Conceptual Transcendence

How does Conceptual Transcendence work?

So I've been thinking about Conceptual Lordship a lot recently, and I have some things I'd like to discuss and get other people's opinions on.

First off, does Conceptual Lordship, as well as Concept and Meta-Concept Manipulation, assume concepts like in Plato's 'Theory of Forms', in which concepts are independent, abstract, perfect and immutable existences that shape reality by way of all aspects of reality 'participating' in them (e.g., a red circle participates in the concepts of 'circle-ness' and 'red-ness', and altering either concept would change the red circle accordingly) or being imperfect reflections of them, and changing the concepts would fundamentally alter all participating aspects of reality. Or can it include abstract ideas partially or entirely formed by human (or other sapient) conceptualisation?

• For concepts in the sense of 'platonic forms', does this imply that concepts exist on a level of reality above baseline reality, but potentially below others? Or would they necessarily be beyond 'levels of reality' due to that very thing being a concept in and of itself? For that matter, what happens when you have concepts of things that are beyond conceptualisation (e.g., the concept of Absolute Transcendence)?

• If they do include concepts in the sense of abstract ideas in the human mind, what does manipulation of these concepts actually do? Concepts in this sense could probably be thought of as collections of abstract ideas created to encompass and represent an aspect of reality on a level abstracted from the actual nature of the aspect in order to make it easier to comprehend. On a base level, it seems like it would just be changing how humans conceive of the represented aspects of reality. So would these powers involve then forcing reality to reflect the alterations to the changed concept? Or does altering even a concept of this kind with one of these powers inherently involve altering everything the concept encompasses, even if the concept isn't the basis of everything it encompasses in the same way that a Platonic Form is?

I think that the idea of manifesting and infusing concepts is easier to consider, regardless of the specific nature of the concepts being used.

• For Platonic Form type concepts, infusing a concept into something would entail making the thing participate to a high degree in that form. Manifesting a concept would entail creating an imperfect reflection of the form (or, in the case of Conceptual Lordship, this could be creating a perfect reflection of the form) to have an affect on reality.

• For concepts as from the human mind, infusing a concept into something would be making the thing reflect attributes associated with the infused concept. Manifesting a concept would be creating something that matches the collective ideas of the manifested concept to a high degree.

• In both cases, the thing being infused with the concept is made to better reflect the ideal set out by the concept in question and the thing being manifested is created as a high-level reflection of the ideal, whether that be some external, perfect ideal or a collective mental ideal of the concept.

Creating a conceptual embodiment is a different matter entirely.

• For Platonic Form type concepts, this is relatively simple to think of. It is likely creating an entity (or converting an existing entity into one) that is unified, on some level, with the form in question. Low level embodiments might be barely unified with it at all, or may even just be participating in the form to a high degree, while higher level embodiments may be fully unified with the form (thus entailing full control over everything the form encompasses) or even encompassing the form entirely (thus being fully beyond it due to containing the entirety of it as an aspect, as opposed to the whole, of their being).

• For mental type concepts, this is a bit more difficult. I mean, similarly, this would most likely be creating an entity that is unified with the concept in question on some level, but what does that actually mean in this context? Do they just reflect the ideas behind the concept perfectly? Or is it more like since the concept is an construct created to categorise and encompass an aspect of reality on an abstract level to allow for comprehension of it, an embodiment of a given concept is an entity that fully represents this aspect of reality (as opposed to just the abstract notion of it) as a single entity and, even though the concept isn't actually the basis of it, therefore controls that aspect of reality? So for example, an embodiment of the concept of color wouldn't be just an entity that perfectly reflects what we conceive of as 'color', but rather an entity that represents everything the concept of 'color' is thought of as encompassing. In this way, every instance of color can be thought of as an aspect of this entity, and they would control every instance of color. This would also mean that changes in the concept of 'color' by humanity as a whole would affect what the entity actually encompasses. To be honest, I'm not entirely sure if I articulated this correctly, but oh well.

• Fundamentally, my question boils down to what being a conceptual embodiment actually means if concepts are thought of as mental ideals rather than external, abstract forms.

Finally, at least for now, we get to one more to do with Conceptual Lordship than anything else. In essence, this is considering how it deals (or doesn't) with things that transcend concepts in some way.

• Something that transcends concepts should be impossible to affect with concepts. Does this mean that they transcend everything a given concept encompasses? It would seem so, though that puts Conceptual Transcendence at risk of being practically identical to Absolute Transcendence, since they should transcend the concept of 'totality'. Not sure how this works. Any thoughts?

• Despite this, Conceptual Lordship is an absolute power, so it should be capable of taking concepts and manifesting them at an absolute level (e.g., manifesting the concept of 'death' at an absolute level would result in Absolute Death Inducement), which could possibly apply to a Conceptually Transcendent entity? This seems a lot like comparing absolutes.

• On a different side of things, let's take Absolute Transcendence. It is obviously transcendent of concepts and thus is in no way beholden to the concept of 'Absolute Transcendence'. However, if Conceptual Lordship were to infuse or manifest this concept into itself, or just make itself an absolute-level embodiment of the concept, would it achieve Absolute Transcendence? I personally think probably yes, but I'd like to see what everyone else thinks. The idea of using a concept to go beyond concepts does seem a bit odd, but I suppose this is Conceptual Lordship.

Oh, and do you think Conceptual Lordship should be considered a Form/Expression of Omnipotence, as it is currently?

So yeah, I think that's everything for now. What do you think?

As the title says, what would you do with scientiapotence?

Just to get a sense that we are talking about the highest level, and to give a basis for others to understand how it works, I will take The Downstreamers/Old Ones as a basis, with data I saw on another wikia.

Yes, I researched some users listed on the scientiapotence page, and I think The Downstreamers are the ones that best represent a user or society that has reached such a level, I haven't looked at all the other users on the list yet, but here is a good example and perhaps the better, since here we are not talking about spiritual, psychic, magical, or any other, but rather powers of science.

When talking about what to do when you acquire magic, psychic power, spiritual power, or another type of power, of a cosmic level or greater, for many it is easy to imagine and talk about what they would do with those powers, but with powers similar to the powers of science, it is a little more complicated, since, apart from the best known and famous, Doctor Manhattan, whose powers often seem like magic, we have few examples of users with clear forms of science powers that are of cosmic level or higher, and the few examples there are are not as well known, and generally the level of their science/technology is also not shown and detailed, which leaves people limited to thinking "what would scientiapotence be like? What would they do differently than others?". And so as a lover of the sci-fi genre, along with my inner child, who still likes powers on a cosmic level, I bring an example to you at the same time as I ask, what would you do?

• Would you empower other people?

• Would you conquer several worlds?

• Would you create buildings that would transform the world similar to a game?

• Would you live isolated in the deepest corner of the universe?

• Another thing? Tell me what you would do.

The Downstreamers can manipulate movement of Big Bang artifacts, has extreme durability, through extreme density of Quark-nugget matter (Quark-nugget matter is Big Bang artifacts The Downstreamers can use to hit and turn entire star into more strange matter and convert it into energy to cause supernova in short time), they can grant Powers and Abilities of The Downstreamers to other people/they can transform other people into a Downstreamer, Their non-corporeal forms include a Causal Loop computer that essentially makes them know things before they happen, Know how every possible event in the universe will unfold down to the quantum level. Their "brains" are Causal Loop computers, a device which grants them infinite thinking and processing power.

After their evolve to Old Ones, their created and transcended an "ultimate reality" which contains the crux of all logical concepts. Created the Red Moon, a construct that could travel through an infinite amount of possible universes within a finite scope of time through the use of phase-space engineering. Capable of easily changing the constants of reality to be able to travel in ways that cannot be described by human language, and may transcend the concept of movement itself. The Old Ones are able to comprehend and manipulate the "infinite manifold" that encompasses all mathematical possibilities.

Can conceptual transcendence be above omnipotence.

What is the perception of a Conceptual Transcendence user like, and is actually useful, even healthy for a mind to handle?

And how powerful is infinite range actually?

I hear this thing "Platonic Concept", and i don't know what it is?.

It's like a abstracto concept or a love Concept?.

Something like that?.

If they were able to warp, bend, break, twist, etc. the very concept/ definition of reality warping and what makes it reality warping, would it become logic manipulation or much more potent than that, perhaps Alpha reality?

Does this break the boundaries of reality warping and reaching a higher threshold?

To bend, twist/alter reality warping as an ability itself and induce it upon existence what will happen? does this become a Universal (multiversal, omniversal, etc) error? since it would be more illogical or paradoxical than your typical form of reality warping, would this potentially lead to warping even non-existence itself?

[This is a hypothetical/theoretic experiment, I require sure responses no jokes or folly]

So for a while I've been thinking about two topics constantly , the collective unconsciousness from Carl Jung and the world of forms from Plato and how they are mysteriously connected .

Because collective unconsciousness is about the eternal ideas and concepts that people instantly know without learning about it , and the world of forms is a plane of reality that houses eternal ideas that transcend space and time .

But what I personally think that these two are connected is some weird way, and if a user had the ability to manipulate the collective unconsciousness from the world of forms that would not only have the power to manipulate all of fictional creation but the real world as well

If you were given the opportunity to transcend everything in existence, every transcendence power on this wiki, would you do it?

What is the difference between conceptual transcendence and insanity?