Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2018
- Messages
- 81
37 years old acts like a child
Tensei Kizoku, Kantei Skill de Nariagaru ~Jakushou Ryouchi o Uketsuida node, Yuushuu na Jinzai o Fuyashiteitara, Saikyou Ryouchi ni Natteta~
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2020
- Messages
- 826
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2018
- Messages
- 619
@The5thSeraph :
You are wrong.
If in isekai the reincarnated MC had a child's brain, he would be unable to read, getting a concept about permanence or self. (which are things that a baby only grasp after a few years because they don't have any brain connection for that before). In most Isekai, the MC is fully able to understand, learn and use complex logic right from the first days.
Memories, thoughts, habits, and other things like that are all mostly from brain connections that are built over the years, so if the MC has his previous memories and co it means he has his previous brain connection. Meaning MC doesn't have a child brain but a fully grown one.
Your example with your computer is bad too, nobody says that MC previous is exactly the same before and after reincarnation, we can all see that his body changed. If you take your hard drive and put it in another computer will you say "It's not the same OS, it's an entirely different computer"? No, it's the same OS as your old computer, even if you put the hard drive in a MAC it's still the OS you used on your old computer, it doesn't magically change into a macOS.
Same for most isekai, the MC's soul changes its body but stays the same soul. When I look at your post I wonder if you really read isekai... "If a man dies and reincarnates as a dog, then he / she / it is a dog" yet there is an isekai where someone become a dog, and it's a "man in a dog" he keeps thinking like a man, he just can't act fully as a man because his body prevents him to do everything like a man (like talking, moving on two legs easily or using tools). So his brain is the brain of a man but his body is one of a dog.
And if you really read various isekai, you should know that they don't follow the same reincarnation rule...
Finally, I would ask you to not insult me, I didn't insult you and I don't know you so be a little respectful. Insulting a stranger is never a good start for any conversation. And it's even worse when you know nothing about the brain or computer and even isekai...
You are wrong.
If in isekai the reincarnated MC had a child's brain, he would be unable to read, getting a concept about permanence or self. (which are things that a baby only grasp after a few years because they don't have any brain connection for that before). In most Isekai, the MC is fully able to understand, learn and use complex logic right from the first days.
Memories, thoughts, habits, and other things like that are all mostly from brain connections that are built over the years, so if the MC has his previous memories and co it means he has his previous brain connection. Meaning MC doesn't have a child brain but a fully grown one.
Your example with your computer is bad too, nobody says that MC previous is exactly the same before and after reincarnation, we can all see that his body changed. If you take your hard drive and put it in another computer will you say "It's not the same OS, it's an entirely different computer"? No, it's the same OS as your old computer, even if you put the hard drive in a MAC it's still the OS you used on your old computer, it doesn't magically change into a macOS.
Same for most isekai, the MC's soul changes its body but stays the same soul. When I look at your post I wonder if you really read isekai... "If a man dies and reincarnates as a dog, then he / she / it is a dog" yet there is an isekai where someone become a dog, and it's a "man in a dog" he keeps thinking like a man, he just can't act fully as a man because his body prevents him to do everything like a man (like talking, moving on two legs easily or using tools). So his brain is the brain of a man but his body is one of a dog.
And if you really read various isekai, you should know that they don't follow the same reincarnation rule...
Finally, I would ask you to not insult me, I didn't insult you and I don't know you so be a little respectful. Insulting a stranger is never a good start for any conversation. And it's even worse when you know nothing about the brain or computer and even isekai...
@Clad95150
ah.. A man of culture. I agree with everything you said. Hats off to you sir.
@The5thSeraph You sir, suck ass and know nothing.
ah.. A man of culture. I agree with everything you said. Hats off to you sir.
@The5thSeraph You sir, suck ass and know nothing.
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2020
- Messages
- 753
good but is a bit generic and is very set up to be milked to chapter 200
ok but anyways now onto the actual criticism
the mc is way too fucking childish they’ve been reincarnated with a full mental capacity why are isekai mcs always so weird because isekai abilities like this would go best with a deadpan mc wtf
ok but anyways now onto the actual criticism
the mc is way too fucking childish they’ve been reincarnated with a full mental capacity why are isekai mcs always so weird because isekai abilities like this would go best with a deadpan mc wtf
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2020
- Messages
- 104
Charlotte looking pretty thicc on the cover.
Ars gets hammered back to reality.
Ars gets hammered back to reality.
@ElfWastaken what's your verdict? XD
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
@Clad95150
At least 95% of the time when someone tells me that I'm wrong, they're talking shit. I'll give people at least the chance to be that remaining 5%, but I ain't gonna get my hopes up.
BUT that doesn't mean that the baby doesn't have a baby brain. It just means the author has failed to realise that a baby's brain is physically incapable of processing such thoughts, and that it isn't just a matter of having or not having memories. It is just as impossible for a baby to have an adult's brain as it is for a baby to think adult thoughts with a baby's brain. There isn't room in its skull for that.
So... accurate observation, but completely wrong conclusion on your part.
And so your second paragraph about the computer comparison is not applicable because it isn't any of the same hardware (nor the same OS files).
See, the thing about "insulting" someone is that it requires regarding them as some sort of peer in the first place. It requires an actual intent to hurt them. But for me talking to strangers online is like talking to a brick wall that happens to talk back. There usually isn't any reason nor sane pattern to their words. Sometimes people just get randomly outraged, as I see it, and it was just something that was going to happen anyway, regardless of whatever I did. Like you can pull some rocks out of a pile of rubble without disturbing anything, but sometimes one rock will just make everything tumble down... except rocks are usually a bit more reliable.
It isn't personal, because to me you're not a person. You're just words on a screen. So no matter what I say, there is no intent to "insult" behind it. I don't even remember your username right now. Pictures are at least convenient. Back on Reddit I used to mix people up all the time because they all behaved the same. One random's text just blurs into another's.
That was a rather longwinded way of saying: Don't bother trying to demand respect from me. You won't get it unless you say something particularly original / memorable to deserve it. And simply being animated meat is not deserving it. Sorry.
At least 95% of the time when someone tells me that I'm wrong, they're talking shit. I'll give people at least the chance to be that remaining 5%, but I ain't gonna get my hopes up.
It is an unrealistic factor. The straight thought processes coming from a baby. The better reincarnation isekai have the whole "awaken to past life memories later on" thing going. Because as you say, a baby really wouldn't be able to think those things.
BUT that doesn't mean that the baby doesn't have a baby brain. It just means the author has failed to realise that a baby's brain is physically incapable of processing such thoughts, and that it isn't just a matter of having or not having memories. It is just as impossible for a baby to have an adult's brain as it is for a baby to think adult thoughts with a baby's brain. There isn't room in its skull for that.
So... accurate observation, but completely wrong conclusion on your part.
And so your second paragraph about the computer comparison is not applicable because it isn't any of the same hardware (nor the same OS files).
They do like to say that, but they haven't ever bothered defining what "soul" consists of. Functionally speaking it is usually just memories. Sometimes "skills" carry over because they like the game mechanic stuff. But if anything physical carries over then it isn't a reincarnation and none of this applies. So at most it can only be data.
Are you talking about that dachschund one? It is another badly written one where the body is behaving in ways that are physically impossible for it. I shouldn't have to spell out that a human brain is too big for any dog's head, should I? If the writer is determined to make a dog's brain behave like a human brain simply on account of data transferring into it that shouldn't be fully compatible with it, then that is their own departure from reality. About the only way anything like that could work would be a Gokukoku no Brynhildr scenario... but I can't go into any more detail on that without it constituting spoilers.
I don't "insult" people. If I believe someone is literally mentally inept by my own standards (most are) then I will call them that. Not as an "insult" but as an observation.
See, the thing about "insulting" someone is that it requires regarding them as some sort of peer in the first place. It requires an actual intent to hurt them. But for me talking to strangers online is like talking to a brick wall that happens to talk back. There usually isn't any reason nor sane pattern to their words. Sometimes people just get randomly outraged, as I see it, and it was just something that was going to happen anyway, regardless of whatever I did. Like you can pull some rocks out of a pile of rubble without disturbing anything, but sometimes one rock will just make everything tumble down... except rocks are usually a bit more reliable.
It isn't personal, because to me you're not a person. You're just words on a screen. So no matter what I say, there is no intent to "insult" behind it. I don't even remember your username right now. Pictures are at least convenient. Back on Reddit I used to mix people up all the time because they all behaved the same. One random's text just blurs into another's.
That was a rather longwinded way of saying: Don't bother trying to demand respect from me. You won't get it unless you say something particularly original / memorable to deserve it. And simply being animated meat is not deserving it. Sorry.
Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2018
- Messages
- 81
i don't know who is worse the MC or this retard acting he knows what he's talking about.
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2019
- Messages
- 21
lol, that end page. This group has no chill.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2020
- Messages
- 110
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 2,804
@LewdDewd
Y'know, that would probably save me time. Well, in theory anyway. I'm probably too disorganised to bother actually saving pre-typed responses to just paste at people. Plus I'd get bothered if it wasn't an exact match for whatever I was responding to.
Hold on. Were you trying to mock me? It just occurred to me that the phrasing of your comment was a close match for several similar comments in the past which were intended as mockery.
Not that it matters, I suppose. I respond to things the same way regardless of intent.
Also your tagging attempt failed (though someone else's didn't, ergo my presence). That and complete absence of grammar / punctuation. But then my former partner informed me that kids these days consider punctuation to be rude, or something like that.
@Kokoe
Nani?
You can tag correctly, at least. No idea what you're trying to convey though.
Y'know, that would probably save me time. Well, in theory anyway. I'm probably too disorganised to bother actually saving pre-typed responses to just paste at people. Plus I'd get bothered if it wasn't an exact match for whatever I was responding to.
Hold on. Were you trying to mock me? It just occurred to me that the phrasing of your comment was a close match for several similar comments in the past which were intended as mockery.
Not that it matters, I suppose. I respond to things the same way regardless of intent.
Also your tagging attempt failed (though someone else's didn't, ergo my presence). That and complete absence of grammar / punctuation. But then my former partner informed me that kids these days consider punctuation to be rude, or something like that.
@Kokoe
Nani?
You can tag correctly, at least. No idea what you're trying to convey though.
Similar threads
