135 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

He probably didn't know it, but he still funded it despite his lack of information. That's the biggest reason he's at fault. 

As for how I know they weren't a part of it, I don't. But I conjecture that they weren't because of how I know cells operate. They're usually self contained, not spread across the galaxy. Each location would be a cell, at least from my understanding.

Besides, those are two different functions, it seems logical to separate them to maintain secrecy. But is of course, just an assumption as we don't have hard intel on it one way or the other.

I can't place him at fault until I know for sure he was fully aware of what was going on. Ignorance to me isn't a crime. True and he only wants a few open at a time and they always convientently go "rogue" when he's talking to Shep. The man really is sly if he knows about everything.

Yeah I simply assume they were working for the same group. I doubt all operatives have to be in the same area to count as a cell. Plus Miranda mangaged to sneak that message past TIM's nose so maybe he's the type to not bother looking to deeply if he doesn't feel that its a valid concern.

And even with all this I still fail to see why Miranda should aplogize to Jack.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 28 octobre 2010 - 08:56 .

[GuardianAngel470]

Ryzaki wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

He probably didn't know it, but he still funded it despite his lack of information. That's the biggest reason he's at fault. 

As for how I know they weren't a part of it, I don't. But I conjecture that they weren't because of how I know cells operate. They're usually self contained, not spread across the galaxy. Each location would be a cell, at least from my understanding.

Besides, those are two different functions, it seems logical to separate them to maintain secrecy. But is of course, just an assumption as we don't have hard intel on it one way or the other.

I can't place him at fault until I know for sure he was fully aware of what was going on. Ignorance to me isn't a crime. True and he only wants a few open at a time and they always convientently go "rogue" when he's talking to Shep. The man really is sly if he knows about everything.

Yeah I simply assume they were working for the same group. I doubt all operatives have to be in the same area to count as a cell. Plus Miranda mangaged to sneak that message past TIM's nose so maybe he's the type to not bother looking to deeply if he doesn't feel that its a valid concern.

And even with all this I still fail to see why Miranda should aplogize to Jack.

He's at fault because he enabled the experiments. Had he cut funding when he became suspicious, then he would be less at fault.  In this case it would be like ignoring the fact that a person doesn't pass the security screens necessary to purchase a concealable firearm, thus breaking the law, and selling him/her several over the course of a year while ignoring reports of streetside murders done with weapons that you have been selling.

No it isn't the same level of guilt, but it certainly isn't negligible. 

[achwas]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

You've never dealt with problems as a child have you? Legal training is only appropriate experience when discussing laws. As there are no laws in play here, you're legal definitions are meaningless.

Sure did. And I was taught very early about owning up to my mistake, and not owning up to other people's mistakes. And particularly I was taught that raging across the room and screaming to high heavens would never make me right, but calmly explaining why and where I was not involved would.
You disagree on these premises ?

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
Jack didn't twist her memories intentionally. As they say, don't attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity. She was young, she was tortured, she was probably a little unhinged, and she was fighting a perceived threat.  You ever been in a fight as a kid? I have, and I can say that half the time, I couldn't remember why I hit the other guy because I was so pissed at whatever happened that I forgot.

Stupidity one is aware of and STILL does allow oneself to be ruled by is inexcusable. And yes, I have been in a fight as a kid. More than enough, more than I care for, usually because I was the one who got hit first, being smaller than most. And I pretty much always knew why I was in the fight.
But I never let it influence my life's hatred's or dislikes. It's only common sense. And I never base(d) a dislike (or like) upon on impression I got when I was drunk, the closest thing I have come to being drugged to the gills.

Jack does twist her memories, check the romantic sweet-talk (I think it's talk #1). She obfusctaes unpleasant aspects, to twist impressions of her. And she is definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer, a fact that cannot have passed her by, which should make her less certain about her conclusions. Nevermind she is not a child (anymore) and  demands respect, even fear but simultaneously wants the indulgences due to beloved children ?

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
In psychology, they have well established reasons for Jack's misremembering. While I don't generally agree with the field of psychology, in this I believe they are correct. When a person doesn't fully remember an event, they start filling in the blanks with logic. After they have, they believe it is what really happened, because the mind tends to believe things it has created itself more easily.

Yes, false and self-induced memories. Indeed. A phenomenon both by now well-documented and scientifically proven and verified, even more so in 2185 I guess. And even sufferers from it are still not immune to willingly lie or distort the truth.
Jack, with her paranoia, tendency to look things up instead of getting them explained face-to-face, should be very much aware of this. But never considers it, in the context of ME-2

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
As for TIM being responsible, yes he is. He funded the project even after he lost track of what they were doing. He provided it with test subjects that they burned through fast. He was a willing accomplice, and in legal terms, that makes him guilty.

He did not provide test-subjects, except for Jack. And I have massive doubt he was aware that the project had gotten away from his control, especially in the light of the fear shown by its staff when an audit by TIM loomed.
You don't fear an audit by an instigator. 

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
Jack acted out of line, but understandably so. She just visited the place of her torture, any human being would be shaken by that. To walk the same halls you committed your first kills in, the ones you were walked through to get to your newest torture, and the ones that held every bad memory of your entire childhood. She was emotionally unstable at that moment, and Miranda fed it by denying Cerberus' involvement. She could have said absolutely anything. She could have stalled for Shepard to get there, she could have showed some level of empathy, she could have lied. 

Jack visited Pragia because she wanted to, in fact insisted on it. She asked for it explicity ! And then expunge it from the galaxy, burning away any doubt she might face, by making it unverifiable, by scorching it in nuclear fire. Blinding rage erasing any chance of ever looking at the truth again.
Which to me hints rather at  "I can't even stand to critically look at it" instead of a real desire to confront her origins. If the pain was so immense, and Jack such a tough character as she makes herself out to be, why did she ever come back at all? it appears, that in her heart she .... suspects that she is wrong about some of her memories, and that insecurity, that vulnerability she cannot abide. Better to burn it to cinders...
Anyway, No idea what a nuclear warhead costs in 2185, but what a seriously expensive indulgence of her whims by TIM. Nevermind the base.

And as I said, Miranda is not afraid of Jack, of her posturing and her senseless rage. She didn't need - in her own mind - Shepard to resolve that for her. Especially if he is not the LI  ! Why would she ? She is not "solve my problems for me, oh mighty Shepard" Tali.  And of course she isn't aware that the game revolves around Shepard, and that my the game's rules, Shepard must resolve that conflict, as a test of his status.

As implemented Miranda is arrogant, aloof  and cold by "nurture", Jack is a raging crackpot because of "nurture". They are equally excused for that, or equally to blame. But Miranda does not rampage through the engine spaces or make threats about killing the other, huffing and puffing. Jack does - throwing an immature tantrum.

Modifié par achwas, 28 octobre 2010 - 09:19 .

[Ryzaki]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...


He's at fault because he enabled the experiments. Had he cut funding when he became suspicious, then he would be less at fault.  In this case it would be like ignoring the fact that a person doesn't pass the security screens necessary to purchase a concealable firearm, thus breaking the law, and selling him/her several over the course of a year while ignoring reports of streetside murders done with weapons that you have been selling.

No it isn't the same level of guilt, but it certainly isn't negligible. 

Eh. I figured they were hiding it from him but he had no reason to be suspicious (Sort of how Wilson manages to sneak through the cracks). so he didn't do anything. He probably started threatening that he wanted some results or he was going to cut soon but they probably kept going on and on about how they were "almost done".

...Yeah I don't see him as guilty at all. He gave them funding but I have no evidence he forced them to do what they did.

That's like blaming a parent for giving their kid money for school books and the kid buys guns and shoots up the place.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 28 octobre 2010 - 09:08 .

[achwas]

Ryzaki wrote...

Eh. I figured they were hiding it from him but he had no reason to be suspicious (Sort of how Wilson manages to sneak through the cracks). so he didn't do anything. He probably started threatening that he wanted some results or he was going to cut soon but they probably kept going on and on about how they were "almost done".

...Yeah I don't see him as guilty at all. He gave them funding but I have no evidence he forced them to do what they did.

That's like blaming a parent for giving their kid money for school books and the kid buys guns and shoots up the place.

Actually, if he ever realized the extend of the problems caused by it, nevermind the atrocities committed, don't you think he would have used the nuclear warhead provided to Jack (or any other means) a tad earlier to hide any tracks, incriminating material and proof that Cerberus was ever involved ?
Instead of leaving them as the mysterious abandoned base on a remote planet ? As is, he can count himself lucky that is was Shepard coming across the remants of the Pragia mess, not Emily Wong^^

yes, he would.

Modifié par achwas, 28 octobre 2010 - 09:21 .

[GuardianAngel470]

achwas wrote...

Jack visited Pragia because she wanted to, in fact insisted on it. She asked for it explicity ! And then expunge it from the galaxy, burning away any doubt she might face, by making it unverifiable, by scorching it in nuclear fire. Blind Rage erasing any chance of ever looking at the truth again.
Which to me speaks rather of  "I can't even stand to critically look at it" far more than real pain over it. If the pain was so immense, and Jack such a tough character as she makes herself out to be, why did she ever come back ? In her heart she .... suspects that she is wrong about some of her memories, and that insecurity, that vulnerability she cannot stand. Better to burn it to cinders... Anyway, No idea what a nuclear warhead costs in 2185, but what a seriously expensive indulgence of her whims by TIM. Nevermind the base.

And as I said, Miranda is not afraid of Jack, of her posturing and her senseless rage. She didn't need - in her own mind - Shepard to resolve that for her. Especially if he is not the LI  ! Why would she ? She is not "solve my problems for me, oh mighty Shepard" Tali or elsuive Kasumi.  And of course she isn't aware that the game revolves around Shepard, and that my thegame's rules, Shepard must resolve that conflict.

As implemented Miranda is arrogant, aloof  and cold by "nurture", Jack is a raging crackpot because of "nurture". They are equally excused for that, or equally to blame. But Miranda does not rampage through the engine spaces or make threats about killing the other, huffing and puffing. Jack does - throwing an immature tantrum.

And that would be right around where I differ with the field of psychology. Nature vs Nurture would dictate that human beings are nothing more than rudimentary learning algorithms, that if you input x value you will receive y value based on a, b, and c being true.


Miranda is better educated in just about everything but street smarts compared to Jack. She knows she is unstable, she knows that she is violent, and she knows that contradiction is meaningless yet she feeds into Jack as if she didn't. Miranda was in a position to have a level head, she wasn't upset, she hadn't just dealt with anything emotional, and yet she fueled Jack's behavior.

Jack on the other hand, is depicted quite clearly throughout the game and especially that LM as someone who isn't as tough as they think they are. She says she survived because of how tough she was compared to the rest, yet she returned. On the mission she expresses how the place is affecting her:

"I'm an all powerful b*tch, but then I'm a little girl again. Sh*t, it's complicated."

Obviously, even from the way she looked in the shuttle as she activated the bomb, she's disturbed emotionally. As such, in terms you might understand, she acts on her passion and immediate emotion.

Miranda acts without that as a crutch, and thus she is more guilty. It would be akin to the difference between first degree and third degree murder. in both cases one is guilty, but one is regarded as more serious because in general, a first degree murder involves forethought and planning as well as a malicious intent.

[achwas]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
Miranda is better educated in just about everything but street smarts compared to Jack. She knows she is unstable, she knows that she is violent, and she knows that contradiction is meaningless yet she feeds into Jack as if she didn't. Miranda was in a position to have a level head, she wasn't upset, she hadn't just dealt with anything emotional, and yet she fueled Jack's behavior.

................

Miranda acts without that as a crutch, and thus she is more guilty. It would be akin to the difference between first degree and third degree murder. in both cases one is guilty, but one is regarded as more serious because in general, a first degree murder involves forethought and planning as well as a malicious intent.

I fully agree on the Jack is disturbed. Her background makes it inevitable.

The same applies for Miranda though - her background makes it inevitable she keeps rational,at a distance, emotionally detached and even crippled by her father's "breeding" her and her fight to get out from under his thumb. The woman who is not even able to hug her twin without outside nudging. She obviously never developed any degree of empathy and emotional caring, subsuming eveyrthing under rational decisions. Which is what she does in the "catfight" - defends herself rationally, without ever letting emotions get into it. Except perhaps for the loyalty to Cerberus, who saved her from the abuse she suffered !
She is as inevitably "damaged goods" and crippled by her childhood, in your words, she requires a "crutch" . Her ordeal only involved psychological torture instead of physical abuse and drugging, but abuse remains abuse. I will not enter into a debate which is worse, since both are sickening enough.
As I said, they are darkly distorted mirror images of each other.

If Jack is entitled to "the benefit of being traumatized" as an excuse, the same holds true for Miranda. But Jack rages without a reason, Miranda defends herself from allegations she bears no responsibility for, and defending her psychological saviour.

Modifié par achwas, 28 octobre 2010 - 09:35 .

[GuardianAngel470]

achwas wrote...

Sure did. And I was taught very early about owning up to my mistake, and not owning up to other people's mistakes. And particularly I was taught that raging across the room and screaming to high heavens would never make me right, but calmly explaining why and where I was not involved would.
You disagree on these premises ?

Stupidity one is aware of and STILL does allow oneself to be ruled by is inexcusable. And yes, I have been in a fight as a kid. More than enough, more than I care for, usually because I was the one who got hit first, being smaller than most. And I pretty much always knew why I was in the fight.
But I never let it influence my life's hatred's or dislikes. It's only common sense. And I never base(d) a dislike (or like) upon on impression I got when I was drunk, the closest thing I have come to being drugged to the gills.

Jack does twist her memories, check the romantic sweet-talk (I think it's talk #1). She obfusctaes unpleasant aspects, to twist impressions of her. And she is definitely not the sharpest knife in the drawer, a fact that cannot have passed her by, which should make her less certain about her conclusions. Nevermind she is not a child (anymore) and  demands respect, even fear but simultaneously wants the indulgences due to beloved children ?


Yes, false and self-induced memories. Indeed. A phenomenon both by now well-documented and scientifically proven and verified, even more so in 2185 I guess. And even sufferers from it are still not immune to willingly lie or distort the truth.
Jack, with her paranoia, tendency to look things up instead of getting them explained face-to-face, should be very much aware of this. But never considers it, in the context of ME-2


He did not provide test-subjects, except for Jack. And I have massive doubt he was aware that the project had gotten away from his control, especially in the light of the fear shown by its staff when an audit by TIM loomed.
You don't fear an audit by an instigator. 

Alright, as for the first part, yes I do agree that one has to own up to their mistakes, quite vehemently so actually. I state that Jack was wrong in fact, if you read my posts. However, I place most of the blame on Miranda just as you would blame a parent for enabling their child by reinforcing negative behavior. 

Now, when exactly did stupid people knowing they were stupid happen? Did I miss something here? That just seems so contradictory to me.

Third, your instance of experience in fights is not the same as the analogy I was creating. I would say Jack is the aggressive type and not the bullied type, wouldn't you? She strikes first and doesn't wait for the first punch to start swinging. She also is more emotional, and when I was her age when she was in Pragia, that's when I had trouble remembering why I started a fight.  However, by first grade I had stopped putting the blame elsewhere. I always took responsibility for my actions, at least in those cases.

She may not be a child anymore, but I regard her with the same level of self control as one. You don't have to be a child to have ****** poor self control. I would like to reiterate that I still think what she did was wrong, but the fact that she has poor self control is a constant, an obvious one. Miranda should have known better.

And as for Miranda being able to handle things on her own, obviously she can't. When a biotic strong enough to hurl you against the wall with enough force to severely damage you and the wall who has ****** poor self control starts yelling at your face and throwing your furnature, the last thing you should do is make it worse. She's lucky to have made it out of that room alive, let alone the possible damage to the ship.

[GuardianAngel470]

achwas wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
Miranda is better educated in just about everything but street smarts compared to Jack. She knows she is unstable, she knows that she is violent, and she knows that contradiction is meaningless yet she feeds into Jack as if she didn't. Miranda was in a position to have a level head, she wasn't upset, she hadn't just dealt with anything emotional, and yet she fueled Jack's behavior.

................

Miranda acts without that as a crutch, and thus she is more guilty. It would be akin to the difference between first degree and third degree murder. in both cases one is guilty, but one is regarded as more serious because in general, a first degree murder involves forethought and planning as well as a malicious intent.

I fully agree on the Jack is disturbed. Her background makes it inevitable.

The same applies for Miranda though - her background makes it inevitable she keeps rational,at a distance, emotionally detached and even crippled by her father's "breeding" her and her fight to get out from under his thumb. The woman who is not even able to hug her twin without outside nudging. She obviously never developed any degree of empathy and emotional caring, subsuming eveyrthing under rational decisions. Which is what she does in the "catfight" - defends herself rationally, without ever letting emotions get into it. Except perhaps for the loyalty to Cerberus, who saved her from the abuse she suffered !
She is as inevitably "damaged goods" and crippled by her childhood, in your words, she requires a "crutch" . Her ordeal only involved psychological torture instead of physical abuse and drugging, but abuse remains abuse. I will not enter into a debate which is worse, since both are sickening enough.
As I said, they are darkly distorted mirror images of each other.

If Jack is entitled to "the benefit of being traumatized" as an excuse, the same holds true for Miranda. But Jack rages without a reason, Miranda defends herself from allegations she bears no responsibility for, and defending her psychological saviour.

I guess I just see it as completely logical not to do that. From a detached perspective, it should be obvious not to poke the wasp's nest as it were.

I don't know though, you may have a point. Most people I know say that I have good empathy, but I'm also ruthlessly logical. I might be projecting myself on Miranda, as I feel like I've been through worse psychological traumas than her yet I see that you shouldn't mess with Jack. Maybe she just doesn't understand that what she said would upset Jack. I find that hard to believe, but who knows at this point.

Heck though, maybe it's causitive. I don't think I understood volatile personalities nearly as well until my life took interesting turns, so maybe I just don't see how she could be so ignorant as to not see the volatility that is Jack as a real threat. 

[achwas]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...
Alright, as for the first part, yes I do agree that one has to own up to their mistakes, quite vehemently so actually. I state that Jack was wrong in fact, if you read my posts. However, I place most of the blame on Miranda just as you would blame a parent for enabling their child by reinforcing negative behavior. 

And we have a consensus there

GuardianAngel470 wrote..
Now, when exactly did stupid people knowing they were stupid happen? Did I miss something here? That just seems so contradictory to me.

Not really. For one, why do people ask for advice or look things up ? All of the time. because they accept that there is more to know about a subject than they recall themself. Same goes for hiring experts, especially advisory and scientific ones. Realization of one's own mental shortcoming, degree of ignorance = degree of stupidity
Admittedly, noone is likely to call himself/herself stupid (but many are willing to claim ignorance ona subject, yet loudly voice their opinions ) , but realizing that one may be menatlly outclassed on a subject ? All the time! And then it comes down to a matter of pride, self-justification and inability to admit a mistake...

aka "Jack" 

GuardianAngel470 wrote..
Third, your instance of experience in fights is not the same as the analogy I was creating. I would say Jack is the aggressive type and not the bullied type, wouldn't you? She strikes first and doesn't wait for the first punch to start swinging. She also is more emotional, and when I was her age when she was in Pragia, that's when I had trouble remembering why I started a fight.  However, by first grade I had stopped putting the blame elsewhere. I always took responsibility for my actions, at least in those cases.

My point being, I never shirked from a fight, maybe even provoked them by not keeping my big mouth shut, unwisely at times.... I joined fights when I deemed it important, say to help a friend, or out of outrage. Striking first is also a very classic response upon being bullied, so I don't think you can draw a precise line there anyway.
And she was in Pragia up until her early teens. Her comment about her rescuers (ab-)using her seems to indicate puberty or later, nevermind that it doesn't fit in with other observations about her.

But anyway, by the time of ME-2 she is in her early 20ies, and even as a late emotional starter, she has had time to evolve and sort some of her childhood memories. And find other points of reference to base her choices on. She didn't and doesn't. Immature

GuardianAngel470 wrote..
She may not be a child anymore, but I regard her with the same level of self control as one. You don't have to be a child to have ****** poor self control. I would like to reiterate that I still think what she did was wrong, but the fact that she has poor self control is a constant, an obvious one. Miranda should have known better.

I fully agree, that's why I called her outburst "immature".

GuardianAngel470 wrote..
And as for Miranda being able to handle things on her own, obviously she can't. When a biotic strong enough to hurl you against the wall with enough force to severely damage you and the wall who has ****** poor self control starts yelling at your face and throwing your furnature, the last thing you should do is make it worse. She's lucky to have made it out of that room alive, let alone the possible damage to the ship.

Miranda being a powerful biotic herself, and even overestimating her biotic capabilities and control, as shown in SM-II prologue ? With the hallmark traits of superiority and self-reliance imprinted on her ? Plus, Jack slandering her emotional saviours and her probable Ersatz-father figure, TIM ? No, I don't think she would back down or go for de-escalating options. She'd go for the jugular, if her self-control and loyalty to the mission allowed it. But she has her orders, and recruiting and abiding Jack are part of these.

Actually a straight-up biotic duel between jack and her might be interesting, since "Warp" and "Slam" (aka "hurling people into walls and damaging them") are pretty potent and tailor made to fight Vanguards like Jack.
Someone, ring up Samara and find a deserted planet !

Shall we close this, or do you think we can call up anything new to add ? *hands over a beer/drink of your choice*

Modifié par achwas, 28 octobre 2010 - 10:13 .

[achwas]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

I guess I just see it as completely logical not to do that. From a detached perspective, it should be obvious not to poke the wasp's nest as it were.

Shepard does it all the time. Then it's called heroic^^

GuardianAngel470 wrote..
I don't know though, you may have a point. Most people I know say that I have good empathy, but I'm also ruthlessly logical. I might be projecting myself on Miranda, as I feel like I've been through worse psychological traumas than her yet I see that you shouldn't mess with Jack. Maybe she just doesn't understand that what she said would upset Jack. I find that hard to believe, but who knows at this point.

I have two childhood friends who had her (or rather a very similar) upbringing. One is still (and has been for the last 15 years) in mental-care, on medications, suicidal and depressive because the couldn't stand the pressure and expectation..
The other one turned into a fething fearsome lawyer. Incidentally she also lacks much emotional intelligence. Maybe I am projecting RL imperessions onto Miranda, but that doesn't make it less true an observation, methinks

GuardianAngel470 wrote..
Heck though, maybe it's causitive. I don't think I understood volatile personalities nearly as well until my life took interesting turns, so maybe I just don't see how she could be so ignorant as to not see the volatility that is Jack as a real threat. 

First hand experience ? Yeah, Miranda seems headed that way....

[achwas]

-double-

Modifié par achwas, 28 octobre 2010 - 10:49 .

[Iwakura-Lain]

achwas wrote...

There is nothing in the ME game that directly implicates TIM, even less so Miranda, who incidentally is only a cell-leader (as EDI explains after the IFF-mission).

Ah yes, the age old 'plausible deniability' card. Except it won't wash. Not even close. For the Lazarus project alone TIM spent "billions of credits." What Jack's facility cost, who knows; but he funded it, and provided test subjects. And as the leader of Cerberus, if he didn't know what happened there, he's either utterly incompetent or wilfully ignorant. Either way, he's still responsible.

The vid logs themselves, never meant as a vindication, state how far the scientists on site knew they were acting in violation of TIMs orders : "If we get results he won't care what we did." "But if he knew..." (the last one utterly fearful). That's not what goons "just following orders" say when faced with an audit.

Nice try. But your argument only underlines TIM's guilt, because the scientists at Pragia didn't just go beyond their initial mandate for no apparent reason -- they did so, precisely because they knew TIM is ultimately just about the bottom line. They knew TIM doesn't really care how it's done, as long as it's done. In fact, TIM actually elevated this policy into a slogan:

"Salvation comes with a cost. Judge us not by our methods, but what we seek to accomplish."

See, the man even bragged about not caring how things are done! So, please, please, don't make it sound as if Timmy was going to be morally outraged or something if he ever found out. Sans the results, he probably would have been upset for the mess, or for the waste of resources; but nothing much beyond that, I assure you.

And Jack? Jack twists her memories to vindicate her decisions and attitudes (try the "sweet talk" options to find a prime example ), is obviously at least in part deluded about her memories, even admits that , to quote "I never understood of what happened here", " a lot of this isn't the way I remember it"  and "bull****, they weren't experimenting on other children for my safety" .... and maintains those self-delusions even in the face of factual proof or other survivors. (again, everything quoted verbatim from the LM)

Jack didn't twist anything "to vindicate her decisions and attitudes." Rather, as a severely abused child from very early age on, she finds out, as an adult, playing back logs and reading other documents, that she wasn't having the full scope of things at the time, is all. Like that the guards, in spite of what she thought, had explicit instructions not to kill her. None of which make the torture and other abuses perpetrated on her any less wrong.

To my mind, the thing that Jack really hates about Miranda is, that she is not directly responsible, highly visible, not remorseful about something she had no part in and almost absolutely rational and in control of herself.

Funny you should mention rational, because I was thinking of a derivative, and more applicable term: rationalizations. What infuriates Jack about Miranda are precisely that, her Wir haben es nicht gewusst rationalizations: her lame hiding behind a cell structure for cheap deniability; her treating TIM as if he's God's gift to humanity; her wilful, in-your-face lack of acknowledgment of any of Cerberus' wrongdoings towards dear Jack.

If anyone maintains self-delusions in the face of factual proof standing right in front of her, it's Miranda. And why? All because she can't cope with the fact that TIM, the man and organization she felt driven to, after having to deal with a very overbearing and cold father, turns out to be not such a nice man after all. I say, at the very least, she owes Jack a profound apology on behalf of Cerberus; and if she has any bone of decency left in her, she would do well to drop at least the cocky attitude towards Jack.

Modifié par Iwakura-Lain, 28 octobre 2010 - 11:39 .

[Caihn]

After this scene, the only thing Jack deserves is what she swear to do to Miranda : death.

There should be an interrupt to shut Jack's mouth during the scene, and put her outside Miranda's quarter.

[Iwakura-Lain]

Yannkee wrote...

After this scene, the only thing Jack deserves is what she swear to do to Miranda : death.
There should be an interrupt to shut Jack's mouth during the scene, and put her outside Miranda's quarter.

Turnabout is fair play: you'll get your STFU-button, if I get the option to airlock Miranda.

Seriously, though, we're trying to have a serious discussion (at least, I hope so); so, a few less one-liners, and a little more argumented cases is something I would personally welcome.

Modifié par Iwakura-Lain, 28 octobre 2010 - 12:01 .

[Ieldra]

Interesting arguments here on both sides. Here's my entry:

Summary: I blame Jack for starting the fight, but Miranda for the outcome. I'd never take Jack's side, though.

I see Jack as the instigator of the fight. We have no hard evidence of how it started, but I can't believe Miranda would bring her into her office unless she intended to sort things out between them, which her later behavior makes unlikely. So Jack started it, which is pretty stupid if you ask me, demanding an apology from one you can be sure you won't get it from (or whatever else she went to Miranda for), and spoiling for a fight. Jack did what she always did: threaten and bully to get what she wants. That it's the only way she knows doesn't excuse it, she should've know that's not the way it works on a warship on a mission.

Miranda, on the other hand, could have chosen not to escalate the fight. Instead, she pours oil into the fire by saying "you were a mistake". She has more control and is more rational than Jack as a rule, so I must assume she did exactly what she wanted. I don't know why, but it's pretty stupid as well to enrage a powerful biotic like Jack. Possibly she wanted a fight as well, for she clearly wasn't happy with Jack's presence on the ship (see below for more about that). I only don't blame her more than Jack because her behavior is contingent on Jack's: hadn't Jack started it, nothing would have happened.

I usually defuse the fight. If I take sides, I can excuse Miranda's behavior more easily from a practical viewpoint. Siding with Jack means to condone her behavior, it's telling everyone that running around on the Normandy spoiling for a fight is OK. While Miranda's behaviour was just as bad, she did act in self-defense.

About the Cerberus angle: on Jack's loyalty mission, Miranda shows she's appalled by what happened there, so she clearly doesn't justify what happened there. On the other hand, there is an easy way out since the logs indicate that the cell indeed went rogue, no matter if you think TIM wouldn't have minded. The staff believed he would. The Teltin facility can be disowned by Miranda easily because she has evidence. Should she know better? I really don't know. Teltin is at the extreme end of Cerberus operations, even more than the experiment on Aite. As experiments on human biotics go, it's much worse than what was done in Ascension, where they only risked serious damage to a child, not deliberately inflicted it on many. Likely Miranda believes that TIM would draw the line somewhere, and where not if here? Again opposing that: somewhere it's said that TIM likes to maintain close oversight, surely Miranda would know that. That would offset the log evidence and make it less likely for her to believe that TIM didn't know. In the end, I think that Miranda may indeed not know what TIM's capable of, but being an intelligent woman, she should be more open to the possibility that TIM justifies atrocities she wouldn't stand for herself for no higher necessity than human supremacy. That she refuses to consider this is a character flaw. It's a trait I don't like because it implies a follower mentality, and it's tied to Miranda's self-perception. She needs to get out of that.
Whether or not that offsets Jack's character flaw of killing people just because they're in the way I leave open to interpretation. In the end, both need to own up to their mistakes and delusions.

Does Miranda owe Jack an apology? It would be a fitting gesture if it came from her. Regardless of how rogue the Teltin facility was or not, it started as a Cerberus facility and Cerberus has to shoulder some of the blame. However, Miranda was not responsible, so while an apology on Cerberus' behalf would be a fitting gesture and a peace offering, it's not obligatory. Most notably, you don't get to demand one from her. If you try, it will only make her stiffen her spine, and rightly so.

Edit:
As for outcome of a all-out fight between them, we've discussed that extensively at some time. The consensus was: there is a significant probability that Jack would kill Miranda with her first attack. If Miranda survived that, she would win because she has better control and tactics.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 28 octobre 2010 - 12:44 .

[achwas]

Iwakura-Lain wrote...

Ah yes,.............

.....Jack.

Sorry to say, you obviously live by the creed "make the facts fit the desired verdict", as in your dogmatic conviction of Cerberus' "evil" will not let you neutrally evaluate fact, or accept fact not fitting your preconceptions. Most of your "facts"have been shown as actually  wrong or as voluntarily misrepresented in this thread alone.

Than you add further suppositions and assumptions about TIM, Miranda and the universe in general which are not backed by actual facts, and expect them to be  valid.

*shrug*

I could try to argue them with you again, but IMHO that looks like a waste of perfectly good electrons (and those are basically fee), if someone already states  :

"They appear innocent and that's alone is proof of their guilt, because they arranged things that way from the very beginning."

Or as you put it - they arranged for "plausible deniablity". Instead of really hiding their tracks, through shell companies, indirect control and smart elimination (including witnesses) of any incriminating proof after things went south.
That is the point were dogmatic and faith-/belief-based debates start, and common sense goes out the door. As history shows, you cannot outdebate or convince a faith or belief-system - you can only outlive it.

"Salvation comes with a cost. Judge us not by our methods, but what we seek to accomplish."

That line has been used as vindication by a long list of people ranging the gamut from  Mahathma Gandhi to Josef Stalin, including but not limtied to, devoted pacifists, dogmatic terrorists, democratic government trying to end wars and democratic governments trying to start wars... the list is long and diverse, from the Roman republic to the current day.. Never mind the Spanish Inquisition or Greenpeace^^
To use it as proof of guilt, a telltale and infallible sign of deep and thorough corruption and culpability, endorsement of violence, encouragement to abomiable experimentation of anyone is utterly naive. 
For one context is everything.
It's simply a commonplace "truth", a pathos filled attempt to appeal to common sacrifice and acceptance of loss. Empty rhetoric. And it definitely applies to Shepard who actually uses it slightly modified in his SM "rally the troops" speech

You want to see Cerberus and TIM as EVIL, so be it.
Since your grasp of German seems up to it, this IMHO applies to you, to the hilt.

"Es darf halt nicht wahr sein was ich nicht wahrhaben will"

I could also point at some historic scenarios and analogies , but that would be against the rules of this forum (which I glancingly hit above, and dear moderator I feel suitably contrite and regret I didn't seen another way ).
Instead, let me put it this way : you argue just like Jack

Modifié par achwas, 28 octobre 2010 - 12:51 .

[achwas]

-double-

Modifié par achwas, 28 octobre 2010 - 12:48 .

[Mondo47]

Yannkee wrote...

After this scene, the only thing Jack deserves is what she swear to do to Miranda : death.
There should be an interrupt to shut Jack's mouth during the scene, and put her outside Miranda's quarter.

What do you base that argument on, other than you liking Miranda more than Jack? Shepard should just destroy the most powerful human biotic in known existance (an exceptionally potent weapon in its own right) because she raises her voice at someone? That ain't an argument, that's plain and simple personal bias.

Though if that's not the case, can I have a execution button for Miranda then then the moment she declares she's Shepard's second in command? Because she isn't my Shepard's second in command just because she's Timmy's enabler, Garrus is (because I like Garrus more, obviously). I'm sure I could swing that as attempted mutiny in a report, and TIM does keep saying that this is Shepard's mission to control as he/she sees fit... bet she wishes that control chip had been inserted now, eh?

I'll just reiterate here though, as much as I like Jack, I think they're both out of line in the situation being considered; Jack knows no better but that doesn't make it right, and Miranda should be smarter than to descend to Jack's level over something as blatantly clear as her adopted father-figure's at least technical culpability for the senseless murder of hundreds of children. It's Miranda's job to be the adult - if she's Shepard's second in command, she should try acting like it, not some girl in the playground that just had her pigtails pulled (that would get her a reprimand also on any military vessel). And, on the flipside, it's Shepard's job as commander to put Jack in her place, not his subordinates... Jack's only get-out-of-jail-free card is the fact she needs teaching how to behave, because the existance she's been given precluded her ever learning how to deal with conflict without force.

[Ieldra]

Mondo47 wrote...
I'll just reiterate here though, as much as I like Jack, I think they're both out of line in the situation being considered; Jack knows no better but that doesn't make it right, and Miranda should be smarter than to descend to Jack's level over something as blatantly clear as her adopted father-figure's at least technical culpability for the senseless murder of hundreds of children. It's Miranda's job to be the adult - if she's Shepard's second in command, she should try acting like it, not some girl in the playground that just had her pigtails pulled (that would get her a reprimand also on any military vessel). And, on the flipside, it's Shepard's job as commander to put Jack in her place, not his subordinates... Jack's only get-out-of-jail-free card is the fact she needs teaching how to behave, because the existance she's been given precluded her ever learning how to deal with conflict without force.

I have to agree with this. Someone has used "Miranda is emotionally damaged" as an excuse, but I don't buy into it. She says she's a good judge of character, and while she does make mistakes, I don't think it's a complete delusion. If Miranda is, as you say, the adult in this situation, then she should act like one. I do understand that she refuses to give in to Jack's demand (see my post above). How she does it, that makes all the difference.

I might add that it's also tied to my perception of Miranda. I tend to downplay her emotional problems (in fact, I think some others play them up too much), and that means I must accept that Miranda has more responsibility in this situation than otherwise.

That doesn't give Jack an get-out-of-jail-free card, IMO, but it does mean nobody is blameless.

[Iwakura-Lain]

achwas wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote..
She may not be a child anymore, but I regard her with the same level of self control as one. You don't have to be a child to have ****** poor self control. I would like to reiterate that I still think what she did was wrong, but the fact that she has poor self control is a constant, an obvious one. Miranda should have known better.

I fully agree, that's why I called her outburst "immature".

Ay, there's the rub. It reminds me of this sexual abuse case (yes, I'm in Law too) in which the Judge was very adamant about not allowing the alleged victim, a young women at the time, to cry in Court. It irritated him, as it were; and he deemed it manipulative (and, no doubt, immature).

See, this is the thing: when confronted with two evils, I tend to condemn the actual crime, rather than finding fault with those not entirely able to deal with the effects of said crime gracefully. So, instead of pointing out the mote in Jack's eye, for no greater crime than being highly triggered and having a very legitimate reason for being upset with Cerberus' golden girl, I first look at the beam in Cereberus' eye.

My sympathy is with Jack, all the way.

[Iwakura-Lain]

achwas wrote...

Iwakura-Lain wrote...

Ah yes,.............

.....Jack.

Sorry to say, you obviously live by the creed "make the facts fit the desired verdict", as in your dogmatic conviction of Cerberus' "evil" will not let you neutrally evaluate fact, or accept fact not fitting your preconceptions. Most of your "facts"have been shown as actually wrong or as voluntarily misrepresented in this thread alone.

[snip of lots of unpleasant ranting and personal attacks]

I saw this post coming. Watching you run out of real arguments, I knew you'd make it personal and nasty, sooner or later. There are more ad hominems in your post I can count; all of which I will let slide, as the forum rules forbid me to reciprocate; save to say I expected more. I did report your post, though.

Goodbye.

[achwas]

Iwakura-Lain wrote...
Ay, there's the rub. It reminds me of this sexual abuse case (yes, I'm in Law too) in which the Judge was very adamant about not allowing the alleged victim, a young women at the time, to cry in Court. It irritated him, as it were; and he deemed it manipulative (and, no doubt, immature).

QED, you assume, take it as fact, draw an unbased conclusion and use it as a foundation for a line of reasoning which then stands unsupported. WHY are you certain he felt that way ?

If you really are in law, I would, in an entirely neutral vein, to work on basing your lines of arguments on unassailable facts, since logical chains are key to even passing the exams. It will certainly help not to "assume" - as in assessing his motivations as "doubtlessly so". Correctors and Lecturers hate that. they care not on iota for moral statements, because morals vary from individual to individual.

Iwakura-Lain wrote...
My sympathy is with Jack, all the way.

And there lies the crux. You feeling sympathy does not make Jack being in the right. It does also not entitle her to threaten or actually kill people for free (no, not Miranda....I thought of all the victims since her escape from Pragia ).

Modifié par achwas, 28 octobre 2010 - 02:08 .

[Iwakura-Lain]

Achwas, we're done. I'll leave it to the moderator now.