• 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.
BestMGQScalerEver said:
I also find this scan from You Can Forget the Words funny
image.png
Click to expand...
You know the author is just trying to sound smart when he added the monkey typewriter thought experiment to his schizo rant for no reason
ToaruCounterfeitCRC said:
More like apophatic theology if the author never contradicts themselves by accident. I doubt you can ever prove negation.


The author has to explain why incorporating a Carpenter most of us happen to know very crucial to their story development then. Just name the verse Byzantine's Heavenly Comedy or smtg, maybe that'd help.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt they could do that. FC/OC is very strict with what they allow.
 
Flowman777 said:
From what I've heard, one of the main problems with tiering Suggsverse is numerous contradictions within itself. So it might be unfeasible to tier it rather than fun.
Click to expand...
It was also just terrible, by any known metric. Not to mention the other issues derived from it and the author himself, which are really not worth discussing more than what has already been said here.
It's merely a relic of silliness in battleboarding history.
 
Flowman777 said:
From what I've heard, one of the main problems with tiering Suggsverse is numerous contradictions within itself. So it might be unfeasible to tier it rather than fun.
Click to expand...
Because he actually doesn't know the "logic" behind the tiering system, on this site or other sites, unlike some cringe fanfiction where people who wrote them at least have basic knowledge and wrote their own stuffs, he mostly copypasted tier 0 description/justification of many tier 0 characters on this site or other sites, and made his character "stronger than these copypasted description/justification" or slap "omnipotent" words into them
 
My genuine question is: If Modal Realism is High 1-A+, then what would Extended Modal Realism be, which incorporates the idea that impossible worlds are just as real as possible worlds ? I'm asking because certain fictions incorporate EMR in it
 
The current theological discussions around Tier 1 are the reason I'm taking so long with my immeasurable proposal (That and because I'm working on my University thesis and various personal projects...). If it gets accepted, I would be surprised.
 
Tdjwo said:
Ugh, I'm getting tired of the back and forth on the Tier 0 thread. I know Deagonx very well. He's never gonna stop replying till the thread reaches 30+ pages. Ultima should just agree to disagree and put him om the disagree list. His vote doesn't count anyways. I expected DT and Agnaa to be the one commenting on the thread.
Click to expand...
Ultima, again, asked me not to until other people had commented.

I don't have a whole lot to say, anyway.
 
Why not comment right now? Deagonx agreed to call it a day and given DontTalkDT has other things like schoolwork that makes it hard for them to respond quickly, it might be fine talking now as your discussion with Ultima on the Incoherences thread was far quicker than DontTalkDT's discussion with Ultima on that thread.
 
Flowman777 said:
Why not comment right now? Deagonx agreed to call it a day and given DontTalkDT has other things like schoolwork that makes it hard for them to respond quickly, it might be fine talking now as your discussion with Ultima on the Incoherences thread was far quicker than DontTalkDT's discussion with Ultima on that thread.
Click to expand...
@Ultima_Reality I do have a three paragraph/point post ready, whenever you are.
 
Hasty12345 said:
If this tier 0 proposal fails, does anyone have any other ideas on how it should be handled?
Click to expand...
Take the accepted High 1-A definition, redefine it as tier 0, and don't have a High 1-A any more.

Or do the same sorta thing we do now, where 0 is a rehash of High 1-A on a higher level.
 
Flowman777 said:
Why not comment right now? Deagonx agreed to call it a day and given DontTalkDT has other things like schoolwork that makes it hard for them to respond quickly, it might be fine talking now as your discussion with Ultima on the Incoherences thread was far quicker than DontTalkDT's discussion with Ultima on that thread.
Click to expand...
Honestly a good idea. The circumstances behind this thread are way different, anyway (Much shorter OP, for one), so, no point in following the model of the previous one.

We ball. @Agnaa
 
Hasty12345 said:
If this tier 0 proposal fails, does anyone have any other ideas on how it should be handled?
Click to expand...
Agnaa said:
Take the accepted High 1-A definition, redefine it as tier 0, and don't have a High 1-A any more.

Or do the same sorta thing we do now, where 0 is a rehash of High 1-A on a higher level.
Click to expand...
I am largely of the same opinion. The only alternative I would have in mind, should we insist on a fixed endpoint, would just be omnipotence.

That comes with its own baggage, but would still be far preferable to classical theism, which is sophistry at best and complete nonsense at worst.
 
Agnaa said:
As per your other tiering revisions, this gets a "myeh" (neutral leaning towards disagreeing) from me. It doesn't hold internal consistencies or objective issues (due to the rigid disqualifiers outlined), it's one of many plausible tiering systems, but takes quite a few steps from what I'd prefer to have in one.

Differentiation of Monad-like Descriptions​


It's a bit weird for omnipotence (the ability to do anything logically possible) and a Type IV multiverse (a multiverse containing everything mathematically describable) to be given such vastly different tiers. Since by default, omnipotence would be constrained by one form of logic, one set of underlying rules for reality, while Type IV multiverses can greatly vary in those. Similarly, I'm concerned that there's multiple similar ways of reaching these tiers which imply different qualities, but which you'd all just equalise to being a monad (omnipotence, holding all truth values, not being describable, being absolutely simple)

High Interpretation, and Proof by a Lack of Anti-Feats​


My general discontent comes with how this takes a very high interpretation of these concepts (in fact, the highest one possible, by not letting anything else reach these), one that less so needs to be proven, and more needs to not be disproven. I always took our system's lack of something like that as a point of pride; Rather than just saying "If they say these 5 words, we'll take them as being stronger than anything else, unless they're contradicted," we looked at the cosmologies established, and gave cosmologies that were established as containing more things to have higher tiers.

Enshrinement of Monads, Despite Cosmology & Quality​


I also find it a bit dissatisfying that it enshrines monads over all other forms of supreme beings. Such as two equal and opposite forces who come together to create the world as it is; I don't like how that sort of thing would be inaccessibly far below monads (as even with a description of their creation which fits High 1-A+, them not being monads would put them and their cosmology to High 1-A at best). Especially with how monads can make jumps (i.e. from a 3-A cosmology to tier 0) which these other types of supreme beings can't.
Click to expand...
He cooked.

RQiUK1d.jpg
 
Agnaa said:
Take the accepted High 1-A definition, redefine it as tier 0, and don't have a High 1-A any more.

Or do the same sorta thing we do now, where 0 is a rehash of High 1-A on a higher level.
Click to expand...
Deagonx said:
I am largely of the same opinion. The only alternative I would have in mind, should we insist on a fixed endpoint, would just be omnipotence.

That comes with its own baggage, but would still be far preferable to classical theism, which is sophistry at best and complete nonsense at worst.
Click to expand...
Personally, I think ending the system at high 1-A is more aesthetic than tier 0 should the idea of not having an endpoint be discarded.
 
Deagonx said:
Perhaps, but "Tier 0" sounds f-ckin badass, so, we have to keep it. I dont make the rules.
Click to expand...
That is true, but it would be really weird to get rid of high 1-A and have a 1-A to 0 jump, not a fan of that idea, at least not from an aesthetic point of view, in principle it's whatever.
 
Nothing wrong with a lil silliness 82 pages in tbh. I honestly would wonder what a "High 2" tier would be without making the other tiers above it needlessly verbose.
 
If anyone's missed it, I've edited my most recent post to include two more sections.
Agnaa said:
EDIT: After reading over the thread, and having a quick talk to Ultima off-site, I have a few more thoughts.

Is This Taking a Religious Stance?​

I do also find it a bit prickly that, while our previous systems could've claimed that we were largely lowballing religious claims due to relying on concrete demonstrations, rather than larger descriptions that have to be taken on faith, from a discussion with Ultima off-site, having these sorts of tiers starts to involve us taking definitive stances on arguments for the existence of God, which some people take as the sole justification of their beliefs, such as the Cosmological Argument and the Ontological Argument, since the justification for this tier's superiority is intertwined with the logic of those arguments.

I do think either presuming that one or both of these are true or false, rather than saying they're matters of faith that lie outside of demonstrated feats and thus aren't relevant, is a modestly worse state of affairs. And while I ultimately don't find this too important myself, I see why stuff like it can rile others up. And for clarity, I don't think Ultima's comment about any approach being a theological one is actually true.

Other Statistics​

While this may belong in another thread, since people mentioned here, I'd want to take a lot of care with our definitions of Tier 0 ratings for other stats. DarkGrath's definition for Irrelevant intelligence, for example, seems like something that people would argue non-0 characters as having.

I could not care less about whether we call such statistics "Irrelevant", "Unbound", or anything else not horribly offensive.
Click to expand...
@DontTalkDT Since I've added more stuff to a post you've liked.
 
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
646
TheOrangeGuy09
TheOrangeGuy09
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System
12 13 14
Replies
530
Views
178K
Ultima_Reality
Ultima_Reality
Back
Top