245 réponses à ce sujet

[Collider]

I've never seen Samara getting pleasure from killing people. Morinth? Yes, I have.

[Terraneaux]

Collider wrote...

I've never seen Samara getting pleasure from killing people. Morinth? Yes, I have.

Then you're not looking hard enough.  Samara became a Justicar (i.e. started killing people) so that she could feel like she hasn't completely failed as a mother (but note that it's not that she failed Morinth, it's that she's failed society by creating this murderer).  Samara kills people so that she doesn't have to feel so bad about herself, or perhaps more correctly it's following the code that makes her feel good about herself, and the people she kills as a consequence are an acceptable side-effect to her.  It probably doesn't hurt that Justicars are morally irreproachable in Asari society, so she never has to worry about people telling her she's a terrible person.  

[UsagiVindaloo]

Collider wrote...

The fact that she chooses her victims carefully leads me to believe that she is in control of her actions.

Been musing on this, and one way of looking at it is that her carefully choosing her victims is akin to us carefully choosing something out of a menu, or from one of those conveyor belt sushi bars (which are pretty awesome, definitely try it out if you can!)

Of course, the obvious difference to us is that it is a living, breathing person that Morinth is picking, as opposed to a succulent and mouthwatering piece of sushi (pizza, filet mignon, whatever). However, this raises the question of biology, psychology, and mental illness. *IS* Morinth capable of recognizing personhood as we understand it? The codex mentions that Ardat Yakshi sufferers cannot develop the same sense of empathy as most asari. Would this then be equivalent to sociopathy, where the subject is incapable of empathizing with other people and recognizing their right to exist and be happy? If so, that may mean that while Morinth is entirely capable of choosing her own actions, she is missing a fundamental key part of her brain that makes the distinction between people and food. Thus, her attraction to certain individuals may literally be the same as my entirely unhealthy obsession with the Japanese tradition of combining raw fish with rice. Mmm, raw fish with rice...

"But Usagi, if Ardat Yakshi are incapable of respecting personhood and right to live and all that stuff, how do you explain Morinth's sisters agreeing to confinement?" Well, we really don't know why they chose isolation. At the moment, we're going off the assumption that they chose isolation in order to protect others from themselves. However, it's quite possible that they're just as sociopathic as Morinth and simply chose confinement because the alternative was death... a self-serving motive. We honestly don't know.

At any rate, a lot of this is hypothetical, but if the Ardat Yakshi condition actually *prevents* Morinth from developing empathy and general sense of, "people should not be killed," does that make her more or less sympathetic? I would hesitantly say more, in that it's not really her fault that she was born without a functioning part of her brain. On the other hand, I have even MORE sympathy for the poor schmucks who died due to "Lack of Brain."


(note that I'm not saying all the above is absolutely true, or even that it's my own belief on what she is - I lean a bit more towards the romantic monster vampire type - only that there is lots of room for different interpretation, and the person lamenting her tragic end is no weirder than the person cheering, "Ding dong the wicked witch is dead," or vice versa)

[Terraneaux]

I'm not a big fan of the 'Ardat Yakshi don't have compassion ergo it's not their fault argument.' Morinth is obviously capable of understanding people just fine, she's great at understanding people's emotions and motivations.

[Collider]

UsagiVindaloo wrote...

Collider wrote...

The fact that she chooses her victims carefully leads me to believe that she is in control of her actions.

Been musing on this, and one way of looking at it is that her carefully choosing her victims is akin to us carefully choosing something out of a menu, or from one of those conveyor belt sushi bars (which are pretty awesome, definitely try it out if you can!)

But being so picky does not remind me of an addict. An addict takes for heroin takes whatever heroin he can get.
As for not being able to have empathy, that does not preclude her from deserving punishment. She obviously knows that people disagree with her actions and that she will be hunted by Samara if she continues to do them. She is putting her in the fire knowing that the fire could burn.

(note that I'm not saying all the above is absolutely true, or even that it's my own belief on what she is - I lean a bit more towards the romantic monster vampire type - only that there is lots of room for different interpretation, and the person lamenting her tragic end is no weirder than the person cheering, "Ding dong the wicked witch is dead," or vice versa)

It's hard to lament her because she has no redeeming qualities. A dictator may have had a troubled childhood, but I don't feel any sympathy for them. I would have more sympathy for someone who sees their victims as monsters rather than beautiful or creative.

[GuardianAngel470]

Terraneaux wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

How is Samara a serial killer?  What group has she killed for the pleasure of seeing them die?  Prostitutes? Women in general?  Men? Children?  Serial killers target a specific group for the sole purpose of seeing them die for being who they are, and Samara has never done this.  Morinth has to some extent, she singled out creative people.  The only people samara has killed based on dialog with her has been either a) people who are committing a crime, ie slavery or people who attacked her, ie that village.  She killed for a just reason, either self-defense of protection of the defenseless.  How does that make her a morally bankrupt person?  I really want to know your justification for that statement.

Any time she kills someone (outside of Asari space, and assuming it's not part of a military operation), it's murder.  I assume she's done this at least twice.  Even if she hasn't, she'd be perfectly willing to if, say, some cop somewhere tries to take her in for questioning.  

A serial killer is just someone who has murdered more than one person on at least two occasions.  

As far as Samara being morally bankrupt goes, it's more important for her to follow the tenets of her code than to let, say, cops doing their jobs live.  And note that, when captured, she wouldn't be compelled to escape, but rather to kill the people who have impeded her progress.  She doesn't look for nonviolent solutions to her problems, but rather moves straight to lethal force.  I'd imagine she gets some kind of righteous self-satisfaction from it, but that's just speculation at this point.  What it comes down to is that she kills people unnecessarily because her code tells her to.  That means that there's something wrong with her code, and something wrong with her for following it.

You are oversimplifying serial killers.  Jack the Ripper was a serial killer.  Charles Witman wasn't.  One killed several women, mainly vain or sexually reprehensible women and the other killed 14 and wounded 32.  What was the difference?  One singled out his victims for the purpose of killing them for their perceived wrong doing, the other was mentally unstable.  If you want to get down to biology, serial killers in humanity don't have a fully developed frontal cortex.  That means that there is something physically wrong with them.  Mass murderers like Charles Witman are just crazy, affected by a traumatic experience or series of traumatic experiences and feel that violence is the only way to solve their mental anguish.  Morinth is a serial killer not because she has a malformed frontal cortex but because that is the closest analogy we as humans can project on a member of another species.

Also, you make a good point about Samara and her code, but it comes back to not judging another species.  They aren't human and thus I can't say what they do is wrong.  They arrived at their conclusion through years of trial and error and it would be extremely insensitive of me to think that I am somehow qualified through my 20 years of life to say that they are wrong. Do I approve of their actions?  I would have to look at it on a case by case basis.  Would you avenge the death of an unarmed civilian if given the choice?  I would probably look for more information.  That doesn't mean that my way is right and Samara's is wrong, just that we are different.

[Terraneaux]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Also, you make a good point about Samara and her code, but it comes back to not judging another species.  They aren't human and thus I can't say what they do is wrong.  They arrived at their conclusion through years of trial and error and it would be extremely insensitive of me to think that I am somehow qualified through my 20 years of life to say that they are wrong. Do I approve of their actions?  I would have to look at it on a case by case basis.  Would you avenge the death of an unarmed civilian if given the choice?  I would probably look for more information.  That doesn't mean that my way is right and Samara's is wrong, just that we are different.

No, you can judge non humans just fine.  If what you posit is the case, it wouldn't be acceptable for anyone to judge anyone older than they are.  

In any case, the asari's right to their culture ends when it starts impinging on other race's security.  EVEN IF all the asari agree that Justicars are a good idea (and I'm betting that there's plenty who don't), it's not like Justicars confine their activities to only regulating other asari.  Since they're willing to go kill aliens for violating what they perceive to be justice, or for, say, holding them for legal reasons, I'm perfectly fine with calling the Justicar code immoral.

[Terraneaux]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

You are oversimplifying serial killers.  Jack the Ripper was a serial killer.  Charles Witman wasn't.  One killed several women, mainly vain or sexually reprehensible women and the other killed 14 and wounded 32.  What was the difference?  One singled out his victims for the purpose of killing them for their perceived wrong doing, the other was mentally unstable.  If you want to get down to biology, serial killers in humanity don't have a fully developed frontal cortex.  That means that there is something physically wrong with them.  Mass murderers like Charles Witman are just crazy, affected by a traumatic experience or series of traumatic experiences and feel that violence is the only way to solve their mental anguish.  Morinth is a serial killer not because she has a malformed frontal cortex but because that is the closest analogy we as humans can project on a member of another species.

No, I'm not.  The term 'serial killer' means someone who has committed a series of murders.  Serial killers often have some sort of mental problems, but not always.  The term 'serial killer' describes behavior, not mental state.

[binaryemperor]

I was wondering why Vanguard Shep wasn't joining in with the blue biotic balls of death.

[UsagiVindaloo]

Collider wrote...

UsagiVindaloo wrote...

Collider wrote...

The fact that she chooses her victims carefully leads me to believe that she is in control of her actions.

Been musing on this, and one way of looking at it is that her carefully choosing her victims is akin to us carefully choosing something out of a menu, or from one of those conveyor belt sushi bars (which are pretty awesome, definitely try it out if you can!)

But being so picky does not remind me of an addict. An addict takes for heroin takes whatever heroin he can get.
As for not being able to have empathy, that does not preclude her from deserving punishment. She obviously knows that people disagree with her actions and that she will be hunted by Samara if she continues to do them. She is putting her in the fire knowing that the fire could burn.

(note that I'm not saying all the above is absolutely true, or even that it's my own belief on what she is - I lean a bit more towards the romantic monster vampire type - only that there is lots of room for different interpretation, and the person lamenting her tragic end is no weirder than the person cheering, "Ding dong the wicked witch is dead," or vice versa)

It's hard to lament her because she has no redeeming qualities. A dictator may have had a troubled childhood, but I don't feel any sympathy for them. I would have more sympathy for someone who sees their victims as monsters rather than beautiful or creative.

Oh no, I agree definitely that she deserves punishment, that's not in question. I'm more just curious how she got to where she is, how her mind works, etc. My comment was actually in semi-agreement with you about her possibly not being an addict, and I was wondering aloud if perhaps she's more of a "connoisseur" who just doesn't seem to understand that the delectable filet mignon that's been sauteed in creative juices and comes with a side dish of exciting personality... actually might have a problem with being nibbled on (or rather, she gets that they'd have a problem with it, but she lacks to capacity to understand why that's important).

As for not lamenting her because she lacks redeeming qualities... ah, that might be the source of the disagreement on my end. I don't need a person to have redeeming qualities to lament them... simply being alive is enough for me to sympathize with a person. Of course, having said that, I sympathize MUCH MUCH MUCH more with an innocent good person than with a sociopathic killer, but the capacity to sympathize more for Nef doesn't preclude also feeling some sadness for Morinth.

[GuardianAngel470]

Terraneaux wrote...

Collider wrote...

I've never seen Samara getting pleasure from killing people. Morinth? Yes, I have.

Then you're not looking hard enough.  Samara became a Justicar (i.e. started killing people) so that she could feel like she hasn't completely failed as a mother (but note that it's not that she failed Morinth, it's that she's failed society by creating this murderer).  Samara kills people so that she doesn't have to feel so bad about herself, or perhaps more correctly it's following the code that makes her feel good about herself, and the people she kills as a consequence are an acceptable side-effect to her.  It probably doesn't hurt that Justicars are morally irreproachable in Asari society, so she never has to worry about people telling her she's a terrible person.  

That is pure projection.  I could easily project emotions on Samara saying that her motivations to become a Justicar were out of a need for revenge because Morinth's first kill was Samara's lover.  Will I? No, I won't claim that it is fact.  It is stated quite clearly that Samara feels great regret at the death of Morinth.  By your logic she should be feeling great happiness.  She doesn't take pleasure in killing, she doesn't seek it out.  What she does say is that she found her taste for combat at an early age.  That could be interpreted in a myriad of ways.  It could mean that she enjoys the adrenaline rush of combat, it could mean that she enjoys killing, or it could mean she's just good at it and enjoys doing something she is good at.  Any of these possibilities are likely, but none of them are confirmed.  Don't single one possibility out and say it is correct just because you think it is.  You need evidence to support your opinion on this forum.

And no where is is said that she feels better about herself after she has killed.  In fact, that theory is put into question when Samara laments the necessity of Morinth's death. "I am a broke vessel of Sorrow and Regret, but I am free." was basically what she said.  That tells me she feels terrible, not good.

[UsagiVindaloo]

Terraneaux wrote...

I'm not a big fan of the 'Ardat Yakshi don't have compassion ergo it's not their fault argument.' Morinth is obviously capable of understanding people just fine, she's great at understanding people's emotions and motivations.

True, but I gather Dexter is too. Being able to logically observe and even act out doesn't always mean the same as feeling it yourself, or really understanding it.

I think for me to make a final decision one way or another, I'd have to know more about this whole thing about serial killers and sociopaths having underdeveloped frontal cortexes... specifically, what I want to know is how many people have this underdeveloped brain but actually refrain from killing, and why. We might (?) be able to say, "All serial killers have underdeveloped brains and lack empathy," but does that mean that, "All people with underdeveloped brains who lack empathy are serial killers?" I'd assume not, but I'd like to know more. That would provide me a basis with which to examine Morinth... if we assume she is physically incapable of compassion, are other outcomes possible? How do her sisters work into this (ie did they just decide to remain isolated out of self preservation instead of compassion for their victims?)

One thing's for sure, I'm going to be busting my butt in my current EEEEVIL femShep playthrough to keep Morinth alive, because I want to see if some of these questions will get answered in ME3. :3

[Collider]

Don't count on it. It seems Morinth is the least likely to return, no question. Plus, she has more room to eat interesting people if she's off the Normandy.

[Nashiktal]

The actual decision surprised me in a good way. However I did not feel much attachment to either character. When I killed Samara in a second playthrough I did feel guilty though.

[UsagiVindaloo]

Collider wrote...

Don't count on it. It seems Morinth is the least likely to return, no question. Plus, she has more room to eat interesting people if she's off the Normandy.

Yeah, I figure as much. A shame... not so much because of her, but because it would be nice to feel like a big decision like that is going to majorly affect my ME3 playthrough (I joke that my current EVIL femShep is going out of her way to make ME3 an absolute disaster zone). 

[GuardianAngel470]

Terraneaux wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

You are oversimplifying serial killers.  Jack the Ripper was a serial killer.  Charles Witman wasn't.  One killed several women, mainly vain or sexually reprehensible women and the other killed 14 and wounded 32.  What was the difference?  One singled out his victims for the purpose of killing them for their perceived wrong doing, the other was mentally unstable.  If you want to get down to biology, serial killers in humanity don't have a fully developed frontal cortex.  That means that there is something physically wrong with them.  Mass murderers like Charles Witman are just crazy, affected by a traumatic experience or series of traumatic experiences and feel that violence is the only way to solve their mental anguish.  Morinth is a serial killer not because she has a malformed frontal cortex but because that is the closest analogy we as humans can project on a member of another species.

No, I'm not.  The term 'serial killer' means someone who has committed a series of murders.  Serial killers often have some sort of mental problems, but not always.  The term 'serial killer' describes behavior, not mental state.

So Charles Whitman is a serial killer? Is that what you are saying? He didn't kill his victims with one instantaneous shot, he killed them in a series.  By your literal interpretation of the phrase he is a serial killer.  The justice system of every county disagrees with you, else every spree killer would be a serial killer.  While it is true that that is the literal definition, that isn't how they distinguish between serial killers and mass murderers.  They look at the whether or not logic is apparent, ie eluding custody deliberately.  Many sources say that serial killers aren't unstable but mass murderers are.  Serial killers lack a fully developed frontal cortex, meaning they are prone to aggression and sadism.  Some would call that crazy, but I suffer from a mental disorder, and there are lines between crazy, unstable, and sadistic.  Sadism can be avoided by acknowledging what is socially acceptable, crazy and unstable need to be treated before they go away, if they ever go away.

[Terraneaux]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

 While it is true that that is the literal definition, that isn't how they distinguish between serial killers and mass murderers.  

Methinks you've been watching too many crime thrillers.  'Serial killer' isn't exactly a legal or psychological term.  

[RyrineaNara]

Terraneaux wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

 While it is true that that is the literal definition, that isn't how they distinguish between serial killers and mass murderers.  

Methinks you've been watching too many crime thrillers.  'Serial killer' isn't exactly a legal or psychological term.  

Actually, it is a psychological term for a lot of Psychopaths. I don't watch to many crime dramas.

[Terraneaux]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Terraneaux wrote...

Collider wrote...

I've never seen Samara getting pleasure from killing people. Morinth? Yes, I have.

Then you're not looking hard enough.  Samara became a Justicar (i.e. started killing people) so that she could feel like she hasn't completely failed as a mother (but note that it's not that she failed Morinth, it's that she's failed society by creating this murderer).  Samara kills people so that she doesn't have to feel so bad about herself, or perhaps more correctly it's following the code that makes her feel good about herself, and the people she kills as a consequence are an acceptable side-effect to her.  It probably doesn't hurt that Justicars are morally irreproachable in Asari society, so she never has to worry about people telling her she's a terrible person.  

That is pure projection.  I could easily project emotions on Samara saying that her motivations to become a Justicar were out of a need for revenge because Morinth's first kill was Samara's lover.  Will I? No, I won't claim that it is fact.  It is stated quite clearly that Samara feels great regret at the death of Morinth.  By your logic she should be feeling great happiness.  She doesn't take pleasure in killing, she doesn't seek it out.  What she does say is that she found her taste for combat at an early age.  That could be interpreted in a myriad of ways.  It could mean that she enjoys the adrenaline rush of combat, it could mean that she enjoys killing, or it could mean she's just good at it and enjoys doing something she is good at.  Any of these possibilities are likely, but none of them are confirmed.  Don't single one possibility out and say it is correct just because you think it is.  You need evidence to support your opinion on this forum.

And no where is is said that she feels better about herself after she has killed.  In fact, that theory is put into question when Samara laments the necessity of Morinth's death. "I am a broke vessel of Sorrow and Regret, but I am free." was basically what she said.  That tells me she feels terrible, not good.

You might want to go back and listen to her dialog about why she became a Justicar.  

In any case, her regret means nothing, and it's not her killing of Morinth that is the problem - it's her insistence on using lethal force, even when not necessary, against anyone who gets in the way of her mission.  Whether or not she regrets it later is not the issue; the fact that she thinks it's necessary brings her moral compass into question.

[Terraneaux]

RyrineaNara wrote...
Actually, it is a psychological term for a lot of Psychopaths. I don't watch to many crime dramas.

*facepalm* No, it's not.  Stop trying to learn everything from watching Dexter.  

[Collider]

I'm no expert, but serial killer to me is someone who kills in series, as in multiple instances(meaning some nasty kid who shoots up their school one day and then shoots himself isn't one), possibly with a pattern or planned, precise targets. They also tend to do it less for politics and money (which tends to be the realm of assassins) and more for satisfaction or as a result of mental illness or something.

[RyrineaNara]

Terraneaux wrote...

RyrineaNara wrote...
Actually, it is a psychological term for a lot of Psychopaths. I don't watch to many crime dramas.

*facepalm* No, it's not.  Stop trying to learn everything from watching Dexter.  

I don't even wacth dexter I read books

[Barquiel]

UsagiVindaloo wrote...

Collider wrote...

Don't count on it. It seems Morinth is the least likely to return, no question. Plus, she has more room to eat interesting people if she's off the Normandy.

Yeah, I figure as much. A shame... not so much because of her, but because it would be nice to feel like a big decision like that is going to majorly affect my ME3 playthrough (I joke that my current EVIL femShep is going out of her way to make ME3 an absolute disaster zone). 

I think Morinth will return as a squad mate if Samara is available in ME3.
- same character model
- same voice (mostly)
= not much work for BW

[GuardianAngel470]

Terraneaux wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

 While it is true that that is the literal definition, that isn't how they distinguish between serial killers and mass murderers.  

Methinks you've been watching too many crime thrillers.  'Serial killer' isn't exactly a legal or psychological term.  

You are wrong in that theory, I never watch crime thrillers.  My only experience of serial killers is from the investigation discovery channel, which is accounts of real life events.  I watched a program on Jack the Ripper and Charles whitman.  Both real people.