georgetruman

I mean more along the lines of comparing say Petra to Edelgard. They basically end up with a 10 point difference in strength and a 10 point difference in speed in their respective favors. The thing is, you only end up needing so much speed and so much strength to 1rko the majority of enemies. Is one closer to those important thresholds than the other, so they don't need as many boosters to get to the point where they can 1rko the vast majority of enemies, or does it end up just being a wash

@Silly do you factor in stuff like farming for speed carrots?

Most people rejected his message. They hated Silly because he told them the truth.

Bernie and Raphael I though was pretty good, and Felix and Dimitri had a really good ending.

Mastering warmaster for dedue is super good and allows him to be way more useful in NG+. Dank Knight for hubert seems the way to go so he can just walk up, oneshot whomever, and walk away. Wyvern for hilda seems like a no brainer if you care about efficiency.

Caspar's B support with Byleth is just ridiculous.

I always use the Japanese dub because I can't tell if its bad or not. It seems that VAs are usually using a fake voice for their character (opposed to like Toy Story where its is pretty much the actors' natural voices) and I feel like its super apparent to me when they do. On the other hand I don't know Japanese at all and never hear people speak it so I can't tell if the voice acting is good or bad. When someone does have a super weird voice (Like ignatz seems to) it just doesn't phase me nearly as much.

I gotta say Raphael. I recruited him thinking he was going to be absolutely garbage as a unit but boy was I surprised. Fist weapons really make low speed units much stronger in this game. And the warmaster class is just really good. Honorable mention to Dimitri, whom I thought was just going to be an edgmaster but turned out to be a real

I am going to use the internet oxford dictionary definition for "objective" and "subjective" here. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/objective http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/subjective Basically something being based upon taste is inherently subjective. Things may objectively influence your tastes, such as genetics or mental conditioning, but something being based off of taste is subjective. Attractiveness is based on taste and ought to be considered subjective. However objective properties may influence whether one finds something attractive or not. You are going to have a very very difficult time convincing a blind man that a painting is objectively attractive. The third paragraph you wrote is, to my understanding, fully subjective. It is subjective to claim that something "deserves" anything. To claim that something is superior, you first have to define parameters to make it so. One might claim that: greater detail makes a painting superior, therefore the painting with more detail is superior to the painting with less detail. The logic in that statement is sound but it follows a subjective parameter.

ohh I though you were talking about frankensteining together a bunch of cloned body parts.

^ I feel like that is totally reasonable. I would have to agree that I definitely cannot claim something as objectively respectfull.

Do you understand why licking bread is almost objectively unacceptable though? Because it spreads germs. If I find out that my friend secretly licks bread in the supermarket I am absolutely going to try to stop him that is obvious. Also do you see how subjective the second point is. A lot of "acceptable" behaviors are still distracting and unnerving to people. I kind of think its gross when people kiss in bars but some people are okay with it. I have the power to get over it. If doing it really brought your friend happiness and joy, would you really tell him to stop or do you think that people could just get over it?

Op you should research moral nihilism. While you obviously can choose to believe in whatever you want, understanding moral nihilism can help you to understand how easily people's core beliefs can differ. The point I want to make is: a discussion like this can be really difficult to have with people unwilling or unable to understand that their viewpoints stem from subjective ethical and moral codes. In answer to your question I think that greed can be used for wonderful things and that greed can cause great grief. I think compassion decides how people will direct their own self interests.

There are plenty of occupations out there for people who are totally out there, farming being a great example. You can't just project your own versions of happiness on other people life doesn't work that way. People have different values and tastes. Their upbringing and biology are different and they feel different ways about different things. Also, you need to open your mind if you want to understand others' analogies. If you listen to somebodies point with the intention of not believing them, you are never going to get their meaning. I have made the point multiple times that I find howling to be rude (depending on the volume), but why would I be bothered by someone walking around on all fours sniffing the ground? If I did let that bother me, what does that say about me? Nobody is answering those questions. Again, I don't know what kind of friends you guys have but mine could give two shits what I do when I am not around them, so long as I am not hurting people. Why would I want friends that gave a shit about that stuff anyway? That would frankly be bonkers.

^Ok thats for sure true. But I don't care if someone is transgender because they want to be or have to be, either way in my opinion it isn't any of my business. The point I am trying to make is that biological or not, being transgender doesn't affect people. On the flip side, being biologically inclined to do something doesn't make it okay either. How many people do you think are biologically attracted to little kids? Society doesn't blame you for being attracted to kids, they blame you when you actually sexually abuse them right? I know that is a hilariously extreme example but its my favorite. I for one am a huge fan of the booty. If I walk around with a shirt that says "I love da booty" then I have indeed taken upon the public role of a man who loves da booty. Most people would be okay with that. If I walk around hooting and complimenting men and women on their bodacious bods, people might consider that harassment. Loving the booty and expressing my love in a way that doesn't impede on others rights is okay, but expressing my love in the form of harassment is not okay. I won't ever find a perfect analogy, but I can do this for days.