293 réponses à ce sujet

[Phaedon]

Err, guys. Racial genocide and even ethnic cleansing are not new concepts to us. They are old and well researched. No need for theoretical experiments.

TobyHasEyes wrote...
 Were the Geth in possession of all the facts? Bare in mind that they had only just reached sentience, or conscious thought, and their first true experience of Quarians was them shutting them down. At that stage the sentient decision making processes may have not even been able to see the Quarians as anything more than a threat, and as I have said earlier.. the difference between military and non-military probably won't make sense to a newly sentient race that was initally attacked with guns (it seems unlikely that the first attempts to shut down peaceful Geth would have been with guns, you'd imagine omni-tools or the like)

 I don't wish to present the Geth as shown to be exempt from all responsibility for their actions, but I think considering their new found sentience, and the strange fractured state if the collective mind, there are a lot of qualifying factors which mean we should be wary of handling judgement

How?

The geth didn't exactly erase their memory cores upon achieving sentience (which, btw, they didn't exactly do at one moment, they weren't non-sentient one second ago and then they evolved) and they were very widespread around the Quarian society, having access even to religious books.

Either way, since they reached sentience, and considering that their minds were designed with computing as their main power (a la computers), they should have had the ability to deduce and even tell harmless from harmful. That is of course, even if we want to take a scenario where the geth were isolated and didn't have conversations with Quarians or access to documents, which is from what we know impossible.

[1136342t54_]

Saphra Deden wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

It is in retaliation against their own extermination.

Yes, most genocide is. One group fears their destruction at the hands of another be it through their religion, culture, or land stolen.

Sorry kid, but if you're going to try and justify the killing of billions of people down to the last man, woman, and child, then you need to be prepared to look at other examples. You've taken a drastic step. You can't embrance one genocide and condemn others so easily.

Shut the **** up. If you really are attempting to make me seem like I'm justifying genocide then I really have no reason to respond to you but you know what I'm going to humor you. When I have I ever justified it? I've said multiple times that it wasn't right at all. Again you are unable to see the difference between understanding and condining it which leads me to believe you are to stupid to look up the meaning.

There has never been a situation on Earth that has been even exactly the same as the Geth in Quarian situation.

[1136342t54_]

Saphra Deden wrote...

1136342t54 wrote...

When it seems that those billions are attempting to kill you and your entire race sometimes you are faced with two choices. In this case though it isn't that black and white but to Geth who while are highly intelligent likely have the maturity of a young child or essentially feeling fear on a wide scale. When the orders were out to deactivate the Geth it was likely seen as an attack by every single Quarian. The Geth responded in kind that started a war in which WMDs were possibly used. It is entirely possible the Quarians killed a large amount of there own population using nukes or Anti matter weapons to stop the Geth.

Ahh, you reveal proof of your ignorance about this topic at last. I had a feeling you would. Nobody who takes the geth side is ever anything other than ignorant.

The quarians did not use WMD's. They did not want to destroy their own civilization. The geth however did. They dropped entire populated space colonies on cities. The geth held nothing back.

Really? Prove it. Also when have I stated I'm taking the Geth side? This is being a devils advocate you idiot. Both sides were wrong.

[Biotic Sage]

^ Saphra is a contrarian. Since most people are obviously going to sympathize with the Geth more than the Quarians, Saphra is going to debate the other viewpoint. Most people tend to sympathize with the victim of the initial aggression in a conflict, not the aggressor (and rightfully so most of the time, especially when the victim is literally starting from a blank slate and has committed no crimes, has not even had the opportunity to commit crimes). It's actually one of the simpler moral judgments in the game.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 06 octobre 2011 - 08:09 .

[TobyHasEyes]

Saphra Deden wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...

For any other just about sentient, frequently non-sentient and inexperienced / naive species.. which is realistically none, as they are fairly unique qualities to the Geth

So if you are going to argue that the geth were too primitive to know better will you also then argue that the quarians, perhaps knowing this, were justified in wiping the geth out? The geth may have been ignorant, but they were dangerous. They were capable of wiping out the quarian species. Weren't the quarians right them to try and eliminate the threat before it could fully manifest?

These two pieces of the argument go hand in hand. You can't have one without the other. If the geth were so primitive that they'd exterminate an entire species then they were also too primitive to be reasoned with. This means the quarians had no choice but to take an aggressive stance to save themselves.

 Arguing that the Geth were too primitive to be able to limit their reaction to mass extermination isn't exactly suggesting they are they were a threat no matter what the Quarians did

 A sentient race that peacefully enquires the nature of their existence, and is given death as an answer.. for a newly sentient/naive race those first few experiences would be very significant in determining how you understand the world. In such a way the Geth can be seen as unable to be held responsibly for those actions due to their primitive sentience, and yet that does not justify the Quarians actions (as any and all evidence points to the violent response of the Quarians being the catalyst)

[1136342t54_]

Phaedon wrote...

Err, guys. Racial genocide and even ethnic cleansing are not new concepts to us. They are old and well researched. No need for theoretical experiments.
How?

The geth didn't exactly erase their memory cores upon achieving sentience (which, btw, they didn't exactly do at one moment, they weren't non-sentient one second ago and then they evolved) and they were very widespread around the Quarian society, having access even to religious books.

Either way, since they reached sentience, and considering that their minds were designed with computing as their main power (a la computers), they should have had the ability to deduce and even tell harmless from harmful. That is of course, even if we want to take a scenario where the geth were isolated and didn't have conversations with Quarians or access to documents, which is from what we know impossible.

The Geth had ways of communicating and even measuring the Quarian ability to fight. It is likely they were possibly the underdogs in the war and saw that they needed to basically fight with everything they got against every Quarian. Remember the first casualties in the war was likely civillians due to the Government tellign everyone to deactivate Geth. In a way to the Geth everyone was essentially hostile.

Like I said before it doesn't make killing billions of people right at all even though Geth likely had taken many more casualties due to the way they are created. Even so it wasn't right but its understandable just how the Quarians deactivating the Geth wasn't right but understandable.

[1136342t54_]

Biotic Sage wrote...

^ Saphra is a contrarian. Since most people are obviously going to sympathize with the Geth more than the Quarians, Saphra is going to debate the other viewpoint. Most people tend to sympathize with the victim of the initial aggression in a conflict, not the aggressor (and rightfully so, especially when the victim is literally starting from a blank slate and has committed no crimes, has not even had the opportunity to commit crimes). It's actually one of the simpler moral judgments in the game.

But even so Saphra is either a idiot or attempting to troll me. I wasn't necessarily playing the Geth up to be a victim when I've said many many many times that they weren't right. Saphra is being purposely ****ing idiotic and this isn't the first time.

[Biotic Sage]

1136342t54 wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

^ Saphra is a contrarian. Since most people are obviously going to sympathize with the Geth more than the Quarians, Saphra is going to debate the other viewpoint. Most people tend to sympathize with the victim of the initial aggression in a conflict, not the aggressor (and rightfully so, especially when the victim is literally starting from a blank slate and has committed no crimes, has not even had the opportunity to commit crimes). It's actually one of the simpler moral judgments in the game.

But even so Saphra is either a idiot or attempting to troll me. I wasn't necessarily playing the Geth up to be a victim when I've said many many many times that they weren't right. Saphra is being purposely ****ing idiotic and this isn't the first time.

Well of course Saphra isn't a troll. 

The best way to respond to contrarians is just to acknowledge the impasse. 

The best way to respond to a troll is to either troll harder or put up a funny gif.

Either way there's no point in arguing with the person.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 06 octobre 2011 - 08:13 .

[1136342t54_]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Yes, so then, will you acknowledge that the quarians are ultimately in the right? They were they were there first. They are sophisticated and capable of reason. They are not a danger to anyone else. The geth are a danger to them and were barely intelligent enough to be considered sapient beings. You acknowledge they weren't intelligent enough to reason with. The quarians had no choice.

Both sides were wrong. The reason for the Geth attack was due to the Quarians attacking first. 

[TobyHasEyes]

Phaedon wrote...

Err, guys. Racial genocide and even ethnic cleansing are not new concepts to us. They are old and well researched. No need for theoretical experiments.

TobyHasEyes wrote...
 Were the Geth in possession of all the facts? Bare in mind that they had only just reached sentience, or conscious thought, and their first true experience of Quarians was them shutting them down. At that stage the sentient decision making processes may have not even been able to see the Quarians as anything more than a threat, and as I have said earlier.. the difference between military and non-military probably won't make sense to a newly sentient race that was initally attacked with guns (it seems unlikely that the first attempts to shut down peaceful Geth would have been with guns, you'd imagine omni-tools or the like)

 I don't wish to present the Geth as shown to be exempt from all responsibility for their actions, but I think considering their new found sentience, and the strange fractured state if the collective mind, there are a lot of qualifying factors which mean we should be wary of handling judgement

How?

The geth didn't exactly erase their memory cores upon achieving sentience (which, btw, they didn't exactly do at one moment, they weren't non-sentient one second ago and then they evolved) and they were very widespread around the Quarian society, having access even to religious books.

Either way, since they reached sentience, and considering that their minds were designed with computing as their main power (a la computers), they should have had the ability to deduce and even tell harmless from harmful. That is of course, even if we want to take a scenario where the geth were isolated and didn't have conversations with Quarians or access to documents, which is from what we know impossible.

 I don't see how you can conclude that they should be able to deduce harmless from harmful, when as I say the likely initial tool to 'shut down' the Geth would likely have been an omni-tool or computer or similar. To the Geth, that means the primary attack methods are not guns, and as such any Quarian would (to a primitive mind) be seen as a viable threat

 I also want to remind people that the sentience of the Geth is fluctuating, and is determind by multiple factors. If each Geth platform alone has merely a canine level of intelligence, then disrupted and fragmented sentience could lead to indiscriminate responses etc.

 I would actually be suprised if Geth talked to Quarians, as the initial response to that was death, and as such their own internal comms would probably have sufficed

 I want to end by saying that I am not trying here to produce a decisive list which proves the innocence of the Geth, but what I am saying is that their nature fluctuates so much, and we still know so little about them and the Quarians, that to judge a species as despicable when their sentience capacity has in its range the level of understanding that a dog has.. is too presumptious 

Modifié par TobyHasEyes, 06 octobre 2011 - 08:15 .

[1136342t54_]

Biotic Sage wrote...
Well of course Saphra isn't a troll. 

The best way to respond to contrarians is just to acknowledge the impasse. 

The best way to respond to a troll is to either troll harder or put up a funny gif.

Either way there's no point in arguing with the person.

I'm pretty much done with Saphra right now anyway.

[Phaedon]

1136342t54 wrote...
The Geth had ways of communicating and even measuring the Quarian ability to fight. It is likely they were possibly the underdogs in the war and saw that they needed to basically fight with everything they got against every Quarian.

Underdogs focus on military targets, not civillians.

Remember the first casualties in the war was likely civillians due to the Government tellign everyone to deactivate Geth. In a way to the Geth everyone was essentially hostile.

Even if:

• The geth did not escape, but remained to their places  even after they were well aware of the Quarians' intentions, and instead killed their civillian owners in a very specific time,
• Could not escape/use less than lethal force against unarmed civillians,

we are talking to only a few thousands escaping out of the billions. That means that they killed children AND infants.

Like I said before it doesn't make killing billions of people right at all even though Geth likely had taken many more casualties due to the way they are created. Even so it wasn't right but its understandable just how the Quarians deactivating the Geth wasn't right but understandable.

This is clearly a bad thing, imo. The geth killed everything that moved. Even when unarmed civillians did not have the capability or will to fight back (Only a few thousands of survivors?).

What the quarians did was wrong. The thing is, it is understandable that they were in emotional distress or in a rush while issuing orders to deactive the geth. And remember, goverment=/=all of the people, even in democratic societies.

[Biotic Sage]

@ Phaedon

All good points, especially about government not representing every single individual's mindset, but I'd like to point out that underdogs are actually the ones who will usually focus on civilian targets. It's generally a move of desperation (e.g. Al Queda).

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 06 octobre 2011 - 08:21 .

[TobyHasEyes]

 I don't think a good argument can be brought forward that would say what the Geth did was a good thing

 But I still maintain that there are at least potential grounds for widespread diminished responsibility

[Biotic Sage]

TobyHasEyes wrote...

 I don't think a good argument can be brought forward that would say what the Geth did was a good thing

 But I still maintain that there are at least potential grounds for widespread diminished responsibility

Definitely not the case; in no way is genocide a good thing.  But I also think no one can bring forth a good argument that asserts the Geth's bad action was caused by the initial Quarian aggression.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 06 octobre 2011 - 08:25 .

[1136342t54_]

Phaedon wrote...

Underdogs focus on military targets, not civillians.

When a unarmed man is attempting to deactivate a Geth the Geth would likely respond by killing that person. Self defense.

Even if:

• The geth did not escape, but remained to their places  even after they were well aware of the Quarians' intentions, and instead killed their civillian owners in a very specific time,

They did? I didn't know they all stayed inside and waited to kill the people who are attempting to essentially kill them. Even so it can basically be seen as self defense on a massive scale as the first battle of the war.

• Could not escape/use less than lethal force against unarmed civillians,

we are talking to only a few thousands escaping out of the billions. That means that they killed children AND infants.

You are assuming that nukes and mass accelerators weren't used against targets on both side. It would be ridiculous to think the Geth went in to every home to kill people. In wars like that collateral damage is large not tomention environmental.

This is clearly a bad thing, imo. The geth killed everything that moved. Even when unarmed civillians did not have the capability or will to fight back (Only a few thousands of survivors?).

Could've sworn a few million.

What the quarians did was wrong. The thing is, it is understandable that they were in emotional distress or in a rush while issuing orders to deactive the geth. And remember, goverment=/=all of the people, even in democratic societies.

The thing is its the government's fault but the people were sent in to kill Geth. Essentially the civillians are attackers in a way. But I'll have to argue later I'm in a rush so I can't give you a more better arguement.

[1136342t54_]

Biotic Sage wrote...

@ Phaedon

All good points, especially about government not representing every single individual's mindset, but I'd like to point out that underdogs are actually the ones who will usually focus on civilian targets. It's generally a move of desperation (e.g. Al Queda).

This would have been mentioned but I am in a rush so gotta go.

[Phaedon]

TobyHasEyes wrote...
 I don't see how you can conclude that they should be able to deduce harmless from harmful, when as I say the likely initial tool to 'shut down' the Geth would likely have been an omni-tool or computer or similar. To the Geth, that means the primary attack methods are not guns, and as such any Quarian would (to a primitive mind) be seen as a viable threat

I can deduce it by noticing what you seem to be missing.

The geth weren't stupid. Non-sentient or primitively sentient=/=sentient. 

Reason=/=sentience

Even with the technolodgy of today you can have machines that are more reasonable than us. That doesn't make them sentient.

In fact, they were so logical (their design was based on logic obviously, not emotions, they are machines) that they developed their own sentience. Therefore, what you suggest (The geth being smart enough to achieve sentience, but too dumb to tell "armed" from "unarmed") is impossible.

I also want to remind people that the sentience of the Geth is fluctuating, and is determind by multiple factors. If each Geth platform alone has merely a canine level of intelligence, then disrupted and fragmented sentience could lead to indiscriminate responses etc.

Forget Geth platforms. Those couldn't have achieved sentience if you left them evolve for thousands of years. These are the brilliant geth networks we are talking about. And every geth was connected to them.

I would actually be suprised if Geth talked to Quarians, as the initial response to that was death, and as such their own internal comms would probably have sufficed

Legion states that they had been asking their owners if they had souls for several times, and even plays a recording of the first time a quarian flipped out when she realized that the geth were sentient enough to realize the concept of a soul and even wonder if they have it. Do you think that they didn't notice that they could talk before that?

 

I want to end by saying that I am not trying here to produce a decisive list which proves the innocence of the Geth, but what I am saying is that their nature fluctuates so much, and we still know so little about them and the Quarians, that to judge a species as despicable when their sentience capacity has in its range the level of understanding that a dog has.. is too presumptious 

Relax. This is just a friendly debate. We are not debating actual morality here as much as we are exploring parts of the lore.

[Phaedon]

Biotic Sage wrote...

@ Phaedon

All good points, especially about government not representing every single individual's mindset, but I'd like to point out that underdogs are actually the ones who will usually focus on civilian targets. It's generally a move of desperation (e.g. Al Queda).

Terrorist groups want to lower morale by terrorizing people. Self-defence in a total war is something completely different. Killing, raping civillians and pillaging villages is not something that armies in self-defence do to achieve victory.

[Biotic Sage]

Phaedon wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

@ Phaedon

All good points, especially about government not representing every single individual's mindset, but I'd like to point out that underdogs are actually the ones who will usually focus on civilian targets. It's generally a move of desperation (e.g. Al Queda).

Terrorist groups want to lower morale by terrorizing people. Self-defence in a total war is something completely different. Killing, raping civillians and pillaging villages is not something that armies in self-defence do to achieve victory.

Very rarely do you have an Atilla the Hun type situation of total war.  Maybe Al Queada was a bad example, but there are numerous other examples of armies that take drastic steps as they are reeling from defeat.  The point is, the favored army has less of an incentive to rape/pillage (which I'm not sure how that applies to the Geth anyway haha) than the army on the ropes who at that point is like a cornered animal; if they have an opportunity to rape/pillage or target civilians then they will do it. 

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 06 octobre 2011 - 08:34 .

[Saaziel]

Phaedon wrote...
In fact, they were so logical (their design was based on logic obviously, not emotions, they are machines) that they developed their own sentience. Therefore, what you suggest (The geth being smart enough to achieve sentience, but too dumb to tell "armed" from "unarmed") is impossible.

I don't think it is.

As i've said before ; Its perfectly possible that the Geth saw Quarians in the same manner they saw themselves, like we do when we're anthropomorphizing something else. They reasoned that Quarians could upload themselves to other "platforms". Killing them wasn't an issue.

Or they could have seen the Quarian Dextro-DNA as the main representation of the Quarian race; It can be argued (As project 2501 would say) that DNA nothing more than a program formed to preserve itself, much like the Geth program. Again this makes its a problem of perspectives.

Its only mass killing of innocents if you take individuality into account.

Modifié par Saaziel, 06 octobre 2011 - 08:36 .

[Phaedon]

1136342t54 wrote...
When a unarmed man is attempting to deactivate a Geth the Geth would likely respond by killing that person. Self defense.

It may be self-defence,technically, but it's not the kind of self-defence that would get you a "Get Out of Jail" card. 

Forget escaping. Or threatening. Or using less than lethal force. 

Just imagine the geth only killing those who tried deactivating them. Do you really think that the Quarians would, one by one, keep deactivating them and get slaughtered in the process? Or that multiple billions deactivated them at once, not realizing the danger, and chickening out of the deal?

They did? I didn't know they all stayed inside and waited to kill the people who are attempting to essentially kill them. Even so it can basically be seen as self defense on a massive scale as the first battle of the war.

What is? Waiting to commit genocide when whether that civillian lives or dies doesn't affect your odds of survival at all? Or are all quarians trained soldiers that could make a great resistance group, a la the turians?

You are assuming that nukes and mass accelerators weren't used against targets on both side. It would be ridiculous to think the Geth went in to every home to kill people. In wars like that collateral damage is large not tomention environmental.

I don't care if the Quarians used WMDs, because if they were the good guys or if they were the bad ones is not what are talking about.

95% of the planet's population dead is NOT collateral damage. It is fully intended. You don't just aim at combat-worthy targets and end up killing some millions per strike too.

Could've sworn a few million.

You are right, but compared to the established popullation of multiple billions, this is nothing.

The thing is its the government's fault but the people were sent in to kill Geth. Essentially the civillians are attackers in a way. But I'll have to argue later I'm in a rush so I can't give you a more better arguement.

I'll need to go too after this post, you don't have to reply to me right now. You can do that tomorrow or the day after that, etc.

The civvies were sent to kill the geth? Even if so initially, they would have stopped the orders once the geth started killing civvies. Also, there is no way that billions of civvies died trying to deactive geth. Let's face it, by the first thousand casualties, they would be retreating and waiting for their military to act.

Modifié par Phaedon, 06 octobre 2011 - 08:36 .