The 3 C’s: Cool, Chūnibyō, and Cringe

[TheMonotonePuppet]

Nah she was just envied of pride so she took his/her place from his/her.

And then forwent her original sin? Instead, she holds onto the position with Gluttony. Again. Not Envy. To represent, in totality, is to stay pure and unchanging. And she has always expressed that she represents in totality on multiple occasions. Once you leave your own position, to take on a new one, you do not represent the old one. You are linked, but you are not it in totality.
She genuinely has departed from Envy in this case.
It's not a matter of lore. It is a genuine inconsistency.

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

can i get an example?

When a drunkard (the something) stays home, lounging with no drink (the nothing, the absence), it creates a something (a withdrawal) and a nothing (an absence of work).

 

[Woolen_Monkey]

And then forwent her original sin? Instead, she holds onto the position with Gluttony. Again. Not Envy. To represent, in totality, is to stay pure and unchanging. And she has always expressed that she represents in totality on multiple occasions. Once you leave your own position, to take on a new one, you do not represent the old one. You are linked, but you are not in totality.
She genuinely has departed from Envy in this case.
It's not a matter of lore. It is a genuine inconsistency.

Puppet... You got me there. Yelp I tried I guess I have to use my ultimate move.

Spoiler: Ultimate move

Just because it's true doesn't mean it's right

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

Puppet... You got me there. Yelp I tried I guess I have to use my ultimate move.

Spoiler: Ultimate move

Just because it's true doesn't mean it's right

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

 

[Woolen_Monkey]

When a drunkard (the something) stays home, lounging with no drink (the nothing, the absence), it creates a something (a withdrawal) and a nothing (an absence of work).

False in the most simple sense as you can't get something from nothing as there is no such thing as nothing there is always something you just don't notice or can't comprehend it.

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

False in the most simple sense as you can't get something from nothing as there is no such thing as nothing there is always something you just don't notice or can't comprehend it.

Oxford dictionary: Nothing - not anything; no single thing"
The absence of work is no single thing.
Therefore, by the Transitive Property, the absence of work is nothing.

 

[Woolen_Monkey]

Oxford dictionary: Nothing - not anything; no single thing"
The absence of work is no single thing.
Therefore, by the Transitive Property, the absence of work is nothing.

But the absence of work is simply not working... By implying your doing nothing is implying you don't exist. Saying it is nothing is the same as saying you aren't doing anything, which is impossible.

 

[ThrillingHuman]

kono dai majo vasn't mentioned?

 

[Prince_Azmiran_Myrian]

When a drunkard (the something) stays home, lounging with no drink (the nothing, the absence), it creates a something (a withdrawal) and a nothing (an absence of work).

Ah, but the withdrawal is a reaction from previous poison intake. Without that previous something, the nothing wouldn't exist.

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

But the absence of work is simply not working... By implying your doing nothing is implying you don't exist. Saying it is nothing is the same as saying you aren't doing anything, which is impossible.

You are conflating absolute/true nothing i.e. the Platonic concept of nothing, with the definition of nothing that makes it usable in our lives. Therein lies the fault of your argument.

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

Ah, but the withdrawal is a reaction from previous poison intake. Without that previous something, the nothing wouldn't exist.

Which is why this is true.

When something interact with nothing, which results in both something and nothing, something does indeed come from nothing.

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

kono dai majo vasn't mentioned?

What-da-what?

 

[Prince_Azmiran_Myrian]

Which is why this is true.

It can indeed. And that is quite easy to determine. When something interact with nothing, which results in both something and nothing, something does indeed come from nothing.

But something was still invloved, so it didn't come purely from nothing.

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

But something was still invloved, so it didn't come purely from nothing.

I never said that it came purely! *throws index finger bombastically in the air* That, my noble dragon, was your assumption.

 

[Prince_Azmiran_Myrian]

I never said that it came purely! *throws index finger bombastically in the air* That, my noble dragon, was your assumption.

So something does not come from nothing. It comes from something and nothing...

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

So something does not come from nothing. It comes from something and nothing...

Something does come from nothing, by something and nothing interacting. Although, I suppose there are situations where something is not coming from nothing, but still coming from something and nothing, perhaps? None are coming to mind though.

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

THIS IS FUN!!!

 

[Woolen_Monkey]

THIS IS FUN!!!

Spoiler

Just because it is true doesn't mean it's right

Goodnight

 

[Bobple]

Huh.
I feel like we have a lot of people on scribble hub who fit B & C.
And at least a few who are A & B & C.
Well, if you are on scribble hub's forms, you are at least a little one of those three.

But in maximum qualities. Hmmm.... I don't think I'm around enough to make an accurate guess.

 

[PeacefulMyst]

Im simply really cool