The main point about the OP is that it is based on a flawed premise. That premise is that research is conducted completely isolated from the real world. In other words the research happens without input at any stage from the outside world. Moreover even when crafting the post and posing the question the OP also makes a value judgement about the research data when judgement should not be made.
If this were not bad enough the OP also ignores the fact that data in and of itself is not good or bad. It is an inanimate object and cannot have that attribute. It is people who make that judgement and more specifically at least 2 people. In the case mentioned concerning research done in WWII. Had Germany won there would have been no opposing side to call the research done immoral or unethical and thus the research would have been called good. Indeed it would still have been used to save lives. Anyone who called such research bad (if they existed) would be the ones who would be persecuted for saying that when obviously it was good and saved lives.
So saying data in and of itself is good or bad is wrong. In ME2 the situation where this crops up is pretty much something like the same. Had no-one interfered with it and it had produced a cure the end result would have been that it would have been called good research because the people who opposed the methods would no longer be around.
Evil or good are values that people have. Without people no such value judgement can be made. And more to the point that value changes depending on a personal point of view. Clearly the OP has not understood the point made within ME2 about this very issue.
Deep Paragon/Renegade Conflict regarding torture. Comparison with Hitlers army.
Débuté par
TowranPeter
, févr. 07 2011 09:54
Retour en haut
#152
Posté 10 février 2011 - 02:30
Dean_the_Young
-
- Members
- 20 676 messages
Is anyone else laughing about someone the internet arguing that taking any aspect or derivative of the product of an immoral process is rewarding the wrong?
'I would never take the fruits of the fruits of evil', says the person using a US-developed internet when the US government as we know it, even ignoring the whole lot of Cold War nonsense, was in large part founded on and nurtured by the profits of slavery.
'I would never take the fruits of the fruits of evil', says the person using a US-developed internet when the US government as we know it, even ignoring the whole lot of Cold War nonsense, was in large part founded on and nurtured by the profits of slavery.
#153
Posté 10 février 2011 - 03:24
fredster184
-
- Members
- 14 messages
Hey op if you don't like things that were made from inhumane ways then you should live in a forest because pretty much everything we own came from such acts.
Microwaves- Scientists allowed people to get radiation sickness just to study them. We used data from those expierements to make microwaves so if you use one you condone those tests.
Your clothes- I bet you some of your cloths were made in a sweat shop somewhere is china. So if you wear it you condone child labor.
Chicken- If you eat chicken it probably came from a farm that cramps them in small places and injects them with growth hormone so if you eat it you agree with animal abuse.
Oil- the gas in your car came from oil companies that drilled and harmed the environment so you must agree with destroying our environment for cheap fuel.
and it goes on and on. So quite acting all righteous because all you really are is a coward.
Microwaves- Scientists allowed people to get radiation sickness just to study them. We used data from those expierements to make microwaves so if you use one you condone those tests.
Your clothes- I bet you some of your cloths were made in a sweat shop somewhere is china. So if you wear it you condone child labor.
Chicken- If you eat chicken it probably came from a farm that cramps them in small places and injects them with growth hormone so if you eat it you agree with animal abuse.
Oil- the gas in your car came from oil companies that drilled and harmed the environment so you must agree with destroying our environment for cheap fuel.
and it goes on and on. So quite acting all righteous because all you really are is a coward.
Modifié par fredster184, 10 février 2011 - 03:26 .
#154
Posté 10 février 2011 - 06:29
Dexi
-
- Members
- 898 messages
fredster184 wrote...
Hey op if you don't like things that were made from inhumane ways then you should live in a forest because pretty much everything we own came from such acts.
Microwaves- Scientists allowed people to get radiation sickness just to study them. We used data from those expierements to make microwaves so if you use one you condone those tests.
Your clothes- I bet you some of your cloths were made in a sweat shop somewhere is china. So if you wear it you condone child labor.
Chicken- If you eat chicken it probably came from a farm that cramps them in small places and injects them with growth hormone so if you eat it you agree with animal abuse.
Oil- the gas in your car came from oil companies that drilled and harmed the environment so you must agree with destroying our environment for cheap fuel.
/thread
#155
Posté 11 février 2011 - 06:20
TowranPeter
-
- Members
- 82 messages
I don't get what's so hard about understanding that if you used scientific data acquired through torture
of a sapient species you're a renegade and if you destroy it you're a paragon. By using the data, all you do is encourage more rogue scientists since they know full well you'll use the data.
I've read a lot of your posts. But man, they are so off topic now lol. Some dude was talking about microwaves and chickens? WTF? haha
Another guy was trying to morally define the word scientist. YES THE ACTUAL WORD. A person who follows the scientific method in order to find a discovery is a scientist right? He then said that a scientist and an intelligent mad man are different, even though the intelligent mad man follows the scientific method LOL.
Here is a clever statemet:
Yes it is rewarding the wrong, because the wrong will continue to do so knowing full well you'll use the product. Rogue scientists will continue gross experimentation, producing highly efficient results knowing full well you'll hypcrotically denounce torture but then use the data lol.
"I would never take the fruits of the fruits of evil". You're right I wouldn't.
In real life I'm not a paragon, I"m very much a renegade. You guys have gone so off topic it's unbelievable. If you want to know what I'd do in real life, I'd use the data because i'm too weak of a person to destroy it even though I know it's the right thing to do. And knowing that i'm surrounded by people who would keep it. I'd use the data out of fear and just pray that I don't get randomly abducted and tortured lol.
If you guys want my real life opinion, I'd use the data and I would consider myself a renegade, not a paragon. By using the data I know that word will get out and the cycle will continue and I would accept that as "life".
But IN GAME, IN GAME, IN GAME my goal was to play Shepard as a PURE 100% paragon that has high morale standards that are very ideological. So when destroying the data yielded renegade, I thought to myself, well the cycle will continue then..................
The issue is that people were used for gross experimentation against their will. Why do you think the solarian even embarked on this endeavor? He probably knew full well that if anyone were to kill him, that they would use his data and his legacy would continue.................. Get it?
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
Rogue scientists who perform gross experimentation on a sapient species ultimately want their data and cure to be used despite what happens to themselves.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
Anyone who called such research bad (if they existed) would be the ones
who would be persecuted for saying that when obviously it was good and saved lives.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
A rogue scientist knows he can torture 19823 people and kill them, produce a result and even if the he is arrested or killed, society will USE his acquired data.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
Rogue scientists who perform gross experimentation know full well society will use his data despite his crimes against humanity.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
MY ARGUMENT IS THAT A TRUE PARAGON WILL STOP THE CYCLE FROM EVER HAPPENING AGAIN.
TO STOP CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
TO DISCOURAGE FUTURE ROGUE SCIENTISTS FROM TORTURING....
Everyone who is against me in this thread, their logic is broken because the rogue scientist will always reach his goal and can count on future support. Get it? Future rogue scientists know they can get away with it because their data will be used.
Future rogue scientists know they can get away with it because their data will be used.
of a sapient species you're a renegade and if you destroy it you're a paragon. By using the data, all you do is encourage more rogue scientists since they know full well you'll use the data.
I've read a lot of your posts. But man, they are so off topic now lol. Some dude was talking about microwaves and chickens? WTF? haha
Another guy was trying to morally define the word scientist. YES THE ACTUAL WORD. A person who follows the scientific method in order to find a discovery is a scientist right? He then said that a scientist and an intelligent mad man are different, even though the intelligent mad man follows the scientific method LOL.
Here is a clever statemet:
Dean_the_Young wrote...
Is anyone else laughing about someone the internet arguing that taking any aspect or derivative of the product of an immoral process is rewarding the wrong?
'I would never take the fruits of the fruits of evil', says the person using a US-developed internet when the US government as we know it, even ignoring the whole lot of Cold War nonsense, was in large part founded on and nurtured by the profits of slavery.
Yes it is rewarding the wrong, because the wrong will continue to do so knowing full well you'll use the product. Rogue scientists will continue gross experimentation, producing highly efficient results knowing full well you'll hypcrotically denounce torture but then use the data lol.
"I would never take the fruits of the fruits of evil". You're right I wouldn't.
In real life I'm not a paragon, I"m very much a renegade. You guys have gone so off topic it's unbelievable. If you want to know what I'd do in real life, I'd use the data because i'm too weak of a person to destroy it even though I know it's the right thing to do. And knowing that i'm surrounded by people who would keep it. I'd use the data out of fear and just pray that I don't get randomly abducted and tortured lol.
If you guys want my real life opinion, I'd use the data and I would consider myself a renegade, not a paragon. By using the data I know that word will get out and the cycle will continue and I would accept that as "life".
But IN GAME, IN GAME, IN GAME my goal was to play Shepard as a PURE 100% paragon that has high morale standards that are very ideological. So when destroying the data yielded renegade, I thought to myself, well the cycle will continue then..................
glacier1701 wrote...
Anyone who called such research bad (if they existed) would be the ones who would be persecuted for saying
that when obviously it was good and saved lives.
So saying data in and of itself is good or bad is wrong. In ME2 the situation where this crops up is pretty much something like the same. Had no-one interfered with it and it had produced a cure the end result would have been that it would have been called good research because the people who opposed the methods would no longer be around.
Evil or good are values that people have. Without people no such value judgement can be made. And more to the point that value changes depending on a personal point of view. Clearly the OP has not understood the point made within ME2 about this very issue.
The issue is that people were used for gross experimentation against their will. Why do you think the solarian even embarked on this endeavor? He probably knew full well that if anyone were to kill him, that they would use his data and his legacy would continue.................. Get it?
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
Rogue scientists who perform gross experimentation on a sapient species ultimately want their data and cure to be used despite what happens to themselves.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
Anyone who called such research bad (if they existed) would be the ones
who would be persecuted for saying that when obviously it was good and saved lives.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
A rogue scientist knows he can torture 19823 people and kill them, produce a result and even if the he is arrested or killed, society will USE his acquired data.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
Rogue scientists who perform gross experimentation know full well society will use his data despite his crimes against humanity.
The rogue scientists ALWAYS WIN. THEY ALWAYS WIN.
MY ARGUMENT IS THAT A TRUE PARAGON WILL STOP THE CYCLE FROM EVER HAPPENING AGAIN.
TO STOP CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
TO DISCOURAGE FUTURE ROGUE SCIENTISTS FROM TORTURING....
Everyone who is against me in this thread, their logic is broken because the rogue scientist will always reach his goal and can count on future support. Get it? Future rogue scientists know they can get away with it because their data will be used.
Future rogue scientists know they can get away with it because their data will be used.
Modifié par TowranPeter, 11 février 2011 - 06:23 .
#156
Posté 11 février 2011 - 06:53
Locutus_of_BORG
-
- Members
- 3 578 messages
Nah, I'm just gonna withdraw my post.
Modifié par Locutus_of_BORG, 11 février 2011 - 07:00 .
#157
Posté 11 février 2011 - 07:13
Kelliak
-
- Members
- 39 messages
Torture, death, and rape is never justified by any means. Those who condone it and utilize such means should always be brought to justice for their crimes.
That being said though, if the deed is done and recorded data from the experiments proves to be fruitful then should you really hide that data from the world, particularly if it is of great benefit? The only thing remaining from the destroyed lives in this instance is likely that very data - extracted through much pain and suffering.
Let's break it down like this...
1) What's done is done - destroying the data won't change anything.
2) You're destroying the ONLY beneficial thing to come from all that out of a misguided sense of justice.
3) The pain and death that the subjects went through were for nothing, because you had to throw a fit essentially.
4) Basically, destruction of the data is borderline childlike angst.
It requires a deeper thinking and understanding than to simply say, "Data came from evil means, it must be destroyed." which is the most simplistic approach to this situation. The writers in my opinion were actually very intelligent in designing this paragon/renegade scenario and really wanted you to carefully consider it. I like that personally.
Individuals will always commit great crimes in the name of science and research. Releasing the data or destroying it won't change a thing in regards to that. The world (or in this case the universe) is, what it is essentially. That won't be altered by such hasty actions that likely no one would be aware of, and if they were, would be extremely disappointed in you.
Ultimately what it really comes down is this; deprive the people of valuable information out of anger or release it for their benefit. There is truly, TRULY nothing more to it than that.
That being said though, if the deed is done and recorded data from the experiments proves to be fruitful then should you really hide that data from the world, particularly if it is of great benefit? The only thing remaining from the destroyed lives in this instance is likely that very data - extracted through much pain and suffering.
Let's break it down like this...
1) What's done is done - destroying the data won't change anything.
2) You're destroying the ONLY beneficial thing to come from all that out of a misguided sense of justice.
3) The pain and death that the subjects went through were for nothing, because you had to throw a fit essentially.
4) Basically, destruction of the data is borderline childlike angst.
It requires a deeper thinking and understanding than to simply say, "Data came from evil means, it must be destroyed." which is the most simplistic approach to this situation. The writers in my opinion were actually very intelligent in designing this paragon/renegade scenario and really wanted you to carefully consider it. I like that personally.
Individuals will always commit great crimes in the name of science and research. Releasing the data or destroying it won't change a thing in regards to that. The world (or in this case the universe) is, what it is essentially. That won't be altered by such hasty actions that likely no one would be aware of, and if they were, would be extremely disappointed in you.
Ultimately what it really comes down is this; deprive the people of valuable information out of anger or release it for their benefit. There is truly, TRULY nothing more to it than that.
Modifié par Kelliak, 11 février 2011 - 07:21 .
#158
Posté 11 février 2011 - 08:30
SalsaDMA
-
- Members
- 2 512 messages
He's not even reading responses, why bother?
He isn't even viewing it in a black/white view, he's viewing it a black/black view (except that he prob even thinks it is black/white... The deities knows why...).
I do find it mildly humerous that hs is actually condoning research in experiments by torture since he is adamant in claiming that such needs to be redone as many times as it takes for random people to get the idea. Instead of your average mad scientist saying: "Oh, that data already exists. Why should I bother conducting those experiments again when the knowledge is freely available on the internet?"
Renegade: My opinion counts supreme. Who cares about the suffering of millions now and in the future?
Paragon: The people is what matters, not my own vain and warped self-esteem.
Yet for some reason OP think it is paragon to say "F U" to all the ones suffering and actively advocating that the grounds should be sown for more horrible acts to be commited.
I think it is safe to at this point to conclude that OP has some sociological issues given what he advocates for in regards to how to treat people that suffer/have-suffered/will-suffer compared to everyone else in this thread. He also seems to have some communication issues, as he doesn't really communicate in the thread, but merely try to proclaim his viewpoint without being able to comprehend or reason with what other people write in response.
The thread, as an actual debate, have been over for quite a while. It's OP saying the same things over and over again while ignoring everything that people actually try and tell him. Maybe he somehow foolishly thinks that if he just keeps repeating the same wrong things time and time again it will somehow be right. It won't. People will just grow tired of trying to comunicate with the human equilevant of a brick wall.
He isn't even viewing it in a black/white view, he's viewing it a black/black view (except that he prob even thinks it is black/white... The deities knows why...).
I do find it mildly humerous that hs is actually condoning research in experiments by torture since he is adamant in claiming that such needs to be redone as many times as it takes for random people to get the idea. Instead of your average mad scientist saying: "Oh, that data already exists. Why should I bother conducting those experiments again when the knowledge is freely available on the internet?"
Renegade: My opinion counts supreme. Who cares about the suffering of millions now and in the future?
Paragon: The people is what matters, not my own vain and warped self-esteem.
Yet for some reason OP think it is paragon to say "F U" to all the ones suffering and actively advocating that the grounds should be sown for more horrible acts to be commited.
I think it is safe to at this point to conclude that OP has some sociological issues given what he advocates for in regards to how to treat people that suffer/have-suffered/will-suffer compared to everyone else in this thread. He also seems to have some communication issues, as he doesn't really communicate in the thread, but merely try to proclaim his viewpoint without being able to comprehend or reason with what other people write in response.
The thread, as an actual debate, have been over for quite a while. It's OP saying the same things over and over again while ignoring everything that people actually try and tell him. Maybe he somehow foolishly thinks that if he just keeps repeating the same wrong things time and time again it will somehow be right. It won't. People will just grow tired of trying to comunicate with the human equilevant of a brick wall.
#160
Posté 11 février 2011 - 10:08
Di-Hydrogen-Monoxide
-
- Members
- 142 messages
Isn't this guy just a troll? His argument seems to consist of "You're renegade, read my logic, you're renegade".
If he isn't a troll then i feel truly sorry for him, as he must be the most narrow minded and scoailly inept people i have ever had the misfortune to encounter. Where the data comes from doesn't matter, only how it can be used for the benefit of humanity etc is. To refuse to use the data is the same as refusing medical treatment due to its long history of malpractice and border-line illegal experiments.
Not to mention you are condeming a race to a drawn out extinction.
If he isn't a troll then i feel truly sorry for him, as he must be the most narrow minded and scoailly inept people i have ever had the misfortune to encounter. Where the data comes from doesn't matter, only how it can be used for the benefit of humanity etc is. To refuse to use the data is the same as refusing medical treatment due to its long history of malpractice and border-line illegal experiments.
Not to mention you are condeming a race to a drawn out extinction.
Modifié par Di-Hydrogen-Monoxide, 11 février 2011 - 10:08 .
#161
Posté 11 février 2011 - 11:26
TowranPeter
-
- Members
- 82 messages
Di-Hydrogen-Monoxide wrote...Not to mention you are condeming a race to a drawn out extinction.
You obviously didn't read any of the codex in the game and you probably hit spacebar anytime dialogue came up. Instead of me giving you a spoiler you should play ME2 again and pay attention to Mordin from the very first word he speaks up until the scenario I reference in my OP thread. You will see your statement is incorrect.
#162
Posté 11 février 2011 - 11:33
TowranPeter
-
- Members
- 82 messages
SalsaDMA wrote...
He's not even reading responses, why bother?
He isn't even viewing it in a black/white view, he's viewing it a black/black view (except that he prob even thinks it is black/white... The deities knows why...).
Everything in life is either black or white, to think that something is grey or colorful is your own delusion. It's foolhardy and it's cute in a neive way and I actually respect it, but the truth is black or white.
SalsaDMA wrote...I do find it mildly humerous that hs is actually condoning research in experiments by torture since he is adamant in claiming that such needs to be redone as many times as it takes for random people to get the idea. Instead of your average mad scientist saying: "Oh, that data already exists. Why should I bother conducting those experiments again when the knowledge is freely available on the internet?"
... lol wut? This paragraph made no relevant sense to anything in this post.
Paragon: The people is what matters, not my own vain and warped self-esteem.
Yes exactly, I'm glad we both agree on this. A fool will use the data and only encourage more rogue scientists to abduct and torture people for experiments since they know the data will be used.
Yet for some reason OP think it is paragon to say "F U" to all the ones suffering and actively advocating that the grounds should be sown for more horrible acts to be commited.
You forget that people are being tortured. Watch two movies:
Hostel
Martyrs
That will give you a proper perspective on why preventing torture is more important than finding a cure to a disease that will be cured overtime through purely paragon means.
I think it is safe to at this point to conclude that OP has some sociological issues given what he advocates for in regards to how to treat people that suffer/have-suffered/will-suffer compared to everyone else in this thread. He also seems to have some communication issues, as he doesn't really communicate in the thread, but merely try to proclaim his viewpoint without being able to comprehend or reason with what other people write in response.
By using the data you encourage rogue scientists to abduct/torture humans for gross experiment knowing full well their data will be used. Counter this argument and discuss nothing else, this argument is the topic of this post. No where did you counter this argument.
The thread, as an actual debate, have been over for quite a while. It's OP saying the same things over and over again while ignoring everything that people actually try and tell him. Maybe he somehow foolishly thinks that if he just keeps repeating the same wrong things time and time again it will somehow be right. It won't. People will just grow tired of trying to comunicate with the human equilevant of a brick wall.
Yup because not one person was able to counter my argument. All I'm reading are completely warped, off topic responses from renegades with large selfish egos. I mean some dude was talking about chickens and a microwave.
You're second paragraph didn't even make any sense.
Modifié par TowranPeter, 11 février 2011 - 11:35 .
#163
Posté 12 février 2011 - 12:55
JrayM16
-
- Members
- 1 817 messages
Naw, he's reading posts, he's just cherry picking the ones he quotes. He only quotes the ones he can somewhat argue with and ignores the more indepth full-proof respones. Not to brag, but for isntance he hasn't quoted any of mine to my knowledge, probably because I provided in depth scenarios of how destroying data could lead to armageddon. Hyperbole, maybe, but so is the OP.
Also, thimnking everything is black and white is so naive.
Also, I think the OP may want to just take a moment and think about the fact that not a single person(maybe one or two, I forget) has agreed with his position. Populrity doesn't win arguments, but chances are if someone holds tha they are the "one-sane man" then they probably aren't.
Not to mention the OP's recent ad hominem where he called all those who disagreed "renegades with large selfish egos." Firstly, ad hominem is generally proof of a alcak of argument. Secondly, the OP falsely claims all responses were off-topic, again he cherry picks. He cites the analogies as off-topic when he used analogies himself in almost every post. He also uses paragon/renegade as an actual value judghement, instead of a meaningless guideline, which is all they are.
I would say I'm done with this thread, but I'm probably not. I just can't resist pointing out the OP's flawed logic again and again.
Finally, if the OP chooses to quote this post, I challenge him to quote one of my more indepth posts and argue with that instead.
Also, thimnking everything is black and white is so naive.
Also, I think the OP may want to just take a moment and think about the fact that not a single person(maybe one or two, I forget) has agreed with his position. Populrity doesn't win arguments, but chances are if someone holds tha they are the "one-sane man" then they probably aren't.
Not to mention the OP's recent ad hominem where he called all those who disagreed "renegades with large selfish egos." Firstly, ad hominem is generally proof of a alcak of argument. Secondly, the OP falsely claims all responses were off-topic, again he cherry picks. He cites the analogies as off-topic when he used analogies himself in almost every post. He also uses paragon/renegade as an actual value judghement, instead of a meaningless guideline, which is all they are.
I would say I'm done with this thread, but I'm probably not. I just can't resist pointing out the OP's flawed logic again and again.
Finally, if the OP chooses to quote this post, I challenge him to quote one of my more indepth posts and argue with that instead.
#164
Posté 12 février 2011 - 02:46
Sentox6
-
- Members
- 460 messages
I find this line of reasoning to be extremely tenuous, but I'd rather raise an adjunct point.TowranPeter wrote...
By using the data you encourage rogue scientists to abduct/torture humans for gross experiment knowing full well their data will be used. Counter this argument and discuss nothing else, this argument is the topic of this post. No where did you counter this argument.
Your attempts to define these two options as Paragon and Renegade in a binary manner strike me as horribly disingenuous. The possible message you send to other would-be perpetrators of these acts is only one aspect of the scenario. You have to weigh this with the possible uses of the data. The discouragement of future experiments versus how the data could improve quality of life? As Mordin would say, both help people.
One tempting reply might be that the suffering involving in creating the data makes discarding it the moral 'high ground'. I could equally point out that doing so renders all the victims' suffering meaningless: the ultimate parting cruelty. But either way, it's simply poor thinking at best. The data itself is inanimate, and neither choice will undo what has been done. Only future consequences are relevant.
Both choices have the potential to fit either type of 'morality'. In truth, the Paragon solution is whichever choice you believe will lead to the greater good, while the Renegade solution is whichever will expedite your current mission.
Modifié par Sentox6, 12 février 2011 - 03:14 .
#165
Posté 12 février 2011 - 05:05
TCBC_Freak
-
- Members
- 743 messages
I'll post this once more, then I'm done; *IF* you read it you'll either see its logical and agree or you wont and go on believing as you do in a logical falsehood. The key word in that is IF.
My argument against you is simple; you assume these people (aliens or otherwise) where tortured. If that is the case then you are right, there is always another way to learn the same data.
However, if that same scientist in you dramatic example was not mad; if he has a plan to cure something but it will cause pain, possible even death, to all those who partake in it so he can implement the cure, but it could save billions of lives - now lets say he asks for volunteers which brings a group of willing people, then it is not torture. True it would be better if it was a painless thing and given time there always is a better way to learn, but torture it is not as they agreed to the method used on them. By the way, I precluded the rape which was pure hyperbole on your part if i may say so as something no sane scientist would do.
That is my argument, you assume torture thus your argument is flawed. Torture by definition is not volunteered for and even in the ME example you used they volunteered. True some did so not knowing the full motives of the people testing on them. This does in the ME example muddy the water of valid research which does make this a much less clear cut example (more like something in real life as it were).
After all, many new drugs go in a human test phase, as a student in school I almost participated in one for money but decided not to. Some people would say this could be torture; the side effects are unknown and when you sign up you tell them you are willing to die to learn if the drug works as it should. I didn't do it because of the possible side effects they knew about. But many people did go on to work as test subjects. Those reaserchers did not torture anyone.
Once again; you have a warped assumption that these people were tortured and did not volunteer; in the Mass Effect scenario that started this all the subjects volunteered; therefore, by definition it is not torture.
Also, you are postulating events that never happen in a well regulated world. There are no scientists like this, very
intelligent mad men maybe, but not scientists. And a mad man by definition would not care about the risks they do what they do regardless, you can not encourage or discourage them with punishment, they don't care. A mad man tortures because he is mad no matter if he learns something or not and no matter if you use it or not.
You are postulating a sane person doing these experiment however the very nature of the experiments precludes a sane person from doing them. No sane person kidnaps people to experiment on them (I should clarify, no sane person who is not a sociopath). They may get volunteers but then it is no longer torture so long as they sign a waver explaining that they fully understand what is possible to happen to them.
Also, in many of your above post you [b]assume the experiments stop, you have NO reason to believe this, it is a fantasy; you have no evidence they would stop because the date is not being used only your speculation. For all you know someone might do even more "torture" to re-cure something saying, "We must keep killing and curing because you keep destroying our work, and we will work all the more, and kill all the more."
You whole argument is based on assumptions, fantasy scenarios that are not as simple as you are making them, no real world data, and warped morality. I'm sorry, but you are flawed in your logic because you are basing it all on hyperbole.
That's all I have, now, if you are a 13 year old kid you will not understand most of what I have said, words like "Hyperbole" and "Postulating" will lose you. However, I am willing to give you more credit then that one last time. Unless you have a direct question to me about my post I will not post again in this thread. Best of luck to those who do.
Logic Police
in the house...
My argument against you is simple; you assume these people (aliens or otherwise) where tortured. If that is the case then you are right, there is always another way to learn the same data.
However, if that same scientist in you dramatic example was not mad; if he has a plan to cure something but it will cause pain, possible even death, to all those who partake in it so he can implement the cure, but it could save billions of lives - now lets say he asks for volunteers which brings a group of willing people, then it is not torture. True it would be better if it was a painless thing and given time there always is a better way to learn, but torture it is not as they agreed to the method used on them. By the way, I precluded the rape which was pure hyperbole on your part if i may say so as something no sane scientist would do.
That is my argument, you assume torture thus your argument is flawed. Torture by definition is not volunteered for and even in the ME example you used they volunteered. True some did so not knowing the full motives of the people testing on them. This does in the ME example muddy the water of valid research which does make this a much less clear cut example (more like something in real life as it were).
After all, many new drugs go in a human test phase, as a student in school I almost participated in one for money but decided not to. Some people would say this could be torture; the side effects are unknown and when you sign up you tell them you are willing to die to learn if the drug works as it should. I didn't do it because of the possible side effects they knew about. But many people did go on to work as test subjects. Those reaserchers did not torture anyone.
Once again; you have a warped assumption that these people were tortured and did not volunteer; in the Mass Effect scenario that started this all the subjects volunteered; therefore, by definition it is not torture.
Also, you are postulating events that never happen in a well regulated world. There are no scientists like this, very
intelligent mad men maybe, but not scientists. And a mad man by definition would not care about the risks they do what they do regardless, you can not encourage or discourage them with punishment, they don't care. A mad man tortures because he is mad no matter if he learns something or not and no matter if you use it or not.
You are postulating a sane person doing these experiment however the very nature of the experiments precludes a sane person from doing them. No sane person kidnaps people to experiment on them (I should clarify, no sane person who is not a sociopath). They may get volunteers but then it is no longer torture so long as they sign a waver explaining that they fully understand what is possible to happen to them.
Also, in many of your above post you [b]assume the experiments stop, you have NO reason to believe this, it is a fantasy; you have no evidence they would stop because the date is not being used only your speculation. For all you know someone might do even more "torture" to re-cure something saying, "We must keep killing and curing because you keep destroying our work, and we will work all the more, and kill all the more."
You whole argument is based on assumptions, fantasy scenarios that are not as simple as you are making them, no real world data, and warped morality. I'm sorry, but you are flawed in your logic because you are basing it all on hyperbole.
That's all I have, now, if you are a 13 year old kid you will not understand most of what I have said, words like "Hyperbole" and "Postulating" will lose you. However, I am willing to give you more credit then that one last time. Unless you have a direct question to me about my post I will not post again in this thread. Best of luck to those who do.
Logic Police
in the house...
Modifié par TCBC_Freak, 12 février 2011 - 05:09 .
#166
Posté 12 février 2011 - 05:18
Kurt Cobain
-
- Members
- 153 messages
I must say that your example of the ****'s is rather shortsighted. I think the USA performed at least equal horrors, though not on jews, on arabs.
#167
Posté 12 février 2011 - 11:15
SalsaDMA
-
- Members
- 2 512 messages
Let's do this the easy way.
Who thinks OP is making a paragon choice when he condems an entire species to extinction because they lost all hope purely for his own selfish reasons?
*OP raises his hand.*
And who thinks OP is making a renegade choice when he condems an entire species to extinction because they lost all hope purely for his own selfish reasons?
*Everyone else raises their hands*
And there we have it...
Mate, you need to get out of the closet. Cause you ain't as Paragon as you proclaim to be.
It's alright. Some people are just born to be Renegades. Just accept it instead of trying to shout ever louder that you are actually paragon in your beliefs. You can't outshout the truth, despite how loud you try and do it. Just accept it's the way of things and move on with the chip off your shoulders instead. Continually fighting who you are will just end up giving you more headaches than it is worth.
Who thinks OP is making a paragon choice when he condems an entire species to extinction because they lost all hope purely for his own selfish reasons?
*OP raises his hand.*
And who thinks OP is making a renegade choice when he condems an entire species to extinction because they lost all hope purely for his own selfish reasons?
*Everyone else raises their hands*
And there we have it...
Mate, you need to get out of the closet. Cause you ain't as Paragon as you proclaim to be.
It's alright. Some people are just born to be Renegades. Just accept it instead of trying to shout ever louder that you are actually paragon in your beliefs. You can't outshout the truth, despite how loud you try and do it. Just accept it's the way of things and move on with the chip off your shoulders instead. Continually fighting who you are will just end up giving you more headaches than it is worth.
#168
Posté 12 février 2011 - 12:08
Display Name Owner
-
- Members
- 1 190 messages
I agree with those saying that it's better to keep such data and make use of it.
But as to the point about essentially giving corrupt scientists validation... wouldn't the fact that they are corrupt, and that they already have an inherent desire to perform such actions mean that they are going to do it regardless? Why do they care what some Paragon or Renegade on the other end of the Galaxy does with some other mad scientist's data?
How are all these scientists even aware of this?
If anything, the point is that the origins of such data should be kept hidden, which makes sense.
But as to the point about essentially giving corrupt scientists validation... wouldn't the fact that they are corrupt, and that they already have an inherent desire to perform such actions mean that they are going to do it regardless? Why do they care what some Paragon or Renegade on the other end of the Galaxy does with some other mad scientist's data?
How are all these scientists even aware of this?
If anything, the point is that the origins of such data should be kept hidden, which makes sense.
#169
Posté 12 février 2011 - 01:05
Dexi
-
- Members
- 898 messages
OP, with all the responds you made... you seem stupider and stupider. No offense intended.
Stopped there... can't stand the stupidity any longer.
Please, people, end this thread before this forum collapses from the weight of it's disgrace.
TowranPeter wrote...
Everything in life is either black or white, to think that something is grey or colorful is your own delusion. It's foolhardy and it's cute in a neive way and I actually respect it, but the truth is black or white.
Stopped there... can't stand the stupidity any longer.
Please, people, end this thread before this forum collapses from the weight of it's disgrace.
#170
Posté 12 février 2011 - 01:30
aeetos21
-
- Members
- 1 478 messages
TowranPeter wrote...
Everything in life is either black or white, to think that something is grey or colorful is your own delusion. It's foolhardy and it's cute in a neive way and I actually respect it, but the truth is black or white.
That couldn't be further from the truth and honestly makes me wonder whether you ever played a BW game to begin with.
Either way, this thread is still going?
#171
Posté 12 février 2011 - 01:37
pmac_tk421
-
- Members
- 1 465 messages
Just end this pointless charade of a thread. If you think that destroying information to restore a race and make thousands die for nothing, fine. Just don't make a "THIS CHOICE SHOULD BE PATCHED NAO" group. They cant patch a choice. Besides, all the consequences are already written and implimented in ME3 since the game is apparently at least playable by this point.
@JrayM16, I agree with you completely.
@Kelliak, I also completely agree with you. The whole quest was a great example of what the bioware writers can do.
@JrayM16, I agree with you completely.
@Kelliak, I also completely agree with you. The whole quest was a great example of what the bioware writers can do.
Modifié par pmac_tk421, 12 février 2011 - 01:39 .
#172
Posté 13 février 2011 - 12:00
JrayM16
-
- Members
- 1 817 messages
aeetos21 wrote...
TowranPeter wrote...
Everything in life is either black or white, to think that something is grey or colorful is your own delusion. It's foolhardy and it's cute in a neive way and I actually respect it, but the truth is black or white.
That couldn't be further from the truth and honestly makes me wonder whether you ever played a BW game to begin with.
Either way, this thread is still going?
Yes. It never ceases to entertain, so I'll have it go on a bit longer.
#173
Posté 13 février 2011 - 04:40
xentar
-
- Members
- 937 messages
TowranPeter wrote...
I don't get what's so hard about understanding that if you used scientific data acquired through torture
of a sapient species you're a renegade and if you destroy it you're a paragon.
Maybe because it is false by definition?
#174
Posté 13 février 2011 - 05:39
DrunkKroganMaster
-
- Members
- 1 messages
*Applauds* We should all remember this day when TCBC_Freak defeated the the great idiot troll TowranPeter in flawless debate. His use of facts, logic, and common sense helped bring and end to TowranPeter's countless assaults of retarded posts. After 7 pages of brutal fighting the brave and intelligent members of this forum kept strong and now with the troll gone this thread can now rest in peace.TCBC_Freak wrote...
I'll post this once more, then I'm done; *IF* you read it you'll either see its logical and agree or you wont and go on believing as you do in a logical falsehood. The key word in that is IF.
My argument against you is simple; you assume these people (aliens or otherwise) where tortured. If that is the case then you are right, there is always another way to learn the same data.
However, if that same scientist in you dramatic example was not mad; if he has a plan to cure something but it will cause pain, possible even death, to all those who partake in it so he can implement the cure, but it could save billions of lives - now lets say he asks for volunteers which brings a group of willing people, then it is not torture. True it would be better if it was a painless thing and given time there always is a better way to learn, but torture it is not as they agreed to the method used on them. By the way, I precluded the rape which was pure hyperbole on your part if i may say so as something no sane scientist would do.
That is my argument, you assume torture thus your argument is flawed. Torture by definition is not volunteered for and even in the ME example you used they volunteered. True some did so not knowing the full motives of the people testing on them. This does in the ME example muddy the water of valid research which does make this a much less clear cut example (more like something in real life as it were).
After all, many new drugs go in a human test phase, as a student in school I almost participated in one for money but decided not to. Some people would say this could be torture; the side effects are unknown and when you sign up you tell them you are willing to die to learn if the drug works as it should. I didn't do it because of the possible side effects they knew about. But many people did go on to work as test subjects. Those reaserchers did not torture anyone.
Once again; you have a warped assumption that these people were tortured and did not volunteer; in the Mass Effect scenario that started this all the subjects volunteered; therefore, by definition it is not torture.
Also, you are postulating events that never happen in a well regulated world. There are no scientists like this, very
intelligent mad men maybe, but not scientists. And a mad man by definition would not care about the risks they do what they do regardless, you can not encourage or discourage them with punishment, they don't care. A mad man tortures because he is mad no matter if he learns something or not and no matter if you use it or not.
You are postulating a sane person doing these experiment however the very nature of the experiments precludes a sane person from doing them. No sane person kidnaps people to experiment on them (I should clarify, no sane person who is not a sociopath). They may get volunteers but then it is no longer torture so long as they sign a waver explaining that they fully understand what is possible to happen to them.
Also, in many of your above post you [b]assume the experiments stop, you have NO reason to believe this, it is a fantasy; you have no evidence they would stop because the date is not being used only your speculation. For all you know someone might do even more "torture" to re-cure something saying, "We must keep killing and curing because you keep destroying our work, and we will work all the more, and kill all the more."
You whole argument is based on assumptions, fantasy scenarios that are not as simple as you are making them, no real world data, and warped morality. I'm sorry, but you are flawed in your logic because you are basing it all on hyperbole.
That's all I have, now, if you are a 13 year old kid you will not understand most of what I have said, words like "Hyperbole" and "Postulating" will lose you. However, I am willing to give you more credit then that one last time. Unless you have a direct question to me about my post I will not post again in this thread. Best of luck to those who do.
Logic Police
#175
Posté 13 février 2011 - 02:39
JrayM16
-
- Members
- 1 817 messages
DrunkKroganMaster wrote...
*Applauds* We should all remember this day when TCBC_Freak defeated the the great idiot troll TowranPeter in flawless debate. His use of facts, logic, and common sense helped bring and end to TowranPeter's countless assaults of retarded posts. After 7 pages of brutal fighting the brave and intelligent members of this forum kept strong and now with the troll gone this thread can now rest in peace.TCBC_Freak wrote...
I'll post this once more, then I'm done; *IF* you read it you'll either see its logical and agree or you wont and go on believing as you do in a logical falsehood. The key word in that is IF.
My argument against you is simple; you assume these people (aliens or otherwise) where tortured. If that is the case then you are right, there is always another way to learn the same data.
However, if that same scientist in you dramatic example was not mad; if he has a plan to cure something but it will cause pain, possible even death, to all those who partake in it so he can implement the cure, but it could save billions of lives - now lets say he asks for volunteers which brings a group of willing people, then it is not torture. True it would be better if it was a painless thing and given time there always is a better way to learn, but torture it is not as they agreed to the method used on them. By the way, I precluded the rape which was pure hyperbole on your part if i may say so as something no sane scientist would do.
That is my argument, you assume torture thus your argument is flawed. Torture by definition is not volunteered for and even in the ME example you used they volunteered. True some did so not knowing the full motives of the people testing on them. This does in the ME example muddy the water of valid research which does make this a much less clear cut example (more like something in real life as it were).
After all, many new drugs go in a human test phase, as a student in school I almost participated in one for money but decided not to. Some people would say this could be torture; the side effects are unknown and when you sign up you tell them you are willing to die to learn if the drug works as it should. I didn't do it because of the possible side effects they knew about. But many people did go on to work as test subjects. Those reaserchers did not torture anyone.
Once again; you have a warped assumption that these people were tortured and did not volunteer; in the Mass Effect scenario that started this all the subjects volunteered; therefore, by definition it is not torture.
Also, you are postulating events that never happen in a well regulated world. There are no scientists like this, very
intelligent mad men maybe, but not scientists. And a mad man by definition would not care about the risks they do what they do regardless, you can not encourage or discourage them with punishment, they don't care. A mad man tortures because he is mad no matter if he learns something or not and no matter if you use it or not.
You are postulating a sane person doing these experiment however the very nature of the experiments precludes a sane person from doing them. No sane person kidnaps people to experiment on them (I should clarify, no sane person who is not a sociopath). They may get volunteers but then it is no longer torture so long as they sign a waver explaining that they fully understand what is possible to happen to them.
Also, in many of your above post you [b]assume the experiments stop, you have NO reason to believe this, it is a fantasy; you have no evidence they would stop because the date is not being used only your speculation. For all you know someone might do even more "torture" to re-cure something saying, "We must keep killing and curing because you keep destroying our work, and we will work all the more, and kill all the more."
You whole argument is based on assumptions, fantasy scenarios that are not as simple as you are making them, no real world data, and warped morality. I'm sorry, but you are flawed in your logic because you are basing it all on hyperbole.
That's all I have, now, if you are a 13 year old kid you will not understand most of what I have said, words like "Hyperbole" and "Postulating" will lose you. However, I am willing to give you more credit then that one last time. Unless you have a direct question to me about my post I will not post again in this thread. Best of luck to those who do.
Logic Police
Hey, what about me?
Naw, TCBC had the best argument by far. Congrats. And here's a thing. IF the OP comes back but doesn't quote you then you should feel flattered cause that means he can't argue with it.
