Transduality type 3 for Maou Gakuin character

[PrinceofPein]

yup, but it's still order which means she's both part of the duality and isn't at the same time. That's where the 5th truth state comes from.

This is head canon

her using it doesn't really prove or disprove anything from my point of view but okay

It disproves your entire neither is claim dear

"It shined brightly like the sun, blinked like a cold moon, and its frozen flowers were burning. One after another, the flowers gathered behind Arcana, creating a moon-like and sun-like, created an object that is neither of them.", it shows both the properties of A and B but is actually neither

We are already past this there is no such thing has having neither the properties

Post in thread 'Transduality type 3 for Maou Gakuin character' https://vsbattles.com/threads/transduality-type-3-for-maou-gakuin-character.141948/post-5069833

Post in thread 'Transduality type 3 for Maou Gakuin character' https://vsbattles.com/threads/transduality-type-3-for-maou-gakuin-character.141948/post-5069955

 

[sen_]

This is head canon

i don't see how this is head canon but ok it's not the most relevant point

It disproves your entire neither is claim dear

not really, it kinda disproves the state of neither A nor B but it doesn't disprove her being both.

We are already past this there is no such thing has having neither the properties

never said it has neither the properties, i said it has both the properties but is neither of those. And the point still stands that she contradicts order in general which already is both A and B

 

[PrinceofPein]

i don't see how this is head canon but ok it's not the most relevant point

not really, it kinda disproves the state of neither A nor B but it doesn't disprove her being both.

Which is why I said you don't get the TD, you must not be able to say this for
statement A about them they are in a state that can't be described as A is true, A is false, A is simultanously true and false or A is neither true nor false. And so they must obey a many-valued logic with at least 5 truth states, and not be in any of the 4 combinations of true and false mentioned earlier.

If i am able disprove a state is false or true then it is no longer TD3.

never said it has neither the properties, i said it has both the properties but is neither of those. And the point still stands that she contradicts order in general which already is both A and B

And I can also say, it is not both of those things
For it to be TD3 i should not be able to say it has both properties or that it lacks both properties, but the LN literally goes out of its way to say that it contains both properties and never something about it not containing both properties

Originally, contradictory ice and flame co-existed without a slight conflict.

. It is six petals that freeze and burn.

The burning ice flowers, It emits cold air and hot air at the same time

Which means I am able to prove a state is true and false, again TD3 falls apart right there.

 

[Dog3352]

Which is why I said you don't get the TD, you must not be able to say this for
statement A about them they are in a state that can't be described as A is true, A is false, A is simultanously true and false or A is neither true nor false. And so they must obey a many-valued logic with at least 5 truth states, and not be in any of the 4 combinations of true and false mentioned earlier.

If i am able disprove a state is false or true then it is no longer TD3.

And I can also say, it is not both of those things
For it to be TD3 i should not be able to say it has both properties or that it lacks both properties, but the LN literally goes out of its way to say that it contains both properties and never something about it not containing both properties



Which means I am able to prove a state is true and false, again TD3 falls apart right there.

You are putting 4 states in your face and in our face, if ice and fire are duality/contradictions, this already makes dualities, if Arcana with its order manages to make both coexist, it means that it is also in non-duality, and taking into account that the Arcana order does not follow any of this, the order would possibly be a fifth state.

 

[sen_]

Which is why I said you don't get the TD, you must not be able to say this for
statement A about them they are in a state that can't be described as A is true, A is false, A is simultanously true and false or A is neither true nor false. And so they must obey a many-valued logic with at least 5 truth states, and not be in any of the 4 combinations of true and false mentioned earlier.

literally what i said in my first comment here, but this does not prove anything because proving A is true does not necessarily prove B is false, in the same way proving she is A and B simultaneously doesn't prove she isn't also neither of those (that's up to further evidence)

If i am able to disprove a state is false or true then it is no longer TD3.
And I can also say, it is not both of those things
For it to be TD3 i should not be able to say it has both properties or that it lacks both properties, but the LN literally goes out of its way to say that it contains both properties and never something about it not containing both properties

the LN doesn't only say it has both properties it also mentions the object she created is neither, and as i said before the fact she is both A and B does not disprove anything as she is also a contradiction of order in general (which is both A and B simultaneously)

 

[sen_]

You are putting 4 states in your face and in our face, if ice and fire are duality/contradictions, this already makes dualities, if Arcana with its order manages to make both coexist, it means that it is also in non-duality, and taking into account that the Arcana order does not follow any of this, the order would possibly be a fifth state.

exactly, the fact she can make 2 orders coexist (Both A and B) and is simultaneously a contradiction of order in general (which is also both A and B) means she can't be described as either.

 

[PrinceofPein]

literally what i said in my first comment here, but this does not prove anything because proving A is true does not necessarily prove B is false, in the same way proving she is A and B simultaneously doesn't prove she isn't also neither of those (that's up to further evidence)

Then you should read the TD page again

the LN doesn't only say it has both properties it also mentions the object she created is neither,

literally past this, I have already addressed it and sent the link.to you address those posts

and as i said before the fact she is both A and B does not disprove anything as she is also a contradiction of order in general (which is both A and B simultaneously)

Again read the TD page again

 

[PrinceofPein]

You are putting 4 states in your face and in our face, if ice and fire are duality/contradictions, this already makes dualities, if Arcana with its order manages to make both coexist, it means that it is also in non-duality, and taking into account that the Arcana order does not follow any of this, the order would possibly be a fifth state.

Ice and flame example again
It is not ice
It is not flame
It is neither ice or flame
It is both ice and flame (this statement holds true) your TD3 falls apart
Argue with the LN not me

Originally, contradictory ice and flame co-existed without a slight conflict.

. It is six petals that freeze and burn.

The burning ice flowers, It emits cold air and hot air at the same time

 

[sen_]

Then you should read the TD page again

explain how can she make 2 orders coexist simultaneously (both A and B) and simultaneously exist as a contradiction of order which is also both A and B

If i am able disprove a state is false or true then it is no longer TD3.

you didn't disprove anything, you just proved it is at least one of those

literally past this, I have already addressed it and sent the link.to you address those posts

i am not arguing that the statement = TD3, i'm saying the LN didn't go out of its way just to say it is both

 

[Fixxed]

Ahh is become too long and i dont know where the part i must reply

But like i says the author make it clear when he talk about "simulteneously true and false" and "neither true nor false"

He even use different example and different explanation for that

Like he use co-existed for describe the simultenously, and clearly mention about the duality that united (burning ice flowers)

And he use neither if it neither of that duality. He not mention about united of duality or give example like that. He clearly mention it neither of the duality

 

[PrinceofPein]

you just proved it is at least one of those

If I can prove it is one of those then it is not TD3, pretty simple.
If I am able to prove any of the state is true TD3 is a no no

Ice and flame example again
It is not ice
It is not flame
It is neither ice or flame
It is both ice and flame (this statement holds true) your TD3 falls apart
Argue with the LN not me

 

[PrinceofPein]

Since this has been exhausting, I will stop arguing now and stop replying to messages that are not necessary

While waiting for DT comment, if he ever comments

 

[sen_]

Ice and flame example again
It is not ice
It is not flame
It is neither ice or flame
It is both ice and flame (this statement holds true) your TD3 falls apart
Argue with the LN not me

ok then let's think of it like this, let's call the truth value "both A and B are true" C, then let's call the truth value "both A and B are false" D and let's say C and D are a new dual system, now if i prove a character is able to use C that does by default imply that D is false, but in this case we have further evidence that she also contradicts order in general (which is in fact C and the contradiction of C is D by default) so that no longer proves anything.

 

[Dog3352]

Ice and flame example again
It is not ice
It is not flame
It is neither ice or flame
It is both ice and flame (this statement holds true) your TD3 falls apart
Argue with the LN not me

And what exactly does that mean?

ice and flame = Dualities (Cannot co-exist at the same time in the same place)

And Arcana makes two dualities/contradictions co-exist at the same time and in the same exact place, aren't those 4 states?

 

[Dog3352]

"It shined brightly like the sun, blinked like a cold moon, and its frozen flowers were burning. One after another, the flowers gathered behind Arcana, creating a moon-like and sun-like, created an object that is neither of them."

 

[PrinceofPein]

And what exactly does that mean?

ice and flame = Dualities (Cannot co-exist at the same time in the same place)

And Arcana makes two dualities/contradictions co-exist at the same time and in the same exact place, aren't those 4 states?

"It shined brightly like the sun, blinked like a cold moon, and its frozen flowers were burning. One after another, the flowers gathered behind Arcana, creating a moon-like and sun-like, created an object that is neither of them."

We are already past this there is no such thing has having neither the properties

Post in thread 'Transduality type 3 for Maou Gakuin character' https://vsbattles.com/threads/transduality-type-3-for-maou-gakuin-character.141948/post-5069833

Post in thread 'Transduality type 3 for Maou Gakuin character' https://vsbattles.com/threads/transduality-type-3-for-maou-gakuin-character.141948/post-5069955

 

[Tatsumi504]

Once again, this isn't to give TD 3 to arcana, it's for Anos and Graham.

Two contradicting orders can't exist at the same time (sun- A, moon- B).

When A is true B is false.
When A is false B is true.
Arcana with her order can make it so that both A and B are true.

All gods refer To themselves as one order despite each having an order and mind of their own.
Eques is the will of the world, aggregate of all order meaning all order exists at the same time as a single indivisible wholeness (both A and B).
Arcana is able to go against this truth state.
If he is both A and B simultaneously, the only way to contradict him is to be neither A nor B.

Her order Can exist as both A and B, neither A nor B yet still remains as a part of order (order in general not any specific one, i.e existing in a state of single indivisible wholeness bereft of separation).This is already 4 truth states confirmed.

Reason itself transcends order (above 4 valued logic states).

Anos and graham are then the opposite and lack of all order and reason. Meaning they exist unbound by this 4 truth states, they're also unbound of reason that already transcends these truth states.

 

[Fixxed]

Once again, this isn't to give TD 3 to arcana

But it is

 

[PrinceofPein]

Snip

Transcending a verse where all dualities exist is not TD, you keep saying this but still don't get it.
This is making a mountain out of a anthill.
Again you need to obey at least 5 truth states for TD3, read the damn TD page will you, literally written there that atleast 5.


Anyway, what chapter is the fight of arcana and eques

 

[sen_]

Once again, this isn't to give TD 3 to arcana, it's for Anos and Graham.

Arcana can get it too, because she is both able to contradict eques (neither A nor B) and make 2 orders coexist (both A and B).

 

[Dog3352]

Transcending a verse where all dualities exist is not TD, you keep saying this but still don't get it.
This is making a mountain out of a anthill.
Again you need to be unbound by at least 5 truth states for TD3, read the damn TD page will you, literally written there that atleast 5.


Anyway, what chapter is the fight of arcana and eques

On the page it says you have to be detached from 4 states to be TD3, not 5.

 

[sen_]

Transcending a verse where all dualities exist is not TD, you keep saying this but still don't get it.
This is making a mountain out of a anthill.

Eques = Both A and B, Arcana is the contradiction of eques = neither A nor B, Arcana can also make 2 orders coexist as seen in the op scan = both A and B.
which means arcana can't be described as either of those = 5th truth state

Again you need to be unbound by at least 5 truth states for TD3, read the damn TD page will you, literally written there that atleast 5.

"they must obey a many-valued logic with at least 5 truth states, and not be in any of the 4 combinations of true and false mentioned earlier." from the TD page, they must be unbound by 4 truth states not 5

 

[Fixxed]

unbound by at least 5 truth

*obey

 

[Tatsumi504]

Transcending a verse where all dualities exist is not TD, you keep saying this but still don't get it.

You're the one who doesn't get it. You know literally nothing. Reason doesn't just transcend as simple as something like HDE, its unbound from order as well.
Order is part of reason. If reason is destroyed, order is destroyed, hence those capable of manipulative reason can **** with anything in the verse.
Anos and graham are above and unbound from both order and reason. They exist outside order (4 truth states).

Again you need to be unbound by at least 5 truth states for TD3, read the damn TD page will you, literally written there that atleast 5.

No, being in a 5th truth state is enough

Anyway, what chapter is the fight of arcana and eques

Thanks for proving you didn't read the scans. They didn't fight.

 

[Tatsumi504]

Arcana can get it too, because she is both able to contradict eques (neither A nor B) and make 2 orders coexist (both A and B).

Another thread, hopefully can be done here as well

 

[PrinceofPein]

On the page it says you have to be detached from 4 states to be TD3, not 5.

Edited it

Eques = Both A and B, Arcana is the contradiction of eques = neither A nor B, Arcana can also make 2 orders coexist as seen in the op scan = both A and B.
which means arcana can't be described as either of those = 5th truth state

These makes no sense.

Ice and flame example again
It is not ice
It is not flame
It is neither ice or flame
It is both ice and flame (this statement holds true) your TD3 falls apart
Argue with the LN not me

No, being in a 5th truth state is enough

Which you have yet to prove

Thanks for proving you didn't read the scans. They didn't fight.

Thanks for saying you read what I said completely wrong
I asked for a chapter in which rhey fought, which means I can't find it in any of the scabs posted.

The fact that they did not fight makes everything easier and your claims based on head canon.
So at this point I will wait for DT

 

[Tatsumi504]

Eques = Both A and B, Arcana is the contradiction of eques = neither A nor B, Arcana can also make 2 orders coexist as seen in the op scan = both A and B.
which means arcana can't be described as either of those = 5th truth state

"they must obey a many-valued logic with at least 5 truth states, and not be in any of the 4 combinations of true and false mentioned earlier." from the TD page, they must be unbound by 4 truth states not 5

Pain- you must be unbound by 5 truth states. You know nothing about TD, Read the TD page.

*checks TD page

TD page- being outside 4 truth states is enough to qualify for TD 3.

Bruh

 

[sen_]

These makes no sense.

how come?, Eques is the will of the world and the aggregate of all order so he's undoubtedly both A and B. Arcana contradicts him, is there any other possible truth value?

 

[Tatsumi504]

The fact that they did not fight makes everything easier and your claims based on head canon.
So at this point I will wait for DT

Yeah, my claim is based on head canon yet there's a scan with Anos saying her order was prepared to contradict even eques

You sure are living the dream buddy. Get off your high horse and accept you know nothing. How many of your comments have been riddled with head canons already?

 

[Dog3352]

how come?, Eques is the will of the world and the aggregate of all order so he's undoubtedly both A and B. Arcana contradicts him, is there any other possible truth value?

Is Eques also no-duality? The order of Eques is not part of the system of dualities.

 

[sen_]

Is Eques also no-duality? The order of Eques is not part of the system of dualities.

eques is TD 2 (A and B are simultaneously true)

 

[PrinceofPein]

Pain- you must be unbound by 5 truth states. You know nothing about TD, Read the TD page.

*checks TD page

TD page- being outside 4 truth states is enough to qualify for TD 3.

Bruh

Read the post again, a mistake that was corrected outside 4 of true and false and obeys 5 multivalue truth states.
So far arcana has not been shown to be any

how come?, Eques is the will of the world and the aggregate of all order so he's undoubtedly both A and B. Arcana contradicts him, is there any other possible truth value?

If eques is an aggregate of all a contradiction will when there is none. Meaning no order. Which is why I said it makes no sense

Yeah, my claim is based on head canon yet there's a scan with Anos saying her order was prepared to contradict even eques

Based on head canon means it did not happen and your interpretation is flawed

You sure are living the dream buddy.

Yes I am

Get off your high horse

No, that means i have to touch the same sand as you, dear.

and accept you know nothing.

Would love to but I am filled with knowledge

How many of your comments have been riddled with head canons already?

None

 

[Tatsumi504]

She contradicts even eques.

Eques= both A and B.

Arcana contradicts eques (aggregate of all order)= neither A nor B,

While still remaining as a part of order(indivisible wholeness)= both A and B.

Her order is true, false, both true and false, neither true nor false (4 logic states).
Anos and graham then exist, beyond these 4 logic states.

How is this not TD 3?

 

[Tatsumi504]

Read the post again, a mistake that was corrected outside 4 of true and false and obeys 5 multivalue truth states.
So far arcana has not been shown to be any

My bad. Still Anos and Graham are beyond 4 valued logic states. You haven't refuted that.

 

[sen_]

So far arcana has not been shown to be any

what?, the op scan literally shows her making both A and B true simultaneously and also shows her contradicting eques

If eques is an aggregate of all a contradiction will when there is none. Meaning no order. Which is why I said it makes no sense

i don't really understand what you're trying to say, could you elaborate further?

 

[Tatsumi504]

None

Yet you claimed she contradicts order by becoming either 1 or 0 not to mention another I can't recall right now.

 

[PrinceofPein]

My bad. Still Anos and Graham are beyond 4 valued logic states. You haven't refuted that.

I don't see them been above 4 "true or false statements" since I already disproved the "neither" statement.
And again this is one of the requirements the other requirement is 5 truth states.
The TD3 revision I was in has a "AND" and not "OR" between this two requirement.
Meaning both must be true not either must be true.

what?, the op scan literally shows her making both A and B true simultaneously and also shows her contradicting eques

i don't really understand what you're trying to say, could you elaborate further?

Tbh I can't right now, but I sent link to some posts check them or my posts to Dereck.

Yet you claimed she contradicts order by becoming either 1 or 0 not to mention another I can't recall right now.

And my next post after that says "my bad" as in a mistake, don't be that guy.

 

[Tatsumi504]

Literally read the last two scans here

Her order was prepared to fight against eques.
Destruction of eques= destruction of all order.
Destruction of order= destruction of the world.
Her order can make it so that eques destruction doesn't destroy the world.

If eques is an aggregate of all a contradiction will when there is none. Meaning no order. Which is why I said it makes no sense

Argument from incredulity and is thus invalid here. In the first place, stuff like this isn't supposed to make sense

 

[PrinceofPein]

Argument from incredulity and is thus invalid here. In the first place, stuff like this isn't supposed to make sense

HUH?
I can believe it just fine, you just cannot prove it.

Anyway enough semantics, let's wait for DT and stop clogging the thread

 

[Tatsumi504]

And my next post after that says "my bad" as in a mistake, don't be that guy.

I'm sorry. I need to calm down before I get heated so I'll be gone for a while, last post till further notice.

since I already disproved the "neither" statement.

Where did you prove it?

Eques is both A and B(single, indivisible wholeness bereft of separation).

By contradicting eques, she is neither A nor B.

She contradicts him while still being a part of (general)order (both A and B).

Arcana is thus;

• Both A and B
• Neither A nor B

Anos and graham existing Unbound from these logic states= TD 3