【Essay】On the Interpretation and Depiction of the ‘Ultimate’ System in This Work

　　【Warning】

The author likes Wolfgang, dislikes Eva.

The author is not a native English speaker.

This is a personal opinion archive. If the reader disagrees, then the reader is welcome to write an article on their own.

Content is based solely on currently available main storyline information.

This discussion addresses character patterns and objective behavioral problems, not character denigration or moral condemnation.

This is the author's stream-of-consciousness musings based on the plot, not an official character analysis. The accuracy of every plot detail and interpretation is not guaranteed.

If this isn't your cup of tea, feel free to close the page.

　　————————



　　Another outstanding aspect of this work lies in its serious treatment of the “Ultimate System” as an existing social mechanism and the “Ultimate Titles” as simplified definitions and labels for individuals, rather than merely using them as gimmicks to promote the story.

This seriousness can be found in several details.

【The Character's Professional Competence and Actual Professional Negligence】

According to the most standardized definition of a debater's profession, Damon, as a debater, is both negligent and unfit to serve as a debater.

Similarly, if we apply the most standardized definition of a lawyer's profession, Wolfgang would also be negligent and unfit to serve as a lawyer.

Some of Damon's current speeches and behavior directly violate many fundamental debater codes of conduct.

For instance, in his speech, he agrees with sophistry, evades the burden of proof, employs unfalsifiable traps, engages in personal attacks, and his remarks carry the potential to endanger others' lives... None of this is what a “truly competent” debater should do.

This pattern is fundamentally not civilized, fair debate, but rather unilateral verbal and cognitive violence. Its function is not to advance social progress, but to cause societal regression.

Like Wolfgang's ideal that “ only defend those he trusts to be innocent” is also a direct violation of fundamental professional principles—not something a ‘truly competent’ lawyer should do. A competent lawyer must maintain objectivity and neutrality, provide legal assistance free from personal bias, and ensure the upholding of procedural justice.

Wolfgang's model, at its core, skips the most crucial trial process of procedural justice by first conducting a personal judgment. It simultaneously assumes the roles of lawyer, jury, and judge, constituting a disregard and an offense to the judicial system.

Ironically, Damon constantly emphasizes social contribution, yet his model pushes the student community—this small society—toward collapse and the risk of casualties. Wolfgang stresses a lawyer's conscience, yet his ideal most fundamentally betrays the core professional conscience of the lawyer profession.

——Their actions themselves prioritize “personal pursuits” over “professional ethics,” and these “personal pursuits” are inherently in sharp conflict with their professional obligations.

Their blindness to their own dereliction of duty and systemic issues (at least as depicted in the current storyline) serves as proof that they are fundamentally unfit for their profession.

　　——————
But this doesn't mean they are necessarily “bad people.”

Only when someone consistently and willingly commits “bad deeds” (which reflect their nature) do they meet the standard definition of a bad person.

If a person has cognitive or behavioral deviations, that's called “having issues.”

If failing to perfectly match the most standardized, idealized professional definition makes someone a bad person, then countless people in this world would be condemned to professional death.

The key point is that they are publicly recognized industry elites—the ‘Ultimate’.

In theory, they should be the ‘perfect new star benchmarks’ in their professions, which is the deeper irony of this ‘top-tier ability, yet dereliction of duty’ phenomenon.

　　——————————
　【Potential Issues with the Ultimate System】

The Ultimate System selects elites and grants titles based on their objective achievements.

This evaluation standard is “broadly defined data and procedural fairness.”

Achievements that can be recorded and observed (proof of ability) → Gain system recognition → Grant identity definition

This represents highly standardized institutional fairness, yet on an individual level, it is simultaneously extremely superficial, excessively label-driven, and profoundly dehumanizing.

The fact that Damon and Wolfgang obtained Ultimate titles proves that during selection, UTP prioritized whether “the data in this file is the most outstanding” rather than whether “this person is fundamentally qualified in their profession.”

Because if UTP had focused on investigating their professional backgrounds—such as conducting interviews with the individuals themselves and relevant associates—Damon and Wolfgang's systemic issues and dereliction of duty would have been easily exposed. They lacked self-awareness of these problems, so they had no concept of “covering them up.”

In other words, the so-called ‘Ultimate’ system values talent, and only talent.

The specifics of “who this person is” are irrelevant.

　　——————
Like Eva.

Her psychological and behavioral patterns have reached pathological standards. Due to her dual cycles of self-deification and victim acting addiction, coupled with cognitive disconnection from reality and extreme oversimplification of thought, she is highly likely to become a potentially dangerous, unstable factor even in daily life.

Yet UTP has bestowed an Ultimate title upon such a high-risk individual, certifying them as a social elite—indicating that UTP conducted no investigation or interviews whatsoever, or at least none of any depth.

This system actually shields Eva.

—Under the dual halos of “elite” and “genius,” an individual's abnormal behavior is easily softened, downplayed, or even overlooked by society and others (geniuses have quirks) (elites are beyond ordinary people's comprehension).

—For instance, if someone in real life calls themselves a liar upon first meeting, it would trigger an alarm, or at least raise suspicion and unease.

Yet because Eva is “Ultimate,” other students (and even the audience) subconsciously overlook this glaringly abnormal behavior and potential danger signal.

　　——————
　【The Impact of Ultimate Labels on Individuals】

Such superficial, label-based, and dehumanizing evaluation criteria can also significantly affect an individual's psychology, particularly during this delicate age of transition between adolescence and adulthood.

On a personal level, they easily “overwrite” one's self-perception.

It may reinforce or even exacerbate existing problematic patterns (e.g., Damon and Wolfgang)

It may also intensify personal value anxiety and psychological pressure, or prematurely solidify self-perception (e.g., Mark and Toshiko)

Or it may provide a “safe zone” for an already pathological individual to cling to, evading growth and change (e.g., Eva)

　　————
On a broader societal level, it's also very easy to “overwrite” a person's existence itself, turning them into a “representative elite symbol of this field.”

For instance, this holds true even at the level of the audience.

Many audience members who aren't deeply invested in the work could habitually refer to characters by their professional titles (labels) rather than their names (dehumanizing).

This stems largely from the fact that the character's title is precisely the core element this work (or any Danganronpa-style work) prioritizes and concentrates its promotion on. Moreover, a simplified label and definition is simpler and easier to grasp than a real name and complete person.

Alongside the discussion earlier, just like the design of the “audience test questions” for “level of reality perception” this is also a crucial part of this work's META-style design.

　　——————

However, this does not mean that “everything is the fault of the system.”

Because whether an individual makes a choice, what kind of choice they make, and so on... ultimately, the responsibility lies with themselves.

Systems bear an external-choice responsibility, and these choices will have consequences. This is not the fault of the affected individuals.

But this does not mean one should, or can, shift all responsibility onto external factors—this is essentially slow self-destruction, and in the process, may endanger others.

“Choice” is actually also one of the key themes in this work.

　　————————
However, this is ultimately just a personal essay.

To avoid overcomplicating the content, I won't elaborate further on topics such as the impact on individual characters or narrative choices.

——————————

【Rejecting Malicious Responses — Distorting the Author's Intent, Misinterpreting Article Concepts, or Emotional Attacks】

【The author reserves the final right to choose not to respond】