My reaction to that information (I'm literally the volcano head guy)here you go buddyApeiron - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Wuji (philosophy) - Wikipedia
Divine simplicity - Wikipedia
Apophatic theology - Wikipedia
Śūnyatā - Wikipedia
Goku - Wikipedia
It's very easy to understand.
Bro Tier 0 just is Omnipotence. No point in overcomplicating it.
Kek, no need for negative theology then?
A form of negative theology is embedded into the definition of Tier 0 because a being with all the properties I've listed (Undifferentiated, Uncaused, Unconditioned, etc) would indeed not be capable of being defined or described in direct fashion (Save by analogy, like I explained on the thread), but I think calling it "beyond omnipotence" is silly. I'd moreso define that state as omnipotence.
Technically "Omnipotence" (Defined as "Limitless power") wouldn't really exist as a separate attribute within the Tier 0, since its utter undifferentiation would prevent it from having any such plurality within itself (So "Omnipotence," "Omnipresence," and whatever others would just be referring to one and the same thing). But that's less because it's "beyond omnipotence" and moreso because we can't conceive of omnipotence to begin with. So it's a distinction between "Our mental notion of Omnipotence as lesser beings" and "Omnipotence as it really is in-and-of-itself," not "Omnipotence" vs "Beyond omnipotence."
So omnipotent in itself is already undifferentiated, so there's no need for such thing as "beyond omnipotence". And because we can't even comprehend the omnipotence itself.
Beyond omnipotence just sounds like paradox.
But consider: Watching people fail will be really funny.
I agree, but many are also likely to succeed erroneously
If this passes literally every single verse with an existing QS layer that isn't dimensional in nature will attempt to argue that it is ontological. Any "higher existence" will be argued to be outerversal. For instance:
I recall a very silly God of War upgrade that gave Athena qualitative superiority to the rest of the gods on the sole basis that she had ascended to a "higher existence" that was more powerful. Our standards require that it be infinitely so, and there was utterly no evidence to support it being infinite, but it was granted anyways and it was a hard fought battle to downgrade it back to where it should have been.
it will be funny at first
mfw I am 1-A (I am a higher existence than a frog).
Wait at least 2 years for layers stuffs to be translated officially
Actually, I want to ask about relation between NEP2 and R>F under your new tiering system proposal.
The problem is I don't know where it is and I'm not really sure how to find it without needing to comb over a War & Peace-length argument. Ideally it should've been in the OP, but you didn't start that thread with the intention of it being a revision which is why it's more of a stream-of-consciousness blog post. It's not a knock on you, I'm just saying I don't really know what's going on and I wager most of the other people don't either. Like, you're well-liked enough that people are just going to agree regardless of whether they can actually make heads or tails of what the points of contention are or what the precise proposal is.
I disagree with the "stream-of-consciousness" bit, but nevertheless: I am well aware of the issues with this, yes. Largely, I just don't see this as being as much of an issue as you do, since even the problems you listed above (The GoW Athena thing, for example) are ultimately problems that relate not much to the existing standards so much as to how they can be interpreted by users, and that interpretive gap is something you can never get rid of, not really.
Don't believe that would change, or need to change, no.
Though this, by the by, is not to say nothing will change apart from the tiers. These proposals will certainly impact several abilities related to the higher tiers being addressed, and lead to a more thorough examination of them, too.
Right, but the interpretive gap can be mitigated to an extent by clarifying what elements are absolutely necessary. I struggle to see how, for instance, the quote of yours describing the new Outerverse level requires anything more than what Athena had.
I'm definitely on the latter of #1, I already have three verses loaded and ready for this.
That's because that description hinges on the user having an understanding of the things being talked about. And providing said understanding is, indeed, what pages like these are for. Everyone knows Reality-Fiction Transcendence as a concept, and everyone knows Beyond-Dimensional Existence as a concept, too (Save certain people who evidently don't know what they should know). So I don't believe the transition between Tiering Systems is cause for as much concern as you think it would be.
Well of course, but R>F is a very straightforward concept. Not that it can't be muddy at times (anything can be muddy under muddy circumstances) but I'm looking for more of a concrete answer with regard to non-R>F qualitative superiority. How do we distinguish between a higher existence that is QS and one that isn't? Like, specifically?
Rip lmao, I'm gonna be waiting at least a year before even thinking of posting a 1-A thread.
The fact something as nebulous as "higher existence" (Judging by the Athena example you gave) is seriously in the domain of discourse for these things is a bit concerning, frankly, since it doesn't (Or at least, shouldn't) fly even in the current system. I think the question is ill-formed because you shouldn't need to distinguish between cases at all when the object of discussion is something so vague. It should just be rejected on sight.
Omnipotence is a paradox in the first place, that's why we're putting it the highest fancy tier.
Facts.
Btw how will Eru from LOTR be tier 0? You mentioned that once.
Don't you think it's best to wait until the dust settles before you ask questions like that?
I don't know what the future standards will be, but other things like BDE, R>F and TD may change.
