302 réponses à ce sujet

[Inverness Moon]

joriandrake wrote...

Cerberus, as example

I should have been more clear, what exactly is anyone, Cerberus in this case, suggesting be thrown away?

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 19 novembre 2010 - 10:45 .

[joriandrake]

Inverness Moon wrote...

joriandrake wrote...

Cerberus, as example

I should have been more clear, what exactly is anyone, Cerberus in this case, suggesting be thrown away?

suggesting? nothing
acting like they already did? a lot

[Peuhkis]

I think humanity should police the council races. Vote Cerberus now!

[MadCat221]

Peuhkis wrote...

I think humanity should police the council races. Vote Cerberus now!

Humanity has been on the interstellar scene for less than three earth decades.  Who the hell are we to declare ourselves top dog?

[Inverness Moon]

MadCat221 wrote...

Peuhkis wrote...

I think humanity should police the council races. Vote Cerberus now!

Humanity has been on the interstellar scene for less than three earth decades.  Who the hell are we to declare ourselves top dog?

Apparently we're the only ones with the initiative to keep pushing for greater heights. Sovereign would not have been stopped without a stealth capable ship and a leader like Shepard who isn't prejudiced. I can't imagine such a diverse and capable crew being assembled under any other circumstances with the way the Citadel races have been practically doing nothing for the past few hundred or few thousand years.

[Phaedon]

Inverness Moon wrote...

MadCat221 wrote...

Peuhkis wrote...

I think humanity should police the council races. Vote Cerberus now!

Humanity has been on the interstellar scene for less than three earth decades.  Who the hell are we to declare ourselves top dog?

Apparently we're the only ones with the initiative to keep pushing for greater heights. Sovereign would not have been stopped without a stealth capable ship and a leader like Shepard who isn't prejudiced. I can't imagine such a diverse and capable crew being assembled under any other circumstances with the way the Citadel races have been practically doing nothing for the past few hundred or few thousand years.

It was the turians who made most of the Normandy.
Shepard is human, so what ? Almost every human soldier (both Alliance and Cerberus) aren't exactly helping him.

And when TIM throws the 'we'll use it against the Reapers and beyond' line...

[Inverness Moon]

Phaedon wrote...

It was the turians who made most of the Normandy.

It was a joint effort initially pushed by Cerberus that would not have happened if humanity hadn't been around.

Phaedon wrote...

And when TIM throws the 'we'll use it against the Reapers and beyond' line...

Too many people look too far into that line. I have no problem with humanity becoming the greatest power in the galaxy thanks to that base. 

[Nimrodell]

Inverness Moon wrote...

MadCat221 wrote...

Peuhkis wrote...

I think humanity should police the council races. Vote Cerberus now!

Humanity has been on the interstellar scene for less than three earth decades.  Who the hell are we to declare ourselves top dog?

Apparently we're the only ones with the initiative to keep pushing for greater heights. Sovereign would not have been stopped without a stealth capable ship and a leader like Shepard who isn't prejudiced. I can't imagine such a diverse and capable crew being assembled under any other circumstances with the way the Citadel races have been practically doing nothing for the past few hundred or few thousand years.

Not quite true. When you look at Shepard's squad plus helpers (Liara) in ME2, you'll notice that humans are the most judgmental and suspicious when it comes to Shepard and his/hers efforts. It's not true that Council races are passive or impotent because we have limited perspective when it comes to that issue, we have limited view, knowledge and we are applying our standards of morality or what needs to be done on species that developed along totally different evolution and historical pathways. Hey, the same sheit we have already in RL, having certain nations or religious groups imposing their views and standars on others claiming that their path is the only one that should be followed and thinking that it's justified to act like brute if the goal will be accomplished.

I could understand partially Cerberus acts if they were only diseased with xenophobic views, ah there are always idiots like that, but having human experiments, considering individuals from their own species as expendable, being prone to do dr Mengele experiments on humans... sorry, but I can't have understanding for that. It's nice and cozy to look at them with benevolent eyes from player's perspective cause they can't actually harm you... but what if you would find yourself in clutches of similar people in RL, claiming that for example they'll do something like indoctrinating you for the sake of humanity or let Thorian spores on you for the same reason? Then it would be called by its true and proper name - crimes against humanity. Cerberus is stuffed with villains like any shady organization... that's why I like last words from Tela Vasir.

[Inverness Moon]

Nimrodell wrote...

Not quite true. When you look at Shepard's squad plus helpers (Liara) in ME2, you'll notice that humans are the most judgmental and suspicious when it comes to Shepard and his/hers efforts.

How did you figure that?

Nimrodell wrote...

It's not true that Council races are passive or impotent because we have limited perspective when it comes to that issue, we have limited view, knowledge and we are applying our standards of morality or what needs to be done on species that developed along totally different evolution and historical pathways. Hey, the same sheit we have already in RL, having certain nations or religious groups imposing their views and standars on others claiming that their path is the only one that should be followed and thinking that it's justified to act like brute if the goal will be accomplished.

It seems like there is a distinct lack of evolution when it comes to many of the races in the galaxy.

I also don't know what you're referring to when you say we are applying our stands of morality or what needs to be done on others or in that last sentence.

Nimrodell wrote...

I could understand partially Cerberus acts if they were only diseased with xenophobic views, ah there are always idiots like that, but having human experiments, considering individuals from their own species as expendable, being prone to do dr Mengele experiments on humans... sorry, but I can't have understanding for that. It's nice and cozy to look at them with benevolent eyes from player's perspective cause they can't actually harm you... but what if you would find yourself in clutches of similar people in RL, claiming that for example they'll do something like indoctrinating you for the sake of humanity or let Thorian spores on you for the same reason? Then it would be called by its true and proper name - crimes against humanity. Cerberus is stuffed with villains like any shady organization... that's why I like last words from Tela Vasir.

You don't have to consider humans expendable to believe that certain things are necessary for whatever reason. Consider Retribution, I have no problem with the experiment done on Grayson, I'm only disappointed that the turians botched it up. If doing a handful of experiments like that is the only way to defeat the reapers then I'll take it.

If I was in the Mass Effect universe and knew about the threat of the reapers and Cerberus came to me and said they need to experiment on me in order to find a way to stop the reapers, I would agree. Now then, does that make it less reprehensible to you that the subject of the experiment volunteered? If that changes anything, why? Whether the subject agrees or not doesn't change the fact that the reapers are coming and we have little to no options at this point. As far as I'm concerned we can worry about our concepts or morality and ethics after our race is saved from extinction.

[Netzach]

MadCat221 wrote...

Peuhkis wrote...

I think humanity should police the council races. Vote Cerberus now!

Humanity has been on the interstellar scene for less than three earth decades.  Who the hell are we to declare ourselves top dog?

The ones who saved the council? The ones who destroyed Sovereign? The ones doing something to actually fight the incomming war?

[lovgreno]

Inverness Moon wrote...Too many people look too far into that line. I have no problem with humanity becoming the greatest power in the galaxy thanks to that base. 

No reason to assume the base will help humanity with anything. It may, but it may also do what the reapers intended to do with it: Harvest humanity to make a new reaper. No one can claim to be in full controll of reaper tech (in fact it has always ended up fully controlling the fool attempting to controll it after a while), especialy not Failberus as their history clearly shows.

[InfiniteCuts]

Inverness Moon wrote...

It seems like there is a distinct lack of evolution when it comes to many of the races in the galaxy.

I also don't know what you're referring to when you say we are applying our stands of morality or what needs to be done on others or in that last sentence.

How do you figure that?  If you're going to make a statement as bold as this, then you should at least make an effort to explain what you mean and how it pertains to the discussion.  Nimrodell implies that the council races are older than humanity and that they've likely developed in ways we have only just begun to understand... begging the question: why should humanity be at the helm?  The asari are more biologically advanced than humanity with their ability to procreate with alien races and their life expectancy.  Salarians possess superior intelligence and cognitive abilities compared to humans.  Even Krogans have their advantages with their physical build and resistance.  Humanity would have been decimated long ago had we been subjected to a "genophage".  Of all the ME races, I'd say humans are closest to batarians... with vorcha somewhere not far behind lol.  Why does humanity, nevermind Cerberus (shining examples of success they are), have to be in control?

[Nimrodell]

Inverness Moon wrote...

Nimrodell wrote...

Not quite true. When you look at Shepard's squad plus helpers (Liara) in ME2, you'll notice that humans are the most judgmental and suspicious when it comes to Shepard and his/hers efforts.

How did you figure that?

Well, I didn't see Ashley or Kaidan or Anderson or Udina searching for Shepard's body nor acting on trust, humans and their perpetual paranoia, it was Liara, the asari, and only she and Tali (if you're male Shepard that is romancing her) were actually stating things that were emphatic... quarian and asari. Even Joker didn't mention the true reason why Shepard died in the first place and he owed him/her his life. Shepard is basically betrayed by his/hers own kind in ME2, Jacob's words, Anderson's or Udina's behaviour, Kenneth and Gabby's words, Shadow Broker's secret files show that humans still kept the path of technological development but not the true evolution... bah tis the same illusion that we're living in nowadays, we're same arses as those 200 years ago were, yes, we have awesome new gadgets and more to come, but we didn't actually evolve from those that were victims in the last London plague. ME2 Shepard is more tragic character than ME1 was ever... not because of death or going to Suicide Mission but because his/hers own kind that left him/her barearsed or trying to manipulate him/her. Garrus, Grunt, Mordin, Tali don't have such secret agenda when they are following him/her.

It seems like there is a distinct lack of evolution when it comes to many of the races in the galaxy.

I
also don't know what you're referring to when you say we are applying
our stands of morality or what needs to be done on others or in that
last sentence.

It was convinient for renegade Shepard to get justification for destroying the heretics from Legion himself... but actually those words were truth. It took Legion, an AI to explain some basic things when it comes to arrogant assumptions what's right, what's wrong and what needs to be done. You can't apply your own morality, philosophical, political stands even in RL onto other nations that were developing differently and have utterly different customs and understanding of life... and in ME we have different alien species with different base for DNA for gods sake... read Tolkien's letter to Lewis about viability of travel through space and travel through time stories. Tolkien explained it so simple through very essence of understanding, ways of thinking and language. As human you know what water is... but if you manage to travel through space that far and find a sapient being, how it's going to even percieve such simple thing as need to drink water or what water actually is if it doesn't need it for it's own survival? Should we call it not evolved just for the simple fact that we need more time to understand a new life form and it needs that time too to understand us? I am orthodox Christian but I'm not trying to impose my understanding of holy trinity to Catholics - I understand their point of view and only because I was patient and curious enough to actually understand it, learn about it and comprehand their logic... history thought us that imposing one's ways is always wrong thing to do cause diversity in development, historical background asks for those willing to learn and understand not militant 'all-knowing' arses.

You don't have to consider humans expendable to believe that certain
things are necessary for whatever reason. Consider Retribution, I have
no problem with the experiment done on Grayson, I'm only disappointed
that the turians botched it up. If doing a handful of experiments like
that is the only way to defeat the reapers then I'll take it.

Wonder if you would think the same thing if your skin was marked for such experiments for 'greater good' . Something may be deemed as necessary but it doesn't mean it should be justified. From fashist point of view, their horrible deeds, holocaust were necessary for what they percieved as a greater good. And here we come again to the simple thing that I was explaining just second ago... who says that your morals, views are actually correct one? There is no one truth, Einstein proved it but before him philosophers and writers as Milton and Njegos... it all depends on perspective from which you're watching the thing you call Truth. Im ME universe, we, as players, have limited knowledge, limited view on things, it works same as in literature. Shepard is not all-knowing, either paragon or renegade, but when it comes to humans, we're in liberty to say that Cerberus did atrocities, deem those deeds as necessery but also not hiding behind political human supremacy b...sheit. Hell, I would be the first to hunt down and punish all those Cerberus arses that were hiding their twisted experiments behind 'greater human agenda' curtain.

If I
was in the Mass Effect universe and knew about the threat of the
reapers and Cerberus came to me and said they need to experiment on me
in order to find a way to stop the reapers, I would agree. Now then,
does that make it less reprehensible to you that the subject of the
experiment volunteered? If that changes anything, why? Whether the
subject agrees or not doesn't change the fact that the reapers are
coming and we have little to no options at this point. As far as I'm
concerned we can worry about our concepts or morality and ethics after
our race is saved from extinction.

Sacrifices are necessary sometimes, but there are pointless ones and ones with true meaning... just look at the Mordin's loyalty mission and the moment with krogan female. At least she had a choice, Cerberus victims didn't have it. Being a willing test subject... hm, that's too hypothetical for me when it comes to humanity. ****** Sapiens is called that way with a reason. For too many times 'stop the  great treat' reason was used and misused already for atrocities done and that's the difference between moral and immoral men. We still can't see the future and I do believe strongly that no one should be allowed to act in a manner of stupid dr Feelgood... let me explain it better cause that guy is not known outside my country:

Dr Feelgood spent some time in USA and then came back here offering simple recepy for long life. He keeps spaming people with talk about their diet, advices on healthy life, and that is all good. But he supports his claims in very similar manner like people here - he says, parapharazing - if you live like this in your 40's and 50's you've stopped illnesses like cancer, stroke, depression, etc... And we all know that is not true, you may lower the risk, but you can't stop completely those things, you are not safe 'safe'. It is just an arrogant assumption and untrue one.

Apologies for long post and answers.

Modifié par Nimrodell, 20 novembre 2010 - 10:17 .

[Inverness Moon]

lovgreno wrote...

No reason to assume the base will help humanity with anything. It may, but it may also do what the reapers intended to do with it: Harvest humanity to make a new reaper. No one can claim to be in full controll of reaper tech (in fact it has always ended up fully controlling the fool attempting to controll it after a while), especialy not Failberus as their history clearly shows.

No reason to assume the base won't help humanity with anything. And the base isn't going to magically harvest humans on its own to create a reaper after the collectors have been destroyed.

Also, you must know that EDI is based on reaper tech. By your logic I expect you to have her destroyed soon, despite the fact that she was vital to the success of your mission.

InfiniteCuts wrote...

How do you figure that?  If you're going to make a statement as bold as this, then you should at least make an effort to explain what you mean and how it pertains to the discussion.  Nimrodell implies that the council races are older than humanity and that they've likely developed in ways we have only just begun to understand... begging the question: why should humanity be at the helm?  The asari are more biologically advanced than humanity with their ability to procreate with alien races and their life expectancy.  Salarians possess superior intelligence and cognitive abilities compared to humans.  Even Krogans have their advantages with their physical build and resistance.  Humanity would have been decimated long ago had we been subjected to a "genophage".  Of all the ME races, I'd say humans are closest to batarians... with vorcha somewhere not far behind lol.  Why does humanity, nevermind Cerberus (shining examples of success they are), have to be in control?

Reproductive abilities and life expectancy are only single aspects of a whole. Both of those could be negated by other factors. Harbinger claims that the asari reliance on alien species for reproduction shows a genetic weakness. The asari might have certain aspects superior to other races, but that does not make them biologically superior as a whole. Humans have greater genetic diversity than any other species. More diversity in general means more possibility of mutation and more probability that humans can adapt to change.

If the salarians possess superior intelligence and cognitive abilities, why have they dismissed the threat of the reapers?

Despite your opinion of humanity, it seems a group of so-called human terrorists are the only ones that have been working to prevent galactic extinction in the two years that Shepard was dead. Species need to evolve and adapt in order to continue to survive. Apparently Cerberus is the only group that has adapted to the idea that a race of sentient spaceships is coming to wipe them out.

Your opinion of the other races, humanity, and Cerberus contradicts what is actually happening in the game as far as superiority goes.

I also don't think I suggested humanity needs to be in control nor do I think they should control other species so long as those other species don't threaten humanity.

[Inverness Moon]

Nimrodell wrote...

Well, I didn't see Ashley or Kaidan or Anderson or Udina searching for Shepard's body nor acting on trust, humans and their perpetual paranoia, it was Liara, the asari, and only she and Tali (if you're male Shepard that is romancing her) were actually stating things that were emphatic... quarian and asari. Even Joker didn't mention the true reason why Shepard died in the first place and he owed him/her his life. Shepard is basically betrayed by his/hers own kind in ME2, Jacob's words, Anderson's or Udina's behaviour, Kenneth and Gabby's words, Shadow Broker's secret files show that humans still kept the path of technological development but not the true evolution... bah tis the same illusion that we're living in nowadays, we're same arses as those 200 years ago were, yes, we have awesome new gadgets and more to come, but we didn't actually evolve from those that were victims in the last London plague. ME2 Shepard is more tragic character than ME1 was ever... not because of death or going to Suicide Mission but because his/hers own kind that left him/her barearsed or trying to manipulate him/her. Garrus, Grunt, Mordin, Tali don't have such secret agenda when they are following him/her.

Firstly, what reason would they have to search for Shepard's body if they assumed it destroyed? It's not like they believed they could somehow bring him back to life. It was Cerberus that made that possible.

Liara was looking for Shepard's body because the collectors wanted it and because TIM informed her that they might be able to bring Shepard back to life, no?

I don't see how choosing to not try to find Shepard's body while being ignorant of those facts makes what Anderson/Udina and the Virmire survivor did a betrayal.

Secondly, there seems to be the implication here that Kaidan/Ashley's behavior towards Shepard had something to do with them being human, or that them being the same species as Shepard should have had some sort of impact on the situation. Shepard was abandoned by everyone that wasn't close to him. You're logic is flawed as you're trying to use individuals to characterize a whole species.

Nimrodell wrote...

It was convinient for renegade Shepard to get justification for destroying the heretics from Legion himself... but actually those words were truth. It took Legion, an AI to explain some basic things when it comes to arrogant assumptions what's right, what's wrong and what needs to be done. You can't apply your own morality, philosophical, political stands even in RL onto other nations that were developing differently and have utterly different customs and understanding of life... and in ME we have different alien species with different base for DNA for gods sake... read Tolkien's letter to Lewis about viability of travel through space and travel through time stories. Tolkien explained it so simple through very essence of understanding, ways of thinking and language. As human you know what water is... but if you manage to travel through space that far and find a sapient being, how it's going to even percieve such simple thing as need to drink water or what water actually is if it doesn't need it for it's own survival? Should we call it not evolved just for the simple fact that we need more time to understand a new life form and it needs that time too to understand us? I am orthodox Christian but I'm not trying to impose my understanding of holy trinity to Catholics - I understand their point of view and only because I was patient and curious enough to actually understand it, learn about it and comprehand their logic... history thought us that imposing one's ways is always wrong thing to do cause diversity in development, historical background asks for those willing to learn and understand not militant 'all-knowing' arses.

I think you misunderstood me. I was asking you to identify where me or anyone else was suggesting humanity or anyone else was trying to impose something on the rest of the galaxy.

Nimrodell wrote...

Wonder if you would think the same thing if your skin was marked for such experiments for 'greater good' .

Yes, that is basically what I answered in the next paragraph.

Nimrodell wrote...

Something may be deemed as necessary but it doesn't mean it should be justified. From fashist point of view, their horrible deeds, holocaust were necessary for what they percieved as a greater good. And here we come again to the simple thing that I was explaining just second ago... who says that your morals, views are actually correct one? There is no one truth, Einstein proved it but before him philosophers and writers as Milton and Njegos... it all depends on perspective from which you're watching the thing you call Truth. Im ME universe, we, as players, have limited knowledge, limited view on things, it works same as in literature. Shepard is not all-knowing, either paragon or renegade, but when it comes to humans, we're in liberty to say that Cerberus did atrocities, deem those deeds as necessery but also not hiding behind political human supremacy b...sheit. Hell, I would be the first to hunt down and punish all those Cerberus arses that were hiding their twisted experiments behind 'greater human agenda' curtain.

I don't see how justification is even relevant, especially if the course of action is necessary.

Now why do you keep bringing up morals and the idea that me or anyone else thinks theirs are the right ones? As I said before, Cerberus is more concerned about saving humans from extinction, not adhering to irrelevant morals and/or ethics.

There also is a truth in the Mass Effect universe. And that is the reapers are coming and if someone doesn't find a way to fight and defeat them, all the sentience races in the galaxy are going to be wiped out.

If you're suggesting that isn't the case, then that is something else entirely and has nothing to do with morals.

Nimrodell wrote...

Sacrifices are necessary sometimes, but there are pointless ones and ones with true meaning... just look at the Mordin's loyalty mission and the moment with krogan female. At least she had a choice, Cerberus victims didn't have it. Being a willing test subject... hm, that's too hypothetical for me when it comes to humanity. ****** Sapiens is called that way with a reason. For too many times 'stop the  great treat' reason was used and misused already for atrocities done and that's the difference between moral and immoral men. We still can't see the future and I do believe strongly that no one should be allowed to act in a manner of stupid dr Feelgood... let me explain it better cause that guy is not known outside my country:

What makes sacrifices pointless or meaningful is a matter of opinion. The experiment conducted on Grayson will have far more impact on the prevention of galactic extinction that the experiment on that krogan female. If conducting that experiment on Grayson was the only way to move forward towards finding a way to fight the reapers then I really don't care how willing he was.

Morals are such an arbitrary concept and have little to no bearing in this case.

The goal is simple, survive. If the only way to do that is to experiment on some unwilling test subject, then so be it. If someone would rather stick to their morals and perish rather than take that course of action then that is their choice alone.

Modifié par Inverness Moon, 21 novembre 2010 - 03:30 .

[Count Viceroy]

I don't trust cerberus in the slightest, but they are a necessary evil and have proven themselves useful. My personal feelings on them are irrelevant.

Modifié par Count Viceroy, 21 novembre 2010 - 06:25 .

[Axeface]

Simple answer from me.



Yes.

[Nimrodell]

Inverness Moon wrote...

Firstly, what reason would they have to search for Shepard's body if
they assumed it destroyed? It's not like they believed they could
somehow bring him back to life. It was Cerberus that made that possible.

Liara
was looking for Shepard's body because the collectors wanted it and
because TIM informed her that they might be able to bring Shepard back
to life, no?

I don't see how choosing to not try to find
Shepard's body while being ignorant of those facts makes what
Anderson/Udina and the Virmire survivor did a betrayal.

Secondly,
there seems to be the implication here that Kaidan/Ashley's behavior
towards Shepard had something to do with them being human, or that them
being the same species as Shepard should have had some sort of impact on
the situation. Shepard was abandoned by everyone that wasn't close to
him. You're logic is flawed as you're trying to use individuals to
characterize a whole species.

Take a look how BioWare sorted out some of the first paragon/renegade points in ME1 - Jenkins - paragon will choose the option saying that Jenkins deserves a burial, renegade will say - leave him. I'm not taking individuals to describe the entire species, I'm just stating that humans are flawed and good as any other species and answering the question if Cerberus is bad. Funny thing is that turians would actually understand better Cerberus dealings than humans if they had such organisation because their morality is a bit different then ours (Hierarchy and view on what makes a 'good' turian), well than most of us. My logic is not flawed in any way, I just see things differently  and have RL pointless and stupid wars, hatred and survival experience. ME1 assigments had shown Cerberus dealings in worst possible way and I didn't speak only about Shepard's body, I did mention other humans stating that Cerberus is bad. Hey even Miranda Lawson states that too many humans join Cerberus out of simple xenophobia. We're not talking about one experiment that will save the galaxy, they perfomed many such experiments and so far we've seen only failures that costed human lifes, not reaper ones (Depot Sigma - 23 is the most vivid one, not going to talk about Kahoku, Toombs and others). Just don't see where is necessity in those things.

Now why do you keep bringing up morals and the idea that me or anyone else thinks theirs are the right ones? As I said before, Cerberus is more concerned about saving humans from extinction, not adhering to irrelevant morals and/or ethics.

There also is a truth in the Mass Effect universe. And that is the reapers are coming and if someone doesn't find a way to fight and defeat them, all the sentience races in the galaxy are going to be wiped out.

If you're suggesting that isn't the case, then that is something else entirely and has nothing to do with morals.

In short - no one should be policing the others. Simple as that. And I wasn't just brining out different morals, I've also said that there are basic differences on biological level as well in political, philosophical etc. Luckily, Cerberus is not humanity... but I see that there is a problem for you to understand what I'm trying to say. Apologies for that, English is not my mother tongue and thus I'm not clear enough I guess. Let's use one horrible parallel in order to make it more clear why I think that Cerberus' dealings can't be justified in most of the cases and considered as necessary evil or just necessary (I hope). During II World War happened this also http://en.wikipedia....by_Nazi_Germany . It was deemed as necessary for survival and improvement of 'Aryan' race by many Germans in those times, justified because they were fighting a war and needed also a plan for replenishing their own numbers - no youth, no survival of the nation... but in the same time there were Germans who didn't agree with that idea of 'survival' and being better than any other nations. Bottom line is, Cerberus has no psychics that can see the future, Cerberus does not possess ability to travel through time and see possible outcomes - they act on assumptions being ruthless in the process (rachni experiments, thorian creepers, trasher maws, husks, Grayson, abandoning Chandana's team) so what makes those things justified? That way we could justify Saren's doings too, he was trying to save organics too, in the way he percieved as the right one - he was fighting for survival too.

What makes sacrifices pointless or meaningful is a matter of opinion. The experiment conducted on Grayson will have far more impact on the prevention of galactic extinction that the experiment on that krogan female. If conducting that experiment on Grayson was the only way to move forward towards finding a way to fight the reapers then I really don't care how willing he was.

Morals are such an arbitrary concept and have little to no bearing in this case.

The goal is simple, survive. If the only way to do that is to experiment on some unwilling test subject, then so be it. If someone would rather stick to their morals and perish rather than take that course of action then that is their choice alone.

Yes, and that's why we are all different as individuals. But also 'survival' can't be used as convinient ground for justification of atrocities... There is basic difference between us and animals - when animal kills it's because it's in its nature, instict that compells it to do it (but animal can't 'percieve' bigger picture, doesn't have higher cognitive processes that will burden it with questions, views on black, white and grey shades of morality). Unfortunately, humans can discern right from wrong, be emphatic or be selfish and also humans can percieve different paths for survival and in choosing them they can choose the necessary one but also they can name it by its true name without hypocritical justification. That's all I'm saying.

I don't want to kill this thread with long answers and endless conversation between two people only. I hope I was clear enough this time what's my stand on Cerberus being or not being bad. It was nice brainstorming .

[mad825]

as an misanthrope (on the verge of timonism), I say yes.

Modifié par mad825, 21 novembre 2010 - 10:36 .

[Inverness Moon]

Nimrodell wrote...

Take a look how BioWare sorted out some of the first paragon/renegade points in ME1 - Jenkins - paragon will choose the option saying that Jenkins deserves a burial, renegade will say - leave him. I'm not taking individuals to describe the entire species, I'm just stating that humans are flawed and good as any other species and answering the question if Cerberus is bad.

I don't get what your point is. I never suggested that humans were flawless. However, if you're suggesting that all species are equally flawed that is not true.

Nimrodell wrote...

Funny thing is that turians would actually understand better Cerberus dealings than humans if they had such organisation because their morality is a bit different then ours (Hierarchy and view on what makes a 'good' turian), well than most of us. My logic is not flawed in any way, I just see things differently  and have RL pointless and stupid wars, hatred and survival experience. ME1 assigments had shown Cerberus dealings in worst possible way and I didn't speak only about Shepard's body, I did mention other humans stating that Cerberus is bad. Hey even Miranda Lawson states that too many humans join Cerberus out of simple xenophobia. We're not talking about one experiment that will save the galaxy, they perfomed many such experiments and so far we've seen only failures that costed human lifes, not reaper ones (Depot Sigma - 23 is the most vivid one, not going to talk about Kahoku, Toombs and others). Just don't see where is necessity in those things.

If those experiments yielded knowledge that was necessary to restore Shepard from the dead, then I could easily argue that they were worth it and necessary. We don't know all the details at this point.

Nimrodell wrote...

In short - no one should be policing the others. Simple as that.

I said it before and I'll say it again. I did not suggest anything of the sort.

Nimrodell wrote...

And I wasn't just brining out different morals, I've also said that there are basic differences on biological level as well in political, philosophical etc. Luckily, Cerberus is not humanity... but I see that there is a problem for you to understand what I'm trying to say. Apologies for that, English is not my mother tongue and thus I'm not clear enough I guess. Let's use one horrible parallel in order to make it more clear why I think that Cerberus' dealings can't be justified in most of the cases and considered as necessary evil or just necessary (I hope). During II World War happened this also http://en.wikipedia....by_Nazi_Germany . It was deemed as necessary for survival and improvement of 'Aryan' race by many Germans in those times, justified because they were fighting a war and needed also a plan for replenishing their own numbers - no youth, no survival of the nation... but in the same time there were Germans who didn't agree with that idea of 'survival' and being better than any other nations. Bottom line is, Cerberus has no psychics that can see the future, Cerberus does not possess ability to travel through time and see possible outcomes - they act on assumptions being ruthless in the process (rachni experiments, thorian creepers, trasher maws, husks, Grayson, abandoning Chandana's team) so what makes those things justified? That way we could justify Saren's doings too, he was trying to save organics too, in the way he percieved as the right one - he was fighting for survival too.

What makes those things justified? The reapers make those things justified. Cerberus acts as it does in order to protect the future of humanity. The reapers represent the very threat to humanity that they have predicted, though of a much greater magnitude I'm sure.

So if we want to find out whether or not what Cerberus did was necessary, then we need to know what knowledge those experiments yielded and how they contributed to saving the galaxy from the reapers.

Your personal feelings about Cerberus's activities are irrelevant, because opinions and facts are two different things. The following are facts:

1. Cerberus pushed for the creation of the Normandy SR1 in order to observe turian ship design. If you question the significance of this then I would ask how important do you think the Normandy's stealth capability was to Shepard's success in ME1? Would he have had the ship if Cerberus hadn't pushed for it?
2. Cerberus was the only organization we know of that believed in and worked towards the defeat of the reapers after Shepard's death.
3. Cerberus resurrected Shepard in order to deal with the reapers and their servants.
4. Cerberus built the Normandy SR2 and equipped it with an AI designed based on reaper technology in order to fight the reapers.
5. Cerberus salvaged technology from the collector operation and used it to conduct an experiment on Grayson in order to figure out how reapers were able to control their servants over immense distances and the effects this had on the body. This is significant because defeating Sovereign while it was in control of Saren's body was what allowed the Alliance fleet to destroy it.

You can hate Cerberus for everything they've done all you want. But it would be immensely difficult for you to reason that we would be better off fighting against galactic extinction if it wasn't for Cerberus.

Nimrodell wrote...

Yes, and that's why we are all different as individuals. But also 'survival' can't be used as convinient ground for justification of atrocities... There is basic difference between us and animals - when animal kills it's because it's in its nature, instict that compells it to do it (but animal can't 'percieve' bigger picture, doesn't have higher cognitive processes that will burden it with questions, views on black, white and grey shades of morality). Unfortunately, humans can discern right from wrong, be emphatic or be selfish and also humans can percieve different paths for survival and in choosing them they can choose the necessary one but also they can name it by its true name without hypocritical justification. That's all I'm saying.

The reapers are certainly a convenient way to justify what Cerberus has done. And I will most certainly use survival against the reapers as a justification whether you agree or not.

You're also suggesting that there are different paths for survival, which is not necessarily the case. If there is only one path then it is obviously necessary if you intend to survive whether you like it or not. TIM sees one path ahead of him for dealing with the reapers and he is going to follow it whether it agrees with arbitrary ideas of ethics and morals or not.

The only way morals could be relevant in this case is if you're suggesting we should create an alternate path, one where we choose not to survive because the path to survival disagrees with someone's morals. You're free to make that choice on a personal basis, but not for the species.

[Phaedon]

Inverness Moon wrote...
It was a joint effort initially pushed by Cerberus that would not have happened if humanity hadn't been around.

Meh, without the massive turian industry, humans would have never made a stealth frigate.

Too many people look too far into that line. I have no problem with humanity becoming the greatest power in the galaxy thanks to that base. 

I do. 
But anyway, I don't think that they'll use it just for peaceful technological achievements, if you get what I mean.

Modifié par Phaedon, 21 novembre 2010 - 04:39 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Phaedon wrote...

Meh, without the massive turian industry, humans would have never made a stealth frigate.

Come again?



How did Cerberus make a stealth frigate?

[Phaedon]

TIM also spent billions of credits in Project Lazarus. What's your point ? The turians made a prototype, Cerberus made 1 ship, because they only needed one.

[Zulu_DFA]

The point is you're totally making up the Turians' share of the effort.

From the Kaidan/Joker conversation it's clear that the Council invested some money into the project, and from the conversation with the inspecting admiral it's clear that the spacial separation of the Bridge from the CIC is the element of design originating with the Turians. That's it.

The stealth system and the Tantalus drive core are products of the Humans' ingenuity and innovative thinking, as evidenced by Shepard's "Show 'em we think outside the box" remark.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 21 novembre 2010 - 06:37 .

[-Skorpious-]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

The point is you're totally making up the Turians' share of the effort.

From the Kaidan/Joker conversation it's clear that the Council invested some money into the project, and from the conversation with the inspecting admiral it's clear that the spacial separation of the Bridge from the CIC is the element of design originating with the Turians. That's it.

The stealth system and the Tantalus drive core are products of the Humans' ingenuity and innovative thinking, as evidenced by Shepard's "Show 'em we think outside the box" remark.

Thats an assumption of both of your parts. Nobody knows exacly how much each party contributed financially, technologically, or conceptualy to the overall design, making claiming that "mostly the turians/humans built it" argument irrelevant. Sure, Shepard's "show em' we think out of the box" comment may have alluded that the Normandy's innovations have been suggested by a human scientist, but whose to say that it wasn't a turian whose engineering expertise and design made said innovations possible?