• 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"

Tdjwo said:
Me already planning to make tier 0 root once this crt passes

💀🗿☠️😈

It's inevitable this time around. Lowkey Root has like top 3 most undeniable monad characteristics
Click to expand...
I don’t think any of what has been mentioned by Ultima has been undeniably. A part from God from Seekers, God from Dante’s Divine Comedy, and Essentially Divinity.
 
Partly, because everyone was excited and didn’t actually read the argument of the mods. Plus, we went here eveytime Ultima went on a hiatus.
 
I have a genuine question. How do we assume that possibilities like 'Every possible world' (like from Leibniz's possible worlds) includes any possible level of High 1-A possibilities within it as High 1-A+ implicates ?

I assumed it was just because the existence of 'any possible level of High 1-A' doesn't really contain a true contradiction , so it would be included, but I'm not 100% certain of that. Especially when it seems pretty NLF to assume that 'possible worlds' incorporate every level of High 1-A just automatically.
 
The_2nd_Existential_Seed said:
I have a genuine question. How do we assume that possibilities like 'Every possible world' (like from Leibniz's possible worlds) includes any possible level of High 1-A possibilities within it as High 1-A+ implicates ?

I assumed it was just because the existence of 'any possible level of High 1-A' doesn't really contain a true contradiction , so it would be included, but I'm not 100% certain of that. Especially when it seems pretty NLF to assume that 'possible worlds' incorporate every level of High 1-A just automatically.
Click to expand...
Depends on what "possible world" means in that case, since there's multiple types of possibility, of course. If you think metaphysical possibility is a thing, for instance, then "All metaphysically possible worlds" wouldn't include all the tiers, since that type of possibility doesn't concern itself only with whether a contradiction exists at all, but also with the actual nature of the world beyond that. So I imagine it'd go up to Low 1-A at most, as a default.

If it's literally just "Literally any logically valid contingent state-of-affairs corresponds to a different reality," though, then, yeah, there's no reason that'd not include all the tiers in the system before 0. It's not really NLF if you explain it right (Which I imagine most verses don't, though). Just a mention of "possible worlds" obviously wouldn't suffice, either way.
 
Last edited:
A
Ultima_Reality said:
Depends on what "possible world" means in that case, since there's multiple types of possibility, of course. If you think metaphysical possibility is a thing, for instance, then "All metaphysically possible worlds" wouldn't include all the tiers, since that type of possibility doesn't concern itself only with whether a contradiction exists at all, but also with the actual nature of the world beyond that. So I imagine it'd go up to Low 1-A at most, as a default.

If it's literally just "Literally any logically valid contingent state-of-affairs corresponds to a different reality," though, then, yeah, there's no reason that'd not include all the tiers in the system before 0. It's not really NLF if you explain it right (Which I imagine most verses don't, though). Just a mention of "possible worlds" obviously wouldn't suffice, either way.
Click to expand...
What of impossible worlds?
 
Me: entering a competition that consists of saying random words

my rival: Yes, and our current system essentially encourages a form of Suggs-style social Darwinian divisive psychopathically power-mad frantic competition to constantly gain greater levels of comparative supremacy in order to grind everyone else under a single bootheel, rather than encouraging a perspective of true oneness (and therefore equality) for everyone at the end, so I technically find what we are currently doing highly immoral as well.

me: I give up 😥
 
Last edited:
Wesker018 said:
Me: entering a competition that consists of saying random words

my rival: Yes, and our current system essentially encourages a form of Suggs-style social Darwinian divisive psychopathically power-mad frantic competition to constantly gain greater levels of comparative supremacy in order to grind everyone else under a single bootheel, rather than encouraging a perspective of true oneness (and therefore equality) for everyone at the end, so I technically find what we are currently doing highly immoral as well.

me: I give up 😥
Click to expand...
Basically, what OC writers do most of the times
 
7eh2HCH.png

wbGYpLm.png

4PXk9yh.png


the yap in question
 
I really don't care for or want to understand tier 0 anymore tbh. I hope it gets resolved soon enough so we can move on to the other parts.
 
Honestly, I kept up with it and found it fun. Especially, since everyone was weary of Ultima proposal but he keeps on doing his thing and the others are worrying less and less.

Eventually, Ultima would win this by what I’ve seen so far. He’s that good.
 
IdiosyncraticLawyer said:
@Ultima_Reality What's x/empty set, x^empty set, and log(empty set)x?
Click to expand...
That kinda just doesn't work cause unless you are referring to the cardinality of the empty set (which is zero and thereby two of those get thrown out the window instantly), functions (unless specified to work with sets, and given you are using the basic operators there, don't and can't be) just don't work.

It's like trying to divide an integer by an array (exactly like that actually), you are either gonna get an error message or a wrong output.
 
It seems weirdly off-topic to be asking Ultima these questions in the first place, but yeah, 2/3 of those questions don't have any meaning to them. There is no division in Set Theory and log(empty set)x is just asking "To what power does the empty set need to be raised to get X" when the empty set isn't a number to begin with (and no 0 isn't the empty set, it's the cardinality of the empty set).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
VS Battles Is Nonsense / Delete My Account
Replies
6
Views
1K
Dragonite007
Dragonite007
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System
12 13 14
Replies
530
Views
150K
Ultima_Reality
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
How many of you guys believe in the tiering system?
Replies
14
Views
2K
Planck69
Planck69
  • Locked
What would debunk the basis of the VSBW tiering system
Replies
6
Views
791
Urshani
GarrixianXD
VS Battles Is Nonsense / Delete My Account UwU
2
Replies
48
Views
2K
Epiccheev
Epiccheev
Back
Top