In order to communicate we need to agree on our definitions. And you clearly don't understand the word "judge". Like most words, "judge" has several different meanings (e.g. a judge at court, etc.) relevant definitions are:
From https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/judge
No where in there is a limitation to "actions and not persons".
If you want to argue, you need to at least understand the definitions of the words you're using.
Do you enjoy rubbing salt in the wound? Feels kinda scummy as an action to me, given that I already admit I failed to enunciate the distinction properly, but I digress.
Evaluating an action and evaluating a person both fall under judgement, but these two, especially your judgements, consist of two different types: one is based off of a moral axiom (causing suffering is bad) and direct logical extensions thereof, the other is an implicit comparison tied to the moral axiom but only indirectly, through comparison (person who does scummy things must be scum, and hence implicitly worse than 'normal'). The first type is calling a person stubborn for holding to an idea harder than they might necessarily have to, or calling an action bad because it's ineffective* - it's almost by definition. The second type is calling them intellectually challenged when the idea they hold onto is particularly offensive to you. These are not trivially similar, and that's what I want to emphasize.
I disagree with the latter comparison, and therefore I disagree with your latter "judgement," or more specifically, your latter "condemnation," where you deign to act as jury. IMO this isn't as simple as picking out M-W's definitions and simply yelling at the other party for "not understanding" but evidently you have no qualms about that.
And finally, it was never "Judge not," but "Judge with care." For someone with such conviction, this error is a bit odd, no?
Do you enjoy rubbing salt in the wound? Feels kinda scummy as an action to me, given that I already admit I failed to enunciate the distinction properly, but I digress.
You didn't admit it. Instead you said "If that's how you want to read it, I can't help you." implying that my use of "judgement" was some subjective, incorrect choice of mine. This is consistent with you - you misrepresent what both I and you said and then run with that misrepresentation.
Evaluating an action and evaluating a person both fall under judgement, but these two, especially your judgements, consist of two different types: one is based off of a moral axiom (causing suffering is bad) and direct logical extensions thereof, the other is an implicit comparison tied to the moral axiom but only indirectly, through comparison (person who does scummy things must be scum, and hence implicitly worse than 'normal'). The first type is calling a person stubborn for holding to an idea harder than they might necessarily have to, or calling an action bad because it's ineffective* - it's almost by definition. The second type is calling them intellectually challenged when the idea they hold onto is particularly offensive to you. These are not trivially similar, and that's what I want to emphasize.
Here you throw in bunch complicated wording to obscure something simple. My logic is simple, and is easy to follow by everyone: "He conned, scammed, manipulated, murdered people, framed other people; therefore he's scum."
All the complications that you threw in there are just to complicate this simple statement, and allow you to turn it into more points to argue with you over. I'm not playing that game.
Here you throw in bunch complicated wording to obscure something simple. My logic is simple, and is easy to follow by everyone: "He conned, scammed, manipulated, murdered people, framed other people; therefore he's scum."
All the complications that you threw in there are just to complicate this simple statement, and allow you to turn it into more points to argue with you over. I'm not playing that game.
See there's the problem, you don't think anyone else could have a point if it goes beyond your simple condemnation. You just want to have your condemnation. Why even debate with me, again, I didn't even quote initially you because I didn't think you were 100% wrong, just about to go overboard.
You think I'm playing a game when what I'm trying to say is "don't go calling everyone and everything scum when you're probably also benefiting from imperialism or exploitation and therefore also scum by extension." Like, yeah, Rembrandt is by no means a "good" person and you can say that, I didn't disagree with that even if I may have implied so (oops, let me make clear, that's not what I mean).
But it's incredibly easy to incidentally fuck someone else over in a VERY similar way even when you're theoretically not "conning, scamming, or manipulating people." You're a landlord, especially of more than one property? You're not so distant. Arms industry, finance, etc? Probably closer than you think to incidentally, or by proxy, doing the exact same shit Rembrandt does. But it's nice and dressed up, so you're not scum, because you didn't get your hands dirty. God help you if you're in the police force, your morals are going to be tested these next decades.
This is the exact kind of moralizing that idealists do to obscure the exact same type of scamming and conning but dressed up in a layer or two more of "officiality." In fact, I have MORE of a problem with your simplified formulation than even your initial one, because you make no allowances for the environment or otherwise. Nope, man did things I think are bad, hence man must be bad and I will ASSUME there is no other reason. Then what? Everyone's scum. What's the point of saying this then?
If you want to view everything as black and white that's your prerogative, but for all we know the people rembrandt killed might've done plenty of shady things themselves, maybe even to Rembrandt. So then what, wipe out the entire city? Or just yell at everyone?
for example, by that standard basically everyone in this story is "scum" to you (made clear in about a hundred chapters) and at that point what are you gonna do, start splitting hairs over which scum is less scummy? you're not even making allowances for compulsion by the environment lmao.
And don't feel pressure to respond lol, if you think what I'm saying is sophistry then just don't interact with it, or throw a strike or dumb or whatever (points on the internet don't matter lmao). But honestly, rembrandt barely compares to even a gilded age tycoon, considering the shortage of full-on child labor.
You didn't admit it. Instead you said "If that's how you want to read it, I can't help you." implying that my use of "judgement" was some subjective, incorrect choice of mine. This is consistent with you - you misrepresent what both I and you said and then run with that misrepresentation.
Again, if that's how you want to read it, I can't help you. Lmao. It's all just me misrepresenting things, and not you having a superiority complex that you feel the reflexive, compulsive desire to feed. Definitely.
Nothing about the wording implied incorrectness. Your interpretation of my words IS subjective, because language IS still partially subjective, but "help you" is only "help you understand what I meant to say." But you don't care about what I meant to say, you're here to get a gotcha out of when I misspoke. Congrats, I misspoke, happy now? Like, you say "I'm not gonna play that game" but the entire reason you hopped in was to yell at me for not agreeing with your "fuck the entire world" attitude. It's clear because as soon as I start explaining in depth you just brush it off to yell at me more. Incredible.
Have your condemnation of rembrandt, jfc, I'm not gonna rob it from you. But you sure have a lot of energy to spend being angry about frankly fairly tame fictional figures as opposed to very extreme real people.
And for the record: This kind of shit IS NORMAL, dude, if you're not feeling it that's because you're fucking lucky. Try living in one of the dozen(s) places that oil corpos have ruined with chemical sludge, or in any of the places that got bombs dropped. A few people dying in corporate struggles is peanuts, and it's incredible that you defend the goddess in this pile. Absolutely incredible.
Frankly from that alone you're not so many steps removed from effectively having the same impact on the world as rembrandt. Making excuses for entities just because they're powerful? the hell?
That's mainly coz the anime skips a lot of stuff though.. It's great that we got to see the magic armor in action b4 the season ended. But I'm also quite sad they decided to cut off a lot of the story.
I wonder if they'll do a kind of flashback to all this in the next season (hopefully we'll get it soon)
What isoycrazy said. But even then, that's not the final form of his ability. At the pace we're going for the manga...I'm guessing it'd be revealed in maybe 4 or 5 years? 😂 And the anime, who knows when. Hopefully both don't get axed before that happens...
From materialising mana, he was able to derive Creation Magic that only gods are able to cast. And what he created was magnificent. Can't wait to see it in the manga/anime
I wouldn't be too sure the author did take a long brake and last I checked only 1-2 new chapter went in
I do wonder if there are new chappies
for those who knows I stopped when
Same. I was following every chapter when it came out from waay back b4 they went to Not Japan. But stopped at the same point. I wonder if there's been any new chapters after that...
That's the thing. That's why Tsukimichi isn't a shonen. It's not just about the MC getting stronger and fighting new enemies over each arc. It's one of world-building and character-growth. So if someone finds that boring, then that just means this kind of story isn't for them.
Personally, I love it more for the extensive world-building and the PoVs of various characters who aren't the main cast. So it's not boring at all, and conversely, for me, it's getting more fun as the story goes on.
If you don't like it coz it's boring, might as well just drop it and read sumthing else that isn't boring to you. Why waste your time to read sumthing you don't even enjoy? 🤔 🤷🏽
They should though. Coz that's how it was depicted in the novels. A weird, gelatinous-looking something of an armor.
However, you do realize that he just started to use this, right? He's basically at level 1 of the mana armor skill right now. And in the anime, that's probably around level 3? (my rough guess ok, there are no actual numerical levels for the skill)
Let me tell you though, his max level mana materialisation skill is nothing to laugh at.
That's gonna take YEARS for the manga to get to, though 😂 😂😂
It's not an argument, not really. It's a logical fallacy that pretends to be an argument to distract you either from your points or the lack of the other person's own in their counterpoint. It is Whataboutism where the person brings up other similar examples of this action as though to say it mitigates their own example.
Same. I was following every chapter when it came out from waay back b4 they went to Not Japan. But stopped at the same point. I wonder if there's been any new chapters after that...
That's the thing. That's why Tsukimichi isn't a shonen. It's not just about the MC getting stronger and fighting new enemies over each arc. It's one of world-building and character-growth. So if someone finds that boring, then that just means this kind of story isn't for them.
Personally, I love it more for the extensive world-building and the PoVs of various characters who aren't the main cast. So it's not boring at all, and conversely, for me, it's getting more fun as the story goes on.
If you don't like it coz it's boring, might as well just drop it and read sumthing else that isn't boring to you. Why waste your time to read sumthing you don't even enjoy? 🤔 🤷🏽
They should though. Coz that's how it was depicted in the novels. A weird, gelatinous-looking something of an armor.
However, you do realize that he just started to use this, right? He's basically at level 1 of the mana armor skill right now. And in the anime, that's probably around level 3? (my rough guess ok, there are no actual numerical levels for the skill)
Let me tell you though, his max level mana materialisation skill is nothing to laugh at.
That's gonna take YEARS for the manga to get to, though 😂 😂😂
Did the author give an illustration of that? Cuz i'm pretty sure the description of "something of an armor" didn't need to be like a fcking gelatin stand🤣
So far my take on the manga is it taking a more serious and cooler vibe compared to the anime so i'd like to see a badass makoto more here
