2463 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Alocormin wrote...
I acknowledge those points.  Didn't feel like writing it all out.  In a way reasonable arguments are sometimes the least effective.  I don't believe the person behind them has to be unreasonable, though, despite that.

Will the galaxy have enough resources and manpower to keep itself stable, much less help humanity?

Honestly, it's easy to see how humanity would be considered valuable.  I am personally not convinced Reaperhood would save anything of what we were, I am convinced it would make us something else entirely.  Something perhaps similar to what we could become in billions of years, but without culture and the type of individual reality we benefit from, whether scrounging for survival or thriving until the end of our days.

Barring the fact that the other races will probably spend ressources on themselves first, the thing about the "council trinity" (Salarians, Turians and Asari), is that humanity offers nothing to them, imo. The Trinity has the muscle, culture, diplomacy and scientific research on its own. What could Humanity offer that is so valuable for them to spend a significant amount of their ressources on us? I personally do not see why they would do that.

It really depends on how you define "humanity". For me, it's nothing but a biological term, I do not subscribe any spiritual or metaphysical definition or importance to our species.

Becoming Reapers will very likely be very different from what we once were, and from my personal perspective undesirable in many ways even, unless absolutely necessary. But in a lot of ways, could also be the culmination of our existence. The end of many of our weaknesses.

So if I am forced to choose betweem either annihilation or an existence of humiliation, exploitation and irreversable weakness, versus not only the survival, but also the dominance of our species. I'd pick the latter. 
I am hoping that I will not be forced to make such a choice.

[Sisterofshane]

Alocormin wrote...

What page are your arguments on, sisterofshane?

They're all over, actually.  I think a good hunk of the most rational arguments are found after page twenty.

I'm sorry that it doesn't narrow it a bit, but I really think most of it occured from 20-50!

Too bad there isn't some kind of filter system here...

[SandTrout]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

You have one unique scenario that is in itself an assumption of the events that transpired on that planet.

No. I have Eingana, I have the accounts of eezo exposure in humans, I have the description of Thessia, both of which support what happenedo n Eingana and lend credence to my theory of what could happen to Earth.

Actually, WE have Eingana and the accounts of eezo exposure in humans.

On Eingana, the planet remained habitable. Some species died, most did not.

In humans, the negative effect rate of Eezo exposure is <40%, meaning that it CANNOT cause extinction, but rather, would only act as a distilling force of a particular genetic trait in the population.

The only valid point that you have is a potential strategy that the Reapers might use, and which may be countered by a strategy of atrition.

Modifié par SandTrout, 15 août 2011 - 08:12 .

[Sisterofshane]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Alocormin wrote...
I acknowledge those points.  Didn't feel like writing it all out.  In a way reasonable arguments are sometimes the least effective.  I don't believe the person behind them has to be unreasonable, though, despite that.

Will the galaxy have enough resources and manpower to keep itself stable, much less help humanity?

Honestly, it's easy to see how humanity would be considered valuable.  I am personally not convinced Reaperhood would save anything of what we were, I am convinced it would make us something else entirely.  Something perhaps similar to what we could become in billions of years, but without culture and the type of individual reality we benefit from, whether scrounging for survival or thriving until the end of our days.

Barring the fact that the other races will probably spend ressources on themselves first, the thing about the "council trinity" (Salarians, Turians and Asari), is that humanity offers nothing to them, imo. The Trinity has the muscle, culture, diplomacy and scientific research on its own. What could Humanity offer that is so valuable for them to spend a significant amount of their ressources on us? I personally do not see why they would do that.

It really depends on how you define "humanity". For me, it's nothing but a biological term, I do not subscribe any spiritual or metaphysical definition or importance to our species.

Becoming Reapers will very likely be very different from what we once were, and from my personal perspective undesirable in many ways even, unless absolutely necessary. But in a lot of ways, could also be the culmination of our existence. The end of many of our weaknesses.

So if I am forced to choose betweem either annihilation or an existence of humiliation, exploitation and irreversable weakness, versus not only the survival, but also the dominance of our species. I'd pick the latter. 
I am hoping that I will not be forced to make such a choice.

Surrender is always an option, if the future looks too bleak.  If it comes down to it, I think it will be a more emotional choice, as opposed to a logical one, because it will involve giving up our very nature to become something that most people can not comprehend, but also something with which we fear.

I however, will not draft up any terms based upon such a lack of evidence as Saphras.  I will fight until it just becomes SO clear that we cannot win, that I don't really have a choice anyway.  If the Reapers are so strong, then we will be "reaperized".  There will be no way around it.

Still, I'm not throwing in the towel just yet -- I want to see what ME3 produces before I make predictions on end-times.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I am not much of an ME lore expert, and I replied to the topic from a more conceptual perspective, and not so technical. As in, what would I do if I saw that humanity is doomed anyways.

But question. If eezo does contaminate Earth, couldn't increase the proportion of human biotics?
That would be an interesting, and potentially beneficial, side-effect.

[SandTrout]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I am not much of an ME lore expert, and I replied to the topic from a more conceptual perspective, and not so technical. As in, what would I do if I saw that humanity is doomed anyways.

But question. If eezo does contaminate Earth, couldn't increase the proportion of human biotics?
That would be an interesting, and potentially beneficial, side-effect.

Yes, with a dramatic increase in the number of human biotics in ~2 generations.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sisterofshane wrote...
Surrender is always an option, if the future looks too bleak.  If it comes down to it, I think it will be a more emotional choice, as opposed to a logical one, because it will involve giving up our very nature to become something that most people can not comprehend, but also something with which we fear.

Being attached to our nature is as emotional. Seeking self-preservation is instinctual.
Logic needs a premise, and that depend on what we value the most. It also depends on whether we believe that humanity becoming reapers is self-preservation, something I'd find debatable as well. 

I'd see it as both self-preservation and self-destruction,  evolution and devolution.

I however, will not draft up any terms based upon such a lack of evidence as Saphras.  I will fight until it just becomes SO clear that we cannot win, that I don't really have a choice anyway.  If the Reapers are so strong, then we will be "reaperized".  There will be no way around it.

Still, I'm not throwing in the towel just yet -- I want to see what ME3 produces before I make predictions on end-times.

Me neither, but even if we had the choice to win, but have to suffer an existence of clearly irreversable weakness and humanity being picked apart by the rest, I'd prefer us becoming reapers.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 août 2011 - 08:25 .

[Sisterofshane]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Being attached to our nature is as emotional. Seeking self-preservation is instinctual.
Logic needs a premise, and that depend on what we value the most. It also depends on whether we believe that humanity becoming reapers is self-preservation, something I'd find debatable as well. 

I'd see it as both self-preservation and self-destruction,  evolution and devolution.

Me neither, but even if we had the choice to win, but have to suffer an existence of clearly irreversable weakness and humanity being picked apart by the rest, I'd prefer us becoming reapers.

This is where you and I differ.  I suscribe to Legions' philosophy that all sentient life should be allowed to self-determinate.  If humanity was to be weakened by the Reapers, I would still consider it a "win".  I think the Protheans understood this point -- it is far more important that organic civilizations continue on their own path then to force them to become constructs of a singularly narrow point of view.

In other words, I would gladly sacrifice not only humanity, but the rest of galactic civilization as we know it, in order to ensure that the cycle of extinction would be stopped.  What the Reapers impose upon us is a violation of all that is life -- it is unnatural.  I will not submit to it until I am positive that there is no other way, and even then they'd probably have to drag me to my inevitable future.

[TuringPoint]

OK.  I see 'humanity' not as a construct of superstitious or even just a means of biological classification, but as being about as existential as it gets.  In fact, the worst the Reapers have to offer us is to become one of them.  It is worth it to defy our own destruction.  Whether we're with or against them, the only way to truly defeat them is to remain as we are.  To defeat their legacy.  That may seem superstitious, but I firmly believe that it isn't.

Modifié par Alocormin, 15 août 2011 - 08:46 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Sisterofshane wrote...
This is where you and I differ.  I suscribe to Legions' philosophy that all sentient life should be allowed to self-determinate.  If humanity was to be weakened by the Reapers, I would still consider it a "win".  I think the Protheans understood this point -- it is far more important that organic civilizations continue on their own path then to force them to become constructs of a singularly narrow point of view.

In other words, I would gladly sacrifice not only humanity, but the rest of galactic civilization as we know it, in order to ensure that the cycle of extinction would be stopped.  What the Reapers impose upon us is a violation of all that is life -- it is unnatural.  I will not submit to it until I am positive that there is no other way, and even then they'd probably have to drag me to my inevitable future.

It being unnatural is part of the appeal to me. That we can become a part of existence that impose our will on nature itself. Our nature is in many ways a limitation. Unfortunately the Reapers' existence to seemingly solely reproduce, also makes it unappealling in other ways. In otherwords, I do not agree with the idea that Reaperhood is perfection, or at least if it is, then it's dull. But it may become necessary from my perspective.

We have different goals. You want to preserve what your percieve as the sanctity of life. I want to secure human interest, no matter its shape and form (even if repulsive). I think both positions are valid. 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 août 2011 - 08:44 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Alocormin wrote...

KnightofPhoenix: Your thoughts make sense.  While it does make sense, I have my own thoughts, and I want those to be understood. 

EDIT:  I'm going to spend a little more time making this all clear.

I think I understand, really. If your arguments are similar to sisterofshane anyhow.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 août 2011 - 08:43 .

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Eezo contamination on Earth would result in more human biotics, but it would also result in more birth defects, cancers, and deaths, both in humans and the wild-life.

There is NO evidence within the game to prove that Eezo exposure would cause fatalities in vast quantities as to extinguish all life on a planet.  For that matter, there is nothing to even suggest that Eezo is toxic to plant life (one of your ASSUMPTIONS that it is).

The only evidence of Eezo "causing:" any extinction in the game is Eingana.  I still believe in  my heart of hearts, that the story of Eingana is meant to be read critically, and not to be taken as fact.

Scientists in the game theorize (in other words, assume) that it was the eezo from the ships that caused the extinction, and the reason that so many ships were gathered there is because the two species were battling over the planet for resources.

But scientists in the game NEGLECT the fact that these "battles" coincided with the same time that a reaper fleet would be within the galaxy, and that the REAPERS could have extinguished all life on Eingana and erased any presence of society BEFORE the wild-life was exposed to all the eezo, and then they just developed as if it had naturally been a part of their environment the whole time.

There are no other planets or models within the mass effect universe that comes close to Eingana.  With how many THOUSANDS of cycles of civilizations rising up, and the INFINITE number of ships with mass effect cores that had been created (and presumably DESTROYED, because they obviously aren't around anymore) shouldn't there be AT LEAST  more then .25% of the planets currently known to the universe in which eezo had caused this?

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Extinction is very natural, Sisterofshane. You should try and make your peace with it. You can't stop it, after all.

That it is Saphra.  No one bemoans the death of the last Dodo Bird, or the dinosaurs, or any of the vast life which had once made up the Earth but is now lost to the ages.

So it is not sucha horrible idea, then, to sacrifice Humanity for a very noble cause -- to defeat the Reapers, and forever end this unnatural cycle.

Thank you for helping me to validate my decision.

[TuringPoint]

My thoughts are now elaborated in the above post. In more concise form than they were going to be originally.

Extinction is natural. Extinction and continuation of the Reaper legacy somehow doesn't seem to me to be natural. It defies nature. That is what Reapers do.

I believe that humanity is a biological thing. Being human is existential as well.  I believe in my own existence and my existence is important to me.  I do not believe I could continue to exist as a reaper, being a biologically evolved being.   Nor would my culture continue to exist, or any manner of legacy that I had created.  It would only be the Reaper legacy, to exploit and exterminate for the rest of time.

Modifié par Alocormin, 15 août 2011 - 08:55 .

[SandTrout]

There are no other planets or models within the mass effect universe that comes close to Eingana. With how many THOUSANDS of cycles of civilizations rising up, and the INFINITE number of ships with mass effect cores that had been created (and presumably DESTROYED, because they obviously aren't around anymore) shouldn't there be AT LEAST more then .25% of the planets currently known to the universe in which eezo had caused this?

You're seriously overstating the % of planets this has occurred on.

Also, note how Saphra has considered my post explaining how her evidence actually supports our position as not worthy of response, but considers 'witty' remarks like "extinction is natural" a worthwhile line of discussion? Some people should learn that it is OK to be wrong once in a while, if you are willing admit it.

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

There is NO evidence within the game to prove that Eezo exposure would cause fatalities in vast quantities as to extinguish all life on a planet.

I did not say it would. That didn't even happen on Eingana. Go read my first post. AGAIN.

Here is what you posted:

Saphra Deden wrote...
So what will happen if we destroy hundreds of Reapers on or in orbit
over the Earth? The same thing that happened on Eingana will happen on
Earth. Refined element zero will poison the environment and wipe out
much of the life there. The effect will likely be much worse on Earth
because Reapers likely carry drive cores much larger than anything the
races fighting over Eingana used, meaning a hell of a lot more eezo is
going to rain down on the planet.

Earth will become a wasteland with most species on land and in the water dead, including plants. This means

we won't be able to grow any edible food there. If the planet can't
support life it certainly can't support industry and with that goes the
human economy and along with it our military standing.

Someday
the Earth will probably recover, but that could take tens of thousands
or even hundreds of thousands of years. It might even take many
millionsof years depending on how catastrohpic and total the die-off is.
Humans
can't afford to wait around that long.

The only real difference in your paragraph and my sentence is the use of the word "all".

I was using hyperbole to illustrate the ludicrousy of your argument.

Read my post above.  Your exapmle only accounts for less then .25% of all planets within the KNOWN galaxy (of Mass Effect lore).

You do not have enough evidence to suggest that this scenario will result in earth becoming a "wasteland".

[Sisterofshane]

SandTrout wrote...

There are no other planets or models within the mass effect universe that comes close to Eingana. With how many THOUSANDS of cycles of civilizations rising up, and the INFINITE number of ships with mass effect cores that had been created (and presumably DESTROYED, because they obviously aren't around anymore) shouldn't there be AT LEAST more then .25% of the planets currently known to the universe in which eezo had caused this?

You're seriously overstating the % of planets this has occurred on.

Also, note how Saphra has considered my post explaining how her evidence actually supports our position as not worthy of response, but considers 'witty' remarks like "extinction is natural" a worthwhile line of discussion? Some people should learn that it is OK to be wrong once in a while, if you are willing admit it.

I may have "no" sense of the scale of a planet-wide catastrophe, but Saphra has no scale of how large the GALAXY really is, and how insignificant Eingana is on the grand scheme of things.

Three times she has ignored that number (.25%).  I think it's time to call this thread "dead".

[Sisterofshane]

Saphra Deden wrote...

You used hyperbole to portray my argument... which was dishonest since you were asking me then to retract statements I never made and defend arguments I never made.

I used a degree of hyperbole in my first post already, so adding even more really distorts things. Needlessly.

In any case, I've got plenty of evidence. If the battle over Earth is bigger than the battles fought over Eginana, and it easily could be, then the mass extinctions could be larger and more severe.

Eingana is only one quarter of a percent (.25%) of the entire known galaxy.

It's not a very solid foundation upon which to base a scenario upon.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Alocormin wrote...
Extinction is natural. Extinction and continuation of the Reaper legacy somehow doesn't seem to me to be natural. It defies nature. That is what Reapers do.

Yes. What is the intrinsic value of nature?

I believe that humanity is a biological thing. Being human is existential as well.  I believe in my own existence and my existence is important to me.  I do not believe I could continue to exist as a reaper, being a biologically evolved being.   Nor would my culture continue to exist, or any manner of legacy that I had created.  It would only be the Reaper legacy, to exploit and exterminate for the rest of time.

Important to you yes. Does it have any intrinsic value?

I will be the first to admit that human survival with interests guaranteed has no intrinsic value either. Just something I want. And I would become irrelevent if we become Reapers, but then again I am irrelevent already in the larger scheme of things, even if I love myself.

I guess what I am trying to say is something similar to sisterofshane actually. It doesn't really matter if humanity gets extinct. Nor does it really matter if we become reapers and the cycle continues. Organics will still be what they are. Flawed beings who are born, whither and die.

So it's a matter of preference, shall we say. I am guessing you would percieve it as noble to end the unnatural cycle.
I personally do not see the intrinsic value of that either.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 août 2011 - 09:02 .

[TuringPoint]

Being alive is still being alive. Being exterminated by the Reapers and having my existence only peripherally alive inside the machine, constructed with organic and synthetic matter, and becoming part of the voice for the continued destruction of infinite more organic races, doesn't seem worth the cost of just giving up and allowing the inevitable to occur.