User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-188432-20130129081336/@comment-1166667-20130402140057: Difference between revisions
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
That's all well and good, SOTO. However, by taking the "one person" side, you are assuming there is going to eventually be an explanation identifying them as one. The timey-wimey side, if you will, of a scenario we don't/can't yet understand. We must assume real-world logic applies until a fantastic solution is clarified in-universe. | That's all well and good, SOTO. However, by taking the "one person" side, you are assuming there is going to eventually be an explanation identifying them as one. The timey-wimey side, if you will, of a scenario we don't/can't yet understand. We must assume real-world logic applies until a fantastic solution is clarified in-universe. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 8: | ||
By calling them the same person, we are excusing an impossibility because there ''might'' be an explanation. We chronicle what the show tells us, yes? Then let's wait for the show to tell us that they are in fact the same person and not just '''''echoes''''' of the same person. | By calling them the same person, we are excusing an impossibility because there ''might'' be an explanation. We chronicle what the show tells us, yes? Then let's wait for the show to tell us that they are in fact the same person and not just '''''echoes''''' of the same person. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20130129081336-188432/20130402140057-1166667]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 21:41, 27 April 2023
That's all well and good, SOTO. However, by taking the "one person" side, you are assuming there is going to eventually be an explanation identifying them as one. The timey-wimey side, if you will, of a scenario we don't/can't yet understand. We must assume real-world logic applies until a fantastic solution is clarified in-universe.
Until the series shows us the wild and imaginative reason they are the same person, we have to default to them being different people. Why?
Because two of them died. And the show hasn't explained how that's possible.
Maybe she was launched through time. Maybe she had her memory wiped. Maybe she's immortal. But these are maybes. Assumptions.
By calling them the same person, we are excusing an impossibility because there might be an explanation. We chronicle what the show tells us, yes? Then let's wait for the show to tell us that they are in fact the same person and not just echoes of the same person.
