Removal of God of War's "Type 1 Concept Manipulation"

[Deagonx]

Hello.
This is the current justification for the "Type 1 Concept Manipulation" that many GoW characters currently have: "Souls are constructs of magic, composed of their form, the metaphysical nature of a being, their luck, their mind and their direction." A broader explanation of the composite elements in the lore are given on this page.

Spoiler: Old Argument

Souls​

Concepts in our standards are an embodiment of -- or higher ultimate form of -- something that exists in individual instances in the world. You might have various evil people in the world, but the "concept" of evil is the abstraction: literally evil itself. To achieve "Type 1" status -- as described in our standards -- the concept must be independent of the part of reality it governs. This is in contrast to "Type 2" where the existence of the concept is tied to its "particulars." So if no one in the world is evil, the "concept" of evil also ceases to exist. That wouldn't happen for Type 1

With that explanation in mind, it's pretty much impossible for every single person's soul to represent a Type 1 concept, or even a Type 2 concept. Each individual soul cannot be a governing abstraction, and none of the evidence suggests souls are concepts at all in the first place. To review the evidence:

Souls are composed of their form, that is the metaphysical nature of a being, their luck, their mind, and their direction, which guides their path to their respective afterlife as per Mimir's words[6].

That's not what the video says. The video only says that souls have four parts: Form, mind, direction, and luck. It does not describe form as "the metaphysical nature of a being" nor does it describe direction as "guiding their path to a respective afterlife." Perhaps such a quote exists somewhere but not here. So that would be removed at a minimum until/unless that description of a "form" can be found.

The Light of Alfheim is a power that existed before the creation of the Nine Realms[6] (Even before Odin) and has gathered souls towards it since the beginning of creation[6]. As such, we have confirmation that souls exist even in the absence of space and time and are thus independent as far as their nature goes.

Souls -- in almost any setting -- exist in the absence of space and time. They are almost definitionally a non-physical thing. Non-physical does not mean "governing concept" or even "concept." Ghosts are not concepts.

Magic​

Later, the argument is made that magic itself is a sort of governing abstraction, by saying that magic is what the "Primordials" are made of, and the Primordials page claims that they are some universal governing concept here:

• Conceptual Manipulation (Type 1) (The Primordials predate the universe and time, having existed in the primordial realm of Chaos,[4] and were responsible for creating the entirety of theGreek World and all of its contents, be it physical or non-physical.[5] The universe itself was created[6]by[3]one of[7]them,[7] and they would exist long after it is reduced to chaos.[8] The Primordials are the literal concepts of the aspects of nature and reality that they represent[9] and are also synonymous with magic, which is itself a fundamental aspect of existence that predates, governs and exists independently of reality)
• Abstract Existence (Type 1) (The Primordials hold a more fundamental existence relative to their domains than gods, who are aware of all that would ever occur within their domains across time and space and are ever present throughout them.[10] The aspects of the world the Primordials embody are merely the physical forms of their true non-physical selves.[1] Primordials and equivalent forces are also synonymous with magic, which is itself a fundamental aspect of existence that predates, governs, and exists independently of reality)

However, there are some massive issues with this. The main one is that... the actual parts of these justifications that speak to any of our standards for Type 1 Concept Manip are just plain text, not scans, and none of the claims within them are reflected in any of the scans being linked elsewhere. For instance:

The Primordials are the literal concepts of the aspects of nature and reality that they represent[9] and are also synonymous with magic, which is itself a fundamental aspect of existence that predates, governs and exists independently of reality)

Here we are told the Primordials are "the literal concepts of the aspects of nature and reality that they represent." Well, you'd expect that after such a lofty claim that the "they represent scan" would... say some of this? But it doesn't, literally it is just a picture of the four Primordials alongside their names, from an art book.

and they would exist long after it is reduced to chaos.

This is a tweet from one of the writers of the series, but... boy, where do I even start. First, the guy asks if certain dimensions reached through a portal -- not the Primordials themselves -- would cease to exist after the fall of Zeus. Second, she says "I doubt they would disappear." Our rules on author statements prohibit using such a statement:

Regarding direct information from the author/creator of a character: We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera. Brief or vague answers to fan-questions via social media are also generally disregarded, whereas more elaborate explanations in serious interviews are usually considered more reliable.

The Primordials hold a more fundamental existence relative to their domains than gods, who are aware of all that would ever occur within their domains across time and space and are ever present throughout them.

Again, the core claim here that primordials "hold a more fundamental existence relative to their domain than gods" is entirely unsourced. Moreover, the claim that gods are "aware of everything that occurs in their domains across time and space and are ever present throughout them" links to a scan that -- again -- doesn't say any of that! It just involves Kratos getting a bunch of visions of war across history while he climbs the stairs to becoming the god of "war," and says "time and space are different for the gods." Never says that gods are "ever-present" through their domains.

The "synonymous with magic" link just goes to the "magic system" explanation page that was gone over above, and the claims made in that segment are similarly unfounded. None of the evidence speaks to magic being a "fundamental aspect of existence" nor one that "governs or exists independently of reality." At best we just know magic predates the nine realms.


The section of the Magic Explanation page attempting to link Primordials and Magic simply says this:

Whereas Greek magic originates from even before the birth of Cronos, and thus time, being used by the Primordials, in their war and is in turn responsible for their very existence as much as anyone else's (as magic/the soul/life force is one and even Chaos herself, the conceptual source of all that exists in the Greek World, is the Primordial of Life[14]).

Again, no evidence of this. The Cronos hyperlink just links to his page, the Primordials just links to their page, and the "Primordial of Life" is just the aforementioned concept art.

TL;DR and Final Conclusions:
1) No evidence exists to suggest that souls or magic are concepts. They are non-physical, but that's not the same thing as being a governing abstraction.
2) The evidence for Primordials being concepts is non-existent. Perhaps it is out there somewhere, but it is absent from any of the pages about them.
3) Interacting with individual instances of something (like a single person's soul amongst many souls) pretty much definitionally cannot be Type 1 Concept Manip.

I am open to the idea that some of these claims actually have evidence somewhere but their conspicuous absence on all of the pertinent justifications makes me inclined to think not. The whole thing reads like a giant house of cards built on smoke, mirrors, and half-truths.

Reminder that this is a staff discussion thread. Due to the inherent complexity of Type 1 CM and the amount of information involved, as well as the inherent controversy of removing such an ability from a well known verse, it is impractical for this to be a normal CRT. Non-staff members seeking to provide their input should ask a thread moderator for permission first.

I've blocked away the main post, as ultimately the verse supporters have said that there is a single scan that justifies viewing the Primordials and -- by extension -- magic and souls as concepts. A large sum of the above is extraneous. If you need to decide on anything, it is this scan:

To quote Planck:

I call it a concept because it behaves as such; Gaia is the earth itself but is herself "formless", "yet lacking in substance" and "an inchoate spirit" who directly influences the earth, her specific aspect.

Being "formless" "lacking in substance" or an "inchoate [not fully developed] spirit" do not have anything to do with whether or not Gaia is a "concept." As such, the ability should be removed.

EDIT: These two pieces of information have since been clarified by the opposition to be contributory towards magic/souls being concepts.

1) Primordial forces are similar in multiple pantheons (the Greek primordial fire in Kratos' blades works for the Norse Surtr)
2) Souls dictate one's physical shape.

My feelings on this are the same as above. This information just very plainly does not have anything to do with proving magic is conceptual.

Tally:

Agree: Mr. Bambu, Deagonx, CrimsonStarFallen. Antvasima, Firestorm808
Disagree: Planck69, Theglassman12, KingTempest, DarkGrath, Emirp Sumitpo, DemonGodMitchAubin, Elizhaa, LordGriffin1000, Abaddon
Neutral: DarkDragonMedeus

 

[Deagonx]

@Ultima_Reality @DarkGrath @Firestorm808 @CrimsonStarFallen @Qawsedf234 @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @KLOL506 @Eficiente @Antvasima @Mr. Bambu @Wokistan

As always, feel free to ignore the ping. This matter is considerably more complex than the earlier threads. In any case however I feel it may be relatively simple regardless of the fine details, as interacting with souls can't actually be "Type 1 Concept Manip" regardless of if the souls are ultimately instantiations of magic, even if magic were indeed a "fundamental essence independent of reality" which, well, it really doesn't appear to be in the first place.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I do not enjoy being conscripted in the crusade, least of all for something like this. Still, I will take a gander when I can.

 

[Planck69]

I'm not in the mood at all to get too far into this given how these threads have gone so I'll make my overall case in this post and ping all the staff who participated in the original thread.

Hello.

This is the current justification for the "Type 1 Concept Manipulation" that many GoW characters currently have: "Souls are constructs of magic, composed of their form, the metaphysical nature of a being, their luck, their mind and their direction." A broader explanation of the composite elements in the lore are given on this page.

It really isn't. It's a shorthand for the explanations on the page itself. Type 1 Conceptual Manipulation comes from the nature of magic in the setting as a whole. The justification reads as such because we've established in a prior CRT that souls are just constructs of magic/life energy, interchangeable terms.

Souls​

Concepts in our standards are an embodiment of -- or higher ultimate form of -- something that exists in individual instances in the world. You might have various evil people in the world, but the "concept" of evil is the abstraction: literally evil itself. To achieve "Type 1" status -- as described in our standards -- the concept must be independent of the part of reality it governs. This is in contrast to "Type 2" where the existence of the concept is tied to its "particulars." So if no one in the world is evil, the "concept" of evil also ceases to exist. That wouldn't happen for Type 1

With that explanation in mind, it's pretty much impossible for every single person's soul to represent a Type 1 concept, or even a Type 2 concept. Each individual soul

Once again, this isn't the core idea regarding why souls are this level of concept in the first place, but merely part of it, as I've said above. Anyways;

That's not what the video says. The video only says that souls have four parts: Form, mind, direction, and luck. It does not describe form as "the metaphysical nature of a being" nor does it describe direction as "guiding their path to a respective afterlife." Perhaps such a quote exists somewhere but not here. So that would be removed at a minimum until/unless that description of a "form" can be found.

The Form is treated as such because it shapes the physical form of a being, that is changes in said soul are reflected in their bodies. This is showcased with Garm, in which his initial appearance visibly changes after Atreus seals Fenrir's soul in him, and actually shifts to resemble the late wolf, unique furpatches and all.

Direction guides a being's soul to its respective afterlife, as this is what is talked about in the case of Brok, who lost his Direction after initially being resurrected and no longer being able to make his way to his people's afterlife, the Lake of Souls.

Souls -- in almost any setting -- exist in the absence of space and time. They are almost definitionally a non-physical thing. Non-physical does not mean "governing concept" or even "concept." Ghosts are not concepts.

To quote the explanation page itself;

The Light of Alfheim is a power that existed before the creation of the Nine Realms and has gathered souls towards it since the beginning of creation.

The independence to be observed here is that not only can they exist absent of space and time, but predate them entirely. This seems to assume that the case for them being concepts is once again, solely reliant on this fact. It isn't. It's just establishing a fact about souls, so this reponse is a non-sequitir more than anything.

Also, no we do not assume souls are just unbound by space and time by default, what? This entire part feels like a response for a response's sake.

Magic​

Later, the argument is made that magic itself is a sort of governing abstraction, by saying that magic is what the "Primordials" are made of, and the Primordials page claims that they are some universal governing concept here:

However, there are some massive issues with this. The main one is that... the actual parts of these justifications that speak to any of our standards for Type 1 Concept Manip are just plain text, not scans, and none of the claims within them are reflected in any of the scans being linked elsewhere. For instance:


Here we are told the Primordials are "the literal concepts of the aspects of nature and reality that they represent." Well, you'd expect that after such a lofty claim that the "they represent scan" would... say some of this? But it doesn't, literally it is just a picture of the four Primordials alongside their names, from an art book.

The scan there is just linking up the Primordials with the specific domain they possess. The idea that this is just the sole scan is also laughable given there was an entire re-clarification thread when the same assumption about their justifications was brought up. To save people's time, I'll just paste the same scans and arguments that were made there.

• The Primordials; specifically their Conceptual Manipulation (Type 1) and Abstract Existence (Type 1) are better detailed here. Frankly, the use of just the image was goofy so better to have it all detailed.
  
  • The Primordials predate the universe and time, given that they existed in the primordial realm of Chaos, with the universe itself having been created by one of them, and would exist long after it is reduced to chaos.
  • Chaos, and the primordial forces within it, predating time is something common across pantheons. The Ginnungagap, or Spark of the World, is the void that preceded Ymir's existence and thus time and space, being where chaos and order meet much like how the order was brought to Chaos by Uranus creating the universe. Sutr himself reminds us that the origin of primordial magic doesn't matter and holds the same nature regardless of mythical origin.
  • They are responsible for creating the entirety of the Greek World and its contents, be it physical or non-physical, being the literal concepts of the aspects of nature that they represent. Primordial forces are also synonymous with magic, which itself is an Independent Universal Concept that predates time and exists throughout all of the reality of a given pantheon.
  • Holding a more fundamental existence relative to their domains than gods, who are aware of all that would ever occur within their domains across time and space and are ever present throughout them, the aspects of the world they embody are merely the physical forms of their true non-physical selves. This I especially feel should've been elaborated better, given some of the aspects (Ourea with Mountains, Ceto with the Oceans), were not as abstract as others (Thanatos with Death, Morpheus with Dreams).

Again, the core claim here that primordials "hold a more fundamental existence relative to their domain than gods" is entirely unsourced. Moreover, the claim that gods are "aware of everything that occurs in their domains across time and space and are ever present throughout them" links to a scan that -- again -- doesn't say any of that! It just involves Kratos getting a bunch of visions of war across history while he climbs the stairs to becoming the god of "war," and says "time and space are different for the gods." Never says that gods are "ever-present" through their domains.

The scan's point is that Kratos's awareness spans the domain of war entirely, and that he is aware of everything that occurs involving it. With "every place war is fought or will ever be fought" being his kingdom. This is a matter of deducing what happens from the scan. A common thread throughout most of this argument is that you seem to refuse to engage with the context of a scan and would instead assume that what's posted is what you expect to see stated verbatim else it is false.

Specifically, the last part of the paragpraph, which is what I assume you have the most issue with, is explained in the last scan in that paragraph. Gaia, a Primordial, is of the earth, the earth itself yet herself an incorporeal embodiment. This is not the same as the gods, who definitely are not literally their domains.

The "synonymous with magic" link just goes to the "magic system" explanation page that was gone over above, and the claims made in that segment are similarly unfounded. None of the evidence speaks to magic being a "fundamental aspect of existence" nor one that "governs or exists independently of reality." At best we just know magic predates the nine realms.

This is once again something addressed at the very start of the page.

In the case of Runic Magic, it is older than the entirety of the Nine Realms and existed in the Ginnungagap as a primordial essence from which Ymir and everything else spawned.

For one thing, Surtr himself reminds us that the origin of primordial magic doesn't matter[12], and indeed, this same magic takes the place of Sinmara's heart to allow Surtr to become Ragnarok. This magic originates from Greece and persists after the latter's destruction within the Blades of Chaos.

What's being stated isn't "all primordials are magic". It's that all primordial forces are the same in nature across pantheons, and from what we know, said forces are magic. It's a deduction from information we have, a deduction you may not agree with sure, but information that is present all the same.

The section of the Magic Explanation page attempting to link Primordials and Magic simply says this:

Again, no evidence of this. The Cronos hyperlink just links to his page, the Primordials just links to their page, and the "Primordial of Life" is just the aforementioned concept art.

Yes. The art that is just used to show what each Primordial represents. Since Chaos represents life and life is synonymous with magic, as established on the first section of the explanation page. To repeat it;

There's always been a tie between magic, the soul, and life-force, which can be seen in multiple instances. Vanquishing enemies with runic magic allows one to harness their life force, the term "Soulsteal" is about taking the life force from one's opponents, and an alchemist experimented with runic magic to increase their lifespan. When Andvari, a dwarf, loses his body to a Soul Eater, Brok theorizes that a sliver of magic is still within his ring and indeed, the ring proves to be sentient and houses a remnant of his soul.

Even in the Greek World, godly power was the same as life energy, one's power and mind are empowered by absorbing life force from fallen foes, and Hades' magic considers draining one's soul and one's life force as synonymous. The god in question absorbs souls to become stronger, so one can see that magic, life force, and the soul are one. This would mean that the soul is but a construct of magic/life energy.

This is the part that's foundational to everything here. Ceto is the Oceans, Uranus is the Heavens, Ourea is the Mountains and Chaos is Life. Life that, as showcased above, is one and the same as magic in the setting. So the entity that predates all of time and space, and is the source of everything in the Greek reality, is life/magic much like in the same way Gaia is the earth itself and not just a manifestation or its embodiment.

TL;DR​

• Life, souls and magic are synonymous, as the first section of the explanation page asserts. That this section is not touched a single time by OP, I will assume there isn't any disagreement here.
• Primordial forces/magic are the same across pantheons and both predate reality. This again, isn't denied by the OP, so I will take the liberty to assume it also isn't an issue.
• The scan regarding the Primordials is solely to showcase who represents what (Uranus-Heaven, Ceto-Ocean, Ourea-Mountain, Chaos-Life). With the scan of Gaia from the novelization showcasing while they fully are what physical they represent, they're true state is incorporeal and inchoate. Hence their abstract existence.
• Summing all of that up, magic predates time, as well as all beings in the Greek world, abstract or otherwise, being what Chaos truly is, and influences all of it. This is partly due to being the source of the other Primordials, but also due to sharing the same nature across pantheons with Norse runic magic, which flows through the entirety of the Nine Realms and is drawn from their very makeup. Souls, whose form aspect shapes the physical state and nature of a person, are also made up of said magic.

That is the sum total of my explanation as to why magic is a Type 1 concept and thus souls as well. I am quite frankly tired of the needless drama these threads cause, so I will just ping everyone who participated in the initial threads to upgrade this and let this come to a staff vote. Respond if you want to to this whole thing.

And frankly, can you stop it with these types of comments? Suggesting something discussed over two threads is wrong is one thing but calling it "smoke and mirrors" and insinuating that I've either pulled the wool over the evaluating staff's eyes or something is tasteless.

@KingTempest @Elizhaa @Theglassman12 @Dereck03 @UchihaSlayer96 @LordGriffin1000 @Maverick_Zero_X

 

[Planck69]

However, as this doesn't address the Evils or Hope, I assume that those are a non-issue so Kratos and Zeus would still keep the ability should it be removed. Just a general heads up.

 

[Theglassman12]

Yeah gonna have to disagree with this thread, at best the explanations from the abilities themselves might need some rework but I’m not really convinced with the arguments here that this wouldn’t scale in any way.

 

[Deagonx]

That's, naturally, quite lengthy. I'd like to avoid a giant text war that discourages thoughtful consideration or voting. What needs to be established about souls, and magic, is that A) They are concepts, not simply not physical, and B) That each individual soul is a "governing concept" of something that can persist even if all of its instantiations are eliminated. Fortunately, the section of your response that addresses this is relatively short.

Yes. The art that is just used to show what each Primordial represents. Since Chaos represents life and life is synonymous with magic, as established on the first section of the explanation page. To repeat it;

This is the part that's foundational to everything here. Ceto is the Oceans, Uranus is the Heavens, Ourea is the Mountains and Chaos is Life. Life that, as showcased above, is one and the same as magic in the setting. So the entity that predates all of time and space, and is the source of everything in the Greek reality, is life/magic much like in the same way Gaia is the earth itself and not just a manifestation or its embodiment.

Art of their names and what they are gods/goddesses of shouldn't be placed in a section where we're supposed to put evidence of them being conceptual. Is this "Gaia is the earth itself" scan meant to be the main evidence for them being concepts? If so, what information within it is meant to establish that Gaia is a concept? It says:

THE EARTH SHOOK, as if shivering with a tremendous fever. Giant cracks appeared along entire continents, and small mountains rose as Gaia's spirit stirred. Formless, of the earth, the earth, and yet lacking in substance, she stretched and began to take note of the world as it had become after the war with the gods.

She had realized then the chance for power had returned, just beyond her grasp, but growing nearer by the instant. For a Titan, time was meaningless, and yet she had to abide since it was so important to the short-lived mortals. Worse, time had ceased to have meaning because her physical form had been ripped away, leaving behind only inchoate spirit.

Okay, where is the part that calls her a concept or describes her in such a way that we'd conclude that she is a concept? A god's physical form being the earth itself does not mean that it is a governing concept.

Moreover, if the argument for primordials and magic being identical is "life force is magic, and Chaos represents life" then that leaves us with no explanation for how the rest of the primordials, who do not represent life, would somehow also be considered identical to the thing that Chaos is identical (making him being the one that represents life somewhat meaningless)

 

[Deagonx]

Yeah gonna have to disagree with this thread, at best the explanations from the abilities themselves might need some rework but I’m not really convinced with the arguments here that this wouldn’t scale in any way.

I am not clear on what your stance is. The issue is that none of the scans describe any of these things as being concepts, just non-physical things which is typical for deities, souls, and magic of any kind. I'm not clear on what you are disagreeing with. What scans are you claiming do establish this and how?

 

[Planck69]

Art of their names and what they are gods/goddesses of should not be placed in a section where we're supposed to put evidence of them being conceptual.

I feel that establishing what Chaos and the others specifically represent is important to do, given it's tied to the explanation at hand.

Is this "Gaia is the earth itself" scan meant to be the main evidence for them being concepts? If so, what information within it is meant to establish that Gaia is a concept? It says:

Okay, where is the part that calls her a concept or describes her in such a way that we'd conclude that she is a concept? A god's physical form being the earth itself does not mean that it is a governing concept.

The point here is that she in her incorporeal state behaves exactly as a concept would based on the earth. She is the earth as a whole (the object) and influences its existence in a non-physical aspect due to being "formless", "yet lacking in substance", "an inchoate spirit" (the concept), that's independent of reality (she predates time and space entirely). It's a showcase of how independent universal concepts would act and thus induced that she is abstract on that level. No different from how other settings do not use the word "concept" verbatim but get the point across in terms of portrayal.

Moreover, if the argument for primordials and magic being identical is "life force is magic, and Chaos represents life" then that leaves us with no explanation for how the rest of the primordials, who do not represent life, would somehow also be considered identical to the thing that Chaos is identical (making him being the one that represents life somewhat meaningless)

The rest of the primordials are Type 1 Abstracts and concepts independent of that reasoning as things stand. They have that due to the same reason Gaia has that. They're independent of reality as they predate it, truly exist as a non-corporeal true state that influences the domain (which is the object in this case) they govern (due to being of a similar nature to Gaia), and everything exists within their specific domains.

That and the fact that primordial forces are implied to be of the same nature across pantheons by Surtr. So even the above aside, they would be of a similar nature to the primordial essence within the Ginnungagap, which is said to be magic by Surtr.

I hope this is sufficient and if not, at least gives enough to be judged by further evaluating staff.

 

[Deagonx]

I feel that establishing what Chaos and the others specifically represent is important to do

It's fine to include it, but as it stands thats literally the only scan in their CM justification. There needs to be scans establishing them as concepts in the first place, not just concept art describing what 4 out of like 12 Primordials are gods of.

The point here is that she in her incorporeal state behaves exactly as a concept would based on the earth. She is the earth as a whole (the object) and influences its existence in a non-physical aspect (the concept), that's independent of reality (she predates time and space entirely). It's a showcase of how independent universal concepts would act and thus induced that she is abstract on that level. No different from how other settings do not use the word "concept" verbatim but get the point across in terms of portrayal.

What parts of the scan -- as you see it -- describe Gaia as "influencing its existence in a non-physical aspect?" Also, why is Earth being envisioned as a "particular" here when it is explicitly described as her physical form? I am not getting any of that out of the scan, and it's not clear how you are.

It's not enough to just state what you believe the scan proves, you have to explain how it proves those things with regard to the text itself. How we get from A to B here is entirely opaque.

They're independent of reality as they predate it, truly exist as a non-corporeal true state that influences the domain (which is the object in this case) they govern (due to being of a similar nature to Gaia), and everything exists within their specific domains.

That and the fact that primordial forces are implied to be of the same nature across pantheons by Surtr. So even the above aside, they would be of a similar nature to the primordial essence within the Ginnungagap, which is said to be magic by Surtr.

Again, I'm already aware of what your claims are, I am trying to figure out what evidence indicates them. At the absolute minimum we would need to switch out the existing scans with ones that actually reference your claims like Primordials "govern" things or that they "influence their domains." Is it just the Gaia scan? Are there any other scans that -- in your view -- actually establish any of these gods or any of these forces (life, magic, souls) as concepts?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I am personally thinking Planck's arguments are making most sense.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Don't expect me to leave an evaluation on this thread, because I really don't want to go down this rabbit hole, but I'll be keeping track of the votes, at the very least.

Current Tally-

Agree: Antvasima, Mr. Bambu, Firestorm808, Deagonx, CrimsonStarFallen
Disagree: DarkGrath, Elizhaa, LordGriffin1000, Planck69, Theglassman12, KingTempest, DemonGodMitchAubin, Emirp sumitpo, AbbadonTheDisappointment
Neutral: DarkDragonMedeus

As per usual, bolded names indicate evaluating staff. If you need your position changed, feel free to let me know

 

[Deagonx]

I am personally thinking Planck's arguments are making most sense.

Which arguments, exactly? I'm not clear yet on what evidence he believes establishes the primordials as concepts, let alone type 1. Can you explain your view on it?

 

[Planck69]

Which arguments, exactly? I'm not clear yet on what evidence he believes establishes the primordials as concepts, let alone type 1. Can you explain your view on it?

For goodness sake, I'll re-detail my argumentation for that part specifically here for everyone to see cause that seems to be the main hang up at this point.

The Primordials are;

• Independent of reality: The clearest part, given they predate the universe and time as a whole. The scans from the comic books posted in my first response and the explanation pages explain as much.
• Govern part of reality: Their specific aspect as far as the setting goes, which that artbook scan lists, that's all. Also, I'm not sure where you're getting 12 Primordials from. We know of Chaos, Ceto, Uranus, Ourea, Gaia, Morpheus and Thanatos and you could potentially contest the latter two. There aren't any others within the setting and we're not assuming so from mythology without proof.
• Concept: This seems to be the most contested part and it's once again, it is that scan with Gaia. I call it a concept because it behaves as such; Gaia is the earth itself but is herself "formless", "yet lacking in substance" and "an inchoate spirit" who directly influences the earth, her specific aspect.

This seems less like a matter of there not being evidence, but rather disagreement that it is sufficient. Which is perfectly fair but that isn't absence of evidence. It's that novel scan and whether or not it is good enough support for the rating for the Primordials can be voted for and discussed.

 

[KingTempest]

With planck's explanation here

• The Primordials; specifically their Conceptual Manipulation (Type 1) and Abstract Existence (Type 1) are better detailed here. Frankly, the use of just the image was goofy so better to have it all detailed.
  
  • The Primordials predate the universe and time, given that they existed in the primordial realm of Chaos, with the universe itself having been created by one of them, and would exist long after it is reduced to chaos.
  • Chaos, and the primordial forces within it, predating time is something common across pantheons. The Ginnungagap, or Spark of the World, is the void that preceded Ymir's existence and thus time and space, being where chaos and order meet much like how the order was brought to Chaos by Uranus creating the universe. Sutr himself reminds us that the origin of primordial magic doesn't matter and holds the same nature regardless of mythical origin.
  • They are responsible for creating the entirety of the Greek World and its contents, be it physical or non-physical, being the literal concepts of the aspects of nature that they represent. Primordial forces are also synonymous with magic, which itself is an Independent Universal Concept that predates time and exists throughout all of the reality of a given pantheon.
  • Holding a more fundamental existence relative to their domains than gods, who are aware of all that would ever occur within their domains across time and space and are ever present throughout them, the aspects of the world they embody are merely the physical forms of their true non-physical selves. This I especially feel should've been elaborated better, given some of the aspects (Ourea with Mountains, Ceto with the Oceans), were not as abstract as others (Thanatos with Death, Morpheus with Dreams).

TL;DR​

• Life, souls and magic are synonymous, as the first section of the explanation page asserts. That this section is not touched a single time by OP, I will assume there isn't any disagreement here.
• Primordial forces/magic are the same across pantheons and both predate reality. This again, isn't denied by the OP, so I will take the liberty to assume it also isn't an issue.
• The scan regarding the Primordials is solely to showcase who represents what (Uranus-Heaven, Ceto-Ocean, Ourea-Mountain, Chaos-Life). With the scan of Gaia from the novelization showcasing while they fully are what physical they represent, they're true state is incorporeal and inchoate. Hence their abstract existence.
• Summing all of that up, magic predates time, as well as all beings in the Greek world, abstract or otherwise, being what Chaos truly is, and influences all of it. This is partly due to being the source of the other Primordials, but also due to sharing the same nature across pantheons with Norse runic magic, which flows through the entirety of the Nine Realms and is drawn from their very makeup. Souls, whose form aspect shapes the physical state and nature of a person, are also made up of said magic.

I disagree

 

[Deagonx]

Independent of reality: The clearest part, given they predate the universe and time as a whole. The scans from the comic books posted in my first response and the explanation pages explain as much.

This is not evidence that they are conceptual. Do you understand that? The "independent of the reality they govern" just means they don't persist only when their particulars persist, and determines what type of concept they are. Predating the universe doesn't support something being a concept.

Govern part of reality:

What scan do you believe establishes this, and how?

Concept: This seems to be the most contested part and it's once again, it is that scan with Gaia. I call it a concept because it behaves as such; Gaia is the earth itself but is herself "formless", "yet lacking in substance" and "an inchoate spirit" who directly influences the earth, her specific aspect.

Being "formless" and "lacking in substance" doesn't make Gaia a concept, and being a spirit does not make Gaia a concept. The earth is called her "physical form" and that also doesn't establish that Gaia is conceptual. Being a spirit with a physical form is not evidence of something being a concept.

 

[Deagonx]

With planck's explanation here

I disagree

Sorry, can you clarify what you think the best evidence is for souls/primordials being concepts are, and why it justifies them being Type 1 concepts? It seems our standards are being misunderstood, so I'd like to get to the bottom of this.

 

[Theglassman12]

I am not clear on what your stance is.

I literally said I disagree with the thread, I don't see how that's somehow not clear enough. You keep saying that none of these things remotely explain concepts and magic but I find it hard to take your point seriously when you haven't refuted every single point Planck has made and only commented on Gaia at best.

 

[Deagonx]

I literally said I disagree with the thread, I don't see how that's somehow not clear enough.

Typically staff members are expected to explain their disagreement or at the very least reference an argument against the thread. At that point in time you had not.

I find it hard to take your point seriously when you haven't refuted every single point Planck has made and only commented on Gaia at best

Then you haven't followed the discussion closely enough to comment on it. Planck's own admission is that the other information is extraneous. The single scan he is using to argue that Primordials are conceptual (which was not present in any of the GoW pages, curiously) is the Gaia scan, on the basis that it calls Gaia "formless" and "lacking in substance" and a "inchoate spirit."

None of those descriptions speak to Gaia being a concept. If you have some idea of how they would, please feel free to explain it. If not, I'll focus my energy on those who do.

 

[Theglassman12]

Why do they have to explain their disagreement when the opposition already summarized their points in the first place? By this logic none of the folks in the prior threads you're a part of remotely counts for votes when all they did is just say "I agree" and they don't elaborate on their points.

So like how you didn't follow the description on how souls work and assumed direction doesn't have anything to do with leading one to the afterlife despite Brok's soul being a thing? I can easily invalidate your point by the fact that you didn't actually look into the games if we're going by that logic of "you didn't pay attention to the argument therefore you can't comment on the scenario". Also no Planck did not only talk about Gaia being conceptual when he's bringing up the Ginnungegap and how the Primordials in Greece function in the first place, Gaia's just the extra description on how her being is in the first place. So yeah, I'm still waiting for the full refute on all of Planck's points because only tackling one part of his entire response isn't doing you any favors here.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that Planck69's arguments seem to make better sense here. My apologies, Deagonx.

However, I am not the best person to ask about this topic.

 

[Deagonx]

Why do they have to explain their disagreement when the opposition already summarized their points in the first place? By this logic none of the folks in the prior threads you're a part of remotely counts for votes when all they did is just say "I agree" and they don't elaborate on their points.

A proposal already explains its reasoning and justification, which is why agreeing with it is sufficient. If one is disagreeing, they are expected to explain why or reference another person's argument. You did not, which is why I said your stance was unclear, because it was.

So like how you didn't follow the description on how souls work and assumed direction doesn't have anything to do with leading one to the afterlife despite Brok's soul being a thing?

You're mistaken. I didn't "assume direction had nothing to do with leading one to the afterlife." I pointed out -- correctly -- that the linked scan didn't say this.

Also no Planck did not only talk about Gaia being conceptual when he's bringing up the Ginnungegap and how the Primordials in Greece function in the first place, Gaia's just the extra description on how her being is in the first place.

Nothing he said about the Ginnungegap was provided as an explanation for something being conceptual, and all that he said about Primordials' function is that they are timeless. Timeless does not mean conceptual. Please don't recite another person's arguments without knowing their contents or purpose. It's just cluttering the thread.

I think that Planck69 seems to make better sense here. My apologies, Deagonx.

Ant, this is a far more egregious case than I believe you realize. You understand that as it is, interacting with any human's soul constitutes "Type 1 Concept Manip" and that the sole basis for believing anything in this verse is conceptual (let alone "Type 1") is a single scan describing a deity as "formless" and "lacking in substance" and that this scan wasn't even in the existing justification, which as of making this thread, was just a link to concept art?

This is one of the worst justifications for Type 1 CM I've ever seen, and it is sure to be removed. Alternatively we'll just have to do a revision on our CM page to better clarify what kind of evidence is needed for something like that, so that these sorts of errors aren't made in the future.

 

[Theglassman12]

That doesn’t explain shit when someone making an entire refute and then others following up with “I disagree with the thread” is enough, the fact you need the opposition to go through this many hoops despite it being very clear as day on why they’d disagree is plain stupid.

You made a comment about the scans and how they don’t talk about the directions having anything to do with the afterlife despite there being actual evidence with Brok being clear as day example of that, again that same logic can be applied to you because you didn’t look into the full context, so don’t pull this stunt on me if you think that’s enough to invalidate my point, especially when this is a staff only thread and I have the right to make a vote here.

So we’re just ignoring the actual CRTs that argued for the CM1 in the first place where we have more arguments there in the first place. You do know that has little to do with the argument being flimsy and more just the base description on the pages being not as in depth as the CRT was. Saying that it’s the worst reasoning when you know clear as day that there’s more arguments than on the pages isn’t really fair and sounds more like you’re nitpicking what’s on the pages rather than the full argument itself.

 

[Deagonx]

That doesn’t explain shit when someone making an entire refute and then others following up with “I disagree with the thread” is enough, the fact you need the opposition to go through this many hoops despite it being very clear as day on why they’d disagree is plain stupid.

I didn't ask anyone to "jump through hoops." All I did was ask what the basis of your disagreement was. This is not a challenging task.

You made a comment about the scans and how they don’t talk about the directions having anything to do with the afterlife despite there being actual evidence with Brok being clear as day example of that, again that same logic can be applied to you because you didn’t look into the full context

The justifications as-written are supposed to provide all of the evidence for something being true. The routine failure to do this is not my responsibility, rather, the responsibility of the people writing these justifications without providing the appropriate evidence on any of the profiles or verse pages.

So we’re just ignoring the actual CRTs that argued for the CM1 in the first place

No, if you read my OP you'd see that I addressed every single piece of evidence from that thread, which is what made it into the justifications in the first place. Apparently a second thread was made with the "Gaia" scan that the entire verse's CM is dependent upon, but that was never added to the justification, which is why at the moment the CM ability just shows a picture of concept art without any scans that actually show any of them being conceptual.The Gaia scan doesn't either, of course, but if that was the basis for it, it should have been in the justification.

Now, none of this has actually pertained to the topic at hand. If you're insistent on continuing with these matters, feel free to take it to my wall. This thread will surely be complicated enough without this kind of derailing.

 

[Planck69]

Man, what the heck did I wake up to?

Typically staff members are expected to explain their disagreement or at the very least reference an argument against the thread. At that point in time you had not.


Then you haven't followed the discussion closely enough to comment on it. Planck's own admission is that the other information is extraneous. The single scan he is using to argue that Primordials are conceptual (which was not present in any of the GoW pages, curiously) is the Gaia scan, on the basis that it calls Gaia "formless" and "lacking in substance" and a "inchoate spirit."

None of those descriptions speak to Gaia being a concept. If you have some idea of how they would, please feel free to explain it. If not, I'll focus my energy on those who do.

Deagonx I can go back and reference no less than 5 threads where staff have agreed or disagreed with you with single sentences and you didn't hound them for explaining every little detail of their stance. And that's fine. But let's not act like this is a standard you hold yourself to regularly.

Wanting clarification is fine, as is wanting to explain yourself further. Insulting my ability to argue a thread, assuming that staff simply cannot comprehend what they agree with or insinuating I'm flying by the seat of my pants every time I say something you disagree with, less so.

This thread seems to have been overwhelmingly rejected so I think it can be closed just fine. I think can wait for Bambu to comment if nothing else since he wanted to but try to act less abrasive about agreements or disagreements from this point.

Edit: I've inquired about it and letting this last 48 hours would make more sense, I've been told. Better to let other staff vote.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

With the portal to hell I've opened elsewhere, my time for sustained debate on this thread may be very limited. Still, I said I would speak on it and so I will.

Hello.
This is the current justification for the "Type 1 Concept Manipulation" that many GoW characters currently have: "Souls are constructs of magic, composed of their form, the metaphysical nature of a being, their luck, their mind and their direction." A broader explanation of the composite elements in the lore are given on this page.

Spoiler: Old Argument

Souls​

Concepts in our standards are an embodiment of -- or higher ultimate form of -- something that exists in individual instances in the world. You might have various evil people in the world, but the "concept" of evil is the abstraction: literally evil itself. To achieve "Type 1" status -- as described in our standards -- the concept must be independent of the part of reality it governs. This is in contrast to "Type 2" where the existence of the concept is tied to its "particulars." So if no one in the world is evil, the "concept" of evil also ceases to exist. That wouldn't happen for Type 1

With that explanation in mind, it's pretty much impossible for every single person's soul to represent a Type 1 concept, or even a Type 2 concept. Each individual soul cannot be a governing abstraction, and none of the evidence suggests souls are concepts at all in the first place. To review the evidence:

That's not what the video says. The video only says that souls have four parts: Form, mind, direction, and luck. It does not describe form as "the metaphysical nature of a being" nor does it describe direction as "guiding their path to a respective afterlife." Perhaps such a quote exists somewhere but not here. So that would be removed at a minimum until/unless that description of a "form" can be found.

Souls -- in almost any setting -- exist in the absence of space and time. They are almost definitionally a non-physical thing. Non-physical does not mean "governing concept" or even "concept." Ghosts are not concepts.

Magic​

Later, the argument is made that magic itself is a sort of governing abstraction, by saying that magic is what the "Primordials" are made of, and the Primordials page claims that they are some universal governing concept here:

However, there are some massive issues with this. The main one is that... the actual parts of these justifications that speak to any of our standards for Type 1 Concept Manip are just plain text, not scans, and none of the claims within them are reflected in any of the scans being linked elsewhere. For instance:


Here we are told the Primordials are "the literal concepts of the aspects of nature and reality that they represent." Well, you'd expect that after such a lofty claim that the "they represent scan" would... say some of this? But it doesn't, literally it is just a picture of the four Primordials alongside their names, from an art book.


This is a tweet from one of the writers of the series, but... boy, where do I even start. First, the guy asks if certain dimensions reached through a portal -- not the Primordials themselves -- would cease to exist after the fall of Zeus. Second, she says "I doubt they would disappear." Our rules on author statements prohibit using such a statement:



Again, the core claim here that primordials "hold a more fundamental existence relative to their domain than gods" is entirely unsourced. Moreover, the claim that gods are "aware of everything that occurs in their domains across time and space and are ever present throughout them" links to a scan that -- again -- doesn't say any of that! It just involves Kratos getting a bunch of visions of war across history while he climbs the stairs to becoming the god of "war," and says "time and space are different for the gods." Never says that gods are "ever-present" through their domains.

The "synonymous with magic" link just goes to the "magic system" explanation page that was gone over above, and the claims made in that segment are similarly unfounded. None of the evidence speaks to magic being a "fundamental aspect of existence" nor one that "governs or exists independently of reality." At best we just know magic predates the nine realms.


The section of the Magic Explanation page attempting to link Primordials and Magic simply says this:

Again, no evidence of this. The Cronos hyperlink just links to his page, the Primordials just links to their page, and the "Primordial of Life" is just the aforementioned concept art.

TL;DR and Final Conclusions:
1) No evidence exists to suggest that souls or magic are concepts. They are non-physical, but that's not the same thing as being a governing abstraction.
2) The evidence for Primordials being concepts is non-existent. Perhaps it is out there somewhere, but it is absent from any of the pages about them.
3) Interacting with individual instances of something (like a single person's soul amongst many souls) pretty much definitionally cannot be Type 1 Concept Manip.

I am open to the idea that some of these claims actually have evidence somewhere but their conspicuous absence on all of the pertinent justifications makes me inclined to think not. The whole thing reads like a giant house of cards built on smoke, mirrors, and half-truths.

Reminder that this is a staff discussion thread. Due to the inherent complexity of Type 1 CM and the amount of information involved, as well as the inherent controversy of removing such an ability from a well known verse, it is impractical for this to be a normal CRT. Non-staff members seeking to provide their input should ask a thread moderator for permission first.

I've blocked away the main post, as ultimately the verse supporters have said that there is a single scan that justifies viewing the Primordials and -- by extension -- magic and souls as concepts. A large sum of the above is extraneous. If you need to decide on anything, it is this scan:

To quote Planck:

Being "formless" "lacking in substance" or an "inchoate [not fully developed] spirit" do not have anything to do with whether or not Gaia is a "concept." As such, the ability should be removed.

If it is accurate that this scan is the primary evidence for Conceptual Manipulation, I would agree that it is baseless to conclude this is Conceptual Manipulation. I would agree with the idea that literally no element of this points towards Conceptual Manipulation- only that if we were to take it as Conceptual Manipulation, it would fit the clinical definition of Type 1.

As such, I agree with the removal.

 

[Planck69]

@chosen There's no need for pinging a staff member needlessly. He's more than likely to have read that post.

 

[CrimsonStarFallen]

I've blocked away the main post, as ultimately the verse supporters have said that there is a single scan that justifies viewing the Primordials and -- by extension -- magic and souls as concepts. A large sum of the above is extraneous. If you need to decide on anything, it is this scan:

To quote Planck:

I'm actually fine with this being Abstract Existence, I just don't see why or how this correlates with souls being type 1 concepts. Even if you say that souls are made of magic, wouldn't everything be, at that point? Magic being the make-up of something shouldn't really indicate that thing being a concept.

 

[Planck69]

I'm actually fine with this being Abstract Existence, I just don't see why or how this correlates with souls being type 1 concepts. Even if you say that souls are made of magic, wouldn't everything be, at that point? Magic being the make-up of something shouldn't really indicate that thing being a concept.

This is specifically for the Primordials though. Like I said before, the reasoning for magic/souls and the reasoning for Primordials is largely independent of each other.

 

[Deagonx]

This is specifically for the Primordials though. Like I said before, the reasoning for magic/souls and the reasoning for Primordials is largely independent of each other.

Wait, what? In the relevant pages the claim that Chaos (a primordial) is life and that life is magic/souls, is the reasoning used. That's not independent at all.

Is there some other scan that is meant to show that magic is conceptual? If so, what is the scan and how does it show that magic is conceptual?

 

[Planck69]

Wait, what? In the relevant pages the claim that Chaos is life and that life is magic/souls is the reasoning used.

Is there some other scan that is meant to show that magic is conceptual? If so, what is the scan and how does it show that magic is conceptual?

Yes, this is true. But the main justification for Primordials specifically is what we've been talking about above. You had doubts as to why Chaos's nature would apply to the Primordials and I pointed out that on top of the Primordial forces being magic, the Primordials had their own reasoning for AE Type 1 and CM Type 1. Which you doubted and thus the whole discussion above.

It's why I'm partly confused as to the focus on this. It's as though the rest of the discussion got left behind.

 

[Deagonx]

The rest of the discussion was left behind because you repeatedly said that the sections directly about souls and magic were not the reason for Concept Manip. Ultimately what it came down to, in your own comments, was the Gaia scan and Chaos' alleged chain-link connection to souls. (Chaos is life, life is magic, magic is soul). Everything traced back to the claim that Primordials were concepts, which there is only one scan for.

If there is independent evidence that is meant to establish magic or souls as concepts, then please explain what that evidence is and how it supports the claim that magic or souls are concepts.

 

[Planck69]

The rest of the discussion was left behind because you repeatedly said that certain scans were not the reason for Concept Manip. Ultimately what it came down to, in your own comments, was the Gaia scan and Chaos' alleged chain-link connection to souls. (Chaos is life, life is magic, magic is soul).

If there is independent evidence that is meant to establish magic or souls as concepts, then please explain what that evidence is and how it supports the claim that magic or souls are concepts.

I discussed magic quite well above, do not assume I didn't repeatedly supply the scans for my arguments. You below, doubted why the Primordials would share that nature;

Moreover, if the argument for primordials and magic being identical is "life force is magic, and Chaos represents life" then that leaves us with no explanation for how the rest of the primordials, who do not represent life, would somehow also be considered identical to the thing that Chaos is identical (making him being the one that represents life somewhat meaningless)

And I responded. Everything specifically about magic, I answered in my first post. What followed was my response specifically regarding the Primordials in response to your query. Anyone on this thread can see that.

 

[Deagonx]

I discussed magic quite well above, do not assume I didn't repeatedly supply the scans for my arguments

Which scans are meant to establish magic as conceptual independently of Primordials? This is entirely unclear.

Everything specifically about magic, I answered in my first post. What followed was my response specifically regarding the Primordials in response to your query. Anyone on this thread can see that.

And everything you said about magic was that the scans being discussed weren't the basis for CM... which is why the discussion moved to being about primordials.

Is there a reason you have constantly avoided requests for clarification on your rational?

 

[Planck69]

Which scans are meant to establish magic as conceptual independently of Primordials? This is entirely unclear.


And everything you said about magic was that the scans being discussed weren't the basis for CM... which is why the discussion moved to being about primordials.

Is there a reason you have constantly avoided requests for clarification on your rational?

Avoided? I've linked repeated past threads, scans and explanation blogs. I've explained my rationale as to why Chaos is equitable to magic and souls on my first post and when asked about the Primordials, I explained the basic logic, twice.

I can only repeat myself so many times, and if you feel like because I've yet to satisfy some inane standards of yours then that's honestly on you.

I'm frankly sick and tired of this accusation every single time someone doesn't conform to whatever sort of thinking you seem to assume I should have. I can call more staff to vote and see, because I certainly don't think the five that agreed with my stance where reading a rationale that doesn't exist.

Be satisfied with this or don't. Respond or don't. I'm honestly done with this.

 

[Deagonx]

I've explained my rationale as to why Chaos is equitable to magic and souls on my first post and when asked about the Primordials, I explained the basic logic, twice.

I know, which is why we're discussing the Gaia scan in the first place!

You are now claiming, instead, that there is an independent basis for magic being conceptual that doesn't have to do with the primordials like Chaos. This is not something you've explained yet, at all. It's not in any of your earlier responses:

It really isn't. It's a shorthand for the explanations on the page itself. Type 1 Conceptual Manipulation comes from the nature of magic in the setting as a whole. The justification reads as such because we've established in a prior CRT that souls are just constructs of magic/life energy, interchangeable terms.

Once again, this isn't the core idea regarding why souls are this level of concept in the first place, but merely part of it, as I've said above. Anyways;

The Form is treated as such because it shapes the physical form of a being, that is changes in said soul are reflected in their bodies. This is showcased with Garm, in which his initial appearance visibly changes after Atreus seals Fenrir's soul in him, and actually shifts to resemble the late wolf, unique furpatches and all.

The independence to be observed here is that not only can they exist absent of space and time, but predate them entirely. This seems to assume that the case for them being concepts is once again, solely reliant on this fact. It isn't. It's just establishing a fact about souls, so this reponse is a non-sequitir more than anything.

You claimed the justification reads like it does because souls are magic which is life. Then you responded to other rebuttals by saying "that's not why we have concept."


Immediately after that, you bring up the Primordials and this is the only section of your comment that actually provides an argument for anything being conceptual.

The scan there is just linking up the Primordials with the specific domain they possess. The idea that this is just the sole scan is also laughable given there was an entire re-clarification thread when the same assumption about their justifications was brought up. To save people's time, I'll just paste the same scans and arguments that were made there.

• The Primordials; specifically their Conceptual Manipulation (Type 1) and Abstract Existence (Type 1) are better detailed here. Frankly, the use of just the image was goofy so better to have it all detailed.
  
  • The Primordials predate the universe and time, given that they existed in the primordial realm of Chaos, with the universe itself having been created by one of them, and would exist long after it is reduced to chaos.
  • Chaos, and the primordial forces within it, predating time is something common across pantheons. The Ginnungagap, or Spark of the World, is the void that preceded Ymir's existence and thus time and space, being where chaos and order meet much like how the order was brought to Chaos by Uranus creating the universe. Sutr himself reminds us that the origin of primordial magic doesn't matter and holds the same nature regardless of mythical origin.
  • They are responsible for creating the entirety of the Greek World and its contents, be it physical or non-physical, being the literal concepts of the aspects of nature that they represent. Primordial forces are also synonymous with magic, which itself is an Independent Universal Concept that predates time and exists throughout all of the reality of a given pantheon.
  • Holding a more fundamental existence relative to their domains than gods, who are aware of all that would ever occur within their domains across time and space and are ever present throughout them, the aspects of the world they embody are merely the physical forms of their true non-physical selves. This I especially feel should've been elaborated better, given some of the aspects (Ourea with Mountains, Ceto with the Oceans), were not as abstract as others (Thanatos with Death, Morpheus with Dreams).

The only scan within this that talks about them being conceptual, per your own clarification, is the Gaia scan. The reason this has anything to do with souls or magic is because of Chaos being the Primordial goddess of Life which is claimed to be magic and souls.

Now you're claiming to another mod that actually the reasoning for magic being conceptual is independent, and that this reasoning was clarified earlier. No it wasn't! No scans or reasoning were provided for magic being conceptual aside from this. You even concluded your argument by again connecting them to Chaos:

So the entity that predates all of time and space, and is the source of everything in the Greek reality, is life/magic much like in the same way Gaia is the earth itself and not just a manifestation or its embodiment.

 

[Deagonx]

Be satisfied with this or don't. Respond or don't. I'm honestly done with this.

If you don't want to provide your reasoning or scans, you don't have to, but it's unquestionable that you did not provide a separate justification for magic being conceptual. So with that, I will encourage people looking over this thread to focus on the only scan you have said is a justification for anything in GoW being a concept:

"Gaia's spirit stirred. Formless, of the earth, the earth, and yet lacking in substance." "An inchoate spirit."

That is the whole sum of evidence being used for anything in GoW being conceptual, and it.... has absolutely nothing to do with Gaia being a concept. If other scans are meant to be part of this justification, they've yet to be provided or explained and everyone voting against this thread has avoided explaining their reasoning despite numerous requests.

 

[Planck69]

Removal of God of War's "Type 1 Concept Manipulation"

Hello. This is the current justification for the "Type 1 Concept Manipulation" that many GoW characters currently have: "Souls are constructs of magic, composed of their form, the metaphysical nature of a being, their luck, their mind and their direction." A broader explanation of the composite...

vsbattles.com

I'm fairly sure that's not the only scan in this post, but eh, go off.

@Celestial_Pegasus @Abstractions @Starter_Pack @LordTracer

You're some of the only staff I've yet to call and are relatively neutral, so feel free to offer input to conclude this, one way or the other.

 

[Deagonx]

I'm fairly sure that's not the only scan in this post, but eh, go off.

Yes, but your own claim was that it was the only scan that served as a basis for something being conceptual. You repeatedly remarked that scans I was addressing simply were not the basis for Concept Manip, but the Gaia scan was.

If other scans are indeed meant to serve as a justification for something being a concept, what are they?

 

[Planck69]

Yes, but your own claim was that it was the only scan that served as a basis for something being conceptual. You repeatedly remarked that scans I was addressing simply were not the basis for Concept Manip, but the Gaia scan was.

If other scans are indeed meant to serve as a justification for something being a concept, what are they?

It is the scan that serves as a basis for being conceptual for the Primordials specifically. It keeps getting brought up because somewhere above you focused on them qualifying. That's all. If you can quote me saying all of my reasoning for the verse and not the Primordials hinges on that feel free.

Do you have an issue with my reasoning for Chaos? How I showcased the Form of a soul shapes a being's material self and nature? How life, magic and the soul are synonymous i.e. the entire first half of the explanation page for the ability you're removing? How Sutr says the Primordial forces are ultimately the same? I would assume not, given how 90% of your posts are about Gaia.

I'm happy to explain matters regarding the Primordials. Because I feel that I don't need to touch anything else given the foundational argument wasn't even touched by the original post and anything after that.

I'll wait for the vote. Call it smoke and mirrors and avoidance. I call it actually knowing my verse from beyond a Wikipedia page.