• 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"

What's the most viewed thread of all time?
OPM discussion thread at 3 million views.
 
Is that a lot?

Honest question.
More than any announcements thread, Q&A, versus thread, regular CRT, calc thread, or thread from our sister wikis.
 
3. Though one of those is very straightforward.

I'll post the Tier 0 thread in the following days, probably.
Tier 0 will be an interesting one.
by the way ultima, all forms of absolute infinity is low outer now?
I heard there are different interpretation of it that can get higher in quality but never heard myself.
 
3. Though one of those is very straightforward.

I'll post the Tier 0 thread in the following days, probably.
Really? I thought it'd be at least 4 more, and probably more like 5.
  1. Tier 0 thread.
  2. Tier 2 thread (probably not).
  3. Which specific rearrangement of tier 11/1/0 to go with.
  4. How to rewrite the main pages (Tiering System and associates).
  5. How to rewrite all supplementary pages (could be merged with previous, speed, nonduality, resistance, etc).
  6. Thread to post CRTs when the changes get implemented.
 
Really? I thought it'd be at least 4 more, and probably more like 5.
  1. Tier 0 thread.
  2. Tier 2 thread (probably not).
  3. Which specific rearrangement of tier 11/1/0 to go with.
  4. How to rewrite the main pages (Tiering System and associates).
  5. How to rewrite all supplementary pages (could be merged with previous, speed, nonduality, resistance, etc).
  6. Thread to post CRTs when the changes get implemented.

I am not doing Tier 2 in these revisions. I'd merge 4 and 5. And I don't really count 6 as part of the active revisions, since it's moreso their aftermath.
 
Any "Reality-Fiction relationship" where the "fiction" interacts with the "reality" by itself or with technology, powers, or forces from their "fictional" world; whether it be travelling to it, ascending to it, viewing it, manipulating it, threatening to destroy, using it to rewrite your "fictional world", or anything else, is a massive anti-feat that almost definitely guarantees it won't be considered a true Reality-Fiction relationship.

Reality can interact with fiction, fiction can't interact with reality. This is a bedrock of the Reality-Fiction relationship.
Considering the cases where the higher reality created the fictional reality, couldn't you argue that the power and ability for the lower reality being to interact with the higher reality was already baked in?

The Lower reality was essentially created with the higher reality's power, so why couldn't the lower reality access that power within it's setting? Every aspect, law, physics, concept, and idea was created with that higher power, including the concept and ability of the lower reality interacting with the higher reality.
 
Considering the cases where the higher reality created the fictional reality, couldn't you argue that the power and ability for the lower reality being to interact with the higher reality was already baked in?

The Lower reality was essentially created with the higher reality's power, so why couldn't the lower reality access that power within it's setting? Every aspect, law, physics, concept, and idea was created with that higher power, including the concept and ability of the lower reality interacting with the higher reality.
Yeah, but this quickly leads you to not having this qualitative/quantitative distinction at all. So they'll just say that "If the lower reality is created in a way where it's able to do that, it's not actually qualitatively lower."
 
Should we close this thread?
There are several other threads that are going to be made following the direct conclusion of the change. IT's not necessarily done.

Yeah, but this quickly leads you to not having this qualitative/quantitative distinction at all. So they'll just say that "If the lower reality is created in a way where it's able to do that, it's not actually qualitatively lower."
Which I would then ask, does the qualitive superiority come from the lack of interaction?
 
Considering the cases where the higher reality created the fictional reality, couldn't you argue that the power and ability for the lower reality being to interact with the higher reality was already baked in?

The Lower reality was essentially created with the higher reality's power, so why couldn't the lower reality access that power within it's setting? Every aspect, law, physics, concept, and idea was created with that higher power, including the concept and ability of the lower reality interacting with the higher reality.
Depends entirely on what the ability in question is. I'd only apply the logic Agnaa outlined above if the interaction is in the form of "The fictional reality and its elements are able to reach out and influence the higher plane solely through their own physicality." If it's a "Such interaction is normally completely impossible, but every being in the lower world has the hidden metaphysical potential to raise higher," I have no issue with it.
 
Which I would then ask, does the qualitive superiority come from the lack of interaction?
I think it kinda does. R>F is being generally indexed like that due to the view that simple quantitative extensions won't be able to reach it.
 
Depends entirely on what the ability in question is. I'd only apply the logic Agnaa outlined above if the interaction is in the form of "The fictional reality and its elements are able to reach out and influence the higher plane solely through their own physicality." If it's a "Such interaction is normally completely impossible, but every being in the lower world has the hidden metaphysical potential to raise higher," I have no issue with it.
So the difference between looney toon characters and Narnia characters?

Personally, I don't see an important difference between the two. One story treats the ability to reach a higher reality as something sacred and the other will do it for a fart joke. I personally don't think looney toon characters should be denied R>F for not worshiping at the altar of transcendence.

I think it kinda does. R>F is being generally indexed like that due to the view that simple quantitative extensions won't be able to reach it.
Then, I would say by that logic, only stories that maintain that lack of interaction completely should qualify. Any story where a character rises above, would violate that lack of interaction. (of course that would be extremely strict and not fun)
 
In DDS, the junkyard. Is that R>F transcendence? They were only able to leave after gaining an ego through the Atma virus? But originally they were just AI?
 
Also, going back to what was said by @Deagonx. IF a story says FTL is impossible and its characters aren't FTL, that doesn't mean a FTL character from another story will have their speed capped if they are placed in the first story.

I would argue the same would apply here, If a story says Lower beings cannot interact with the higher reality and its characters who are lower simply can't, that shouldn't mean a lower character from another story where they can interact with the higher reality, shouldn't be able to do so. No?
 
Then, I would say by that logic, only stories that maintain that lack of interaction completely should qualify. Any story where a character rises above, would violate that lack of interaction. (of course that would be extremely strict and not fun)
Sorry to double post. But I guess a loop hole would be the higher reality, simply recreating the lower character in their reality.
 
So the difference between looney toon characters and Narnia characters?
More like the difference between "This ability is something imbued into the fictional reality by the power of a higher being, and which is not co-equal to, but suffuses and empowers, certain substances in that reality" and "The fictional reality somehow, entirely on its own terms, developed the ability to interact with a higher ontological layer, without any input whatsoever from higher things."

Of course, Looney Tunes is not something I reject from R>F solely because of "People from the lower reality unexplainedly interact with their animators." I simply also argue that "This character sees a reality as immaterial and insubstantial from their higher perspective" doesn't follow from purely visual depictions whatsoever, and needs to be separately elaborated.

Also, going back to what was said by @Deagonx. IF a story says FTL is impossible and its characters aren't FTL, that doesn't mean a FTL character from another story will have their speed capped if they are placed in the first story.

I would argue the same would apply here, If a story says Lower beings cannot interact with the higher reality and its characters who are lower simply can't, that shouldn't mean a lower character from another story where they can interact with the higher reality, shouldn't be able to do so. No?
Not really the same case, no, since a higher layer being ontologically higher requires a structural discontinuity between the two. Interaction-based anti-feats are largely problematic because they imply that there is, in fact, continuity to be found between the realms.

Meanwhile, how fast FTL is doesn't depend on showcases of interactions with slower things. It's something whose minimum value (2c) we already know a priori, rather than inferring it a posteriori by observing how it acts. So it's a pretty bad analogy to tack on here.
 
Back
Top