Thanos vs Odin: War

Originally posted by quanchi112
Standstill means a deadlock. I mean it's almost pointless of you to go on at this point. This fight ended in a standstill/standoff pick whatever word you want to use.

You define their fight as a showing of equal power based on the word, and then you justify the use of the word based on their fight. Circular reasoning, begging the question fallacy of illegitimate assumption.

You've also lost your only strand of evidence that you claimed you would hold on to for dear life no matter how much sense it made (as it turns out, it doesn't support you anyways). So, you've pretty much sunk any argument you had Quan.

There's nothing in that fight to indicate a deadlock nor a standoff nor a stalemate. Pretty much end of discussion.

Originally posted by Original Smurph
No, you can't. It isn't a stalemate, nor is it a standoff. It came to a standstill, however, and then was never concluded.

I never said it was concluded. Why would you type something so ridiculous?

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Thanos' limits were being tested, which requires him going all-out. Add that to the fact that Thanos' ego wouldn't permit him to be smacked around and lectured if he could simply up his game and better match-up against Odin, especially in a fight completely couched in "who is superior." It's common-sense Gungnir amplifies Odin's attacks to some degree, otherwise there's no point in bringing it out. It's also evident because the fight was escalating, not being scaling backwards.

Both were feeling each other out and Thanos wasn't done by a longshot. It was escalating hence gungir. Keep in mind also Odin was fresh compared to Thanos because it wasn't long ago he fought power gem Thor.

Originally posted by Original Smurph
One implies a lack of movement. The other implies opposing forces of equal power.

You define their fight as a showing of equal power based on the word, and then you justify the use of the word based on their fight. Circular reasoning, begging the question fallacy of illegitimate assumption.

You've also lost your only strand of evidence that you claimed you would hold on to for dear life no matter how much sense it made (as it turns out, it doesn't support you anyways). So, you've pretty much sunk any argument you had Quan.

There's nothing in that fight to indicate a deadlock nor a standoff nor a stalemate. Pretty much end of discussion.

^ My table is at a standstill right now. Doesn't mean it matched me in a fight.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Yes, they were but at no point or time was he in danger of losing his life. We've seen him before in these situations against Galactus or possibly against Tyrant and he wouldn't risk losing his life to see Thor get well.

Both were feeling each other out and Thanos wasn't done by a longshot. It was escalating hence gungir. Keep in mind also Odin was fresh compared to Thanos because it wasn't long ago he fought power gem Thor.

Thanos was feeling out the ground with his tongue. Had he kept pushing Odin's buttons, Odin would have killed him. Keep in mind also that Thanos ended up being beaten on like ared-headed step-child by a casual Odin who was annoyed that Thanos wouldn't concede his superiority.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Which means deadlock. Both words have deadlock in their definition meaning you can use whatever word you want meaning I was right and you were wrong. Smurph I laughed out loud when you missed the same word is pretty much in all of these interchangeable words in the definition.

Standstill is defined as a simple lack of movement. Nothing more, nothing less. It is a huge leap of logic to assume that it implies a deadlock, and is nothing more than an instance of you attempting to redefine a word to secure your case when the actual definition no longer fits. Otherwise known as a definitional dodge fallacy.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I never said it was concluded. Why would you type something so ridiculous?

Oh, you're attempting to portray what I've written as something else entirely so that you can counter to attempt to gain some sort of ground?

Strawman fallacy, Quan.

haw-som

^ Original Smurph, you had better watch out. That keyboard you're typing on is at a standstill right now. But at any moment it can match you in a fight equally.

Tread carefully. uhuh

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Thanos' limits were being tested, which requires him going all-out. Add that to the fact that Thanos' ego wouldn't permit him to be smacked around and lectured if he could simply up his game and better match-up against Odin, especially in a fight completely couched in "who is superior." It's common-sense Gungnir amplifies Odin's attacks to some degree, otherwise there's no point in bringing it out. It's also evident because the fight was escalating, not being scaling backwards.

The last section of your post we are in agreement on. I believe the same thing as you and believe he was escalating the levels. I don't believe gungnir is the be all end all of Odin upping the stakes so I assume we're in agreement there. All I was looking for is proof that it's upping it one level as opposed to 2 or 3. However, I guess that is all relative and conjecture on both our parts.

The first part I disagree with partially... Was Thanos just going to let himself by smacked around if he could simply win by raising the level. No. So we agree there. However, as I've pointed out and what is also clear is that Thanos wasn't trying to put Odin down for the count. He needed Odin help, hence him even bringing Thor there. Thor was his concern, as he knew once he broke free, he wouldn't be able to contain him. You don't injury or incapacitate somebody that you need help from. That is common sense. Not to mention.. as we have discussed before... Thanos wasn't employing any shielding for the duration of the fight. We have gone back and forth on this, and I believe the proof and evidence are clearly in my corner. You believe the same. However, what is undisputable is you have ZERO proof Thanos was using any shielding as it was neither mentioned, implied nor shown. That leaves me clearly ahead imo. Regardless, that is really here nor there and gone over before with us. What I think is fair to say is this....

Odin wasn't going all out but was certainly putting forth a good amount of effort to put down Thanos. Thanos always wasn't going all out but putting forth a good amount of effort to try and get Odin to listen to him. I believe neither was going all out based on depiction and narration and common sense. Odin good effort was clearly better than Thanos good effort and that is undisputable.

Dictionary Wars!!!!!

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ My table is at a standstill right now.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Original Smurph, you had better watch out. That keyboard you're typing on is at a standstill right now. But at any moment it can match you in a fight equally.

Tread carefully. uhuh

Originally posted by Starscream M
that's incorrect usage of the word standstill.

standstill |ˈstan(d)ˌstil|
noun [in sing. ]
a situation or condition in which there is no movement or activity at all : the traffic came to a standstill.

If his table isn't moving, it's at a standstill. In an utter deadlock with everything else that's not moving at any moment in time. Could get ugly.

Originally posted by Original Smurph
standstill |ˈstan(d)ˌstil|
noun [in sing. ]
a situation or condition in which there is no movement or activity at all : the traffic came to a standstill.

If his table isn't moving, it's at a standstill. In an utter deadlock with everything else that's not moving at any moment in time. Could get ugly.

you wouldn't say the tree or the parked car is at a standstill...even though neither has activity nor movement.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
The first part I disagree with partially... Was Thanos just going to let himself by smacked around if he could simply win by raising the level. No. So we agree there. However, as I've pointed out and what is also clear is that Thanos wasn't trying to put Odin down for the count. He needed Odin help, hence him even bringing Thor there. Thor was his concern, as he knew once he broke free, he wouldn't be able to contain him. You don't injury or incapacitate somebody that you need help from. That is common sense. Not to mention.. as we have discussed before... Thanos wasn't employing any shielding for the duration of the fight. We have gone back and forth on this, and I believe the proof and evidence are clearly in my corner. You believe the same. However, what is undisputable is you have ZERO proof Thanos was using any shielding as it was neither mentioned, implied nor shown. That leaves me clearly ahead imo. Regardless, that is really here nor there and gone over before with us. What I think is fair to say is this....

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Odin wasn't going all out but was certainly putting forth a good amount of effort to put down Thanos. Thanos always wasn't going all out but putting forth a good amount of effort to try and get Odin to listen to him. I believe neither was going all out based on depiction and narration and common sense. Odin good effort was clearly better than Thanos good effort and that is undisputable.

Originally posted by Starscream M
standstill could only describe something that would have motion in the first place but is stopped temporarily

you wouldn't say the tree or the parked car is at a standstill...even though neither has activity nor movement.

Quan would reply, but he's too busy searching the internetz desperately for a definition of "standstill" that uses the word deadlock. haw-som

Originally posted by Original Smurph
That's not true. There's just little reason to use the word unless there's a change in the standard situation (for instance if the tree had been swaying in the wind, then came to a standstill). You wouldn't describe trees that you see normally as being at a standstill, because that's typically assumed and generally dull. This doesn't make it semantically incorrect though, just irregular.

taking normal tables into consideration, tables are not in a state of movement, and thus without some addendum stating such, we assume ODG's table was not moving prior to being in a state of standstill...thus his usage was semantically incorrect.

Originally posted by Original Smurph
Quan would reply, but he's too busy searching the internetz desperately for a definition of "standstill" that uses the word deadlock. haw-som

😂

Originally posted by Starscream M
so then how the hell could ODG's table be at a standstill unless it was moving just prior?

taking normal tables into consideration, tables are not in a state of movement, and thus without some addendum stating such, we assume ODG's table was not moving prior to being in a state of standstill...thus his usage was semantically incorrect.

To reiterate:

A state of standstill does not imply previous movement. Typically we don't specify a state of standstill unless there was movement previously, because there's no point and it's typically assumed for the items that you mentioned. However, that doesn't make it semantically incorrect to do so, just irregular.

In other words, EXACTLY what I just told you.

Standstill is not defined as "a state of no movement following a state of movement". It's just "a state of no movement".

Originally posted by Original Smurph
😐

To reiterate:

A state of standstill does not imply previous movement. Typically we don't specify a state of standstill unless there was movement previously, because there's no point and it's typically assumed for the items that you mentioned. However, that doesn't make it semantically incorrect to do so, just irregular.

In other words, EXACTLY what I just told you.

Standstill is not defined as "a state of no movement following a state of movement". It's just "a state of no movement".