About 1-A and High 1-A

[OmniScalator]

while we know that by R>F we can establish a qualitative superiority if there aren't some anti feats (like existing in same reality you perceive as fiction) is 1-A, what i don't understand is How exactly can a character reach High 1-A? what exactly is "meta-quality"? it would help if you can make up a example

 

[Arceus0x]

it's what 1-A is to Low 1-C.
Imagine you have 1-A+. It is infinitely or uncountably or uncountably-uncountably infinitely stacked R>F layers on top of each other. High 1-A surpasses that and it cannot be reached by that kind of stacking. It is in similar vein to how you can infinitely stack dimensions higher and higher but it would still not be 1-A no matter what.

 

[OmniScalator]

it's what 1-A is to Low 1-C.
Imagine you have 1-A+. It is infinitely or uncountably or uncountably-uncountably infinitely stacked R>F layers on top of each other. High 1-A surpasses that and it cannot be reached by that kind of stacking. It is in similar vein to how you can infinitely stack dimensions higher and higher but it would still not be 1-A no matter what.

So if you see a 1-A character as fiction who is 1-A due to some other reason and not R>F? will it be High 1-A in this case?

for example seeing platonic concepts as fiction?

 

[Arceus0x]

So if you see a 1-A character as fiction who is 1-A due to some other reason and not R>F? will it be High 1-A in this case?

for example seeing platonic concepts as fiction?

I don't think platonic concepts give tiers nowadays. If you see something 1-A as fiction that's just +1 layer of 1-A. Seeing something as fiction is one of the basis of an r>f difference.
High 1-A would be something surpassing a heirarchy of 1-A layers to an impossible extent, where rather than being another higher layer you are outside the heirarchy in the first place.

 

[OmniScalator]

I don't think platonic concepts give tiers nowadays. If you see something 1-A as fiction that's just +1 layer of 1-A. Seeing something as fiction is one of the basis of an r>f difference.
High 1-A would be something surpassing a heirarchy of 1-A layers to an impossible extent, where rather than being another higher layer you are outside the heirarchy in the first place.

won't this give 1-A?

1. True Platonic Concept: Such concepts, or forms, are completely transcendent of reality in every aspect. These forms are 1-A in nature, as they are beyond all spatial and temporal dimensional constructs and all of reality merely "participate" in these concepts. For example, a circular object is circular because it is "participating" in the form of "circle-ness". In this way, the alteration of these concepts will change every object of the concept across all of reality. These concepts must exist prior to and after the existence of any object of the concept.

 

[Arceus0x]

won't this give 1-A?

that's a 2018 unposted blog.
This is the modern page.

Conceptual Manipulation

Conceptual Manipulation is the ability to manipulate, create, and/or destroy abstract concepts. This ability has a variety of applications, ranging from not combat-applicable to incredibly dominating. Conceptual Manipulation involves the manipulation of concepts, and not the universe directly...

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[OmniScalator]

that's a 2018 unposted blog.
This is the modern page.

Conceptual Manipulation

Conceptual Manipulation is the ability to manipulate, create, and/or destroy abstract concepts. This ability has a variety of applications, ranging from not combat-applicable to incredibly dominating. Conceptual Manipulation involves the manipulation of concepts, and not the universe directly...

vsbattles.fandom.com

thanks

for some reason that unposted blog have better search engine optimization

 

[SuperNova55555]

thanks

for some reason that unposted blog have better search engine optimization

It should be mentioned that true platonic forms are no less than High 1-A+, so r>fing a platonic form is literally an anti-feat.

Tho, most “platonic forms” in fiction are in fact just 1-A, so r>fing it would be like 1 layer into 1-A.

In any case, if you want to understand High 1-A, I would explain it as such:

Imagine a ladder where each “step” is an additional r>f layer (so they see the lower step as fictional); so, the first step is normal reality, the second step is 1-A, the third step is 1 layer into 1-A, the fourth step is 2 layers into 1-A and so on and so forth.

High 1-A now (or “meta-quality” as it’s also called), would be to see the ladder itself as fictional. So instead of seeing the previous step as fictional like a higher step does to the lower, you simply see every step as equally fictional as the ladder itself isn’t real to you at all.

As the previous commenter explained, it’s like how a 1-A being sees every spatial dimensional as equally fictional in nature; just now, you substitute “dimension” for “R>F layer”.

 

[BeTheWay1rst]

It should be mentioned that true platonic forms are no less than High 1-A+

Source: Trust me bro

 

[SuperNova55555]

Source: Trust me bro

There are mods on record saying this.

Anyways, I’ll still explain it: the reasoning for High 1-A+ is rather similar to what current Tier 0 has, in the sense that true Platonic Forms don’t have accidents or “receive” the property of what it is to be them since they are the property itself.

A knife “has” knife-ness, but the Platonic Forms of a Knife is knife-ness in the sense that it is “what-it-is-to-be-a-knife”. They are essentially what define what “possible worlds” can be, since a “possible world” is one in which X objects have Y properties; but the capability to “have” or “receive” the “Y properties” is enabled by the Platonic Form.

The “realness” or “fiction-ness” of 1-A layers can be received since they participate in the Platonic Form of “Fiction”, which is just “what-it-is-to-be-fictional”.

The issue with the “1-A Platonic Forms” is that it means that those Platonic Forms have or receive “realness”, which is impossible since they can’t participate in anything due to not having properties and instead are identical to their respective property (or what-ness). So, they are the standard itself by which things participate in, instead.

Current Tier 0 (Pure Esse) follows a similar logic, but instead of it being “what-it-is-to-be-X”, Tier 0 is simply “what-it-is-to-be” as it is the standard for existence itself, and all things “receive” existence by participating in it.

 

[BeTheWay1rst]

There are mods on record saying this.

Anyways, I’ll still explain it: the reasoning for High 1-A+ is rather similar to what current Tier 0 has, in the sense that true Platonic Forms don’t have accidents or “receive” the property of what it is to be them since they are the property itself.

A knife “has” knife-ness, but the Platonic Forms of a Knife is knife-ness in the sense that it is “what-it-is-to-be-a-knife”. They are essentially what define what “possible worlds” can be, since a “possible world” is one in which X objects have Y properties; but the capability to “have” or “receive” the “Y properties” is enabled by the Platonic Form.

The “realness” or “fiction-ness” of 1-A layers can be received since they participate in the Platonic Form of “Fiction”, which is just “what-it-is-to-be-fictional”.

The issue with the “1-A Platonic Forms” is that it means that those Platonic Forms have or receive “realness”, which is impossible since they can’t participate in anything due to not having properties and instead are identical to their respective property (or what-ness). Instead, they are the standard itself by which things participate in, instead.

Current Tier 0 (Pure Esse) follows a similar logic, but instead of it being “what-it-is-to-be-X”, Tier 0 is simply “what-it-is-to-be” as it is the standard for existence itself, and all things “receive” existence by participating in it.

Some concepts like reality and existance are concept that define others conepts, and i am sure that we can go even further backward infinitly since concept aren't incomprehensible.

 

[SuperNova55555]

Some concepts like reality and existance are concept that define others conepts, and i am sure that we can go even further backward infinitly since concept aren't incomprehensible.

Real-ness here is referring to properties that define the hierarchical placement in an “R>F hierarchy” or whatever. But all of those “R>F layers” are still equally real in the sense that they are Acts which are received by participating in the Pure Act or in the aforementioned Platonic Concepts.

Lower qualitative layers are only relatively non-existent to you, but they’re not actually non-existent.

 

[SuperNova55555]

Some concepts like reality and existance are concept that define others conepts, and i am sure that we can go even further backward infinitly since concept aren't incomprehensible.

Also, true Platonic Forms would kind of necessitate some form of ineffability.

 

[BeTheWay1rst]

Real-ness here is referring to properties that define the hierarchical placement in an “R>F hierarchy” or whatever. But all of those “R>F layers” are still equally real in the sense that they are Acts which are received by participating in the Pure Act or in the aforementioned Platonic Concepts.

Lower qualitative layers are only relatively non-existent to you, but they’re not actually non-existent.

Would you think platonic world R>F all possible/impossible world since the concept of world is located in there ?

 

[SuperNova55555]

Would you think platonic world R>F all possible/impossible world since the concept of world is located in there ?

That’s not why they’re High 1-A+. It’s because they are the standards for which properties can be received that makes them that. And they don’t “r>f” possible worlds either—that’d be an anti-feat.

 

[Shikitaka]

Okay, I'll explain High 1-A (As far as I understand):

• Imagine there's some structure that's called A. A ontological transcends (qualitative superiority) to all below structure (11-C to Low 1-A). Assume this statement is true and there's no anti-feat. A is 1-A.
• B transcends ontological distinction or difference between A and all below structure (Which is Ultima calls "Algorithm") and see it as fiction. We can't say B is 1-A above baseline 1 layer because B doesn't just R>F into A but also R>F into qualitative superiority itself, since B transcends algorithm of quality or difference between 1-A quality and below 1-A quality mean B transcends the entire framework itself. B is High 1-A.
• In the same way, if there's infinite hierarchies of R>F. First layer is 1-A and higher layer transcends and views lower layer as unreality. High 1-A is something transcends distinction and difference of quality between higher layer and lower layer, since 2nd layer transcends 1st layer like 3rd layer transcends 2nd layer. From that we can say N+1 layer always transcends N layer in same way for all possible N. If something transcends "way" of transcending itself, it also transcends all possible layers of hierarchies too.

 

[Arceus0x]

Okay, I'll explain High 1-A (As far as I understand):

• Imagine there's some structure that's called A. A ontological transcends (qualitative superiority) to all below structure (11-C to Low 1-A). Assume this statement is true and there's no anti-feat. A is 1-A.
• B transcends ontological distinction or difference between A and all below structure (Which is Ultima calls "Algorithm") and see it as fiction. We can't say B is 1-A above baseline 1 layer because B doesn't just R>F into A but also R>F into qualitative superiority itself, since B transcends algorithm of quality or difference between 1-A quality and below 1-A quality mean B transcends the entire framework itself. B is High 1-A.
• In the same way, if there's infinite hierarchies of R>F. First layer is 1-A and higher layer transcends and views lower layer as unreality. High 1-A is something transcends distinction and difference of quality between higher layer and lower layer, since 2nd layer transcends 1st layer like 3rd layer transcends 2nd layer. From that we can say N+1 layer always transcends N layer in same way for all possible N. If something transcends "way" of transcending itself, it also transcends all possible layers of hierarchies too.

You basically said what I said but in a more confusing way honestly

 

[Shikitaka]

You basically said what I said but in a more confusing way honestly

I just add some details because it doesn't need to have infinite hierarchies of 1-A to create High 1-A character.

 

[SuperNova55555]

You basically said what I said but in a more confusing way honestly

This is funny

I just add some details because it doesn't need to have infinite hierarchies of 1-A to create High 1-A character.

This is (obviously) true, as well.

In fact, you can also get High 1-A by simply transcending the very distinction between baseline 1-A and non-1-A.