Wow. Just wow. Do you think a discussion on my "unbending personality" or my accusation of "petty insults" is so crucial to the validity of the R=U theory that you would claim it hinders the argument when I try to get rid of what was quickly turning into a petty squabble? Or perhaps it is the discussion of how many of your in-game examples I missed (the italicised 's' was meant as an act of goodwill you know, to fess up to me having missed some of your earlier post) which you find so vital?Like I stated previously, it is really difficult to carry on an intelligent and logical argument if you ignore the points of the person you are arguing with. Nothing I wrote previously was irrelevant, and by carrying on this argument with you, I have actually become even more convinced that Ultimecia is Rinoa. Actually, I am more sure that this is a fact than I have been sure of many other things.
I would have appreciated if you answered quote by quote, but I see that you choose to concede parts of this argument. I have already logically proven that Rinoa can be Ultimecia and that it is not at all unlikely for her to be Ultimecia. Not only have I defended this point logically, but I have cited examples from the game which are considered canonical that further support the theory.
My decision to not go quote by quote was done because half your last post (and large bits of my last post too) was concerned with such stupid issues, when the discussion is in fact about the validity of R=U. Furthermore, several of your replies were all about the same thing, and basically said the exact same thing. By rather cutting straight to the bits that mattered, I had hoped to steer the argument back on track again, but judging by your even more relentless references of me being "unbending" and gaining no joy from FF8, that's not something you seem to want. On top of that, you even have the nerve to claim that I must have conceded to various aspects of the discussion? That's real big of you, I must say. Regardlessly, I will continue to ignore all parts of your post dealing with such irrelevant matters, because I am not interested in a mud-slinging contest. If you honestly think that is a sign that I must be conceding, then be my guest. I would rather not continue arguing in such a manner, even if it meant you feeling the victory is on your side.
But since you insist so, I can gladly answer quote by quote, even if it means repeating myself. I will not, however, go back to the previous post, because everything I wanted to say about it I already did. Again, if you see this as a victory on your part, be my guest. Oh, and I won't deny the possibility that there are traces of frustration and annoyance in this post, just so we're clear.
Well, I suppose I'll have to do a piece by piece breakdown of the bolded part of your last post then, and explain to you more specifically why I said what I did last post.You have already claimed that you believe that Rinoa is not Ultimecia by stating that you have faith in a “plausible absolute.” This is not simply a point of not knowing for sure- this is a point of plausibility and logical probability. If you had read my entire post previously, you would have payed greater attention to the part in bold which specifically makes for an argument of the plausibility and even the probability for Rinoa becoming Ultimecia. Remember how I stated before that probability is on your side? I have changed my mind on this- both probability and plausibility are on my side, and therefore if any “plausible absolute” is to be made, it is to be in support of Rinoa being Ultimecia.
So far so good.Scenario: The sorceresses in Rinoa’s time and in Rinoa’s future suffer intense persecution following the failed attempt of Time Compression. They want to prevent any sorceress from possibly becoming the feared Ultimecia, or someone of the like, so they unfairly target any and all sorceress for extermination. This may lead some sorceresses to go into hiding and eventually they may harden their hearts enough against the world for persecuting them, causing them to hate the world and wishing to destroy it. This is a popular scenario which has been discussed as a possibility of why Ultimecia wants to destroy normal time.
Not so good this time, I'm afraid. as you point out later in this bolded section, Esthar tried to seal Rinoa earlier in the game, but Squall wouldn't let them. In fact, a major point is made out of Squall realising that he cannot live with Rinoa sealed away. Where is Squall in this scenario then? Why on earth has he suddenly let Rinoa get sealed away? What about Laguna? He's the President of Esthar (ie. the kind of man you'd hope was responsible for who gets sealed and not), and he knows Rinoa very well (she's his son's girlfriend even). In fact, Rinoa was instrumental in Laguna and Odine's plan to defeat Odine. Without Rinoa, Ultimecia wouldn't be defeated. What has happened to Laguna then? Has he forgotten about all this and simply let Rinoa get locked away anyway?Furthermore, another theory, which I myself have developed, is that Rinoa becomes persecuted and is locked away in stasis, just like Adel.
The concept of Rinoa being locked away in the Sorceress Memorial is a way to let Rinoa live to see Ultimecias era, but as you can see, you have some rather serious problems to explain before this is even remotely a possibility.
Perhaps someone frees her, eh? A psychological manifestation of Squall? Certainly very imaginitive, but where is the logic behind it? In fact, if you knew anything at all about Griever, you would know that he is a GF created by Ultimecia in the final battle based on images in Squalls mind. He certainly is not some spiritual or psychological remnant of Squall. How do I know this? You would have known had you read the FAQ I linked you too, but here, let me copy and paste for you:After generations in stasis, perhaps someone frees Rinoa (maybe a psychological remnant manifestation of Squall (aka Griever) because he swore to be Rinoa's knight, and will do anything to be with her and have her be free. This also explains the last scenes of the game when the SeeD team is fighting against Ultimecia and Griever. Squall and Rinoa may in effect be fighting against their future selves!!).
"[...]the only suggestion offered in-game is that it is
a creature that Squall conceived of in his own mind, as Scan tells us that in
Squall's mind, Griever is the strongest GF:
"Griever
In Squall's mind, the strongest GF. Through Ultimecia's power, continues
fighting without vanishing."
Further, Ultimecia's Witch Embodiment powers granted her the ability to reach
into other's minds and pull things out (as she often displays when completely
removing a character's stock of a certain type of Spell). In the case of
Griever, she simply manifested the thoughts she pulled from Squall's mind
regarding what he believed to be the most powerful being in existance. This
would be a great strategical move on Ultimecia's part. This is made even
more plausible when examining what the japanese version has Ultimecia say:
Ultimecia: Your feelings, I shall summon the most powerful of things
[from them]! The more strongly you feel, that will be what shall torment
you. Fufu."
As you can see, Griever was clearly created there and then, and thus cannot
be used to form a link between Rinoa and Ultimecia. "
Your claim there is obviously in no way logical at all.
That's all well and good, but as I pointed out earlier (see the repetition that comes about through quote by quote answering? It just makes things more complicated sometimes), there are serious flaws in the idea that Rinoa was persecuted and sealed away soon after the game (ie. because neither Squall, leader of SeeD, or Laguna, president of Esthar, were likely to let that happen). Until you deal with them, I won't pursue the issue of how you can call this "evidence", because quite frankly, I don't have to.Therefore, as you can see, there is evidence in the game to draw a conclusion of possibility and plausibility that Rinoa can become/is Ultimecia. If she is placed in stasis and captured, just like Adel was, and then later released, just like Adel was, the argument of "normal life spans" gets thrown COMPLETELY OUT THE WINDOW.
As stated though, the fact that Squall stopped them must have slid right past you even though you made a point out of it right here.Also, remember that Esthar already attempted to place Rinoa in a sorceress prison, but Squall would not allow it. So I am not pulling this 'out of thin air.' This is what happens because this is Final Fantasy, and that is the explanation of the entire game. The cycle of sorceress persecution causes Rinoa to become Ultimecia, and then everything is explained. Damn I'm good! lol
I agree though, that the persecution of sorceresses is what created Ultimecia. However, it is hardly necessary for R=U in order for this to work (again, I refer to the FAQ I linked to), and in fact, due to the flaws of the R=U theory, work better if the theory is NOT correct.
As you can see, your bolded section hardly makes for a convincing case. Not only was the premise it was based upon flawed, you offered no actual in-game examples which foreshadowed the event. Recall that when Square added the idea that Laguna is Squalls father, they made the hints clear and fairly easy to see. Considering how big a thing R=U is, don't you think it's absolutely essential of you to come with some good 'hints' for the theory? You have so far come with none. Questionable logic based on shaky foundations spiced up with a few in-game references do not make for a 'hint', by the way. A hint is more along the lines of the Moomba calling Squall 'Laguna' coupled with the fact that Moombas recognise people by their blood.
But I know already I'll be repeating this later, so why bother now, eh?
Ignoring the fact that you took the Irvine bit quite out of context, even though I went to great lengths to explain it last post, I must question your claim of "definite logical support and in-game support". I have yet to see much of either, even though I know you'll disagree wildly here.We are not arguing about any random fact here (such as Irvine having a sex change, which you so ‘tastelessly’ brought up, lol). We are arguing about a theory which has definite logical support and even in-game support.
Tell you what, why don't you compile a list of all the in-game events/quotes which clearly foreshadow the R=U scenario you imagine, and then all the logical arguments which can be used to deduce R=U (taking into account the flaws pointed out earlier in this post). If you think I should know it all by now, consider it a favour to a dumb poster who gets confused due to the fact that half the posts are quotations and the other half are irrelevant comments about his personality (and yes, I know that is an exaggeration; you are aware that not all statements are meant entirely literally, I hope).
Post it all here, and I can deal with them one by one, which you so seem to enjoy. It'll be easier at least for me that way. Regarding the 'hints' though, I would once again refer the the FAQ before posting them, because I think you'll find most of them have lost their validity.
Except you haven't (yet, anyway), as explained above.People in real life argue about the existence or non-existence of God, but neither side has significant proof to completely change the balance. Hence, it is not simply an argument about possibility; it is an argument of probability and plausibility, and as I have proved in my previous post and as I have stated above, both are in support of Rinoa being Ultimecia.
Do you think I would have found it even remotely possible to write the aforementioned FAQ if I am ignoring all the "logical and solid evidence" backing up the R=U theory? If you had even skimmed through it, you would have found it dealt with any hint and argument you can think of (I'd be willing to bet). In fact, in the first versions of that FAQ, I was arguing pro-R=U! I know I said I would ignore all irrelevant comments, but I found your assertion that because I don't believe the R=U theory I must somehow be ignoring all the evidence you claim to exist (yet as stated, haven't shown anyone yet) so absurd, that I simply couldn't let it pass. Unless you have any clue about me, my past, or even something as trivial as the FF8 Plot FAQ I co-wrote, you would be better of leaving such snide remarks (nice touch with the smiley face by the way; you couldn't have made it more condescending if you tried) to yourself.You are arguing a sophism. Like I stated above, Rinoa being Ultimecia is not an argument pulled out of thin air. The arguments you listed above about tortoises and elephants are just that: arguments pulled out of thin air. Therefore, you are incorrect to classify the Rinoa=Ultimecia theory into the same group of imaginary figments. There is both logical and solid evidence to support such a conclusion, and if you choose to ignore it, then that is up to you.
Moving on to the relevant part of your post though, you are taking me out of context. My point was that considering all possibilities leads to a logical quagmire, as demonstrated by the pink elephants or whatever. Because of this, we must judge all theories according to a certain standard; ones who don't make the cut are not considered valid. R=U doesn't make the cut. It cannot be considered valid. R=U may have more 'backing' to it than pink elephants, but if the arguments are flawed or hopeless, it does belong on the same group.
Again, you must by all means prove me wrong by coming with a list of in-game support, hints and flawless logic which makes it quite clear that R=U, but as pointed out numerous times, you have yet to do so.
Foolish? I disagree. The majority of FF games have had simple plots with no major open endings. Even FF7, which you might have used as an argument, is now being resolved through Advent Children and the likes. Final Fantasy X was resolved though X-2. The rest of them had no open-endings. Furthermore, all through FF8, the classic fairy tale scheme is used with Squall being the knight having to save the princess (Rinoa), who is endangered repeatedly through the game to the point of cliche. In the ending we clearly see them united in love, perfectly in accordance with the games themes of love and dependance on others. R=U would twist that completely around, and the fact of the matter is that Square don't have a reputation of doing that. In fact, in most FF's, they do the opposite. In FF8, true, they to a certain extent leave Ultimecias background up for discussion, but there are far more plausible backgrounds for her than R=U, as touched upon more below by the content of the Ultimania.Perhaps the authors of the game did have something definite as an ending, or perhaps they didn’t. By making the assumption that the authors definitely do not support Rinoa=Ultimecia is a baseless and unfounded assumption. It is far more likely that the authors of the game purposely left so many questions unanswered, and have purposely continued to leave these questions unanswered because they in fact meant Rinoa to be Ultimecia all along. We have no idea of knowing exactly what the authors thought, so it is foolish to even bring them up as a point of defense for your argument.
As for the authors intending for Rinoa to be Ultimecia? As stated, when they added Laguna being Squalls father, they made it clear. The 'hints' (which you have not yet given might I add) for the R=U theory are not even close to being as obvious as the Laguna-Squall hints, and all have much more plausible alternate explanations (again referring to the FAQ). Furthermore, there is absolutely not a peep about it in the Ultimania Guide, which is supposed to be Square's vehicle for filling us in on all the fuzzy plot details. Instead of mentioning anything remotely resembling the R=U theory, they rather explain that "sorceresses have human lifespan", a crushing blow to the theory meaning you have to resort to flawed scenarios using the Sorceress Memorial. Don't you think that if the authors intended it, they would have mentioned it somewhere in the Ultimania, and that they would have made it slightly more obvious? As it is, not a single person I have spoken to thought that Rinoa was Ultimecia after playing the game. All of them heard of the idea on the net. How about you?
As you said though, we are not discussing Irvine, so instead of me giving you arguments, I'd rather repeat my request to see your arguments for R=U. Because you have proven nothing, given no hints, and provided only flawed reasoning so far. Again, I would advise you to list your case in one bigger, more structured form to help me see exactly what 'evidence' and 'logic' it is you have. Because it honestly doesn't mean a thing if you claim to have evidence when you haven't given any (which isn't either flawed or based on a flawed premise).All we have to go on is what is given in the game and what can be logically concluded. As I have already proven, it is both probable and plausible that Rinoa does become Ultimecia. This has nothing to do with your concept of “anything is possible” or “anything is plausible.” Myself and other supporters of this theory are basing our argument from fact and logic. If you have worthy facts and logic that support Irvine getting a sex-change, then I would like to hear them.
Then pray tell, what part of the game is it that specifically implies that Rinoa will be sealed up despite the flaws mentioned; what part of the game hints at Rinoa becoming Ultimecia; what part of the game implies that Squalls psychological remnants turn into Griever who release Rinoa.My imagination does not interfere with fact and logic, but I believe your imagination does.
Because last time I checked, these are all products of your imagination, and certainly not provided by the game itself.
Except, as I pointed out, you have not made it plausible at all, because both Squall and Laguna would clearly not let such a thing happen.I have already addressed in my previous post that it is plausible for the persecution of sorceresses because of Ultimecia to affect Rinoa, and have her be locked in stasis in the Sorceress Memorial.
Let me get this straight. You are here implying that in a different timeline, Rinoa became Ultimecia, but that she changed the past to what we see, thereby eliminating all traces of how she originally became Ultimecia, creating a timeline in which Rinoa does not become Ultimecia.What’s more, the fact that Ultimecia achieved time compression signifies that she changed the past: she reached from the future and she altered all time, including Rinoa and Squall’s time. Perhaps she really was Rinoa, but now since she has altered the past, Rinoa may not become her, and that is why the game has a happy ending. The logic behind this makes sense, and it is by no means ‘pulled from thin air.’
And how exactly is that not pulled out of thin air? Last time I played the game, I found no references to alternate dimensions or timelines in which Rinoa becomes Ultimecia. Did I miss something?
As I have demonstrated though, the logical justification is not strong as steel at all (highly rusty steel perhaps), and you have not given 'plenty of support' to the scenario. In fact, the only support you have given (namely that people would fear sorceresses and persecute them, thus backing up Rinoa being sealed away) was clearly flawed, as shown.That’s funny how you keep calling it a ‘figment of my imagination.’ Sorry to burst your bubble, but it is something that far escapes my imagination. The entire R=U theory is much closer to solid fact than an arbitrary piece of fan-fiction gone wild. If you find this difficult to comprehend because of your unending inflexibility, then I cannot help you, but this does not change the logic and evidence behind the theory. The scenario already has plenty of support, as I have demonstrated, and its logical justification is strong as steel..
If you think I've missed something critical though, I plead you again too systematically list all 'hints', 'support' and 'logical arguments' which back up your scenario. Consider it inept arguing on my part.
Except you haven't. Again, please refer to the FAQ linked to, and/or make a compilation which I can comment on. It helps no one to say that "myself and others and offered much evidence and logical support" without really giving any (except flawed stuff, as mentioned so many times I am beginning to hate writing this post). I could easily say "Well, me and others have offered more evidence for Rinoa not being Ultimecia, so there you are", but without specifying, what is the point? In fact though, I would claim just that, and for specification, I would refer not only to this topic, but for a more systematic dissection to the FAQ.A theory is just that: a theory. Myself and others included have offered much evidence and logical support for a conclusion of Rinoa being Ultimecia.
Copious amounts eh? So far, your main scenario rests entirely upon a flawed foundation (Rinoa being sealed) and you have not provided a single 'hint' foreshadowing R=U. Maybe we have different feelings about the word copious?The R=U theory does not have to be firmly rested on what the game tells us: the game is purposely left with many questions open, and the answers which are most likely are those which have the greatest logical support for probability and plausibility. I have already shown you that the R=U theory has copious amounts of both.
Of course, if you think I am stupid here, please help me gain a better understanding of your argument by listing it more systematically. having spent nearly two hours writing this post and still not being finished, I might well be missing vital bits.
Several different ways? Please indulge. Besides being sealed away, what other reasonable possibilities exist? Rinoa developing timetravelling magic? Unfounded, as made clear earlier in the thread. Any others?Rinoa can reach Ultimecia’s era is several different ways, so there is certainly at least one way for her to reach the same time period.
The rest of your chunk here I have already answered once or more, so forgive me for jumping to the next bit, because it's kind of late other here and I want to get to bed.
You accused me of taking you out of context, but ironically enough, your statement here then reeks of hypocrisy itself. You said that I was being hypocritical for stating a certain conclusion about R=U while admitting to true lack of certainty. I then said that, 'hypocrisy' or not, it is an essential part of logical argument, and proceeded to explain why. I did not say that hypocrisy is fundamental to logic. Please reread where you got the quote from before rushing off so eager of having found a new bit of mud to sling.Hypocrisy is fundamental to any logical argument? This is completely erroneous. By the way you conduct dialectics, I can see why you would believe such a false notion.
I have already adressed the reason for Irvine, and your inability to understand why I have not 'cited support' for the claim simply demonstrates your lack of understanding towards my arguments. As for straw men, I wouldn't be so vain if I were you, and rather focus on actually delivering solid logic and sound theory.You keep bringing up the circumstance of Irvine turning into someone else…I have repeatedly asked you to cite support for this, as I have cited both logical and in-game support for Rinoa being Ultimecia. What you are doing is conducting a sophistic argument. You do not realize it, but you are setting up really valid point and i'm impressed by your thinking. after really valid point and i'm impressed by your thinking. for me to knock down with the solidity of logic and sound theory.
The next chunk is basically the same as has been said before (ingame evidence for the game, me being a lousy debater etc.) so again, I will skip past it.
Again, I was so apalled at this statement that I couldn't help myself commenting. How many times do I have to mention that I started off supporting the R=U theory? I was even more die-hard than you, if I may say so myself. Your patronising comment only serves to weaken your stance; please do not judge me unless you actually know anything about me.Rinoa being Ultimecia does however, and I hope one day you’re able to get beyond inflexibility to realize what is possible and what is plausible in a Final Fantasy game, especially in Final Fantasy VIII.
Really? I could have sworn I only saw flawed arguments, or logic based on flawed assumptions, or ingame examples not at all relevant to ascertaining the validity of the theory.I referred to plenty examples, so I do not know why you blatantly lie that I ‘have not referred to a single example.’ All the examples you need are in my previous post
Excuse me? You are kidding right? You do realise that both your post, and my FAQ are perfectly visible to the public right? You are honestly claiming that your last post was full of the same hints I have dissected in the FAQ? Ok, then please quote yourself referring to the following hints:I’ve already addressed all counterarguments, and I’m not about to go on a wild goose chase when you yourself had no respect to respond to my previous post which was full of the same ‘hints’ you are showing me here.
1) Rinoa and Ultimecia both having wings.
2) Ultimecias words during the final battle.
3) Rinoas allusing to wanting time to stand still on the Ragnarok.
4) The location of Ultimecias castle.
5) The possibility of Ultimecias name really being Artemisia.
6) The possible similarity between Rinoa and Ultimecias faces.
7) Ultimecia having Griever.
8) The Japanese instruction booklet referring to Rinoa becoming "warped".
How on earth you can critisice ME for somehow not noticing that your last post referred to all of these, when in fact it referred to none of them, is appalling. Did you even look at the FAQ before stating that?
Please, do yourself a favour and read through the R=U part of the FAQ before responding further. Because those are the types of hints that have been missing in your posts, and your claim that they're really hiding there in the blank spaces of your post is quite frankly ridiculous.
No she does not. She has several 'minor errors' (the idea that a sorceress gets potential powers at 5 is pulled out of thin air), flawed logic and simply overly complex, bad ideas. But I refuse to let this turn into a sub-debate about her FAQ. I'll only respond to whatever of her stuff which you directly use in this argument.Falseheads plot analysis is logical, correct, and speaks with great soundness. She may have a few minor errors, but the majority of her evaluation is supported by clear in-game examples and logical support. Also, Falsehead writes that sorceresses get their potential powers at age 5, and in the case of Rinoa, they did not actually manifest until much later when the chain of events which would lead her to be possessed by Edea and Ultimecia is already set in motion.
In all the popular science books I have read by Stephen Hawking and Brian Greene for one. And no offense, I'll put a wee bit more trust in them than in you. Wikipedia also backs this up, although you might question it's validity.Most real scientists consider time traveling to be impossible? Where did you hear that?
EDIT: I made a gross mistake in my comment here last night, which you may laugh at if you already read it, but in my defense, it was about half past 1 in the morning when I wrote it. Still, I apologise for screwing up here. If you didn't actually read what I said here before editing, don't bother about it. I made a bad mistake, that's all.Also, I trust you have heard of Albert Einstein and his theory of relativity? Not only does it allow for time dilation and time travel, but such possibilities have been substantiated by generations of physicists and thinkers who have followed Einstein. Why would you comment on something when you know virtually nothing at all about it?
True, theory of relativity allows timetravel in theory, but I trust you are familiar with the fact that the requirements for time-travelling through time-dilation are an infinite amount of energy, so the theory of relativity essentially bars time-travelling for any object with a mass. So far (last time I checked anyway) no one had found a way to bypass the light speed boundary, meaning human beings cannot use time-dilation as a means for travelling to the past. That is why Stephen Hawking and Brian Greene believe timetravel to the past to be highly unlikely; because only massless objects or objects initially travelling at greater than light speeds could do it. You might bring up worm holes too, but at that point I'd have to refer you to your own argument later on about not comparing FF8 with the real universe so bluntly.
But please, even though I made a mistake while on the verge of falling asleep last night, I would be very careful about claiming any sort of knowledge about what I do and do not know.
Given your apparent admiration for falseheads FAQ, one would think you had actually read it properly. The reason I stated "quantum dynamics" is because that is what falsehead does to intitiate the very argument you claim is quite well done in theory. She says, and I quote: "For example, current Quantum Theory posits that its IS in fact possible to go back in time and kill your own grandfather and still exist to do so."Why would you even state ‘quantum dynamics?’ This has virtually nothing to do with time travel, and you are only demonstrating your continued inflexibility and outrageous assumptions.
So which is it? If you say I am mistaken, you just stated that it was in fact quite logical and good, bringing to question your knowledge of both physics and falseheads FAQ. If I am correct here, you still stated that I was wrong. Honestly, I'm getting a bit confused here.
This is interesting. You think that falseheads time theories are good, yet they automatically assume that the FF8 Universe is identical to ours (by introduing real life concepts of quantum dynamics, or whatever it really is...). Now you shout at me for doing the same, even though one of the very things I disliked about falseheads FAQ was this very same fact? I don't know whether to laugh or cry!. Also, why would you even think to compare the universe in Final Fantasy VIII with our universe in such a blunt manner?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I already knew of the scenario long before this.My arguments are entirely original (I came up with Rinoa being locked in stasis in the Sorceress Memorial),
----
I'm done with this post now. I'm sick of repeating myself, sick of your mudslinging, and sicker yet to find you guilty of all the things you accuse me of. I'm going to bed now, and quite frankly, I kind of don't hope I have to go through another stint like this. Please though, before replying at all, read through the FAQ I linked to thoroughly, ok?
PS: Sorry if any gross mistakes have been made in this post, because it's long as hell, and I sure as hell aren't going to reread it all now.
PPS: I realise now that I should have specifically gone through your Sorceress Memorial scenario in my last post, and it is probably understandable that you were annoyed that I didn't. For that I apologise. I have responded to it in detail in this post though.
