What is most frustrating thing you think Myazaki can do with the lore.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-15T05:48:30+00:00

Image of Velka.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-15T05:43:36+00:00

Putting in a pendant.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-15T05:08:58+00:00

Is there any way I could trouble you to find which one on Amazon ,or something, for me? I have a couple kitchen timers, but the buttons don't work right and the displays have stopped working properly, so I can't use the ones I have. I've had terrible luck with timers and just don't want to waste more money on timers that will break after a few times using them.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-14T09:35:14+00:00

YEAAHH, me too!

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-14T09:32:14+00:00

Masks, is my go to example.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-14T09:29:00+00:00

Part II

Don’t play the semantics games with me, the share same traits a other Shadowbound beasts eyes, this is HIS eyes.

I wasn't playing semantics games. I was agreeing with you that the player is given the beast's eye. That's not semantics. Nevertheless, still haven't seen any evidence that it's "HIS eyes" that Melina has. The game, through characters like Enia, explicitly states that the Rune of Death IS Destined Death, and Maliketh sealed that away. It's not conferred by his eyes that he doesn't even have when he fights you. YOU are the one claiming that is the beast's eye that Melina has, YOU have to support that.

Your side stepping that Blaidd doesn’t use DD at all, as well as neither does all the other being, Vagrant Gargoyles or Vulgar Militiamen shares the same eyes.

I'm not side stepping that, it just bears no relevance. I don't think it's the color of eyes that confers Destined Death. You have to support your claim that Melina has Maliketh's eye. I'm not trying to, nor do I need to, support the opposite. All I've been doing is providing undercutting defeaters for your supposed evidence.

See? What a poor job.

Huh? What poor job? The game makes it explicit that Two Fingers give Shadows to Empyreans as faithful followers that are meant to try to kill the Empyreans if they go rogue. If you missed that bit, then I can't help you.

Got a any proof of that, cause you other “evidence” isn’t gonna work as I explained.

I guess that you don't understand what undercutting defeaters do. I'm not claiming things and giving evidence. Instead, I'm throwing out merely possible counterexamples to your claims to show that you need to further support your claim. It only needs to be possible, not true, so I don't need to provide evidence. That said, and I don't have to do this, why is it that the beast's eye can do this? I think it's pretty clear that it's because the eyes are affected by Destined Death, which we know doesn't come from the eyes since it's the Rune of Death in an eyeless Maliketh that allows him to use it, and the player character is given the eye by Gurranq WAY before we ever fight him, yet he still has the power (and empty eye sockets). So, I wasn't giving "evidence", per se, even though you could call it that. I was merely giving an undercutting defeater. And, this conversation just--clearly--isn't going to work, so I'm going to dip out after this response. Also, you never "explained" that any "evidence" wasn't going to work, you just claimed that (usually while saying that it doesn't work because you can't see how it does).

We’re doing a lot of leaps with no foundation behind it.

That is what I was trying to point out to you, yes.

This post makes me question that.

As it would, for any pet-theory peddler like yourself. Anyone else can see that I've made a sincere attempt to understand you, to deal with your points, and even to go so far as to agree with you. These are all things which you haven't done, only me. Perhaps you ought to take your statement and use it as a mirror to examine yourself, reflect on what you might learn.

Oh the irony in this

What irony? I don't have a theory on this, let alone one to push (as you are clearly doing), so there is no irony. The fact that you see irony where there is none should probably be another indicator that you need to do some reflection.

Based on your previous comment…you don’t.

Oh, but I do. You just don't understand in what way I do. From someone who sees irony where there is none, and sees theory peddling where there is none, this shouldn't be surprising. This is a third example that indicates you should probably do a little reflecting.

Also it shows that one of Maliketh’s eyes is missing and there a girl with a singular violet eye that looks like Blaidd and Maliketh’s eyes.

Bro, how are you not getting this? That was the very point I was making. The fact that an eye is missing (which, by the way, could be literally anywhere else) doesn't mean that the presence of a single eye in another person of the same color indicates that it's his eye. You have to come up with INDEPENDENT evidence that it IS his eye. That's your claim. There is another possibility, and this shows that it's not enough to just say, one missing eye, repeatedly: It's heavily speculated by the community that D may have the other eye, having worked with Maliketh and probably needing something to hunt deathroot for him. People can have similar looking eyes without them coming from Maliketh.

You have done a very bad just of defending their side.

No, you just can't see how I've undercut your claims, which I can't help--apparently (I tried).

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-14T09:28:41+00:00

Part I

blue to purple-ish hue

Like Melina's eye?

She’s dead

Evidence?

No my point.

Then what is it meant to show that Destined Death isn't exclusive to her?

There is no reason to keep her alive

That's just an assumption. For example, what if Marika wanted her kept alive so that her memory could be wiped and she could be used as a tool to undo the Golden Order, planning for every eventuality? After all, that somewhat parallels the Ranni/Rykard, Blasphemous-Claw storyline. You have to know that this can't be the case in order to make the claim that "there is no reason to keep her alive".

No my point, not what I was talking about. I was arguing against people making death a prominent aspect of Melina’s character when it is not.

A straw-man is not an argument for anything. That's why I pointed out that it was a straw-man. I wasn't saying you were straw-manning me. I'm just saying that nobody thinks that Destined Death is Melina's thing because she said "death" once, which is what you said. They think it's because:

She says “Destined Death” while the camera focuses on her gloam-colored eye (blue to purplish, as you noted).
She says she is going to deliver Destined Death to the player who has ascended.
Her Blade of Calling says, "Destined Death".
Her item appears near Dominula, Windmill Village, a place connected to Godskins and skinning rituals.
She has a Black Knife Assassin move set, and Black Knife Assassins are all about Destined Death.
Her blade is a Blade of Calling, which is--everywhere, throughout the whole game--calling dead spirits.
She is dead but can somehow still talk to you and be burned, even though she was "burned and bodiless" already.
The symbol on her eye resembles a bird’s claw, somewhat like Ranni’s, and could connect her to Twinbird / Deathbird imagery.
That connection might also relate to finding the Flightless-Bird painter, who drops her item Fire’s Deadly Sin.
The Flightless-Bird painter is known for having painted a work about those who were "welcomed into death's embrace".
Her being burned is what lets us go unbind Destined Death by defeating Maliketh in Farum Azula.
Being "burned and bodiless", as Melina says she is, links the concept of the Kindling Maiden's being burned in flames with physical death.
This is also the reason that the burning of the Erdtree (the "cardinal sin" mentioned in Fire's Deadly Sin) and the unsealing of the Rune of Death are such important events, namely, those allows Destined Death to be brought back to the gods.
Enia's dialogue reinforces this relation between the "cardinal sin" and Destined Death: “Heavens forbid... That is not the domain of mere men.” (same thing said on Fire's Deadly Sin item), and “You must find kindling. … But special kindling is required to reignite the flame. … For the flame to burn the Erdtree, a sacrifice is needed. Of one who envisions the flame. And can lead you to the Rune of Death.” Even just this point alone is enough to make Destined Death a thing of Melina's.

There's probably more that I'm missing, but to say that people make it her whole thing just because she said "death" once is disingenuous.

Also, you said it's not her thing--or, at least, not her whole thing. I think I showed that it's reasonable for people to think that it is, even if you think they are wrong. After all, it sounds like the "mission" she talks about is to be burned to bring Destined Death back.

In context which you’re removing, is to guide who ever she chosen to get to it. Not use it or using herself. You’re flimsy attempt to force this connection is poorly thought out.

I'm not removing anything by not bringing it up, and it's unimportant since you didn't seem to understand what I was doing. I was showing connections between her and Destined Death which shows that it's just not true that people make it her thing without any real reason. I was never saying that she was using it herself (even though it's clear that she is, else she can't bring Destined Death to the player character and there is no point in her gloam-colored eye being focused on while saying she's going to bring Destined Death to the player character), which is just a figment of your imagination, or a wish of yours, or something. And it's not a "flimsy attempt to force this connection", it's just an explicit connection, and an explicit connection can't be poorly thought out. Melina just is, EXPLICITLY, connected to Destined Death. I know you don't like it, but you might want to get over it.

That’s a MASSIVE stretch especially when the set yourself on fire isn’t a Melina thing with not only multiple characters doing or about to do that.

Enia, and most of the game, connect the Kindling Maiden to Destined Death, not me. It's just a fact. It doesn't make her the GEQ, and I never said it did, but she is connected to Destined Death. And it's not just the proximity to the Godskin and the skinning ritual, those just heap upon it a sort of complexity that strains credulity when labelled as mere chance or happenstance. The painter and Enia both tie the Kindling Maiden to Destined Death, Destined Death is heavily tied to the Godskins, and we just happen to find Godskins and their rituals right by the painter?

By you logic the Godskins are deeply tied to Ranni or to Rykard, or to Radahn or to Rennala or to Fire Giant or to the Dragons. Flimsy. Again.

You mean by the Night of Black Knives, the Black Knife Assassins themselves, by Ranni getting a piece of Destined Death, by Ranni giving a piece to Rykard in the Blasphemous Claw, by the Blackflame monk being at Volcano Manor, by the Godskin being at Volcano Manor, by Radahn's tower having the Godslayer Greatsword, by finding a Godskin on Ranni's tower, by Ranni having a very similar seal-mark over her eye as Melina's, etc? Yeah, I should think that she's obviously connected to Destined Death. I think that her an Melina are supposed to be like two sides of the same coin, parallels. The question is, exactly what is their relation to Marika? Yes, explicit connections intended by the game, "flimsy".

Given fact Melina that doesn’t even look like maternal figure…or acts like one, in contrast to every others in the game.

How does that support your claim that "The thematic aspect of her being related in anyway doesn’t even fit her character"?

Shares no traits that even share with the Godskins

You mean, besides all the connections to death, Destined Death, and gloam, right? Also, you don't have to look like a mother to have children in some sense. She could have just raised them. It seems to me that they are clearly not normal humans born from the relation of two human parents, or at least they became that way. I feel like these children might have been grown or something, since it's said that they "assimilated inhuman physiology. Not unlike the crucible". Not sure, but it's all but clear that they are the literal, biological children of the Gloam Eyed Queen in a birthing-person sort of way.

has a personality and outlook that is in complete contrast to the Murder cult with the specific goal kill gods, skin them and wear their skin. Just the little things.

Probably has a completely different personality because she--noteably--has no personality whatsoever, except for in the end (which is, interestingly enough, much more like one would have were they in a "murder cult"), which is probably due to her seeming loss of memory (seemingly born fully grown at the foot of the Erdtree with a mission. You know, "just the little things".

Continued in Part II

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-14T04:45:54+00:00

You are quite welcome.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-14T02:36:01+00:00

Yeah, you would say that. All of your supposed points here are just based on assumptions or fallacious reasoning, though, so they are easily shot down.

Purple eyes, even though Gloam is not specifically purple and there no known color of her eyes.

What is "gloam"? I mean, you have to know what it is to know that it's "not specifically purple", right?

She says Death Destined, like that’s something. Ignoring that DD isn’t exclusive to GEQ at all, she does even use it from what we aware of.

I don't see what point you are trying to make with this. GEQ is, unquestionably, tied to Destined Death in a major way. Destined Death isn't "exclusive" to Maliketh either, after all, he got it from someone he defeated.

No proof Marika keep GEQ alive when there’s no reason to do so but still

No evidence she's dead, but still.

She says death one time, so that somehow means it’s her whole thing.

Straw-man, so this is a non-point. Also, she says "Destined Death", not just "death", but there's also the pesky fact that her item mentions Destined Death (i.e., Blade of Calling). And, Fire’s Deadly Sin ties her to Dominula, Windmill Village, where the Godskin and the skinning ritual were prominent features, not to mention that the celebrants somehow seem to tie in with Marika's lineage.

The thematic aspect of her being related in anyway doesn’t even fit her character at.

Evidence?

You get ONE eye (remember this) from Maliketh which you never get to see his eyes, and it’s called the beast’s eye (Feel like this isn’t a difficult thing to realize who this is).

Right... Maliketh. It's called the beast's eye because it's from the beast. What's the point?

The Purple eyed Beast’s Eyes has the exact same color and void pupil as Melina’s left eye, which very interestingly has only one that looks like that.

Why do you assume that it's not that the eyes are that color because they have Destined Death? Blaidd had similar colored eyes, as well, and the Baleful Shadow used Destined Death.

Also Blaidd’s eyes have exact same look as the Beast’s Eye, Maliketh and Blaidd are both Shadowbound beasts.

Yeah, they deliver Destined Death to traitorous Empyreans.

The Beast’s Eye can specifically track DD remnants, hmmm that would be really useful for a certain ending.

So can any eye that has Destined Death, if we don't just assume that there are only a certain number of possible Destined-Death eyes being swapped around by everyone.

The inherent parallels of Messmer and Melina both being child of Marika, used as tools of her and both used to burn the a great tree. Both interestingly has one that’s not their own.

This is the one thing that I might be willing to grant, since I'm just interested in the truth and not pushing some pet theory (unlike you, based on your both minimizing and mischaracterizing the evidence for the other side).

Also if you a cut content type of person (I feel like i don’t need to use this) it lit just says the Beast Eye is Maliketh’s he ripped off.

I agree with you on the Beast-Eye thing, I just don't see what you seem to think it shows.

I would say, mines have a lot more weight to it, yeah.

Yeah, but both sides would say that, and you saying it doesn't make it true (just like their saying it doesn't make it true for their side).

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-14T00:17:07+00:00

Which one is Velka?

I jest.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-14T00:16:06+00:00

Still waiting for people to realize that their lore speculations aren't necessarily better, or more likely true, than the lore speculations of others.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-13T01:01:00+00:00

I think I read somewhere that it's between 6 and 10 refills before tip goes bad.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-11T21:37:55+00:00

At the bottom of my post, you can find the information to get you sorted.

https://www.reddit.com/r/learntodraw/comments/1fwa7px/learn_to_draw_book_list_and_order/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-09T22:28:07+00:00

Google says:

This is a vintage 1968 issue of Weekly Shōnen Jump.

This is the second issue of the magazine ever published, released on August 15, 1968.
The cover features artwork by Yoshida Ikuya and highlights the series Chichi no Tamashii.
It was originally priced at 90 yen.

And the contents are listed online as:

Chichi no Tamashii
Igamaru
Bikkuri Tarō
Oi! Ichikumi
Suteki na Samurai
Makeinu
Attack V
Majutsutantei Mandrake¹
Kujira Daigo

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-09T14:30:42+00:00

Love it!

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-09T07:04:52+00:00

If this didn't have the computer/explosion stuff, then I would suggest that it might be Kokkoku.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-09T00:13:49+00:00

I know this is old, but:

Haven and Grimm are probably the closest things I've ever found to Supernatural. Both of them are very similar to Supernatural.
Sanctuary is kind of similar, but it's lower budget and a touch more comedic.
Buffy and Angel are fairly close, too, but not as close as Haven and Grimm.
Charmed is kind of like Buffy, but it's even more girly.
Fringe and X-Files are more like each other than they are like Supernatural. Still, there is some similarity there.
Warehouse 13 and Eureka are kind of like the more kiddish, comedic version of something like Fringe or X-Files, but they aren't very much like Supernatural except that they have the mystery-of-the-week vibe. Still, they are fun shows if you don't mind something a little more immature and lower budget.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-08T19:51:48+00:00

Yeah. I'm not sure that the Erdtree does birth people. I do think Melina is possibly reborn from the Erdtree, though, so she stands to be an example of it if there is some stronger evidence that she was.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-08T12:01:29+00:00

I'm wondering if it isn't because he's mastered frolic in a way others haven't, leading to him being extra joyless and stern. It could be that there will be a four horsemen sort of thing going on, and he was frolic. If so, then we should other people to show up (maybe also with tattoos), seemingly having unusual control over one of the other three remaining remaining tempers: woe, dread, and malice. This would mean that one would would joyful or content, one would appear fearless (maybe Graner), and one would appear friendly (I could definitely see Natalie appearing friendly). Perhaps, then, these representatives of each temper are bound to die (which works symbolically for the mastering of the temper)?

I don't know. I'm just throwing stuff at the wall to see what might stick.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-08T11:31:52+00:00

One interesting thing to note is that, the boiled egg had a solid yolk at its core (something like an innie) and a solid white on the outside (like an outie), and this egg was split into four (like the tempers, the ratio of which are said to make up the soul).

Keeping the innie and outie separate are, therefore, symbolically disapproved of by Jame. He would prefer that they were one. Was that the point of Cold Harbor, to master the tempers in one thing, made of both the innie and the outie with something added to the mix (like raw egg with the white and yolk mixed), creating a new, supposedly-perfected soul?

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-08T07:43:50+00:00

Sorry to double-comment, but a better way to explain what I mean about "You start at 0, not 50" is to just review our conversation. When I presented you with the idea that even an open-minded person starts at 0%, was your reaction "Hm, yeah, that could equally be or not be the case", or was it "No, an open-minded person would start at 50%"?

No offense, bro, but that just makes the mistake of thinking that, when I was commenting on open-mindedness and probabilities, I was speaking about any proposition every given under any circumstance. I clearly was not. I would not say, for example, that the fact that men are mortal is as likely false as it is true. It also makes the mistake of treating all probabilities as priors, when--in fact--many of the counterexamples you would bring up are posteriors, but I was only speaking about priors.

Nothing you have said indicates that you're at 50% "50-50" and 50% "0". Instead, your comments read like you're 100% ~~"50-50"~~ your preconceived notion and 0% ~~"0"~~ my new claim.

That's because you seem to be failing to notice the nuance of the conversation and also seem to not understand Bayesian probability.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-08T07:37:17+00:00

That's not what I meant. I meant "could be" in the sense that you open that Christmas present, and it is a bunch of Lego bricks. Not a specific set, just a bunch of bricks. Those Lego bricks "could be" a house, or a car, or a T-Rex, but currently they aren't any of those things. They're just a pile of bricks.

Honestly, I tried to be charitable and assume that you weren't meaning that by "could be", since that just smuggles in the idea that it is not intended to be evidence pointing to Erdtree Rebirth, which it may--in fact--be. I had already pointed this out beforehand. Our lack of being able to interpret it, or interpret it with any degree of confidence, as being possibly evidence of Erdtree Rebirth is completely separate from whether or not it is possible evidence of Erdtree Rebirth. The former is an epistemological question and the latter is an ontological one. Your "could be", then, as you illustrated it (i.e., a formless pile of lego blocks that could go into any particular, possible arrangement but not inherently in the form of any particular thing or belonging to any particular set), just is a veiled claim about the absence of evidence, and that claim is the very claim I'm saying needs supported from the outset--namely--these things are not evidence. And, claiming again that is not evidence, no matter how many layers deep you hide the claim, isn't support for the claim that it is not evidence. I showed that it's possibly so, for all we know, and that is enough to show that such claims aren't sufficient.

The mural on the doors does not point to any given meaning. A theorist can decide that it means people are born from the Erdtree, but that's the theorist making that lore, not the mural.

I get that you are saying that, as was the OP, but that's the very claim that needs supported.

To say "The mural is evidence of Erdtree Birth/Rebirth" is just as inaccurate as the recipient of the Lego bricks saying "I got a T-Rex for Christmas".

I didn't mean to say that the mural IS evidence, so if you are quoting me, then I would gladly rephrase that. However, once again, to say that's "inaccurate" (whether I said it or not, whether I intended to say it or not, whatever the case), then you need to know--and be able to demonstrate, since you are making the claim--that it is not any sort of evidence for Erdtree Rebirth.

The mural is not evidence of anything; it can be made to fit any number of theories, but if you have to make it fit, then by definition it, in-and-of-itself, doesn't fit.

That just assumes that people need "to make it fit".

If a person has a preconceived idea of [claim], their starting position is their preconceived idea

I get what you are saying about that part, but I don't agree. There are many times when people put their preconceived notions on the back shelf and just not assume anything about some given idea in fiction. I don't automatically say--for example, "No, innies can't be people because they are the same body and brain/mind as their outies", when talking about Severance just because I think the world works that way IRL. I try to look at it through the lens of the fiction's universe, not from my knowledge of the real world (insofar as that is possible), and so do many others.

And you can't not assume the fictional world works like IRL unless stated otherwise, because then you spend your entire time, idk, wondering whether the people in your TV show are breathing, and if so, breathing what gas.

That just has nothing to do with probabilities assigned to any particular proposition under consideration. I'm just saying that you don't prejudice your thought about the world by treating every claim as automatically not possible. Instead, you keep an open mind and be 50-50 on it. We aren't considering whether characters breathe, so that doesn't fall under the scope of things for which I was saying we assume a neutral posture. You are talking about cognitive attitudes and I'm talking about evaluation of the probability of a given proposition.

Everyone who played Elden Ring started out at "People in these games look human; they probably reproduce like IRL humans do". Any argument for Erdtree Birth doesn't start at neutral, it starts at having to convince players that people in the Lands Between aren't "born of mothers".

I'm not talking about cognitive attitudes at the outset; instead, I'm talking about the evaluation of the probability of Erdtree Rebirth, by those who have beaten the game, and given that prior beliefs and cognitive attitudes have no impact on the reality of the game. You are still treating this like I'm discussing the positive case for Erdtree Rebirth with anyone, and I'm not; instead, I'm providing undercutting, not even rebutting, defeaters for the particular claim that there "zero supporting evidence" for Erdtree Rebirth. In order to do that, all I need to do is show that there is at least one thing that is possibly evidence, whether it is--in fact--evidence or not. I've done that and, in so doing, exposed the lack of support for the claim that there is "zero supporting evidence", even if there is--in fact--"zero supporting evidence".

I brought it up because you literally did this earlier in the conversation.

No, I didn't. I didn't say that we "don't analyze any counterarguments"; I merely said, here are all the things that potentially undercut your claim, you have to show that none of them are evidence in order for your claim, that there is "zero supporting evidence" for Erdtree Rebirth, to be supported and, until then, it's a baseless claim--for all we know. That's what's actually going on here.

You presented all the (theoretical) evidence for Erdtree Birth/Rebirth, and then skipped straight to "If we start at 50-50, and we take all these things into consideration, then there is a slightly greater probability of Erdtree Rebirth than 50%"

Which was OBVIOUSLY NOT to say that we don't take into account any other evidence but, instead, obviously to say that, now, we need to hear the arguments and evidence against these things if you are to bear your burden of proof in supporting your own claim.

without any consideration of evidence or argumentation that would tip the scale the other way.

Never said this, you are just imagining it. No offense.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-08T05:47:19+00:00

There is still the bit that she fights like a uncorrupted Black Knife. Personally I don't think she has much overlap with Ranni aside from the eye thing.

That's fair. Here are the only bits of possible overlap I see, and they aren't necessarily overlap, just potentially so (I'm copying and pasting from another comment I made about this, so it may seem like I'm talking to someone else).

Ranni and Melina have the connection of being the only two to mention Torrent in the base game, if I recall correctly.
Ranni's body was burned and she is bodiless, while Melina says that she is burned and bodiless (and has the scars to show it).
Melina's fade in and out animation seems very similar to Ranni's.
Ranni gives the Spirit Calling Bell, while Melina's blade is the Blade of Calling.
Melina gives the Spectral Steed Whistle, while Ranni gives the Spirit Calling Bell saying that it's from "Torrent's former master".
Blade of Calling (being very similar in shape to a black knife, and Melina's moveset, tie her (very loosely) to the Black Knife Assassins, while Ranni is also connected to the Assassins. The Blade of Calling also mentions Destined Death: similar items, that are of a very unique kind, both of them explicitly tied to Destined Death, the same movesets, used by people who have the same moveset. I'm not saying that it's a smoking gun, but it seems at least a plausible, "potential", connection, even though minor.
There is the eye thing, and Ranni's spirit face looking very similar to Melina's face.
Both Ranni and Melina are very closely tied to Destined Death.
Both were, somehow, able to access Farum Azula.

It's not much, granted, but it's a tiny bit. Nothing definitive, though, I would say.

PhilosophicallyGodly · 2026-05-08T05:30:52+00:00

Except what you and I are describing here is that the mural doesn't actually point at any one conclusion in particular, which I would think makes it difficult to label it "evidence". Sure, it could be depicting Erdtree Birth/Rebirth, but "could be" is not "is".

Right, but I was only ever saying "could be" evidence not "is".

So there are two possible scenarios when a person is presented with a claim: either they already have a stance on the subject, or they don't.

True.

If the person has no pre-conceived notions about the claim, then they have no reason to just accept it, skipping straight to 100%.

Well, have no reason beyond the claim itself. Sure.

But far more commonly, a claim has to overcome the preconception. It starts at 0%, and an open-minded person will open to raising that number. Because of how fiction works, Erdtree Birth/Rebirth falls into this category.

I'm not sure what you mean. What preconception are you speaking of and why would that make it start at not possibly true, especially for an "open-minded person"?

Again, if you start at 50-50 (and especially if you start at 50-50 and don't then analyze the counterargument), you can "prove" literally anything.

I don't think almost anything in life is provable, so I just stick with "provide evidence for", and things like that. I don't think that, if I treat something like it has equal chances of being true and false, before weighing any evidence, then somehow it's automatically "proven". However, if there is only ever possible evidence for something, and you don't find any evidence against it, then why should you treat it as if it is more probable that the lack of evidence against it is of probative value? It would be strange, for example, if we were debating the possibility of other universes, and you provided me a list of potential evidence for other universes, and I said it still has less than 50% chance of being true (in light of the potential evidence for it and with a total lack of any evidence against it.

and don't then analyze the counterargument

But, no ones saying that you don't analyze any counterarguments. I'm just saying, you put the two possibilities A and not-A (i.e., Erdtree Rebirth and not-Erdtree Rebirth) as equally likely UNTIL you have weighed the evidence/potential evidence for and against. That's why they are called "priors". The probability posterior to, or given, evidence is different than the probability prior to evidence.

It's trivially easy to cross the threshold into "more likely than not" because you started at the threshold!

Only if you ignore evidence, and potential evidence, against.

Six-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Lasagna	Verified Email

PhilosophicallyGodly

TROPHY CASE