That, is in and of itself, a definition. It creates an attributional black hole where nothing we say, even the things that are meant to establish this framework in the first place, can be accepted. As far as I am concerned, that is illogical and self-defeating.
You'd have to ask Ultima, but I don't know that he would consider the two distinct.
From when I asked him, it is. If I remember correctly, he believes that no sensical omnipotence exists besides logical omnipotence. If a being can do it, it's logical. He would not put a being described as able to do "anything logically consistent" and "anything at all, including logically inconsistent things" on different tiers.
Who's doing that?
That makes much more sense, thank you.
IMO I just think the verse is 1-A. dunno about tier 0 or high 1-A+ but Ultima might have other words when he plays/reads through the VN since his main concern is the "new absolute reality".
Based what I read about Orthodox catechism, this part about the Trinity does not invalidate the Monadhood (that described by Ultima). As you've indicated, Orthodox theologists believe that the Triune God is One and that three persons are co-substantial (of one essence) as much as Catholic theologists do. Inasmuch as, the very person that insists this distinction does not reject divine simplicity himself, noted by many scholars. The Orthodox Church perhaps decides that the energies of God extending to His creation are so much a truth of the divine mysteries that it should not be overlooked (as not real). I argue that it ultimately differs little from how the Kabbalistic idea of Ayin/Ein Sof/Ohr Ein Sof and subsequent Tzimtzum does not affect the monadhood of said Unity.
Ultima said he'd be quite strict limiting nonsensical rant's applicability. His argument of Monad's "superiority" based on the lack of metaphysical parts make such requirement unavoidable. I figure it eventually boils down to how we might critique a Monad's Eternal Will (i.e. the entirety of said verse itself) to discern whether or not such a Monad being properly established. I also found your concern in the Staff Thread about the portrayal of a Monad's free will, or the lack thereof, is valid but not fatal. You have said most fictional works will never delve that deep into the subject; I think a distinction between one eternal Will and arbitary free will is almost non-existent when said tier 0 is never protrayed from its own subjective view; on the other hand, any depiction of the subjective view, assuming the lack of understanding from work's author, would almost certainly disqualify the verse. I find certain ways of depicting infinitely transcendent beings as if they're simply more powerful men obnoxious anyway.
The Orthodox Church doesn't take the metaphysical simplicity doctrine to the same extent, asserting that the three Divine Persons have a real distinction. Ultima's thread incorporates the metaphysical simplicity of folks like Aquinas, disallowing any distinction, not just a unified substance.
As such, this understanding of God would be disqualified. The distinction of God's energy and essence is disallowed. That's the reason for my protest, as it is ultimately meaningless.
The issue is that the distinction of God's energy and essence is not an ontological distinction, but rather subjective (or mythical) distinction that extends down to the creation. If such distinction is considered as metaphysical differentiation, a Kabbalistic cosmology would violate Ultima's proposal at the Tzimtzum step. But Ultima has said the concept of Ein Sof embodies tier 0 Monadhood multiple times, I doubt he would say such separation being a disqualifier.
I don't know what you mean by "ontological distinction" precisely but, for metaphysical composition to be avoided, God's energy and essence must be identical.
I believe Ultima has failed to appreciate just how radical of a doctrine divine simplicity truly is. The only reason the Roman Catholic version wouldn't be disqualified by the Trinity is because they've asserted all of those distinctions are fake.
It's probably a disagreement on the doctrine of mysticism (or the lack thereof). To me it seems that energy/essence distinction must be real to accommodate the limit of perception of Divine Mystery being real lest one can become God.
So Orthodoxy denies the energies of God being His ontological component (much like your actions are not you but a distinct extension of you). However they proclaims the energies of God are Divine and uncreated being extension of His ontology.
I agree. Absolute Divine Simplicity is radical, yes. Ultimately, I feel Ultima just wants its doctrine of lacking metaphysical (or better worded as lacking qualitively discriminating) parts to establish supremacy over his previous tiers within the logical framework of this website. His ambitious wording perhaps raises too much concern.
To quote some literature on the subject.
If it were merely a unified essence without physical parts that'd be fine. The idea of a lack of metaphysical distinction insofar as something cannot have attributes is ridiculous in my opinion, and altogether unmeaningful. Perhaps I'm saying the Emperor has no clothes here, but I don't believe it should be instituted within our system.
All staff members are allowed to comment on staff threads, even the ones that cant vote on policy revisions. This includes CGMs and Content Mods as well.
Tier 0 content is 98% philosopher jargon. Quite different from Tiers Low 1-A to High 1-A which at least can be made comprehensible for ordinary users.
Geez take it easy lol. Most of it does seem like yap because T0 in itself is already yap. Doesn't mean the discussion about that yap isn't valuable.
I see. I'm just confused since you're the only non-admin/bureaucrat who's repeatedly been commenting.
I do understand most of what's going on in the thread. I just think the back and forth on the same subtopic is unnecessary at this point.
I never said the discussion wasn't valuable. Where did you get that from?
The amount of staff members who care about TierShit™ is remarkably low.
Cuz its boring as shit. Same with H1A. Although, ultima's new tier 0 sounds more interesting. But according to what I see in the thread so far, it might become just as boring as the tier 0 we've been using.
Probably true, I guess also the sheer hyper-focus on a specific thing that seems to be in each system can kind of turn people away from wanting to interact. Last time it was cardinality and whatnot, now this. Not to diss anyone who liked those systems ofc
Because whether you create a tiering system based on mathematical or metaphysical principles, most of the tier 1 requirements tend to be arbitrary and confusing as hell. I think the recent [Bigger than 2-A=Low 1-C when?] and [Re-evaluation of temporal dimension standards] drama permanently killed off the remaining staff interest in tier 1 stuff. Those revisions pretty much exposed how chaotic it can get when literally every tier 1 expert has a completely different interpretation of the most fundamental standards (I guess that’s what happens when 2 people recreate your whole tiering system from the ground up).
I know this is the ineffability paradox, I know but it misinterprets the notion of negative theology. It can be addressed this way tho.
It's more metaphysical rather than logical but yes. Technical logical in itself is incomplete so it shouldn't be the sole proprietor to judge whether or not certain can actually exist.
Logical omnipotence is incompatible with monadhood tho, there's an issue with how monadhood is tier 0 and exceeds categories and attributes but doesn't exceed logically inconsistent things. Because logical omnipotence is restricted to influencing anything that's logically consistent, which is good because the omnipotence paradox can't be applied to it.
Not sure, but they're a hyperspace or Hyperverse
No one can answer me?
I can, that's clearly High 3-A
bro，It's not funny.
What did you expect? Not enough context
I wouldn't even say High 3-A, there's like no context for anything at all just rambling. From my personal interpretation it just sounds like it is talking about concepts
Then, let me introduce the most powerful stepping stone (torrent) at this level first.
Probably be 1-A or High 1-B
The protagonist breaks through infinite layers of dreams (each layer is the gap between reality and illusion), and then only a dream on a higher level. The upper level is also infinite, and there are even higher levels above the infinite upper level. This is an infinite cycle, and the first infinite layer is already H1-B, right? (Perhaps according to Ultima's rules, it will be above 1-A?)
Personally, I do. If Ultima doesn't then I'll talk with him.
