[Game] Umineko - Spoilers, Theories, Interpretations

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Renall

Bern saying she "went further back" might suggest timeline manipulation, but it's easier if you just think of the church as Aura said: Fiction. What Bern's really saying is "I changed the premise."

The other stories were written from the implicit assumption of a "real world" foundation; that is, they're based on the premise of the family conference as people believe it actually happened in 1986 (at least up to the point where information is unavailable). The Lion story is a story of the October 1986 conference, yet based on a different premise: What would 1986 have been like if Natsuhi had accepted the baby? Changing that premise is "reaching outside the box" in the sense that all the other Rokkenjima stories only chose to alter what happens in their fictional stories after the October 4th information cutoff. Lion's world only exists by taking from a premise that isn't true.

I suspect this is part of why Bern can taunt Claire about this. Lion is a false hope in that his/her existence is escapism; no such world can actually exist outside of a fiction. Will's retort amounts to "Yeah, well so what? At least some version of this person has a great life, can't you leave that alone?"

Bern, naturally, can't, but she's an asshole.

You know since EP5 I always promoted the idea that Umineko is different from Higurashi and that instead of the multiple realities there are just many different fictional stories.

Now that the story ended I do think that anything that happened can be explained with that theory, and I do think that it's the best possible explanation. But only for a 90%.

In other words I can't help but to think there are a few things that don't fit well with this.


Let's take the case of Lion and Will. If you think about them as characters in a story everything makes sense. The fact that they can later be "supported" by Lambda whether Bern likes it or not fits well with the idea of characters that were abandoned by an author but then used by another.

The whole story in EP7 then would just be some kind of fictional world created by... well let's just put aside who created this story in the real world... if such persons exists at all...

What really matters is the universe where Lion was accepted by Natsuhi which was probably one of Yasu's fantasies after she learned the truth.

But then what's with Bern making this claim?

Mathematically speaking, there's actually a 2,578,916/2,578,917 chance of her refusing to raise you

There is no way to infer a mathematical probability from a bunch of stories. How exactly she made that calculation? That sentence only seems to exist for the purpose of making you think that Bern is the same as in Higurashi with her power to travel kakera and stuff.


There are then the various scenarios of the 1998, which cannot be explained simply as fictions. For example the 1998 from EP4 contains so many detailed info about Ange and the people surrounding her that it would be impossible for Tohya and Ikuko to know all of those and to write them without causing an uproar and retaliations from the Sumadera (legal and illegal).

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

There is no way to infer a mathematical probability from a bunch of stories. How exactly she made that calculation? That sentence only seems to exist for the purpose of making you think that Bern is the same as in Higurashi with her power to travel kakera and stuff.

At least, regarding this part, I interpreted it as "Out of all the Rokkenjima fan-fic that's happened, "Lion" only occurs at that rate."

In other words, most authors are really, really, really against the idea of Lion even being a possibility, which matches up with Bern being able to troll with this fact. "People find it EXTREMELY unlikely that Natsuhi would've ever accepted you." Something like that.

Though I doubt there are enough speculative fanfics about Rokkenjima for her to get such an exaggerated numerical figure.

[Jan-Poo]

But even in the improbable case Bern counted all the fictions that have been written about Umineko, that's still a void statement because people could always write more fictions later thus changing that "mathematical probability".

In fact it shouldn't even be called "probability" if she simply counted the fictions, it should be a simple "percentage". She could only talk about "probability" if she knew how likely are people to write fictions with Lion on it. But that's simply preposterous.


As a side note... are there really a minimum of two and a half millions stories on the Rokkenjima incident in the umineko universe?!!! Holy hell...

[Judoh]

Originally Posted by Kealym

At least, regarding this part, I interpreted it as "Out of all the Rokkenjima fan-fic that's happened, "Lion" only occurs at that rate."

I interpreted it as a gag to be honest.

As a side note... are there really a minimum of two and a half millions stories on the Rokkenjima incident in the umineko universe?!!! Holy hell...

It's Ryukishi's dream for Fanfiction of his work to sell like hotcakes I guess?

[Kealym]

Originally Posted by Judoh

I interpreted it as a gag to be honest.

Yeah, pretty plausible. I think my interpretation still works even if it's a gag, though. "Nobody believes you couldv'e happened, kiddo. Nobody writes that."

[UsagiTenpura]

Suggesting an alternative view:

Yasu as shown in arc 7 tends to "rewrite" her real reality into another, as long as she can believe it. Low probability could refer to how unlikely it is that Yasu herself believes this was her life. I know this should be obvious but look at everything else she did believe it was.

[AuraTwilight]

There is no way to infer a mathematical probability from a bunch of stories. How exactly she made that calculation? That sentence only seems to exist for the purpose of making you think that Bern is the same as in Higurashi with her power to travel kakera and stuff.

Because it's included in the narrative, the Sea of Kakera is part of the story setting in a weird meta-way. Therefore, when Bern created this Lion Miracle World, she dictated that one of the rules was it's probability of existence.

Or she's exactly what she claims to be, and pantheistic solipsism is in effect.

Or both.

[cmos]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

There are then the various scenarios of the 1998, which cannot be explained simply as fictions. For example the 1998 from EP4 contains so many detailed info about Ange and the people surrounding her that it would be impossible for Tohya and Ikuko to know all of those and to write them without causing an uproar and retaliations from the Sumadera (legal and illegal).

The way I see it, they aren't written by Tohya and Ikuko. You can say that those stories are "divine revelations" directly from the author (Ryukishi) himself. On the highest meta level they are created by Featherine, who is the god and Creator of that universe we refer to as Rokkenjima-prime and Ryukishi's avatar. The same with ep7 revelations: Featherine "ordered" Bern to make a game and reveal the truth and some dirty guts, in other words, Ryu just wrote an answer episode.

The readers were already part of meta-world since Higurashi, so nothing strange if the author himself is present there too.

Spoiler for Higurashi meta:

[AuraTwilight]

I wouldn't call Featherine a god and creator of anything though; she doesn't know the truth of Rokkenjima any better than we do, really.

[Jan-Poo]

Yeah, Featherine is just the god of her own stories and her own characters, which can be said of any author.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

What really matters is the universe where Lion was accepted by Natsuhi which was probably one of Yasu's fantasies after she learned the truth.

But then what's with Bern making this claim?

There is no way to infer a mathematical probability from a bunch of stories. How exactly she made that calculation? That sentence only seems to exist for the purpose of making you think that Bern is the same as in Higurashi with her power to travel kakera and stuff.

Why must these two facts be connected? Bern could be correct that, probabilistically, there was only a certain chance of Natsuhi accepting the baby (if there was ever one in the first place). The assumption she's leading us to is "if she really did that -> Lion's World." There's no reason that has to be true. The Lion we see at the chapel is a fictional construct, probably the way Yasu would like to have had it play out, but not necessarily the "real" Ushiromiya Lion who could have existed.

In other words, there was a chance that a real world could have existed in which Lion was accepted, and that chance was a certain probability which Bern has the power to estimate. However, that doesn't make the Lion story any less fanciful fiction.

There are then the various scenarios of the 1998, which cannot be explained simply as fictions. For example the 1998 from EP4 contains so many detailed info about Ange and the people surrounding her that it would be impossible for Tohya and Ikuko to know all of those and to write them without causing an uproar and retaliations from the Sumadera (legal and illegal).

This assumes that (1) the 1998 parts appear in the actual text of Alliance on R-Prime, which we do not know; and (2) that Tohya and Ikuko wrote them if they are fictions, rather than someone like Ange who might have more information.

Again, I find it highly improbable that the text we receive as Umineko episodes is the exact same content as exists in all the stories as written on R-Prime. At least some aspects of the story are probably supposed to run parallel to the "original documents" we never get to see. It's impossible to sort out which, but in my mind the meta-world and 1998 are by far the least likely to have ever actually appeared in the text, with the magic scenes and mystery scenes increasingly more likely.

Particularly since we don't actually know with certainty when Alliance was released. In the ep6 1998 Dawn has apparently just come out, which would mean Alliance would have to precede it, which means Alliance can't contain something written about 1998 unless it's completely speculative. Of course that's not a very good benchmark, as that entire Featherine sequence breaks just about every rule of the fictional framework we have.

[Jan-Poo]

Renall how the hell you can estimate the probability of events that have already happened? How can you tell that they could have gone differently? It's absolutely impossible. What happened happened, with a 100% certainty.

Probabilities are only meant to represent our limited knowledge about the variables that influence an event. In theory the Demon of Laplace doesn't have that problem and can foresee the result of any event with 100% certainty. However once an event has happened we don't need to have the power of that demon to know what was the inevitable result.

I can agree that a coin toss has a 50% probability of showing either face, but only because I lack the knowledge of all the related variables, the probability only reflect my ignorance. I maintain that if I knew all of the variables I could predict the result. So after the coin toss has happened I will claim that such result had a 100% probability of happening.

The only case where you are entitled to talk about probabilities for past events is in the case you accept the many world interpretation of quantum physics. But if there's just a single universe what happened simply happened.

Did you understand my point? My point is that fictional theory alone cannot explain everything, you still need to use the many world interpretation to explain some facts... or assume that Ryuukishi messed up his story.

P.S: note that Bern is talking in present time.

This assumes that (1) the 1998 parts appear in the actual text of Alliance on R-Prime, which we do not know; and (2) that Tohya and Ikuko wrote them if they are fictions, rather than someone like Ange who might have more information.

Remove Tohya and Ikuko and insert "anyone" and you still have the same problem. Even if you say that it was Ange, Ange couldn't know many of the things that happened unless she is psychic or those weren't actually real (which would be kinda lame). She can't know, for example, that Kawabata has a bunch of Sakutaro on his futon shop or that Nanjo had found 100 million yens in a bank account.

[Leafsnail]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

I can agree that a coin toss has a 50% probability of showing either face, but only because I lack the knowledge of all the related variables, the probability only reflect my ignorance. I maintain that if I knew all of the variables I could predict the result. So after the coin toss has happened I will claim that such result had a 100% probability of happening.

Einstein lost this debate. Apparently, God does play dice.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

The only case where you are entitled to talk about probabilities for past events is in the case you accept the many world interpretation of quantum physics. But if there's just a single universe what happened simply happened.

Uh, under the logic you just provided, could you not say the same thing about future events?

Probabilities can be representative of "things we don't know" as well as "things that haven't happened yet", basically. If I flip a coin and hide it from you, from your perspective, there's still a 50-50 chance of each.

[Jan-Poo]

Probabilities can be representative of "things we don't know" as well as "things that haven't happened yet", basically. If I flip a coin and hide it from you, from your perspective, there's still a 50-50 chance of each.

Because I don't know. But just because I don't know it doesn't mean there isn't already a 100% certain result.


Let me make a question.

-the chance of a coin toss to give head as a result is 50%
-as per probabilistic rules the probabilities of two different events happening must be multiplied.
-therefore the chance of two coin toss to give both head is 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25

So far it's not debatable.

Now let's say the first coin toss ha been done already and it was a head.
What is the probability that the second coin toss will give head as well?

[Leafsnail]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Now let's say the first coin toss ha been done already and it was a head.
What is the probability that the second coin toss will give head as well?

It's completely and utterly irrelevant, but it's 50%. Just like it was before the other coin was flipped.

The thing is, your argument about a deterministic universe seems to destroy the rest of your argument. As far as I can tell, following your logic, it's invalid to apply probabilities to ANYTHING ever because everything has an 100% chance of happening or a 0% chance of happening.

The thing is... that isn't how probability works. Probability is merely quantifying the uncertainty of on the information we don't have. Whether we don't have that information because it hasn't happened yet (and we don't know enough variables to predict that) or because the result has been hidden from us is irrelevant.

[Jan-Poo]

The question is: what's the probability of both coins to give head.

Before the first coin was tossed it was 0.5 * 0.5 = 0.25

After the first coin was tossed resulting a head it became 0.5

so x * 0.5 = 0.5

what has become that x? yeah 1, in other words 100%

The probability of what has already happened is 100%
If you don't understand that you'be better quit at betting, else you'll do like those retards that think x number at the lottery has more probability to be extracted because it's a long time that it wasn't.

Probability is merely quantifying the uncertainty of on the information we don't have

And what did I say?

Probabilities are only meant to represent our limited knowledge about the variables that influence an event.

But once an event has happened already and you know what happened, you have absolute knowledge of the result of that event.

Therefore probabilities are meaningless on things that you know.

If you realize that the very purpose of the probabilities is to quantify the uncertainty of information that we don't have, you should also realize that for what concerns informations that we have then it's not a matter of probabilities anymore.

[Renall]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

Remove Tohya and Ikuko and insert "anyone" and you still have the same problem. Even if you say that it was Ange, Ange couldn't know many of the things that happened unless she is psychic or those weren't actually real (which would be kinda lame). She can't know, for example, that Kawabata has a bunch of Sakutaro on his futon shop or that Nanjo had found 100 million yens in a bank account.

And maybe those things aren't true. Maybe Kasumi isn't a psychopath. We're proved apparently wrong about Okonogi after all, aren't we?

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

But once an event has happened already and you know what happened, you have absolute knowledge of the result of that event.

Therefore probabilities are meaningless on things that you know.

If you realize that the very purpose of the probabilities is to quantify the uncertainty of information that we don't have, you should also realize that for what concerns informations that we have then it's not a matter of probabilities anymore.

I don't think you understand the philosophy of probability as well as you understand the math of it. There is a difference between recording of observable events - basically history or statistical data collection - and speculation as to the likelihood of that event occurring.

The probability at the time an event happened that it would have the outcome it did has no bearing on the recorded result afterward. The notion that only one outcome was possible is nonsensical; although obviously real-world factors influence the outcome in ways one could theoretically measure, let's pretend we're dealing with mathematically isolated coins and other objects.

Your coin example is overly simplistic, so let's take a die. If I roll a die there is a one-in-six chance of any one side coming up. Once I have rolled the die and found that it rolled, say, three, the result of that roll is indeed a matter of record. It was three, and nothing in the universe can change that. However, that doesn't mean the chance of rolling three was 100%. In fact, the chance was ~16-17%. It was actually more likely than not that I wouldn't roll a three. But I did roll three. That's fine. But the point is, I can go back and examine the conditions preceding the roll and understand what the odds were of rolling what I actually rolled. This is how we can say something like "Huh, I rolled three sixes for 18, that's unlikely." Because the chance of rolling 18 with three dice is quite low relative to other totals. The unlikeliness of the event doesn't mean the event didn't happen. But the reverse is also true. A very likely event is not guaranteed to happen simply because the odds of something different happening were incredibly low at the time, and then the expected result occurred.

In Bern's case, the same is true. The notion that Lion was accepted by Natsuhi in the present world is impossible, because she didn't. However, one can go back and look at all the thousands upon thousands of thoughts, actions, and conditions on that day in 1967 and determine some hypothetical probability that, were the day replayed from some arbitrary point in time billions of times over, that Natsuhi would accept Lion x out of n times. She didn't, but it doesn't mean she never could have. Merely that as it played out she did not.

Note of course that a fiction hypothesis isn't even required to obey this. In fiction you can place a fifth Ushiromiya adult, Frank Ushiromiya, who never existed and never had any opportunity to exist (well, most likely). So even if the chance of Lion's acceptance is literally zero (for instance, because there never was a baby), a fiction can be written around the idea all the same. That does mean you have to reconcile Bern's line, but it's much easier to do that than it is to go on a rail against theoretical probability.

[Leafsnail]

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

The question is: what's the probability of both coins to give head.

Before the first coin was tossed it was 0.5 * 0.5 = 0.25

After the first coin was tossed resulting a head it became 0.5

so x * 0.5 = 0.5

what has become that x? yeah 1, in other words 100%

The probability of what has already happened is 100%
If you don't understand that you'be better quit at betting, else you'll do like those retards that think x number at the lottery has more probability to be extracted because it's a long time that it wasn't.

...I just said that the two results are independant. And if the question is "What's the chance of both coins being heads" with you having flipped one and not shown me... the answer is still 25% from my perspective.

Originally Posted by Jan-Poo

But once an event has happened already and you know what happened, you have absolute knowledge of the result of that event.

Therefore probabilities are meaningless on things that you know.

I guess this makes more sense, but you can still construct a probability if you use a given. "Given that Ushiromiya Natsuhi received this baby 19 years ago, the probability that she would keep it is X depending on other things that could've happened". It's if you theoretically didn't have the knowledge that she rejected the baby.

[AuraTwilight]

To make this even more simple, guys, Bern is (under fictional theory) a fictional character that has magical probability powers. Therefore WITHIN THE NARRATIVE, she is a fictional character giving setting fluff.

It's like if Spiderman says there was a 89% chance that the radioactive spiderbite would've killed him instead of giving him superpowers. Yea, in actuality it was 100% because he was predestined to get awesome superheroes so Marvel could sell a comic series, but in-universe this isn't the case.

[Jan-Poo]

Originally Posted by Renall

And maybe those things aren't true. Maybe Kasumi isn't a psychopath. We're proved apparently wrong about Okonogi after all, aren't we?

We did? What exactly was proved to be wrong about Okonogi?

But let's even said that those things weren't true, who wrote them, why and how? I hope you realize that

1) The idea that weren't true is merely a speculation.
2) It would be extremely lame if they were, there isn't even a "catbox" scenario here to justify it.

Originally Posted by Renall

I don't think you understand the philosophy of probability as well as you understand the math of it.

*snip*

First off, even if I used bold you still managed to ignore that Bern is talking in present time.

Do you understand? Bern said the probability is not the probability was.

Therefore your whole point on this issue is completely void for the case at hand.

But let's talk about the philosophy of probability. Actually let's not talk about it, let's just say that I firmly believe that the result of die roll can be theoretically determined with 100% certainty by knowing all the related variables and you have no damn way to demonstrate that I'm wrong not with logic nor with empirical methods.

So your claim that I don't understand the philosophy of probability is quite pretentious because you are assuming that your philosophy is right and mine is wrong.

The theory of probabilities itself is absolutely unrelated to such issues anyway. You can still use probabilities for things that are absolutely determined.

For example if I ask you which of my closed hands holds a coin, it's a matter of probabilities for you but it's absolutely determined for me.

But let's not talk about this. Let's rather talk about how Bern could mathematically determine the likeliness of Natsuhi making a decision with such a precision.

There is only one way to quantify the human behavior: statistic.
There is absolutely no other way.

So in the case Bern has seen 2.5 millions of universes where Natsuhi doesn't accept Lion and only one where she does, then she can by all means mathematically infer that the statistic probability of such an event happening is as she says.

But if what she's got is just one single case... statistic can't help you there. A single case has no statistic relevance.

Quantifying human behavior with a single case is impossible unless you posses superhuman knowledge which Bern isn't supposed to have.

Originally Posted by Leafsnail

...I just said that the two results are independant. And if the question is "What's the chance of both coins being heads" with you having flipped one and not shown me... the answer is still 25% from my perspective.

Look leafsnail I think I understood where's the problem. I never specified that the past events must also be known events, but I thought it was implied. The case of Natsuhi was such a case.

Originally Posted by Leafsnail

I guess this makes more sense, but you can still construct a probability if you use a given. "Given that Ushiromiya Natsuhi received this baby 19 years ago, the probability that she would keep it is X depending on other things that could've happened". It's if you theoretically didn't have the knowledge that she rejected the baby.

Which things that could have happened?

How are you going to determine and quantify those things that "could have happened"?