395 réponses à ce sujet

[VaultingFrog]

Aiynn wrote...

I'm not saying you're wrong at all.  I'm just saying that society can only exist because people agree not to kill each other, and that if you do kill someone, there's consequences.  I'm not an expert on Iraq but I'm willing to bet murder is illegal there as well.  Cold blooded murder, unrelated to ritual or anything specific to a culture, was determined to be "evil" ever since ancient kings realized they couldn't control or stabilize a civlization that was running around stabbing each other in the back, stealing and rioting.  Notice I said murder, not executions, sacrifices, what have you.  Those are relative to culture, and you are correct in asserting one culture cannot judge another because it is impossible to have their perspective if you don't understand their ways.    

There still is an issue though about "murder". While I personally believe that no being has the right to take another beings life (such as executions and what not) that doesnt mean it holds true for everybody.

Some could feel (not saying they do) that they are entitled to it, or that it aleviates a condition they have or any number of other reasons. While they may not seem "right" to someone like me, it doesnt mean they are wrong from their views.

And yes there are consiquences to each action, though some dont care about them. Whats more is that creating general consiquences is more or less a single group of individuals judging all of humanity by their own morals and enforcing it through brute force.

Not perfect I know but we work with what we have. Flawed as we are I see no alternitive though I skirt the boundries in many cases because of my own perceptions.

My point being is that "murder" might not be "murder" from the perspective of the one taking the act.

For instance:

A woman lies with another man instead of her husband. Her husband then takes her out and stones her to death. To me that could and should be classified as murder, but for the one actually doing it it isnt because it is part of their beliefs.

Humans suck in otherwords

[marshalleck]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

marshalleck wrote...
How is that trolling?

Because no one could seriously claim the moral high ground for a horde of giant parastic monster-ships bent on endless galactic genocide.

I never claimed moral highground for anyone. I said it's irrelevent, just as I believe concepts of "good" and "evil" are generally unsuitable for anything but provoking an irrational like/dislike reaction towards the subject to which they are applied. 

If you want to look at the Reapers objectively, as I assume you do since you're crying about "moral relativism" then all you can do is assess how efficiently their methods satisfy their goal. And since they've developed technology far in excess of anything understandable by the contemporary races, and by virtue of the fact that they've existed for millions and millions of years, the only objective conclusion you can reach is that their methods are highly efficient at satisfying whatever their motivations are. 

There's your objectivity for you. Deal with it.

That's not objectivity, that's just base utilitarianism. 

As others have noted, you seem incapable of discussing this topic through any but your own filters of right and wrong, which makes your crying over moral relativism amusing.

[VaultingFrog]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

I'm not arguing with you. I'm arguing against you. I'm arguing against the pathetic postmodern nonsense that all beliefs and all perspectives are created equal. I have no hope of convincing someone who was indoctrinated into psuedointellectual cultural relativism that they are gravely mistaken.

But someone can believe whatever they want. It's when they use force and coercion to impose choice-limiting beliefs on others that they cross the line. A murderer, kidnapper, rapist, or robber is seeking to impose his desire for something on someone else through force and coercion. The Reapers could believe that worthy species should be made into Reapers and everyone else should disappear. It's when they take action to make those things happen against the will of the individuals who make up those various species that they earn the word "evil".

The use of force to stop someone from that imposition, however, is justified. Self defense, or the defense of another.


Now, as for cultures that actively promote things like FGM, "honor" killing, sending their youth out to blowselves up in crowds of innocent civilians?   They can either change, or die out, as far as I'm concerned. 

And the world is black and white for you. That is just fine, but your method of thinking is not superior to mine, nor is mine to yours. They are just different.

And thanks for saying I was brainwashed.... Is it so hard to think that somebody can come up with the conclusions I have by having their own personal experiences?

I am sorry but I just dont abide by "good" and "evil" as they are too open of a lable for perspective. There are always two sides to an issue and to each the other is evil and their own is good.

And honestly I find you to be completely arrogent in that you believe that your own beliefs are far more important than others. You even state as such by saying that no beliefs are created equal.

My beliefs in life are no less and no more valid than your own, it doesnt get any more simple than that.

[ManBearPig91]

You've all accomplished absolutely nothing. The reapers aren't evil? I'm sorry but as a wise man once said that's f***ing retarded. They think they're doing the moral thing? Big deal, ****s thought they were doing the right thing (and the extermination nicely parallels the reapers).

All you've accomplished in this thread is proven you can argue for 10+ pages and not say anything at all.

[marshalleck]

ManBearPig91 wrote...

You've all accomplished absolutely nothing. The reapers aren't evil? I'm sorry but as a wise man once said that's f***ing retarded. They think they're doing the moral thing? Big deal, ****s thought they were doing the right thing (and the extermination nicely parallels the reapers).

All you've accomplished in this thread is proven you can argue for 10+ pages and not say anything at all.

Well thanks for demonstrating Godwin's law for us. You certainly accomplished something!

[VaultingFrog]

ManBearPig91 wrote...

You've all accomplished absolutely nothing. The reapers aren't evil? I'm sorry but as a wise man once said that's f***ing retarded. They think they're doing the moral thing? Big deal, ****s thought they were doing the right thing (and the extermination nicely parallels the reapers).

All you've accomplished in this thread is proven you can argue for 10+ pages and not say anything at all.

Philosophical issues rarely if ever actually seem to go anywhere, however it gives insight into the people participating.

And yes, to me arguing the validity of "good" and "evil" for the Reapers is moot because those terms are lables for a perspective and nothing more.

It still can be very stimulating however.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Indeed, I feel like I'm in a discussion with several appologists for Mr H and crew...

"Well, they thought they were doing the right thing, so you can't say they were evil!"

[GunMoth]

LONG POINTLESS RAMBLING ESSSAAY.

Comparing the reapers to humans is a bit of a category mistake when it comes down to specifics - but from a generalized standpoint I definitely see your point and I think its a fair allegory. Edit: But saying that the reapers aren't evil because humans "aren't" evil - or because we engage in the same activities does NOT make them just. There are also diferences between the two. :3 

Farm animals and animals we have chosen to domesticate are surprisingly intelligent. Chickens have better cognitive awareness than dogs. Cows have extremely complex social empathy / social hierarchies. Yet we chose to make dogs our companions because, our agendas were the same and we have very similar social empathy cues. We can see a natural symbiosis in the country side of Mexico - or in underdeveloped countries. Feral dogs will help with livestock guarding and pest control in exchange for food. After work is completed - they return into their habitat.

So I don't believe that any form of domestication or symbiosis is a problem necessarily. Its simply the way most people dismiss the unique qualities animals have by assuming they are of a lesser intelligence. In a way, they are, but they are more "specialized" than humans. Without learning and appreciating them we wouldn't have been able to make technological advancements. We also wouldn't have learned the importance of biodiversity.

My point is: there are no reapers that we have encountered who seek to form a peaceful symbiosis with humans. It could EASILY be obtained. Many people die/commit suicide/are on death row/don't have time left for medical reasons. There's a lot of pointless death. If the reapers hung out and needed to collect resources by offering services (building more relays) then a beneficial relationship could be formed - if we could get over the ethical and social ramifications of having a giant flying death ship in our system. More people have died pointlessly between ME1 and ME2 (coupled with arrival) than necessary. It would be less work for the reapers in the long run as well. The problem with this is that they don't WANT to reach an understanding with humans. They believe that their existence is beyond our comprehension. We also don't understand their purpose or agenda other than creating another reaper. But why? Why expand in numbers?

Modifié par GunMoth, 25 août 2011 - 07:34 .

[marshalleck]

GunMoth wrote...
 They believe that their existence is beyond our comprehension. We also don't understand their purpose or agenda other than creating another reaper. But why? Why expand in numbers?

Do you have any idea what it's like to exist for millions of years? Do you know what their true purpose and agenda are?

The answers to both of those questions are beyond you. The Reapers are not incorrect in their assumptions, in this regard. Just as a gnat has no concept what it's like to be human.

Modifié par marshalleck, 25 août 2011 - 07:36 .

[VaultingFrog]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Indeed, I feel like I'm in a discussion with several appologists for Mr H and crew...

"Well, they thought they were doing the right thing, so you can't say they were evil!"

You can call them evil all you want. It just doesnt mean that the lable is correct.

From one perspective they are, from another they are not. Just depends on which way you are looking, an no I dont appologise for much considering my own morals dont lead me into situations like that.

If you want to believe they are evil then go right ahead. I dont agree with their actions but I can see at least a glimps of their morality behind their actions and reconize that there are not absolutes.

[Killjoy Cutter]

marshalleck wrote...

ManBearPig91 wrote...

You've all accomplished absolutely nothing. The reapers aren't evil? I'm sorry but as a wise man once said that's f***ing retarded. They think they're doing the moral thing? Big deal, ****s thought they were doing the right thing (and the extermination nicely parallels the reapers).

All you've accomplished in this thread is proven you can argue for 10+ pages and not say anything at all.

Well thanks for demonstrating Godwin's law for us. You certainly accomplished something!

Godwin's Law doesn't really apply when the comparison is apt and valid.   

[ManBearPig91]

marshalleck wrote...

ManBearPig91 wrote...

You've all accomplished absolutely nothing. The reapers aren't evil? I'm sorry but as a wise man once said that's f***ing retarded. They think they're doing the moral thing? Big deal, ****s thought they were doing the right thing (and the extermination nicely parallels the reapers).

All you've accomplished in this thread is proven you can argue for 10+ pages and not say anything at all.

Well thanks for demonstrating Godwin's law for us. You certainly accomplished something!

You're obviously missing the irony here.

[Killjoy Cutter]

marshalleck wrote...

GunMoth wrote...
 They believe that their existence is beyond our comprehension. We also don't understand their purpose or agenda other than creating another reaper. But why? Why expand in numbers?

Do you have any idea what it's like to exist for millions of years? Do you know what their true purpose and agenda are?

The answers to both of those questions are beyond you. The Reapers are not incorrect in their assumptions, in this regard. Just as a gnat has no concept what it's like to be human.

Humans are thinking beings. The Protheans were thinking beings. The Reapers are thinking beings. 

There is no "beyond" or "different level" here.  

[VaultingFrog]

Aiynn wrote...
See, your example would be an execution in the societies that follow such laws.  It's the fact that socities share laws that I'm trying to emphasize.  You're correct, there is no one true morality.  There's countless.  My overall point is societies all have rules, otherwise they wouldn't be able to exist.  Yes these rules can be vastly different and make no sense to a neighboring culture.  But without them there would not be order.  Or there would, but it'd be more along the lines of organized chaos.     

The world has always been in chaos, and there has never been any order to it no matter how many laws we lay down. Personal needs, wants, desires and morals always see to that.

But we are very good at pretending otherwise.

And yes societies have rules, doesnt make them just or unjust. They just exist, and following them or not is up to the individual.

What a wonderful world we live in isnt it?

[marshalleck]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

ManBearPig91 wrote...

You've all accomplished absolutely nothing. The reapers aren't evil? I'm sorry but as a wise man once said that's f***ing retarded. They think they're doing the moral thing? Big deal, ****s thought they were doing the right thing (and the extermination nicely parallels the reapers).

All you've accomplished in this thread is proven you can argue for 10+ pages and not say anything at all.

Well thanks for demonstrating Godwin's law for us. You certainly accomplished something!

Godwin's Law doesn't really apply when the comparison is apt and valid.   

It makes no claim about whether the comparisons are apt. If this were a discussion of 20th century geopolitics, fascism, authoritarianism, etc. then it obviously would not apply. 

[marshalleck]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

GunMoth wrote...
 They believe that their existence is beyond our comprehension. We also don't understand their purpose or agenda other than creating another reaper. But why? Why expand in numbers?

Do you have any idea what it's like to exist for millions of years? Do you know what their true purpose and agenda are?

The answers to both of those questions are beyond you. The Reapers are not incorrect in their assumptions, in this regard. Just as a gnat has no concept what it's like to be human.

Humans are thinking beings. The Protheans were thinking beings. The Reapers are thinking beings. 

There is no "beyond" or "different level" here.  

Of course there is. Are you claiming to know what it's like to exist as a spacefaring entity capable of living for millions of years? 

And people accuse the Reapers of arrogance...

Modifié par marshalleck, 25 août 2011 - 07:48 .

[VaultingFrog]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Indeed, I feel like I'm in a discussion with several appologists for Mr H and crew...

"Well, they thought they were doing the right thing, so you can't say they were evil!"

Actually this is more of an example of Godwin's Law than anything else if I am understanding the reference right...

[VaultingFrog]

Aiynn wrote...

VaultingFrog wrote...

Aiynn wrote...
See, your example would be an execution in the societies that follow such laws.  It's the fact that socities share laws that I'm trying to emphasize.  You're correct, there is no one true morality.  There's countless.  My overall point is societies all have rules, otherwise they wouldn't be able to exist.  Yes these rules can be vastly different and make no sense to a neighboring culture.  But without them there would not be order.  Or there would, but it'd be more along the lines of organized chaos.     

The world has always been in chaos, and there has never been any order to it no matter how many laws we lay down. Personal needs, wants, desires and morals always see to that.

But we are very good at pretending otherwise.

And yes societies have rules, doesnt make them just or unjust. They just exist, and following them or not is up to the individual.

What a wonderful world we live in isnt it?

Bearing all of that in mind makes the Reapers not seem so crazy.  I mean, I don't agree with their methods and I don't want to volunteer for Reaperfication, but I can see where they're coming from.  I think what this all comes down to is that villains are always better when you can sympathize or emphasize with their motivations.  Doing whatever they're doing just "for the evil lulz" is like color coding good and bad for an uncreative audience. 

Bad guys/girls are always more fun when there is a reason behind the madness instead of just the madness. That is what makes enemies worth fighting in games. Otherwise I wouldnt bother with the game at all.

Edit to your edit:

I prefer making my own path instead of walking one already walked before.

Modifié par VaultingFrog, 25 août 2011 - 07:53 .

[GunMoth]

marshalleck wrote...

GunMoth wrote...
 They believe that their existence is beyond our comprehension. We also don't understand their purpose or agenda other than creating another reaper. But why? Why expand in numbers?

Do you have any idea what it's like to exist for millions of years? Do you know what their true purpose and agenda are?

The answers to both of those questions are beyond you. The Reapers are not incorrect in their assumptions, in this regard. Just as a gnat has no concept what it's like to be human.

Holy **** this thread moves FAST.

No - we cannot fully understand the way they perceive the world. Nor can we fully understand the Asari, or the Salarians. I cannot fully understand you. 

The way cognitive awareness and environmental psychology works all comes down to perception and our nervous systems. I could write a HUGE essay on why subjectivity will always be flawed - but I will avoid that.

By giving humans an objective reason as to why they need to harvest it could fill in a huge hole that this debate has. Its a shred of evidence and gives us insight on their existance. Dismissing evidence because of something as subjective as perception isn't a good thing. Hell, look at all of our technological advancements as of late. They're achieved by studying other life forms. 

But if that's your belief - that if nothing can be achieved because we will never understand things different from us - then thats your perogitive. 

[VaultingFrog]

GunMoth wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

GunMoth wrote...
 They believe that their existence is beyond our comprehension. We also don't understand their purpose or agenda other than creating another reaper. But why? Why expand in numbers?

Do you have any idea what it's like to exist for millions of years? Do you know what their true purpose and agenda are?

The answers to both of those questions are beyond you. The Reapers are not incorrect in their assumptions, in this regard. Just as a gnat has no concept what it's like to be human.

Holy **** this thread moves FAST.

No - we cannot fully understand the way they perceive the world. Nor can we fully understand the Asari, or the Salarians. I cannot fully understand you. 

The way cognitive awareness and environmental psychology works all comes down to perception and our nervous systems. I could write a HUGE essay on why subjectivity will always be flawed - but I will avoid that.

By giving humans an objective reason as to why they need to harvest it could fill in a huge hole that this debate has. Its a shred of evidence and gives us insight on their existance. Dismissing evidence because of something as subjective as perception isn't a good thing. Hell, look at all of our technological advancements as of late. They're achieved by studying other life forms. 

But if that's your belief - that if nothing can be achieved because we will never understand things different from us - then thats your perogitive. 

I just want to point out that we do have a shred of insight into the Reapers motovation. Harbinger stated that they were our salvation not our distruction. Salvation from what is a big mystery but so is life.

[marshalleck]

GunMoth wrote...

But if that's your belief - that if nothing can be achieved because we will never understand things different from us - then thats your perogitive. 

I said no such thing, and you're doing yourself no favors by suggesting it. While we may understand their motive if they would simply tell us (which they won't in the first and second chapters, since this is a game trilogy and the big spoiler has to be saved for the finale), we'll never comprehend what it's like to consciously exist for millions of years uninterrupted. In that sense, Sovereign was not wrong when it suggested Shepard was ignorant.

Modifié par marshalleck, 25 août 2011 - 07:58 .