes sure, also the ability he described is possiblity manipulation, just like his profiles said, so that is not flying here

Let me give a better example which matches MGK verse mechanism instead of your fan theories.

Just say there are 10 bridges leads to a different places which already exists. In which there is a bridge which can lead to Place A.

Someone has only knowledge of 5 bridges and places which those bridges leads to them. That someone says there is no bridge which can lead to Some place A.

But When the Guy who has Knowledge about complete 10 bridges states there are 10 bridges in total and one could lead you to Place A. That doesn't mean other 9 bridges are imaginary product.

I hope you get what i am saying. Anyway I guess we will wait for dread response. Also this is a Big Downgrade for the verse. As a supporters Dereck and Elizha input is more valuable than anyone else. I hope you don't push the Downgrade thread in a way like Fujiwara did.

 

[Artorimachi_Meteoraft]

... you shouldn't "agree/disagree fra" based on what's the popular vote, that just kills the integrity of CRT's but I digress

Well that’s just me quantu sorry.

 

[Robo432343]

Well that’s just me quantu sorry.

dont be sorry for making a fallacious argument

 

[Artorimachi_Meteoraft]

dont be sorry for making a fallacious argument

I tend to most of the time wait until a lot of people are on the thread then do it.

though sometimes I do it when i’m one of the first on the scene.

Anyway this is starting to derail so I’m leaving bye bye

 

[Deagonx]

If there is already "Another world" regardless if one gets dragged into it by any means itself says that it is different from "Current World"

The evidence seems to indicate that this "other world" is unrealized and isn't comparable to the actual, existing, world.

I haven't been persuaded by any of the counter-arguments, so I agree with the OP.

 

[Robin]

Disagree bc princeofpein made this post

 

[Deagonx]

In other words the infinite futures should already exists so that she can grab hold of one future from those.

The statements seem to indicate otherwise, that the futures don't actually exist, they are just possibilities that can be realized through the power being used.

 

[Theglassman12]

@Artorimachi_Meteoraft bandwagoning isn’t going to help you in anyway shape or form here for votes.

Anyways does the series lack any explanation that possibilities mean actual real universes/space-times? Because that’s kind of important for this to even be registered as 2-A. If there is none and the 2-A is heavily reliant on infinite possibilities statement with no elaboration on them being separate realities then count me in as agree.

 

[Planck69]

Theglassman12 laid it out nicely. There should be some indication of these possibilities existing to start with, else the argument for 2-A more or less falls apart.

Count me as agree for now. May change depending on any new information.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

I agree with the OP.

 

[Artorimachi_Meteoraft]

@Artorimachi_Meteoraft bandwagoning isn’t going to help you in anyway shape or form here for votes.

You are correct since @PrinceofPein said that’s why normal votes don’t matter. Staff votes do.

So does it really matter whether I bandwagon or not since I’m not a staff member in the first place. It would really matter if I was a staff member but I’m just a blue name.

Anyway

Spoiler: pokemonfan peace out

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

The statements seem to indicate otherwise, that the futures don't actually exist, they are just possibilities that can be realized through the power being used.

" Kandakuizorte, is the many futures of this world, that is equal to the shape of the world. Your action is to compare who will perish first, the world or yourself. The conclusion will be clearer than looking at the fire"

"God is order. The agent will be the same. The many futures seen by the future god Nafta, are constructed according to that order. No matter how much power she has, an orderly god cannot overturn an orderly future."

The future already materialised by order. NAFTA chooses one future among infinite futures. The structure of future worlds already stores up infinite futures. She can't choose a future which doesn't exists

Oh it's funny how Pain always calls staff who are not knowledgeable on the verse.

 

[TheGreatJedi13]

None of these timelines are disconnected for infinite time meaning for tiering purpose they will be low 2-C.

I don't really care about Anos tiering to participate here but

It would still fall under 2-A if they are real branching timelines because as DT said
unless the future intersected again it will go infinitely into the future

https://vsbattles.com/threads/tier-2-requirements-and-examples-part-2.145939/post-5434419

either way branching timelines where the futures no longer intersect at any point in time will be considered infinitely long in time and thus are considered qualified for 2-A
if there are infinitely branching timelines like this

As for whether they are real or not is not my problem.
Debate on

 

[Deagonx]

The future already materialised by order. NAFTA chooses one future among infinite futures. The structure of future worlds already stores up infinite futures. She can't choose a future which doesn't exists

I'm not seeing anything in your quotes that supports the conclusion that these infinite futures all exist in true form rather than just possibility.

She can't choose a future that isn't possible, it seems very clearly that her power is the ability to will circumstance in any plausible direction, but you haven't provided any evidence of 2-A

It would still fall under 2-A if they are real branching timelines because as DT said

There's not really any evidence of them being alternate timelines in the traditional sense. From the quotes Pein has shown, it's the opposite, they only "exist" as possibilities that can be willed into existence by NAFTA. She's not hopping between timelines. Notice that she can't choose a different past.

 

[TheGreatJedi13]

I'm not seeing anything in your quotes that supports the conclusion that these infinite futures all exist in true form rather than just possibility.

She can't choose a future that isn't possible, it seems very clearly that her power is the ability to will circumstance in any plausible direction, but you haven't provided any evidence of 2-A

There's not really any evidence of them being alternate timelines in the traditional sense. From the quotes Pein has shown, it's the opposite, they only "exist" as possibilities that can be willed into existence by NAFTA. She's not hopping between timelines. Notice that she can't choose a different past.

not arguing for any of that. my points isn't about the NAFTA but the fact that Pein claimed that even if they are real they will not qualify.

edited my message.

As for whether they are real or not is not my problem.
Debate on

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

I'm not seeing anything in your quotes that supports the conclusion that these infinite futures all exist in true form rather than just possibility.

She can't choose a future that isn't possible, it seems very clearly that her power is the ability to will circumstance in any plausible direction, but you haven't provided any evidence of 2-A

You should know future world has a different timeline from present to future so it's a disconnected from real world. I don't see why it needs a seperate past when it's considered as a new starting point from that onwards.

She can't chose a future which doens't exists / not constructed by Order. Order Constructs everything in the verse. Gods only follows whatever order has constructed. In other words future should already constructed in the first place so that she can grab a hold of it.

 

[Deagonx]

You should know future world has a different timeline from present to future so it's a disconnected from real world.

You're missing the crucial point: The evidence indicates that these worlds are not actualized, which means it isn't 2-A.

Gods only follows whatever order has constructed. In other words future should already constructed in the first place so that she can grab a hold of it.

The quotes directly refute this claim. It doesn't construct it until she wills it, they only exist as possibilities in a crystal.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

You're missing the crucial point: The evidence indicates that these worlds are not actualized, which means it isn't 2-A.

It does. As long as present exists future would rise again and again. Why would future would rise again? She is not constructing the future. It's Only coming to reality because they already constructed by Order check the below scans. Future would rise again and again because every possibility would come true when one possibility gets destroyed. Possibilities is refering to future here. It's clear statement.They already exists in materialised form.

Nafta swears an oath. As long as the present is here, the future will rise again and again, even if it perishes. The only way to destroy the crystal of the future is to destroy all possibilities

The quotes directly refute this claim. It doesn't construct it until she wills it, they only exist as possibilities in a crystal.

God is order. The agent will be the same. The many futures seen by the future god Nafta, are constructed according to that order. No matter how much power she has, an orderly god cannot overturn an orderly future.

Can you show me where she said SHE WILL CONSTRUCT THEM? Scan is saying order is the one which already constructed them and she can't overturn that.

Oh wait Tatsumi and dread seems to make a argument for OP later I guess. I won't be replying anymore until KNOWLEDGEABLE Staff on the verse replies.

 

[Deagonx]

Why would future would rise again? She is not constructing the future. It's Only coming to reality because they already constructed by Order check the below scans. Future would rise again and again because every possibility would come true when one possibility gets destroyed. Possibilities is refering to future here. It's clear statement.They already exists in materialised form.

The scan doesn't say that they are already constructed, it says they are constructed according to that order. In conjunction with this scan:

There is no such thing. If there is even one future where we can fly, that future will materialized, but there is no future where you can fly in this tree crown celestial sphere

This proves that they aren't already materialized, they will be if she desires a possible future where we can fly. "Will materialize."

 

[Deagonx]

I won't be replying anymore until KNOWLEDGEABLE Staff on the verse replies.

This is also a weird thing to say. The evidence is right in front of us. If there is other evidence that is necessary to understand your viewpoint, then you should be posting your evidence. If it's not a matter of additional evidence, then we are all as knowledgeable as we need to be about the subject. In which case, are you just demanding that a staff member who likes MG arrive to arbitrarily argue in your favor? Because so far the argument is pretty weak. The scans indicate that these futures are not actualized, and so far all I've seen in terms of evidence for them being real is "trust me bro."

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

The scan doesn't say that they are already constructed, it says they are constructed according to that order. In conjunction with this scan:

This proves that they aren't already materialized, they will be if she desires a possible future where we can fly. "Will materialize."

Already explained this in here. Don't take the Materialised part as something else.

https://vsbattles.com/threads/maou-gakuin-no-futekigousha-downgrade.151249/post-5591360

With example

https://vsbattles.com/threads/maou-gakuin-no-futekigousha-downgrade.151249/post-5591395

This is also a weird thing to say. The evidence is right in front of us. If there is other evidence that is necessary to understand your viewpoint, then you should be posting your evidence. If it's not a matter of additional evidence, then we are all as knowledgeable as we need to be about the subject. In which case, are you just demanding that a staff member who likes MGK arrive to arbitrarily argue in your favor? Because so far the argument is pretty weak. The scans indicate that these futures are not actualized, and so far all I've seen in terms of evidence for them being real is "trust me bro."

Stop taking my words out of context. As I linked above I already explained it multiple times. So I would wait for staff who are knowledgeable on the verse. I didn't said they would agree with me. Show me where I said that? You are making a big Scene of out of my statement for no reason. I just don't want to go in circles. I will just wait for Knowledgeable staff to review the thread.

Only thing OP and whoever agreeing is just ignoring the context because of complexity of the verse. I guess I cannot call you people ignorant.

There is no evidence in OP that supports those possibilities doesn't exists. I already explained multiple times. I will just wait for Knowledgeable staffs. Because other staff lacks the Knowledge on how verse mechanism works. So stop accusing others because they don't want to go in circling arguments.

 

[Deagonx]

Already explained this in here. Don't take the Materialised part as something else.

As an unrelated aside, I always find it really grating when someone says "explained" when what they really mean is "stated my personal opinion or claim."

So, let's hear it:

The God was talking about there is no future exists where other characters can fly. He is telling the Materialised part as reference that futures are already materialised but there is no future other characters can fly.

Your claim is that the phrase "will materialize" was in reference to futures that have already materalized. Do you not see how this instantly fails as an argument? The verb tense in front of materialize is literally the opposite of what you're claiming it is. So, why do you believe that "already materialized timelines" is what is being referred to? Because I do not see evidence for this in any scan, and the actual wording is directly opposed to this.

You also said:

One god stated there is no materialised futures where you can fly to NAFTA and NAFTA denies that by saying there are infinite possibilities and she will grab a hold of one possibility.

But this is plainly wrong. The god never stated there were "no materialized futures." You are editorializing the evidence, it just says "no future." It says if there was a future in which they could fly, then that future would materialize. Indicating that it is not yet materialized.

And given what we know about the crystal, all indications are that these "futures" are not actual existent timelines, they are just abstract possibilities that can be imposed onto reality through this power.

I will just wait for Knowledgeable staffs. Because other staff lacks the Knowledge on how verse mechanism works.

You claim that people aren't knowledgeable, or don't understand what you're saying, or are misunderstanding the text, but you're offering an interpretation that directly contradicts the text. Why do you believe that this is the meaning of the scan? Because it upgrades MG or because it's an actual logical reading of the actual words we have? I don't know where your theory even comes from. You seem to be making it up wholesale to try and contort the evidence to fit an agenda and hoping nobody notices.

 

[Reiner04]

The evidence seems to indicate that this "other world" is unrealized and isn't comparable to the actual, existing, world.

I haven't been persuaded by any of the counter-arguments, so I agree with the OP.

The scans are referring that there is no end to possibilities, the moment you will see the future everything will be predecided and so possibilities will cease to exist and so the number of worlds, that's why you can never fly off to the the future, the timelines nafta is travelling to after destruction of current one is already existing timelines as even if the present world gets destroyed there are still possibilities that has been existing. That's what the scan means.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

As an unrelated aside, I always find it really grating when someone says "explained" when what they really mean is "stated my personal opinion or claim."

So, let's hear it:



Your claim is that the phrase "will materialize" was in reference to futures that have already materalized. Do you not see how this instantly fails as an argument? The verb tense in front of materialize is literally the opposite of what you're claiming it is. So, why do you believe that "already materialized timelines" is what is being referred to? Because I do not see evidence for this in any scan, and the actual wording is directly opposed to this.

You also said:


But this is plainly wrong. The god never stated there were "no materialized futures." You are editorializing the evidence, it just says "no future." It says if there was a future in which they could fly, then that future would materialize. Indicating that it is not yet materialized.

And given what we know about the crystal, all indications are that these "futures" are not actual existent timelines, they are just abstract possibilities that can be imposed onto reality through this power.

There is no such thing. If there is even one future where we can fly, that future will materialized, but there is no future where you can fly in this tree crown celestial sphere

Materialize and materialized both has different tenses.

Here he is clearly refering to that future already exists not that it will come true. You are talking about if yes. But the problem is that god just acquired the power of NAFTA. He shouldn't be able to tell that infinite possibilities Existence if he already known then he wouldn't have lost to NAFTA. Lol.

You claim that people aren't knowledgeable, or don't understand what you're saying, or are misunderstanding the text, but you're offering an interpretation that directly contradicts the text. Why do you believe that this is the meaning of the scan? Because it upgrades MG or because it's an actual logical reading of the actual words we have? I don't know where your theory even comes from. You seem to be making it up wholesale to try and contort the evidence to fit an agenda and hoping nobody notices.

Because it's not a verse like Naruto or DB so that you can easily understand how it works. You need to know how Order works in the verse.

If you still want to accuse because I said other staff can't understand the verse mechanism go one. I don't care at this point. Because OP clearly have no intention of asking for staff who agreed with the upgrade i guess.

 

[Deagonx]

Materialize and materialized both has different tenses.

"Will materialized" is likely a minor typo. It cannot be both past and future tense, and the inclusion of "will" cannot be a typo but adding an unnecessary "d" to "materalize" is a likely typo. Though if you really feel that strongly about it we can confirm with someone who speaks the language to determine the tense. It's also a subjunctive clause ("if" there is a future) which means past tense doesn't work there in any way.

Here he is clearly refering to that future already exists not that it will come true.

Exist, yes, but not materalize. "If there is even one future where we can fly, then that future will materalize."

So the futures "existing" is demonstrated to be independent of them materializing. So these futures in the crystal are not materialized.

 

[PrinceofPein]

I don't really care about Anos tiering to participate here but

It would still fall under 2-A if they are real branching timelines because as DT said
unless the future intersected again it will go infinitely into the future

https://vsbattles.com/threads/tier-2-requirements-and-examples-part-2.145939/post-5434419

either way branching timelines where the futures no longer intersect at any point in time will be considered infinitely long in time and thus are considered qualified for 2-A
if there are infinitely branching timelines like this

That is correct but the point is that, I was in the thread and forgot about that point

@Deagonx should be the OP instead he carried it.

@EldemadeDityjon no one is sayin the possibilities do not exist, but rather they do but not as an actual universe or another timeline, also the term "real" was used to refer to the actual world.

The scans are referring to that there is no end to possibilities, the moment you will see the future everything will be predecided and so possibilities will cease to exist and so the number of worlds, that's why you can never fly off to the the future, the timelines nafta is travelling to after destruction of current one is already existing timelines as even if the present world gets destroyed there are still possibilities that has been existing. That's what the scan means.

bring me a scan where it said timeline and I will concede, like a scan where the statement "timeline" was used instead of future or possibilities.
What you just did is called using "inflated languages"
Anyway since you said they use MWI, that mean you are saying there are infinite anos correct?

Materialize and materialized both jas different tenses.

this are the raws

「そんなわけがないさ。 飛べる未来が一つでもあれば、 そ
の未来は実現するからって、 この樹冠天球を飛べる未来な
んてあるわけが･･････」

Here is the translation

It can't be. If there is one future in which you can fly, you can fly.
"There is no such thing as a future in which you can fly through the canopy of the sky, because if there is one future in which you can fly, that future will come true.
There is no such thing as a future where we can fly in this canopy of the heavens. ・・・・・・"

So you are actually using your own interpretation, there is "will"

 

[ImmortalDread]

So the futures "existing" is demonstrated to be independent of them materializing. So these futures in the crystal are not materialized.

The argument from OP is them not existing in the first place due to "not being materialized".
So I don't understand your stance in this thread.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Anyway, I found the novel, so I will start gathering information.

 

[PrinceofPein]

The argument from OP is them not existing in the first place due to "not being materialized".
So I don't understand your stance in this thread.

no my argument is that they exist but as possiblities and not different timelines or realities. That is my argument

 

[Deagonx]

the timelines nafta is travelling to after destruction of current one is already existing timelines as even if the present world gets destroyed there are still possibilities that has been existing. That's what the scan means.

I don't agree and I don't think what you're saying is supported by the text.

As long as the present is here, the future will revive over and over again even if it perishes. The only way to destroy Future World Crystal is to destroy all possibilities." The number of crystal fragments increases in a blink of an eye, like a shining sandstorm, it envelops this place.

All that's being said here is that as long as the present exists, there will be ever-increasing possible futures in the crystal, which is normal, but doesn't support the claim that these are existent timelines.

The argument from OP is them not existing in the first place due to "not being materialized".
So I don't understand your stance in this thread.

This is a bit of a semantic quirk. They are not materialized, but they "exist" in the crystal. The text clearly indicates this, by saying that if there is a future where we can fly, then it will be materialized. So the futures are there, in the crystal, as possibilities. They aren't materialized. That's what OP meant by "not existing." Exist is a very flexible term and I was using it slightly differently to demonstrate what the text is showing us.

 

[Deagonx]

Here is the translation

This translation is actually a lot clearer than the one in the imgur album. Would you mind providing a similar translation for the other scans? I think it would be very insightful. Also the full context of that exchange would be helpful. If she's explaining her own power, then we can say definitively that her ability is more akin to probability manipulation than anything else.

 

[ImmortalDread]

no my argument is that they exist but as possiblities and not different timelines or realities. That is my argument

Noted.

 

[Reiner04]

bring me a scan where it said timeline and I will concede, like a scan where the statement "timeline" was used instead of future or possibilities.
What you just did is called using "inflated languages"
Anyway since you said they use MWI, that mean you are saying there are infinite anos correct?

Pain, you do realise that it's just basing your arguement over a word but not the context? The "Futures" and "possibilities" and "another worlds" has been quite used interchangeably, can anyone deny? No.

As much I can understand the basis of the arguement based of materialisation of the future, it's nothing more than referring that if future has been seen there won't be any possibilities, and so no world. That's why, the future can NEVER be seen.

All that's being said here is that as long as the present exists, there will be ever-increasing possible futures in the crystal, which is normal, but doesn't support the claim that these are existent timelines.

Refer to the Scan in the OP that destroying present or even the world won't mean anything but you gotta destroy all possibilities. If world has been destroyed, what's there left as possibility for this world? What it means to "destroy possibilities"? Possiblity, future crystals, future worlds, another world is all has been used interchangeably. I don't see why destroying world and still not affecting infinite possibilities hold any arguement for them being not another world.

 

[Deagonx]

Refer to the Scan in the OP that destroying present or even the world won't mean anything but you gotta destroy all possibilities.

What scan says this? This scan says the opposite of that:

As long as the present is here, the future will revive over and over again even if it perishes. The only way to destroy Future World Crystal is to destroy all possibilities." The number of crystal fragments increases in a blink of an eye, like a shining sandstorm, it envelops this place.

It says as long as there is a present, the future will revive even if it perishes. This is logical, since a present entails future. It never says "destroying the present won't mean anything." Can I ask which scan that phrase is from? That "destroying the present or even the world" won't mean anything?

 

[ImmortalDread]

I will attend to this matter later, as the scans present conflicting results. However, I will make a note of this, as I misconstrued the initial premise based on feedback from multiple members indicating its non-existence.

This is a bit of a semantic quirk. They are not materialized, but they "exist" in the crystal. The text clearly indicates this, by saying that if there is a future where we can fly, then it will be materialized. So the futures are there, in the crystal, as possibilities. They aren't materialized. That's what OP meant by "not existing." Exist is a very flexible term and I was using it slightly differently to demonstrate what the text is showing us.

It appears that you may have misunderstood the crux of the matter. If we accept the notion that futures are merely potentialities, it would necessarily imply a 2-A cosmology, where the range of possibilities is infinite.