View Single Post
Old 2012-08-30, 07:37   Link #30265
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
It is more likely that the person Ikuko met is a stranger than Ushiromiya Battler, in a raw probabilistic sense that "I saw a stranger crossing the street on my way to work" is probabilistically more likely to occur than "I saw Michael Jordan crossing the street on my way to work." Unless, of course, you happen to drive past Michael Jordan's house every day right about the time he goes out for a jog.

So the chances of Ikuko finding a person who happens to actually be Battler by chance is incredibly small, smaller than finding a random stranger who just so happens to have amnesia too, unless of course she was actually looking for Battler himself. In which case we'd need to know why she was looking for him and how she knew where to look. Otherwise it's by far the biggest and unlikeliest coincidence in the entire storyline, if only because it's a situation that is not self-contained to a small area like the stuff on Rokkenjima.
This logic is based on the wrong assumptions.
It would work only in the case there was some kind of relation between Ikuko and Battler, but they are on respect to each other two completely random persons.
Sure Battler later became famous, but Ikuko is still a completely unrelated individual. and this story is still a story about Battler among all the rest.
It's as if you read a story about Michael Jordan and you claimed it's not realistic because a random individual meets Michael Jordan. Someone is bound to meet Michael Jordan unless he decides to become a hikikomori.
A coincidence requires that two particular factors coincide.

And if by any chance you are claiming that it is an unacceptable coincidence that amnesiac Battler met of all the people someone that crazy to take him home rather than to an hospital, then you'd need to admit that Stephen King's Misery is equally unacceptable.

But let's compare the two cases:

A) Ikuko=Yasu & Tohya=random person
B) Ikuko=random person & Tohya = Battler

There is absolutely no difference in the improbability of these ecounters. In both cases the particular person related to Rokkenjima encounters a random person. Except the random person of case A possess more convenient peculiarities than of case B.

What's more peculiar? An amesiac whose mind is completely moldable, that is casually looking enough like Battler, that casually remembers to be 18 years old and whose background is generally compatible to that of Battler or...
A weird and bored rich person with low morality?

Originally Posted by Renall View Post
I mean, even if Battler became an amnesiac hobo, he could be anywhere in Japan
Originally Posted by Patchwork Chimera View Post
There's a point of interest about probability.
If Battler escaped from Rokkenjima, the only likely place where he could wash alive is Niijima So, it's very likely that Battler was in that island when he was taken by Ikuko.
Actually no. It's been speculated that Ikuko lives in Shimoda or nearby, because it is suggested that the ferry service to go to Niijima is close by to where she lives.

So it's not a random place, it's a place that can be reached directly by boat traveling from the approximate position of Rokkenjima.

Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
No shit. I know what circular logic is. I know it's a logical fallacy. I know I'm engaged in it. Do you know you're engaged in it too when you claim Touya=Battler?
So you're claiming your argument is based on a logical fallacy....
But exactly how my argument is a circular logic? I think you don't quite grasp the concept of "circular logic".

Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
This sequence of argument has been about comparing my "Touya=random_amnesiac" theory and your "Touya=hired_actor" theory, both of which require Touya to not be Battler, which implies that Ikuko must be Yasu. You seem to have forgotten what we were actually arguing about and accused me of "assuming Ikuko=Yasu" in the middle of a debate where both our ideas imply it's assumption by default, anyway.
The way I see it we were arguing under different assumptions not just one.
Of course I'm arguing against your Yasu=Ikuko theory, but I'm also arguing against your Battler=random amnesiac theory. And if we assume Yasu=Ikuko, Tohya=random amesiac is as much probable and grounded on facts than Tohya=Hired actor. I do not support either theory, I'm just pointing out that when a theory is so little grounded on facts it is as good as a plethora of others.

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
If it's the problem of where the two are getting their information, we don't really have any proof that Ikuko's never read Eva's diary. Just saying.
It's just that this option in my opinion is the most improbable of all. In the first place does such diary even exist? There is no conclusive certainty of its existence.
And it also looks very odd that Eva would write such diary. She spent her whole life trying to protect that secret, and then she just let a random stranger to find it?
I think it somehow could make sense if she made it so that truth would reach Ange when she was older, but then why she didn't ensure it would actually work?
The big question here is why Ikuko among all people would get that diary and how? What kind of relation is there among Eva and Ikuko? None that we know of.

And there's yet another problem. Eva died in 1998. Are you telling me that Itoikukuroreigonamu's forgeries never existed before 1998? that doesn't seem likely to me. In fact it wouldn't make sense, because it is implied that Ange already knew about those forgeries by that time. But then that would mean that Ikuko obtained the diary before Eva's death. How the hell did that happen?
You'd need to come out with some sort of explanation that has absolutely no basis whatsoever.

Last edited by Jan-Poo; 2012-08-30 at 08:43.
Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote