Maou Gakuin Source/ Root Type 1 Concept: Round 2

[Theglassman12]

@Dog3352 not my fault you guys don't do the best of jobs to explain how it's type 2 or 1. Also Source being type 2 with the information provided in both the cosmology blog and the profiles do not remotely explain type 2 concept for the source. All of this just sounds like a type 3 concept for the source.

@Dereck03 So did you like, ignore what type 3 concept hax remotely says? Because it says this little line here.

Concepts that don't meet the same standards as Type 1 or Type 2, such as personal concepts that continue to govern the object in question, merely on a more specific scale, or concepts whose nature is not elaborated upon.

And what exactly does the source govern again? The specific individual in question? Like how it's stated in the cosmology blog? This is textbook definition type 3 concept hax.

As for the whole make a CRT to nuke the source being type 2 well... someone's already did that so have fun with that.

 

[Dereck03]

@Dereck03 So did you like, ignore what type 3 concept hax remotely says? Because it says this little line here.

Personal concepts would only be type 3 if they did not meet the requirements of the other two types, which is just not the case here.

Exactly this. Nothing says that personal concepts cannot be type 1 or 2, in fact the simple descriptions provided imply that the source would not even qualify for type 3 or 2 because it is independent of what it governs and more statments already provided, furthermore the page refers to what the concept itself governs, it never limits it, so the argument against it is completely incorrect, if you feel bad just change the standards to limit personal concepts or expand the range of influence of the concepts for qualification cos the very definition of type 2 and 1 is against all of the refutals..

To add onto this, when mental concepts were still an entirely separate type, there were verses that had mental concepts that were type 1, eg persona, where mental concepts were type 1 in addition to the previously mentioned type 4, or concepts that behaved like basically all types, eg nasuverse, where the concepts literally behaved like every single concept type on wiki.
Just because something is a nonstandard type of concept (type 3 or the now merged with type 3 type 4) doesn't mean it can't be a standard type of concept (types 1 and 2), at worst they simply just are both type 3 and either type 2 or 1.

^^

And what exactly does the source govern again? The specific individual in question? Like how it's stated in the cosmology blog? This is textbook definition type 3 concept hax.

Now you are the one who ignores that the page explicitly states that whatever this concept governs, it is not limited to someone or something.

As for the whole make a CRT to nuke the source being type 2 well... someone's already did that so have fun with that.

I don't mind something so badly done that they're already making fun of it.

 

[Theglassman12]

@Dereck03 Ok so Deonment is just wrong then. If you're claiming you can manipulate a concept that can be more than one type then it's one or the other, you can't pick both. I don't need to make a standard change when type 3 concepts literally refer to as personal concepts, plus governing a specific individual or specific scale, as stated in the profile for concept hax, is not the same as a concept that governs reality.

You can make fun of it as much as you want, if you don't refute it and it gets accepted then it's all on you.

 

[Fixxed]

.

Yeah personal concept, every concept by default is personal, if it concept of stone then its just limited to the stone's "person", it will not make it a "universal concept"

The only thing that will make it CM 3 is that personal concept is just govern the thing in specific scale not all scale of it

 

[Dereck03]

@Dereck03 Ok so Deonment is just wrong then. If you're claiming you can manipulate a concept that can be more than one type then it's one or the other, you can't pick both. I don't need to make a standard change when type 3 concepts literally refer to as personal concepts, plus governing a specific individual or specific scale, as stated in the profile for concept hax, is not the same as a concept that governs reality.

Don't be mistaken, I am not saying that the source is classified as several types at the same time, what I am saying is that there is nothing that says that personal concepts cannot be type 1 and 2, since type 3 says that if the concept does not meet the requirements of 1 and 2 then it would fall into this archetype, which the source does, and furthermore the concept governs a reality that is life across space-time, since there are no limits to what a concept can govern or not since each concept governs its reality in its area of influence and the reality of the area of influence of the source is the body, mind, soul, spirit and abyss.

You can make fun of it as much as you want, if you don't refute it and it gets accepted then it's all on you.

I'm not, i said they.

 

[Theglassman12]

@Fixxed Which is what the source classifies as. It governs the specific person in question. For it to be type 2 it has to govern reality, as stated in the page for type 2 concepts.

@Dereck03 Nothing about it says it governs life across space-time, what scan remotely says that? All I see is a sword with a special ability to erase someone's concept across the past present and future.

 

[Fixxed]

@Fixxed Which is what the source classifies as. It governs the specific person in question. For it to be type 2 it has to govern reality, as stated in the page for type 2 concepts.

Every concept by default is just govern specific thing, if it concept of stone then it just govern specifically to the stone. What the reality you mean, explain...

 

[Tatsumi504]

If source were to be type 1, all humans or everyone with a source would be under the influence of a single one. i.e. there will be a single source that is governing all other source or humans in the verse, not like one source for each person as those are specific concepts, which will be CM type 3.

Pein this refutation only works if what the source governs is all humanity as opposed to individual existence.

The reality the source governs is an individual's existence, the reality it participates in is that same individual's existence not all of humanity.

When I asked about this I specifically mentioned it governing a single object and the reply I got went beyond what I was expecting saying that "Scale" and "Range" of the concept doesn't matter.
The example you gave me for this was the concept of darkness.
Taking this your example, this concept will govern darkness be it planet wide even darkness in the whole universe. This concept is still governing something specific just like the source governs an individual's existence. The issue is there's actually some kind of bias in your mind that makes the concept of darkness seem not specific because of how large "darkness" is in scale as opposed to one individual. This will apply all the same to the concept of light, specific colors, water, air etc.

Even going by the definition of type 3 concepts

Lesser Fundamental Concepts: Concepts that don't meet the same standards as Type 1 or Type 2, such as personal concepts that continue to govern the object in question, merely on a more specific scale, or concepts whose nature is not elaborated upon. Case-by-case specifications and explanations are necessary for such concepts and examples, and they are likely not going to meet the same standards for abilities such as High-Godly regeneration that other concepts may. Conceptual manipulation of this type can be resisted by those who resist sufficiently similar abilities, even if the exact mechanics may differ.

The page doesn't say "personal concepts can only be type 3", it says that if they don't meet the criteria in type 1/2 and their nature isn't elaborated upon, then they should be classified as type 3. In the case of the source, forget about meeting the standard for type 2, it meets the criteria for type 1. It's nature is also elaborated upon.

The source governs an individual existence and is independent of it. It's not affected by any change to that existence, isn't erased by the erasure of that existence.
Split the source will split the body mind and soul and fusing the source back together fuses all 3 as well with no need to perform the action on the other 3.
The biggest supporting factor here is that the source is equivalent to Fire Dew. It predates universal reality and is unaffected by the destruction of universal reality.

@Dereck03 Ok so Deonment is just wrong then. If you're claiming you can manipulate a concept that can be more than one type then it's one or the other, you can't pick both. I don't need to make a standard change when type 3 concepts literally refer to as personal concepts, plus governing a specific individual or specific scale, as stated in the profile for concept hax, is not the same as a concept that governs reality.

Bruh, I'm now officially convinced you are incapable of entertaining any opinion that isn't alligned with your own even going as far as to deny what's stated in the ability description

Lesser Fundamental Concepts: Concepts that don't meet the same standards as Type 1 or Type 2, such as personal concepts that continue to govern the object in question, merely on a more specific scale, or concepts whose nature is not elaborated upon. Case-by-case specifications and explanations are necessary for such concepts and examples, and they are likely not going to meet the same standards for abilities such as High-Godly regeneration that other concepts may. Conceptual manipulation of this type can be resisted by those who resist sufficiently similar abilities, even if the exact mechanics may differ.

The description doesn't say all personal concepts are type 3, it says concepts that don't qualify as type 1/2 or whose nature isn't elaborated. It then goes on to give personal concepts as an example.
In other words, personal concepts that don't qualify as type 1 or 2 are type 3, if a personal concept qualifies as type 1 or 2 then it is either of those types. If you disagree with this then go review the conceptual manipulation page and change it to say personal concepts can only ever be type 3.

For it to be type 2 it has to govern reality, as stated in the page for type 2 concepts.

I swear you're full of it. At this point you're just being dishonest. The page doesn't say it has to govern reality, it only has to govern the reality it participates in. The reality the source participates in is a person's existence.

Nothing about it says it governs life across space-time, what scan remotely says that?

Maybe the fact that source destruction erases all future incarnations of a person proven by the fact that they experience the death of all those incarnations combined when the source is destroyed.
Also proven by the fact that <Gavuel> (Source self destruction) releases an infinite amount of magic power which a random person doesn't have. Where does the infinite magic come from then? It's coming from the magic power of all infinite incarnations.
By the way both of these things are in the OP which you would know about if you even bothered to read it

 

[PrinceofPein]

2. Dependent Concepts: Such concepts are abstract and govern all reality within their area of influence. These concepts shape everything, and changing them would either require the alteration of every object of the concept or, if manipulated directly, change all objects of the concept alongside the concept itself. These concepts, however, exist simultaneously with and are bound by the object of the concept.

except if you alter the existence of the person totally, their source is unaffected, with type 2, altering all the objects underneath them means the concept itself changes. And the OP seem to claim that altering the person or the person dying does not affcet their source, even though the sources also get destroyed after death.

It is not necessary to have more than one object that 'participates' in this concept for it to be type 2, the sources are said to be a 'fundamental concept of existence', and see my explanation.

your explanation ignores all I said

Also in the OP it was already shown that it was confirmed by CM experts on the wiki that a concept linked to an object itself.
in addition to also having Dereck's comment just above yours explaining this.

Btw that was me and Planck answering very general question, and only type 2 is the concept linked to the object, type 1 the object is linked to the concept but the concept is not

No, it doesn't this is objectively false, the platonic archetype of a vase does not govern anything but a vase, it makes 0 sense for us to use the relationship between concept and reality rather than a concept and the thing it governs, as the latter implies the concept has any impact upon reality greater than just the existence of what the concept is the concept of.
Reality in this context objectively means the thing the concept is the concept of, cease and desist.

No actually reality in this case means space or a place.
I do not even know how platonic archetypes entered this discussion, and what you said makes absolutely no sense.

Personal concepts would only be type 3 if they did not meet the requirements of the other two types, which is just not the case here.

Again personal cocepts are simply type 3, you cannot spin this away. Concept that governs a very specific thing is type 3.

Scale doesn't matter with concept types, this is cap. The only thing that determines their type is their relationship with what they are the concept of.

You should really read the page.
1. A place or space in which the concept governs all objects participating in the concepts and also independent of that reality no matter the level it exist at (level here means dimension or plane)

That isn't how that would work, there can be a platonic form of [Insert person here], but that does not make that form not type 1, because it still has the properties that type 1 concept displays.

Good thing platonic concepts are no longer some sort of superior concepts.
Also please read the type 3 part of the page cause you just keep going south and no one here as mentioned platonic concepts I really do not even know how they found their way here, sounds like something ChatGPT would answer as

Pein this refutation only works if what the source governs is all humanity as opposed to individual existence.

actually if it governs all of humanity then you have an argument for type 2 or type 3, not the other way around

The reality the source governs is an individual's existence, the reality it participates in is that same individual's existence not all of humanity.

So a personal concept?

When I asked about this I specifically mentioned it governing a single object and the reply I got went beyond what I was expecting saying that "Scale" and "Range" of the concept doesn't matter.

But here you have something called specific scale, which would be type 3.

The example you gave me for this was the concept of darkness.
Taking this your example, this concept will govern darkness be it planet wide even darkness in the whole universe. This concept is still governing something specific just like the source governs an individual's existence. The issue is there's actually some kind of bias in your mind that makes the concept of darkness seem not specific because of how large "darkness" is in scale as opposed to one individual. This will apply all the same to the concept of light, specific colors, water, air etc.

For the concept of darkness to be type 1, it would govern all darkness in its area of influence, it is not bias, you keep ignoring the fact that sources are just personal concepts and govern a very specific something on a very specific scale, the darkness part will not apply to this.
Also Can you count darkness? or can you look at darkness and say that is 1 darkness? so how is darkness specific to a single darkness? Governing one object inside a reality is far different from governing a personal object.

Even going by the definition of type 3 concepts

Lesser Fundamental Concepts: Concepts that don't meet the same standards as Type 1 or Type 2, such as personal concepts that continue to govern the object in question, merely on a more specific scale, or concepts whose nature is not elaborated upon. Case-by-case specifications and explanations are necessary for such concepts and examples, and they are likely not going to meet the same standards for abilities such as High-Godly regeneration that other concepts may. Conceptual manipulation of this type can be resisted by those who resist sufficiently similar abilities, even if the exact mechanics may differ.

The page doesn't say "personal concepts can only be type 3", it says that if they don't meet the criteria in type 1/2 and their nature isn't elaborated upon, then they should be classified as type 3. In the case of the source, forget about meeting the standard for type 2, it meets the criteria for type 1. It's nature is also elaborated upon.

it says concepts that do not meet the criteria for type 1 and 2 such as (Meaning examples of concepts that do not meet the criteria for type 1 and 2) then continue to list those criteris which the source simply qualifies for here

The source governs an individual existence and is independent of it. It's not affected by any change to that existence, isn't erased by the erasure of that existence.
Split the source will split the body mind and soul and fusing the source back together fuses all 3 as well with no need to perform the action on the other 3.
The biggest supporting factor here is that the source is equivalent to Fire Dew. It predates universal reality and is unaffected by the destruction of universal reality.

What is the fire dew point again? I did not read the whole thread.

Also only one person should be replying opposition at a time, getting tagged by three or four people for the same messages kind of makes someone lose interest

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

except if you alter the existence of the person totally, their source is unaffected, with type 2, altering all the objects underneath them means the concept itself changes. And the OP seem to claim that altering the person or the person dying does not affcet their source, even though the sources also get destroyed after death.

Sources won't gets destroyed no matter what unless a character intentionally destroys it. Source is Unbound by time & death. Character dying doesn't mean their sources gets destroyed.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Sources won't gets destroyed no matter what unless a character intentionally destroys it. Source is Unbound by time & death. Character dying doesn't mean their sources gets destroyed.

saw something in the OP that says otherwise and the OP clarified that it was the order of reincarnation something. who do I believe?

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

saw something in the OP that says otherwise and the OP clarified that it was the order of reincarnation something. who do I believe?

There is no scan in OP states dying would destroy the source. It's Other way around. If you destroy the source character would die. But character dying won't destroy the Source.

You can confirm below scan for my claims. Anos died by hands of time God who has CM type 1 time manipulation. His body was erased our of existence by aging him. His source was unaffected by that affect.

The Scythe of the Timekeeper merged with his arm wreaked havoc on the temporal state of my body.

“Vanish in the eternity of time.”

Silver light enveloped me, and time accelerated. A billion—ten billion—no, an eternity repeated before me in a single instant. Not even the Demon King’s body could last forever. Eventually, it would wither and disappear.

By the time the light exploded, the body that had acquired an eternity of time had vanished—and died.

“Bwa ha ha! Well? What do you have to say now, foolish founder? Fate cannot be altered. This moment was decided from the moment I became immortal—no, from the moment you fled from war two thousand years ago!”

Hmm. So he’d finally revealed his true colors.

“I’m not sure how you’ve retained your memories after your past was erased, but it seems you haven’t forgotten me after all, Ivis.”

I placed my hand on his shoulder from behind.

Slowly, Ivis turned in disbelief. “H-How...? You were dead. I’m sure of it...”

Ivis had been born right as the war came to an end. He may have been a demon of the Mythical Age, but he didn’t know true magical warfare.

“Did you really think killing me was enough to make me die?”

Ivis activated his Magic Eyes. But there were no tricks to it—I had indeed died just now.

“Don’t act so surprised. I merely used Ingall.”

“You cast magic...with your source alone?! Without using a single drop of blood...”

Even if the physical body perishes, the source of one’s power remains. Those who have mastered magic are able to cast spells with only their source—making feats like reincarnation possible. Resurrection could be performed as long as the magic was cast within three seconds of death.

 

[PrinceofPein]

There is no scan in OP states dying would destroy the source. It's Other way around. If you destroy the source character would die. But character dying won't destroy the Source.

You can confirm below scan for my claims. Anos died by hands of time God who has CM type 1 time manipulation. His body was erased our of existence by aging him. His source was unaffected by that affect.

it is in the OP, you need to cast that magic for ressurection before your source gets deestroyed after death.

2.) During the last attempt at this, the major argument against the upgrade as stated by knowledgeable member @imZer0Null was

When a person dies by almost any means, e.g. by being decapitated or by having their physical body destroyed, their source and consciousness will remain for a short while (presumably at least 3 sec, tho we've seen more powerful characters remain as only a source for a longer time), before "ascending to heaven and dying".
If they cannot resurrect or reincarnate themselves via magic, it is said to be equivalent to source destruction. This is because their source changes form, changes power, and loses memory, essentially becoming a different source, before it governs the person's existence when they are naturally reborn.
In short, the source is slightly independent from the object it governs, that being a person's existence, but when a person dies, the source changes form and governs the naturally reborn person's existence, meaning it basically changed which object it governs.
Therefore, it is not completely independent from the object it governs and does not qualify as a type 1 concept.

Firstly, don't get me wrong, what he stated is absolutely correct but something is missing from all this and that's the Order of Reincarnation.

This means it is due to the order of reincarnation that the sources do not get destroyed when the person themself dies, meaning they are not independent of the person they govern.
Anyway it is not a hill I am willing to die on as that is not my point, just something worth mentioning.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

it is in the OP, you need to cast that magic for ressurection before your source gets deestroyed after death.

This means it is due to the order of reincarnation that the sources do not get destroyed when the person themself dies, meaning they are not independent of the person they govern.
Anyway it is not a hill I am willing to die on as that is not my point, just something worth mentioning.

Order of reincarnation will be upgraded to CM type 1 for being great order of Militia World ( well too busy with other things)

Anyway we are talking about existence itself not specific persons Existence.

 

[Fixxed]

it is in the OP, you need to cast that magic for ressurection before your source gets deestroyed after death.

This means it is due to the order of reincarnation that the sources do not get destroyed when the person themself dies, meaning they are not independent of the person they govern.
Anyway it is not a hill I am willing to die on as that is not my point, just something worth mentioning.

Yeah that will contradict with the scan on novel, even if it 2000 years later the root is not "die"

二千年前に転生した魔族は多いはずだ。まだ転生できていない根源が、虚空を彷徨うことにもなりかねない。
There must be many demons that were reincarnated two thousand years ago. The roots that have not yet been reincarnated may end up wandering in the void.
-WN CHAPTER 423

 

[PrinceofPein]

Yeah that will contradict with the scan on novel, even if it 2000 years later the root is not "die"

I am just following what the OP said, that is who you should be addressing tbh and not me
@Tatsumi504

 

[Tatsumi504]

it is in the OP, you need to cast that magic for ressurection before your source gets deestroyed after death.

You're clearly misunderstanding

This means it is due to the order of reincarnation that the sources do not get destroyed when the person themself dies, meaning they are not independent of the person they govern.

No, the source isn't destroyed when a person dies, neither is it destroyed because they failed to reincarnate neither is it because of the order of Reincarnation that it isn't destroyed.

The Order of Reincarnation only exists in the militia world in the first place. All it does is enable one to keep their memories, power after reincarnating.

"If the fire dew is lost, life will be lost in the bubble world. Isn't it possible that the residents who were supposed to be reincarnated will be reborn in another world?"
...
"Why don't you bring back the fire dew? They have their lives too."

"What do you mean? Their life ends when they die. It's just a matter of starting a new life in a new world. It's just a different person with the same origin."
...
"Returning fire dew to the bubble world is a foolish act that erases life. Bubbles will eventually disappear. Throwing life into it is like returning a fish that has finally reached the sea to the land again. It may be different from your world's beliefs, but that's the principle of the Silver sea."

Instead of denying me, Ottorlou said gently.

"It's a very lucky thing for the life that fire dew crosses the world. It's a proof that they were blessed by this sea."

If the bubble world will surely perish, then there is certainly a point.

Fire Dew is a force that exists across the entire Silver Sea and is equivalent to the "Order of Life-force", or the term "Source" in the world of mortals.

Fire Dew
Something that flows through the Fundamental Laws Cyclic Garden, the domains of the Four Fundamental Laws Gods, equivalent to the term "Source" in the world of mortals. It is born, deepens, meets its demise, changes and cycles back to birth again, gradually decreasing its total amount in the process.

A visualization of the laws that affect the "Source" of the earth, which flows in the depths of the "Azure Sky of the Gods". It is the very power itself that the world contains, and the strength of the world's order is approximately equivalent to the total amount of fire dew that it contains.

Fire Dew predates reality, is unaffected by the destruction of reality and causes the destruction of reality if exhausted. Source= Fire Dew

 

[Tatsumi504]

I am just following what the OP said, that is who you should be addressing tbh and not me
@Tatsumi504

When I said @imZer0Null statement was correct, it wasn't referring to the source being destroyed upon an individual's death. Everything else has been addressed above

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

Snip.

As @Planck69 said Fire dew qualify for CM type 1. Fire dew is Source of the reality/bubble meanwhile all living as same thing which is root. That's why equivalent term is used.

 

[Planck69]

As @Planck69 said Fire dew qualify for CM type 1. Fire dew is Source of the reality/bubble meanwhile all living as same thing which is root. That's why equivalent term is used.

I said it likely would based on what I've seen of the scans. It's not a direct endorsement. Just thought I should make this clear.

 

[PrinceofPein]

stuffs

I mean the scans for Fire Dew being a type 1 concept
Also the scan that it predates reality.
And also clarify, the fire dew is the source for laws and the domain of gods?
Those three will be a start for CM type 1, if source is said to be equivalent to it, then at least now you have a good argument, all the rest should be a supporting argument

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

I said it likely would based on what I've seen of the scans. It's not a direct endorsement. Just thought I should make this clear.

Yeah i get your point but fire dew definition clear cut matches type 1 concept explanation as per how wiki page states. It governs the reality of the world at the same time it's Unbound by it.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

I mean the scans for Fire Dew being a type 1 concept
Also the scan that it predates reality.
And also clarify, the fire dew is the source for laws and the domain of gods?
Those three will be a start for CM type 1, if source is said to be equivalent to it, then at least now you have a good argument, all the rest should be a supporting argument

Yeah fire dew is CM type 1.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Yeah fire dew is CM type 1.

read this and I am not seeing the CM type 1.

 

[Theglassman12]

@Fixxed You do understand what governing reality means right? The concept in question has to have some control or effect over reality for it to qualify for type 2 concept at bare minimum. Even if you're the abstract concept of death, death has an effect on reality itself, same with being the concept of fate or the concept of time as they all by default have governing control over reality unless the series heavily contradicts that.

@Tatsumi504 You do realize listing personal concepts as an example doesn't refute my point that it's a type 3 concept right? If this personal concept doesn't have some control over reality like what type 2 or 1 has, then it doesn't go beyond type 3.

Yeah sure, I'm dishonest when I'm literally using the page where the first line on both type 2 and type 1 concepts literally says they govern reality. How about you give me the evidence that the source governs reality instead of labeling me random names?

Yeah, so nuking the source in the past results in the infinite lives in the future going away because the source is gone, a classic time paradox because the source no longer exists for them to reincarnate into. Infinite magic also doesn't mean shit here as it has nothing to do with erasing someone across time and space.

 

[DaReaperMan]

I disagree for Glass' reasonings

 

[Dog3352]

I disagree for Glass' reasonings

Shouldn't you change your vote here? Agreeing with the source being a Type 1 concept would go against you agreeing that the source is a Type 3 concept.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

Shouldn't you change your vote here? Agreeing with the source being a Type 1 concept would go against you agreeing that the source is a Type 3 concept.

He didn't agree with type 1 concepts though... He said he disagreed because of Glass' reasons

Anyways disagree FRA if that wasn't obvious.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Shouldn't you change your vote here? Agreeing with the source being a Type 1 concept would go against you agreeing that the source is a Type 3 concept.

I don't think so

 

[Dog3352]

I don't think so

Don't think what?

He didn't agree with type 1 concepts though... He said he disagreed because of Glass' reasons

Disagreeing with Glass and disagreeing with the OP, he is arguing against the CRT.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Don't think what?

Did I stutter?

 

[Dog3352]

Did I stutter?

Imagine stuttering in writing? You would probably need a doctor, or you would be writing a story if you stuttered while writing.
Good, since I didn't hear you say anything, I'm not sure.

 

[Theglassman12]

@Dog3352 tone down the condescending attitude towards Reaper. If he votes to disagree on a CRT then he disagrees, simple as that.

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

Yeah, so nuking the source in the past results in the infinite lives in the future going away because the source is gone, a classic time paradox because the source no longer exists for them to reincarnate into. Infinite magic also doesn't mean shit here as it has nothing to do with erasing someone across time and space.

Your Ignorance and reading comprehension always hits me.

Here he didn't destroyed the Source he wounded it which was affecting his infinite future incarnations. If you still want to be dishonest go on. Show me where it's stated destroyed?. Its clearly show it affects completely reality of wherever source exists.

“Now do you understand? Having your source wounded is an agony worse than death. Condensing every imaginable pain in this world into one would still be incomparable. After all, the deaths of your infinite number of future incarnations are occurring all at once.”

With my fingertip, I applied a light wound to his source.

“Agh, graaaaaagh... Gaaaaaaaaaaaah!”

Tears and saliva dripped down Diego’s face, but he paid them no mind as he screamed like a beast.

 

[Tatsumi504]

read this and I am not seeing the CM type 1.

Will explain later. Sorry for not being active. Had a hectic day.

 

[Tatsumi504]

Yeah, so nuking the source in the past results in the infinite lives in the future going away because the source is gone, a classic time paradox because the source no longer exists for them to reincarnate into.

Glass, explain how the deaths of all those infinite incarnations are actually occurring

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

Glass, explain how the deaths of all those infinite incarnations are actually occurring

The fact he said nuked where scan says something else shows he never bothered to read actual evidence provided by us. Yeah a great way to evaluate a thread by a staff.

 

[mal]

that mean sasha+misha=1 root existed in present and they go to the past to combined with their past root right?

 

[EldemadeDityjon]

I disagree for Glass' reasonings

Just saying buddy Glass never bothered to read the scans it seems.

This is not happening by time paradox nowhere it states source got destroyed in past. Glassman made that thing up his own dishonesty. It's clearly mentioned as wounded which means it's still not destroyed. Just affecting it in the present is affecting all of the characters infinite incarnations at once.

I scratched the white orb with my nails.

“G-Gaaaaaah! Guwaaaaaaaaaaahhh!”

His screams were louder than the cries of a dying man.

“Now do you understand? Having your source wounded is an agony worse than death. Condensing every imaginable pain in this world into one would still be incomparable. After all, the deaths of your infinite number of future incarnations are occurring all at once.”

With my fingertip, I applied a light wound to his source.

“Agh, graaaaaagh... Gaaaaaaaaaaaah!”

Tears and saliva dripped down Diego’s face, but he paid them no mind as he screamed like a beast.

 

[Fixxed]

@Fixxed You do understand what governing reality means right? The concept in question has to have some control or effect over reality for it to qualify for type 2 concept at bare minimum. Even if you're the abstract concept of death, death has an effect on reality itself, same with being the concept of fate or the concept of time as they all by default have governing control over reality unless the series heavily contradicts that.

First, explain the "reality" in your mind

And even if you say it mean the world, destroy root already destroy the person's future, it literally mean affect the world