• 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.

Remove Transduality from Monitor-Mind The Overvoid

Status
Not open for further replies.
If the Overvoid named itself after the flaw then it would only qualify for Type 1 Nonduality, if at all.
I agree that Type 1 Nonduality is the only viable possibility, but right now we're trying to decide if it should get Type 1 Nonduality or not. Right now, Myself, Elizio, Lawyer, and DDM are against it, but Ant thinks it should likely have Type 1. Would you consider yourself neutral, or are you willing to take a firmer stance one way or the other to help wrap this up?
 
you need qualitative superiority for transduality, not nonduality
Yes, but the Overvoid still forms a duality with the flaw which is everything that the Overvoid is not and had to contain it.
Thanks for the input. I suppose this can be applied then, @Elizio33
I don't mind for adding type 1 nonduality
 
I have unlocked the page. Tell us here when you are done please.

 
Do you mean a footnote explanation for why the Monitor-Mind does not have it listed? If so, yes that seems like a good idea.
 
What about: Although Monitor-Mind has been described as nondual several times in the story and by the author, it has been decided that the context of Monitor-Mind distinguishing itself from the flaw which is everything that Monitor-Mind is not, provides evidence that the Overvoid is outside of dual systems without transcending them. Therefore, do not attempt to upscale Monitor-Mind The Overvoid to higher levels than Nonduality (Type 1).
 
What about: Although Monitor-Mind has been described as nondual several times in the story and by the author, it has been decided that the context of Monitor-Mind distinguishing itself from the flaw which is everything that Monitor-Mind is not, provides evidence that the Overvoid is outside of dual systems without transcending them. Therefore, do not attempt to upscale Monitor-Mind The Overvoid to higher levels than Nonduality (Type 1).
The correct formatting for Type 1 Nonduality is [[Nonduality]] (Nature 1, Aspect 1; <JUSTIFICATION>). Why does Monitor-Mind have Type 1 Nonduality again, remind me?
 
The correct formatting for Type 1 Nonduality is [[Nonduality]] (Nature 1, Aspect 1; <JUSTIFICATION>). Why does Monitor-Mind have Type 1 Nonduality again, remind me?
Well, personally, i think that what Morrison meant by non-dual when describing Monitor-Mind is that the Overvoid represents nothingness, where there are no dual concepts because, well, it's nothingness and nothing exists in such a state, while the flaw represents existence encompassing concepts unfamiliar to Monitor-Mind such as love, hate, life, death, heroes, villains. It's basically non-existence and existence or nothing and everything if you prefer. I would understand why it still does not qualify for non-duality type 1
 
We could say it like this, and keep it a bit briefer:

Although Monitor-Mind has been described as nondual by the story and author, the relationship between the Overvoid and the Flaw is portrayed as a duality itself. As such it has been decided that this does not meet our criteria for non-duality.
 
We could say it like this, and keep it a bit briefer:
I agree I would just add on the part: "the relationship between the Overvoid and the Flaw is portrayed as a duality representing nothing and everything."

What do you think?
 
If that's what we're going with, Nonduality would have to be removed entirely when we add the note, not merely relegated to Type 1.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top