| abstract
| - __NOWYSIWYG__ This discussion is for the community to resolve an edit conflict on the Avatar article. the article currently reads (at the beginning of the article): "upon death, the avatar spirit is reincarnated into the next nation..." This gives more information on the details of the avatar's reincarnation than we can canonically confirm, as the issues on "the avatar spirit" reincarnating has not been addressed. We do, however, know, as an isolated fact, that the "avatar" reincarnates. i therefore propose that we replace the sentence, or at least that part of it, with katara's quote from the southern air temple: "when the avatar dies, he's reincarnated into the next nation in the cycle." having an exact quote in place is much less arbitrary/speculatory than something we know little about, and i think would better serve the purpose the article is aimed at. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 20:33, January 21, 2014 (UTC) Since we are still not sure exactly what the Avatar,mor even Raava is and the Avatar is also a human, I think that the term "spirit" would be inappropriate. Instead, I think that we could use "the spiritual medium between a human and a spirit". I think it would be ok to remove the word "spirit." Having it just say "the Avatar" would be better since it doesn't seem everyone agrees on what the Avatar Spirit is. If there was one accepted definition of the Avatar Spirit, then I'd say to leave the article the way it is. Earth Kingdom (wall • contribs) 08:12, January 22, 2014 (UTC) You want a canonical source for the fact that it is the Avatar Spirit that reincarnates? In Light in the Dark, Korra and Raava got separated and Korra's reaction: "The cycle is over. I'm the last Avatar." Regardless of what exactly the Avatar Spirit is -as that is not the discussion here- it is undisputed that it is the Avatar Spirit that reincarnates. Korra stated that the loss of her connection to Raava and the her past lives meant that the Avatar Cycle was over. Why? She was still alive. What changed? She lost her connection to Raava. So again, regardless of what exactly the Avatar Spirit is, we know that is has something to do with Raava. Raava is always the one to reincarnate, again, regardless of how you view the Avatar Spirit. So it is the Avatar Spirit that reincarnates and as such there is no need to change a perfectly fine sentence. 08:49, January 22, 2014 (UTC) the only thing we can confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt is that "the avatar reincarnates". the term "avatar spirit" is too undefined and wasn't adequately addressed. anyway, using an exact quote removes the possibility of an inaccuracy, so we should do just that. and yes, the definition of the avatar spirit is kinda the dispute here: since we don't know what it is, we shouldn't use it. korra saying "the cycle is over. i'm the last avatar." proves nothing, other than it is raava's presence that forces the avatar to reincarnate. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 09:05, January 22, 2014 (UTC) Do you agree that in Light in the Dark it was the Avatar Spirit that was destroyed by Unalaq? I'm not asking what you think the Avatar Spirit is, I am just asking if you agree that is was the Avatar Spirit that was destroyed. (in case you would be doubting: canonical source of Tenzin saying "her Avatar Spirit has returned" after Korra merged with Raava again). So we have the canonical evidence of the Avatar Spirit being destroyed and then canonical evidence of Korra saying that the cycle is over due to the destruction of the Avatar Spirit. Yes, there is also canonical evidence of the mention that the Avatar reincarnates, but why limit ourselves to a more vague version when we have an equally canonically stated one that it is the Avatar Spirit? And no, the definition of the Avatar Spirit has nothing to do with it. All we need to know in this case is that it has something to do with Raava and that has never been disputed by anyone. So we know that there is no Avatar Spirit without Raava. And you said yourself that Raava's presence forces the Avatar to reincarnate. So without Raava, there is not reincarnation. Without Raava, there is also no Avatar Spirit. So without the Avatar Spirit, there is no reincarnation. All simple logic and deduction based on canonical events. 09:18, January 22, 2014 (UTC) but you're taking that logic too far. we have an exact quote to cover the facts, so it should be used - anything else is speculatory. i'm not sure why using it is such a big deal. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 09:37, January 22, 2014 (UTC) one more thing: it's not equally stated. the fact that the avatar reincarnates is verbatim, no deducing needed. another: saying the avatar spirit reincarnates implies that it is just the avatar spirit that reincarnates, leaving behind the human, which we know isn't true b/c raava said they would be together for all his lifetimes. and even that relies on a definition of the avatar spirit that we can't confirm, so let's just stick with the exact quote. "[will you agree that unalaq destroyed the avatar spirit?]" that too relies on a definition of the avatar spirit, which we can't say for certain is correct. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 09:42, January 22, 2014 (UTC) Please explain how and where I took that logic too far? After Raava was destroyed, Korra verbatim: "The cycle is over. I'm the last Avatar." After Korra and Raava merged again, Tenzin verbatim: "Her Avatar Spirit has returned." So what, it is now taking this "too far" when you put two literally stated sentences and put them together? You said yourself "korra saying "the cycle is over. i'm the last avatar." proves nothing, other than it is raava's presence that forces the avatar to reincarnate." As such, you agree that it is Raava who causes the reincarnation cycle. Combine your own statement with literal statements of the show and you get "the Avatar Spirit reincarnates." It's not because you just agreed to something that disproves what you've been saying all along that it suddenly is taking things "too far". I get why you would say that, but that doesn't make it true. implies that it is just the avatar spirit that reincarnates, leaving behind the human. Which would be correct. The human in se is always different as the human is the body. What you are referring to is more the soul of the human, but that's not the body. I don't see why we should limit ourself to a vaguer version of something that was said in the series as well. But anyway, this is once again reverting into the discussion I have had too many times already with you, so with all do respect, I'm sick of repeating myself on that subject. 16:30, January 22, 2014 (UTC) Since we are still not sure exactly what the Avatar,mor even Raava is and the Avatar is also a human, I think that the term "spirit" would be inappropriate. Instead, I think that we could use "the spiritual medium between a human and a spirit". —Preceding unsigned comment added by TarrlokUltimateWaterbender (wall • contribs) 19:33, January 22, 2014 How exactly is it inappropriate? "The Guide", Jinora says "The Avatar is part spirit? Of course! Just like the statue." Why? Because the Avatar is fused with Raava, a spirit. And Raava is inseparable from the Avatar Spirit. Whether or not there is more to the Avatar Spirit is not the question. All we need to know for this situation is that Raava is the thing that makes the Avatar Spirit (regardless of whether or not there is more). Without Raava, there is no Avatar Spirit. I'm not even sure what the purpose of your suggestion is, I'm sorry. 19:37, January 22, 2014 (UTC) I agree with LL - what we have now is about as accurate as it gets, given the information we were given especially in "Beginnings" and in "Light in the Dark" - we were told and shown (in BPt2) that the spirit leaves the body and heads for the next person, and without said spirit (LitD), there is no Avatar. Why change to something more ambiguous? 20:56, January 22, 2014 (UTC) it's not more ambiguous - we can't confirm what the avatar spirit is. as it is now, it sounds like the avatar spirit reincarnates and leaves the human half of the spirit behind, but from beginnings we know that's not true: raava said they would be together. also, the bit lostris wants to add at the very beginning about the avatar holding the avatar spirit implies that they are two separate things - so having "avatar spirit" in both places means that the avatar spirit leaves the avatar behind, which we know not to be true from the quote "when the avatar dies, he is reincarnated into the next nation in the cycle." If we were to say "upon death, the avatar spirit is reincarnated", then we could not say that the avatar holds the avatar spirit, and vice versa. this debate started from a desire to eliminate "he or she". the solution to this was to say "avatar spirit", which is a rather ambiguous term. instead, we could use a direct quote, which would remove any ambiguity and retain all accuracy. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 21:13, January 22, 2014 (UTC) But as was pointed out, without Raava, there is no Avatar. Without her presence, that person no longer exists - just as by the extinguishing of Vaatu, the Dark Avatar is to never reincarnate. So by replacing what we have now by Katara's ambiguous quote basically is to ignore what Korra mentioned and thus established fact. 21:19, January 22, 2014 (UTC) the fact of the matter is, they both reincarnate. if you argue that saying the avatar reincarnates is saying that just one half reincarnates, then we should say that the avatar spirit causes the avatar to reincarnate. how does this sound: "upon physical death, the avatar spirit causes the avatar to reincarnate." everyone's agreed that the avatar spirit (be it raava or the fused spirit of both of them) is what makes the avatar reincarnate, so could we word it that way?Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 21:45, January 22, 2014 (UTC) There is no Avatar without the Avatar Spirit, thus the Avatar is reincarnated because it is the Avatar Spirit that moved on to the next person, making that one the Avatar. 21:55, January 22, 2014 (UTC) just avatar spirit doesn't move on, the entire avatar does: raava said they'd be together for all [the] lifetimes. plus, that bit of logic doesn't make sense: you can't draw the conclusion that just the avatar spirit moves on from the fact that the avatar spirit makes the avatar the avatar. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 22:03, January 22, 2014 (UTC) Even with either of us interpretations, the Avatar Spirit moving on is correct. I'll do you even the favor of explaining it using your own theory. According to you, the Avatar is always Wan + Raava; Raava being the Avatar Spirit, Wan being the human vessel. No matter in what form Wan reincarnates, Raava will always find him. As such, the Avatar Spirit is just Raava moving on from one of Wan's dead bodies to the next new one. As such, Wan reincarnates on himself but it is Raava that always finds him again at Wan's birth in his new body, bringing with her the Avatar Spirit. As such, it is the Avatar Spirit that forms the reincarnation of the Avatar, as there is no Avatar without the Avatar Spirit. 22:12, January 22, 2014 (UTC) What LL said. Keep status quo to avoid ambiguity. ― Thailog 22:17, January 22, 2014 (UTC) actually, LL, no, that's not it: raava and wan reincarnate together, they never separate, so raava never has to re-find wan - or whoever - at all. that was the point of fusing at HC - that their souls are permanently intertwined. raava's presence causes the avatar to reincarnate. and thailog, status quo before the edit war was "when the avatar dies, he or she is reincarnated..." Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 22:19, January 22, 2014 (UTC) I'll adapt it to your theory then: There is no dispute that Raava is the Avatar Spirit. If Raava and Wan reincarnate together, then that means that Wan too is tied to to the Avatar Spirit. As such, again the Avatar Spirit that is doing to incarnation, moving on to the next vessel that will be called the Avatar. How much longer do you want us to keep repeating ourselves and using your own arguments show to you that you too have been saying that it's the Avatar Spirit that reincarnates, you're just too proud now to admit that. 22:26, January 22, 2014 (UTC) I agree with LL. I don't think there's much to say that she hasn't covered already and at the end of the day, she has a significantly greater amount of canonical evidence to back her logic than the supporters of this proposal. Just saying. --MinnichiFile:Dai Li Sprite.gif 22:35, January 22, 2014 (UTC) i'm getting tired of the ad hominem arguments. too proud? really? leaving it as just "the avatar spirit reincarnates" indicates that the avatar spirit - again, regardless of what that actually is - is somehow separate from the rest of the avatar, and in the process of reincarnation, leaves the rest behind. we should say that the avatar spirit causes the avatar to reincarnate. that's something that both parties have stated, so since we agree on that fact, why don't we use it in the article? Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 22:41, January 22, 2014 (UTC) There is a difference between attacking you and stating the truth. I've used /your/ theory to show you how it works and yet, you just flip-flop sides as opposed to acknowledging that you yourself have always advocated that is was the Avatar Spirit who reincarnates. Perhaps you didn't realize that it was that which you were saying, but that doesn't make it any less true. If you find me calling your refusal to thus acknowledge your own theory to be coming from a sense of pride, then I apologize for that. I didn't mean to offend you, I was in my opinion merely calling things as I saw them. But as said, if you feel that was offensive, then I apologize as that was not the intention. And yes, the Avatar Spirit is separate from the Avatar as the Avatar is just a vessel. The body itself does not reincarnate -if it did, 1. then I don't want to know how, and 2. all Avatars would look the same. So yes, the Avatar Spirit moves on and leave the body of the then-Avatar behind when that body dies. It goes on to the next, making that the new Avatar. All that is also true. It's not just because you don't want to acknowledge that, that it makes it all any less true. So why should we all settle for a lesser version of what it could be because you don't want to accept other things that have also canonically been stated? 22:51, January 22, 2014 (UTC) avatar=/=just the body. the body is merely a shell for the avatar. i'm not flip - flopping sides, i've maintained the same argument throughout. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 23:00, January 22, 2014 (UTC) You do realize that by saying that the body merely is the shell for the Avatar, that you are basically saying that what makes the Avatar the Avatar is the Avatar Spirit reincarnating into it... right? 23:03, January 22, 2014 (UTC) that's still forgetting the human half. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) Shoot, I had a reply here...I guess that's what I get for doing this on my phone. Anyway, I've been thinking about this. I'd be alright with leaving it as upon death the AS reincarnates, but then we'd also have to not say the avatar holds the avatar spirit, b/c that would mean that they are separate, and only the AS reincarnates, which has been established isn't true. Basically, I'm voting for no change at all to the opening few paragraphs, as of this vote.Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 07:24, January 24, 2014 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)