Yoku Wakaranai Keredo Isekai ni Tensei Shiteita You Desu - Vol. 15 Ch. 69 - I DON'T REALLY GET IT BUT IT FEEL VERY SUSPICIOUS

[Hikineet]

random encounter with a dragon slayer who gives out rare and expensive material for a meal...
I guess he couldn't find any monster nearby due to Norn and Bell hunting them away

The barrier tower probably repelled all the monsters in the area.

 

[Justking14]

there is no romance tag

Alright then demon lord and hump buddy

 

[T-Dizzle]

IDK Isekai

Just call it Isekai Don't Know. It's right there.

 

[BoredTears]

I'd just like to note my theory on the old man from when I read this part in the web novel. I'll use a spoiler tag because while I don't think any of this comes from later in the story, it might. Also the scene was a bit expanded in the web novel.

Spoiler

I think the guy is her father, and also old, really old. The only time when someone in the story was mentioned in killing a dragon, it during the founding of the nation, and the description of that dragon and what was given to this wing membrane lined up. The founder and ancestor of the royalty had a friend, and together they killed a dragon with a holy weapon blessed by wind spirit/god. There is nothing else about that friend of the nation's founder, but it kind of came off like they were a celestial like Ren. That they also had creation magic and other such abilities.

Also the meal Ren fed him were dishes that generally don't exist in that world, but he acted like they weren't surprises. So it came off like he was also reincarnated. As far as his behavior in the web novel he kind of came off like a guy being treated to a meal by his daughter.

 

[jasty]

I think the old man is actually friendly, just powerful and cautious.

 

[Solipsist]

Why does the MC pretend to have a problem with a bad contract?

If those documents are legal, it should also have a way for her to get out of it. And she has the cash for it. Hire someone. Heck, she's acquainted with a prince for fuck's sake.

And if not... She has creation magic. Poof into existence hypnosis-esque drugs, and have the merchant null the contract.

Girl has ton of options. There's no tension here.

 

[Enalis]

Thanks for the chapter

 

[AHomicidalTelevision]

It's odd that this manga has become tamer over time instead of more raunchy. It's the opposite of how it normally goes.

 

[popinloopy]

Thank you for the chapter! That, my friend, is what we in the business call "raising a flag."

 

[AncientWatcher]

Fuck that, Ren. Just kill that merchant. Slavery is an atrocity.

That ending is like going to a restaurant, ordering several courses, and dropping off a full-sized gold bar as payment.

 

[dextersTomato]

she will use that dragon wing membrane to create a new toy for her daily routine

 

[Goldenzeal]

there is no romance tag

not yet anyway
I've seen that happen before...

 

[kikix12]

why are you pretending that a modern court is overlooking this?

if its a magical compulsion that cannot be resisted until the contract period is complete then vague details would screw over the worker

A modern court would very much likely overlook it for the same reason that many people looking at this chapter would overlook this. Judges are also humans. And history has proven a lot that some of them are not fit for the position, either for lack of intelligence, corruption or neglect.

That being said, it is not relevant for modern court in at least some countries as there are laws that automatically 'input' the proper clause into every contract. Others simply outright make any permanent contract invalid. A contract with no end date is simply unenforcable.

As for why I brought real world into this despite this being a magical enchantment is simple. It's written by a real world human. Moreover, going by the story, I can say with absolute certainty that it is a person that does NOT understand this principle. That is why the story has a logical flaw, whereas it should not. From the definition of 'contract', the ability to end it is automatically derived. Therefore 'contract magic' would instantly assume it, as it is the only logical outcome. Otherwise it would be enslavement magic, and those are two different things.

 

[Forikorder]

A modern court would very much likely overlook it for the same reason that many people looking at this chapter would overlook this. Judges are also humans. And history has proven a lot that some of them are not fit for the position, either for lack of intelligence, corruption or neglect.

That being said, it is not relevant for modern court in at least some countries as there are laws that automatically 'input' the proper clause into every contract. Others simply outright make any permanent contract invalid. A contract with no end date is simply unenforcable.

As for why I brought real world into this despite this being a magical enchantment is simple. It's written by a real world human. Moreover, going by the story, I can say with absolute certainty that it is a person that does NOT understand this principle. That is why the story has a logical flaw, whereas it should not. From the definition of 'contract', the ability to end it is automatically derived. Therefore 'contract magic' would instantly assume it, as it is the only logical outcome. Otherwise it would be enslavement magic, and those are two different things.

Logic and magic are incompatible in the first place,magical contracts being permament is also a very standard trope

 

[kikix12]

Logic and magic are incompatible in the first place,magical contracts being permament is also a very standard trope

Logic and magic are very compatible with each other actually. It's physics that are incompatible.

Do you know the common trope of magical beings and their contracts? They are absolute and to-the-letter. In case of demons, they usually use loopholes in the wording to bring forth undesired effects, but the words themselves are upheld.

The fact that magic works on a different set of rules in no way makes it illogical. If it was, when casting fireball you would get a water spear every so often. You don't. That's why it's called a 'system of magic'. Systems are, as the name clearly shows, systemized. Only logic can be systemized. Things that are either outright facts, or that follow a specific order. Other things can only be catalogued.

Magical contracts in stories usually being permanent has zero bearing on the topic. They are permanent because the content of the contract says 'until death'. The fact that it is not present in this employment contract is exactly the point I'm making.

 

[Forikorder]

Do you know the common trope of magical beings and their contracts? They are absolute and to-the-letter. In case of demons, they usually use loopholes in the wording to bring forth undesired effects, but the words themselves are upupheld

Proving my point?

That wouldnt work on the kind of legal contract logic your attempting to apply

 

[kikix12]

Proving my point?

That wouldnt work on the kind of legal contract logic your attempting to apply

...No...It's not proving your point...Quite the opposite...

If a contract is enforced EXACTLY to the letter, then there being no mention of the method to end it means that there is literally no way to prevent it from being ended by either party at their leisure.

What do you not understand in 'contract is a document requiring to do something and restricting you so that you do it properly'?! It means that everything that is not in the contract does not exist. A contract does not forbid ANYTHING, if it's not written in it explicitly. 'What's not forbidden is allowed' applies to contracts the same way as it applies to laws and dissolving a contract is very much an action that is possible, hence since it's not forbidden, it's allowed.

And I don't know what you mean in that second part starting with 'that wouldn't work'. It makes absolutely no sense, so no matter how much I try to think of what you could have meant, I'm turning in a blank. What wouldn't work? What kind of legal contract? Contract logic, or logic when applied to contract? The statement just doesn't make sense whatsoever.

 

[Forikorder]

...No...It's not proving your point...Quite the opposite...

If a contract is enforced EXACTLY to the letter, then there being no mention of the method to end it means that there is literally no way to prevent it from being ended by either party at their leisure.

What do you not understand in 'contract is a document requiring to do something and restricting you so that you do it properly'?! It means that everything that is not in the contract does not exist. A contract does not forbid ANYTHING, if it's not written in it explicitly. 'What's not forbidden is allowed' applies to contracts the same way as it applies to laws and dissolving a contract is very much an action that is possible, hence since it's not forbidden, it's allowed.

And I don't know what you mean in that second part starting with 'that wouldn't work'. It makes absolutely no sense, so no matter how much I try to think of what you could have meant, I'm turning in a blank. What wouldn't work? What kind of legal contract? Contract logic, or logic when applied to contract? The statement just doesn't make sense whatsoever.

yes if its not in the contract it doesnt exist, so if there is no time limit on how long the contract lasts there is no expiration and it continues indefinitely, if it does not say there is a way to void it then one does not exist

so if the contract simply saids "you work for me" and there is a magical compulsion like she saids then she effectively does literally become a slave just like she said she would and she is compulsed to do whatever job he gives her for as long as he wants

 

[kikix12]

yes if its not in the contract it doesnt exist, so if there is no time limit on how long the contract lasts there is no expiration and it continues indefinitely, if it does not say there is a way to void it then one does not exist

so if the contract simply saids "you work for me" and there is a magical compulsion like she saids then she effectively does literally become a slave just like she said she would and she is compulsed to do whatever job he gives her for as long as he wants

...You...You're no good with logic, right?!

'Compulsion' is 'something'. 'Permanence' is a 'trait'. That means that permanent employment in a contract needs TO EXIST to apply.

If a duration does NOT exist in a contract, then it does NOT mean it's permanent. The exact opposite. It means that it can be broken in ANY WAY AND AT ANY TIME.

I don't understand how you can agree that something not written means that it doesn't exist, and then say that something not written does in fact exist in a single phrase, and think that it makes sense...If the contract does not state that it cannot be broken, then IT CAN BE BROKEN.

 

[Forikorder]

...You...You're no good with logic, right?!

'Compulsion' is 'something'. 'Permanence' is a 'trait'. That means that permanent employment in a contract needs TO EXIST to apply.

If a duration does NOT exist in a contract, then it does NOT mean it's permanent. The exact opposite. It means that it can be broken in ANY WAY AND AT ANY TIME.

I don't understand how you can agree that something not written means that it doesn't exist, and then say that something not written does in fact exist in a single phrase, and think that it makes sense...If the contract does not state that it cannot be broken, then IT CAN BE BROKEN.

Then why does she believe shed have to resort to murder for freedom?