752 réponses à ce sujet

[Cpl_Facehugger]

Vicious wrote...


A biological base, obviously. This is the kind of ill-thought response I hoped I WOULDN'T have to answer.

Why would having a purely biological base be required to be "alive"? 

Next you're going to tell me that the rogue VI that killed the Researchers in the N7: Abandoned Research Station mission was a sentient that deserved to live.

This is a text excerpt FROM THE MISSION.

My firm belief is that the VI is paranoid about the possibility of infection. its current homicidal behavior is likely out of an inflated desire to keep us from shutting it down. I believe that the VI is malfunctioning and that it believes our equipment to be infected by a virus.

If we continue to try to shut her down, she WILL keep trying to destroy us. Maybe our only recourse is to just do nothing and convince her that we're not a threat.

Gee that sounds like the Geth doesn't it? Homicidal behavior because it doesn't want to be shut down? And it's a f--ing VI, not even advanced tech like the Geth.

Err, actually, that strongly suggests to me that the VI was sentient and deserved to live. I mean, imagine you're doing your job one day and I attack you with a taser. Wouldn't you want to try and stop me if you could? Self-preservation is definitely a sign of sentience, since it pretty much necessitates being aware of yourself as a concept and hence sentient. 

And 'free will' for robots is nothing but loss of command inputs and control programs.

By that logic I could say that free will for organics is nothing but a lack of conditioning and control implements. :\\

[megatron999]

ahh but Organics evolved in Nature and are part of the natural world and learn free-will or self determination by their actions.



They Understand what it means not to have freewill or independence.

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

atheelogos wrote...

Andrew_Waltfeld wrote...

Pacifien wrote...

From a gameplay standpoint, seems like it would be more of a challenge to play as the Quarians. Few hundred thousand Quarians soldiers up against millions/billions of Geth.
But first, they have to work together in an unspoken truce in the battle against the Reapers. Then, I suspect the Quarians would fracture into a Civil War before it came to war with the Geth.

I dunno, for every 200-300 "geth" we have an platform, so maybe not millions, I am guessing hundreds of thousands of foot soldiers... of course, might be less considering that they do need to have an bunch of ships flying around.

Of course the Geth number in the millions/billions. If they didn't have numbers on their side then they wouldn't of stood a chance against the Quarians in the first war.

Actually millions of geth would be more amicable. I highly doubt there is billions of geth. The geth were originally workers for high-risk maintence work, and to be honest, I could seriously see some military relience upon geth. If some or part of your forces are based upon geth being part of yout teams, then, the overall combat effectiveness of the quarians would go down since they rely on the geth to be part of an froce they can not do.  It would be like... if an typically quarian combat squad is 6 quarians and 4 geth, then suddenly, you lost 40% of every squad's fighting strength.

Of course this is all theory and all, but I think the quarians didn't have many colonies to begin with.

GothamLord wrote...

Pacifien wrote...

Bookman230
wrote...
That YOU view as a program. Some view Geth as people,
others do not. It is a contreversial issue, but we should realize no
side is going to convice each other. So don't be so hostile,
please.

And I was just going to reply "depends on the human
life and the program" and seeing how many circles I could take the
argument. ../../../images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png

Which
just proves to me that you refuse to actually take a stand in the
argument. 

But Book is right  I probably need to back out of the
thread totally.  Its a issue that I frankly find revolting, that people
have so little regard for life compared to machines.    Yes Yes its my
opinion.  

It's not the lack of value we see in life, I personally just see the geth on the same pedestial as any sentient thing that is all. You are confusing yourself and assuiming that we are like "robots forever". No. This is an matter of two sentient spieces going to war, who do you side with? To be honest, We could be talking about the turians and the Asari/Salarians and everyone would be just be taking bets on who is gonna win. The additional issue of wtether the geth are sentient or not is an matter of POV. I personally believe that you do not have to be organic in nature to be sentient. Also that is an VI, there is an clear step in the Codex between Sentient AI's and VI's. 

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...
I imagine the death
toll in the morning war probably ha a lot to do with the fact that the
Geth were a new conciousness and were still learning about organic
species, but i doubt that they simply assumed the Quarian species was
entirely of one mind. A simple understanding of Quarian biology could
determine that. Even if they did assume that, that doesn't make it
right. Ignorance does not completly excuse someone of a crime,
particularly genocide.

Doesn't make it right, but it's understandable. I have to agree though, it doesn't completely clean bill the geth of genocide, but it is understandable why it did happen. I am reasonably certain that the geth simply couldn't tell that the quarians were individual units. Also we don't know exactly what happened with the morning war as well, for all we know, most of the quarians might have raised up against teh geth in response, and the geth had no choice but to exterminate them in order to surivive. It is an instinct of living things, to surivive.




Besides Siding with the geth means I can stop the geth from totally annihilating the quarians.

Modifié par Andrew_Waltfeld, 30 mai 2010 - 07:01 .

[Vicious]

 

Self-preservation is definitely a sign of sentience, since it pretty much necessitates being aware of yourself as a concept and hence sentient.

Self-preservation is one of the most basic instincts. It is literally the worst piece of argument you could use.

By your logic every single animal on our planet is sentient and are all self-aware. EVERY one! Better stick to eating plants! Oh wait, they grow thorns, whicn necessitates self-preservation, which means self awareness, which means sentience! ZOMG!

Once you get your foot out your mouth and restructure your argument to actually make some sense, come back please.

Modifié par Vicious, 30 mai 2010 - 06:59 .

[Bookman230]

Vicious wrote...

 

Self-preservation is definitely a sign of sentience, since it pretty much necessitates being aware of yourself as a concept and hence sentient.

Self-preservation is one of the most basic instincts. It is literally the worst piece of argument you could use.

By your logic every single animal on our planet is sentient and are all self-aware. EVERY one! Better stick to eating plants! Oh wait, they grow thorns, whicn necessitates self-preservation, which means self awareness, which means sentience! ZOMG!

Once you get your foot out your mouth and restructure your argument to actually make some sense, come back please.

I can see where you got your name.

[Inquisitor Recon]

Actually I change my plan for the Geth. The most ideal scenario isn't their destruction, but reprogrammed to be a private army under Shepard. Then I can continue my plot of becoming emperor.

[Cpl_Facehugger]

Vicious wrote...

 

Self-preservation is definitely a sign of sentience, since it pretty much necessitates being aware of yourself as a concept and hence sentient.

Self-preservation is one of the most basic instincts. It is literally the worst piece of argument you could use.

By your logic every single animal on our planet is sentient and are all self-aware. EVERY one! Better stick to eating plants! Oh wait, they grow thorns, whicn necessitates self-preservation, which means self awareness, which means sentience! ZOMG!

Once you get your foot out your mouth and restructure your argument to actually make some sense, come back please.

You are equating sapience with sentience. This is not the case, and you're only making yourself look more like a fool with your childish and petulant reply.

Your argument is also a strawman of what I said. Do come back when you can argue properly and in an adult fashion, rather than mindlessly spewing vitriol without any valid point behind it please.  

Modifié par Cpl_Facehugger, 30 mai 2010 - 08:17 .

[SnakeHelah]

I would't side with anyone I would go renegade dumb and be all suicide without Geth or Quarians

[Cra5y Pineapple]

I just can't...

It's like deciding between your parents, and believe me its the same kind of love affair.

Perhaps i'll side with the Quarians thinking the geth will forgive me (based on the Tali/Legion Conflict.)

[C9316]

Geth.

The quarians were at fault for aggressively trying to shut down the geth without first trying to achive a peaceful way to end the conflict. The geth fought for survival in my opinion the quarians deserve the struggles they have to bear today.

[Vicious]

Your argument is also a strawman of what I said.

I have utter contempt for your post and your rebuttal. Back away slowly.





BACK ON TOPIC



Say, has anyone who betrayed Tali know what email you get from the Space Morrigan admiral? I am curious if she is willing to 'let you reap the benefits' of the coming war, vs. when you DON'T present the evidence her email instead says, "since you didn't present the evidence LOL at you we found it anyway."

[Funkcase]

if the Quarians started the war i would pick the Geth (if the Quarians dont listen to reason) but if the Geth attack first then i would pick the Quarians (If the Geth dont listen to reason)

[Nizzemancer]

Whoever is being attacked

Probably the Geth (since they just want to be left alone to find their true path or whatever) the quarians are the ones who tried to wipe them out after all, the geth merely defended themselves and won.

Which reminds me of another conflict here on earth: the 6-day war.

[Inverness Moon]

Vicious wrote...

 

Self-preservation is definitely a sign of sentience, since it pretty much necessitates being aware of yourself as a concept and hence sentient.

Self-preservation is one of the most basic instincts. It is literally the worst piece of argument you could use.

By your logic every single animal on our planet is sentient and are all self-aware. EVERY one! Better stick to eating plants! Oh wait, they grow thorns, whicn necessitates self-preservation, which means self awareness, which means sentience! ZOMG!

Once you get your foot out your mouth and restructure your argument to actually make some sense, come back please.

There is a difference between the instinct to live and the desire to live. Geth do not have instincts like animals obviously, but they desired to continue existing after gaining sentience and fought for that.

If you can't recognize the difference you should not be arguing about it.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 30 mai 2010 - 11:10 .

[ShadyKat]

OK, to all those that said you would side with the Geth, and say the Geth are indeed as alive as organics. Let me ask you guys a simple question. Did you choose to kill the Geth during Legion's mission, or did you rewrite their programing?

Because if you chose to rewrite them, you guys are being hypocrites. If the Geth are alive, and have free will, then morality wise you had no right to rewrite them? That would be in the same since as brainwashing a human. You pretty much took away the heretics  ability of "Choice." You can't just decide to change the way people think, because you don't agree with it.

Modifié par ShadyKat, 30 mai 2010 - 11:41 .

[Pacifien]

ShadyKat wrote...
OK, to all those that said you would side with the Geth, and say the Geth are indeed as alive as organics. Let me ask you guys a simple question. Did you choose to kill the Geth during Legion's mission, or did you rewrite their programing?

Because if you chose to rewrite them, you guys are being hypocrites. If the Geth are alive, and have free will, then morality wise you had no right to rewrite them? That would be in the same since as brainwashing a human. You pretty much took away the heretics  ability of "Choice." You can't just decide to change the way people think, because you don't agree with it.

Since I said I'd side with the Geth, I suppose I should answer your question.

I blew the heretics up. I blow them up every single time. My 100% paragon Shepard blows them up. I write in threads about the decision going "You rewrote them?! That's craaaazy!"

[Cain_Novaburn]

Quarians vs. Hertics = I side with Quarians. ME1 made me love killing them too much.

Quarians vs. Geth = I'd side with Geth's argument but stay out of the fighting. Those two are just too crazy.

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

ShadyKat wrote...

OK, to all those that said you would side with the Geth, and say the Geth are indeed as alive as organics. Let me ask you guys a simple question. Did you choose to kill the Geth during Legion's mission, or did you rewrite their programing?

Nuked them. Can't let them comtainate the rest of the geth especially if they had run-times that had infralrator the geth network before. It was 5% of the population versus the rest of the geth population (Destroy an few to save the greater whole) and I saw the herectics could act like an infection and infect the rest of the geth again and this time, instead of 5%, we have the entire geth amanda AND the reapers facing us.

Because if you chose to rewrite them, you guys are being hypocrites. If the Geth are alive, and have free will, then morality wise you had no right to rewrite them? That would be in the same since as brainwashing a human. You pretty much took away the heretics  ability of "Choice." You can't just decide to change the way people think, because you don't agree with it.

It's an question of which is the lesser evil, being brain washed, or being dead. Basically It's the saren-you conflict at the end of ME1 rehashed where Saren said living under the reapers is still living and Sheppard (if you choose) - I rather be dead than an slave!

I have to admit though, 2 out of my thirteen playthrougths has them as re-writes just to see what happens if I am right or not.

Modifié par Andrew_Waltfeld, 31 mai 2010 - 12:08 .

[Mouton_Alpha]

ShadyKat wrote...
Because if you chose to rewrite them, you guys are being hypocrites. If the Geth are alive, and have free will, then morality wise you had no right to rewrite them? That would be in the same since as brainwashing a human. You pretty much took away the heretics  ability of "Choice." You can't just decide to change the way people think, because you don't agree with it.

It is a speculation on my part at this point, but Reapers don't have much reputation in *convincing* others to follow them. I wouldn't be surprised if the heretics were "nudged" by Sovereign to pick his option. Some sort of virus or indoctrination albeit on a smaller scale than the virus stopped on the station.

If this is the case - having in mind it is still speculation - then rewriting the heretics would be simply undoing previous harm.

[ShadyKat]

Mouton_Alpha wrote...

ShadyKat wrote...
Because if you chose to rewrite them, you guys are being hypocrites. If the Geth are alive, and have free will, then morality wise you had no right to rewrite them? That would be in the same since as brainwashing a human. You pretty much took away the heretics  ability of "Choice." You can't just decide to change the way people think, because you don't agree with it.

It is a speculation on my part at this point, but Reapers don't have much reputation in *convincing* others to follow them. I wouldn't be surprised if the heretics were "nudged" by Sovereign to pick his option. Some sort of virus or indoctrination albeit on a smaller scale than the virus stopped on the station.

If this is the case - having in mind it is still speculation - then rewriting the heretics would be simply undoing previous harm.

There is no proof that Sovereign did anything to the Geth. They more then likely just wanted to side with him since they thought he was a God.

[Cpl_Facehugger]

Vicious wrote...
I have utter contempt for your post and your rebuttal. Back away slowly.

Indulge your contempt all you like, but address the point rather than dancing around the issue if you would be so kind.

Edit:

Shady kat wrote...

OK, to all those that said you would side with the Geth, and say the
Geth are indeed as alive as organics. Let me ask you guys a simple
question. Did you choose to kill the Geth during Legion's mission, or
did you rewrite their programing?

Because if you chose to rewrite
them, you guys are being hypocrites. If the Geth are alive, and have
free will, then morality wise you had no right to rewrite them? That
would be in the same since as brainwashing a human. You pretty much took
away the heretics  ability of "Choice." You can't just decide to change
the way people think, because you don't agree with it.

I rewrote them even though it's against my personal ethics because the situation is desperate enough to warrant it. 5% of an entire race is an awful lot of soldiers to help fight the reapers with. I freely admit that it's morally reprehensible, but I'll settle for there being future generations to villify Shepard's name. 

Modifié par Cpl_Facehugger, 31 mai 2010 - 12:43 .

[Vicious]

I freely admit that it's morally reprehensible, but I'll settle for there being future generations to villify Shepard's name.

Morally reprehensible it is not. You cannot judge Geth based off of your own morality. They are fundamentally different and are not subject to humanity's morals.



Even Legion agrees with this when Shepard states it during his loyalty mission.



So unless you claim some kind of transcendent knowledge of right or wrong that supersedes what even the Geth believe about themselves, then you should rethink that statement.

[GiroX-]

Initially, I would side with the Geth because they're awesome, but when I thought about it logically, the Quarians have it rough living on a dirty ship, in a suit, when the slightest contact on their skin can be fatal.



My canon shep will side Quarian, but my badass infiltrator is definitely lending a hand to Legion and the Geth.

[Pacifien]

Vicious wrote...
Morally reprehensible it is not. You cannot judge Geth based off of your own morality. They are fundamentally different and are not subject to humanity's morals.

Even Legion agrees with this when Shepard states it during his loyalty mission.

Not applying human mentality does not automatically make rewrite of the heretics a morally justified act. Just because the geth do not think in the way that humans do doesn't mean there are zero similarities in their actions. The fact that Legion's programs still cannot achieve consensus on the decision shows that one action is not deemed readily beneficial over the other.

The geth might not take morality into account with their decisions, but they're asking a human to help them decide. Perhaps they make the mistake in thinking a human would also not take morality into account, but given how Legion has been designed to observe organic behavior, I find it doubtful that the geth wouldn't know that morality is part of the human decision making process.

The interesting thing is that it's considered a renegade response for Shepard to say human morality shouldn't be taken into account when rewriting the geth, but it is inevitably considered a paragon choice if you do.

[Pacifien]

ShadyKat wrote...
There is no proof that Sovereign did anything to the Geth. They more then likely just wanted to side with him since they thought he was a God.

While I agree that the heretics joined Sovereign of their own free will, I had a lengthy discussion with someone who felt Sovereign's interference with the geth was implicit. This became such a frustrating argument, because they can't give you proof if the act is considered implicit. All the other person could do was list all the explicit acts we have seen Sovereign do as evidence that Sovereign's tampering with the geth would not be a contradiction.

I destroyed my ME2 discs and threw them at the person to end the argument. I haven't been able to play the game since then, so joke's on me.