• 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.

The commoners thread: Discussing Ultima's "On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System"

Status
Not open for further replies.
IdiosyncraticLawyer said:
"I was kidding" will hardly be an appropriate excuse if/when you prompt religious harassment of our site.
Click to expand...
Nothing religious would’ve been brought up lol. I know the rules very well. At worst it would’ve been a light hearted discussion about the paradox of omnipotence.

The only reason I said what I said was to make an analogy to show you that I did infact know what “falsidical paradox” meant. Since you were doubting I knew the meaning of the words I use for some odd reason. You need to chill out.
 
Arnoldstone18 said:
Nothing religious would’ve been brought up lol. At worst it would’ve been a light hearted discussion about the paradox of omnipotence.

The only reason I said that was to make an analogy to show you that I did infact know what “falsidical paradox” meant. Since you were doubting I knew the meaning of the words I use for some odd reason. You need to chill out.
Click to expand...
"Omnipotence is a falsidical paradox" is an extremely contentious philosophical proposition. I could just as easily provide a bunch of philosophical arguments that it's not.
 
Yeah and it would’ve been a fun philosophical discussion as long as religion isn’t brought up.

You need to chill x2
 
Grand_Saver_Ritsuka said:
can anyone summerize me all the requiements for tier 0?
Click to expand...
If you're not Goku, then refer to this:

vsbattles.com

On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System

To clarify the situation, let me spin up a scenario: Suppose you have two realms. Realm A and Realm B. Realm A is a universe much like ours, while Realm B is a transcendental place that has pretty much all of the properties we'd expect of something that fits the bill for "qualitative...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
 
Ultima_Reality said:
If you're not Goku, then refer to this:

vsbattles.com

On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System

To clarify the situation, let me spin up a scenario: Suppose you have two realms. Realm A and Realm B. Realm A is a universe much like ours, while Realm B is a transcendental place that has pretty much all of the properties we'd expect of something that fits the bill for "qualitative...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
Click to expand...
But what about Vegeta
 
Dragon Ball is already tier 1, it doesn't really need much else especially given its premise of brute force being better than hax.
 
Tyranno223 said:
We need an official crossover where Goku punches Superman, causing him to say

"Gah, he's even stronger than Lucifer Morningstar. He must be at least High Outerversal+ in base!"
Click to expand...
Official crossover where Goku destroys the entire DC multiverse and kills everyone.
 
Other than the DT replies, and later the Agnaa replies, there's also the entire project of how to handle the changes, create new standards, experiment with some different values and ideas, and much more that goes into big changes like this one. I wouldn't be surprised if this "Ultima x DT" is actually the shortest part of the entire revision.
 
I don't think some of these accusations against DontTalkDT are accurate.

I don't see how DontTalkDT is stalling. Their initial arguing seems like it was mainly to understand the specifics behind Ultima's proposal while counterarguing mainly against points that DontTalkDT immediately had concerns/counterpoints about. Examples of DontTalkDT trying to understand this revisions' specific details include:
At here,
Edit: To ask a fun question in advance - How would transduality play into this? Characters that are said to transcend all duality are technically in a similar position to R>F, aren't they?
Click to expand...
At here,
And to ask a similar question: What about omnipotence? Would that not, too, be a qualitative superiority (in your sense of that term)? How would omnipotence compare to other kinds of qualitative superiority?
Click to expand...
At here,
No comment for the time being. I'm just trying to figure out the consequences of your proposed revision and the logic it operates by in practice.
Click to expand...
At here,
I believe how you wish to interpret what exactly that is, is part of the debate.
Personally, I don't plan to commit to any assumptions on its nature other than "something fictional like that can never harm the real thing, no matter how boosted. So it's at least an infinite difference." That includes me not assuming that the author can add things to the story beyond what is shown, which I believe you wish to argue otherwise.
Click to expand...
At here,
I, indeed, have no interest in trying to read you mind. I think what I wrote above should already give you one idea. Inconsistent application of ideas is another. And I believe a general sense of the standards being far from a fair conservative estimate could also be something some people dislike.
There are more, but I'm not gonna try to be exhaustive.

As a reminder, the questions were:
  1. Is power over all concepts / transcendence of them also a qualitative difference?
  2. How do you justify the existence of layers at qualitative levels?
  3. Wouldn't transdual character by their very nature be beyond any dual difference of reality and fiction?
  4. What about omnipotence? (See the example I brought up as one guidepoint)
Click to expand...
At here,
Actually, I think it affects the debate a lot?
Like, whether you say that we should per default assume that R>F characters (or others with qualitative superiority) can affect all higher dimensions or not is a big difference in how things would work in practical debates and in the degree of extrapolation you suggest. So a yes or no to my initial question would be nice
Click to expand...

Then, when DontTalkDT got enough information to understand Ultima Reality's revisions in specific detail, DontTalkDT made a counterproposal. The proof that DontTalkDT needed said previous information before making this counterproposal is the line:
Now, Ultima doesn't actually explain very well in the OP what he actually assumes the nature of R>F to be. He just expands on it being different from dimensions. But in the debate since he has explained more on his assumptions and I will quote those. (Obviously gotta make a selection here, so you are warned)
Click to expand...

When DontTalkDT got accused of misunderstanding Ultima Reality even after that, DontTalkDT made yet another effort to try to understand Ultima Reality's revisions.

So, it feels like DontTalkDT is trying to understand Ultima Reality as best as reasonably possible and then make counterpoints rather than trying to stall.

I also feel the fact that DontTalkDT is going out of their way to try to understand Ultima Reality's points throws the accusation that they are trying to mischaracterize Ultima Reality out. Going so far out of their way to try to understand Ultima Reality's points/revisions shows that DontTalkDT wants to steelman Ultima Reality's points. There is also the fact that when DontTalkDT tried to summarize Ultima Reality's positions when Ultima Reality asked some people for input, DontTalkDT sourced the exact quotes that Ultima Reality used, showing where DontTalkDT is getting their information from.
 
I would probably guess Ultima already has pretty much all the standards written down already, given how much he's already written for that thread.

I think the updated tiering system could be implemented pretty quickly if that's the case. The time consuming part is how pages will be updated to fit them, since it will basically be a CRT on many, many Tier 1/0 verses all at the same time.

Though, there is probably going to be a lot of updates to BDE, Nonduality, and some other things as a result too.
 
Flowman777 said:
I don't think some of these accusations against DontTalkDT are accurate.

I don't see how DontTalkDT is stalling. Their initial arguing seems like it was mainly to understand the specifics behind Ultima's proposal while counterarguing mainly against points that DontTalkDT immediately had concerns/counterpoints about. Examples of DontTalkDT trying to understand this revisions' specific details include:
At here,

At here,

At here,

At here,

At here,

At here,


Then, when DontTalkDT got enough information to understand Ultima Reality's revisions in specific detail, DontTalkDT made a counterproposal. The proof that DontTalkDT needed said previous information before making this counterproposal is the line:


When DontTalkDT got accuse of misunderstanding Ultima Reality even after that, DontTalkDT made yet another effort to try to understand Ultima Reality's revisions.

So, it feels like DontTalkDT is trying to understand Ultima Reality as best as reasonably possible and then make counterpoints rather than trying to stall.

I also feel the fact that DontTalkDT is going out of their way to try to understand Ultima Reality's points throws the accusation that they are trying to mischaracterize Ultima Reality out. Going so far out of their way to try to understand Ultima Reality's points/revisions shows that DontTalkDT wants to steelman Ultima Reality's points. There is also the fact that when DontTalkDT tried to summarize Ultima Reality's positions when Ultima Reality asked some people for input, DontTalkDT sourced the exact quotes that Ultima Reality used, showing where DontTalkDT is getting their information from.
Click to expand...
He doesn't necessarily have to be stalling intentionally, but that's effectively what's happening. His argument is circular and it shows. Ultima has repeatedly addressed DT's points with his own arguments, if he's not able to understand what Ultima is saying this late into the conversation even after Ultima has repeatedly explained what he means then DT shouldn't be having that conversation to begin with. The thread has 7 pages by this point and most of it is those two arguing with each other. It's excessive.

Edit: At the time I wrote this the thread had 7 pages but I wrote 17 by mistake. The core message remains the same but it's worth correcting that error even if it's well after the fact.
 
Last edited:
Flowman777 said:
I don't think some of these accusations against DontTalkDT are accurate.

I don't see how DontTalkDT is stalling. Their initial arguing seems like it was mainly to understand the specifics behind Ultima's proposal while counterarguing mainly against points that DontTalkDT immediately had concerns/counterpoints about. Examples of DontTalkDT trying to understand this revisions' specific details include:
At here,

At here,

At here,

At here,

At here,

At here,


Then, when DontTalkDT got enough information to understand Ultima Reality's revisions in specific detail, DontTalkDT made a counterproposal. The proof that DontTalkDT needed said previous information before making this counterproposal is the line:


When DontTalkDT got accused of misunderstanding Ultima Reality even after that, DontTalkDT made yet another effort to try to understand Ultima Reality's revisions.

So, it feels like DontTalkDT is trying to understand Ultima Reality as best as reasonably possible and then make counterpoints rather than trying to stall.

I also feel the fact that DontTalkDT is going out of their way to try to understand Ultima Reality's points throws the accusation that they are trying to mischaracterize Ultima Reality out. Going so far out of their way to try to understand Ultima Reality's points/revisions shows that DontTalkDT wants to steelman Ultima Reality's points. There is also the fact that when DontTalkDT tried to summarize Ultima Reality's positions when Ultima Reality asked some people for input, DontTalkDT sourced the exact quotes that Ultima Reality used, showing where DontTalkDT is getting their information from.
Click to expand...
As Ben has also summarized, I'm not saying that he is deliberately stalling, however that doesn't change my thinking that further wait on the current situation is needless red tape. If there was a game changer for him to bring, it would have already been brought up by now.
 
First, Ultima Reality has been addressing DontTalkDT's points but DontTalkDT has been addressing Ultima Reality's points. It's a two-way street.

Second, I'm not saying they can't understand Ultima's points even now, but rather that they are getting accused of misunderstanding Ultima's points. The latter being true does not mean that the former is true, and TBH I don't think the former is even true at all. Ultima Reality's main point is that larger objects can be reached by making an object larger but no matter how much larger a fictional object is, it will never become real due to not having any realness at all, making being "more real"-level power above all larger sizes (source):
By contrast, reality is obviously not composed out of slices of fiction, and neither can a real object be obtained by summing up fictional things, because the difference between the two hinges on an existential quality (i.e. The fact one is real and the other isn't), and not on physical measurements such as volume. Whereas a 3-dimensional object still has lower-dimensional portions of itself (As a cube can be divided into squares, and squares into lines, and lines into points), a body in reality has no part of itself that is fictional (And so a real cube can only be divided into real squares, and real squares into real lines, and real lines into real points. It cannot be divided into fictional squares, and nor can squares be divided into fictional lines, and nor lines into fictional points)
Click to expand...
And (source):
Unreality and nothingness not being exactly the same also isn't really relevant when you consider that unreality/fiction definitionally is an absence of something (And I know plenty of verses where it's explicitly stated to be like that, too). And an absence of a thing can't add up to the existence of that thing. Non-substance can't add up to substance. Same argument ultimately applies.
Click to expand...
DontTalkDT's main counterpoint is that the reverse is also true: no matter how real an object becomes, it will never become larger, thus meaning that being more real and being larger are merely different ways to be more powerful (source):
R>F equalizing to dimensional jumps is no true correspondence, obviously. Technically, R>F and dimensional tiering should be on two separate power axis. Both being 5D and seeing a universe as fiction are being infinitely superior to it, but without feats neither should be able to affect the other. The 5D character can't punch something more real than it and the R>F character doesn't cover 5D space as part of the cosmology it transcends. I will say that, as usual, I consider assumptions that R>F should just be able to cover the dimensions because in real life dimensions don't matter for a writer as overextrapolation. It's too much enforcing our views on fictional verses.
Click to expand...

The point that Ultima Reality made that follows from his main point is that reality/fiction difference is equivalent to viewing something as literal nothingness - not just there is 0, but literally nothing/empty set (source):
By contrast, take the empty set (∅): This, as the name suggests, is a set with no elements whatsoever. It is, in effect, the set-theoretical 0, and for preciseness' sake we must note that it isn't exactly nothing, per se, but rather a set containing nothing. Nevertheless it is, for obvious reasons, close enough to the idea of nothing to serve as an illustrative tool for our purposes, as a Reality-Fiction Transcendence is, as stated, nothing but a relationship where the superior side sees the inferior side as literal unreality, and thus, as nothing. So the empty set, from here and onwards, will serve as a stand-in for that "unreality."
Click to expand...
DontTalkDT's main counterpoint is that fiction is not literal nothingness in the first place (source):
I will say that fiction is logically not synonymous with nothingness. All nothingness is identical, but there are different stories is fiction, for example.
Click to expand...
And (source):
As a person that was involved in writing most of the wikis R>F standards, I can furthermore tell you that we never really have debated that to mean anything that deep. It's just an alternative to saying fiction, for verses that might have similar ideas without calling it fiction. It was an afterthought, not a big conscious decision to add that word to declare fiction as being the same as nothingness. Whether unreality even means nothingness, when we were to ignore the spirit of the text, is pretty debatable.
Cambridge dictionary defines reality as "the state of things as they are, rather than as they are imagined to be". Negating that, unreality just means imagination, making the term synonymous to fiction. Google (Oxford languages) defines unreality directly as "he quality of being imaginary, illusory, or unrealistic."

...

In any case, I believe fiction and nothingness not being the same as just a fact. Two things are identical exactly then iff they have all the same properties. It's not further hard to come up with a property that some dream has and nothingness doesn't.
Click to expand...

It seems DontTalkDT is trying to counterpoint Ultima Reality's points with their counterpoints. Thus, DontTalkDT understands Ultima Reality's points.
 
Flowman777 said:
Ultima Reality's main point is that larger objects can be reached by making an object larger but no matter how much larger a fictional object is, it will never become real due to not having any realness at all, making being "more real"-level power above all larger sizes (source):

DontTalkDT's main counterpoint is that the reverse is also true: no matter how real an object becomes, it will never become larger, thus meaning that being more real and being larger are merely different ways to be more powerful (source):

The point that Ultima Reality made that follows from his main point is that reality/fiction difference is equivalent to viewing something as literal nothingness - not just there is 0, but literally nothing/empty set (source):

DontTalkDT's main counterpoint is that fiction is not literal nothingness in the first place (source):

It seems DontTalkDT is trying to counterpoint Ultima Reality's points with their counterpoints. Thus, DontTalkDT understands Ultima Reality's points.
Click to expand...
Side note, this is a god-tier summary dude. I’m impressed.
 
Flowman777 said:
First, Ultima Reality has been addressing DontTalkDT's points but DontTalkDT has been addressing Ultima Reality's points. It's a two-way street.
Click to expand...
Hardly.

Flowman777 said:
The point that Ultima Reality made that follows from his main point is that reality/fiction difference is equivalent to viewing something as literal nothingness - not just there is 0, but literally nothing/empty set
Click to expand...
For the sake of full clarity here: It should be noted that the "Fiction = Absolute Nothingness" thing is not particularly something I was ever that committed to, and which (As I commented before), I eventually shaved off my argument anyway. You can see me being somewhat ambivalent on that in a quote you've provided yourself, there. The point ultimately being that the empty set illustration works regardless, as I pointed out even in later parts of the thread, like here.

Flowman777 said:
DontTalkDT's main counterpoint is that fiction is not literal nothingness in the first place
Click to expand...
DontTalk's most recent formulation of his counterpoint was essentially "There are interpretations of Reality-Fiction Transcendences that don't involve surpassing something so hard that you see them as the empty set or something analogous to that."

This being said, he did provide some (Fairly bizarre) "counterexamples" to that notion, among which were computer simulations, which he argued can't hold arbitrarily-many dimensions due to computers having limited computing power (Ignoring the fact computers don't have enough power to render universes, either). In general, a rather large point of his is that "Reality-Fiction Transcendences can be quantitative, too," hence the previous example, which also ignores the fact that the Reality-Fiction Transcendence page itself says that the gap between a higher layer and a lower one is "strictly one of quality, not quantity," thus meaning the counterexamples he gives simply aren't R>F to begin with. So, basically using some very haphazard idea of "fiction" that doesn't at all align with the present definitions.

Now: I don't think DontTalk is intentionally stalling the thread. Highly doubt he is doing this out of malicious intent. But I certainly do think his side of the debate has been extremely evasive, and hasn't really addressed the core point, either. (As my last post in the thread details)

ProfectusInfinity said:
Side note: this is a god-tier summary dude.
Click to expand...
Eh.
 
I'll be honest that I disagree with a lot of that summary but also be honest that I'm not sufficiently invested to dedicate a text wall of my own in response to it. Not when I can summarize my opinion in two sentences.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
VS Battles Is Nonsense / Delete My Account
Replies
6
Views
3K
Dragonite007
Dragonite007
demonwarrior2266
Application of Ultima's CRT
Replies
4
Views
2K
Hypertornado099
Hypertornado099
  • Locked
What would debunk the basis of the VSBW tiering system
Replies
6
Views
2K
Urshani
Boy.Line
Qualification issues.
Replies
7
Views
626
TheOrangeGuy09
TheOrangeGuy09
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System
12 13 14
Replies
530
Views
177K
Ultima_Reality
Ultima_Reality
Back
Top