142 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

I still maintain that all the hate is unreasonable. I'd like to ask TIM this question when I meet him again: How exactly does working with the Reapers benefit humanity? What I'll do will depend on his answer.

[GodWood]

wiggles89 wrote...
Though I don't share it, I certainly understand the hatred for TIM. But his "associates" and "lackeys"? What indication do we have that shows they're all people worthy of death?

I'm the opposite.

I understand the desire to kill the Cerberus folks who did commit the crimes and the ones who are shooting at you (although the desire to kill everyone in Cerberus is ridiculous)
But cannot fathom the reasoning for every paragon wanting to murder TIM.

Naturally I assume it's easier for them to pin all the crimes of Cerberus on to him instead of the unknown faceless men who actually did them.

[sael_feman]

@Ieldra2, the question you ask is as old as drama itself. Is it safer to stand by the devil's side than infront of him?

Presumably, those who support evil are trying to avoid their own destruction - and maybe have anger issues to take out on everyone else. But there are times when evil must be confronted, in a truly just war would you, I or anyone really choose not to fight?

[sael_feman]

@Wiggles89 Cerberus and the Illusive man are quite the enigma, I'm sure we will find out more in 2012 when ME3 is released. But their motives seem highly suspect even now.

[Repearized Miranda]

wiggles89 wrote...

But they're all not shooting at us. Unless everyone associated with Cerberus turned into shock troopers while I wasn't looking.

Look it's not like we'll be fighting just 60 troops with only 10% of them beng good. We don't know if it's all of Cerberus as there may be some individuals (other than Miranda + Jacob) that join our side in that fight. All we know is, we're gonna have to take those bastards out!

[Repearized Miranda]

wiggles89 wrote...

I understand the desire to kill the Cerberus folks who did commit the crimes and the ones who are shooting at you (although the desire to kill everyone in Cerberus is ridiculous)

I understand that aspect of the hatred. However, as you said, the hatred of a few colouring one's perspective of the rest is ridiculous.

No more ridiculous than Jack's or the VSs spewed hatred whenever they made contact with what represented Cerberus the most. For those three, it was a damn logo and/or a squadmate if you brought her with you. (Jacob was an afterthought - just ask Jack)

[Ieldra]

sael_feman wrote...
@Ieldra2, the question you ask is as old as drama itself. Is it safer to stand by the devil's side than infront of him?

Presumably, those who support evil are trying to avoid their own destruction - and maybe have anger issues to take out on everyone else. But there are times when evil must be confronted, in a truly just war would you, I or anyone really choose not to fight?

I am unaware of having asked any question that could lead to your reply, but here's my answer nonetheless:

(1) I am unaware of having proposed not to fight the real "evil": the Reapers' plans of harvesting all organics.
(2) I am unware of having proposed to support even the secondary "evil" (which appears to be TIM). All I have said it that I'll hear him out.
(3) I do not think in moral absolutes. Moral absolutes are a human conceit, a lens that distorts the view of others as well as the universe at large. There are infinite shades of grey, but no black and white.
(4) I am also somewhat consequentialist: sometimes, the end justifies the means, particularly in a war for survival. For a moral judgment of any supposedly evil action, intent and necessity must be taken into account. That applies to many of Cerberus' experiments. 
(5) The question of whether or not a just war can exist is still an open question. A war might be necessary. Nothing more.
(6) I have spoken against hate. Moral judgments are inherently intuitive, so it's natural that some people will come to hate. But I count that itself as a flaw. It's an "evil", if you want. By judging from hate, we become the monsters we hate.  

In short: life and morality aren't as simple as you might want to believe.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 08 juillet 2011 - 09:30 .

[Barquiel]

wiggles89 wrote...

Though I don't share it, I certainly understand the hatred for TIM. But his "associates" and "lackeys"? What indication do we have that shows they're all people worthy of death?

Because the Normandy crew members (hand picked by TIM) seem to be the only cerberus operatives who are not completely amoral.

One cell runs a death camp for human children.
One cell abducts asari girls and experiments on them in order to create a chemical weapon.
One cell tries to enslave the geth.
...

And nobody seems to have a problem with it.

[Arijharn]

Hear hear Ieldra!

My only 'fear' about TIM and Cerberus working with the Reapers if it's a plot thread that is as 'deep' as something that a 5 year old could dream up: "They offered me everything I wanted" is such an example. Even Saren had an understandable reason for turning towards Sovereign even if Sovereign eventually twisted his ideology, even making him a tragic 'hero' in some respects.

I just find the concept that a 'real' alliance between Cerberus and the Reapers to be laughable because given everything that has happened, I find the concept of them 'fully trusting' one and another to be borderline stupid. The excuse that 'they've been indoctrinated' as well is as engaging as the idea that the Turian Councillor has somehow been indoctrinated too... Honestly, I think it's more of a cop out than any good emotionally engaging storytelling.

Yes Ieldra; I know that me talking about 'emotionally engaging' and 'cop outs' and storytelling is remarkably ironic considering our recent conversation

[sael_feman]

@Ieldra2 I think you mistake me, I'm not of the view that morality is either always right or wrong, there are grey areas. I'm not sure who this Tim is you mention by the way.

If you've ever seen the film the Devil's Advocate - featuring Keanu reeves and Al Pacino you might know that the story is about a young lawayer who finds out that his father is actually the devil. The crux for Keanu reeves is should he side with or oppose his father.

I was under the impression, faslely perhaps; do tell me if I'm wrong, that you were debating the righteousness of the Reapers human conquest. If you weren't, ignore the next bit because it's only relevant if you are debating the rights of the reapers actions.

The moral question is: Is it right to ally yourself with the reapers (an opponent) and do their bidding if it means you are saved; despite everyone else dying.

Now this is similar to the Jedi Sith conflict in Star Wars - Why would a Jedi (or indeed commander Shepherd) fight a stronger opponent when joining would be easier and less painful for all concerned, well, perhaps because he/she has a moral code driving him/her.

I think the Reapers and Commander Shepherd are different in an important way, but also similar in an important way. The Reapers want to kill nearly all life as a priority, Commander Shepherd wants to completely destroy the Reaper threat. Both the commander and the Reapers however are only doing these actions for one reason, survival. The reapers feed on humans and then hibernate for millenia. The Commander doesn't want to be harvested, so he fights. It's an animalistic survival struggle, like cheetahs and gazelle - hunter and hunted.

The difference I think exists that the commander would prefer not go to war if he did not have to (this depends on your perception of the commander - paragon or renegade) - the reapers don't see any other choice, to feed or not to feed.

Do you see my point of view? Or perhaps I've missed yours. What do you think?

S'F'

Modifié par sael_feman, 08 juillet 2011 - 01:01 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Barquiel wrote...

wiggles89 wrote...

Though I don't share it, I certainly understand the hatred for TIM. But his "associates" and "lackeys"? What indication do we have that shows they're all people worthy of death?

Because the Normandy crew members (hand picked by TIM) seem to be the only cerberus operatives who are not completely amoral.

One cell runs a death camp for human children.
One cell abducts asari girls and experiments on them in order to create a chemical weapon.
One cell tries to enslave the geth.
...

And nobody seems to have a problem with it.

Have you asked any of them? Have ever listened to or overheard the general opinions, personal views, or private concerns of any of the other Cerberus cells? Have you even met any of them? If we weren't Shepard, would we have any sign of anyone on the ship having any problem with Shepard blowing up a Batarian planet? (No, because even as Shepard we get nothing of the sort.)

And where does Overlord ever suggest or imply enslaving the geth? The VI is a Messiah figure, not domination aspect: all the descriptions for the project is that the VI appeals to the Geth religious inclinations for them to willingly follow. Overlord no more manages to hack the geth than any other method. Since the Geth who have religious inclinations are the Heretics, and they themselves are only being appealed...

[GodWood]

TIM = The Illusive Man

[JaegerBane]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Have you asked any of them? Have ever listened to or overheard the general opinions, personal views, or private concerns of any of the other Cerberus cells?

Well, according to Retribution and Ascension, the general opinions and personal views of the people involved with them seem to tally with precisely his point - that the personnel tend to be, at best, amoral.

The only individual in the Overlord Cell we get to know anything about is the good doctor, true, but he spouts the same 'the ends justify the means' excuse as the rest of those loonies. So unless your point is that only the good Cerberus personnel perish, I'm not sure where you're going with this.

And where does Overlord ever suggest or imply enslaving the geth?

Uh.... the part when David forcibly takes over geth platforms? Unless you're saying that those platforms were just empty, and that the whole ability to speak to and influence Geth was just something that was a side issue?

Modifié par JaegerBane, 08 juillet 2011 - 01:09 .

[Medhia Nox]

@Dean_the_Young: I suspect you're currently a poly-sci major - that, or philosophy. You're well trained in sophistry.

==========

Mordin explains that the Krogan evolved to deal with the ulta-hostile environment on Tuchanka. The planet naturally culled their numbers through violent ends. As a contained ecosystem - the Krogan were existing in exactly the state they developed in.

Like several invasive species taken out of one environment and put into another - they lost all natural predation ( the "civilized universe" can't keep up with Krogan populations). So - since scientific means "uplifted" the Krogan - scientific means had to deal with them.

Otherwise - nature was dealing fine by having the ultra-resilient, violent Krogan in an equally resilient and violent habitat which - it is very likely - that they would never have left on their own.

As a scientific species - the Salarians should know the basics about invasive species and ecosystems, but I suppose desperation makes "men" do self-destructive things.

====

Again - it comes down to fear of the inevitable (defeat by the Rachni) that caused a panicked solution that ended poorly (the expansion of the Krogan). The Council didn't do it as a preventative measure - that's another difference between the Council and Cerberus. The Council seems to be largely reactive to situations - and yes, some of them are ethically appalling - but Cerberus is willing to do these things as a preventative for imagined dangers.

The Collectors and the Reapers are a notable exception.

TIM is a xenophobe - and that fear is the impetus to everything he does. ((There's probably a few other phobias the man has to add to his state of being.))

If they wanted to make TIM, and by extension Cerberus, more sympathetic - they could have played off of the bad things that have happened to TIM (assuming there are any) to make him act this way. And then every bleeding heart would say: "Oh, but he's had such a hard life! I totally understand why he does the things he does." Look at Morinth - she's a blue John Wayne Gacy, and people just "feel" for her.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 08 juillet 2011 - 02:23 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Dean_the_Young: I suspect you're currently a poly-sci major - that, or philosophy. You're well trained in sophistry.

Electrical Engineering and military science. Likewise, sophistry is misleading with language, not arguing over the proper use (and against misleading uses) of it.

==========

Mordin explains that the Krogan evolved to deal with the ulta-hostile environment on Tuchanka. The planet naturally culled their numbers through violent ends. As a contained ecosystem - the Krogan were existing in exactly the state they developed in.

Like several invasive species taken out of one environment and put into another - they lost all natural predation ( the "civilized universe" can't keep up with Krogan populations). So - since scientific means "uplifted" the Krogan - scientific means had to deal with them.

Otherwise - nature was dealing fine by having the ultra-resilient, violent Krogan in an equally resilient and violent habitat which - it is very likely - that they would never have left on their own.

As a scientific species - the Salarians should know the basics about invasive species and ecosystems, but I suppose desperation makes "men" do self-destructive things.

====

None of which contradicts anything I said, so... thanks for a text dump.

TIM is a xenophobe - and that fear is the impetus to everything he does. ((There's probably a few other phobias the man has to add to his state of being.))

He isn't. Besides that 'phobia' means an irrationa fear, the Illusive Man (through the events of his origin comic) has the same basis as Shepard for knowing there are big baddies out there in the galaxy, both behind the public rivals and elsewhere.

If they wanted to make TIM, and by extension Cerberus, more sympathetic - they could have played off of the bad things that have happened to TIM (assuming there are any) to make him act this way. And then every bleeding heart would say: "Oh, but he's had such a hard life! I totally understand why he does the things he does." Look at Morinth - she's a blue John Wayne Gacy, and people just "feel" for her.

Or they could have done any number of other things to justify Cerberus concerns, like having alien species attack Humanity without provocation, or have publicly unknown forces that threaten human existence, or show characters of note and importance in alien governments who do wish to suppress Humanity, and show that other species in the galaxy are not adverse to war and genocide and other actions when it serves their own purpose.

[Dean_the_Young]

JaegerBane wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Have you asked any of them? Have ever listened to or overheard the general opinions, personal views, or private concerns of any of the other Cerberus cells?

Well, according to Retribution and Ascension, the general opinions and personal views of the people involved with them seem to tally with precisely his point - that the personnel tend to be, at best, amoral.

So, having a sparse view on two cells, neither of whom come close in any sense to the Pragia cell nor who circumvented procedures like Archer did, you now have a better understanding of everyone involved in all cells and Cerberus operations?

The only individual in the Overlord Cell we get to know anything about is the good doctor, true, but he spouts the same 'the ends justify the means' excuse as the rest of those loonies. So unless your point is that only the good Cerberus personnel perish, I'm not sure where you're going with this.

You realize every faction and every alignment in Mass Effect spouts that 'excuse', yes? It's the basis of the Spectres, it's the attitude of the Alliance, and it's the very defense even Paragon Shepard makes on a number of occassions (like, say, murdering a certain planetful of Batarians). Even Anderson, the most moral person in the series, spouts the 'the mission comes first'.

If that's your definition of loony, then you've tarred every organization in the galaxy with that brush as well and made it a meaningless concept.

And where does Overlord ever suggest or imply enslaving the geth?

Uh.... the part when David forcibly takes over geth platforms? Unless you're saying that those platforms were just empty, and that the whole ability to speak to and influence Geth was just something that was a side issue?

Except David never forcibly took over a Geth Platform: they woke up. David talks to them: the entire basis of the Overlord project is that they want to follow him. Overlord is to the Geth what Sovereign was: a messiah/deity figure they follow of their own will.

Nothing in Overlord ever suggests or overcomes the traditional Geth resistance to hacking. Overlord isn't changing their nature: Overlord appeals to it.

[Medhia Nox]

Yes, I know what sophistry means - and I meant it the way I used it.

Engineering, the military, and a negative reinforcement childhood (as per a prior comment on another thread) good deal.

====

And it's not what you said btw - you claim that uplifting a species clearly unfit for survival in a non-hostile environment that controls their birth rate naturally - had no relation to the necessity of the genophage.

"It isn't even logical to say that uplifting the Krogan was what necessitated the genophage either: the uplifting isn't what required it, but the Krogan policies continued well after they were uplifted. There's no real causal link between the two, any more than the breath you are taking right now is responsible for if you have a child in twenty years. While, yes, you breathing today is required for some action in the future, the action in the future isn't necessary because of the requirement of today." Dean_the_Young

If I put up kudzu vine - with whatever reasoning I want to invent behind doing so - and then find that the species has enveloped an entire town (it happens) - then I must take steps to stop it, or let it consume the town. Putting the kudzu vine into play - was the reason behind having to stop it in the first place.

Same with the Krogan - or do you have further insight?

[Barquiel]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Have you asked any of them? Have ever listened to or overheard the general opinions, personal views, or private concerns of any of the other Cerberus cells? Have you even met any of them? If we weren't Shepard, would we have any sign of anyone on the ship having any problem with Shepard blowing up a Batarian planet? (No, because even as Shepard we get nothing of the sort.)

I honestly don't care WHY they think it's necessary to abduct children and asari girls in order to torture and kill them.

But I would arrest TIM and his lackeys, where arrest is possible, rather than kill them. Maybe someone else is interested...

[Dean_the_Young]

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Have you asked any of them? Have ever listened to or overheard the general opinions, personal views, or private concerns of any of the other Cerberus cells? Have you even met any of them? If we weren't Shepard, would we have any sign of anyone on the ship having any problem with Shepard blowing up a Batarian planet? (No, because even as Shepard we get nothing of the sort.)

I honestly don't care WHY they think it's necessary to abduct children and asari girls in order to torture and kill them.

And yet now you're moving your goal posts. You criticize them because you do not hear any dissenting opinion, and yet you don't even care to look. Yet when you actually were around a Cerberus cell and heard views of members within, you didn't find them unreasonable.

Does it not, at all, seem possible that Cerberus cells and operatives may be more nuanced than you can tell from brief exposures at a distance?

But I would arrest TIM and his lackeys, where arrest is possible, rather than kill them. Maybe someone else is interested...

Who needs the justice of liberalism, eh?

[Dean_the_Young]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Yes, I know what sophistry means - and I meant it the way I used it.

Engineering, the military, and a negative reinforcement childhood (as per a prior comment on another thread) good deal.

I never claimed it was from my childhood: that's the sort of assumptions that are leading you astray. You don't ask and you don't look for the possibility of misunderstanding, and hence you misuse and misattribute. Similar to, say, assuming that because I use language precisely and hold others to do the same, I was an entirely different focus of education.

And it's not what you said btw - you claim that uplifting a species clearly unfit for survival in a non-hostile environment that controls their birth rate naturally - had no relation to the necessity of the genophage.

"It isn't even logical to say that uplifting the Krogan was what necessitated the genophage either: the uplifting isn't what required it, but the Krogan policies continued well after they were uplifted. There's no real causal link between the two, any more than the breath you are taking right now is responsible for if you have a child in twenty years. While, yes, you breathing today is required for some action in the future, the action in the future isn't necessary because of the requirement of today." Dean_the_Young

Unsurprisingly, what you say I said has little relation to what I actually said. This may be because you don't understand what I said, in which case I'll apologize for not putting it more clearly for you.

Correlation =/= causation. A correlation is a relation: a causation is a catalyst or impulse in a direct chain of events that is responsible and leads to something.

The uplifting of the Krogan is a correlation with the Genophage, because the occurance of one is related to the occurance of the other. But the uplifting of the Krogan did not cause the Genophage to be necessary: the actions and policies of the Krogan, a sentient species in and of themselves with full capability for self-determination, is what brought the Genophage to bear. The first and foremost proof of this was that the genophage was only developed after the Rebellions began: when there was simply Krogan population growth, the Salarians and Council did not care. Had the Krogan not acted with unchecked aggression, there is no suggested or reason that the Council would have fought them either.

The genophage was used because the Krogan fought the Council. This is a causal relationship. But the Krogan did not fight the Council because they were uplifted: the uplifting in no way required, coerced, or encouraged the Krogan to fight the Council. That was their own choice.

Uplifting the Krogan was an enabler for the Krogan Rebellions, but it was not a cause.

If I put up kudzu vine - with whatever reasoning I want to invent behind doing so - and then find that the species has enveloped an entire town (it happens) - then I must take steps to stop it, or let it consume the town. Putting the kudzu vine into play - was the reason behind having to stop it in the first place.

Same with the Krogan - or do you have further insight?

Sure: besides what I posted above, introducing species is not an evil act in and of itself, even if it doesn't turn out for the best later on. Which is back to pretty much how this conversation began.

[Medhia Nox]

Sure - there's no causation if the catalyst is a complete idiot.

A species - like the Krogan - was uplifted because they were hyper violent. Shocker that they might continue to be hyper violent.

The Krogan COULD not fight the Council - except for the fact that they had been uplifted.

Just because the Salarians said - concerning the Krogan rebellion that followed - "Wow, I didn't see that coming." Doesn't mean what they did wasn't the cause of the Krogan rebellions. It means that either they're far more ignorant than the Salarians themselves would have everyone believe - or, they're being willfully dense so that they may not reflect on the nature of their own actions. Or, and most likely in my opinion, so arrogant that they thought they could control the situation should their pet Krogan ever get out of hand.

Honestly - it's this lack of culpability that causes most of the problems in the real world.

I imagine that for some people that's a very necessary way to sleep well at night.

===

Oh, and just for the fun of it - since you say I didn't ask: "I developed in a negative-reinforcement environment - and it shows from time to time." - Dean_the_Young

I don't think it was unreasonable to consider "developed" to suggest youth. Though I admit - I'm not quite as advanced a life form as I ought to be.

So, were you hatched? Molded from clay maybe? Or - perhaps as an adult (or young adult) - you were "molded".

And - as a sentient creature fully capable of making your own choices - you either like being "caustic" as I put it, or you're no more in control of your nature than the Krogan. Your negative-reinforcement environment is not the "cause" of your manner of writing - at least, according to you.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 08 juillet 2011 - 05:47 .

[Arijharn]

I think that the Council expected the Krogan to behave themselves afterwards at best, or at worst just didn't care. They thought 'awesome, we've won the war' and then pretty much left the Krogan to self-determinate, which is what the Council does anyway (i.e., does not directly interfere with member species affairs... well, they aren't supposed too).

It's only when the Krogan Rebellion's began that the Council started to formulate strategies.

But I think it's a fallacy to state that the Krogan Rebellions were destined to occur.

Incidentally, I do find it rather amazing that the Krogan specifically blame the Salarian's and the Turian's for the Genophage, but don't blame the Council; which I guess is a massive stroke of fortune for the Council in itself.