[Theory] Hypothesizing future power-ups (NS) and Debunking the Elder-Younger Son Parallel

[Transcendence]

I don't think that Naruto will become the new so6p or at least not until Sasuke and Naruto have fought. Imho Naruto represents the body and Sasuke the eyes of the so6p. But still nice theory

Already debunked that man. But thank you!

 

[Transcendence]

Nice theory mate,keep up the good work
rep added as a thank you

Thanks man!

 

[Transcendence]

Naruto's sage mode is stronger than Tsunade, and your saying Tsunade can punch through Susanoo.

Also your saying naruto sage beast mode can't create a Bijuu-dama to match Tsunade's punches?

Yeah sorry thats the only thing wrong with your thread otherwise its genius.

Tsunade's physical punches are still stronger then SM Naruto. The Bijuu-Dama on the other hand... Yea I agree.

And thanks man!

 

[Transcendence]

dumbass little boy your opinion means nothing
show me where it says the uchiha are related to the uzimaki... my cousin's cousins aren't my cousins and hypothesized??? lmao by who??? **** that when since a hypothesis been solid without a experiment ? u are a moron

You must be registered for see images

2. what did the shrine do? nothing dumb dumb it wasn't even in the plan

You must be registered for see images

this is pointless u are basing things off of theories this was too easy i could just throw pages at u but u too set in your idiocy to reevaluate the non-sense u spew

You're an absolute buffoon. None of that proves anything. You didn't even refute anything I said... You just spewed a new topic into discussion. Here's an idea, before you say I'm illiterate (When I'm clearly not) check your own failed grammar and then come back. Theories are made to hypothesize things, not to be concrete fact. There is a clear tie between the Uzumaki and the Uchiha but you are too stupid to see it.

Please stop posting on this thread.

EDIT:

You must be registered for see images

There's the link. Now you can gladly get the hell out of here...

 

[DarkWolf Nashoba]

As promised, I will reply and try to explain myself.

First off here's a post by Derp Obito about the eye itself: That's highly improbable, the Rinnegan is the Eye of Samsara, the Eye of Suffering. Since he suffered to fight and seal the Juubi inside him. If the Sage was born with the Rinnegan then the Eye would be called the Eye of Bodhisattva aka the Eye of the Sage, if Rikudou acquired the Rinnegan through meditation and learning then it would be called the Eye of Nirvana aka the Eye of Enlightenment. So it is a logical certainty that the Rinnegan came from the Juubi.

This was to debunk the theory that the Sage of the Six Paths was born with the Rinnegan. It is illogical to assume he was born with the eye of the Progenitor of the World, seeing as he only became a Divine God, AFTER he sealed the Juubi in him.

My premise therefore lies in the fact he gained the Rinnegan because of the influence the Juubi's chakra had on his body, and it mutated his eyes. So I hypothesize, on top of the foreshadowing from 629, that if someone were to gain the collective amount of chakra that comprise the Juubi (The Bijuu's like Naruto go) they would be able to awaken the Rinnegan; hence the reason why I say Naruto would get it."]

Madara reverse engineered the two brother bloodline, which is the other logical way of getting it. One brother represents Yang, the other Yin. By applying the Yang portion to the Yin's eyes, it mutates the eyes into the Rinnegan, successfully reverse engineering the original bloodlines. It is also highly probably that the powers both brothers obtained were more so in credit to the Juubi rather than their father; Mokuton being the peak of the Younger Son (Juubi's body), and EMS being the peak of the Elder Son (Juubi's eye). Therefore logically, like Madara did, you can reverse engineer the two bloodlines to comprise what the Juubi's influence had on the brothers.

Hope this covers that.

Hmmm. Interesting...
I think there's more discussion to be had. Let's begin.


With regard to the portion in red:
I can't completely agree with this "logical certainty."
This "certainty" is based on a logical fallacy, or rather, a few fallacies.

This first fallacy involved is the propositional fallacy known as "Affirming a disjunct." Basically this means that you are assuming that two conditions are mutually exclusive and thus concluding that because one disjunct is true, any others must be false. (A or B; if A is true, then B must be false) We don't know for a fact that the Rinnegan was awakened due to one thing in particular. It could have been a multitude of events that led to its arousal in the forward direction, as opposed to the singular event of "reverse engineering" which we have seen proven in the manga.

The second fallacy involved is the formal "Appeal to probability." This one takes an inference based on inductive reasoning and makes the assertion that because something is probably true, that it will be true.

Thirdly, the final fallacy here is the informal "genetic fallacy." This fallacy assumes a conclusion based on something or someone's origin (just as you propose the name suggests its origin) rather than the current context. An example of this would be like saying that the Volkswagen Beetle Cars are evil because they were first manufactured during Hitler's reign in Germany.

Do any of these fallacies make your guess likely to be wrong/incorrect? No. Your guess is fine.
You just can't state that the SO6P acquired the Rinnegan due to the influence of the Juubi as an undeniable fact, as you did in the blue portion of your post. As I said before, you've made a good hypothesis. However, it's a hypothesis and nothing more. Don't confuse extrapolated guesswork with interpolated fact. That's all I have to say about the sentence in blue.

Regarding the portion in green:
As long as the premises you've presented above do indeed prove to be correct, then this thought process is definitely a good one in terms of plausibility. I like it. Only time will tell how Kishimoto decides to handle the situation.

I beg of you, please please please don't claim to be logical and then break the rules of logic with fallacious statements. Do I sometimes generate fallacies? Yeah, I'll admit, I can screw up too. I'm not afraid to let others correct me either, because I'd like to continue to improve upon my ability to provide quality argumentation. You have great potential and I want you to capitalize on that. Don't let my constructive criticism get you down. Just keep up the good work, bro.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

Hmmm. Interesting...
I think there's more discussion to be had. Let's begin.


With regard to the portion in red:
I can't completely agree with this "logical certainty."
This "certainty" is based on a logical fallacy, or rather, a few fallacies.

This first fallacy involved is the propositional fallacy known as "Affirming a disjunct." Basically this means that you are assuming that two conditions are mutually exclusive and thus concluding that because one disjunct is true, any others must be false. (A or B; if A is true, then B must be false) We don't know for a fact that the Rinnegan was awakened due to one thing in particular. It could have been a multitude of events that led to its arousal in the forward direction, as opposed to the singular event of "reverse engineering" which we have seen proven in the manga.

The second fallacy involved is the formal "Appeal to probability." This one takes an inference based on inductive reasoning and makes the assertion that because something is probably true, that it will be true.

Thirdly, the final fallacy here is the informal "genetic fallacy." This fallacy assumes a conclusion based on something or someone's origin (just as you propose the name suggests its origin) rather than the current context. An example of this would be like saying that the Volkswagen Beetle Cars are evil because they were first manufactured during Hitler's reign in Germany.

Do any of these fallacies make your guess likely to be wrong/incorrect? No. Your guess is fine.
You just can't state that the SO6P acquired the Rinnegan due to the influence of the Juubi as an undeniable fact, as you did in the blue portion of your post. As I said before, you've made a good hypothesis. However, it's a hypothesis and nothing more. Don't confuse extrapolated guesswork with interpolated fact. That's all I have to say about the sentence in blue.

Regarding the portion in green:
As long as the premises you've presented above do indeed prove to be correct, then this thought process is definitely a good one in terms of plausibility. I like it. Only time will tell how Kishimoto decides to handle the situation.

I beg of you, please please please don't claim to be logical and then break the rules of logic with fallacious statements. Do I sometimes generate fallacies? Yeah, I'll admit, I can screw up too. I'm not afraid to let others correct me either, because I'd like to continue to improve upon my ability to provide quality argumentation. You have great potential and I want you to capitalize on that. Don't let my constructive criticism get you down. Just keep up the good work, bro.

You of all people then should know that not all arguments follow Modus Tollens. So the logical fallacies you've mentioned are Inconsequential and Categorically Erroneous

Now can anyone please tell how the Rinnegan couldn't have come from the Juubi?

You must be registered for see images

 

[Transcendence]

Hmmm. Interesting...
I think there's more discussion to be had. Let's begin.


With regard to the portion in red:
I can't completely agree with this "logical certainty."
This "certainty" is based on a logical fallacy, or rather, a few fallacies.

This first fallacy involved is the propositional fallacy known as "Affirming a disjunct." Basically this means that you are assuming that two conditions are mutually exclusive and thus concluding that because one disjunct is true, any others must be false. (A or B; if A is true, then B must be false) We don't know for a fact that the Rinnegan was awakened due to one thing in particular. It could have been a multitude of events that led to its arousal in the forward direction, as opposed to the singular event of "reverse engineering" which we have seen proven in the manga.

The second fallacy involved is the formal "Appeal to probability." This one takes an inference based on inductive reasoning and makes the assertion that because something is probably true, that it will be true.

Thirdly, the final fallacy here is the informal "genetic fallacy." This fallacy assumes a conclusion based on something or someone's origin (just as you propose the name suggests its origin) rather than the current context. An example of this would be like saying that the Volkswagen Beetle Cars are evil because they were first manufactured during Hitler's reign in Germany.

Do any of these fallacies make your guess likely to be wrong/incorrect? No. Your guess is fine.
You just can't state that the SO6P acquired the Rinnegan due to the influence of the Juubi as an undeniable fact, as you did in the blue portion of your post. As I said before, you've made a good hypothesis. However, it's a hypothesis and nothing more. Don't confuse extrapolated guesswork with interpolated fact. That's all I have to say about the sentence in blue.

Regarding the portion in green:
As long as the premises you've presented above do indeed prove to be correct, then this thought process is definitely a good one in terms of plausibility. I like it. Only time will tell how Kishimoto decides to handle the situation.

I beg of you, please please please don't claim to be logical and then break the rules of logic with fallacious statements. Do I sometimes generate fallacies? Yeah, I'll admit, I can screw up too. I'm not afraid to let others correct me either, because I'd like to continue to improve upon my ability to provide quality argumentation. You have great potential and I want you to capitalize on that. Don't let my constructive criticism get you down. Just keep up the good work, bro.

Your criticism is greatly gratified. The point of a hypothesis/theory is to display a thought/idea in a different light, from a different point of view. At this time in the manga we have only one solid case of someone awakening the Rinnegan; Madara reverse engineering the brother's original bloodline, ala adding the Yang portion of the Senju to the Uchiha's Yin.

I understand these fallacies can grasp at topics/idea that are not concrete at the moment, but these fallacies (If you want to call them that) can be justified. Because Madara is the only known case of awakening it, everyone accepts it as fact. I'd like to use an analogy as to why this thought process is wrongful; There is more than one way to assassinate a dignitary, grasping at the fact (or theory) that there is more than one way to unlock the power of the Rinnegan.

But literally, it has to be at least brought into consideration that this forgone certainty be at least partially justified. I mean seriously, look at the eye of the Juubi. Superimpose the image by taking away the Tomoe (And colouring it a light purple) and you get an exact replica of the Rinnegan; ergo the Rinnegan itself.

It's also been stated in the manga that the Sage transcended humanism AFTER he became the Juubi's Jinchuriki; therefore through logical deduction you can assume that the Sage wasn't born with the eye of the Progenitor of the World. There in being an outside source (The Juubi's chakra). But yes these are assumptions, fallacies if you will. I hope this comes to fruition.

If I may add, I most enjoy debating with you.

 

[Transcendence]

You of all people then should know that not all arguments follow Modus Tollens. So the logical fallacies you've mentioned are Inconsequential and Categorically Erroneous

Now can anyone please tell how the Rinnegan couldn't have come from the Juubi?

You must be registered for see images

Here lies an example when you superimpose the eye of the Juubi.

 

[Flawž]

great theory man.

I agree with pretty much everything.

Again, great job.

 

[Transcendence]

great theory man.

I agree with pretty much everything.

Again, great job.

Thanks man!=D

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

The Rinnegan Chart ​

You must be registered for see images

 

[Transcendence]

I'll be going off topic with this, but I have to do a sports injury seminar and this is what I used to describe the causes of Whiplash in one of my PowerPoint slides:

Whiplash is commonly associated with motor-vehicle accidents; mainly due to the fact that when a car is hit from the rear, the person(s) in the front seat are pushed with a forward force that causes their neck (and whole body) to spring in that direction and when the momentum of the impact is finished, “snap” backwards, causing this distortion that is commonly used to describe Whiplash. However, the injury can be sustained in many other ways, including head banging, bungee jumping and falls. Basically any activity/occurrence that will cause your neck to suddenly distort and overextend.

Any good?

 

[DarkWolf Nashoba]

I'll be going off topic with this, but I have to do a sports injury seminar and this is what I used to describe the causes of Whiplash in one of my PowerPoint slides:

Whiplash is commonly associated with motor-vehicle accidents; mainly due to the fact that when a car is hit from the rear, the person(s) in the front seat are pushed with a forward force that causes their neck (and whole body) to spring in that direction and when the momentum of the impact is finished, “snap” backwards, causing this distortion that is commonly used to describe Whiplash. However, the injury can be sustained in many other ways, including head banging, bungee jumping and falls. Basically any activity/occurrence that will cause your neck to suddenly distort and overextend.

Any good?

Eeesh. I'm not too good with anatomy/injuries and such, but it sounds good to an uninformed observer like me -- which is what I anticipate the majority of your audience will be.

The Rinnegan Chart ​

You must be registered for see images

...woah. Impressive chart. For visual learners such as myself, that's most helpful in demonstrating the final conclusion that some of you have reached.

If I may add, I most enjoy debating with you.

Same to you.

You of all people then should know that not all arguments follow Modus Tollens. So the logical fallacies you've mentioned are Inconsequential and Categorically Erroneous

I'm afraid I'm not sure how Modus Tollens is directly associated with each of the fallacies I listed. I can kinda see how residing outside of denying-the-consequent-type argumentation would negate the genetic fallacy and affirming a disjunct... but the appeal to probability would still apply in all cases of logic, wouldn't it?
If not, I'd appreciate learning something new here.

 

[Transcendence]

Aha, yea. These seminars were given randomly and random topics so nobody is expecting common knowledge.

 

[Transcendence]

If my hypothesis is correct and Naruto does gain the Rinnegan, I want him to look like this:

You must be registered for see images

If anyone can photoshop the Rinnegan on to there then that would be awesome!

Or this:

You must be registered for see images

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

Eeesh. I'm not too good with anatomy/injuries and such, but it sounds good to an uninformed observer like me -- which is what I anticipate the majority of your audience will be.



...woah. Impressive chart. For visual learners such as myself, that's most helpful in demonstrating the final conclusion that some of you have reached.



Same to you.



I'm afraid I'm not sure how Modus Tollens is directly associated with each of the fallacies I listed. I can kinda see how residing outside of denying-the-consequent-type argumentation would negate the genetic fallacy and affirming a disjunct... but the appeal to probability would still apply in all cases of logic, wouldn't it?
If not, I'd appreciate learning something new here.

An appeal to probability is only applicable to arguments with unwarranted assumptions, like for example out of the many religions one of them is probably true. It is a fallacy when talking about absolute terms. However, in cases of theories like this one which has sufficient and substantiated evidences and in the fields of mathematics, science, economics,etc wherein probability is used for the purpose of approximating the truth and the likelihood of positive and negative outcomes, the fallacy is not applicable.

 

[Transcendence]

To add on to that; Because we have only 1 example of someone awakening the Rinnegan, it is not enough sample evidence to deem that as the only factual way to awaken it. Other evidence which substantiates claims made in theories suggests otherwise, and therefore mitigates the possibility of it being a fallacy.

 

[DarkWolf Nashoba]

An appeal to probability is only applicable to arguments with unwarranted assumptions, like for example out of the many religions one of them is probably true. It is a fallacy when talking about absolute terms. However, in cases of theories like this one which has sufficient and substantiated evidences and in the fields of mathematics, science, economics,etc wherein probability is used for the purpose of approximating the truth and the likelihood of positive and negative outcomes, the fallacy is not applicable.

Hmm. I fully understand the nature of accepting approximations as "close-enough/true" in science and mathematics (being a chemical engineering major), so I believe your parallel has hit its mark with me.
Still, to ensure I have acquired a thorough understanding of what you present here, I'd like to summarize your explanation in my own words and see if you agree with my interpretation.

This theory is an extrapolation which implies that inductive reasoning was utilized to produce it. Fallacies of the sort I stated are only applicable when deductive reasoning is utilized. Fallacies have roots that reside primarily within the domain of tautology, but usually not within the domain of inference.

Is that pretty much what you were going for?

 

[Transcendence]

When Derp Obito sees this he'll probably reply. I'll reserve my opinion on your explanation of what he established later.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

Hmm. I fully understand the nature of accepting approximations as "close-enough/true" in science and mathematics (being a chemical engineering major), so I believe your parallel has hit its mark with me.
Still, to ensure I have acquired a thorough understanding of what you present here, I'd like to summarize your explanation in my own words and see if you agree with my interpretation.

This theory is an extrapolation which implies that inductive reasoning was utilized to produce it. Fallacies of the sort I stated are only applicable when deductive reasoning is utilized. Fallacies have roots that reside primarily within the domain of tautology, but usually not within the domain of inference.

Is that pretty much what you were going for?

Yes, they are universal or general propositions that are derived from specific examples, the greater the similitude of the particular to the universal, the more veracious the inductive inference is, this is not to say that inductive reasoning is perfect since even if the premises are true, the conclusion might be proven false when further evidences suggest its' errancy, however substantiated inductive inferences gives us a valid reason to believe that conclusions are true until they are proven otherwise.