• 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.

Transduality Revisions.

Ultima_Reality

Ultima_Reality

?????????
VS Battles
Administrator
5,466
12,473
I propose that we should change the Transduality page, as its current state is frankly extremely misleading and even factually wrong in some parts, not to mention it is extremely outdated by now, as it makes no mention of ideas which have been bought up multiple times and are generally accepted across the Wiki (Such as the idea of "Specific Transduality" as defined below), and also leads many people to the line-of-thinking that Nondualism is automatically 1-A, which is just plain wrong due to reasons I have already outlined in another Thread.

So, I believe it should be better defined and divided into Types which encompass multiple levels and applications of Transduality, all listed below.

I would also like to give special thanks to Aeyu, as she has helped me a lot off-site, and without her this wouldn't be possible, the girl deserves all the love and Freedom

Types
Type 1 (Specific Transduality): The state of being outside of the applications of the binary nature of a given System, or even of an entire Concept, while not being necessarily above all binary ideas and states (i.e Such a being would only be above individual binary concepts, such as Good / Evil, Light / Darkness, True / False, etc.)

Type 2 (False Binary Transduality): The state of being external to all binary distinctions within the context of the scope of an entire reality, but not all concepts of duality itself on any/all levels. Such a state is relative to the cosmology of the verse it belongs to, as there can by other, vaster frameworks wherein binary concepts are of a much larger scope. Furthermore, the difference between types 2 and 3 is not necessarily a dimensional/adimensional distinction.

Type 3 (True Binary Transduality): Transcendence over the very concept of Duality. As such, a Nondual Entity of this scope would be unhinged from all distinctions and possible dichotomies at any given level, as they would exist above the very idea which encompasses and governs them in the first place. Such characters usually exist as living contradictions within their own setting, and abide to Dialetheic or Trivialistic Systems of Logic, or are alternatively portrayed as residing upon a state of single, indivisible wholeness devoid of any separation.

Type 4 (Paraconsistency): A state of being wherein even the dichotomy between being within or outside the scope of binary distinctions is rendered irrelevant. Such characters will exist outside of binary logic at any level and will typically obey alternate systems of logic altogether, up to and including those states which are beyond human comprehension. A basic example of this would be characters who operate under Many-Valued logic, where multiple conclusions can be made other than the basic true/false/both/neither dichotomies (True/False/3rd Value, for instance)


NOTE: STAFF ONLY
 
Thank you for creating this revision, as the frequent misunderstandings are turning into a problem.

This seems fine to me by the way.
 
Sorry for posting here, but I thought I could make a recommendation?

Absolute Transduality: Such "entities" (if they can even be called that) are fully beyond the confines of mathematics, being that they exist independent of all truth values, and therefore cannot be assigned descriptions or attributes to any meaningful capacity.

In layman's terms, this Level Type denotes a state of being beyond all description and classification, existing independently of any and all statements or attributions about such a state of being, as well as being beyond any and all levels of ordered binary logic.

Also, I agree with Ultima, Transduality has been questioned as far back as July of 2018:

https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/1856189
 
Given that the highlights thread will usually not gather enough attention from the staff, feel free to ask all of them directly to comment here as well via their message walls.
 
Personally I would suggest using a word aside from "transcendent" for the definition.

I am not sure if it's intended, but transcendend makes it sound like such a being has a superior position regarding the thing it transcends. That is, transcending a binary system sounds like it would have power over it or generally be unaffected when interacting with it, which I think is not necessarily consequence or requirement. That is btw. also something I would suggest clarifying on the page.


I am not sure if Paraconsistent is the right word for type 4.


Regarding the "Absolute Transduality" idea: Yeah, the type would be pointless. If one can make a page for a character it can not have this type and if a character had this type we couldn't make a page for it. For a profile to be made a character needs to have "true" properties, since those are the only ones we can write on the profile.
 
Paraconsistent seems like the best name for it, since the word refers to alternate Logical Systems apart from Classical Logic, which reject the Principle of Explosion and Noncontradiction, as well as the idea of Bivalence (i.e any possible proposition can be categorized under "True" or "False"), which is pretty much what Many-Valued Logic (used as one of the bases for Type 4 Transduality) opposes the most.
 
Thing is, in my understanding a binary logic system can be paraconsistent and a many-value logic system does not have to be paraconsistent.

E.g. Take a normal binary logic system and eliminate the "and" operator from it (and everything that could be used to replace it). In that case you still have a (very weak) binary system of logic, but since you can't make the statement "A and not A" due to "and" not being a thing, it would have no Principle of Explosion. (Or one could instead eliminate just the "or" operator for a more elegant option)

Other way around, a many value logic system could not allow anything to have more than 1 of its many truth values at the same time (including being true and false), meaning it can have something similar to the principle of explosion.
 
@DontTalk

Hmm, fair enough, then. Would something like Transmodality be better, then? Since it fits the definition of Type 4 Transduality pretty neatly (Other Modes of Logic aside from the Classical one)
 
After 20 minutes of reaserach I have decided that modality, in context of logic, probably refers to something like whether a statement is possible, necessary, factual or impossible and I hence have no idea what exactly the term Transmodality is actually supposed to mean.
 
I'm not familiar with this ability, but it does seem very well placed.
 
DontTalkDT said:
After 20 minutes of reaserach I have decided that modality, in context of logic, probably refers to something like whether a statement is possible, necessary, factual or impossible and I hence have no idea what exactly the term Transmodality is actually supposed to mean.
Click to expand...
I believe it would be extending a proposition into other Logical Modalities which differ from the standard of categorizing it as claiming "possibility, impossibility, contingency or necessity", as the page I linked puts it. It seems pretty closely aligned to Many-Valued Logic, which is one of the bases for Type 4 Transduality like I said, and is probably a better name than "Paraconsistent".
 
Here are some staff members that you can ask to give input here, if you wish:

Azathoth

Ryukama

DarkLK

SomebodyData

Darkanine

Reppuzan

Dragonmasterxyz

Celestial Pegasus

Dark649

Soldier Blue

Monarch Laciel

Kaltias

Assaltwaffle

Saikou The Lewd King

Kepekley23

Antoniofer

Gemmysaur

PaChi2

DarkDragonMedeus

AKM Sama

Dargoo Faust

MrKingOfNegativity

Theglassman12

Wokistan
 
Since we lost the highlights function, we have to make do with more time-consuming ways to get attention. (I have informed Fandom about that the new method is inefficient, and asked them to allow more highlights again.)
 
My only problem with your suggestions is that the word "paraconsistency" preferably needs to be replaced with something that is easier to understand for a general audience.

Also, should we mention in the page at which level of transduality that 1-A characters start to appear, or is this a bad idea?
 
Antvasima said:
My only problem with your suggestions is that the word "paraconsistency" preferably needs to be replaced with something that is easier to understand for a general audience.
Also, should we mention in the page at which level of transduality that 1-A characters start to appear, or is this a bad idea?
Click to expand...
I don't see that as necessary, considering that this can be explained by links provided in the page itself, and I already proposed another name that is better than "Paraconsistency"

You could be a Nondual 1-A entity and be only a Type 1 Transdual, but characters of that Tier can also fit into Type 2, 3 and 4 given the right conditions. The distinction between types of Transdualism isn't the same thing as the distinction between a False Platonic Concept and a True one, where the latter can only be 1-A by definition and the former is strictly only applicable for Tiers which function under Dimensions, it all depends on context really, though I suppose clarifying this on the page itself wouldn't do any harm.

Although, It should be noted that both Type 3 and Type 4 are only for 1-A characters and above, though the latter would be more commonly found in Tier 0s.
 
I don't really get the details of Transduality so I'm not sure how much help I'll be here, but I'll keep watch on the thread and pop in an opinion if I have one.
 
@Ultima

Okay. I think that seems fine.

However, transmodality would still sound too alien to most of our visitors. Perhaps a brief to the point description phrase would be preferable to a single word?
 
Maybe something like Plurality then? It effectively holds the same meaning as the previous suggestions, and isn't as convoluted for casual visitors, it could also be alternatively extended into "Non-Binary Plurality" if that single word is still deemed as being too confusing (Though I particularly think this way of spelling it is redundant)
 
Plurality sounds better than duality, because duality sounds specifically like existing at two places at once as opposed to 3 or more.
 
I think that plurality or non-binary plurality seems fine.

Which term do the rest of you prefer?
 
Reading through right now.

Gonna take a bit before I can wrap my head around this.
 
Ultima Reality said:
Although, It should be noted that both Type 3 and Type 4 are only for 1-A characters and above, though the latter would be more commonly found in Tier 0s.
Click to expand...
Why? I don't see why you would need to have 1-A durability or attack potency to be in either of these categories.

Unless with "transcendent" you mean "has absolute control of and is untouchable by", in which case I would argue that that is an different thing than just transduality.

Edit: To explain some more. The possibilities of dual characters are a subset of the possibilities of transdual characters. Meaning: There is nothing a dual character can do or that can happen to it, that every transdual character is incapable of doing or is impossible of happening to it. So for example "Getting wounded, due to being stabbed by a normal human" is possible for a dual character, therefore it is also possible for transdual characters to exist, which's own logic enables it to do the same.

Of course that isn't the result of getting stabbed for all transdual characters, there probably is a kind of logic would probably lead to every thinkable result of getting stabbed, but there are some for which it is like that.
 
This will be the one and only time I post on this thread. I want to ask all of you here which characters would qualify for Type 4 Transduality, because I honestly cannot name any off the top of my head.
 
So, for Transduality of 2, 3 and 4:

Would it not be impossible for a non-Transdual being to harm them in anyway?

For example, a Dual being throws a rock and it hits the Transdual being, would the transdual not only be hurt, but not hurt both at the same time?

So, any damage done to a transdual being by a dual being would amount to nothing, right?
 
To get anywhere with this, somebody still likely needs to inform all of the staff members that I mentioned earlier.
 
Udlmaster said:
So, for Transduality of 2, 3 and 4:
Would it not be impossible for a non-Transdual being to harm them in anyway?

For example, a Dual being throws a rock and it hits the Transdual being, would the transdual not only be hurt, but not hurt both at the same time?

So, any damage done to a transdual being by a dual being would amount to nothing, right?
Click to expand...
No, transduality is not the incapability of taking binary truth values, it is the ability to additionally take values aside of binary values. What you suggest would be that nothing about a trasndual being is in the "true" state, which would have the problem I mentioned regarding absolute transduality.

To that comes that it is pretty much up to the fiction in question to specify what the results of a character having a property, whichs truth value is something aside from true and false, is.

For example: If "the arm was chopped off" is neither true or false, to which extent can the character use it? As if it weren't chopped off? As if it was chopped off? To some partial capability inbetween? Completly different from how a normal arm is used?

It has to be something, but without being told we don't know. In principle it can be any of the above or other things, dependend on which of the infinite alternatives to dual logics the character obeys.


When it comes to what transduality does, it is in my opinion almost entirely dependend on the fiction in question. It can be extremly powerful, completly mundane or even detrimental depending on which logic the transdual characters employ as replacement to the normal one.

A general resistance to common logic manipulation might be the only ability they really all share.
 
The first 3 types are easy to understand and if we word them a bit more beginner friendly then i am totally for them, but i dont really grasp the last type. Is it possible to nutshell it a bit easier?
 
I think that it is good to evaluate what works best for our purposes.
 
Sorry for the comment however I believe that as Ant said the descriptions should actually mean something to the wide range of verses rather then just being there. The last description didn't mean much in verses discussions, I feel as though this should have siginificance.
 
Also for anyone confused about Transduality it only means transcendance over a binary system or duality without all the complications. The last definition was only for the concept of Duality whilst this is clarifying types of Transduality.
 
@DontTalk

Type 3 Transduality would be 1-A because it is the state of being external to the very concept of Binary and all its elements on a fundamental level, as opposed to simply transcending all binary concepts in "individual ways", if that wording makes sense. Meaning that a being with Type 3 Transduality wouldn't be constrained by the scope of the Cosmology wherein they reside regardless of how big or small it is, because they are unhinged from the concept that defines all Dichotomies (Including Space and Time, Existence and Nothingness, etc) in all possible levels and complexities, so unlike an entity with Type 2 Transdualism, their state would in no way be rendered irrelevant within a larger framework where all binary concepts are of a far larger scope.

I fail to see how a being which exists outside the applications of Duality on all possible levels would still be physical and bound by Space and Time, this isn't about having some aspect of your being which is Nondual, it is about your entire existence standing beyond any dichotomies entirely, being stabbed by a normal human wouldn't be a possibility when "Yes / No" would still be a dichotomy that is transcended on all forms by Type 3 Transduality, this has nothing to do with AP / Durability or the capability of blowing shit up, it has to do with the fundamental nature of 1-A.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Deagonx
  • Locked
"Nonduality Nature 1 Aspect 2"
Replies
35
Views
4K
Antvasima
Antvasima
BestMGQScalerEver
Expanding Arceus Transduality Justification
Replies
14
Views
2K
ProfectusInfinity
ProfectusInfinity
Georredannea15
A little change or fix for the Nonduality page??
2
Replies
60
Views
4K
Georredannea15
Georredannea15
DontTalkDT
Nonduality doesn't make you immune to things until stated
Replies
25
Views
4K
PrinceofPein
PrinceofPein
Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara
  • Locked
Transduality --> Nonduality Application [STAFF ONLY]
Replies
8
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top