of reading
346
Read books
that's halfway to being correct. you evaluated how life is objectively, but failed subjectively. we are humans, not any other race. what does that mean? well, if you're not a sociopath, then that means, us, humans, come before the rest of the animals do, and receive extra benefits and leniencies compared to the rest of the animals, from each other, fellow humans. why? because we're from the same race, no other reason. this is a common expectation we are all naturally born with, it is also the reason our identity as 'social creatures', who gather in groups and work together to be stronger, works at all. to not selfishly perceive other humans as above the rest of the animal kingdom is not hypocritical, it is the most fundamental human nature, it ensures our method of survival doesn't break. is that hypocritical? that would mean humans seeking survival is hypocritical, which is exactly contradictory to what you claimed earlier, that all life is equal; us, humans, too, are equal, are we not? we, too, need survival; we are not higher beings, and if there is an equal salvation for animals, then it is not up to us humans to provide it. in conclusion, choosing to kill animals but not humans; choosing to eat animals but not humans; choosing to spare humans but not animals is not hypocritical. to claim otherwise puts us above the rest of the animal kingdom, which is inherently arrogant, since, just as you said earlier, we are all animals.
did he put healing bugs on her so he could heal her after she's betrayed?
Thanks, have a nice life. I apologize if I misinterpreted your words, as I assure you, it was not intentional.
Hello! I am here from chapter 61 paragraph comments, after reading your entire rant, where you made a stupid comment, refused to elaborate, doubled down, accused me of doing all of that- thereby turning this into a childish game of "he said, she said”- and insulted me for about half a dozen paragraphs. Now, unlike you, I can accept these insults in stride. They don't scratch me personally, just change and distort my perception of the one who spoke; in this case, you, for referring to me as a, "stupid mutt," amongst various other colorful language. Now, it seems you have a false sense of security in your beliefs; I say this because you, as stated on several occasions in that rant, feel secure and validated about your beliefs due to arbitrary pieces of information, most notably, your likes- a mere number, and that people agree with you, not disagree, elsewhere. I say you have pride, as you can't seem to imagine a scenario where someone disagrees with you, and you are wrong, or at least, the other party is not wrong. Even when you admit to such, it is in vague, uncertain terms that make it seem as though you're admitting a concession, not discussing something but arguing with a holier-than-thou attitude. Now, did I make mistakes? Yes. I did not understand your greatest level of agreement came from a a half of a line in several paragraphs. I took your phrase "Funny how-" and took it as you actually finding this funny, which I now understand is wrong, you instead find this aggravating to that unfortunate pride, which must always project its insecurities on others, be correct at all times, and must have people agreeing with at all times. In addition, I did insult you; I apologize, I shouldn't have gotten so worked up over just a Webnovel comment. That was my fault, I don't blame you if you don't forgive me. Now, to get back to the meat of this DISCUSSION, wherein two parties disagree on a matter and CIVILLY and attempt to reach a consensus, I believe I did state Ryota is just one of the countless people the protagonist interacted with. This interaction was specifically highlighted in the text, receiving several paragraphs, to inform the reader that Ryota is an important character, and will return later. This is GOOD writing on the author's part, as I'd rather read about a character who is at least slightly fleshed out and made to be a villain by the true villains, than some random dude who was never hinted at previously. This technique, as you must be aware of, is known as foreshadowing. Now, this author uses foreshadowing quite a lot, which you seem to have a problem with: Kai was stated to hate the protagonist, no surprise he sides against the protagonist, though a redemption arc would have been appreciated personally. Hikaru was stated to hold murderous intent toward the protagonist, but didn't kill due to his status; he would obviously jump at an opportunity to do so, where it is not a legal problem. This is not bad writing. This is effective use of foreshadowing, character development, and nearly closed up the plot strings. That is my opinion, I hope you can respect it. Also, side note, why do I need to care if 3D artists and tech bros agree with what you have to say on WRITING? Their opinions are like a chef's opinion of an architect's designs. Irrelevant. Cite linguists, novelists, authors of published books, professors who helped those people along, and so on. Not programmer and art dudes. Thanks for reading if you did, I hope we can clear up this misunderstanding and move on. Have a good day.
weak AF unless it also increases mass. if it increases size while maintaining density, then that's actually just creating matter out of nothing, pretty strong and deserving of Mangekyo slot. if it doesn't maintain density, doesn't alter mass, then it's weak AF.