Is No-Limits Always a Fallacy?

Finn Mac Cool

Finn Mac Cool

Active Member
One thing anyone who spends much time in the OBD eventually becomes familiar with is the no-limits fallacy, which makes claims like "Superman's heat vision can reheat the Sun; it can burn through anything."

That example is obviously erroneous reasoning, and it's standard practice in the OBD to point out when someone's using a no-limits fallacy to support their character of choice in a versus thread. However some of recent debates in the Meta-Battledome have gotten me thinking: what's the board feeling when it comes to characters or abilities that are described using no-limits terms? Suppose a character is described as "infinitely strong," or a sword is said to be able to "cut anything," or someone's hand is supposed to "kill whoever it touches." Now, actual feats are almost always given precedence over claims, since someone making a claim might be lying, misinformed, or exaggerating; on the other hand, claims are usually treated as fact if there are no feats or other claims to contradict them.

So what do people think? If a character or ability is described using terms like "anything," "everything," or "infinitely" is it still a no-limits fallacy to take those descriptions literally?
 
You can only go by the highest end feats.

If someone says they can cut anything and they cut diamond, they cannot cut adamantium.

Also, Susano being able to tank a Death Star blast is a no limits fallacy.
 
Sylar said:
You can only go by the highest end feats.

If someone says they can cut anything and they cut diamond, they cannot cut adamantium.

Also, Susano being able to tank a Death Star blast is a no limits fallacy.
Click to expand...
Actually it depends.
 
Itachi states that nothing can break through Susano.

So do you really think Superman Prime couldn't?

Saying Susano can tank anything bigger than an attack which destroys a small building on top of a mountain is a no limits fallacy.
 
No it doesn't. Not unless the feat can replicate something on a very similar level.
Click to expand...

Example: If you are intangible, you can go threw anything, period. (Unless its some anti intangibility wall).

Saying Susano can tank anything bigger than an attack which destroys a small building on top of a mountain is a no limits fallacy.
Click to expand...
You are judging things only on a destructive level. Superman could tank a nuke, but could he tank something like an attack that obliterates every atom in his body and nullifies any kind of defense, durability, or regen? This attack is not nearly as destructive as a nuke, however, it surely would kill Prime.
 
So what about, say, the subtle knife from His Dark Materials which is stated to be able to cut through anything?

Or what about Blackbeard's gravity powers that he claims can suck in anything?

Or that lady from s-CRY-ed whose hair can turn anything into water?

And what exactly makes an infinite/anything claim different from a regular claim?
 
Depends on the nature of the limit. There are cases where no limits is a logical extension of a power to a point.

Its kind of like this, there is always a limit. Someone with some massive galactic scale divinity can and will break the power. BUt before you reach that point there is the whole question of what is the nature of the power, is it an Absolute effect power or is it a Graded Effect power.

For example, I have the power to paralyze someone, is it based off of me doing 10,000 paralysis points, or if someone looked up its mechanics would it say "Paralyze... period."
 
Sonic said:
You are judging things only on a destructive level. Superman could tank a nuke, but could he tank something like an attack that obliterates every atom in his body and nullifies any kind of defense, durability, or regen? This attack is not nearly as destructive as a nuke, however, it surely would kill Prime.
Click to expand...

Actually Prime did survive an attack which ripped his body from the universe atom by atom....
 
Actually Prime did survive an attack which ripped his body from the universe atom by atom....
Click to expand...
Except the fictional attack I described is worse, you cannot tank it. You will be obliterated. Simple as that. Besides, don't tank it too literally since you know what I'm trying to say.
 
Finn Mac Cool said:
So what about, say, the subtle knife from His Dark Materials which is stated to be able to cut through anything?

Or what about Blackbeard's gravity powers that he claims can suck in anything?

Or that lady from s-CRY-ed whose hair can turn anything into water?

And what exactly makes an infinite/anything claim different from a regular claim?
Click to expand...

All of those claims are judged on HOW the effect happens. Blackbeard's powers don't work against someone who can overpower the gravitational pull (like Superman, who has flown out of a black hole). If, however, his abilities simply stated "target is now sucked inside, full stop" then they very well may work on Superman.
 
Sonic said:
Except the fictional attack I described is worse, you cannot tank it. You will be obliterated. Simple as that. Besides, don't tank it too literally since you know what I'm trying to say.
Click to expand...

Except for the fact thats what it was stated to do against Superman too...oh wait now.
 
Sylar said:
The Guardians discuss what the sacrificed Guardian did to Prime and the result of that is shown.
Click to expand...
Again, not the same thing. In that case it just removed all of his atoms from the Universe (then warped him to a Multiverse). So none of his atoms were actually destroyed. In mine, his atoms or destroyed, ala no longer existing and it nullfies any durability, regen, special abilities.

Of course mine is just a made up ability, but the point is, you can't simply say no limits fallacy works for everything. I'd say that if they say they can cut anything, then they can, but don't bring that logic to the Battledome in a fight or trying to compare people.
 
Try again.
Click to expand...
I love it how you ignore what I said.

Again, not the same thing. In that case it just removed all of his atoms from the Universe (then warped him to a Multiverse). So none of his atoms were actually destroyed. In mine, his atoms or destroyed, ala no longer existing and it nullfies any durability, regen, special abilities.

Of course mine is just a made up ability, but the point is, you can't simply say no limits fallacy works for everything. I'd say that if they say they can cut anything, then they can, but don't bring that logic to the Battledome in a fight or trying to compare people.
Click to expand...
Concession accepted. Time to read Gantz (Read it btw if you haven't, its awesome)
 
Sonic said:
You are judging things only on a destructive level. Superman could tank a nuke, but could he tank something like an attack that obliterates every atom in his body and nullifies any kind of defense, durability, or regen? This attack is not nearly as destructive as a nuke, however, it surely would kill Prime.
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with no limits fallacy?
 
I Я TWF said:
His atoms were destroyed in the originating universe.

Try again.
Click to expand...
It said removed, besides, he was just warped someone else. Removed and warped. Thats all they did. If all of his atoms were destroyed then he'd be dead.

What does this have to do with no limits fallacy?
Click to expand...
People seem to be using "no limits fallacies" only on a linear destructive scale.

Ala, if they tank a nuke then they can tank a gernade, or small bomb, or kiloton blast, etc. But can they tank something like a microbomb, or atom removal? No limits fallacies work both ways.








Look, you know what, I don't want to argue/debate about this right now. I concede, you guys win. On another note, omg I almost cried on Chp 18/19 of Gantz. Damn it. I need to take a shower. Later.
 
I always found a good point to make about this in the Stand Notorious BIG in JJBA


the stands info page clearly states that the stand is always faster than its opponent
 
Sonic said:
People seem to be using "no limits fallacies" only on a linear destructive scale.

Ala, if they tank a nuke then they can tank a gernade, or small bomb, or kiloton blast, etc. But can they tank something like a microbomb, or atom removal? No limits fallacies work both ways.
Click to expand...

Ok, but that really has nothing to do with a no limits fallacy.

Maybe if Superman was said to be completely invulnerable to everything, but he isn't...
 
Taleran said:
I always found a good point to make about this in the Stand Notorious BIG in JJBA


the stands info page clearly states that the stand is always faster than its opponent
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the matter of it moving based upon chasing only what it detects as the fastest moving object balances it out a bit. While it's not like it can easily and constantly speedblitz you no matter the distance difference.

So I wouldn't say it's a clear cut no limits fallacy.
 
No Limits is a fallacy when discussing manga and comic books fights. Always.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom