Forum › Liar Satsuki Can See Death discussion

joined Oct 12, 2021

prez man is an annoying tryhard.

joined Jun 5, 2018

Well, if Liar Satsuki actually becomes a good liar, that would 1. make her a lot less sympathetic 2. throw a wrench into prez plan.

What if corruption is the true threat all along?

Lcwgnwr
joined Jan 4, 2022

Satsuki x Akira ftw

joined Mar 30, 2021

lemme guess,Akira's body?

joined Mar 30, 2021

they should save innocent people instead of killing bad people,killing is a horrible thing,killing those bad people doesn't make them any better them

at least that's what i think

joined Mar 30, 2021

I-i really hope nothing bad happens to Akira and her mom... i mean, since they are far away from Satsuki, she wouldn't know if she was in danger, right??
Also i really hope Komachi doesn't turn to be the main antagonist (though it would be interesting), because i like her a lot lol I can't really understand her but she is quite interesting

i hope so

Karma
joined Oct 21, 2017

they should save innocent people instead of killing bad people,killing is a horrible thing,killing those bad people doesn't make them any better them

at least that's what i think

I think so too.

joined Apr 29, 2019

This basically Daredevil vs The Punisher

Chinatsu%202
joined Jan 27, 2016

they should save innocent people instead of killing bad people,killing is a horrible thing,killing those bad people doesn't make them any better them

at least that's what i think

Really depends on how bad the person is honestly. Killing a highschool bully for being kind of a shithead? Completely unjustifiable. Killing a murderer because it's your best option to stop them murdering people? I'd say that's a lot more justified. The president's general ideals have some grounding in a reasonble ethical position you just aren't going to find many instances where it's reasonable in a highschool.

Hmmm
joined Jan 1, 2022

This story seems bizarre thematically. All of the characters are treating this situation as though the big moral question here is "do some people deserve to die?" which is a decent theme to base a story around. But shouldn't they first be questioning whether the president in particular deserves that power given that he's an obvious psycho who thinks schoolyard bullying deserves the death penalty? If he had actually been trying to kill someone as bad as Akira's dad the scenes with Akira and with the vice president would have felt more natural, but as it stands I just want to tear my hair out and scream at the characters because the entire premise of this "argument" is fucking stupid!

joined Sep 29, 2021

I think the corpse might be that teacher who’s always giving her advice since it showed something up with his stomach on page 9

Fb_img_1636852439556
joined Oct 30, 2021

This story seems bizarre thematically. All of the characters are treating this situation as though the big moral question here is "do some people deserve to die?" which is a decent theme to base a story around. But shouldn't they first be questioning whether the president in particular deserves that power given that he's an obvious psycho who thinks schoolyard bullying deserves the death penalty? If he had actually been trying to kill someone as bad as Akira's dad the scenes with Akira and with the vice president would have felt more natural, but as it stands I just want to tear my hair out and scream at the characters because the entire premise of this "argument" is fucking stupid!

From your point of view it is, but think about it, both the Prez and Satsuki must have saw/went through something that made them think that way and they're just high schoolers, its to be expected that their way of seeing the world would change extremely, theyre also immature so they still dont really know how the world works

Tumblr_inline_o3faqeqbgs1s9j5kz_400
joined Mar 10, 2018

The prez and vice-prez should be thankful. If Satsuki did think it was okay to kill people to save others, they would probably be the first ones she would kill.

joined Jul 14, 2021

I have to wonder if the author is being intentionally ironic or not with the pres/vice-pres position here. They're both bullying Satsuki this very moment with the framing and gaslighting. Are they meant to be inconsistent, or would they agree that they deserve to be murdered now?

joined Sep 7, 2021

Ayo.. At the start they're laughing when that girls head is on the floor.. Like huh, aren't they supposed to be friends.. kinda sus no..

Nvm, I got this one wrong. Jeez I need to learn to read before asking questions. XD

last edited at Jan 14, 2022 10:52AM

joined Sep 7, 2021

Godamn it this is so good. I am hooked.

Truewarrior
joined Dec 13, 2014

I have to wonder if the author is being intentionally ironic or not with the pres/vice-pres position here. They're both bullying Satsuki this very moment with the framing and gaslighting. Are they meant to be inconsistent, or would they agree that they deserve to be murdered now?

Well they think what they are doing is right so they are just doing what they believe needs to be done to convince Satsuki to join them.

Would be ironic to have them encounter a person spouting the same drivil they do murdering someone they (the prez and vice-prez) didn't think deserved to die. Like they'd agree with the methods, but not the verdict, and so this gives them an example that they can comprehend of what Satsuki sees them as (Satsuki wouldn't kill these people even then but it's close enough to hurt them).

last edited at Jan 14, 2022 9:16PM

Truewarrior
joined Dec 13, 2014

Another Ironic thing that could happen would be someone who does something they would murder someone for, but then subsequently commits suicide. It takes away the argument of what they're doing as being something that could deter bad behavior, since it would be clear that people who are willing to die aren't going to be swayed by the prospect of being killed.

last edited at Jan 14, 2022 9:47PM

joined Oct 9, 2021

I have to wonder if the author is being intentionally ironic or not with the pres/vice-pres position here.

I think the author is pretty self-aware. I mean in the middle of Satsuki and Akira's ethics showdown you have Miho commenting how weird they are while casually munching on chips.

It's going to be hard to understand the student council's perspective until we learn more about them. Kai intentionally keeps everything ambiguous, but he has no problem taking underhanded methods for what he believes is the greater good. He seems honestly supportive of those he deems good, but bad people are an active threat with no rights in his eyes. It's important to note the manga has already called misguided righteousness the greatest source of evil, back in chapter 5. The manga's stance on his insane form of discipline is clear.

Sayoko is an even greater mystery, so this is largely speculative. She's much harsher in her beliefs, being the direct victim of whatever gave them this mindset in the first place. I view her through the lens of the president and vice president acting as a mirror to Satsuki and Akira: Sayoko and Akira aren't always supportive of their partner, but they're fiercely protective, with strong emotions tied to abusive pasts that make them confrontational. She outright condemns Satsuki rather than seeing her as a potential ally.

I think Komachi could be key to illustrating their difference. Satsuki will do anything to help Komachi, but can't even recognize Komachi has severe underlying issues she's doing nothing to save her from. Kai and Sayoko are willing to let Komachi get hurt a little if it helps show Satsuki that Miho is too dangerous, but they recognize Komachi is actually suffering and needs help saving her life, not just keeping her alive.

Meanwhile there's also a lesson being illustrated with Miho that good and evil are just something we impose on each other; both are innately part of everyone and nobody has the right to arbitrarily declare someone as pure good or pure evil. The student council fails this lesson. They don't recognize their own actions as harmful, and while they might be made slightly more sympathetic, I don't expect them to ever be justified. Satsuki is making efforts to understand it and will ultimately be proven right.

joined Mar 30, 2021

I think the corpse might be that teacher who’s always giving her advice since it showed something up with his stomach on page 9

oh god,Noooo!!

i don't want him to die....

joined Mar 30, 2021

they should save innocent people instead of killing bad people,killing is a horrible thing,killing those bad people doesn't make them any better them

at least that's what i think

Really depends on how bad the person is honestly. Killing a highschool bully for being kind of a shithead? Completely unjustifiable. Killing a murderer because it's your best option to stop them murdering people? I'd say that's a lot more justified. The president's general ideals have some grounding in a reasonble ethical position you just aren't going to find many instances where it's reasonable in a highschool.

hmm,that's true

joined Jun 5, 2018

Meanwhile there's also a lesson being illustrated with Miho that good and evil are just something we impose on each other; both are innately part of everyone and nobody has the right to arbitrarily declare someone as pure good or pure evil. The student council fails this lesson. They don't recognize their own actions as harmful, and while they might be made slightly more sympathetic, I don't expect them to ever be justified. Satsuki is making efforts to understand it and will ultimately be proven right.

I agree to your interpretation of what each characters role is supposed to be, from a perspective that goes beyond the plot. But I dont agree with what conclusion you might want to draw out of it. Or rather, perhaps you have hit the mark with what the author intends to convey, yet their is an underlying contradiction in your statement.

Without sounding way too 'edgy', that is, this is not meant to be arguing for arguings sake, one might take a step back and see what properties 'rights' or also 'ideals' must fulfill for everyone to be able to accept. That does not mean one necessarily shares the same - as seen in this forum, but I think at least some less emotionally driven will see the angle prez is coming from. (Even though he is in fact not fulfilling the most fundamental property.)

Any rights or ideal need to be selfconsistent (In all practial purposes). That is, if I take an arbitrary setup (that one finds acceptable as 'it may be done in actuality', this is of course up to discussion...) I must draw the same conclusion from any angle I come from in my set of rights. E.g. for prez: All bad people must die. + Some dynasty forum user: A sufficient condition for a person to be bad is someone who kills.
This is not a selfconsistent set of rights and definitions ('ideal'). Because for all practical purposes, trying to enforce rule 1 means to be susceptible to rule/defintion 2.

You probably need to impose more properties for rights and ideals than this first one, but it's not even the point I try to make. You in fact, fail this basic property too, with your conclusion. Let me show you:

  1. Nobody has the right to arbitrarily declare someone as pure good or pure evil.

I know, this is a bit plain, because I only cited one thing. And you have subtely included 'pure' in your right, but following from this rule, how are you supposed to judge whatever actions are harmful (= bad)? Certainly, a pure evil person is equivalent in doing only evil actions, yet because you (as you hopefully are a person) cannot judge a person to be pure evil, you cannot judge whether any arbitrary action is bad (take a person that only does one action.), rendering all other discussion about morals useless. (mind you, that a not pure evil person doesnt necessairly mean a pure good person, so technically you allow me to judge wheter or not someone is evil or good. With that in mind, and your postulate of everyone being a mix of both, there is no reason to cite right 1 in the first place.)

At the end of the day, even if your morals fulfill all possible conditions, enforcibility is what makes or breaks your ideals. In the case of MC and prez, it is more of a power struggle and less of a 'who's morals are better' discussion. So who can outdo the other first, is the one who is 'right'..

joined Dec 18, 2020

Love this! Thanks so much for the translation.

Does it deserves the Yuri tag though? To me it looks like "subtext" would be more appropriate, at least as far as chapter 39.

X
joined Mar 20, 2020

This story definitely similar to Fortuna's Eye's plot. A Japanese movie in 2019 except for the yuri.
I hope that the author doesn't copy the plot raw as it is.

To reply you must either login or sign up.