- 4,523
- 2,242
Others too, but yeah
-
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.
Nasuverse Discussion Board (New Forum)
- Thread starter DemonGodMitchAubin
- Start date
Ubdon
He/Him- 636
- 279
Both are based tho
- 1,152
- 1,330
Haha Nasu and your Funny GenderBends , although Gil , Ozy , King Hassan etc being a chad is W
- 5,343
- 6,087
Bradamante is underrated.
- 39,668
- 15,591
- 1,152
- 1,330
I liked her design and personality but some ppl said it was generic or annoying.
she still has a cool mecha like armor tho
- 39,668
- 15,591
Peoples who said that are just for hate sake and ignoring the other servants that way generic and annoying than her
- 1,152
- 1,330
personally I would say she was overshadowed by Morgan and her fairy knights. They are a very big deal cause of LB6 so yeah , tough competition
- 947
- 363
It actually does. But to clarify, Apophatic is the western/christian equivalent of what she would be to eastern/taoism. The cultural foundation is different, they aren't the same, even if equivalent. "She" is Wuji.
Not really. She's not quantifiable, to begin with. And, as she said herself, as the whole is "nothingness", a part or the whole are literally indistinguishable. And it wouldn't even make sense to say she downscales, because she is the only appearance of "The Root" ever, what would she downscale from, herself?
Tdjwo
He/Him- 3,175
- 1,298
If you only see a part of nothingness, what would it be? Nothingness. Simple as that. Void Shiki is a part of nothingness as she is still the whole of Nothingness. Just because we see only a part of nothingness(Void Shiki) doesnt mean she's disconnected from the whole Nothingness. So yeah, it doesn't disprove her being apophatic.
Last edited:
- 947
- 363
I would even say "part" of Nothingness is something that would make no sense, actually. Nothingness is ONE thing. All nothingness are one nothingness. The very limitation of "part", in the realm of nothingness, doesn't exist. If it had a part, it wouldn't be Nothingness.
The problem with Apophatic and taking "she's apophatic" as a direct statement instead of a comparison is that Apophatic ultimately derives from a religious view of a God that transcends his creation (God = Creation + Something OR God > Creation). Taoism view is very much the opposite I would say, in that this "nameless thing" is immanent in the creation itself (Wuji = Creation). (Adn there would the a third type, the Kabbalah-like Immanent Transcendence, but that is even weirder than simple Immanence)
Basically, you cannot apply western/christian foundations to a work that from the very start basis itself in something else. "Kami" may be translated as God(s) but it doesn't mean it carries the same semantical baggage as the word God, for one easy example that I think is very easy to understand.
Last edited:
Tdjwo
He/Him- 3,175
- 1,298
The thing is, Taoism directly references apopathic theology to its nature and even uses the very word and characteristics.
About Nothingness and Void Shik, I was merely trying to simplify it. For example, If you are in a dark maze, everywhere is dark but you can only see a section of the darkness not the wholeness of it despite the particulalr section being amomgst the wholeness of the darkness. It's the same with Void Shiki. The Shiki we see is still Nothingness as a whole but we are only seeing a certain part of it through her. So claiming that her existence contradicts negative theology because she has descriptions is wrong.
- 25,632
- 15,962
Off-topic but does anyone know what crimson’s new PFP is from?
- 4,523
- 2,242
I’m getting a bunch of conflicting accounts. On the one hand she doesn’t scale to the root and is only an aspect of it, and on the other she apparently does scale to it cause she is it…what the ****
- 947
- 363
Taoism precedes Apophatic Theology by hundreds of years, how could it reference it?
- 947
- 363
She can't be an "aspect of Nothingness" in the way you are trying to use the word because that would imply Nothingness isn't Nothingness.
I gave the quote, Nothingness = free from binary opposition. Part and whole is a binary opposition. Nothingness has no parts, Nothingness is one and can only be one, unless it is smoething else because it has some type of quality.
- 4,523
- 2,242
Yet Theoretical says that she is more like an avatar rather than the literal thing:
Besides, this is fiction. It's pretty weird to say that it's illogical to be an aspect of nothingness when that isn't even remotely true to begin with, especially in a medium like this.
- 4,523
- 2,242
That doesn't make much sense. As the person above me said, Taoism is older than Apophatic Theology to my knowledge.
- 947
- 363
- 842
- 511
I don't think she's apophatic at all sjes just connected to something Apopathic which leads to her scaling to be somewhat equivalent even, when she's not apopathic which is still not a contradiction to apophatic theology.
And I'm pretty sure I only said physical manifestion of it, not that she's physically "it", considering that she's in a vassel that material and not immaterial.
- 947
- 363
And I would add that the Root is defined by the fact it is a place of potentiality, not actuality, therefore a "physical" Root is literally a contradiction of what it says it is.
- 842
- 511
Potentiality in what sense? As in how the Taoist view Dao to be? Ever changing? I don't think that would apply to the ineffable aspect of the Root but I'll wait for you to elaborate.
I think the only contradiction here is actually assuming void shiki even with her physical aspects scales to the root, an Apopathic being can never be a "material being".
When I say physical manifestion I don't mean to say the root is physical, it's to say this being that's seemingly connected now exists in a vessel that's material and part of the material world. It appears to be more of a contradiction to assume she's the root in all aspects when she's a material being and all material things are confined by spatial and temporal limitations, so I guess the root would have limitation that would be grand but it can't be because you're providing a positive description for it being as such which is self defeating to it being "ineffable.
That's why in Tao, Dao that can be spoken a different aspect of God is distinguished from dao that cannot be spoken off because the latter is ineffable. That's why God can be said to have an aspect of wholeness but that not be a contradiction to God being ineffable because that's a different aspect of God, while the ineffable aspect of God strictly cannot be spoken off, hence when we say God is everywhere in everything we don't contradict the Ineffable aspect of God because the aspect of God that can be spoken off is not the aspect of God that cannot be spoken of which the latter is God's in his truest sense.
- 947
- 363
You don't even have to go that far, it's literally what Void Shiki says. "Where all things are in potential", 100% potentiality. "and therefore where nothing is whatsoever", 0% actuality.
She's not, though. Void Shiki is a "personality" of the Body, she's not the body. She even says the body is a hollow notional husk.
And anything/everything is self-defeating to being ineffable. Even being called ineffable is a positive description. Apophatis is a self-defeating thesis like that. It admit that it fails, and starts from there.
Problem is you just gave a positive description of the ineffable part of God, as an opposite/complementary part of the part of God that can be spoken of. It therefore isn't ineffable. And that's why to use apophasis you have to begin by accepting you are failing.
Last edited:
- 842
- 511
Where does "all things are in potential" come from I only remember her saying where everything is provided hence there is nothing, I mean ye there's nothing because it's nothingness lmao.
Also where everything is, is like the wholeless aspect of God/akashic recorded the issue here is ineffability which is seperate from that.
I didn't say she's the body, I said if we take her to be the root hyper-literally her having a material vessels puts limits spatial and temporal limits upon her, the root is supposed to limitless atleast within the context of the nasuverse which is seems self defeating.
I also find it odd how something that's supposed to lack properties and alll attributes seemingly has "personality" now, which is another contradiction to negative theology.
It's not, in contemporary apophasis God the wholeness of God is treated as seperate from the Ineffable aspect of God.
That's why we have the ineffability thesis which is invoked in the nasuverse (why the root is referred to as " ", otherwise it wouldn't have negative theology because negative theology is not negative theology and without the ineffability thesis.
It's not, it can only be considered self-defeating to people who haven't studied it enough.
No.
No.
No.
- 4,523
- 2,242
I mean, it kind of is a contradiction. If a non-Apophatic entity can scale, Al being downscale, to something apophatic, then that apophatic being can therefore be quantified which would be against the very meaning of apophasis
- 947
- 363
I gave the link in one of the post above. It's KNK Epilogue. Here
It's just not. The setting literally doesn't care for that thesis.
She has always been Wuji . If you can't differentiate the analogy from the original, don't use analogies...
Therefore, the ineffable aspect of God is defined as the separate part. It's not so ineffable. This is simple, tautological logic. Come on.
Quotes where said thesis is invoked. People have used of analogy so much that they are mistaking the analogy for the original.
You seem to think you studied it enough, but you keep defining something you say is "ineffable" without even seeing you are doing so... If it's so ineffable, the only answer you should be able to provide is absolute silence. (Which was an answer used, both in Taoism and Christianity, actually.)
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
- 4,523
- 2,242
He already addressed this though. I fail to see why you keep using this as an argument
Rakih_Elyan
He/Him- 4,408
- 3,041
I will bring apophatic to staff discussion thread later, shit will be same as omnipotent and tier 0 R>F.
- 5,343
- 6,087
W tbh
- 5,343
- 6,087
You misspelled goku.
- 4,523
- 2,242
Funny way of spelling goku
- 4,059
- 1,713
wait, so a non apophatic being can be scaled to an apophatic being....? that is weird.
- 947
- 363
No he didn't. His "adressing" of it is a description in disguise.
- 4,523
- 2,242
That's a pretty weird argument.
Ubdon
He/Him- 636
- 279
It's fine Goku has many names and titles after soloing every verse that exist
- 6,034
- 3,061
Since nobody have bothered to post it I will do it, new permament servant, Kashin Koji
She is able to loop with BG
And 3 turn Kiara
She is able to loop with BG
And 3 turn Kiara
- 39,668
- 15,591
It's funny that we got two GudaGuda servants that aren't from it's own event
Wonder what are they gonna releasing in GudaGuda 2023
- 4,059
- 1,713
if you get isekaied and you get to choose one nasuverse hax, what will it be? Note: Void shiki's ability is not allowed since it allows you to access ALL the hax. You can have only 1
