2010-09-12, 19:30 | Link #4661 | ||
阿賀野型3番艦、矢矧 Lv180
Graphic Designer
Moderator Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Belgium, Brussels
Age: 37
|
Quote:
Quote:
It isn't really an issue with Ep6 and 7, since the GM itself has changed the game to fit Erika in the lot.
__________________
|
||
2010-09-12, 20:34 | Link #4665 |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
That's illogical. If that was true you could say in red stupid statements like:
The 19th human on Rokkenjima is Santa Klaus. Rosa's second child is Frankenstein Battler's wife is Tinkerbell And then you would say that since Frankenstein, Santa Klaus and Tinkerbell do not exist, then there's no 19th human, no Rosa's second child and no Battler's wife.
__________________
|
2010-09-12, 20:49 | Link #4666 | |
Blick Winkel
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Gobbled up by Promathia
|
Quote:
The fundamental truths are the ones that say things like Ushiromiya Battler's mother is Ushiromiya Asumu. Perhaps these are likened to "background" information that forms the foundation of the game. These do not change. Parameter truths are used to create the mysteries of the game. As shown in EP6, these are what can create logic errors. You can as many of them in red as you want, but it's only okay as long as there is another possibility for the solution to the puzzle. This is my interpretation of why some reds cause a "logic error" while some cannot be spoken at all. To reiterate, there is no difference in mechanic between these kinds of red truths. It's not like Ryukishi himself has two kinds of red truths. These are almost completely arbitrary names and categorizations but may assist in the understanding of the rules of the game. EDIT: I guess I can say this much: Fundamental truths stay the same during each of the games. Like you cannot say "Rosa Ushiromiya is a male" unless she somehow IS a male. Parameter truths can change each game and are used to construct puzzles. Example: Kyrie is dead. |
|
2010-09-12, 20:55 | Link #4667 | ||
Local Crackpot
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere?
|
Quote:
Quote:
It's like having an imaginary friend named Fred, and because imaginary people do not exist in the real world, Fred does not exist.
__________________
|
||
2010-09-12, 21:14 | Link #4668 | ||
Mystery buff
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gone Fishin!
|
Quote:
She does not exist in the worlds before this one, nor does she influence them. LD:"Of course, it's plus 1 over the previous number. But don't worry. Furudo Erika only increases it by one person." Furthermore Erika isn't the only person they are doing this with. There is also the man from 19 years ago and Battler openly considers the problem of purupurupiko man. I think it's safe to say that although there is an illusion of a person probably they aren't considering this as a rule that has to absolutely followed. If it were I don't think we'd have new characters appearing all the time in each episode. It's pretty much a rule now that the closed circle thing isn't respected by anyone in the Umineko universe. Even GM Battler doesn't follow it. Quote:
__________________
Last edited by Judoh; 2010-09-12 at 21:25. |
||
2010-09-13, 14:41 | Link #4669 | |
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
Yeah okay but that doesn't change the fact that your interpretation would allow those ridiculous red truths to be effective. And I really do not think it is possible. "Tinkerbell is Battler's wife" is not a truth, and likewise "Erika is the 18th human" is not a truth if Erika doesn't exist.
__________________
|
|
2010-09-14, 00:39 | Link #4670 | ||
Local Crackpot
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere?
|
Quote:
Quote:
Tinkerbell is Battler's wife, but not this Battler, but the other Battler that was never brought up ever since EP4. Since there are no hintings of humans who carry the same name as the others, this can only be possible for Ushiromiya Battler. Even though the point of the red truth is to give the detective hints, Beato does a hell of a good job using it to screw with Battler. No more than 17 humans exist on this island!! There are 17 people. Kind of...Odd. Before it was X is less than or equal to 17, and now X absolutely equals 17.
__________________
Last edited by Helmet-kun; 2010-09-14 at 00:54. |
||
2010-09-14, 00:45 | Link #4671 | |
Mystery buff
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gone Fishin!
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2010-09-14, 08:15 | Link #4672 | ||
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
I don't think you get the point. A red truth is simply the truth. A statement that is not a truth cannot be said in red. "Tinkerbell is Battler's wife" is not a truth, the fact that neither Tinkerbell nor Battler's wife exist doesn't make this statement a truth. Quote:
X <= 17 X+Y = 17 (where Y might be 0 or 1) The first statement is neither contradictory nor deceiving, it does get you closer to the truth. Without that statement X could be anything from 0 to infinite. With that statement you restrict the possibilities to a very low number. You are a lot closer to the truth with that statement than without it.
__________________
|
||
2010-09-15, 01:23 | Link #4673 | ||
Local Crackpot
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere?
|
Quote:
X=17 in order for the statement I am the 18th person of Rokkenjima. X=17 Therefore, in the X+Y equation, X+Y=18 X+Y= 18 Substitute X. 17+Y=18 Y=1 HOWEVER, the statement There are 17 people. make X+Y have to equal 17 not 18. Which makes Y=0. You cannot put a number between 0 and one because it exceeds 17. Which means: A) Erika was fired (Y value changed within a short period of time) B) "Erika" is a new name for non-existent Person 18, because people thought Person X was too bland a name. Quote:
It's one thing to say, "because neither Tinkerbell nor Battler's wife exist, the statement "Tinkerbell is Battler's wife" cannot be true." That's because right here, it's already denied that Battler has a wife, and that Tinkerbell does not exist. But we can call Battler's non-existent wife (=0) anything we want because that non-existent person does not have a name, and we can use Tinkerbell as long as she does not exist. That's why the statement "Tinkerbell is Battler's non-existent wife" can be true, because it satisfies both requirements, that Tinkerbell does not exist, and that Battler has no wife. It's another to say, " because the statement Tinkerbell is Battler's wife is false, Tinkerbell and Battler's wife do not exist." You can't assume that Tinkerbell does not exist in that statement, there's simply nothing saying that she can't exist as someone other than Battler's wife or that Battler's wife has another name. All the statement says is that she can't be Battler's wife, and that Battler's wife's name isn't Tinkerbell. So long as 'Tinkerbell does not exist' and 'Battler's wife does not exist' is not stated, I can assume that Tinkerbell and Battler's wife still exist, I just haven't seen them on the game board. Yes I know I'm arguing over the existence of a magical floating fairy that exists in some island somewhere. Also, Battler was able to pull a red truth from episode 4 to prove his 'I am not the detective' stunt in episode 5, because it was a truth that Beato gave to him...But how did he know that that truth also applied to the game board he was on?
__________________
|
||
2010-09-15, 01:51 | Link #4674 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
|
Quote:
My only explanation is that Dlanor missed her chance to strike at that flaw. At that point Battler was the game master so he could say almost any red he wanted, his reasoning that went with it was just something to satisfy the knox decalogue. |
|
2010-09-15, 03:00 | Link #4675 | |
Mystery buff
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gone Fishin!
|
Quote:
And even if it didn't how the hell would Dlanor know? He just got through a conversation between him Dlanor and Virgilia where he learned the red was created as a method to give him facts about the game works so he can solve it. So he should therefore assume going by the premise they talked about that facts given from the red can be used to give him direction to understanding the game. So as long as it's effective against Dlanor he couldn't care less. Also Dlanor is a new arrival so Battler should be more reliable once he reaches the witch's rank since he's a veteran in this game. Battler also said in this same red that it was from the 4th game so may have known there was a possibility it may or may not apply to the 5th one. And even if he didn't think of that he's assumed this far that the reds 'there are only 5 master keys', and 'it's impossible to construct a closed room from the outside" for example were true in episode 3 when Beato said it in red in episode 2. But she acknowledged they still counted and he trusted her.
__________________
Last edited by Judoh; 2010-09-15 at 03:51. |
|
2010-09-15, 07:39 | Link #4676 | |||
別にいいけど
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
|
Quote:
The statement: I am the 18th person of Rokkenjima. means: X=17 Y=1 and the statement There are 17 people (including Erika) means: X+Y=17 this is a mathematical paradox. And there's no other way to fix this except by postulating an error in one of the statements. However there isn't any reason to think the error lies in one rather than in another. Well actually the last statement is probably the correct one, but as for Erika's "X" and "Y" they can be equally both wrong. So there are 3 possibilities: -Erika's "X" and "Y" are not the same "X" and "Y" Battler and Beatrice talk about. In that case the equation should better use different labels for the four variables. -"X" is not 17 -"Y" is not 1 Basically this problem can be reduced to this. Quote:
"Tinkerbell is Battler's non existent wife" assumes the existence of a "non existent (in the real world) wife". This statement can only make sense if there is in fact a postulated wife for Battler. In other words a wife that exists in the imaginary, which would make "tinkerbell" equally existent. However if there isn't any postulated wife not even in someone's fantasy then that statement is devoid of any meaning, it isn't an effective red truth. Translated into our Erika dilemma, this would mean that: -Erika's "X" and "Y" are not the same "X" and "Y" Battler and Beatrice talk about. Quote:
__________________
|
|||
2010-09-15, 10:48 | Link #4677 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
|
Real Erika probably drowned near Rokkenjima on the day of the family conference. Her corpse was never found and because her fate was unknown it was possible for the forgers to create the tales, where she's present on the island. We saw these tales in ep5-6. Our Erika is a pure fictional character, created by forger - Tohya.
Red truth just states the facts. However, some things can be true only in their own context, such as almost any game-specific reds, that are true only for a certain game (tale). There's also the truth that is fixed, despite being hidden in the catbox among other possible tales, and that's the truth of the real event on the island. Of course, it can also be stated in red. When Erika says that she's the 18th human, it's the truth. But it's only the truth in its own context, for her own tale and game, because she's a fictional character. It's the same as saying something like Poirot exists in "The Murder of Roger Ackroyd". It's the truth, isn't it? But Battler and Beato know the real truth. In fact, Erika knows it too. That's why earlier with Lambda she says that she was able to withstood the truth about herself and escape from inescapable hell to arrive here. That's why she knows what kind of bullet they will hit her with. And so they say that Erika never existed on the island in reality. This is also the truth and it doesn't contradict the previous one. Poirot never existed in reality. |
2010-09-15, 11:24 | Link #4678 | |
It's Hammertime!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Italy (Neaples)
|
Quote:
This may be the explanation for the "There are 17 people" part, but they say that there are 17 people Even if you (Erika) do join us.. Assuming that one sentence can only have one context, even if they are talking about the "reality" where Erika doesn't exist, how can a non-existent being "join" them? |
|
2010-09-15, 11:38 | Link #4679 | |
Dea ex Kakera
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
|
Quote:
I think this is how Beatrice's two kinds of magic interact. "Endless creation" is her imagination bringing forth an infinite number of possible fictions, and then "magic realization" brings them into reality by getting people to act them out.
__________________
Last edited by LyricalAura; 2010-09-15 at 11:54. |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|