2013-11-24, 06:35 | Link #1021 | ||||||||||
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
|
Quote:
The Law of Cycles may well be a law of the universe; Madoka the person does not appear to be one. But even if she is, it does not follow that all laws are equal, or that they must apply the way one might intuitively assume. For all we know, the Incubators might be able to create a small, constrained domain where they can violate the second law of thermodynamics. As long as maintaining that domain produces more entropy in the external universe than what they can save via whatever they are doing inside it, that would still be a losing proposition for them. If we allow that magic can violate the second law of thermodynamics, then it is at least possible that other violations might also exist. All we can say with confidence is that the Incubators are not able to exploit them for their benefit. In fact, even "not able" is going too far. It may simply be the case that the magical girl system is so much more efficient that the alternatives are not worth pursuing. We simply do not know what the relevant laws are. Actually, there seems to be some real confusion here about what "law" even means in this context. I'll continue this line of thinking after the next quote. Quote:
Quote:
Secondly, a phrase like "science that can permanently rewrite how science functions" sounds to me to show a profound misunderstanding of what science is and how it functions. Scientific laws are descriptions of reality, not rules that govern reality. They are models with empirically demonstrable predictive utility. In science, when somebody "breaks" a law, that isn't a problem; it is in fact great progress. Madoka did not "permanently rewrite how science functions" at all. She rewrote how the universe functions -- that is not the same thing. She provided a demonstration that the universe is more malleable than we might previously have supposed. Science incorporates this new information and continues. There are some real hypotheses being researched in theoretical physics right now that, if correct, would mean that the universe is "hackable" for lack of a better term. Are they right? Who knows!? One can always draw a circle around what was thought to be all of reality, and treat that as a sub-system of some greater system. Even if our universe is truly all that exists, that doesn't necessarily mean it can't be modified from within. That we do not yet know how proves nothing. Third, there is no way, even in principle, to know that the laws one has perfectly reflect reality. At best, one can say that they are in concordance with all available evidence (and even that has never actually happened in the history of science; there have always been at least some known flaws). If one did solve all known flaws, there would still always exist the possibility of untested circumstances or new phenomena that could reveal flaws in one's laws. It doesn't matter if it's Kelvin, Kyubey, or anybody else. Quote:
What PMMM established is that making a contract grants a girl some powers based on her wish. Beyond that minimum, any other powers are just speculation until they are explicitly demonstrated. Quote:
Quote:
You may feel that is unreasonable, but the alternative is more unreasonable, IMHO. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As for Christ: in an important sense he can't. But this is not the place for debating real world dogmas and how much sense they do or don't make. I feel going into this would inevitably take us too close to violating AnimeSuki Posting Rule 2.8, so I will politely decline further pursuing any debates about entities from real religions. |
||||||||||
2013-11-24, 15:20 | Link #1023 | ||
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
2013-11-25, 08:26 | Link #1024 | ||
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
|
Quote:
Quote:
I don't see how that Aphrodite comparison works. Even ignoring all the other differences, Aphrodite's relationship with love is more like "patron deity." She is associated with love, but also with other things like beauty, pleasure, and procreation. Specifically non-lustful love isn't the integral part of her message or identity. Madoka is described as becoming hope itself, and that metaphor exists within the larger hope vs. despair framework of the series. It's quite a different relationship. |
||
2013-11-25, 16:31 | Link #1025 | ||||
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
Even if she's not absolutely omniscient, she's close enough that she should function as such for plot concerns. Quote:
Quote:
Even then, though, it doesn't matter; because she's a SOURCE of hope. A judeo-christian deity does not feel salvation/forgiveness/whatever benefit is being conferred onto those the deity is blessing. Quote:
She's not 'literally' hope. She CAN'T be. Madoka's existence doesn't effect the capacity of humans to feel that emotion aside from the circumstantial.
__________________
|
||||
2013-11-25, 22:39 | Link #1026 | ||||
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
|
Quote:
Look at the other side for a moment. Madoka isn't a philosopher or a scientist. In the universe-reboot scene, she is talking to her friend, not giving a lecture. Suppose, just hypothetically, that what Madoka said there is mostly true, but there are some technicalities involved. Certain odd exceptions or edge cases exist that, under the right conditions, create what are effectively blind spots in her knowledge of the future. Do you really think it is reasonable to expect that she would have gone into those details at that time? Because here is the thing: Madokami is only in like two scenes in the entirety of Season 1. She's in the universe-reboot scene, and the Sayaka farewell scene. Oh, and her disembodied voice says one word in the after-credits stinger. So where is the opportunity for her to explain such details? You are extrapolating so much from such limited information. I don't understand how you can seriously feel such confidence from such a weak foundation. Positive claims require positive evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Omniscience is a huge claim. And the only indication we have is a couple lines of dialogue that might be saying that, but can also be interpreted in other ways. It's not like she is shown to do anything that only an omniscient being could do. The only special knowledge we can be sure she was granted is when & where she has to go to erase each witch. Beyond that, we're in the land of "maybe." While I'm on the topic of big claims: the idea that the Magica Quartet (and everyone else with a voice in the project) just forgot or overlooked that they made Madoka omniscient at the end of Season 1 is really hard to swallow. That's not a minor oversight. We're not talking about an anachronistic prop, or some inconsistent magitechnobabble. If your interpretation is the intended one, how did the creative team overlook this? Quote:
"Before the hope we wished for summons an equivalent amount of misfortune, we have no choice but to vanish from this world." So somehow they do understand, at least vaguely, that the Law of Cycles saves them from having their wishes turn to ill. They don't know about witches specifically, but they know something bad is being averted. Quote:
She is also not a judeo-christian deity. She's not a creator god of any kind. Attempts to connect the two do more to confuse than to clarify. An ascended former-mortal is a fundamentally different sort of being than the source of all existence. Quote:
|
||||
2013-11-26, 01:57 | Link #1027 | ||||||||
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
It's ACTING on that omniscience that can be a deal-breaker. We also don't really know how Madoka defines 'everything will be alright', considering she has a Valhalla now to justify pretty much all Magical Girl tragedies. You know, some would argue that any sort of afterlife at all will take the punch out of any sort of drama in a story's universe. One's Mileage May Vary. Quote:
She was functionally omniscient with all evidence leaning towards such until Rebellion happened, which wasn't part of the original plans. Regardless of what is the case NOW, the original intent seems to lean toward Omniscient Madoka. And Rebellion seemingly contradicting this is just one of many things I'm taking grievances with for coherency's sake. Quote:
That's why I said she's functionally omniscient. Whether she's absolutely so is entirely irrelevant because she will be for the sake of all situations where she is an agent capable of taking actions, retcons and questionable movie shenanigans notwithstanding. There's really no convenient reason why the events of the movie should've been a blindspot to her. Quote:
I mean, gosh, it's not like continuations of otherwise complete narratives don't just completely discard inconvenient setting elements to conduct their sequels properly, intentionally or otherwise. Highlander II, anyone? tl;dr the argument of incredulity is a fallacy. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The only qualifiers of Madoka's emotional state and significance is that she's hope for everyone else, she'll never fall into despair, and she insists that things will be alright and miracles will happen. And she's happy and optimistic and bright and cheerful and totally at peace with everything. Given that the series has already conflated Hope and Happiness into basically a singular mass as it is, the certainty of her future is kind of unimportant. It really, REALLY doesn't matter if she can feel "hope" in a dictionary sense.
__________________
|
||||||||
2013-11-26, 05:36 | Link #1028 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: eastern europe :(
|
I feel like everyone forgot that Madoka after her wish in 12th episode looked like normal magical girl with huge magical powers.
Spoiler for screenshot from 12th episode:
She became godlike being due her wish, only after her soulgem came to its end and her witch was released. Bowmura is exactly the same, but her wish is reffering to Madoka only(so her goddess(Devil) form is different). Even her black bow represented Madoka's weapon. |
2013-11-26, 08:23 | Link #1029 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
|
Are you going to defend the claim that Rebellion contradicts the original series or not? If you are, then I will take the time to write up a proper response. If you are just going to keep defending that your interpretation could have been correct, then there is nothing worthwhile for us to discuss. A sequel is only obligated to match what was definitely established to be the case; it is not obligated to match what could have been interpreted as being the case.
|
2013-11-26, 14:16 | Link #1030 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
|
Quote:
While it is true that she isn't "the creator", there are plenty of parallels to call Madoka the Messiah who gave up her humanity to bring salvation to her people. |
|
2013-11-26, 15:03 | Link #1031 | ||
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
2013-11-27, 07:17 | Link #1032 |
Goat
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
|
Regarding Madoka having omniscience, I have to agree with Revan in that I really don't see it as being necessarily the case.
Madoka used way too much uncertainty-conveying language in her parting with Homura: "moshikashitara", "kitto", "kamo shirenai", "shinjiyou". |
2013-11-27, 15:03 | Link #1033 | |
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
Plus, I can turn Revan's argument right around. If her job is to give people hope, and hope requires uncertainty, then she should always speak in uncertain but optimistic terms regardless for the sake of her conversation partners.
__________________
|
|
2013-11-27, 15:42 | Link #1034 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: United States
|
Come to think of it, I think I know why the ending is unsettling for me: This has become a repeat of the debacle that happened with Mega Man Zero (which much like PMMM is a deconstruction of its genre not to mention its series).
To elaborate: According to Inafune, the 3rd game was supposed to be the end of the series. Alas, meddling by Capcom executives demanded a 4th game who's events basically overrode the happy ending of the 3rd game, retconned the ending to kill 3 major characters off screen, and who's only function was a way to set up the next series. The irony: The 3rd game already left a good hook for the ZX series. The game itself is generally considered a big step down in terms of the quality of its writing and especially its game play. What's also oddly similar is that Homura's fate in Rebellion is an almost 1:1 match for Spoiler for Mega Man series spoiler:
As a further similarity, there's also the comparison between the two series on the endings that were overridden. Spoiler for major MMz3 spoilers:
__________________
Last edited by magnum12; 2013-11-27 at 19:24. |
2013-11-27, 16:36 | Link #1035 | |
Senior Member
Author
|
Quote:
Also, speaking in certainties doesn't negate hope for the listener, because the listener still has to believe that you're telling the truth, and belief requires at least a little bit of hope. So for the listener, speaking in uncertainties may well lower one's hope if it undermines belief in the speaker. In fact, isn't that true of conversations in general? People are generally more likely to believe something stated in confident certainties/specifics than in something stated in uncertain or vague language. Madoka spoke in uncertainties because she herself was probably not entirely certain about what she was saying. That, and/or she was still trying to compute everything herself. A human mind suddenly being thrust into a state of heightened cosmic awareness will take awhile to adjust. Even if Madokami isn't fully omniscient, she still is being bombarded with vast quantities of new information. I have no doubt that she did in fact see all the loops that Homura went through before. Even if her words are exaggeration, this much is true. And that alone is a lot for a human mind to take in.
__________________
|
|
2013-11-27, 21:11 | Link #1036 | |
The True Culprit
|
Quote:
Assuming she even experiences subjective linearity.
__________________
|
|
2013-11-28, 07:20 | Link #1037 | |
Goat
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
|
Quote:
In the first place I don't think anything worth the sacrifice is even realistically possible, but the creators have even basically said that at this point they're making the story up as they go along. It's just sad. I was literally in a state of grief in the days after I saw the movie. The overriding of the original ending caused me feelings of personal loss. I do have some excitement to see where the story is taken next, but I doubt the story as a whole can ever again be as meaningful as it once was. As it stands now, it's not even close. |
|
2013-11-28, 07:59 | Link #1038 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 38
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
2013-11-28, 08:03 | Link #1039 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In the middle of nowhere
|
Quote:
Dude, I think it was quite obvious what he meant there: The movie sets up a future conflict... but they have admitted that they don't have any plans for how to resolve said conflict as of yet. Heck, didn't Urobuchi flat-out say that he won't be writing any more for the series after this? The point is, if they were going to do this anyway, the least they could do is plan out the full story-arc, with an actual concrete plan for how to resolve this mess, before they went and started the story-arc.
__________________
|
|
2013-11-28, 08:04 | Link #1040 | ||
阿賀野型3番艦、矢矧 Lv180
Graphic Designer
Moderator Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Belgium, Brussels
Age: 37
|
Quote:
Quote:
In fact, it could have been fine if the movie ended as "planned" until they added that plot twist. The audience is not to blame if they wanted to know what's up with a sequel, then being betrayed by unexpected changes.
__________________
|
||
Tags |
madoka |
|
|