468 réponses à ce sujet

[Swerodent]

The enemy of my enemy is an enemy for another time...

[CmdrFenix83]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

Mallissin wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Mallissin wrote...

Do not mistake failure as incompetence. Doing the right thing and not succeeding is still a step in the right direction.

Oh, come on! A true hero always succeeds, and makes everyone happy in the process. Even if by a repetitive quickload!

*Hits ESC, opens the Load menu and selects a save before this conversation starts*

Heh, it is quite contentious isn't it? Oh no, I support Cerberus' goals, therefore I must be morally bankrupt!

"The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

Their goals aren't what is called into question.  Only their methods.

Your proverb and your statement don't match.

They match just fine.  Cerberus' goals are their intentions.  If you buy into religion, then the quote means that despite your 'noble goals' (human advancement and defeat of Reapers), using impure methods corrupt the soul and despite your noble goals, you still end up corrupting your soul and end up in Hell.

[Big I]

Cerberus are not good. Why? The ends do not justify the means.

[Zulu_DFA]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

"The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

Their goals aren't what is called into question.  Only their methods.

Your proverb and your statement don't match.

They match just fine.  Cerberus' goals are their intentions.  If you buy into religion, then the quote means that despite your 'noble goals' (human advancement and defeat of Reapers), using impure methods corrupt the soul and despite your noble goals, you still end up corrupting your soul and end up in Hell.

OK, I withdraw my objection. I see now how they match. I am not into religion and I've always read that proverb like: "Most people actually don't know what's acually good for them, and when seeking what they think is good, they actually seek their own destruction." But your interpretation makes sense too, and I'll take your word that it's correct. But then, I must notice, that the proverb itself is misguiding, as it says nothing about "methods corrupting the soul", but says something about the "good intentions", as if the "bad intentions" couldn't pave the road to hell equally well.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 30 mars 2010 - 08:59 .

[Massadonious1]

I like cake, but the cake is a lie. That means Cerberus is a lie.

[Mcjon01]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

"The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

Their goals aren't what is called into question.  Only their methods.

Your proverb and your statement don't match.

They match just fine.  Cerberus' goals are their intentions.  If you buy into religion, then the quote means that despite your 'noble goals' (human advancement and defeat of Reapers), using impure methods corrupt the soul and despite your noble goals, you still end up corrupting your soul and end up in Hell.

OK, I withdraw my objection. I see now how they match. I am not into religion and I've always read that proverb like: "Most people actually don't know what's acually good for them, and when seeking what they think is good, they actually seek their own destruction." But your interpretation makes sense too, and I'll take your word that it's correct. But then, I must notice, that the proverb itself is misguiding, as it says nothing about "methods corrupting the soul", but says something about the "good intentions", as if the "bad intentions" couldn't pave the road to hell equally well.

The secret is that every road leads to hell.  If you want to upgrade to the "chance at salvation" plan, that's an extra hundred dollars a month.

[Zulu_DFA]

Mcjon01 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

"The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

Their goals aren't what is called into question.  Only their methods.

Your proverb and your statement don't match.

They match just fine.  Cerberus' goals are their intentions.  If you buy into religion, then the quote means that despite your 'noble goals' (human advancement and defeat of Reapers), using impure methods corrupt the soul and despite your noble goals, you still end up corrupting your soul and end up in Hell.

OK, I withdraw my objection. I see now how they match. I am not into religion and I've always read that proverb like: "Most people actually don't know what's acually good for them, and when seeking what they think is good, they actually seek their own destruction." But your interpretation makes sense too, and I'll take your word that it's correct. But then, I must notice, that the proverb itself is misguiding, as it says nothing about "methods corrupting the soul", but says something about the "good intentions", as if the "bad intentions" couldn't pave the road to hell equally well.

The secret is that every road leads to hell.  If you want to upgrade to the "chance at salvation" plan, that's an extra hundred dollars a month.

Sounds like a hoax to me.

Or, extortion racket.

[yummysoap]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Wildecker wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

The Reapers are the end of all life as we know it. They are Evil.

Cerberus opposes the Reapers. Cerberus is Good.

(To Shepard's knowledge, nobody else is doing anything about the Reapers, which means Cerberus is the best.)

End of story (at least until the Reapers are history).

Way back in 1950:

Communism is the end of the American Way of Life. It is Evil.

The Mafia opposes Communism. The Mafia is good.

The ****s opposed Communism (among other things). They must have been good.

Imperial Japan opposed Communism. They should have been good.


Way back in 1980:

Islamic Revolution in Iran cost us an ally and embarassed us in public. Islamic Revolution is Evil.

Saddam Hussein goes to war against Iran. Saddam is good!


Way back in 2000:

Heroin is Evil.

Taliban burn opium fields. Taliban are Good!

Sometimes it's not only what they do, but also why they do it. If the Reapers ever offered Cerberus a deal - stand aside and we'll leave a few chosen human worlds alone, so your race will be left after all the others have been processed - the only thing that would keep Cerberus in the fight would be the Man's distrust in the honesty of aliens.

Look what we got here...

250 comments down the line and the first that's worth of the topic. Too late, man, too late.

I suppose that illegitimizes everything he said, then? Because he's a few pages late?

I'd have pointed out your faulty logic ages ago if I wasn't banned for projecting limitless amounts of (rule-breaking) verbal criticisms at people who try to dismiss legitimate arguments out of a pure sense of pride. Being the jolly sailor that I am, I shall hereby be lovely and rational:

Cerberus has been described by the devs as being a "necessary evil" meaning someone who, despite their debauched morality, can further an individual or nation's goals. Did you know that Saddam Hussein's rise to power was originally supported by America against the communist-affiliated president of Iraq Abd al-Karim Qasim because they considered him the lesser evil of the two, despite the fact that the US was well aware he was on the path to a potential dictatorship?

Hell, you could even say Saddam and his associates were actively working for the States to overthrow the ever-growing Iraqi Communist Party (which I think melds nicely with your theory that Cerberus is working for the Alliance), considering that the US funded the staged coup that eventually lead to the overthrowing of Qasim and Qasim's communist followers. I think we can both agree from this that just because the States supported Hussein at that point in time does not in any way absolve him of his sins (both during the coup and after).

By the same token (and I feel exceptionally nerdy comparing the very real uprising of Saddam's reign to the fictional rule of the Illusive Man's establishment, but that's what these forums were made for - fans to ridiculously blow things out of proportion) Cerberus is still an abhorrent enterprise guilty of crimes against man (and alien), regardless of whether it works for the Alliance (I don't personally believe it does, but I can agree that it's a possibility).

So, while Cerberus is good for Shepard in that they offer him support - they are by no stretch of the imagination good in a moral or legal sense. The only redeeming feature they possess is the acknowledgement of the Reaper threat, but that doesn't instantly mean they aren't guilty of the twist murders they committed.

Of course, my points are moot because this discussion apparently ended in your thread title.

Modifié par yummysoap, 30 mars 2010 - 09:33 .

[Zulu_DFA]

yummysoap wrote...
Being the jolly sailor that I am...

Welcome aboard, Jolly Sailor!

You're are a little late too, but the wind is favorable and warm, and the sea is smooth, the sun shines brightly, and maybe I will even read your wall of text.

[Arijharn]

Maybe I'm bit of the self martyr then, but I guess I would be happy to consign myself to hell if it meant I could ensure my species exist. Whether it does or not is rather irrelevant I would wager, because at the end of the day I could feel as if I had done everything I could.



Then again, that's probably similiar to logical thought processes that religious fanatics go through, but they think they'll go to heaven instead.

[yummysoap]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

yummysoap wrote...
Being the jolly sailor that I am...

Welcome aboard, Jolly Sailor!

You're are a little late too, but the wind is favorable and warm, and the sea is smooth, the sun shines brightly, and maybe I will even read your wall of text.

You are too kind <3

[Zulu_DFA]

@ yummysoap

I see you see that this discussion ended in my thread title, so I'll take on you Iraqi example.
As I am not an Iraqi, I don't give a sh*t about whether there is a dictatorship imposed by Saddam, or a chaos, imposed by the Americans.

However, if I were a poor enough bastard to be an average Iraqi, I would most probably have hated Yankee guts for destroying my country and stealing my oil, and putting me on mercy of their proxy thugs and religeous fanatics gangs and denying me anything I used to have under Saddam like quality healthcare and decent education, and worshipped Saddam like a goddamn hero and a bloody icon, and given no sh*t to what had happened to a bunch of separatists who defied the UN principle of territorial integrity of their member states.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 30 mars 2010 - 09:37 .

[ExtremeOne]

They are good but Bioware should have had a option in the game for Shepard to join up with Cerberus fully

[Zulu_DFA]

ExtremeOne wrote...

They are good but Bioware should have had a option in the game for Shepard to join up with Cerberus fully

Yes, those petty squabbling attempts on TIM both renegade and paragon in the final dialogue were lame.

[yummysoap]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

@ yummysoap

I see you see that this discussion ended in my thread title, so I'll take on you Iraqi example.
As I am not an Iraqi, I don't give a sh*t about whether there is a dictatorship imposed by Saddam, or a chaos, imposed by the Americans.

However, if I were a poor enough bastard to be an average Iraqi, I would most probably have hated Yankee guts for destroying my country and stealing my oil, and putting me on mercy of their proxy thugs and religeous fanatics gangs and denying me anything I used to have under Saddam like quality healthcare and decent education, and worshipped Saddam like a goddamn hero and a bloody icon, and given no sh*t to what had happened to a bunch of separatists who defied the UN principle of territorial integrity of their member states.

Well... Gee. To be honest I was kind of counting on you being a trumpet-saluting, patriotic, flag-toting American when I cited that example. Irrelevant, though, there are thousands more - and I wasn't really trying to start an argument as to whether Saddam's crimes are justified or not.

What you are saying, though, is that you don't care that Saddam murdered hundreds and tortured women and children because in your (hypothetical) situation, you were off safe in Healthcare and Education land. I can't... really... argue against that factually, other than to criticise you of lacking any principles whatsoever. Analogy time:

If a mouse chooses not to care about the snake that's picking off his brothers one by one based on the fact that because the mouse didn't specifically target him then he's in for a mighty fine surprise when one day he wakes up being digested by snake stomach acid. The snake may have been really nice, as well. He may have fed the mouse and made him nice and chubby before swallowing him whole. The mouse didn't think about that, though.

But we are both digressing, the argument is whether Cerberus' help against the Reaper absolves them of their extreme crimes and the answer is, well, based on personal opinion, as always. I personally think that Cerberus was very useful, but I would never continue to work to them after they served their purpose. My issue is more with your arrogance and absolute insistence that you are correct, so much as to say "end of story" before anyone even had the chance to reply to your thread.

Modifié par yummysoap, 30 mars 2010 - 10:11 .

[Wildecker]

From 3:50 to about 7:30 ...

[Keltoris]

@OP, I apologise if this has been done already, but I'm not wading through what is probably an 11 page flame war. Now then, I fixed your argument:



The Reapers are the end of all life as we know it. They are Chaotic Evil.



Cerberus opposes the Reapers. Cerberus is Lawful Evil.



There's shades of grey here man. An example: the Mafia are Lawful Evil; they like a stable government they can sink a few hooks into. Not downright anarchy which is downright bad for business. <Terrorists> are Chaotic Evil, they're just blowing stuff up for what they view as a fair cause.

[westiex9]

They served their purpose, but that doesn't mean i wasn't transmitting sensitive data and intel to the alliance the entire time, Cerberus are a terrorist organisation and i only worked with them because no one else could help at the time. Once the collecter threat was ended i didn't need em anymore.



Seeya cerberus! thanks for the ship the crew and the new lease on life!

ill be sure to let anderson know you said hi when he makes me an admiral

oh and TIM don't call us we won't be calling you!

[Zulu_DFA]

yummysoap wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

@ yummysoap

I see you see that this discussion ended in my thread title, so I'll take on you Iraqi example.
As I am not an Iraqi, I don't give a sh*t about whether there is a dictatorship imposed by Saddam, or a chaos, imposed by the Americans.

However, if I were a poor enough bastard to be an average Iraqi, I would most probably have hated Yankee guts for destroying my country and stealing my oil, and putting me on mercy of their proxy thugs and religeous fanatics gangs and denying me anything I used to have under Saddam like quality healthcare and decent education, and worshipped Saddam like a goddamn hero and a bloody icon, and given no sh*t to what had happened to a bunch of separatists who defied the UN principle of territorial integrity of their member states.

Well... Gee. To be honest I was kind of counting on you being a trumpet-saluting, patriotic, flag-toting American when I cited that example. Irrelevant, though, there are thousands more - and I wasn't really trying to start an argument as to whether Saddam's crimes are justified or not.

What you are saying, though, is that you don't care that Saddam murdered hundreds and tortured women and children because in your (hypothetical) situation, you were off safe in Healthcare and Education land. I can't... really... argue against that factually, other than to criticise you of lacking any principles whatsoever. Analogy time:

If a mouse chooses not to care about the snake that's picking off his brothers one by one based on the fact that because the mouse didn't specifically target him then he's in for a mighty fine surprise when one day he wakes up being digested by snake stomach acid. The snake may have been really nice, as well. He may have fed the mouse and made him nice and chubby before swallowing him whole. The mouse didn't think about that, though.

But we are both digressing, the argument is whether Cerberus' help against the Reaper absolves them of their extreme crimes and the answer is, well, based on personal opinion, as always. I personally think that Cerberus was very useful, but I would never continue to work to them after they served their purpose. My issue is more with your arrogance and absolute insistence that you are correct, so much as to say "end of story" before anyone even had the chance to reply to your thread.

Your mouse analogy fails, becase Saddam's victims were moslty ethnical minorities that denied being Iraqis in the first place. They fell quite well under common definition of the "public enemy", because they were, in fact, the enemies of the Iraqi public, as it was under Saddam. Besides, it's the Orient, man! They never had a slightest idea of what is "western democracy", and they don't want it. Moreover, they couldn't have it even if they knew and truly wanted it. But they could have capitalism, and they have it, right now.

As to my arrogance and insistance, I'll admit I'm much amuzed that people are buying this little "end of story" special effect. It even misled them about my true intention long enough so that the first really sound reply occured at page 11 of the thread, and by that time I've already lost interest in discussing the topic.

[Arijharn]

Keltoris wrote...

@OP, I apologise if this has been done already, but I'm not wading through what is probably an 11 page flame war. Now then, I fixed your argument:

The Reapers are the end of all life as we know it. They are Chaotic Evil.

Cerberus opposes the Reapers. Cerberus is Lawful Evil.

There's shades of grey here man. An example: the Mafia are Lawful Evil; they like a stable government they can sink a few hooks into. Not downright anarchy which is downright bad for business. are Chaotic Evil, they're just blowing stuff up for what they view as a fair cause.

It's not that simple as arbritrarily assigning dnd alignment rules to real life. I doubt Terrorists, for example, paint themselves as Chaotic Evil. They are, after-all... on a holy crusade, which implies sacrificing self interest for their gods cause.

There are, however, definitely shades of grey.

[Zulu_DFA]

Keltoris wrote...

@OP, I apologise if this has been done already, but I'm not wading through what is probably an 11 page flame war. Now then, I fixed your argument:

The Reapers are the end of all life as we know it. They are Chaotic Evil.

Cerberus opposes the Reapers. Cerberus is Lawful Evil.

There's shades of grey here man. An example: the Mafia are Lawful Evil; they like a stable government they can sink a few hooks into. Not downright anarchy which is downright bad for business. are Chaotic Evil, they're just blowing stuff up for what they view as a fair cause.

From this we can have a conjecture that Cerberus is anything but "terrorist".
They don't just blow the stuff up, and their actions are not even aimed at the public or any particular power house. Even the mission to the Migrant Fleet (failed by Grayson's defection) was not terrorist in nature, more like infiltration mission with objectives of recovering valuable assets and recon by force. All dead quarians are just collaterals, not targets.

But this lawful/chaotic dichotomy deals with the methods, and the good/evil dichotomy deals with the goals, so I am sorry, but Cerberus comes out Lawful Good, just because there's no better goal than to stop the Reapers. My initial post stands.

[Wildecker]

Cerberus had some pretty bad things going until a few years ago. No use in denying that. Miranda tries to justify the Husk and the Thorian Creeper experiments that just went out of control, and she seems quite shaken if you bring her to the facility Jack was raised in.



I have absolutely no problem with an organisation that wants to protect mankind from harm. But I would expect it to have a closer look at its projects than Cerberus. I might have handed the base over if The Man had used some other keywords than just "This victory will ensure human dominance against the Reapers and beyond!" I want mankind to survive and stand tall and proud of its achievements all right. Yet I don't need to see all others on their knees and in chains. I don't perceive the future as a zero-sum game where you can only gain something if you take it from someone else.

[Keltoris]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

From this we can have a conjecture that Cerberus is anything but "terrorist".
They don't just blow the stuff up, and their actions are not even aimed at the public or any particular power house. Even the mission to the Migrant Fleet (failed by Grayson's defection) was not terrorist in nature, more like infiltration mission with objectives of recovering valuable assets and recon by force. All dead quarians are just collaterals, not targets.

The question is, when do collaterals become unacceptable?

Zulu_DFA wrote...

But this lawful/chaotic dichotomy deals with the methods, and the good/evil dichotomy deals with the goals, so I am sorry, but Cerberus comes out Lawful Good, just because there's no better goal than to stop the Reapers. My initial post stands.

Imo their primary goal is not stopping the Reapers. It's their current goal. The primary goal is what, at the end of the day they hope to achieve. Which is human superiority. Stopping the Reapers is an addendum to this as it's kind of hard to assure human superiority if 1) all humans are dead and 2) there's nothing left alive to be superior to.

The Reapers are a severe threat, but once they're dealt with, Cerberus will go back to normal.

[Zulu_DFA]

@ Wildecked

I see you too are getting swepped a little away from the point of my initial post... That in the situation the Reapers are putting us in the only positive morality is relativistic-survavalist-utilitarian version of it, which undeniably makes Cerberus good. Under the circumstances. But when (and not until then) the circumstanses change, so will the moral standing of the acting bodies, including, and most importantly those of Shepard and TIM.


@ Keltoris

I'll throw in a seemingly irrelevant, but at the same time totally relevant (because everything may be reduced to it) idea: We humans are all apes. And live by instincts. And our basic instinct manifests itself as hunger, sexual desire, and craving for domination, and it is all one and the same "survival instinct". And TIM is a damn good silverback, because his survival instinct is very strong and this is clearly exhibited by its manifestation in the form of craving for domination of his entire social group over other social groups. That's why TIM is the best to be entrusted with our survival against the Reapers, but surely he'll "go back to normal" when the dust settles.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 30 mars 2010 - 11:38 .