Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-32182236-20190721003717/@comment-32182236-20200109184000

By my definition, a story with contradictions doesn't even qualify as a story, much like a hypothesis with contradictions doesn't qualify as a hypothesis.

After all, what would it mean for a story to have something both happen.. and not happen? For a rule to both exist.. and not exist?

This is what I mean when I say a certain game (or certain game series) doesn't actually have a story, but a mess of things.

Because contradictions are not physically possible, anything that posits the reality of such a contradiction is also impossible. Therefore, a "story" with contradictions cannot really be a story-Just a noncoherent list of propositions.

And since we're trying to find out the truth about what HAPPENS in Undertale, if the result gives us a contradiction, it must be false. So we throw it out.

But if there are no contradictions (whether within the result itself, or between the result and the actual evidence within the game), then there's really no need to reject it (unless, of course, it violates Occam's Razor when compared to an alternative hypothesis that also lacks contradictions, which, as I've revealed in my previous posts, is why we shouldn't just say that FNAF is a dream.)