• 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.

Touhou Project Conceptual Manipulation Downgrade

Status
Not open for further replies.
@Kisaragi_Megumi
d97.jpg
 
I feel most of the evidence presented is just type 2. With the existence-nonexistence being the only thing for Type 1.

But as a note the scan the OP provided would still go against Type 1. There wasn't nothing and then something, there was chaos and then definition to chaos. It's still probably Type 1 but it's not because they predate anything.
 
Qawsedf234 said:
I feel most of the evidence presented is just type 2. With the existence-nonexistence being the only thing for Type 1.

But as a note the scan the OP provided would still go against Type 1. There wasn't nothing and then something, there was chaos and then definition to chaos. It's still probably Type 1 but it's not because they predate anything.
Click to expand...
So, is type 1 good to stay or are you still in favor of type 2? Idk if I included this in my original post, but gods (which are nameless) are stated to be "nothing", so would that help prove that namelessness = nothingness?
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
So, is type 1 good to stay or are you still in favor of type 2?
Click to expand...
In my view it looks more like Type 2, but I really don't know much about the verse to say much.

Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
would that help prove that namelessness = nothingness?
Click to expand...
Nothingness isn't Type 1, since there were things before nothing in this universe. Nothingness is only Type 1 if there was a nothing before everything and still a nothing after everything, rather than a diametrically opposed concept of existence like there is here.
 
Qawsedf234 said:
In my view it looks more like Type 2, but I really don't know much about the verse to say much.
Click to expand...
Alright then, I'll keep you in the agree category.

Qawsedf234 said:
Nothingness isn't Type 1, since there were things before nothing in this universe. Nothingness is only Type 1 if there was a nothing before everything and still a nothing after everything, rather than a diametrically opposed concept of existence like there is here.
Click to expand...
That wasn't really my point. You just said that reality wasn't nonexistent, just in a state of "chaos", so I posted that as proof that reality genuinely was nonexistent prior to the gods giving everything names.

Tally hasn't changed, but @Qawsedf234 is more solid on type 2 now (I think).
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Agree: @Qawsedf234

Disagree: @Duedate8898, @KLOL506, @Theglassman12

Neutral: @Planck69
Click to expand...
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
If I can have a TLDR summary, then perhaps.
Click to expand...
  • Anti-Type 1: There was Chaos that contained everything, the Gods named everything, then creation was clarified
  • Pro-Type 1: Concepts like "Nothing" and "Everything" should predate creation and it was argued you can be outside the concept of Life and Death but not beyond its boundaries. Implying there's a difference between the act of Death and the conceptualized idea of death
Or at least, that's the jist I got.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
If I can have a TLDR summary, then perhaps.
Click to expand...
Well my full rebuttal with scans and such is here, but for a TL;DR:
-OP claims that names and boundaries in Touhou only govern individual concepts, and are thus type 3.

-Boundaries shape concepts across all of reality (like space-time, life and death, dimensions, existence and nonexistence, etc), and predate reality via creating it. If boundaries don't exist, reality collapses in on itself, all of which combined makes them type 1 (since being able to exist before reality means you don't rely on what exists in it and will be unaffected by the destruction of that reality).

-Names created everything in reality from nothing, including boundaries. As boundaries are type 1, names are too since a type 2/3 concept can't govern type 1 concepts. Names can also alter the nature of the gods, which is an idea spread across reality, and similarly predate reality like boundaries.

In regards to the "chaos" bit, we know what came before names was nothingness. Gods (which are nameless) are stated to be "nothing", and giving a name to something is to create something from nothingness. The chaos bit is, IMO, a bit of flowery language, and doesn't really contradict the nonexistence stuff.
 
Last edited:
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Scan ain't working, but if it's what I'm thinking of, I don't recall this being related to gods or names (pretty sure it was about the power used to stop the night in Imperishable Night).
Click to expand...
Yes it's in Imperishable Night (Alice/Marisa route) I'll just quote it then

"It looks like the two of you are using a copy
of an ancient power.

A chaotic power, from the time before humans were around.
Those were the days.

I wonder if special powers should be patentable.

Well, before anything else--
Udonge, I'll leave this to you.

Whatever you do, do not let them take our princess."
 
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Agree: @Qawsedf234

Disagree: @Duedate8898, @KLOL506, @Theglassman12, @Elizhaa

Neutral: @Planck69, @DarkDragonMedeus

Is this enough to close the thread, or should we wait a little longer?
Click to expand...
Conflicted tbh, the disagree part has required it's condition so by all mean this thread has been rejected
But in other hand i feel there's more room go be debated, tho Qawsed has likely give up on it

I dunno, i let you guys decide, also put me on disagree as well
 
ImmortalDread said:
a refutation follows, reiner. You creates an argument, you got response from it. You can't rush the thread and close and not let the person who wanted to respond, has no chance to respond.
Click to expand...
I didn't rush the thread. We had 4 staff disagreements (and even @Qawsedf234 disagrees with type 3), that is more than enough input for a thread to be closed. You can't just keep indefinitely stalling threads just because you didn't like the outcome.
 
ImmortalDread said:
the thread was not even a day, it was rushed the moment you spam vote tally. Also, why are you arguing? Keep civil. Qawsed disagreed with type 1 as well.
Click to expand...
There is no grace period for a rejected thread. The votes were clearly in favor of keeping type 1, so we closed the thread based on that. Just admit the arguments used weren't very good and move on, christ.
 
Fuji, no energy to "fight with you". Sure, I want to debate, also Fuji, the votes don't matter as long as you rushed it in the moment the person was supposed to respond. You can spam this thread with this irrelevant topic, I am waiting till he finish his essay.
 
Thanks for opening the thread. the argument I have is regarding spell cards which are rated the same concept hax type 1 for being created by a Concept Type 1

Names being Type 2 or Type 1 is irrelevant to it

Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Again, none of those examples are why names are type 1. You're taking the end result (all names being type 1) and assuming that's my evidence, when it's not (the real reason is that names created all of reality, including other type 1 concepts, and predate that reality as a result).


It's the exact same power though. If gods have type 1, then so do the non-gods who also use names. Keep in mind non-gods are stated to be able to give names to gods, which affects ideas spread across reality, so this isn't even right.
Click to expand...
True but only God's gave name to something that governs reality as a whole. and people naming God's is only affecting an aspect of those Gods and such making them only express those aspect they got named on. A Few cases like Yukari for being able to control boundary would only actually fall under Type 1 or 2 for Concept hax due to the extent of what her boundary covers and can do. Others like Cirno (I Like Cirno) do not exhibit nor is shown capable of making name for such a concept that would govern an entire reality at best it is personal concept born from their powers.
Using the power of naming is not equivalent to using its power to create something equivalent to it.
I can use Fire because the concept of fire make it exist and governs it but that doesn't mean i can concept hax fire to either make an equivalent concept.
What I'm pointing with this is that despite the capabiltiy of what naming can entail not everyone is capable of using it to an extent that would qualify the concept they created from it to Type 2 let alone 1.
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara said:
Except they're not just manipulating stuff that was created by those concepts. They're the ones making the concepts to begin with. You clearly do not even understand why Touhou's CM is a thing.
Click to expand...
Exactly they are making those concepts but those concept doesn't automatically default to Type 1 just because it is created by Type 1 concept. Although the Type 1 concept have feats of creating another Type 1 concept (Like Boundary like you argued as much as i disagree with that) that doesn't mean everything it creates is a Type 1 Concept.
Some universal Concept named by it can be dependent like existence and nonexistence like you said
and some beings in gensokyo can make concept using name to make Personal Concept or personal attack that doesn't necessary govern reality but rather creates the Powers of Spellcard they wanted to make to create those special moves.

to Simplify​

My Argument isn't specifically arguing Names are Type 3 concept
but rather things created by Naming shouldn't automatically default to Type 1 Concept simply because it was created by Naming which is a Type 1 concept
No one is manipulating, changing or destroying the concept that is Naming things. Sure it can create the concept of boundaries but not everything created by it are all Type 1 concepts else it would be a circular argument since even the concept of nonexistence and existence would be Type 1 and the argument for Boundary and Names being Type 1 is because they predate it thus they predate reality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

LordGinSama
Another Reid downgrade
4 5 6
Replies
201
Views
14K
Zabazab
Zabazab
Dog3352
  • Locked
Updating Source to CM type 1
Replies
9
Views
2K
EldemadeDityjon
EldemadeDityjon
Eseseso
  • Locked
Delving further into the Conceptual Nature of Astral Forms (Marvel Comics)
Replies
14
Views
2K
Eseseso
Eseseso
Deceived3596
Viernes (Fairy Tail) Conceptual Manipulation Rework
Replies
18
Views
2K
LordGinSama
LordGinSama
Aaaaa11112222
Can 4D AP bypass Type 2 Conceptual Manipulation?
Replies
23
Views
1K
TheOrangeGuy09
TheOrangeGuy09
Back
Top