FANDOM


  • I remembered seeing something about how Patapotence used to be its own power, but is now listed as an alternate name for Metapotence.

    Why is that? What happened that caused the Patapotence page to be deleted?

      Loading editor
    • There was a comment chain about it being made, but since it would be pretty much useless and there's nothing Omnipotence can't do, no one made that page.

        Loading editor
    • Patapotence never existed on the Wiki, it was only a subject of discussions.

      "Patapotence" falls in the "semantic abuse" category, in this case a word-based attempt to transcend that which inherently cannot he transcended (Omnipotence and its Metapotence variation, which isn't any stronger since such a thing is impossible, but simply more straightforward).

        Loading editor
    • Patapotence is a thing? Can someone tell me the latin in the name please...

        Loading editor
    • not latin, french.

      It came from 'pataphysics. it was an idea, who basically was the illogical side who transcendent omnipotence, based on the paradox of "if omniptoent being can do everything, she can create something stronger then herself", and other paradox form that kind, plus the fact that one of the definitions of omnipotence is posseseing infinite power over everything, and as math shows, there are more then infinite diferent infinitys, and then there is the inaccesible cardinal, which is like infinity for infinitys, and then above it there are other "things". the 'pataphysics idea was basically to put a power there, in this logicless insane place.

        Loading editor
    • It's a weird concept. But if Omnipotence can exist why can't this exist as well?

        Loading editor
    • How about Sexpotence or Memepotence, you can sexualise anything and fuck it unlimited or make anything a meme and mock about it as if they were nothing.

        Loading editor
    • Heh?

        Loading editor
    • Wth. I mean sure if Omnipotence can exist than anything can exist but wth.

        Loading editor
    • DYBAD wrote: Patapotence never existed on the Wiki, it was only a subject of discussions.

      "Patapotence" falls in the "semantic abuse" category, in this case a word-based attempt to transcend that which inherently cannot he transcended (Omnipotence and its Metapotence variation, which isn't any stronger since such a thing is impossible, but simply more straightforward).

      You know full well that was not the crux of that discussion. The idea was pitched from a conceptual standpoint of there being an existence of an “author” figure for our own reality. And following the same logic, there could be one for that creator, and onwards into infinity.

      Patapotence was a proposal that, like the Inaccessible Cardinal, we could declare in axiomatic logic that there would exist something or someone that is so great, nothing could even begin to imagine it; not even the God of God. You personally rejected this because, “it places undue dominion over other authors’ works,” not because the idea itself was inherently flawed.

      To compound this issue, Omni-Creator does nearly the same thing, it just masks this mysterious supreme entity as in-universe gods.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.