82210 réponses à ce sujet

[lillitheris]

flemm wrote...

lillitheris wrote...
Well, let’s move away from absolutes: do you agree that it is also a valid position to take that it is morally wrong to use the tech?

If you do, then we’re on the same page.

Sure, I think that's a valid position. But the idea that it should be kept and studied is also valid. Both arguments have weight, which is why both sides have been debated at great length in similar circumstances in the real world when similar issues have arisen.

Certainly. If I were in the situation, and TIM was not a factor, it might be a tough choice.

However, Miranda does go with the argument that it would be immoral to use it.

[Taboo]

MisterJB wrote...

Stop acting as if you're the ultimate authority in Miranda Lawson and everyone who disagrees with you simple students.
Either make an argument or shut up.

If you could stop with the personal attacks we might be able to get somewhere.

I can't debate you.

If anything I've learned this the hard way.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 31 août 2012 - 06:17 .

[Steelcan]

flemm wrote...

lillitheris wrote...
Well, let’s move away from absolutes: do you agree that it is also a valid position to take that it is morally wrong to use the tech?

If you do, then we’re on the same page.

Sure, I think that's a valid position. But the idea that it should be kept and studied is also valid. Both arguments have weight, which is why both sides have been debated at great length in similar circumstances in the real world when similar issues have arisen.

correct I is a debate, and an interesting one at that, but in the end the ends do justify the means, use the base

[krukow]

lillitheris wrote...

Certainly. If I were in the situation, and TIM was not a factor, it might be a tough choice.

However, Miranda does go with the argument that it would be immoral to use it.

Anyone in that situation would make the same choice.

It's like you all don't understand how humanity works, or how we react to acts of atrocity.

Nobody short of a total sociopath would use game theory in that moment.

[MisterJB]

I have yet to see you try to debate anything. Only make comments meant to imply you know something we don't which is condescent and I don't like it.

[flemm]

lillitheris wrote...
Certainly. If I were in the situation, and TIM was not a factor, it might be a tough choice.

However, Miranda does go with the argument that it would be immoral to use it.

Yeah, and I don't have an issue with that. I *understand* the issue some people have with it, but I think ultimately the character is better off if there is room for flexibility. I wouldn't want her capacity to be pragmatic to be lost, but it's fine if she doesn't always make decisions that way.

[lillitheris]

MisterJB wrote...

First, I don't see that much of a different between studying Legion and studying the Base. Both are tools (granted, Legion less so but that was not known at the time) which have been used for murder. And you can retrieve the Reaper IFF and have the crew kidnapped imediatelly afterwards which doesn't leave time for much of a change.

We’ll have to disagree on that. They’re vastly different, not in the least because Legion doesn’t actually consist

Placing those who are alive over the memory of dead ones is not amorality.

I can certainly accept the argument that someone would choose the (potential) benefits. I think that the arguments have gone a little further than that, but that’s certainly reasonable. I do contend that a majority would not be comfortable with it.

And Miranda’s one of them.

As for the rest of your characterization, I see you have a lot of exceptions. That’s telling.

[Taboo]

MisterJB wrote...

I have yet to see you try to debate anything. Only make comments meant to imply you know something we don't which is condescent and I don't like it.

I have been. For months. As has everyone here. All you've done is dismiss it as being OOC and bad writing.

You told me months ago that Miranda wanting a family was OOC. You then said that Oriana needed to die so that Miranda could focus on something else.

How can I possibly argue with you when you're making statements like these? When you're disregarding base elements of the character to suit your vision?

I'm asking you to look at it yourself because I can't do it any other way.

[Ieldra]

MisterJB wrote...
Taboo:Stop acting as if you're the ultimate authority in Miranda Lawson and everyone who disagrees with you simple students.
Either make an argument or shut up.

[lillitheris]

krukow wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Certainly. If I were in the situation, and TIM was not a factor, it might be a tough choice.

However, Miranda does go with the argument that it would be immoral to use it.

Anyone in that situation would make the same choice.

It's like you all don't understand how humanity works, or how we react to acts of atrocity.

Nobody short of a total sociopath would use game theory in that moment.

That’s not true, either. It’s not an either-or. There are two moral considerations, as I just said above.

[flemm]

krukow wrote...
Anyone in that situation would make the same choice.

I'm not sure that it's possible to generalise so broadly, but basically I agree that there is a difference in terms of actually being there, which would be reflected in Miranda's reaction at the time.

[lillitheris]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I'm asking you to look at it yourself because I can't do it any other way.

Make your argument, or stay out of it. This is tiresome.

[Steelcan]

flemm wrote...

krukow wrote...
Anyone in that situation would make the same choice.

I'm not sure that it's possible to generalise so broadly, but basically I agree that there is a difference in terms of actually being there, which would be reflected in Miranda's reaction at the time.

I would use it, I can't speak for anyone else, but I would

[krukow]

lillitheris wrote...

krukow wrote...

lillitheris wrote...

Certainly. If I were in the situation, and TIM was not a factor, it might be a tough choice.

However, Miranda does go with the argument that it would be immoral to use it.

Anyone in that situation would make the same choice.

It's like you all don't understand how humanity works, or how we react to acts of atrocity.

Nobody short of a total sociopath would use game theory in that moment.

That’s not true, either. It’s not an either-or. There are two moral considerations, as I just said above.

Not when you're standing in the middle of it.  Two systems removed where it's all statistical data (or on a forum discussing things that are really just long strings of 1s and 0s), it's apparently a debate.

It's not a debate when you're ankle deep in the dead.

It's just not.  Human being don't work that way.

edit: No you wouldn't steelcan.  Not if you were there.  You can only say that because we're discussing a video game.

Modifié par krukow, 31 août 2012 - 06:31 .

[Ieldra]

krukow wrote...

lillitheris wrote...
Certainly. If I were in the situation, and TIM was not a factor, it might be a tough choice.

However, Miranda does go with the argument that it would be immoral to use it.

Anyone in that situation would make the same choice.

It's like you all don't understand how humanity works, or how we react to acts of atrocity.

Nobody short of a total sociopath would use game theory in that moment.

A military strategist would be expected to. I'm not saying people wouldn't feel anything or fail to express their feelings. But acting on it if it can cost you the war, that's quite a different matter. It might bother you to the point of making you nauseous, but you are still expected to act as a strategist.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 31 août 2012 - 06:32 .

[MisterJB]

katcrave wrote...

Being 'overwhelmed by sentimentality' is entirely dependent upon the circumstance. Once we've established that, yes, she is capable of feeling emotions and of being sentimental, then its just a matter of finding the threshold of where her emotions will override her pragmatism. A base of liquified humans (she did witness one of the colonist/crew members being processed) might just do the trick. Its certainly within the realm of reason to accept it as such anyway.

The evidence you presented such as Miranda being appaled by corpses on the Collector Cruiser are simply nothing new. We knew Miranda values human life from the very beginning "I just hope it was worth it. Lots of people lost their lives in that station."
However, during the game she consistently is shown taking the more practical solution, even if that means sacrificing others.

The situation at the Collector Base is different still. This is not a pragmatic dillema such as "Torture David Archer and prevent a war or release him" where there is an obvious gain but something must be sacrificed in return. The Dilema at the CB is entirely moral and I can think of three similar situations that we could compare it to.
The Geth have killed millions of humans. Does Miranda think Legion should be destroyed? No, she wants to study it.
The man she loves is being held in an Alliance prison. Does she break in to see him? No, she stays aways because that would practically be an admission of guilt to the Alliance.
Thousands where killed at Sanctuary. Does Miranda think the research should be destroyed? No, she lets Shepard upload it and use it for the good of others.

Thus, we have nothing in both games that support Miranda placing sentimentality over efficiency and we have, at least, three different examples that directly contradict this. As such, I am quite confident in my belief that the "Betrayal" line is no more than a quite flagrant case of OOC.

[Steelcan]

Ieldra2 wrote...

krukow wrote...

lillitheris wrote...
Certainly. If I were in the situation, and TIM was not a factor, it might be a tough choice.
However, Miranda does go with the argument that it would be immoral to use it.

Anyone in that situation would make the same choice.

It's like you all don't understand how humanity works, or how we react to acts of atrocity.

Nobody short of a total sociopath would use game theory in that moment.

A military strategist would be expected to. I'm not saying people wouldn't feel anything or fail to express their feelings. But acting on it if it can cost you the war, that's quite a different matter. It might bother you to the point of making you nauseous, but you are still expected to act as a strategist.

. It's reasonable to use the base, there are several valid reasons to do it, mostly having to do with efficiency, destroying the base however is a moral argument, not a strategic or logical one

[Taboo]

MisterJB wrote...


Thus, we have nothing in both games that support Miranda placing sentimentality over efficiency and we have, at least, three different examples that directly contradict this. As such, I am quite confident in my belief that the "Betrayal" line is no more than a quite flagrant case of OOC.

No. You missed the entirety of her point. She is not arguing that she is not pragmatic. She is arguing that she is more than capable of having a sentimental reaction.

Given the nature of the CB one that she was directly involved in, she states that it isn't impossible for her to have an emotional reaction.

Things are ALWAYS grey until they involve you. Always.

She is at the focal point of a terrible situation. She has an emotional reaction. You're frustrated because it doesn't fit your idea of the character.

Not the same as the Geth. Detached viewpoint.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 31 août 2012 - 06:37 .

[wright1978]

Steelcan wrote...

It's reasonable to use the base, there are several valid reasons to do it, mostly having to do with efficiency, destroying the base however is a moral argument, not a strategic or logical one

Destroying the base to keep it out of TIM hands is a strategic one.

[katcrave]

MisterJB wrote...

katcrave wrote...

Being 'overwhelmed by sentimentality' is entirely dependent upon the circumstance. Once we've established that, yes, she is capable of feeling emotions and of being sentimental, then its just a matter of finding the threshold of where her emotions will override her pragmatism. A base of liquified humans (she did witness one of the colonist/crew members being processed) might just do the trick. Its certainly within the realm of reason to accept it as such anyway.

The evidence you presented such as Miranda being appaled by corpses on the Collector Cruiser are simply nothing new. We knew Miranda values human life from the very beginning "I just hope it was worth it. Lots of people lost their lives in that station."
However, during the game she consistently is shown taking the more practical solution, even if that means sacrificing others.

The situation at the Collector Base is different still. This is not a pragmatic dillema such as "Torture David Archer and prevent a war or release him" where there is an obvious gain but something must be sacrificed in return. The Dilema at the CB is entirely moral and I can think of three similar situations that we could compare it to.
The Geth have killed millions of humans. Does Miranda think Legion should be destroyed? No, she wants to study it.
The man she loves is being held in an Alliance prison. Does she break in to see him? No, she stays aways because that would practically be an admission of guilt to the Alliance.
Thousands where killed at Sanctuary. Does Miranda think the research should be destroyed? No, she lets Shepard upload it and use it for the good of others.

Thus, we have nothing in both games that support Miranda placing sentimentality over efficiency and we have, at least, three different examples that directly contradict this. As such, I am quite confident in my belief that the "Betrayal" line is no more than a quite flagrant case of OOC.

It is about the circumstance. She is in the CB. She had just witnessed the death of civillians. It was all recent and in her mind. The Geth having killed millions is a statistic that she has had time to rationalize and come to terms with. I'm not arguing that Miranda does not make rational, pragmatic decisions at all. I'm merely saying that she is human. And that sometimes, despite our best efforts, our emotions get the better of us.

As for breaking Shepherd out of the Alliance, I'm not sure that is very morally significant. She know he's not being tortured and i'm under the impression that she would have done something had she felt his incarceration would have been permanent. Forgive me for asking but what research from Sanctuary does she hand over? I know she gives the tracer on Kai Leng but I'm not recalling any mention of research...

[MisterJB]

Taboo-XX wrote...
I have been. For months. As has everyone here. All you've done is dismiss it as being OOC and bad writing.

No, I make counter arguments based on evidence provided by the game which appears to be an alien concept to you.

You told me months ago that Miranda wanting a family was OOC. You then said that Oriana needed to die so that Miranda could focus on something else.

How can I possibly argue with you when you're making statements like these? When you're disregarding base elements of the character to suit your vision?

First, whishing Oriana was dead is a personal opinion. If I said Miranda doesn't love Oriana, that would be disregarding base elements of the character.

Second, it's actually quite easy. You say:
"I don't believe Miranda wanting a family is OOC because she said this and this and this" and we can go from here.

I'm asking you to look at it yourself because I can't do it any other way.

Asking others to make your own arguments. Shocking.

[krukow]

Steelcan wrote...
.It's reasonable to use the base, there are several valid reasons to do it, mostly having to do with efficiency, destroying the base however is a moral argument, not a strategic or logical one

Even though I think it's wrong, yes, there are several valid reasons to use it.

That doesn't matter.  If you were there, you would not care about game theory or strategy.  That's not how the human mind reacts to in person atrocity.  It just isn't.

Also, what's with the periods at the begining of your sentences?  Just curious is all...

[Steelcan]

wright1978 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

It's reasonable to use the base, there are several valid reasons to do it, mostly having to do with efficiency, destroying the base however is a moral argument, not a strategic or logical one

Destroying the base to keep it out of TIM hands is a strategic one.

. You have no reason not to trust TIM in the context of the decision

[Steelcan]

krukow wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
.It's reasonable to use the base, there are several valid reasons to do it, mostly having to do with efficiency, destroying the base however is a moral argument, not a strategic or logical one

Even though I think it's wrong, yes, there are several valid reasons to use it.

That doesn't matter.  If you were there, you would not care about game theory or strategy.  That's not how the human mind reacts to in person atrocity.  It just isn't.

Also, what's with the periods at the begining of your sentences?  Just curious is all...

. Just my thing, and Shepard first a foremost a military man, he knows an asset when he sees one

[wright1978]

Steelcan wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

It's reasonable to use the base, there are several valid reasons to do it, mostly having to do with efficiency, destroying the base however is a moral argument, not a strategic or logical one

Destroying the base to keep it out of TIM hands is a strategic one.

. You have no reason not to trust TIM in the context of the decision

You have multiple reasons for not trusting TIM based on your experience of him in the game.