I have a question regarding paraconsistent physiology. Before I begin with my question, however, I want to ensure that my understanding of dualities and logical states aligns with this wiki's standards for them. From my studies of biomathematics and biophysics, I understand that a duality is any system where two opposing concepts are defined in terms of each other, and together they are meant to be exhaustive and mutually exclusive. What this means is that for concepts A and not-A, three essential rules must be obeyed, where you cannot be both A and not-A at once; everything must fall into one or the other; and each concept only has meaning in relation to its opposite. From what I have read of this wiki's standards, this is the way they treat a duality operating under classical logic, which aligns with my understanding.
An important nuance about classical logic-operating dualities is that there are at least two different forms: logical/formal and substantive/ontological. Using the concepts of creation and destruction, I am going to explain the difference between these two forms. A logical/formal duality is defined as a duality that is generated purely by the structure of negation itself; this would be creation and not-creation. Not-creation is defined as simply everything that is not "creation". It has no independent identity or content of its own, meaning it is entirely parasitic on "creation" for its definition. It is just the complement set: the reality of all things, minus creation. A substantive/ontological duality, on the other hand, is defined as a duality where both terms have rich and independent content; this would be creation and destruction. Destruction doesn't just mean the absence of creation. It is an active force, process, or principle with its own nature, which is the unmaking of things, the return to nothingness, and annihilation. You could give a full account of what destruction is without ever mentioning creation, and yet, the two are deeply interdependent in a way that goes beyond mere logical negation. For example, creation presupposes something that can be destroyed; but if nothing could be unmade, what would it mean to make something? Additionally, destruction presupposes something that was created, but you cannot destroy what never existed. They define a cycle together, giving the other meaning and stakes, where neither term is simply the shadow of the other.
In this wiki, the page for paraconsistent physiology portrays logical/formal and substantive/ontological dualities as synonymous, when they are not. Essentially, my question is: how do we distinguish between and take into account these two forms of dualities when analyzing feats?
the only thing is the "1A" afterlife argument is based on an outdated tiering system where having BDE type 1 is 1A or whatever now the new meta my friend Zeta uses is the summit scale where Goku black cuts space time the effect was beyond his understanding of space and time therefore he's 1A. 
vsbattles.com
