1104 réponses à ce sujet

[Aaleel]

I think anyone in here honestly would try to save both if it came down to it. People act like it would be easy to just say alright those whatever billions of people just have to die and that's the way it is.

But I stick by my answer of you have to defeat the reapers or it doesn't matter, so I would make my choice based on that if I have to pick one.

Modifié par Aaleel, 21 août 2011 - 02:27 .

[RAF1940]

Luc0s wrote...

RAF1940 wrote...

I think he's coming at this from a scientific angle. And, scientifically, he is right.

Yes, THANK YOU! Finally someone who understands!

Yes, I understand what you mean.


The reason you are arguing with everyone else is that you're coming at this from more of a scientific angle, while most people would approach this from a moral angle.

[RAF1940]

Luc0s wrote...

RAF1940 wrote...

...did you just argue with yourself?

No, you just quoted one of my posts and somehow managed to mix it up with someone else's nickname.

Ah, I see my error. Thank you.

[Sunnie]

I think it's silly to be having heated arguments over something that is just not possible. Humans are like cockroaches, they are all over the galaxy and spreading at breakneck speed. Even if earth is lost, there's still many other planets humans inhabit. This whole debate is irrelevant. And yes, I would sacrifice Earth if saving Thessia was more likely to succeed.

[atheelogos]

Xilizhra wrote...

RAF1940 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

This means he believes that  I would save humans becasue the loss of humans would affect me more than the loss of Asari. That is selfish becasue I am only concerned with my own interests.

I do not BELIEVE that, I KNOW that. Without humanity you lose the ability to procreate. And that's basically what live is all about, to procreate and preserve your genes. That's how nature works. And you're going right against your nature. You're unnatural.

According to your logic, you are selfish too, because you are also only concerned with your own interests, which is the asari race.

I'll make my own definition for what my life is all about, not your antiquated gene-based morality.

I think he's coming at this from a scientific angle. And, scientifically, he is right.

"Should" is entirely morality-based. The glory of sapience is that we don't have to be led around by genes.

You do realize that our morality is based on that "gene-based morality", right? Our "gene-based morality" is the very foundation of every single morality there is today in human society.

I never said that my life is all about procreation, but it is the foundation of life.

Sure, I have my own beliefs, philosophies, moral values and what not, but I do realize that somewhere deep inside me it's all build around my primal instrinct, the primal instrinct to survive and the primal instinct to procreate.

You're ignoring that I am procreating in this scenario anyway.

Again your not. The Asari is

[Sisterofshane]

SpiffySquee wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

Eh, that's why I said it doesn't really apply, but it's about the same concept.

How about this analogy for you then -- your house is burning down.  You have only enough time to save your cat, or your child -- now which one would you save?  I think it can be argued that you can love both equally, but which one do you value more when it comes to sacrificing one over the other?

And I agree that there would never really be such a hypothetical situation as to just coming down to straight sacrificing a species for the other.  But in this case, it would need context -- context that only the game will provide.  Until then we can only speculate as to the worth of these races in the present battle against the Reapers and the future.

You are assuming that the simple fact that I was born here makes humans my child and Asari my cat. Why? Why not the other way around? What makes Humanity my child?

It also does not work because you are talking about a specific bond between 2 people. Love for a race is more abstract and cannot be looked at the same way. I love my child becasue I spend every day with that person and know that person in and out. The same cannot be said for every human. I don't know every human and culture so my love for the race as a whole is more abstract than my love for my child.

What if I was a spacer and grew up around aliens? I might have spent more time with Asari than humans. Would your analogy still work?

Actually, yes, that is exactly the way I see it.

My posterity  can only exist through humanity alone.  I can't further my race through the Asari ( as the children are born Asari) nor can I expect my ideals and culture to be upheld through them.  The loss of humanity would be the loss of my way of life, which I happen to value much more highly then theirs.  Not that I wish for any second that they should be obliterated -- they are a unique culture of their own.  But I want my children, my grandchildren, and so down the line, to inherit from me the best of my world.  It's not going to happen if I decide that another race is more important then my own.

And even as a spacer, you are born of and raised by parents of the human race and culture.  They impart much more then genetics to you.

So I will twist my hypothetical one more time -- your house is burning down.  You have a chance to save your best friend ( of the same gender) or your potential mate (mother/father of your future children).  If you save your friend (whom you love just as much as your mate), then  you will never have another opportunity to have children and procreate, and pass down your wisdom and love and advice to them -- you will never see them grow or achieve, never see them have children of their own.  Would you take more solace in knowing that your friend could do the same things?

If  wanting to save my future makes me selfish, then so be it.

[RAF1940]

Luc0s wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...


You should read my original post again. I said I viewed them as equal and would save whoever I had the greater chance of saving. I never said I felt a stronger attachment to the Asari. I said I would not have a stronger attachment to humans just becasue I was one.

Asari won't die very easily. Their population goes within the trillions. Even with billions of casualties, the asari will survive. So there is no real concern for the asari.

However, you SHOULD be concerned over humanity. Because billions of human casualties would mean the end of humanity. We simply can't afford such loss.

So, keeping that in mind, would you still save the asari first and humanity second?

Once again, I don't think he's viewing this from a mathematical, scientific, logical standpoint like you are.

[Xilizhra]

Luc0s wrote...

RAF1940 wrote...

The reason you are arguing with everyone else is that you're coming at this from more of a scientific angle, while most people would approach this from a moral angle.

I wouldn't say my arguments are scientific, they're just more rational.

Everyone else argues based on their emotions. I argrue based on sound logic and reason.

But apparently, on BSN, logic and reason = selfish.

Then why are you getting so emotionally heated?

[bobdooly]

Luc0s wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...

I think it's silly to be having heated arguments over something that is just not possible. Humans are like cockroaches, they are all over the galaxy and spreading at breakneck speed. Even if earth is lost, there's still many other planets humans inhabit. This whole debate is irrelevant. And yes, I would sacrifice Earth if saving Thessia was more likely to succeed.

Get your facts straight.

99% of the entire human race is stationed on planet earth. With planet earth gone, humanity is gone.

No planet eart = no humanity.

You're both wrong (and right). The majority of humans is on Earth and if it goes, so does any human power. Humanity will still survive, but in no way shape or form will they be respected or considered and they will be either vassalized or enslaved. Thus, cultural genocide.

[RAF1940]

Luc0s wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...

I think it's silly to be having heated arguments over something that is just not possible. Humans are like cockroaches, they are all over the galaxy and spreading at breakneck speed. Even if earth is lost, there's still many other planets humans inhabit. This whole debate is irrelevant. And yes, I would sacrifice Earth if saving Thessia was more likely to succeed.

Get your facts straight.

99% of the entire human race is stationed on planet earth. With planet earth gone, humanity is gone.

No planet earth = no humanity.

I dunno. Earth's population is only 8 billion or something in ME, isn't it (IIRC from the planet profile in the codex - please correct me someone if that's wrong).

There's no telling how many humans are on Omega, Illium, the Citadel, etc. Not to mention human colonies.

[SpiffySquee]

Luc0s wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...


You should read my original post again. I said I viewed them as equal and would save whoever I had the greater chance of saving. I never said I felt a stronger attachment to the Asari. I said I would not have a stronger attachment to humans just becasue I was one.

Asari won't die very easily. Their population goes within the trillions. Even with billions of casualties, the asari will survive. So there is no real concern for the asari.

However, you SHOULD be concerned over humanity. Because billions of human casualties would mean the end of humanity. We simply can't afford such loss.

So, keeping that in mind, would you still save the asari first and humanity second?

Umm... what?

You said save one or the other. That means one is wiped out and the other is not. Now you are saying that if I save humanity the Asari will not be wiped out??? 

So.... if I choose to save the humans, the Asari will also live... if I choose to save the Asari, the humans will die... that makes no sense

And Trillions of Asari? What is your source? The only numbers we have is Illium at about 98 million and a planet called Zesmeni with 620 Asari. We have no idea how many Asri there are or if they are anywhere near trillions strong.

[RAF1940]

RAF1940 wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...

I think it's silly to be having heated arguments over something that is just not possible. Humans are like cockroaches, they are all over the galaxy and spreading at breakneck speed. Even if earth is lost, there's still many other planets humans inhabit. This whole debate is irrelevant. And yes, I would sacrifice Earth if saving Thessia was more likely to succeed.

Get your facts straight.

99% of the entire human race is stationed on planet earth. With planet earth gone, humanity is gone.

No planet earth = no humanity.

I dunno. Earth's population is only 8 billion or something in ME, isn't it (IIRC from the planet profile in the codex - please correct me someone if that's wrong).

There's no telling how many humans are on Omega, Illium, the Citadel, etc. Not to mention human colonies.

I looked up earth's ME population. Human pop. is 11,490,225,106 in 2183 according to the novel "Mass Effect: Incursion".

[bobdooly]

RAF1940 wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...

I think it's silly to be having heated arguments over something that is just not possible. Humans are like cockroaches, they are all over the galaxy and spreading at breakneck speed. Even if earth is lost, there's still many other planets humans inhabit. This whole debate is irrelevant. And yes, I would sacrifice Earth if saving Thessia was more likely to succeed.

Get your facts straight.

99% of the entire human race is stationed on planet earth. With planet earth gone, humanity is gone.

No planet earth = no humanity.

I dunno. Earth's population is only 8 billion or something in ME, isn't it (IIRC from the planet profile in the codex - please correct me someone if that's wrong).

There's no telling how many humans are on Omega, Illium, the Citadel, etc. Not to mention human colonies.

It's around 11 billion now (I think). HUman colonies would not have any firepower to remain independent and would be taken over and vassalized/enslaved, or be forced to flee and go quarian.

[Sunnie]

Luc0s wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...

I think it's silly to be having heated arguments over something that is just not possible. Humans are like cockroaches, they are all over the galaxy and spreading at breakneck speed. Even if earth is lost, there's still many other planets humans inhabit. This whole debate is irrelevant. And yes, I would sacrifice Earth if saving Thessia was more likely to succeed.

Get your facts straight.

99% of the entire human race is stationed on planet earth. With planet earth gone, humanity is gone.

No planet eart = no humanity.

lol.. there are no "facts". its a fictional universe where humanity is all over the galaxy. There's been no "facts" presented within this world to indicate that the loss of Earth alone woulf mean the extinction of humans. You, my friend, need to stop mixing reality with fantasy.

[RAF1940]

Huh... apparently earth rotates backwards when orbiting it in ME2. Cool.


Info coming from:     http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Earth


And it's so urbanized it looks like the moon. O.O

Modifié par RAF1940, 21 août 2011 - 02:41 .

[Travie]

If thats the big decision in ME3 I would laugh, its really a no brainer.

I'd only save the asari to see what happens.

[RAF1940]

Sunnie22 wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...

I think it's silly to be having heated arguments over something that is just not possible. Humans are like cockroaches, they are all over the galaxy and spreading at breakneck speed. Even if earth is lost, there's still many other planets humans inhabit. This whole debate is irrelevant. And yes, I would sacrifice Earth if saving Thessia was more likely to succeed.

Get your facts straight.

99% of the entire human race is stationed on planet earth. With planet earth gone, humanity is gone.

No planet eart = no humanity.

lol.. there are no "facts". its a fictional universe where humanity is all over the galaxy. There's been no "facts" presented within this world to indicate that the loss of Earth alone woulf mean the extinction of humans. You, my friend, need to stop mixing reality with fantasy.

Actually, we do have earth's population. About 11.5 billion in 2183 (only humans; no alien population mentioned) according to the novel "Mass Effect: Incursion".

Source: http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Earth