|
|
Post by masterprime64 on Jan 3, 2011 17:58:06 GMT -5
@ Nexus Nice dude
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Jan 3, 2011 18:02:28 GMT -5
You said what was super and you changed it. I was pointing out that change. That's what I'm arguing against. I never changed anything. My stance and argument has been consistent the entire time. |
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Jan 3, 2011 18:05:19 GMT -5
You said what was super and you changed it. I was pointing out that change. That's what I'm arguing against. I never changed anything. My stance and argument has been consistent the entire time. Your stance and argument is that the definition of super abilities changes depending on which particular character/set of characters you're talking about. My stance and argument is in doing that, you lose the meaning of what super abilities actually are. |
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Jan 3, 2011 18:07:20 GMT -5
I never changed anything. My stance and argument has been consistent the entire time. Your stance and argument is that the definition of super abilities changes depending on which particular character/set of characters you're talking about. My stance and argument is in doing that, you lose the meaning of what super abilities actually are. Not true. I think that if we take the point of the reader as to what is considered super and only the reader, the term 'super' loses all of its meaning entirely because everyone in comics is super compared to you and me. |
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Jan 3, 2011 18:09:47 GMT -5
Not when the reader has it all clearly defined by what the writer presents in the comics, and the blogs, and wikis, and bios that come from it. If what you were saying was true, then Creator wouldn't have been able to make his tier chart. |
|
|
|
Post by masterprime64 on Jan 3, 2011 18:10:41 GMT -5
Take it easy
|
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Jan 3, 2011 18:11:43 GMT -5
I'm sorry, thought that I was. If I came off as harsh or anything I apologize.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterprime64 on Jan 3, 2011 18:13:23 GMT -5
Both of you...Calm down...think happy thoughts
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Jan 3, 2011 18:13:58 GMT -5
Not when the reader has it all clearly defined by the writer presents in the comics, and the blogs, and wikis, and bios that come from it. If what you were saying was true, then Creator wouldn't have been able to make his tier chart.Not true at all because his chart is not a 'what qualifies as super X ability' chart. It is a measuring of individuals in a category of strength, speed, etc relative to humans. |
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Jan 3, 2011 18:14:50 GMT -5
I do not think you were being harsh at all. I sure was not intending to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Jan 3, 2011 18:25:42 GMT -5
Not when the reader has it all clearly defined by the writer presents in the comics, and the blogs, and wikis, and bios that come from it. If what you were saying was true, then Creator wouldn't have been able to make his tier chart.Not true at all because his chart is not a 'what qualifies as super X ability' chart. It is a measuring of individuals in a category of strength, speed, etc relative to humans. Okay, you lost me for a second. The chart measures and defines what is considered super strength, speed, ect relative to humans in the comic world. That's the common reference, the common viewpoint that every reader can go to as laid out by the writers. If the writers chose to define everything in terms of Kryptonians, then fans like Creator would have made a different chart, but we'd still have that as a common point of reference, and as such, we'd still have a solid definition that everyone could refer to as super. Either way, we'd have something that's consistent, and as long as we have that, we have a solid definition. Just as we have a consistent, universal metric system. |
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Jan 3, 2011 18:30:32 GMT -5
@nexus:
The chart is a measurement of power relative to humans. Everyone can be included but not everyone on the list is considered 'super'. In fact, no one is even called super at all in the charts. Only their abilities compared to a human is.
Not sure where I am losing you on that. It seems extremely uncomplicated to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Jan 3, 2011 18:46:03 GMT -5
Yes, the chart is all that, and the reason that it doesn't call anyone super is because it's not supposed to. I'm not arguing about who is super strong and who isn't, I'm arguing about what super strong actually is. And that chart clearly lays it out by comparing super strong abilities to humans (low, avg, athletic, trained, peak, enhanced) and to abilities that are super and beyond.
We're discussing the abilities not the people with them. The reason the chart works is because it's comparing all of those abilities to the fictitious humans in the comic world. It has a common frame of reference, and thanks to that frame of reference, it can then define what constitutes as low super, mid super, high super, and so on, which allows anyone reading that chart to gather for themselves how strong someone has to be to be considered super. Again, it's thanks to the reference point that all of that is possible. If there were no frame of reference, then there'd be no way to truly define what something like super strength is because it would change from fictitious race to fictitious race. How can you define something if what you're defining constantly changes? If the definition isn't universal, it's not a definition.
And for defining adjectives like big, grand, ugly, pretty, and super, which are completely subjective by nature, there needs to be a common viewpoint, a common denominator, a common reference. Otherwise, it'll just be a word that will mean what I want it to mean when I feel like it meaning it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Jan 3, 2011 18:47:34 GMT -5
The term 'super strong' is relative. It just boils down to that.
|
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Jan 3, 2011 18:50:05 GMT -5
Yes it is relative. That's why there needs to be a reference to define it. That was my point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Jan 3, 2011 18:51:21 GMT -5
Yes it is relative. That's why there needs to be a reference to define it. That was my point. There is a reference to define it. Whatever is extraordinary. |
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Jan 3, 2011 18:52:14 GMT -5
Now there needs to be a reference for extraordinary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Jan 3, 2011 18:53:49 GMT -5
Now there needs to be a reference for extraordinary. There is for that as well. Whatever is beyond the normal capabilities of something or someone. |
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Jan 3, 2011 18:55:38 GMT -5
Okay, now which something or someone are we talking about? As you made exceptionally clear what's beyond the capabilities of a human isn't for a Viltrumite.
|
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Jan 3, 2011 18:57:12 GMT -5
Okay, now which something or someone are we talking about? As you made exceptionally clear is that what's beyond the capabilities of a human isn't for a Viltrumite. Yeah so how are you getting lost? Are you seriously wanting to consider them in the same group? That is.... strange. Do you consider apes to have super strength? |
|
