Canon/Filler - Point of the debate and its resolution

[Marin]

I wanted to make this thread because of the sheer amount of spam and meaningless bickering (not to mention flaming and trolling) that results from approaching this topic the wrong way. I aim to resolve the issue of what is and isn't canon by putting the debate in the correct context (one which should've been very obvious).

Let's start with the definitions:

- canon: things that actually happen in a story's continuity
- non-canon: things that don't really happen in a story's continuity

Note two things:

1) we should drop the word filler when discussing "what really happens" as filler is simply any material put into an anime so that it can buy time for the source material to amount enough content that can be adapted when the anime catches up. Filler can be both canon and non-canon. Examples of canon filler include flashbacks and recaps while examples of non-canon filler are non-canon (anime only) arcs that serve a specific purpose of buying time for the manga to amount enough material for when the anime catches up.

Therefore, filler is irrelevant when discussing things like character feats or certain events. It's simply a word used to describe a tool that the anime industry uses for its schedule. (Fill in the current air time since we don't have anything else to show.) Therefore, all of you who equote filler with non-canon are using the word incorrectly.

2) notice that I'm phrasing the defintions of canon and non-canon in terms of continuity. That's the key point because instead of asking "what does really happen in a story?" we should ask "what does really happen in a story's continuity?".

The prospect of this is that we reach a point at which we can sensibly and clearly differentiate between the same story told in different ways: the anime and the manga.

Everything that happens in the manga can be viewed as manga continuity and everything that happens in it is canon for the manga continuity.

Likewise, everything that happens in the anime belongs to the anime continuity and is canon for this continuity but not the manga continuity.

We can thus find a compromise. Everything can become canon but not for every continuity. This puts an end to the constant bickering that results from mashing all events together and then arguing which version was legit which usually boils down to people desperately trying to find Kishimoto's name in the credits of whatever it is being discussed to validate their opinion. (Never mind the fact that Kishimoto directly wrote and approved things that are non-canon for both the anime series and the manga making his own new continuities such as the case of the Road to Ninja movie so Kishi himself isn't very concerned with these things.)

Point is: we need to understand canon and non-canon in the context of separate continuities instead of insisting that there is only one "real" continuity with others being "fake". There is no one "real" continuity. As long as it is officially produced be it the manga, the show, the novels or the movie it is a "real version" of the story - a real continuity.

A sensible question to ask would be "what happens in the manga continuity?" Or "what happens in the continuity of the source material?" or even more clearly "what happens in the continuity as the author originally envisioned it?". Framed this way, we just need to follow the specific continuity in question to find the answer. There is no need for pointless speculation and empty bickering.

While I'm at it I also want to mention the sentiment that non-canon or filler material is in principle poor or inferior to canon material which a lot of the people here seem to echo. In response to this I'll just link this video:

[video=youtube_share;bo7IutRGTUE]https://youtu.be/bo7IutRGTUE[/video]​

So can we move on to discuss more interesting things and if we really need to gloom over canon/non-canon things atleast let's do it in a more constructive and meaningful way. It's all entertainment and at the end of the day what really matters is "Is the content enjoyable?" and this has nothing to do with the specific continuity it belongs to.

~ Peace, LaGrim out!

 

[Made in Heaven]

Kodachi and Kishimoto don't care about Canon/Filler evidenced by the manga referencing the anime and the anime in turn referencing past fillers.

So I don't care either.

 

[Mori Jin]

Canon is the original story i.e. The Manga. The anime is supposed to be an animated adaptation of the Manga, but adding in things that have already been cemented in part 1 and then expecting people to say okay is stupid. Like yesterday's episode from what I've heard Sarada copied a technique that she shouldn't have been able to. She copied a technique that can only be done with the Kiba swords. The Sharingan can only copy non KKG techniques and only techniques that use hand signs, when it comes to Ninjutsu and Genjutsu.

The anime so far is filler except for the Gaiden Arc (not the filler fight scenes between shin and sakura) and the actual trip as that was referenced in the Manga, but not the events that transpired.

The girl Sarada faught against said Naruto killed her father. How would you explain that when we know for a fact Naruto never met him.

Nothing is stopping you from enjoying it, but filler will always be filler. Unless of course they're referenced in the Manga.

 

[Made in Heaven]

Things will just get more hilarious as the anime continues to references past fillers.

 

[Hyuga Prodigy]

I don't think the whole notion of canon and fillers matters anymore . They botched it up with not only the anime but also the manga from both way out. Boruto is literally the DBS so that means everything can be taken at face value. Every medium pieces whether it be the movie, novels, manga or the anime follow its own continuity with their respective realm. This is not like the Naruto manga or any series in general that are more commonly adapted from the original source materials. Boruto literally has no roots on its own aside from the 2h movie film which was supposedly to be the finale of Naruto but then it ended up having reboot with so much tweaks and adjustment.

 

[Marin]

Canon is the original story i.e. The Manga.

There are two reasons why simply defining canon as the source material is problematic:

1) It implies that the same events portrayed in the material in a different medium (such as the series or a movie) would be rendered non-canon on the grounds that they are a part of something else than the source material. You're stuck with reductio ad absurdum.

2) It's playing semantics. It's easy to just define the manga continuity as canon and call it a day. You need to provide rationale for the view that canon = manga otherwise debates would be pointless as anyone can just as easily claim their prefered medium to be canon. I explained how understanding the story of Naruto (and fiction in general) in terms of continuities (where canon/non-canon become relative terms with respect to what continuity we're talking about) gives a more satisfactory resolution to the debate as it is rooted in the nature of different forms of same fictional work and derives a more precise and definitive way of thinking than simply someone's "say so".

The anime is supposed to be an animated adaptation of the Manga, but adding in things that have already been cemented in part 1 and then expecting people to say okay is stupid. Like yesterday's episode from what I've heard Sarada copied a technique that she shouldn't have been able to. She copied a technique that can only be done with the Kiba swords. The Sharingan can only copy non KKG techniques and only techniques that use hand signs, when it comes to Ninjutsu and Genjutsu.

Plot holes aren't something unique to adaptations. Source material can (as a matter of principle) have plot holes as well but this wouldn't deminish it's status, it would simply impact the quality of the story overall. This goes to show that the quality of the writing is irrelevant to the canonical status of something and as such isn't the topic of this thread.

The anime so far is filler except for the Gaiden Arc (not the filler fight scenes between shin and sakura) and the actual trip as that was referenced in the Manga, but not the events that transpired.

The girl Sarada faught against said Naruto killed her father. How would you explain that when we know for a fact Naruto never met him.

Nothing is stopping you from enjoying it, but filler will always be filler. Unless of course they're referenced in the Manga.

As I said in the OP, filler isn't a term that has any bearing on the discussion at hand. The only reason why I even mentioned it in the title (which is what I assume you're going by here as you don't seem to have read what I said) is for the purpose of shedding it aside in favor of a more fitting distinction of canon vs non-canon.

I don't think the whole notion of canon and fillers matters anymore . They botched it up with not only the anime but also the manga from both way out. Boruto is literally the DBS so that means everything can be taken at face value. Every medium pieces whether it be the movie, novels, manga or the anime follow its own continuity with their respective realm. This is not like the Naruto manga or any series in general that are more commonly adapted from the original source materials. Boruto literally has no roots on its own aside from the 2h movie film which was supposedly to be the finale of Naruto but then it ended up having reboot with so much tweaks and adjustment.

I don't strictly disagree with everything you said but the general principle of different continuities applies in every work of fiction that has adaptations in different mediums. So long as there are differences between the source and the adaptations the two are different continuities even if they overlap for the most part.

 

[Obitosama]

who cares if it's filler or canon? they're all one

 

[Draw]

Kodachi and Kishimoto don't care about Canon/Filler evidenced by the manga referencing the anime and the anime in turn referencing past fillers.

So I don't care either.

When did Kishimoto ever reference Anime Filler in the manga? And don't reference the war.

 

[Draw]

I wanted to make this thread because of the sheer amount of spam and meaningless bickering (not to mention flaming and trolling) that results from approaching this topic the wrong way. I aim to resolve the issue of what is and isn't canon by putting the debate in the correct context (one which should've been very obvious).

Let's start with the definitions:

- canon: things that actually happen in a story's continuity
- non-canon: things that don't really happen in a story's continuity

Note two things:

1) we should drop the word filler when discussing "what really happens" as filler is simply any material put into an anime so that it can buy time for the source material to amount enough content that can be adapted when the anime catches up. Filler can be both canon and non-canon. Examples of canon filler include flashbacks and recaps while examples of non-canon filler are non-canon (anime only) arcs that serve a specific purpose of buying time for the manga to amount enough material for when the anime catches up.

Therefore, filler is irrelevant when discussing things like character feats or certain events. It's simply a word used to describe a tool that the anime industry uses for its schedule. (Fill in the current air time since we don't have anything else to show.) Therefore, all of you who equote filler with non-canon are using the word incorrectly.

2) notice that I'm phrasing the defintions of canon and non-canon in terms of continuity. That's the key point because instead of asking "what does really happen in a story?" we should ask "what does really happen in a story's continuity?".

The prospect of this is that we reach a point at which we can sensibly and clearly differentiate between the same story told in different ways: the anime and the manga.

Everything that happens in the manga can be viewed as manga continuity and everything that happens in it is canon for the manga continuity.

Likewise, everything that happens in the anime belongs to the anime continuity and is canon for this continuity but not the manga continuity.

We can thus find a compromise. Everything can become canon but not for every continuity. This puts an end to the constant bickering that results from mashing all events together and then arguing which version was legit which usually boils down to people desperately trying to find Kishimoto's name in the credits of whatever it is being discussed to validate their opinion. (Never mind the fact that Kishimoto directly wrote and approved things that are non-canon for both the anime series and the manga making his own new continuities such as the case of the Road to Ninja movie so Kishi himself isn't very concerned with these things.)

Point is: we need to understand canon and non-canon in the context of separate continuities instead of insisting that there is only one "real" continuity with others being "fake". There is no one "real" continuity. As long as it is officially produced be it the manga, the show, the novels or the movie it is a "real version" of the story - a real continuity.

A sensible question to ask would be "what happens in the manga continuity?" Or "what happens in the continuity of the source material?" or even more clearly "what happens in the continuity as the author originally envisioned it?". Framed this way, we just need to follow the specific continuity in question to find the answer. There is no need for pointless speculation and empty bickering.

While I'm at it I also want to mention the sentiment that non-canon or filler material is in principle poor or inferior to canon material which a lot of the people here seem to echo. In response to this I'll just link this video:

[video=youtube_share;bo7IutRGTUE]https://youtu.be/bo7IutRGTUE[/video]​

So can we move on to discuss more interesting things and if we really need to gloom over canon/non-canon things atleast let's do it in a more constructive and meaningful way. It's all entertainment and at the end of the day what really matters is "Is the content enjoyable?" and this has nothing to do with the specific continuity it belongs to.

~ Peace, LaGrim out!

The easiest way to explain the filler and canon in Boruto is that the Boruto anime is currently Canon. We are covering the events before they become Genin. While some may view that as "filling in the gaps of the story--aka Filler" it's literally canon. It's like saying the Frieza arc in Super anime is filler because it wasn't written in the manga.

Giving us Pre-Genin days is a part of the original story. I mean cmon, do people want them to be covering this in the manga? Now when we get a troll filler arc, that's real filler. This is important parts of the story. Clearly Kagura is going to be important later in the series if we are mentioning the field trip in the manga.

 

[Styles]

Didnt read filler stays filler :axedance:

This. :axedance:

 

[Ansatsuken]

There are two reasons why simply defining canon as the source material is problematic:

1) It implies that the same events portrayed in the material in a different medium (such as the series or a movie) would be rendered non-canon on the grounds that they are a part of something else than the source material. You're stuck with reductio ad absurdum.

You still unable to see and understand so the effort of clarification here not met the objective. You just sound like Bad Touch Yakushi in explaining this topic. To make it simple you just want to say "Both are story that we can enjoy and there was no canon or non canon.


2) It's playing semantics. It's easy to just define the manga continuity as canon and call it a day. You need to provide rationale for the view that canon = manga otherwise debates would be pointless as anyone can just as easily claim their prefered medium to be canon. I explained how understanding the story of Naruto (and fiction in general) in terms of continuities (where canon/non-canon become relative terms with respect to what continuity we're talking about) gives a more satisfactory resolution to the debate as it is rooted in the nature of different forms of same fictional work and derives a more precise and definitive way of thinking than simply someone's "say so".

I make it simple. Yes Manga(story and continuity) is always canon to everything after it unless stated otherwise or an announcement made by author about the status of his/her fictional writing. It not just Naruto but other Shonen(DB, OP, Bleach etc) or Seinen also. You need to remember that Shonen/Seinen etc is the answer from Japan to Comic from USA. And what similarity that both have? Its that they are "story book with 100% pictures and dialogues" and not a cartoon or an anime ot a novel etc.

We despise Wiki but it still can be helpful

You must be registered for see links

So we not argue semantic here but know/acknowledging about the "basis" or "origin" of it. Then we can sort this out in the effective ways. Back to the topic Manga will always be a canon story. Anime the main focus here is just an animated adaptation of Manga story line. It still can be acceptable if they(animation studio) adding "something" just for making the "plot adaptation" much longer and more substance but the add-on still on the line and logical to the plot in focus. But creating entirly new story line that railings off from the manga put it into non-canon category. So we cant say anime is 100% canon to the story. It cant be a canon story if it go against manga or add something that not present in the manga.

They(Fans) preferred other medium of storytelling doesnt make them right. Preferences meant nothing and it will not turned what they like to be true. Unless they understand and accept the word "origin". Someone "say so" is not valid to the entire idea of canon and non-canon. If it comes to me I'm not "saying so" but my reason is "Shonen is always be a manga. Look at the definition of Shonen and it will told you Shonen is the genre of Manga. Full stop


Plot holes aren't something unique to adaptations. Source material can (as a matter of principle) have plot holes as well but this wouldn't deminish it's status, it would simply impact the quality of the story overall. This goes to show that the quality of the writing is irrelevant to the canonical status of something and as such isn't the topic of this thread.

It bcus you doesn't understand what is Shonen, what is manga and what is canon/non-canon, thats why you wrote all the above. The status of Canon or non canon of the story is not down to plot holes but a "contradiction" or "made up" materials that clearly against Manga (canon continuity). What Sarada did in the latest episode is a "clear" contradiction. Its not just contradict manga fact but also DB fact. That's another point, Fact. Contradiction to "fact"
Is the worse Sin here. So somethings that Contradict the established fact cant be considered as canon. And the topic of this thread is canon and non-canon.


As I said in the OP, filler isn't a term that has any bearing on the discussion at hand. The only reason why I even mentioned it in the title (which is what I assume you're going by here as you don't seem to have read what I said) is for the purpose of shedding it aside in favor of a more fitting distinction of canon vs non-canon.

Yes, filler has different meaning. I agree.

The answers are bold part. For a LaGrim I think you can do better than this in clarifying this matter.

 

[Marin]

To make it simple you just want to say "Both are story that we can enjoy and there was no canon or non canon.

Right at the first paragraph you miss the point. I literally made the thread in order to establish the proper context in which to use terms like canon/non-canon. Saying that the two don't exist goes directly against what I am saying in the OP.

Right at the beginning you made a fundamental misunderstanding even after I clearly stated what I'm talking about:

Point is: we need to understand canon and non-canon in the context of separate continuities instead of insisting that there is only one "real" continuity with others being "fake". There is no one "real" continuity. As long as it is officially produced be it the manga, the show, the novels or the movie it is a "real version" of the story - a real continuity.

A sensible question to ask would be "what happens in the manga continuity?" Or "what happens in the continuity of the source material?" or even more clearly "what happens in the continuity as the author originally envisioned it?". Framed this way, we just need to follow the specific continuity in question to find the answer. There is no need for pointless speculation and empty bickering.

The only relevant thing you said in this post was you trying to put down the adaptation for deviating from the source material. Adaptations are not 100% replicas. Each and every adaptation has a right to creative freedom given to the creators of the adaptation by the original author himself. The adaptation adapts the original story in it's own way. Some adaptations can be more faithful than others but in the case of the Naruto franchise we see that creative freedom being used often (sometimes for better, other times for worse) and this is an obvious indication that the adaptations are doing their own thing.

Other than this, you've simply reiterated everything the user I was answering to in that post said. (This is not mentioning the fallacious use of shonen as something manga-exclusive when in reality it is a genre/demographic label used for japanese fiction in general.)

 

[Ansatsuken]

Right at the first paragraph you miss the point. I literally made the thread in order to establish the proper context in which to use terms like canon/non-canon. Saying that the two don't exist goes directly against what I am saying in the OP.

Right at the beginning you made a fundamental misunderstanding even after I clearly stated what I'm talking about:



The only relevant thing you said in this post was you trying to put down the adaptation for deviating from the source material. Adaptations are not 100% replicas. Each and every adaptation has a right to creative freedom given to the creators of the adaptation by the original author himself. The adaptation adapts the original story in it's own way. Some adaptations can be more faithful than others but in the case of the Naruto franchise we see that creative freedom being used often (sometimes for better, other times for worse) and this is an obvious indication that the adaptations are doing their own thing.

See its futile explaining to someone who couldn't read a clear and simple reasoning and points.

Anime is always followed up of manga. What I meant by "followed up" here is turning inanimate story into an animation or animating the manga story. In a sense its a "replica" of the manga story.

You're clearly dismissing the meaning of Shonen in correlation to manga. I've put Wki link there.

Freedom that manga author gave to animation studio doesnt automatically makes anime storyline canon on itself. It never happen before in manga history. You should know this. Manga takes precedent over anime. The most famous Manga in history in One Piece clearly pronouncing this. When one Japanese writer had a story idea and wanted to presenting it to the public and he/she chose Manga to tell the story and not anime or novel so what it tells you here? It tells you that canon story started by manga so any "works" beside that is not separate canon story but merely an adaptation of manga canon storyline. See its easy to understand it.

Freedom of animating the story is not an excuses to accept anime story as canon especially the filler stories.

Who cares about what studio does but the manga is the canon one bcus every mainstream Shonen series started from manga.

Understand this will make your life easier.

Other than this, you've simply reiterated everything the user I was answering to in that post said. (This is not mentioning the fallacious use of shonen as something manga-exclusive when in reality it is a genre/demographic label used for japanese fiction in general.)

No, my understanding of this matter is quite different than Mori Jin

And no you're wrong, shonen is genre of manga besides other genre . Twisting real world fact about Manga will not take you anywhere.

You must be registered for see links

You must be registered for see links

Manga is an old creation older than the first anime work or adaptation

 

[Marin]

Anime is always followed up of manga. What I meant by "followed up" here is turning inanimate story into an animation or animating the manga story. In a sense its a "replica" of the manga story.

@bold: This is not even true for Naruto let alone fiction in general. Boruto itself originated as an animated movie which the manga then adapted in its own way.

In response to my explanation of how adaptations can and do change things and make their own continuities by doing so you merely reiterated that it is a replica and left it that. Again, just your "say so".

Freedom that manga author gave to animation studio doesnt automatically makes anime storyline canon on itself. It never happen before in manga history. You should know this. Manga takes precedent over anime. The most famous Manga in history in One Piece clearly pronouncing this. When one Japanese writer had a story idea and wanted to presenting it to the public and he/she chose Manga to tell the story and not anime or novel so what it tells you here? It tells you that canon story started by manga so any "works" beside that is not separate canon story but merely an adaptation of manga canon storyline. See its easy to understand it.

Freedom of animating the story is not an excuses to accept anime story as canon especially the filler stories.

Who cares about what studio does but the manga is the canon one bcus every mainstream Shonen series started from manga.

I see you're just going to talk past me and repeat yourself. The bold literally doesn't follow from what you said before in any way nor have you explained why you think it does.

I've stuck to this thread to answer whatever constructive criticism may arise but so far you've failed to understand what I was even saying and didn't even recognize this in itself. If anything, these last two posts illustrate why arbitrarly limiting the concept of canon to the source material isn't a constructive way to lead this debate. Unless you provide actual material for the discussion don't expect further replies for me.

 

[Ansatsuken]

@bold: This is not even true for Naruto let alone fiction in general. Boruto itself originated as an animated movie which the manga then adapted in its own way.

In response to my explanation of how adaptations can and do change things and make their own continuities by doing so you merely reiterated that it is a replica and left it that. Again, just your "say so".

I'm strictly talking about Japanese manga/anime industry m8.

And yes that specifically for Boruto but I'm talking about original Naruto series. I know how to look between the line. But in this discussion I'm being specific but not deeply specific.

Yes I'm fully aware of "story formats". If I'm being deeply specific about Canon and Non-canon. Which "format" started first it can be declares as canon story. Like Boruto its mixed(actually Gaiden started first and its manga writing). DBS both are canon story(manga/anime)-its a special case. But original Naruto always be manga canon first.

And I dont understand the style of your arguments here. I said its a "replica" of manga bcus without filler stories its exact similar to manga story plot. So I'm in agreement with one of your idea here but in reverse.

What count as 'replica' here is anime story that's showing manga plot aka 100% manga plot adaptation. Filler story that's outside of manga plot line is considered as non-canon. It should be like that.

So 3 posts all with explanation in it. If you still "avoiding" consider it as you're pointless.

I see you're just going to talk past me and repeat yourself. The bold literally doesn't follow from what you said before in any way nor have you explained why you think it does.

I've stuck to this thread to answer whatever constructive criticism may arise but so far you've failed to understand what I was even saying and didn't even recognize this in itself. If anything, these last two posts illustrate why arbitrarly limiting the concept of canon to the source material isn't a constructive way to lead this debate. Unless you provide actual material for the discussion don't expect further replies for me.

Clearly you're misunderstood. That point never contradict my other point.

What I meant to say, Manga is the canon story. And anything(anime fillers or novel etc) besides that cant be consider as canon story lime if the story is against manga or never exist inside manga. We saw in anime between manga adaptation there were countless of filler stories. So entire anime storyline cant be consider as canon.


Naruto is heavy with fillers than DB or OP or FT. Only Bleach came close. Adding a figthing choreograph(made the manga battle little longer) or scene still can be acceptable to a degree.

And I provides to you the explanation of manga and Shonen(wiki). Go argue against that.

 

[Marin]

I'm strictly talking about Japanese manga/anime industry m8.

And yes that specifically for Boruto but I'm talking about original Naruto series. I know how to look between the line. But in this discussion I'm being specific but not deeply specific.

Yes I'm fully aware of "story formats". If I'm being deeply specific about Canon and Non-canon. Which "format" started first it can be declares as canon story. Like Boruto its mixed(actually Gaiden started first and its manga writing). DBS both are canon story(manga/anime)-its a special case. But original Naruto always be manga canon first.

And I dont understand the style of your arguments here. I said its a "replica" of manga bcus without filler stories its exact similar to manga story plot. So I'm in agreement with one of your idea here but in reverse.

What count as 'replica' here is anime story that's showing manga plot aka 100% manga plot adaptation. Filler story that's outside of manga plot line is considered as non-canon. It should be like that.

So 3 posts all with explanation in it. If you still "avoiding" consider it as you're pointless.



Clearly you're misunderstood. That point never contradict my other point.

What I meant to say, Manga is the canon story. And anything(anime fillers or novel etc) besides that cant be consider as canon story lime if the story is against manga or never exist inside manga. We saw in anime between manga adaptation there were countless of filler stories. So entire anime storyline cant be consider as canon.


Naruto is heavy with fillers than DB or OP or FT. Only Bleach came close. Adding a figthing choreograph(made the manga battle little longer) or scene still can be acceptable to a degree.

And I provides to you the explanation of manga and Shonen(wiki). Go argue against that.

Ok, Ansatsuken. Let's review what has been said so far. I'll start off by presenting the arguments you people proposed.

Argument 1: The source material is canonical because adaptations contradict it

Both you and Mori Jin raised this same argument in your posts. He did it in #3 while you did it in #13. I said the argument fails because plot holes (this includes contradictions as well despite your predisposition to the contrary) aren't unique to adaptations as source material can as well (as a matter of principle) contain things that make no sense. This wouldn't diminish it's status as canonical (as that would mean there would be no canon which makes no sense) so this shows that there is no intristic connection between shoddy writing and something being canon. Therefore, whatever problems the adaptation may raise for the story they are a separate issue and irrelevant to this thread.

Note: I use the word canon here in the way you guys use it.

Argument 2: The source material is canonical because that's the medium the author envisioned

You are the one who brought this up in #13 and reiterated it in #15. Two responses were given to this:

1) No objection was given to phrasing canon/non-canon in the context of different continuities. That there are multiple continuities is undeniable. However, if you want to descriminate between them then you need to provide an account on how this is done. Therefore, all you do here is establish one continuity which the author envisioned. The author also envisioned and approved of other continuities such as the anime continuity. Author's choice of mediums which present the story has no bearing on the issue.

2) This draws behind it a problem that if the same events are to be presented in a medium other than the one in which the original source material was presented, the events would be rendered non-canon despite them being identical to the events of the source material. To put things into perspective, this view puts importance on the kind of paper on which the book is printed rather than that which is written on that paper.

Therefore, the argument fails because the discrimination is arbitrary but also because (even if granted) it leads to absurdities.

Argument 3: The source material is canonical because it came first

This was also brought up by you in posts #13 and #15 and it too fails for the similar reasons as the previous argument:

1) It provides no reasoning for why the original continuity should be considered the only legitimate material. As such it is arbitrary.

2) In case of Boruto, which you conceeded, the source material was an animated movie and not the manga yet people insist the anime isn't legit while the manga (which was itself an adaptation) is.

The argument too doesn't provide a fitting criteria for why we should only look at the things that came first nor does it provide a satisfactory account of the fact that there are alternate continuities.

_________

Now since in your first post here you gave off a sentiment that you're more fond of the "old LaGrim" I'm gonna do you a favor and present the OP argument in the old style which means I'm going to outline it in a deductive form consisting of 13 premises and a conclusion. It will illustrate my thought process clearly, provide a strict, constructive overview of what I am saying and will allow us to more easily and precisely get to the points we disagree on. I will now lay out the argument.

Premise 1: A continuity is a series of events which happen in sequence
Premise 2: Different versions of a story present different continuities
Premise 3: If there are different versions of a story there are different continuities of a story (follows from 1 and 2)
Premise 4: There are multiple versions of the story of Naruto - manga, anime, movies, etc.
Premise 5: There are multiple continuities in Naruto (follows from 3 and 4)
Premise 6: If there are mutliple continuities they are separate (mutually exclusive)
Premise 7: Naruto consists of mutually exclusive continuities (follows from 5 and 6)
Premise 8: If a continuity is officially a part of a franchise it is a real/official continuity
Premise 9: Naruto has multiple equally official/real separate (mutually exclusive) continuities (follows from 7 and 8)
Premise 10: There is no one Naruto continuity more real than the other (follows from 9)
Premise 11: If no one continuity is more real than the other there can be no absolute canon
Premise 12: There is no absolute canon for the story of Naruto (follows from 10 and 11)
Premise 13: If there is no absolute canon the only meaning to canon can be found in relative context

Conclusion: Therefore, canon is a relative term which refers to a specific continuity in question (follows from 12 and 13)

If you want to escape the conclusion of my argument you will have to provide an objection to any one of these 13 premises. Now go ahead and make a point-by-point objection if you can. I also advise you to do so in a point by point manner as to avoid obscurity.

 

[Ansatsuken]

Ok, Ansatsuken. Let's review what has been said so far. I'll start off by presenting the arguments you people proposed.

Argument 1: The source material is canonical because adaptations contradict it

Both you and Mori Jin raised this same argument in your posts. He did it in #3 while you did it in #13. I said the argument fails because plot holes (this includes contradictions as well despite your predisposition to the contrary) aren't unique to adaptations as source material can as well (as a matter of principle) contain things that make no sense. This wouldn't diminish it's status as canonical (as that would mean there would be no canon which makes no sense) so this shows that there is no intristic connection between shoddy writing and something being canon. Therefore, whatever problems the adaptation may raise for the story they are a separate issue and irrelevant to this thread.

Note: I use the word canon here in the way you guys use it.

You still not get it right? The contradictions that happen in the canon story is the problem of canon story writing. We will call that as asspull, plothole etc but that not diminishing the canon status of entire manga story line. But it will affect the quality of story/writing.

And as anime just merely an adaptation of manga story and I know you're able to acknowledge it so if Studio tries to create their own story bcus of "freedom" it will not makes their story a canon story line bcus;

1) Studio just adopting manga story and not creating entirely different story that still using the same Characters from manga.

2) As the reason above there's never exist anime own canon continuity for Naruto series. Kishi and SP never apply DBS "format" or Mainstream comic "format". DBS managed to created two separate canon storylines but using the same story plan. They(Akira/Toyotaro and Toei) are using same story plan but the plot is entirely different. ToP arc for example starts differently in the two platforms.

If SP and Kishi wanted two canon stories(manga and anime) they should follow DBS format, uses the same story blueprint but creates entirely different plot between each other. But no, SP is 100% copying manga plot and adding their story with countless of fillers.

3) Exclusive for Naruto series only. Databook. There's the problem for anime story line. Yes DB never shy from hyperbole or fallacy but thats the one thing besides manga used to validates canon materials. Kaguya arc informations in the anime never been proven true in DB, Hagoromo has PS/Sharingan or Kaguya's Husband etc. The info not exist in the DB. You're dismissing DB.

Its not just manga, you need to answer DB too.

Argument 2: The source material is canonical because that's the medium the author envisioned

You are the one who brought this up in #13 and reiterated it in #15. Two responses were given to this:

1) No objection was given to phrasing canon/non-canon in the context of different continuities. That there are multiple continuities is undeniable. However, if you want to descriminate between them then you need to provide an account on how this is done. Therefore, all you do here is establish one continuity which the author envisioned. The author also envisioned and approved of other continuities such as the anime continuity. Author's choice of mediums which present the story has no bearing on the issue.

2) This draws behind it a problem that if the same events are to be presented in a medium other than the one in which the original source material was presented, the events would be rendered non-canon despite them being identical to the events of the source material. To put things into perspective, this view puts importance on the kind of paper on which the book is printed rather than that which is written on that paper.

Therefore, the argument fails because the discrimination is arbitrary but also because (even if granted) it leads to absurdities.

1) Clearly Naruto series is not a comic or adopting comic format so there was no different continuity/story exist in NV. I dont know how you came to this idea. Like I said numbers of time every manga will have its own anime adaptation. Its a known trend. How its done? Studio Perrot asking Kishi that they wanted to adapt Manga story into anime. Kishi gave green light to them. Similar to every manga that exist today. But Kishi worked mostly on his manga and not anime. I know he gave them ideas or approval but what Kishi knows, manga still a primary one.

But in the end of the day Manga still his preferred format for Naruto story.

2) "this view puts importance on the kind of paper on which the book is printed rather than that which is written on that paper."

See what you wrote above and its misleading. Bad analogy to used in this kind of discussion. Its not about "kind of paper" but a format. Paper is still paper and book is still a book. The format here is book/paper/manga and not anime. Which came first for the story? Its a book/manga.

In anime what parts is canon? Its Manga-Anime adaptation. What is non? Fillers. Easy and if I took the overall into consideration sure anime story continuity as a whole is not canon. But here I separating it.

And no there is no absurdity. You need to accept it. Thing here is manga is the main story line. Its absurd only if people call Manga is not all or invalid.

Argument 3: The source material is canonical because it came first

This was also brought up by you in posts #13 and #15 and it too fails for the similar reasons as the previous argument:

1) It provides no reasoning for why the original continuity should be considered the only legitimate material. As such it is arbitrary.

2) In case of Boruto, which you conceeded, the source material was an animated movie and not the manga yet people insist the anime isn't legit while the manga (which was itself an adaptation) is.

The argument too doesn't provide a fitting criteria for why we should only look at the things that came first nor does it provide a satisfactory account of the fact that there are alternate continuities.

1) The format in used and the story system it applied. The format is manga and the story system 'one author do all thing' and no separate stories for one character or entire story like Marvel or DC. And at least most of different continuities in Marvel is in the same format(Comic) and it clearly established but Naruto/Boruto shy away.

Most of anime works done by SP and SP is not another writer of story but just working on anime adaptation. They never created new story from the start. Fillers not count.

2) Exclusive to Boruto but not Naruto. But my entire idea still stand.
_________

Now since in your first post here you gave off a sentiment that you're more fond of the "old LaGrim" I'm gonna do you a favor and present the OP argument in the old style which means I'm going to outline it in a deductive form consisting of 13 premises and a conclusion. It will illustrate my thought process clearly, provide a strict, constructive overview of what I am saying and will allow us to more easily and precisely get to the points we disagree on. I will now lay out the argument.

Premise 1: A continuity is a series of events which happen in sequence

Yes but "continuity" in anime not making it a canon story to its own. The only Canon continuity is Naruto manga.

Premise 2: Different versions of a story present different continuities

Yes I know but I say it again "the only Canon continuity here is Manga story. Anime can go anywhere they want but it doesn't make it(the extra stories) canon to the actual story. Non-canon mean something that never been proven in the manga or Databook or never happened. In other words "against established facts"

Premise 3: If there are different versions of a story there are different continuities of a story (follows from 1 and 2)

But Naruto anime just an adaptation of manga. Ignoring fillers, it follows 100% manga plots. Again they are not using mainstream Comic story system.

Premise 4: There are multiple versions of the story of Naruto - manga, anime, movies, etc.

its only one version and its manga story. Movie like the Last for example stands on its own and not adopting manga plot so its a canon story to manga(Kishi confirmed it) and it also happen "outside" of manga and not within/between manga plots(Fillers). Other movies is non canon bcus the story line is not tied to manga example RtN.

Premise 5: There are multiple continuities in Naruto (follows from 3 and 4)

So??? Read above responses.

Premise 6: If there are mutliple continuities they are separate (mutually exclusive)

All continuities (Fillers/some movies) just "trying" to filled the Gap left by manga. But its futile as manga and Databook disagreed with the effort. And its not closer to parallel universes story. They all still tied 100% to manga plot.

Premise 7: Naruto consists of mutually exclusive continuities (follows from 5 and 6)

Most of it just a short stories(movies). It is as canon as Broly movie can gets. So its not canon to the actual story line.
Naruto SD is not canon also. But you still can enjoy it. Unless there is "issues" :sdo:

Premise 8: If a continuity is officially a part of a franchise it is a real/official continuity

All of it is not official to manga story. It not take much effort to know it. Many parts of manga and DB disagree.Except Mitsuki one shot, The Last and Boruto movie.

Premise 9: Naruto has multiple equally official/real separate (mutually exclusive) continuities (follows from 7 and 8)

hmmm...what???

Premise 10: There is no one Naruto continuity more real than the other (follows from 9)

Only manga bcus it came first and here's where all the efforts put inside by Kishi. You keep talking about various 'continuities' but for me it just Manga and Anime.

Premise 11: If no one continuity is more real than the other there can be no absolute canon

Only manga get it? In comic all issues are canon but not Naruto series. But you still can enjoy it.

Premise 12: There is no absolute canon for the story of Naruto (follows from 10 and 11)

The hell??????

Premise 13: If there is no absolute canon the only meaning to canon can be found in relative context

The "backbone" or "central story" here is always Manga story unless its Boruto series. DB help cementing it bcus all infos from DB were entirely focus toward Manga story. Find me filler info in all DB and I concedes. It became non canon bcus its full with invalidated informations.

Conclusion: Therefore, canon is a relative term which refers to a specific continuity in question (follows from 12 and 13)

Canon in manga industry is the manga story itself. Kishi approval of SP fillers cant be used to validates canonity status of the fillers.
Kishi is not working 100% on anime story. For him manga is the only one. Like Stan Lee he mostly focusing on his comic stories and not cartoon or any adaptation. He just approved it but not mean much to his comic stories. But Comic has luxury that Naruto manga lack, that is "true freedom". The freedom that comes from Marvel universe structure. Its all logical.


If you want to escape the conclusion of my argument you will have to provide an objection to any one of these 13 premises. Now go ahead and make a point-by-point objection if you can. I also advise you to do so in a point by point manner as to avoid obscurity.

For the last part the answer in Bold

Even if I becomes Manga writer, I can gives an approval to anything especially if I'm getting paid for it. But the heart of my attention is only on Manga.

I see where this leads us and to simplifies it as we only talked about Naruto/Boruto bcus this is the first time "such thing" happen in manga industry.

I couldn't give clear "indicators" for Boruto series bcus its messy. You have this, you have that, so complicated and confusing.

But Naruto original manga series is the absolute canon one.

 

[Marin]

The contradictions that happen in the canon story is the problem of canon story writing. We will call that as asspull, plothole etc but that not diminishing the canon status of entire manga story line. But it will affect the quality of story/writing.

That's just a fallacy of special pleading.

And as anime just merely an adaptation of manga story and I know you're able to acknowledge it so if Studio tries to create their own story bcus of "freedom" it will not makes their story a canon story line bcus;

1) Studio just adopting manga story and not creating entirely different story that still using the same Characters from manga.

This is unintelligible. An adaptation that presents a different course of events is a version of the same story. No buts about it.

2) As the reason above there's never exist anime own canon continuity for Naruto series. Kishi and SP never apply DBS "format" or Mainstream comic "format". DBS managed to created two separate canon storylines but using the same story plan. They(Akira/Toyotaro and Toei) are using same story plan but the plot is entirely different. ToP arc for example starts differently in the two platforms.

If SP and Kishi wanted two canon stories(manga and anime) they should follow DBS format, uses the same story blueprint but creates entirely different plot between each other. But no, SP is 100% copying manga plot and adding their story with countless of fillers.

This makes no sense. It's like saying a Hitler didn't get anyone killed except for those he did so he is a 100% not a murderer. An adaptation that adds it's own stuff is not a copy of manga plot.

3) Exclusive for Naruto series only. Databook. There's the problem for anime story line. Yes DB never shy from hyperbole or fallacy but thats the one thing besides manga used to validates canon materials. Kaguya arc informations in the anime never been proven true in DB, Hagoromo has PS/Sharingan or Kaguya's Husband etc. The info not exist in the DB. You're dismissing DB.

Its not just manga, you need to answer DB too.

The Databook describes the Manga, not the anime. It's a part of the manga continuity. Anime events are irrelevant to it.

1) Clearly Naruto series is not a comic or adopting comic format so there was no different continuity/story exist in NV. I dont know how you came to this idea.

If you still don't know how I reached this conclusion after I told you so many times then I don't see how talking to you anymore is going to amount to anything.

Like I said numbers of time every manga will have its own anime adaptation. Its a known trend. How its done? Studio Perrot asking Kishi that they wanted to adapt Manga story into anime. Kishi gave green light to them. Similar to every manga that exist today. But Kishi worked mostly on his manga and not anime. I know he gave them ideas or approval but what Kishi knows, manga still a primary one.

But in the end of the day Manga still his preferred format for Naruto story.

You're literally arguing in a circle here:

"We should prefer the version of the story the author worked on the most because stories on which the author worked the most are to be prefered."

You're supposed to justify the inference that the original source material is prefered due to the fact that author worked on it the most, not simply reassert it.

2) "this view puts importance on the kind of paper on which the book is printed rather than that which is written on that paper."

See what you wrote above and its misleading. Bad analogy to used in this kind of discussion. Its not about "kind of paper" but a format. Paper is still paper and book is still a book. The format here is book/paper/manga and not anime. Which came first for the story? Its a book/manga.

In anime what parts is canon? Its Manga-Anime adaptation. What is non? Fillers. Easy and if I took the overall into consideration sure anime story continuity as a whole is not canon. But here I separating it.

And no there is no absurdity. You need to accept it. Thing here is manga is the main story line. Its absurd only if people call Manga is not all or invalid.

You misunderstood the analogy. The point is you're putting the focus on the medium through which canonical events happen rather than the events themselves. Already explained the problem 2 times and I won't do it again.

You simply insisting that it's not a problem doesn't make it any less so.


__________________

When it comes to the argument as I presented it, a few things need to be made clearer as you've made several nonsensical replies. First of all, it is a deductive argument. This means that it starts off with premises from which a conclusion is derived. You don't attack the conclusion of a deductive argument, you attack it's premises. I clearly pointed out which premises are derived as conclusions from earlier premises yet there were instances where you agreed with the premises from which a conclusion is derived yet you still denied the conclusion. This is pure violation of rules of deductive logic.

An example of that is that you say "yes" to both the first and second premises but then argue against premise 3 which follows necessarily from 1 and 2. If you don't know how deductive reasoning works you shouldn't insist that I bring the argument up in deductive form.

Here's a list of derived premises: 3, 5, 7, 9, 10 and 12. The conclusion goes here as well. You cannot deny these directly. You must first tackle the premises from which they are derived. As for the premises which you can and should be arguing against, those are as follows: 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 11 and 13. I'll now go through these premises and review your responses as you said something with respect to each one. Your responses will be put into quotes.

Premise 1: A continuity is a series of events which happen in sequence

Yes but "continuity" in anime not making it a canon story to its own. The only Canon continuity is Naruto manga.

Here you should've stopped at "yes". The rest is completely irrelevant into the premise as you're rushing to refute a different set of premises that come later in the argument. All the premise does is define a continuity. Express your agreement or disagreement with what each premise says and move on. Otherwise you're just padding the post and disrupting the flow of the argument hence rendering clear deductive outlining meaningless.

Premise 2: Different versions of a story present different continuities

Yes I know but I say it again "the only Canon continuity here is Manga story. Anime can go anywhere they want but it doesn't make it(the extra stories) canon to the actual story. Non-canon mean something that never been proven in the manga or Databook or never happened. In other words "against established facts"

Again, you jump the gun. You agree with what the premise says but then go on to argue against things that the premise doesn't include.

Premise 4: There are multiple versions of the story of Naruto - manga, anime, movies, etc.

its only one version and its manga story. Movie like the Last for example stands on its own and not adopting manga plot so its a canon story to manga(Kishi confirmed it) and it also happen "outside" of manga and not within/between manga plots(Fillers). Other movies is non canon bcus the story line is not tied to manga example RtN.

You're objecting to a premise that is clearly true. Does the manga tell the story one way ? Yes. Does the anime tell it another way? Yes. Are there more alternate versions such as Rock Lee SD, Road to Ninja, games etc? Yes. Then you cannot deny the truth of there being multiple versions of Naruto story. Again, don't bring in things like whether they adapt the manga as that is completely irrelevant to the premise.

Premise 6: If there are mutliple continuities they are separate (mutually exclusive)

All continuities (Fillers/some movies) just "trying" to filled the Gap left by manga. But its futile as manga and Databook disagreed with the effort. And its not closer to parallel universes story. They all still tied 100% to manga plot.

Downright false. Road to Ninja has nothing to do with the manga continuity, a lot of anime-only arcs don't have anything with filling in the gaps (eg. 12 guardians arc or Chikara arc or Blood Prison etc) but are simply there to tell an independant story.

Premise 8: If a continuity is officially a part of a franchise it is a real/official continuity

All of it is not official to manga story. It not take much effort to know it. Many parts of manga and DB disagree.Except Mitsuki one shot, The Last and Boruto movie.

Yet again, completely irrelevant to the premise. It doesn't have to be related to the manga, the manga itself is just one part of the Naruto franchise. Read franchise.

Premise 11: If no one continuity is more real than the other there can be no absolute canon

Only manga get it? In comic all issues are canon but not Naruto series. But you still can enjoy it.

Are you even aware of how childish and redudant simply repeating "I'm right get it?!" is? Needless to say, there is no substance here so I'm ignoring it.

Premise 13: If there is no absolute canon the only meaning to canon can be found in relative context

The "backbone" or "central story" here is always Manga story unless its Boruto series. DB help cementing it bcus all infos from DB were entirely focus toward Manga story. Find me filler info in all DB and I concedes. It became non canon bcus its full with invalidated informations.

This is, again, utterly irrelevant to what the premise is saying. All it does is assert that if there is no absolute meaning to canon, then the only meaning left is a relative one. Nothing in your comment denies this.

Void of any actual defense of your position, my conclusion remains untouched.

 

[Ansatsuken]

That's just a fallacy of special pleading.

Fallacy to who but you. So move on.

This is unintelligible. An adaptation that presents a different course of events is a version of the same story. No buts about it.

I think the one who lack in understanding of the whole situation here is you. You want to argue on something that you failed to understand. It just wasting people time.

"An adaptation that presents a different course of events of the same story"

This thinking leads to this never ending problem of misconceptions.

Since when Naruto anime presenting a different course of events of the same story? They(manga and anime) started similar and ended in similar manner. The whole plot(anime) are 100% adopting manga plots apart from fillers.

So you think all those fillers/add-ons means a "different course of story"? What an uneducated thinking there. Its not even a "version".

They not changing the whole structure or plot of the manga story so it can't be considered as a "different course" but just an add-on that mean nothing to the original or the canon materials. Even the "fillers" not tied very well with the central story. A loose connection.

This makes no sense. It's like saying a Hitler didn't get anyone killed except for those he did so he is a 100% not a murderer. An adaptation that adds it's own stuff is not a copy of manga plot.

Again a bad analogy and not very well connected to the point you want to address.

Hitler is still a murderer bcuz he killed people and even though other killings done by his underlings, he still a murderer bcuz he has done a killing.

And put the same picture on Naruto series, Naruto manga is the original canon and anime adapting that Story. When anime still within the "line" all their works are considered as canon bcuz it still follows 100% manga plot. But fillers that never happen in the manga is not canon. So anime is true to canon true if we ignore fillers. But if you take all storyline of anime (the adaptation and fillers) into one and call it a canon story. You are terribly wrong.

So like Hitler's situation, anime still can be consider as canon bcuz it adopting Manga story 100% ignoring fillers.

And the tricky part when using your analogy is that Hitler is always one Hitler but in manga/anime situation who will be Hitler here?

But as Hitler is the main man so Manga(canon) is the actual Hitler here.

The Databook describes the Manga, not the anime. It's a part of the manga continuity. Anime events are irrelevant to it.

Bcuz Databook only describing/explaining the canon source that is manga. Its clear as day which one is the absolute canon story of Naruto and there was no version of it.

You said it yurself "anime events are irrelevant to it" bcuz its irrelevant in the grandest scheme of thing especially Fillers/Add-ons.

If you still don't know how I reached this conclusion after I told you so many times then I don't see how talking to you anymore is going to amount to anything.

It same to me when it comes at you. Its futile talking to someone like you that clearly one dimensional.

I gave many reasons to supported my point on why you're mistaken/, on why Manga/anime is not like what you think here.

You're literally arguing in a circle here:

"We should prefer the version of the story the author worked on the most because stories on which the author worked the most are to be prefered."

You're supposed to justify the inference that the original source material is prefered due to the fact that author worked on it the most, not simply reassert it.

Reading this makes me think you're helpless or in dire situation.

When it clearly established without needing a deeper proof on why Kishi preferred manga over anime or other platform.

If he think anime is a better choice for his Naruto story he can just make a deal with any animation studio. But no he chose manga writing for his one shot and later on a full story of Naruto.

Yes I need to repeat it every time bcuz it appears that you still unable to grasped it.

You misunderstood the analogy. The point is you're putting the focus on the medium through which canonical events happen rather than the events themselves. Already explained the problem 2 times and I won't do it again.

lel no, you're completely wrong in both part. Here I saw two people trying to insert their belief on each other's so not misunderstanding here. But whose belief is true here?

And I think my belief holds more weight than yours as Manga is always the canon one in case of Naruto and other mainstream Shonen story.

The first format in used.



And I will.not going to cover the rest if your post bcuz it just a pointless game started by you.

I will not just answering the premises with yes, no, ok, alright etc but the premises need an objections also bcuz the one who presented it need to learned a lot. You're not fit to sort this kind of subject laGrim.
__________________

 

[Ansatsuken]

It seems I can't just let this passed by

__________________

When it comes to the argument as I presented it, a few things need to be made clearer as you've made several nonsensical replies. First of all, it is a deductive argument. This means that it starts off with premises from which a conclusion is derived. You don't attack the conclusion of a deductive argument, you attack it's premises. I clearly pointed out which premises are derived as conclusions from earlier premises yet there were instances where you agreed with the premises from which a conclusion is derived yet you still denied the conclusion. This is pure violation of rules of deductive logic.

An example of that is that you say "yes" to both the first and second premises but then argue against premise 3 which follows necessarily from 1 and 2. If you don't know how deductive reasoning works you shouldn't insist that I bring the argument up in deductive form.

Here's a list of derived premises: 3, 5, 7, 9, 10 and 12. The conclusion goes here as well. You cannot deny these directly. You must first tackle the premises from which they are derived. As for the premises which you can and should be arguing against, those are as follows: 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 11 and 13. I'll now go through these premises and review your responses as you said something with respect to each one. Your responses will be put into quotes.

Premise 1: A continuity is a series of events which happen in sequence



Here you should've stopped at "yes". The rest is completely irrelevant into the premise as you're rushing to refute a different set of premises that come later in the argument. All the premise does is define a continuity. Express your agreement or disagreement with what each premise says and move on. Otherwise you're just padding the post and disrupting the flow of the argument hence rendering clear deductive outlining meaningless.

It because I know people like you need a constant reminder. Looked how many posts between us here.

And your responses are not better either e.g nonsensical, childish, unintelligible, absurd etc etc

And I clearly tried my best to explain a lot.

Premise 2: Different versions of a story present different continuities



Again, you jump the gun. You agree with what the premise says but then go on to argue against things that the premise doesn't include.

Yes I agree with the meaning/description but I know the intention behind it.

Premise 4: There are multiple versions of the story of Naruto - manga, anime, movies, etc.



You're objecting to a premise that is clearly true. Does the manga tell the story one way ? Yes. Does the anime tell it another way? Yes. Are there more alternate versions such as Rock Lee SD, Road to Ninja, games etc? Yes. Then you cannot deny the truth of there being multiple versions of Naruto story. Again, don't bring in things like whether they adapt the manga as that is completely irrelevant to the premise.

Manga = telling the original/centre of Naruto story (most people around the world only referred to this when discussing about NV)

Anime = Anime basically telling the Naruto original story in animated way. So it literally just telling the same story. Fillers just to prolonged the episodes with a purpose of entertainment but doesn't have any impact to the actual story/plot.

So the true purpose of anime is to animating the story. It apply to other mangas too.

The main focus here and from the beginning is on manga and anime. People mainly debates between this two.

So Naruto SD, RtN, etc are not the other version of Naruto story but side products of the series.

And there's was only one version of story that telling about Naruto journey and its manga story. The serious one.

Maybe you need to understand the true meaning of "version" here. For me the meaning of version here is a completely different full story that tells about Naruto journey from the start until the end. And not a short story of a single plot.

Premise 6: If there are mutliple continuities they are separate (mutually exclusive)



Downright false. Road to Ninja has nothing to do with the manga continuity, a lot of anime-only arcs don't have anything with filling in the gaps (eg. 12 guardians arc or Chikara arc or Blood Prison etc) but are simply there to tell an independant story.

Maybe I'm not explaning or expand my point well enough there. I'm fully aware.

Besides filling the Gap I forgot to say about prolonging the story especially for fillers/add-ons. SP only purpose. And for movies it just for 1/2 hours entertainment.

Premise 8: If a continuity is officially a part of a franchise it is a real/official continuity



Yet again, completely irrelevant to the premise. It doesn't have to be related to the manga. Read franchise.

Naruto franchise exist bcuz of Manga. And the actual storyline was written in the manga and animated by SP.

Other side products are not the actual story of Naruto or canon story but unrelated side story and its non canon and not canon to the actual events. Its like DBGT and DB/Z.

I can't but post it here;

, the manga itself is just one part of the Naruto franchise

and laugh for a second

You just made manga sounds like the other guy in the room here

Naruto manga is not a one part but its the centre of everything Naruto. It takes precedent over any others.

Premise 11: If no one continuity is more real than the other there can be no absolute canon



Are you even aware of how childish and redudant simply repeating "I'm right get it?!" is? Needless to say, there is no substance here so I'm ignoring it.

I can say the same thing on your whole idea/belief.

Premise 13: If there is no absolute canon the only meaning to canon can be found in relative context



This is, again, utterly irrelevant to what the premise is saying. All it does is assert that if there is no absolute meaning to canon, then the only meaning left is a relative one. Nothing in your comment denies this.

Void of any actual defense of your position, my conclusion remains untouched.

Do you even aware what context you used here or base on? When did I say canon can be found/define using relative context here?

Manga is the absolute canon continuity here. We here are trying to prove/disprove that manga is not the only canon source. Your attempt is to prove it.

Anime canon is sure related to manga bcuz it adopted the storyline. So the underlying of anime story is manga story thus making manga the absolute canon between the two. Other products from Naruto are just covering small spectrum.