Kadmos1
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2012
- Messages
- 442
- Reaction score
- 17
Defining the terms:
In the Yahoo! Answer question "What is the difference between the terms 'Sentient' and 'Sapient'?", the OP asks "When referring to different forms of life."
The responders says this: "Sentience is consciousness: the ability to understand signals, interpret them, learn them, and use them.
Regarding the creation of the Juubi and
Sapience is the ability to think abstractly about the world, to search for meaning instead of purpose.
Some say apes are sapient. Some say Cnidaria (jellyfish and polyps) are not sentient, even though they have a nervous system. What is clear is that at least 99.999% of animal species is not sapient, and that all sponges and all non-animal life forms on earth are not sentient."
Sentience Sapience and the apparent lack of either in most writers
This is a bug bear of epic proportions, mainly because it has so filtered into the media that it is literally IMPOSSIBLE to create any kind of sci-fi without making this basic elemental blunder.
The problem is that these two words do NOT mean the same thing, and the word SENTIENT is used pretty much exclusively where the word SAPIENT is required.
From the article "Sentience Sapience and the apparent lack of either in most writers":
"http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentient
Summary: Sentient = Having sensation.
Summary: Sapient = Having wisdom.
Now, these two seem similar, but they're very different. Virtually every life form is sentient. Basically anything that can tell that it is different from other things around it has sentience. Mice are sentient life forms because they can sense that they're being prodded and know that it is by something that is not them. They understand that object A is a worm and can be eaten, and object B is a rock and cannot. They understand that both A and B are not part of itself.
Sapient species are those capable of wise thought, typically characterised as ABSTRACT thought.
If a man and a dog go to the top of an open mine shaft, and the man drops a glass ball and a steel ball, the man can deuce from his prior experience that it is likely that the glass ball will have shattered when it hits the mine floor, whilst the steel ball will quite likely be intact. The dog cannot do so, it would only be able to perceive this if it went down the mine and saw for itself first hand. That is assuming it was capable of understanding that the steel ball and the pile of broken glass represented the same items it saw at the top, which is unlikely.
This demonstrates the essential difference between the two concepts, man has shown SAPIENCE the dog merely SENTIENCE.
Now every time I hear someone on a sci-fi film or series ask something like 'Is there any sentient life?' they would be far better asking 'Is there any sapient life?' because the chances are very good that what he's really trying to find out is if there are any creatures down there we can talk to and get stuff from. The amount of times that question gets asked and the answer is 'No' followed by the cast wandering around whilst various critters waft around is staggering.
Two mildly relevant points; sapient creatures are by definition ALSO sentient, but the reverse is most certainly not true. The reason why we have the scientific classification Homo Sapiens is simply because we are the ONLY specie on this planet capable of the kinds of abstract thought that warrants being sapient. If one day we show that dolphins or chimps are also then they would be reclassified, probably something along the lines of 'Ceta Sapiens' or, er, 'Munky Sapiens'.
It drives me batty. Hopefully after you've read this you'll become massively intolerant of this same gratuitous misuse of English and campaign vocally for the mistake to never be repeated."
-On the Juubi:
As his Naruto Wiki entry says, he's "an impartial entity and was completely devoid of feelings or even ideals as it stayed neutral and almost ambivalent to the constant wars that were waged around it by mankind" and that he "appears to be a sapient being to some extent as it reacted to seeing the presence of the tailed beasts' chakra inside Naruto and the image of the Sage of the Six Paths by gathering chakra and strengthening itself. There is further evidence of the Shinju displaying sapience when Madara was told to absorb it by the tree itself."
Going with this, I find it weird how a tree that basically lacked both sentience and sapience could be the creator of the Naruto planet. I'd think that for it to truly be a planet creator, it'd have to a bit of both (for example, feeling the pain of the loss of innocent life and being wise on not letting people touch his sacred tree).
So, what am I trying to say? Well, if the Juubi (he "awakened" when Kaguya stole his fruit) was indeed a planet creator, he wasn't the universe creator. This was The Juubi was created by a creation deity. This creation deity created the universe and the Juubi.
There was a similar thread about a creation deity creating the Juubi but I can't find it because my account won't list all my posts (and I mean all 200-something since I joined Oct. 2012)
However, my take on the Rinnegan's existence and the prophecy: While the Juubi essentially being Hagoromo's "father" may explain how Hagoromo got the Rinnegan through Kaguya mixing her chakra with the Juubi chakra, I think it's there's something even more supernatural.
That is, "God" had the Rinnegan from the get go and bestowed this power to Hagoromo. Why? Other than to utilize Ninshu, it was a weapon to fight back against the Juubi.
Picture this: God tells humans not to eat the fruit but Kaguya disobeys. The Juubi awakens and is set on punishing mankind for eating his fruit. God doesn't want the Juubi to take it out on all of mankind but only Kaguya (feeling for the innocent that were being attacked by the Juubi) and decides to give his power to Hagoromo to punish the punisher for punishing the wrong people.
I don't exactly why God would create such an outrageous being and perhaps he didn't tell mankind to eat from the tree rather mankind assumed they shouldn't because it's a god-tree.
The Juubi is gaining power and Hagoromo's time is near. This is when God decides to choose Nagato and Naruto to be the Chosen Ones. God does this because he knows Hagoromo can't live on this physical earth forever and that someday the Juubi would return. Now, he tells the Great Toad Sage that someday a child will bring forth a great change to the ninja world.
Whether or not God intended it to be Naruto or Nagato or he intended it to be both is debatable.
Evidence of this is that just before Nagato dies from chakra depletion, he says that maybe his meeting with Naruto was the work of a real god.
Even the Great Toad Sage mentions that he didn't imagine there would be 2 Chosen Ones and that maybe their meeting was preordained.
This type of theory and being a Nagato fanboy are the reasons why I believe Nagato was born and awakened his Rinnegan before Madara unlocked his his and awakened without any involvement from Madara.
Where is God know? That's speculative.
In the Yahoo! Answer question "What is the difference between the terms 'Sentient' and 'Sapient'?", the OP asks "When referring to different forms of life."
The responders says this: "Sentience is consciousness: the ability to understand signals, interpret them, learn them, and use them.
Regarding the creation of the Juubi and
Sapience is the ability to think abstractly about the world, to search for meaning instead of purpose.
Some say apes are sapient. Some say Cnidaria (jellyfish and polyps) are not sentient, even though they have a nervous system. What is clear is that at least 99.999% of animal species is not sapient, and that all sponges and all non-animal life forms on earth are not sentient."
Sentience Sapience and the apparent lack of either in most writers
This is a bug bear of epic proportions, mainly because it has so filtered into the media that it is literally IMPOSSIBLE to create any kind of sci-fi without making this basic elemental blunder.
The problem is that these two words do NOT mean the same thing, and the word SENTIENT is used pretty much exclusively where the word SAPIENT is required.
From the article "Sentience Sapience and the apparent lack of either in most writers":
"http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sentient
Summary: Sentient = Having sensation.
You must be registered for see links
Summary: Sapient = Having wisdom.
Now, these two seem similar, but they're very different. Virtually every life form is sentient. Basically anything that can tell that it is different from other things around it has sentience. Mice are sentient life forms because they can sense that they're being prodded and know that it is by something that is not them. They understand that object A is a worm and can be eaten, and object B is a rock and cannot. They understand that both A and B are not part of itself.
Sapient species are those capable of wise thought, typically characterised as ABSTRACT thought.
If a man and a dog go to the top of an open mine shaft, and the man drops a glass ball and a steel ball, the man can deuce from his prior experience that it is likely that the glass ball will have shattered when it hits the mine floor, whilst the steel ball will quite likely be intact. The dog cannot do so, it would only be able to perceive this if it went down the mine and saw for itself first hand. That is assuming it was capable of understanding that the steel ball and the pile of broken glass represented the same items it saw at the top, which is unlikely.
This demonstrates the essential difference between the two concepts, man has shown SAPIENCE the dog merely SENTIENCE.
Now every time I hear someone on a sci-fi film or series ask something like 'Is there any sentient life?' they would be far better asking 'Is there any sapient life?' because the chances are very good that what he's really trying to find out is if there are any creatures down there we can talk to and get stuff from. The amount of times that question gets asked and the answer is 'No' followed by the cast wandering around whilst various critters waft around is staggering.
Two mildly relevant points; sapient creatures are by definition ALSO sentient, but the reverse is most certainly not true. The reason why we have the scientific classification Homo Sapiens is simply because we are the ONLY specie on this planet capable of the kinds of abstract thought that warrants being sapient. If one day we show that dolphins or chimps are also then they would be reclassified, probably something along the lines of 'Ceta Sapiens' or, er, 'Munky Sapiens'.
It drives me batty. Hopefully after you've read this you'll become massively intolerant of this same gratuitous misuse of English and campaign vocally for the mistake to never be repeated."
-On the Juubi:
As his Naruto Wiki entry says, he's "an impartial entity and was completely devoid of feelings or even ideals as it stayed neutral and almost ambivalent to the constant wars that were waged around it by mankind" and that he "appears to be a sapient being to some extent as it reacted to seeing the presence of the tailed beasts' chakra inside Naruto and the image of the Sage of the Six Paths by gathering chakra and strengthening itself. There is further evidence of the Shinju displaying sapience when Madara was told to absorb it by the tree itself."
Going with this, I find it weird how a tree that basically lacked both sentience and sapience could be the creator of the Naruto planet. I'd think that for it to truly be a planet creator, it'd have to a bit of both (for example, feeling the pain of the loss of innocent life and being wise on not letting people touch his sacred tree).
So, what am I trying to say? Well, if the Juubi (he "awakened" when Kaguya stole his fruit) was indeed a planet creator, he wasn't the universe creator. This was The Juubi was created by a creation deity. This creation deity created the universe and the Juubi.
There was a similar thread about a creation deity creating the Juubi but I can't find it because my account won't list all my posts (and I mean all 200-something since I joined Oct. 2012)
However, my take on the Rinnegan's existence and the prophecy: While the Juubi essentially being Hagoromo's "father" may explain how Hagoromo got the Rinnegan through Kaguya mixing her chakra with the Juubi chakra, I think it's there's something even more supernatural.
That is, "God" had the Rinnegan from the get go and bestowed this power to Hagoromo. Why? Other than to utilize Ninshu, it was a weapon to fight back against the Juubi.
Picture this: God tells humans not to eat the fruit but Kaguya disobeys. The Juubi awakens and is set on punishing mankind for eating his fruit. God doesn't want the Juubi to take it out on all of mankind but only Kaguya (feeling for the innocent that were being attacked by the Juubi) and decides to give his power to Hagoromo to punish the punisher for punishing the wrong people.
I don't exactly why God would create such an outrageous being and perhaps he didn't tell mankind to eat from the tree rather mankind assumed they shouldn't because it's a god-tree.
The Juubi is gaining power and Hagoromo's time is near. This is when God decides to choose Nagato and Naruto to be the Chosen Ones. God does this because he knows Hagoromo can't live on this physical earth forever and that someday the Juubi would return. Now, he tells the Great Toad Sage that someday a child will bring forth a great change to the ninja world.
Whether or not God intended it to be Naruto or Nagato or he intended it to be both is debatable.
Evidence of this is that just before Nagato dies from chakra depletion, he says that maybe his meeting with Naruto was the work of a real god.
Even the Great Toad Sage mentions that he didn't imagine there would be 2 Chosen Ones and that maybe their meeting was preordained.
This type of theory and being a Nagato fanboy are the reasons why I believe Nagato was born and awakened his Rinnegan before Madara unlocked his his and awakened without any involvement from Madara.
Where is God know? That's speculative.
