Soul Manipulation and The Real World

[Iapitus_The_Impaler]

Concepts that exist in our perception are very clearly real because we defined them. Concepts may be something we view and define, but they exist. The concept of oneself as she does it has to do with prescribed attributes to that concept anyway, so it would still apply. Either way its semantics

 

[The_Impress]

Wait, so the OP needs to state the equalization rules before making a versus match, right? That's what we're deciding on here?

If the OP doesn't do that, we follow the Standard Battle Assumptions for the versus thread.

SBA states:

Verse equalizatio: Similar supernatural aspects of verses get equalized in a reasonable fashion. So a supernatural energy that almost everyone in a Verse has, which is necessary to fight the characters of said Verse, will be assumed to be the equivalent energy that the opponents use in their techniques so that a proper fight can happen.

That's a ******* circle, ain't it?

 

[Wokistan]

Yeah so the match just doesn't happen if OP refuses to specify.

Also, it seems that Touhou characters that predate concepts have resistance to concept manip, which sets the precedent that these things are not equalized.

 

[Paulo.junior.969]

So, is the "everything has a soul unless stated otherwise" standard you guys use going to be changed? Legit asking.

 

[Agnaa]

Concepts that exist in our perception are very clearly real because we defined them. Concepts may be something we view and define, but they exist. The concept of oneself as she does it has to do with prescribed attributes to that concept anyway, so it would still apply. Either way its semantics

They don't necessarily exist, as Assalt could explain better.

 

[Wokistan]

Paulo, we don't know.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Yeah so the match just doesn't happen if OP refuses to specify.

Also, it seems that Touhou characters that predate concepts have resistance to concept manip, which sets the precedent that these things are not equalized.

Keep in mind those characters created said concepts later on down the road.

 

[Ogbunabali]

snip

What are you equalizing the soul to?

 

[Agnaa]

Yeah so the match just doesn't happen if OP refuses to specify.

Also, it seems that Touhou characters that predate concepts have resistance to concept manip, which sets the precedent that these things are not equalized.

This already happens with soul manipulation. If you're saying things should keep going the way they are, then your thread is pointless.

However, you want to change it so that verses that don't mention souls get soul manipulation resistance. Hence, verses without concepts get concept manipulation resistance, and so on.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Look, I'll just keep it simple.

It's infinitely easier and should've been less controversial to just assume everything has a soul unless proven otherwise than the alternative.

 

[Paulo.junior.969]

Paulo, we don't know.

Then, shouldn't you guys be discussing that? Seriously, I really don't care if souls actually exist irl or not, I just think the verse should follow the standard, so we really should be talking more about whether the "everything has a soul unless stated otherwise" should be used or not.

 

[Sera_EX]

So we're seriously going to verse equalize real life? Fine, whatever.

 

[The_Impress]

What are you equalizing the soul to?

Likely neuron signals. That is usually what soul manipulation in this wiki does, right?

 

[Wokistan]

Mainly the real world in this point. With real world proof standards, things with inconclusive evidence default to the negative, as a positive claim must first be proven. This would mean that IRL stuff would be treated as not having these things, meaning they do not equalize due to the concept of a soul being something very much mentioned in reality but never conclusively proven.

 

[Iapitus_The_Impaler]

@Agnaa

That depends on how you view concepts. If concepts are something that we define as opposed to preexisting, then they do exist, because we have defined it that way. Even if they are Arbitrary, they still technically exist. We defined the concept of extortion, that does not exist in nature, but the actions we have pinned under that label very much exist. I am gonna guess that he is gonna go for something like concepts are just an illusion, which I bypass by saying concepts don't work in a way that they can simply exist or not exist

 

[Ogbunabali]

Look, I'll just keep it simple.
It's infinitely easier and should've been less controversial to just assume everything has a soul unless proven otherwise than the alternative.

It being easier doesn't make it correct or an argument. And that is blatantly ignoring that the burden of proof is on you to prove they exist, as well as imposing a baseless assumption.

 

[Wokistan]

I have never heard of equalizing a soul to neuron signals. That would be mindhax territory.

 

[Agnaa]

So we're seriously going to verse equalize real life? Fine, whatever.

This website is about having fictional characters battle. If they battle real things, they should have the same movesets they have in fiction. Otherwise we're just matching up characters with their movesets slashed against real things.

 

[The_Impress]

I have never heard of equalizing a soul to neuron signals. That would be mindhax territory.

Idk, my religion equates the soul to that, in which soul is essentialy your involuntary fuctions controller

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

I'm 90% sure we're all thinking the same thing when we think of souls. We've all seen the same idea countess times in media. It's not complicated. This isn't matter of "muh, different things have different interpretations" because of my first sentence. There's no equalization. They're just assumed to have it. In the same way if I name a character with no descriptions, you'd assume they're coming with all of their limbs.

 

[Agnaa]

@Agnaa

That depends on how you view concepts. If concepts are something that we define as opposed to preexisting, then they do exist, because we have defined it that way. Even if they are Arbitrary, they still technically exist. We defined the concept of extortion, that does not exist in nature, but the actions we have pinned under that label very much exist. I am gonna guess that he is gonna go for something like concepts are just an illusion, which I bypass by saying concepts don't work in a way that they can simply exist or not exist

It does depend on how you view it, but concepts aren't necessary, and concepts aren't provable. Similar to souls for a certain extent. They should be treated similarly.

 

[Paulo.junior.969]

Btw, if I haven't made my opinion clear already, here's what I think:

If the "everything has a soul unless stated otherwise" continues to be used, then real life has souls, if we stop using that standard, then it doesn't.

 

[Wokistan]

We already don't equalize to things that do not have things to equalize to.

Souls aren't just "never mentioned" in the real world, it's a very common point of contention with at least thousands of different takes. Due to inconclusive evidence, due to burden of proof requiring a positive claim to first be proven, the result that they are not there is the default until disproven.

As such, real life stuff would be these "characters that do not have souls" that don't equalize, as opposed to "characters that never mentioned souls"./

 

[Ogbunabali]

@The real cal howard

That's still not an argument, and that's still ignoring that the burden of proof is on you, and that's still imposing a baseless assumption.

 

[Wokistan]

I'm 90% sure we're all thinking the same thing when we think of souls. We've all seen the same idea countess times in media. It's not complicated. This isn't matter of "muh, different things have different interpretations" because of my first sentence. There's no equalization. They're just assumed to have it. In the same way if I name a character with no descriptions, you'd assume they're coming with all of their limbs.

I mean, I personally don't believe in them, so I don't picture a soul by default when I think of someone. My concept of a human being does not inherently include a soul. However, from experience I have seen and otherwise observed that most people have limbs, so I have accommodated for that within my own personal conception of a person.

 

[Antoniofer]

This thread escalated quickly, perhaps a bad moment to have electricity and internet... Neh, joke.

If we are voting, I prefer to let stuff like it was (the verse that has souls set the standard in the battle), otherwise, how you put a ghost against an verse with no reference to souls?

I have never heard of equalizing a soul to neuron signals. That would be mindhax territory.

Actually, thats more Biological Manipulation and (Bio)Electricity Manipulation than Mind Manipulation.

 

[Agnaa]

@Wokistan We already don't equalize to things that do not have things to equalize to.

We only don't equalize when not everyone in the verse has the thing. When everyone in the verse has the thing, we equalize it, since it's never a weakness in-verse.

Souls aren't just "never mentioned" in the real world, it's a very common point of contention with at least thousands of different takes. Due to inconclusive evidence, due to burden of proof requiring a positive claim to first be proven, the result that they are not there is the default until disproven.

Same for concepts.

 

[Sera_EX]

This website is about having fictional characters battle. If they battle real things, they should have the same movesets they have in fiction. Otherwise we're just matching up characters with their movesets slashed against real things.

This site is not about fictional characters fighting each other, least of all fighting real life things.

 

[Wokistan]

This isn't true when things specifically lack them. I can't ever just give a Culexus Assassin a soul (Extreme example I know, first soulless character I could think of) just because they're ubiquitous elsewhere.

So this applies to personal concepts and other forms of spiritual whatever then. It doesn't have to be worded specifically as soul.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

@The real cal howard

That's still not an argument, and that's still ignoring that the burden of proof is on you, and that's still imposing a baseless assumption.

There is no burden of proof in this. This has been stated many a time above.

 

[Agnaa]

This site is not about fictional characters fighting each other, least of all fighting real life things.

You're right, it's mostly for indexing. However, that's the point of the versus matchups section, which this thread is concerned with.

 

[HeadlessKramerGeoff777]

So real life has immunity to soul hax via not having souls? Thanos dino just got cooler

 

[Paulo.junior.969]

Also, keep in mind we'renot discussing whether souls exist in real life or not, we're discussing what should be assumed when making a versus match (there's a difference), so we really should be discussing the standards used by the wiki, not "burden of proof" or things like that.

 

[Ogbunabali]

There is no burden of proof in this. This has been stated many a time above.

Ok, prove souls exist.

 

[Agnaa]

This isn't true when things specifically lack them. I can't ever just give a Culexus Assassin a soul (Extreme example I know, first soulless character I could think of) just because they're ubiquitous elsewhere.

So this applies to personal concepts and other forms of spiritual whatever then. It doesn't have to be worded specifically as soul.

I agree, but real life doesn't explicitly lack them, we just don't know because it's unprovable.

 

[Wokistan]

But due to how proof standards work, for real life we have to default to a no and treat it as a lacking.

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

This site is not about fictional characters fighting each other

We can lie to ourselves as much as we want about this being an indexing site far more than a versus site, but our name is versus battles for a reason. The people who want us to be the former (mostly staff and respected users) make up a fraction of a fraction of the people on the site, who I'm almost certain believe otherwise.

 

[Agnaa]

But due to how proof standards work, for real life we have to default to a no and treat it as a lacking.

You literally cannot prove that anything exists in real life, besides your own mind. We don't default to a "no" for everything IRL existing.

 

[LSirLancelotDuLacl]

But isn't not knowing the whole point of defaulting for a negative?

I

 

[The_real_cal_howard]

Ok, prove souls exist.

Prove platonic concepts exist

Prove life force exists

Prove spatial dimensions exist