135 réponses à ce sujet

[Nightwriter]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Is it really a revelation to say that if things hadn't happened the way they had happened, it wouldn't have turned out the way it turned out?

I'd rather not roll the dice again, would you?

No, but neither would I go so far as to say that what happened in history was absolutely necessary simply because it achieved the result of our current world.

Nightwriter wrote...

Fight so that it's not necessary now or in the future.

No disagreement there.

A good amendment.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 28 mars 2010 - 10:35 .

[KainrycKarr]

Dragonikus wrote...

That's not the point. Its about sharing your thoughts, memories with a whole nation that is merged into one being. I am sure they can think of some fun things to do.

It kind of is the point. It isn't about being right of wrong. It's free will. The reapers aren't offering what they bring...they're forcing it.

Forcing something upon someone undeserving is wrong. Period. I don't want to lose my individuality as a person to become a reaper.  If a reaper forces me to do so as part of a bigger plan, it is evil, unless I CHOOSE to do so.

I suppose you could think of it as a bizarre form of genetic rape.

I love leaving my posts on a high, positive and uplifitng note.

[Collider]

Shandepared wrote...

Collider wrote...

That's quite literally a logical fallacy to say.

No, it isn't.

Yes, it is a logical fallacy. This is the "Hypothesis Contrary to Fact" or "Counterfactual conditional" logical fallacy.
This was your argument:
1. Invasions caused civilization (or the Romans caused civlization)
2. Therefore, if there were no invasions (or Romans), there would not be civilization.

This is your argument structure styled so you may see the error of it:
1. My father married my mother after they met.
2. Therefore, if my father had never met my mother, he would have never married.

1. I learned about the Romans in Smith Middle School.
2. Therefore, if I had never gone to Smith Middle School, I wouldn't have learned about the Romans.

Modifié par Collider, 28 mars 2010 - 10:44 .

[ObserverStatus]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...
I would assume that your criticism also extends to the original premise concerning the geoligists then? 

Well, not entirely. I'm inclined to believe that oil could theoretically run out (hence some geologists are saying it could run out) in 30 years from now, because I've read about it in school books and it's a known fact that if we keep burning finite oil reserves, they will run out eventually. Also testament to that hypothesis is the fact that oil drives lots of international conflicts such as the Iraq war.

Your assuming that oil reserves are finite.  That has not been proven to my knowledg

Of course, we'll just herd our dinosaurs into giant fossilization machines.

Your assuming that humans will always need oil.  Your also assuming that the human race will outlive oil reserves on the planet.

Um, no, I wasn't assuming either. I was ridiculing the idea of oil being cost-effectively renewable.

[Nightwriter]

Shandepared wrote...

Collider wrote...

This is your argument structure styled so you may see the error of it:
1. My father married my mother after they met.
2. Therefore, if my father had never met my mother, he would have never married.

No, I'd argue that if your father never met your mother that you'd never be born.

I'm fairly certain that that was not the point at all.

[Collider]

Shandepared wrote...

Collider wrote...

This is your argument structure styled so you may see the error of it:
1. My father married my mother after they met.
2. Therefore, if my father had never met my mother, he would have never married.

No, I'd argue that if your father never met your mother that you'd never be born.

Like nightwriter said, not the point. Just because x caused y, does not mean that y would not happen if x did not happen. Obviously specific stuff like I would not have been born if my father did not impregnate my mother is logical, but more general stuff like "with no invasions there would be no civilization" or "if I had not gone to Smith middle school, I wouldn't have learned about the romans" is illogical.

[ObserverStatus]

JohnnyDollar wrote...
Ridiculing the idea of oil being cost-effectively renewable assumes that it will always need to be renewable. In the context of this debate.

Just because a resource is not used, that does not mean it is infinite.

[Collider]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I'm fairly certain that that was not the point at all.

I'm fairly certain he has no point. He thinks that civilization would have advanced just fine without ever needing to spread itself violently.

I do have a point. That point is that you are speculating on hypotheticals. The romans did invade other civilizations. That doesn't mean we can conclusively say that if the romans didn't, there would be no civilization. Quite possibly, another civilization other than the romans could have done it. Or if you want to say invasions in general, we've already observed trade as a medium through which technology and culture are shared.

As an addition, civilization technically happened ~10,000 years ago with the advent of farming, long before the Romans.

[Biserthebomb]

[Nightwriter]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I'm fairly certain that that was not the point at all.

I'm fairly certain he has no point. He thinks that civilization would have advanced just fine without ever needing to spread itself violently.

Violence is a grim side effect, but not an intrinsic requirement, of developing life.

[Collider]

Shandepared wrote...

Collider wrote...

I do have a point. That point is that you are speculating on hypotheticals.

So are you.

The difference is that I am not saying that {civilization would not have happened if there were no invasions}.
{logical fallacy}

[Nightwriter]

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Violence is a grim side effect, but not an intrinsic requirement, of developing life.

True, but we don't live in a perfect world either.  (and we never will)

You're right. The world is imperfect - and yet you are saying, are you not, that the violence that has occurred throughout history had to happen in order to achieve that imperfect world.

[ObserverStatus]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

@bobobo878
I had to edit my last post. I said the exact opposite of what I meant to say.

Ah, well that makes more sense.

[Collider]

Nightwriter wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Violence is a grim side effect, but not an intrinsic requirement, of developing life.

True, but we don't live in a perfect world either.  (and we never will)

You're right. The world is imperfect - and yet you are saying, are you not, that the violence that has occurred throughout history had to happen in order to achieve that imperfect world.

A good point, night. I think we both now that humans are perfectly able to progress without violence. Violence may be a catalyst for technology sometimes, but a lot of technology results from the innocuous competition between companies.

[Xaijin]

Dragonikus wrote...

  These forums are full of
assumptions, and most of us hope that Bioware will, yet again, surprise us with
some kind of interesting stories/information. The idea of the Reapers is great
and it is a very original one.
I was asking myself about the "meaning of life" and Reapers came into
my mind.



Yes, their ways, "manners", and acts are generally evil but what if
their purpose was a good one?

Organics "wither and die", humans live around 100 or more years,
asari more than a thousand but still, they eventually die, while Reapers are
almost immortal.



There are many theories about what happens after our life ends, but if the
Reapers were the best choice? Our bodies and maybe souls merged into one. Many
thoughts, one mind. Millions, billions or even more years of existence. Unlike
during reincarnation your memories are kept within your genetic
"paste" and merged. 



My little theory about the way our souls travel is that there is one big
source, one soul, one force so big we cant even begin to understand and when a
life is born a tiny, almost unnoticeable piece of this force is transferred
into this new organism. So in my theory we are all one soul anyway, just
separated for the moment, but they will merge eventually.

No one said I cant have my own faith, right? and its not based on Mass Effect.



What if being a part of a Reaper was a good thing? 




 

I hate anime villain cry cry, and will stick my ME 3 disc in the microwave if this is the case.

It's been done to death and it's officialy stale and old.

No.

[thegreateski]

Good or not I'm still going to shove my CAIN up their as-



they don't have asses do they?

Modifié par thegreateski, 29 mars 2010 - 01:02 .