Ultimecia's Parting Words

[Ryushikaze]

Ryushikaize... I'm trying to bring some sort of amelioration
to these discussions because all they seem to do is wind up being is closed.

I DON'T want to get into a fight with you. I really don't... But most of the time... All you ever seem to do is post REJECTION to anything anyone says to the matter and NEVER post anything ORIGINAL to the subject matter.

STOP DOING THAT!!! All it ever results in is flaming and name-calling. I swear to God, it's like you and yours only seem to LOOK for a fight and nothing else. Post something original, NOT a counter-post to other people, post your original thoughts on the subject matter. We were finally starting to get along and DISCUSS in that other thread about Guardian Forces and other mysteries, why stop there?

As you saw, I tried to be FAIR on both sides of the discussion; not favoring for either or.

And it's not just you Ryushikaize. I don't mean to single you out, but... I mean, OMG, it's never gonna fuggin' end, why are you people fighting over FANTASY... FANTASY... Even the MODS have been adamant about this when they close these threads... Just stop it.

Well, there technically is a rule against these sorts of posts... Though I think most of these types of threads gets closed for being either completely nonproductive, or flaming occuring.

Ryushikaize, by you saying this: "::Sigh:: Or there are the people who began from observation and tried to maintain the rational method in their analysis. "

It counters this, which you also said:

"'Squall did not die' does not need to be proven. It is the negative claim. 'Squall died and came back to life' is a positive claim, as is 'Squall died'. Positive claims need to be supported with evidence before you give them the time of day."

No, it doesn't. When I speak of positive and negative claims, I refer to rational reductionism, and positive claims (this is so) must be supported, and if they cannot be, then the negative claim (this is not so) is favored by default. Observation says that since Squall is up and well after each incident, the chances of him dying are slim, and him dying and coming back is a rather extraordinary claim, for which there is no supporting evidence.

All that says is that you don't agree with it, because it interferes with YOUR interpretation, YOUR belief, YOUR "Opinion" is "Law".

It's not. No one's is.

Actually, since it has no evidence, it is disfavored in favor of a more parsimonious claim, in this case, the negative.

I swear, you all sound like a bunch of "Religious Zealots"! You believe "This" but then someone else who believes otherwise either believes different, or that/you attack you/they and you/they have to "defend" your/their beliefs... It never ends.

Continuing the religious metaphor, what we are doing is the equivalent of asking someone for evidence that their flood myth, or claim about the composition of the cosmos (ex: perfect heavenly spheres)

It's FANTASY, and no matter what "evidence" ANYONE comes up with, there is nothing but assumption and interpretation... The ending has the most confusing visuals ever and no audio to give a definiative explaination of the ending. Just like with FFVII....

In a much lesser sense, all we have about reality is assumptions and interpretations. That does not keep us from coming up with the best guess.

Can you all PLEASE!!! PLEASE!!! Just get the fug along? There is no reason to put down anyone on this... GAME of how they interpreted it.

It is not my intent to put anyone down, save perhaps FE, about this game. I merely wish for them to back up their views with empirical data, and become frustrated when they do not.

Squall died; Squall didn't die; Squall died and Rinoa used her Soreceress Power to bring her back... It doesn't matter.

This I'll grant, but then again, most of what we do here doesn't really matter.

The ideal, visuals, and vagueness of Time Compression and Sorceress Power leaves everything in this game/story open to speculation and therefore, there is no reason why people can't voice their views, opinions, and interpretations of how the ending occurred without getting into a "DEBATE" about it... It's Fantasy, and very poorly done in the tradition of Final Fantasy at that...

And there's also no reason we cannot employ rational reductionism to those explanations, either.

Now everbody kiss, hug, do a little dance, and make a lot of angry-make up love, and get down tonight... (sigh):eep:

angry make up sex sounds incredibly akward, though I'm sure listening in would be worth a few chuckles.

what Pharoh Amon Khan III is very true. You're an annoying bastard with no original ideas. all you do is whine and complain, and make life a misery for the rest of us. :mad:

And that kind of posts, good child, are why these threads get closed. Care to apologize before a Mod wanders in?

[MJN SEIFER]

Fine. Now prove that Squall died.

What's that? You CAN'T! SHOCK OF SHOCKS!

There is no evidence that Squall died.

And no, MJN, it is NOT hinted, and if you think it is, show me the evidence.

Lying motion less and not breathing = DEAD

it isn't a hint, it flat out obvious!

[Azure Chrysanthemum]

We do not attack other members on this site, ever. If I see much more of this from ANYONE I will not hesitate to hand out warning and/or bans as I see fit.

[Pharoh Amon Khan III]

How 'bout this?

How about we discuss these varied interpretations. Instead of stating someone is infailiably wrong... We can try to see from each other's perspective...

Now, the Squall dies and is revived by Rinoa version seems a likely occurance.

Why? Well, with 'Love' there is often 'Tragedy' involved in a 'Love Story'... which I really did not feel in this story, but, I digress.

In a Time Compressed World, a decaying one at that, no one can exist.

I won't go into the hallucinations/memories/Ultimecia's Message 'theories' for now, but at any rate... It seems that Squall IS in the Flower Field as he promised but is not in time-sync with Rinoa...

As the Time Compressed World decays, he dies, and Rinoa, as it seems to be demonstrated often, unconciously uses her Sorceress Power to 'find' Squall right behind her in the TC version of the flower field.

Now seeing that Ultimecia could use Edea to bring stone statues to 'life' and various other phenomena, it does not seem too far fetched that she would be able to simutaneously bring herself and Squall OUT of the Decaying Time Compressed World (Flower Field) and bring Squall back to life.

It may even be that Squall, trapped in the Decaying Time Compression, had 'ceased to exist' and by Rinoa bringing him 'back' he... 'existed'.

I guess that would give some merit to Laguna's 'speech' of love and friendship to bind you back to the world you came from...

Yeah... I like that...

[jammi567]

what Pharoh Amon Khan III is very true. You're an annoying bastard with no original ideas. all you do is whine and complain, and make life a misery for the rest of us.

And that kind of posts, good child, are why these threads get closed. Care to apologize before a Mod wanders in?

sorry. it won't happen again, i promise. i was just angry at something else, and you're the one i took it out on.

[Ryushikaze]

Fine. Now prove that Squall died.

What's that? You CAN'T! SHOCK OF SHOCKS!

There is no evidence that Squall died.

And no, MJN, it is NOT hinted, and if you think it is, show me the evidence.

Lying motion less and not breathing = DEAD

it isn't a hint, it flat out obvious!

Squall is lying motionless because he just passed out from exhaustion. Though I'm curious how you determined he wasn't breathing, given the short time he is focused on after his fall.

How 'bout this?

How about we discuss these varied interpretations. Instead of stating someone is infailiably wrong... We can try to see from each other's perspective...

People have tried before. It tends to wind up even more flametastic. But sure, let's give it a spin, if you'll see my perspective about empirical backing.

Now, the Squall dies and is revived by Rinoa version seems a likely occurance.

Why? Well, with 'Love' there is often 'Tragedy' involved in a 'Love Story'... which I really did not feel in this story, but, I digress.

Not so much.There are two basic love story archetypes, tragic and comedic. Tragic romances do usually involve a tragedy yes, but comic ones- well, good comic ones- simply have adversity. They're also marked by tragedy ending poorly, and comedy ending well. FF8 is a comedy in this regard.
Also, Squall biting it and coming back also does not seem to follow the themes of death in FF. While there are occasionally some 'cheats', the overwhelming majority of the dead in FF do not come back. The major exceptions are basically ghosts, ghosts with physical presence, and a boy who didn't technically die the first time, but no real examples of both revived body and 'soul' at once.

In a Time Compressed World, a decaying one at that, no one can exist.

Well, the world wasn't completely compressed, though I don't see how it reverting to standard is relevant. In fact, shouldn't the unravelling of compression cause rapidly recovery of existence?

I won't go into the hallucinations/memories/Ultimecia's Message 'theories' for now, but at any rate... It seems that Squall IS in the Flower Field as he promised but is not in time-sync with Rinoa...

As the Time Compressed World decays, he dies, and Rinoa, as it seems to be demonstrated often, unconciously uses her Sorceress Power to 'find' Squall right behind her in the TC version of the flower field.

Now seeing that Ultimecia could use Edea to bring stone statues to 'life' and various other phenomena, it does not seem too far fetched that she would be able to simutaneously bring herself and Squall OUT of the Decaying Time Compressed World (Flower Field) and bring Squall back to life.

Well, animation and restoring life are technically different powers, and one does not necessarily mean the other. And if sorceress's had life power, one wonders why Ulti could not set up a spell to execute as she died to revive herself if it was so easy (OTOH, she could just be insane and egomaniacal). Of course, discussing animation v ressurection is giving me images of Zombie Squall (braiiiiiiiins.... whateverrrrrr....), so let's get off that mind track for now. Now, I would not doubt Rinoa brought Squall back (the involvement of her power as opposed to just connecting with the poor boy is questionable, though)

It may even be that Squall, trapped in the Decaying Time Compression, had 'ceased to exist' and by Rinoa bringing him 'back' he... 'existed'.

I don't follow. When time compression decays, it pours back into its own place in time, so while Squall may be misplaced, it would not seem he stops existing any more than any other time traveller.

I guess that would give some merit to Laguna's 'speech' of love and friendship to bind you back to the world you came from...

Yeah... I like that...

It is a rather nice sentiment, though I don't really see why Squall needs to die for it.

[Pharoh Amon Khan III]

Ah, there it is... See, I'm not saying that Squall needs to die. I'm saying that some people interpet it that way. And that's okay, because it's reasonable they would see it that way. Even those that say he 'fainted' saw it the first time they played the game as he was dead... The entire mood of the this scene portrays utter sadness and we are not assured the exact fate of Squall until the final scene. This is why there is speculation. Let's take a look. You'll also note in the clip it's questionable that is Rinoa talking to Squall, or just gone into the 'denial stage' of mourning. But those questions are soon resolved... ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mwqgUJeQNs


Upon seeing this scene for the first time, one assumes that Squall is dead by the portral of the events and Rinoa's expressions.

The way she hugs him closely is what makes one believe that she is so heart-broken.

And so, it goes that he either fainted and she realized she thought too soon, OR the Power of the Sorceress Rinoa brings them both out of Time Compression Decay and Squall alive again.

It can go either way. I just don't see the arguement that if someone thinks Squall died is a problem.

The only thing you're talking about is the final scene where he is clearly alive. What WE'RE focusing on it the initial scene when Rinoa finds him. Dead or alive, fainted, whatever...

I personally think either/all view(s) is/are acceptable for in the final scene he IS standing with Rinoa.

Some think that if Rinoa is Utilmecia that the ending with them standing together was the "Everlasting Moment" Ultimecia-Rinoa was trying to achieve...

Again, either way I personally find acceptable. There's no need to argue simply because someone sees it differently. The only thing that is evident is...

THE END

[Ryushikaze]

Ah, there it is... See, I'm not saying that Squall needs to die. I'm saying that some people interpet it that way. And that's okay, because it's reasonable they would see it that way.

It's reasonable that they jump to that conclusion. It is not reasonable that they try and make their assumption, their positive assertion, into fact.

Even those that say he 'fainted' saw it the first time they played the game as he was dead...

Gonna have to kibosh that and tell you that when I saw it, I thought he was at most comatose, and was just passed out from sheer exhaustion.

The entire mood of the this scene portrays utter sadness and we are not assured the exact fate of Squall until the final scene. This is why there is speculation. Let's take a look. You'll also note in the clip it's questionable that is Rinoa talking to Squall, or just gone into the 'denial stage' of mourning. But those questions are soon resolved... ;D

If you're talking about the "Squall was a hallucination" argument, oi. That's a grand deciever argument, and those fail by default, I'm afraid. It makes for decent fanfiction, but as an attempt to unravel the truth, it's rather useless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mwqgUJeQNs


Upon seeing this scene for the first time, one assumes that Squall is dead by the portral of the events and Rinoa's expressions.

The way she hugs him closely is what makes one believe that she is so heart-broken.

Actually, when I saw her hugging, I was reminded of the tight embracing of one who one has just recovered something very dear to them, like my mother once did after I was climbing a tree and the branch I was on broke, and I managed to get out of the situation unharmed.

And so, it goes that he either fainted and she realized she thought too soon, OR the Power of the Sorceress Rinoa brings them both out of Time Compression Decay and Squall alive again.

And the former is far more parsimonious.

It can go either way. I just don't see the arguement that if someone thinks Squall died is a problem.

It's not so much a problem as it is bad in the reductionalist sense, since it adds extra unsupported terms to the explanation of the scene.

The only thing you're talking about is the final scene where he is clearly alive. What WE'RE focusing on it the initial scene when Rinoa finds him. Dead or alive, fainted, whatever...

No, I was focused on the scene in question from the start.

I personally think either/all view(s) is/are acceptable for in the final scene he IS standing with Rinoa.

So Squall is a Pupu? Christmas will be so pleased! Seriously though, not all views are equal, though it can often be hard to tell why they are not. Not all of them can be as blatant as "so, how did they get back to Garden after the end of the game?" "Teleportation, LOL!".

Some think that if Rinoa is Utilmecia that the ending with them standing together was the "Everlasting Moment" Ultimecia-Rinoa was trying to achieve...

Then Ulti is either the stupidest or most intelligent insane genius I've ever met.

Again, either way I personally find acceptable. There's no need to argue simply because someone sees it differently. The only thing that is evident is...

THE END

It's not really about seeing it differently, it's about supporting your view with empirical backing. And, as a reductionalist, shaving away all but the simplest viable explanation.

[jammi567]

i agree with you there (Actually, when I saw her hugging, I was reminded of the tight embracing of one who one has just recovered something very dear to them). but it also looks like she's crying because she's lost him (i'm well aware of the ending after the credits).

[Pharoh Amon Khan III]

It's reasonable that they jump to that conclusion. It is not reasonable that they try and make their assumption, their positive assertion, into fact.

But... Isn't that what you're doing? Why can't people just share POVs instead of saying their's is 'what actually happened' or 'your POV is ridiculous' compared to mine. As you said, it's reasonable, but BOTH are reasonable. There's no need to reasonable arguement here accept intolerance. Remember how we discussed "Eden"?

Gonna have to kibosh that and tell you that when I saw it, I thought he was at most comatose, and was just passed out from sheer exhaustion.

Again, that's just YOUR secular POV on the scene. Others have theirs. Your view is NOT superior to those that are different and does not give you the right to say other views are wrong or put a "Kibosh" on anything. You have no more supporting evidence than they do for this scene in a fantasy. There are those who will say they thought he was 'dead' versus 'fainted'. It doesn't matter. There's no need for opposition.

If you're talking about the "Squall was a hallucination" argument, oi. That's a grand deciever argument, and those fail by default, I'm afraid. It makes for decent fanfiction, but as an attempt to unravel the truth, it's rather useless.

I don't even want to get into that, but that's why I think it's time we let bygone's be bygone's about this. Some say hallucination, some say Time Compression Unravelling, some say Squall trying to find something to hang onto to escape Time Compression... I find that none are superior to the other only 'favorable'. And for some reason because people have different views of the interpretation of this event they argure or 'debate' with others that disagree with their favorable conclusion. It's gotta stop. Let them see/be what they see/be.


[quote]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mwqgUJeQNs

Actually, when I saw her hugging, I was reminded of the tight embracing of one who one has just recovered something very dear to them, like my mother once did after I was climbing a tree and the branch I was on broke, and I managed to get out of the situation unharmed.

AGAIN, that's just YOU and so many others that have different interpretations. C'mon, Ryu, you know exactly what I meant when I made that statement, so now you're just lumping yourself against a poor generalization I made; but you know exactly what I meant. Not ALL see it the same way. They don't see it the same as you or me! But there's no reason to go about cutting up people's statements with quotes just ot outright REJECT their ideals. And that's what still all you're doing. You're not posting original statements, just direct rejection responses to parts of a post.

As you see, this is the first in a long time I've done the "Quote Qwazy" with you because I find it ridiculous and the discssion gets convoluted.
Bottomline: I've tried to summerize the views of all people that I've read that have different views and give fair view point to their reasons why.

I would appreciate it if you were to just make a post explaining your view on the scene; we already know that you don't agree with whatever anyone else says, but we DON'T know what you DO agree with... We don't know your view point.

And, I'm asking you try to refrain for the over-usage of over-priced words such as "parsimonious" and "Occam's Razor"... I'm sure there's some other layman's terms you can use that others will understand. I know you're gonna say that "these are proper terms for a debate". But...

1. This is NOT a 'debate; this is a disucssion.

2. You can not have a discussion if we're not speaking the same language.

And so, it goes that he either fainted and she realized she thought too soon, OR the Power of the Sorceress Rinoa brings them both out of Time Compression Decay and Squall alive again.

And the former is far more parsimonious.

See? There you go again. You're only speaking in favor of the interpretation of your choice and claiming it more acceptable than any other. How can you say that? I mean, really, You don't support it with a view point other than "It's what the majority of everyone else believes as well so there! No shut up with your ridiculous theories."

For me, that's like a Neo-Con saying that racism doesn't exist or things were much better back in the 'old days'. It's narrow-minded.

It's not so much a problem as it is bad in the reductionalist sense, since it adds extra unsupported terms to the explanation of the scene.

I don't see how breaking down the scene is going to 'add' anything. It's simple, he fainted or died, died and came back to life, whatever... It's fantasy; it's possible. Why can't people leave it at that? It's fantasy stop argueing amongst each other about how it ends.

Tomato/Tamato; Sky-Blue/ Sea-Green; Purple/Violet; Taste Great/Less Filling.

We're all color-blind and we gotta live with that. Some of just don't see all the same colors of the rainbow/spectrum.

No, I was focused on the scene in question from the start.

It doesn't quite seem like it... More like you're constantly referring to "Squall Stands With Rinoa" scene. We know this... It's just questionable that as he's lying there he seems to have died... or fainted. Either or. This is why it's most likely best if you POST instead of "add reply"/"quote"...

So Squall is a Pupu? Christmas will be so pleased! Seriously though, not all views are equal, though it can often be hard to tell why they are not. Not all of them can be as blatant as "so, how did they get back to Garden after the end of the game?" "Teleportation, LOL!".

Now you're just being ridiculous, and just so Christmas will not 'Deck My... uh,...Halls' I'll agree with that Pupu statement.

I see your reason for this, but I don't understand... Why does it seem so wrong that people have a different POV when their's nothing to support either side?

And I know you mean to use the statement "It's safe to assume that Balamb Garden swooped by and picked them up." as a reference to your point of how 'ridiculous' these parsimonious and unfounded claims are made... Here comes the sarcasm: "There's no evidence that Balamb Garden picked them up so it's much have been teleoportation". C'mon, Ryu, you know exactly what I mean. I'm just saying why are people argueing that their version is better than their version. Oy!

Then Ulti is either the stupidest or most intelligent insane genius I've ever met.

No, that would be Dr. Odine... G.W. Bush running second... Laguna is dead last.

It's not really about seeing it differently, it's about supporting your view with empirical backing. And, as a reductionalist, shaving away all but the simplest viable explanation.

You do realize you're talking about fantasy, right? I don't see the point of an arguement here...

Let's take the movie "Crank" for example. Guy, does some amazing things and survives impossible odds... But even at the end some people left the theatre claiming that *SPOILER* that he lived.

If you've seen the movie... Well, you can see why I wasn't gonna support this idea... I don't think he lived... But... Let them believe what they wanna. They didn't want their hero to die. They wanted their happy ending... I'm thinking: "... Ah, let 'em eat cake."

An even strong example was Future Esthar... His theories were extremely... uh... different, but when he wasn't explaining himself I asked him to... I never outright rejected his statements. I asked him to explain and refer to his source/inspiration so we can all see where he was coming from... When he couldn't do that... Well... Let 'em eat cake.

I mean, let this guy post whatever he wants, no matter how strange it is... Something might come out of it. I just want to get his POV, no argue with him.

And that's what I think everyone should do... It's just fantasy. Have fun with it.

Please post instead of reply/quote. I wanna understand where you're coming from perspective wise...

[MJN SEIFER]

Squall is lying motionless because he just passed out from exhaustion. Though I'm curious how you determined he wasn't breathing, given the short time he is focused on after his fall.

Rinoa holds him for a while and we can see clearly that he is not breathing and he is focuses very steadily.

Further more he didn't "pass out fro exhaustion" he was effected by Time Compression.

Anyone else want to motion this to be a thread of it's own so we can get back on topic?

[Pharoh Amon Khan III]

Ah, there it is... See, I'm not saying that Squall needs to die. I'm saying that some people interpet it that way. And that's okay, because it's reasonable they would see it that way.

It's reasonable that they jump to that conclusion. It is not reasonable that they try and make their assumption, their positive assertion, into fact.

Even those that say he 'fainted' saw it the first time they played the game as he was dead...

Gonna have to kibosh that and tell you that when I saw it, I thought he was at most comatose, and was just passed out from sheer exhaustion.

The entire mood of the this scene portrays utter sadness and we are not assured the exact fate of Squall until the final scene. This is why there is speculation. Let's take a look. You'll also note in the clip it's questionable that is Rinoa talking to Squall, or just gone into the 'denial stage' of mourning. But those questions are soon resolved... ;D

If you're talking about the "Squall was a hallucination" argument, oi. That's a grand deciever argument, and those fail by default, I'm afraid. It makes for decent fanfiction, but as an attempt to unravel the truth, it's rather useless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mwqgUJeQNs


Upon seeing this scene for the first time, one assumes that Squall is dead by the portral of the events and Rinoa's expressions.

The way she hugs him closely is what makes one believe that she is so heart-broken.

Actually, when I saw her hugging, I was reminded of the tight embracing of one who one has just recovered something very dear to them, like my mother once did after I was climbing a tree and the branch I was on broke, and I managed to get out of the situation unharmed.

And so, it goes that he either fainted and she realized she thought too soon, OR the Power of the Sorceress Rinoa brings them both out of Time Compression Decay and Squall alive again.

And the former is far more parsimonious.

It can go either way. I just don't see the arguement that if someone thinks Squall died is a problem.

It's not so much a problem as it is bad in the reductionalist sense, since it adds extra unsupported terms to the explanation of the scene.

The only thing you're talking about is the final scene where he is clearly alive. What WE'RE focusing on it the initial scene when Rinoa finds him. Dead or alive, fainted, whatever...

No, I was focused on the scene in question from the start.

I personally think either/all view(s) is/are acceptable for in the final scene he IS standing with Rinoa.

So Squall is a Pupu? Christmas will be so pleased! Seriously though, not all views are equal, though it can often be hard to tell why they are not. Not all of them can be as blatant as "so, how did they get back to Garden after the end of the game?" "Teleportation, LOL!".

Some think that if Rinoa is Utilmecia that the ending with them standing together was the "Everlasting Moment" Ultimecia-Rinoa was trying to achieve...

Then Ulti is either the stupidest or most intelligent insane genius I've ever met.

Again, either way I personally find acceptable. There's no need to argue simply because someone sees it differently. The only thing that is evident is...

THE END

It's not really about seeing it differently, it's about supporting your view with empirical backing. And, as a reductionalist, shaving away all but the simplest viable explanation.

Squall is lying motionless because he just passed out from exhaustion. Though I'm curious how you determined he wasn't breathing, given the short time he is focused on after his fall.

Rinoa holds him for a while and we can see clearly that he is not breathing and he is focuses very steadily.

Further more he didn't "pass out fro exhaustion" he was effected by Time Compression.

Anyone else want to motion this to be a thread of it's own so we can get back on topic?

Yeah, move it. BUT... Statement's like 'clearly' that's just shoving down people throats again. I'm not picking sides, I just want people stop 'comparing' notes instead of 'sharing' notes...

[Ryushikaze]

It's reasonable that they jump to that conclusion. It is not reasonable that they try and make their assumption, their positive assertion, into fact.

But... Isn't that what you're doing? Why can't people just share POVs instead of saying their's is 'what actually happened' or 'your POV is ridiculous' compared to mine. As you said, it's reasonable, but BOTH are reasonable. There's no need to reasonable arguement here accept intolerance. Remember how we discussed "Eden"?

Except I'm on the side of the negative assertion. To draw my favorite analogy, say I am telling you of the existence of spacewhales, but all of my "evidence" has a truly much more mundane explanation. In this case, I, the positive assertion need more evidence to support my extraordinary claim. You, the negative assertion- of not believing in spacewhales- are the priveliged on, since if I cannot show any, or enough to properly support my position, your position of skepticism is favored by default.

Gonna have to kibosh that and tell you that when I saw it, I thought he was at most comatose, and was just passed out from sheer exhaustion.

Again, that's just YOUR secular POV on the scene. Others have theirs. Your view is NOT superior to those that are different and does not give you the right to say other views are wrong or put a "Kibosh" on anything. You have no more supporting evidence than they do for this scene in a fantasy. There are those who will say they thought he was 'dead' versus 'fainted'. It doesn't matter. There's no need for opposition.

Actually, I was only kiboshing your 'everyone' statement. I recognize this is how I saw the scene, both initially, and after examining the scene. As for no more supporting evidence, no, but, and this is not to be rude, but my side of the argument has fewer terms that need to be supported. The 'death' side must call forth a hitherto unexpressed power of Rinoa's, explain why Squall is not becoming pallid as corpses do, and perhaps a few other terms. My side must merely explain squall's nonmovement, and now his apparent nonbreathing, thanks to MJN, though I don't really think that casual breathing has ever been visible in the FMVs, even during FF7AC.

I don't even want to get into that, but that's why I think it's time we let bygone's be bygone's about this. Some say hallucination, some say Time Compression Unravelling, some say Squall trying to find something to hang onto to escape Time Compression... I find that none are superior to the other only 'favorable'. And for some reason because people have different views of the interpretation of this event they argure or 'debate' with others that disagree with their favorable conclusion. It's gotta stop. Let them see/be what they see/be.

On this case, I will agree with you. There is not a satisfactory explanation for TC's resetting. Where I disagree is granting them nonzero validity.
Let's use the sun for this example. Let's go back in time before we figure out what it is. Someone says the face of a god. Someone says a giant glowing rock. Someone says a celestial fire. All of these claims have zero validity. And even if someone stumbled on the right answer in guessing, he too would have zero validity until such a time as he could support his position logically and empirically.

AGAIN, that's just YOU and so many others that have different interpretations. C'mon, Ryu, you know exactly what I meant when I made that statement, so now you're just lumping yourself against a poor generalization I made; but you know exactly what I meant. Not ALL see it the same way. They don't see it the same as you or me! But there's no reason to go about cutting up people's statements with quotes just ot outright REJECT their ideals. And that's what still all you're doing. You're not posting original statements, just direct rejection responses to parts of a post.

Actually, I quote/reply because it is the most efficient method of addressing everyone's points.

As you see, this is the first in a long time I've done the "Quote Qwazy" with you because I find it ridiculous and the discssion gets convoluted.
Bottomline: I've tried to summerize the views of all people that I've read that have different views and give fair view point to their reasons why.

And you are fully entitled to do that, just as I am fully entitled to my method.

I would appreciate it if you were to just make a post explaining your view on the scene; we already know that you don't agree with whatever anyone else says, but we DON'T know what you DO agree with... We don't know your view point.

And, I'm asking you try to refrain for the over-usage of over-priced words such as "parsimonious" and "Occam's Razor"... I'm sure there's some other layman's terms you can use that others will understand. I know you're gonna say that "these are proper terms for a debate". But...

Well, there are other ways to put them, but most of them are rather verbose, or at least incredibly clunky. I'll try though.

1. This is NOT a 'debate; this is a disucssion.

2. You can not have a discussion if we're not speaking the same language.[/quote]

Well, they do apply to any sort of logical exchange of ideas (in which case the difference between debate and discussion rapidly becomes one of formality, and I've been using the term debate loosely anyways). You do, however, have a valid second point.

See? There you go again. You're only speaking in favor of the interpretation of your choice and claiming it more acceptable than any other. How can you say that? I mean, really, You don't support it with a view point other than "It's what the majority of everyone else believes as well so there! No shut up with your ridiculous theories."

Firstly, parsimony has nothing to do with majority (which is what I am inferring from your mock quote of me), but rather the removal of all unnecessary terms in order to find the explanation which can work without any unnecessary assumptions. From that follows secondly, that as a matter of what each theory claims, mine has fewer assumed terms (hasty judgements) compared to the competing (death, revival, and if you're inserting the last bit, additional time travelling). Now, your theory could be correct, but without the additional evidence to determine it so, one should rationally default to a theory with fewer terms, if not the negative case entirely.

For me, that's like a Neo-Con saying that racism doesn't exist or things were much better back in the 'old days'. It's narrow-minded.

Well, the only thing the Neocon and I share in this case is the negative position. We can present more than enough evidence to crush the neocon's position. In this case, he is being willfully ignorant. I can and will change my stance if you can show me empirical evidence of your point. It's like being skeptical of ID. They can't show evidence to support their position, so we don't consider it. They show us evidence, we consider it, examine it, and determine if we need to revise our stances.

I don't see how breaking down the scene is going to 'add' anything. It's simple, he fainted or died, died and came back to life, whatever... It's fantasy; it's possible. Why can't people leave it at that? It's fantasy stop argueing amongst each other about how it ends.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

Tomato/Tamato; Sky-Blue/ Sea-Green; Purple/Violet; Taste Great/Less Filling.

We're all color-blind and we gotta live with that. Some of just don't see all the same colors of the rainbow/spectrum.

Granted, there are many things which cannot be determined, such as matters of preference, or subtle variations in the eye causing different colors. Of course, those differences of perception do not change what is actually there, such as the wavelength of what we call 'seagreean'. I seek to find the wavelength, the thing that is actually there, in FF8. Why? Cuz it's kinda fun.

It doesn't quite seem like it... More like you're constantly referring to "Squall Stands With Rinoa" scene. We know this... It's just questionable that as he's lying there he seems to have died... or fainted. Either or. This is why it's most likely best if you POST instead of "add reply"/"quote"...

I find quote/reply efficient both for myself and for readers. ::shrug::
And no, while that scene is referenced as prove that Squall lives in the end, my question now is whether or not Squall ever died before this point.

Now you're just being ridiculous, :p and just so Christmas will not 'Deck My... uh,...Halls' :p I'll agree with that Pupu statement.

I admit to being ridiculous. I happen to find it useful for highlighting a point.

I see your reason for this, but I don't understand... Why does it seem so wrong that people have a different POV when their's nothing to support either side?

It's not the point of view I have issue with- for example, you can like or hate Rinoa all you like- it's different views of events.
And that, by the way, was a very subtle, and no doubt well intentioned golden mean fallacy. Not all claims are equal.

And I know you mean to use the statement "It's safe to assume that Balamb Garden swooped by and picked them up." as a reference to your point of how 'ridiculous' these parsimonious and unfounded claims are made... Here comes the sarcasm: "There's no evidence that Balamb Garden picked them up so it's much have been teleoportation". C'mon, Ryu, you know exactly what I mean. I'm just saying why are people argueing that their version is better than their version. Oy!

The point is actually that we have no direct evidence of what happened between that scene and the garden party. However, we also have no evidence for anyone being able to teleport at will, and direct evidence that neither person can (EX: the ragnarok), so assuming that they teleported home, rather than having it swing around, or walking there, or taking the Ragnarok, or something, is not a reasonable assumption to make.
I suppose it can be summed up as "When in doubt, be mundane"

No, that would be Dr. Odine... G.W. Bush running second... Laguna is dead last.

Idunno... destroying time to get yourself nookie? It's definitely at one end of the spectrum, the only question is which.

It's not really about seeing it differently, it's about supporting your view with empirical backing. And, as a reductionalist, shaving away all but the simplest viable explanation.

You do realize you're talking about fantasy, right? I don't see the point of an arguement here...

Well, even fantasy should be internally consistent.

Let's take the movie "Crank" for example. Guy, does some amazing things and survives impossible odds... But even at the end some people left the theatre claiming that *SPOILER* that he lived.[

If you've seen the movie... Well, you can see why I wasn't gonna support this idea... I don't think he lived... But... Let them believe what they wanna. They didn't want their hero to die. They wanted their happy ending... I'm thinking: "... Ah, let 'em eat cake."

Well, I can sympathize with them, as a cynic and a goer of action movies, I never doubt the ability of a person to 'not die' somehow, at least until I see the body. Of course, I tend to hold such things in a schroedinger state, neither dead nor alive until such a state can be proven, though given the conditions of a 'death' I may favor one or the other.
Of course, this is a different matter, though. Is not the point of a discussion such as this an attempt to come closer to the empirical truth, such as it can ever be in a video game? If not, it is simply fanfiction.

An even strong example was Future Esthar... His theories were extremely... uh... different, but when he wasn't explaining himself I asked him to... I never outright rejected his statements. I asked him to explain and refer to his source/inspiration so we can all see where he was coming from... When he couldn't do that... Well... Let 'em eat cake.

Not Kentucky Fried Chocobos?

I mean, let this guy post whatever he wants, no matter how strange it is... Something might come out of it. I just want to get his POV, no argue with him.

And I want his empirical backing for said POV. I have no problem with FE fronting a different version of FF8. I have an issue with him fronting said version nearly entirely devoid of support.

And that's what I think everyone should do... It's just fantasy. Have fun with it.

I can't disagree with that sentiment, though I do think if you're trying to tell people you've found the truth of the game, you should be consistent with it.

Please post instead of reply/quote. I wanna understand where you're coming from perspective wise...

I'll do so in a bit. There's too much of your post to simply reply to. I think we'd both get lost if I did so.

Squall is lying motionless because he just passed out from exhaustion. Though I'm curious how you determined he wasn't breathing, given the short time he is focused on after his fall.

Rinoa holds him for a while and we can see clearly that he is not breathing and he is focuses very steadily.

Interesting thing about that scene, Squall's lips twitch slightly. Another intersting thing, you can really see signs of breathing on rinoa either. And a cursory glance through most other FMVs shows that relaxed breathing really never becomes discernible to the viewer.

Further more he didn't "pass out fro exhaustion" he was effected by Time Compression.

How does this directly contradict my statement?

Anyone else want to motion this to be a thread of it's own so we can get back on topic?

Sure, why not. Go go.

[Pharoh Amon Khan III]

:laugh: He can eat Kentucky Fried Chocobos and eat the cake for dessert...

[jammi567]

Wow. this is much better behaviour then in other threads.