Is there any Marvel character that could beat Superman Thought Robot?

Is there any Marvel character that could beat Superman Thought Robot?

The One Above All

Marvelman

archetypes > characters

Doubt it. Superman Thought Robot is above all creation.

And yet he still died in the end.

Franklin Richards probably.

Not an argument

How is that not an argument?

He didn't

How is him dying prove that The One Above All could beat him?

If someone says 10 is a bigger number than 9 and you say that isn't true because 11 is bigger than 10, are you making a reasonable argument?

Just throw the Sentry at him.
STR can die, the Sentry can't.

You do understand just how massive the STR is right?

Literally ends with his grave and tombstone. He dead.

Is the Character Evil?
Y: then they cannot defeat Superman Thought Robot
N: then they would not face Superman Thought Robot
Ergo: no, there is not any character which could defeat STR. STR is a function of good defeating evil. It only exists and performs within that context, and within that context it is perfect.

And what was written on the tombstone?

>steals your power

then why did he almost lose to a gay vampire that eats books or some shit

Mandrakk was basically God, he was the first being split off from the primal canvas of reality.

Because that's the story, numbnuts. The hero almost loses only to make a come back and triumph in the end.

A lie.

God Doom and IG Thanos. Plus most astral entities.
Superman thought robot is a shit concept. I love Morrison but he has shitty ideas sometimes.

America mi gente!

No

Thanos only had omnipotence in-universe with the infinity gauntlet. He never gained awareness of our world outside of his comic and if I remember correctly he never even left the confines of the one universe he was in which in itself makes him less powerful than any of the DC characters who can go between universes. Or in terms of Marvel characters the Living Tribunal was implied to be more powerful than Thanos since he existed outside of that particular universe and was called on by Eternity to stop Thanos for them.

Isn't Captain Marvel more ideal as a hero than Superman anyway

>almost

> then they would not face Superman Thought Robot

Heroes fight all the time. It's hardly a stretch to say a hero would not be happy with the concept of an all-powerful being, no matter how well intentioned. That was basically the premise of AvX.

Nah, he's up there with Saitama and Demonbane in that the point is they can't be beat.

If he can die, he's clearly NOT "above all creation"

If he is above all creation, how can he die?

It's not all powerful, it can only defeat evil. It couldn't even boil an egg.
It's not a hero, it's a literary device, and is recognized as such in-story.
Misguided heroes might theoretically destroy an innactive Thought Robot, but it would not fight them, and it would reassemble or be fixed in its time of true need. This is fundamental to its nature. It is literally MADE out of good-beats-evil, like it's not made of steel or adamantium or bullshitium, it's honest to god made out of PLOT.

Doom armed with DOOMwank.

>If he can die, he's clearly NOT "above all creation"
lol, nope.

>Superman Thought Robot is above all creation.

Are you stupid? TOAA is literally the writer, he could say "then Superman slipped on a banana and died" and that would happen

The plot is also it's greatest weakness. If you can change the ending, the robot loses despite all its apparent overwhelming power.

Squirrel Girl.

If Superman is so strong, then explain to me why he will become the puppet of this guy?

Reminder that Bendis, much like Stan Lee and Kirby, is a Marvel character and his avatars are in multiple universes

Yeah, but Sentry is better than superman because he is from marvel. That's why he wins lol

Reed beat the shit out of god doom and he wasn't even trying.

Unironically, this. If STR is powered by 'Good Beats Evil', a not-quite evil writers pet has a chance.

I don't understand what you're suggesting here. Are you saying that if the author makes the Thought Robot lose, then it loses? That's self-evident, and also pointless. The whole notion of the STR is that it wins against evil because that's how the story goes. That's the gestalt of the superhero, and that's what the STR is. Contradicting that in a story would either miss the point entirely or would amount to nothing more than 'Nuh-Uh!' You could do that with literally any fictional idea. Functionally that'd be like suggesting Squirrel Girl ITT with a straight face.

If it doesn't qualify as evil the STR wouldn't fight it. If it qualifies as evil the STR beats it. If the matter is decided via authorial fiat, what's the pont of asking the question in the first place?

To be fair, we're not talking shades-of-grey evil. We're talking End-of-the-World, who-can-save-us-now evil. I mean STR is a metafictional nuke. It ain't made for sharpshooting.

>he could say "then Superman slipped on a banana and died" and that would happen
Here's a panel of the One-Above-All explaining that the characters in the Marvel universe aren't his puppets.

Also he's the Judeo-Christian God, which means he corresponds to DC's Presence. And the Presence isn't the writer, per this panel here.

If the writer wants the STR to lose, it will lose.

His existence is bigger than what the writer wants. He cannot lose against evil.

Stop making these metatextual vs threads they are fucking retarded and unnecesary

He's the archetype of the idea of superman.You'd have to rid superman from the collective memory of humanity for him to be beaten.

Wait until after Bendis is gone to say that.

You know he is still paint on paper right?

It's not as simple as that, ideas trascend the paper they are represented in

By that logic if toaa is a marvel writer then he loses by getting a lawsuit for meddling with dc characters

>ideas trascend the paper they are represented in

Yes, this: is not the collective idea of superman, it's just the representation of it. It can't trascend paper cause it is not on the mind of the fandom but in on paper or strings of 0 and 1 in our case

>You know he is still paint on paper right?
You're confusing the Platonic Form with the objects that merely participate in it.
e.g. This particular image of wagecucking Wojak isn't Wojak in himself, it's merely participating in the Form of Wojak.
Similarly most everything you work in terms of on your computer when you use it is a double-bodied situation. On the one hand you have the Platonic Forms of abstract structures like a "desktop" or a "cursor" or a "window," but in the particulate world what you're really dealing with are just a bunch of hypnotic lights and sensors tracking your interactive hallucination so the computer can produce events that match your imagined use of those abstract tools.