Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-32182236-20190716014521/@comment-32182236-20190720180855

Or you can aknowledge that it's more easy to conclude that Chara is the one making this comment since they have died here thus is more likely to know where they've died.

Usually, the burden of proof is on the person making the initial claim. This is something I plan to go over in later parts. ("More likely than not" does not mean "definitely true".)

So if I were a skeptic of the narrator theory, I would definitely point this out as an informal fallacy. (Though your first argument is quite strong indeed. I'd probably try to argue against Premise 2... But I don't see a way that those memories could exist without Chara being there. One could argue that Frisk is not seeing these memories, and they're strictly for us, but one of the memories actually wakes Frisk up from their bed if they try to sleep in the Ruins when Toriel is destroying the door. The Narrator Theory seems quite strong indeed.)

"One could say that the first conclusion is a hasty generalization"

This can be valid for your argument that Chara must be the narrator aswell since who knows maybe there's two narrators???

You're right-One could reject the premise that there is one narrator, and the argument falls apart. One could even say that the second narrator is Frisk on these grounds.. But doing that would mean Chara, the first narrator, is in pacifist because of Conclusion 2. And would violate Occam's Razor on many grounds.

But yeah I agree that it would become needlessly complicating(especially considering that many neutral run narrations still remain unchanged in the genocide run so if you refuse to believe that Chara is the narrator then you must accept the fact that not only there's two different narrators but also that they somehow coexist in the genocide run)

That's right. And neither of them make any indication to distinguish themselves. Chara reveals themselves, and the latter makes no revelation. Chara's memories are within Frisk, and the second narrator's memories are nowhere to be found (unless it's the war between humans and monsters... But even then, it's not from their perspective. Unless they're Poncho Human. In which case, they have no reason to help Frisk-They should act like Genocide Chara.)

All these additional entities start piling up, and the number of ad hoc explanations you'd need keep piling up as well.

In conclusion, you have to be a strong negationist to not aknowledge the fact that Chara is the narrator lol

That, or a psuedoskeptic. Or a denialist. ...Or someone who just hasn't seen the argument for Chara being the narrator. There's probably plenty of people who read flavor-text-chara and rejected its premise... And that's all they know about Narrator Chara.