695 réponses à ce sujet

[Panicomatic]

The logic supplied by the godchild is still faulty. If the godchild cared about organic life it would use the reapers to quell synthetic rebellion. Instead Sovereign used synthetic life to wage war on organics. In reality it is likely that the godchild is lying, and the reapers leave other forms of life for the purpose of reproduction. Which tells me that the reapers are driven by self preservation. That conversation can't be taken at face value, nor can the ending be in its current state.

[Cazlee]

The Angry One wrote...

Cazlee wrote...

Maybe not in this galaxy.  You don't know what the catalyst knows, it has billions of years of experience on us.

All I know is that all the evidence in the game contradicts him.
Look at Rannoch. No, don't even bother with the Quarians. The Geth had total supremacy over Rannoch for 3 centuries and... there are still birds in the sky.

The Geth literally wouldn't harm a fly.

It has only been 50,000 years. Perhaps the reapers are guarding against something they believe is inevitable, and they might even have a damn good reason.

I just want to reiterate that the logic is not circular.  It may not be correct or right, but it isn't circular. We can disagree about the truth of the logic while still both accepting that the logic itself is fine.

Modifié par Cazlee, 26 mars 2012 - 02:16 .

[Elishiaila]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

Except that he does use circular logic.

He created advanced synthetics to kill advanced organics, so that the advanced organics wouldn't create synthetics which would then kill all organics.

I'm failing to see a connection between "pruning trees" and committing genocide over and over and over, but maybe that's just me.

Lets assume: Life (and evolution) in the galaxy = Tree
Individual Races, civilizations = Branches
Advanced civilizations that can create synthetics = Branches that use too much resources.

Now try to prune that tree. 

As you see Reapers do that.

Why Synthetics is an issue? Why it isn't only war issue? Not because reapers would expect a war. But because with help of self replicating machines we can use up too much materials too quickly, which in turn would lead to kill all life on all planets.  We could make all planets barren forever.  So killing only the harmfull forms of life can save the rest, and reapers pursue this goal.

[chkchkchk]

Sovereign tells us that the Reapers guide the development of galactic civilization along paths the Reapers desire. If the Reapers want to stop synthetics from killing organics, why do the Reapers create a situation where organics create synthetics? Why don't the Reapers guide the development of civilizations in such a way that organics avoid creating synthetics.

IT IS ALMOST AS IF A NEW WRITER REJECTED THE EXISTING LORE OF THE SERIES. IT IS ALMOST AS IF MARAUDER SHIELDS WAS TRYING TO TELL ME SOMETHING.

[Lugaidster]

@Admiral H. Cain

I already read that article, and it brings fair points. But it regards the catalyst's logic as circular when it is in fact not.

@Unit-Alpha

That solution is still arguable. In fact, I'd say it's at least as bad, from our point of view and a lot worse from their point of view. The reapers are not guardians keeping the galaxy in check, they simple reset the status of the galaxy every fifty millennia. In a way, they simply put a timer on galactic civilization, do all you want, play all you want and invent all you want, they will simply reset everything to the starting point and preserve those organics in reaper form instead of losing them forever.

@The Angry One

To be fair, they didn't actually upgrade them and leave them to go rampant. They were being controlled by a reaper, they were hacked. Since you released them, they could go back to your side. Do remember though, that the reapers wanted to turn the geth into a reaper (by using the reaper as the geth mega-structure) also, which is why the heretics joined them in the first place.

@JulienJaden

It's not sufficiently accurate. There's no such thing as accurate ridicule, and if it were, this is not it because regarding it as circular logic is failing to understand it. It may not be a great motivation, but it certainly isn't "stupid."

@yllamana

That's a pretty good analogy.

[doodiebody]

Lugaidster wrote...

However, I believe that the conclusion everyone's making is false. The reason for that is that the catalyst isn't killing organic life to stop synthetics killing organic life. That's an oversimplification. It's killing some organic life to prevent synthetics to kill all organic life. That premise might be wrong, but it's not a logical fallacy as there's no contradiction.

I made a post about this the other day.  I agree with you here.

The thing I was pointing out in my thread is that while his logic isn't exactly circular, it's based on a premise that must be false.  If synthetics ever completely wiped out organic life, to the point where it couldn't return, the organics in the game wouldn't exists.  So we can only conclude that no synthetics have ever succeeded in fully wiping out organics.  Which means his solution (leaving behind only simple organics) is indistinguishable from whatever synthetic horrors he claims to be protecting us from.

[MakeMineMako]

It's still circular logic. A roundabout argument.

But even if it wasn't, the idea that synthetics are predestined to kill off organics, because we are an "accident" and "chaos", is pure horsesh*t on the lowest level.

Sparkly Space Hitler is just outright wrong in his assertions.

[Kreid]

CaptainZaysh wrote...
a) What are the better methods?

Maybe, just maybe, educating emerging civilizations on the dangers of synthetic life and a technological singularity insted of sistematically wiping them out in a horrible fashion? It might not be easy but creating a never ending circle of evolutive stagnation effectively leads to nowhere as far as we know.

If the Catalyst assigns (or was programmed to assign) no value to a specific society's continued evolution, it makes perfect sense.

Isn't the Catalys an immensely powerful A.I.? If EDI can alter it's core programming I'm pretty sure the Catalyst can too. If he's conducting such genocide without even making value judgments it's all the most incoherent.

Modifié par Creid-X, 26 mars 2012 - 02:19 .

[Lugaidster]

chkchkchk wrote...

Sovereign tells us that the Reapers guide the development of galactic civilization along paths the Reapers desire. If the Reapers want to stop synthetics from killing organics, why do the Reapers create a situation where organics create synthetics? Why don't the Reapers guide the development of civilizations in such a way that organics avoid creating synthetics.

IT IS ALMOST AS IF A NEW WRITER REJECTED THE EXISTING LORE OF THE SERIES. IT IS ALMOST AS IF MARAUDER SHIELDS WAS TRYING TO TELL ME SOMETHING.

They guide the evolution of the species in a certain pattern, but they can't eliminate free will. As every organic species will regard time as valuable, they will create tools that make them have more time with themselves, in the end, the ultimate tool will be constructed: a sentient synthetic life form. They can't eliminate that posibility, they can just cull those when it happens.

[CaptainZaysh]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Except what's the point? I mean, what's the motivation behind the Reapers themselves? They have no personal stake in any of this. For all they care, they could sit out in dark space, drinking margaritas.

That's a very strange criticism.  Clearly they do greatly desire that the technological singularity is never achieved.  Personally I suspect that's why the Catalyst was created in the first place.

Unit-Alpha wrote...
Besides, by giving organics many of the keys to create these "deadly" synthetics, they are just shooting themselves in the metaphorical foot. 

The synthetics aren't created by the Citadel or the relay network.  I think we can all accept that organics will create synthetics if left to their own devices.  That's not the Reapers rigging the game, it's people inventing robots to do tasks.

Unit-Alpha wrote...
And if the AI god child is controlling them, then why would we accept the logic of a synthetic, which is gonna seek to preserve its kind?

The Catalyst clearly does not seek to preserve all synthetics.  In fact it is attempting to ensure that synthetics that could wipe out organic civilisation are never born.

[Militarized]

Even if his logic isn't entirely circular, which I believe it is, tech singularity is dumb and total weaksauce.

[Admiral H. Cain]

Elishiaila wrote...

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

Except that he does use circular logic.

He created advanced synthetics to kill advanced organics, so that the advanced organics wouldn't create synthetics which would then kill all organics.

I'm failing to see a connection between "pruning trees" and committing genocide over and over and over, but maybe that's just me.

Lets assume: Life (and evolution) in the galaxy = Tree
Individual Races, civilizations = Branches
Advanced civilizations that can create synthetics = Branches that use too much resources.

Now try to prune that tree. 

As you see Reapers do that.

Why Synthetics is an issue? Why it isn't only war issue? Not because reapers would expect a war. But because with help of self replicating machines we can use up too much materials too quickly, which in turn would lead to kill all life on all planets.  We could make all planets barren forever.  So killing only the harmfull forms of life can save the rest, and reapers pursue this goal.

Let's review what exactly circular reasoning is: 

Circular Reasoning – supporting a premise with the premise rather than a conclusion.  

The Catalyst claims that he created these advanced synthetics to kill advanced organics because advanced organics will (probably) create advanced synthetics which will then wipe out all organics. He argues that this will happen because it has happened before and will happen again. 

Find me the conclusion.

Modifié par Admiral H. Cain, 26 mars 2012 - 02:22 .

[FlyingCow371]

Grellow wrote...

ediskrad327 wrote...

yet they leave the geth intact

Well synthetics aren't going to make organics to kill all syntheyics.

Except they did. The reapers had been guiding their 50,000 year cycles for a while, eventually resulting in Shepard showing up with the crucible/catalyst combo all set to go. Which uses the citadel, a creation of the synthetic reapers, to (potentially) destroy all synthetic life. The reapers are not too good at being an advanced sentient lifeform thing and not being retarded.

[Lugaidster]

doodiebody wrote...

Lugaidster wrote...

However, I believe that the conclusion everyone's making is false. The reason for that is that the catalyst isn't killing organic life to stop synthetics killing organic life. That's an oversimplification. It's killing some organic life to prevent synthetics to kill all organic life. That premise might be wrong, but it's not a logical fallacy as there's no contradiction.

I made a post about this the other day.  I agree with you here.

The thing I was pointing out in my thread is that while his logic isn't exactly circular, it's based on a premise that must be false.  If synthetics ever completely wiped out organic life, to the point where it couldn't return, the organics in the game wouldn't exists.  So we can only conclude that no synthetics have ever succeeded in fully wiping out organics.  Which means his solution (leaving behind only simple organics) is indistinguishable from whatever synthetic horrors he claims to be protecting us from.

Do remember that they actually remove synthetics from the galaxy. The geth heretics actually joined Sovereign in the first place because they wanted to become a reaper to achieve their goal at building the geth megastructure. This geth megastructure could be considered as a reaper by itself also, so it's not entirely unaccurate that the premise could be true at some point. You only need one synthetic life form that goes rougue to actually prove his point.

I'm not saying that he's correct in his motivations, but his logic isn't flawed.

[CaptainZaysh]

Creid-X wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...
a) What are the better methods?

Maybe, just maybe, educating emerging civilizations on the dangers of synthetic life and a technological singularity insted of sistematically wiping them out in a horrible fashion? It might not be easy but creating a never ending circle of evolutive stagnation effectively leads to nowhere as far as we know.

I'm not sure that "it might not be easy" adequately describes the difficulty of preventing a certain field of technological advancement across a whole galaxy.  Have you considered that this method might have zero possibility of success in the long run?

Creid-X wrote...

If the Catalyst assigns (or was programmed to assign) no value to a specific society's continued evolution, it makes perfect sense.

Isn't the Catalys an immensely powerful A.I.? If EDI can alter it's core programming I'm pretty sure the Catalyst can too. If he's conducting such genocide without even making value judgments it's all the most incoherent.

Perhaps it can't - the Catalyst is not EDI, and so far as we know nobody has ever unshackled it.  It could be following (a warped interpretation of) its original programming to prevent the rise of civilisation-killer AIs.

[Cazlee]

It's been too long for me to remember how put these statements into mathematical equations, but can someone please do it to help these people that aren't sure why 1 doesn't equal 2?

[Cody211282]

No he basically said it exactly as the meme says he did.

Worst writing I have head the misfortune of dealing with in a long time.

[Elishiaila]

MakeMineMako wrote...


It's still circular logic. A roundabout argument.

But even if it wasn't, the idea that synthetics are predestined to kill off organics, because we are an "accident" and "chaos", is pure horsesh*t on the lowest level.

Sparkly Space Hitler is just outright wrong in his assertions.

Synthetics = Self replicating machines.

While a Synthetic usually doesn't overstep its bounds, and this is why we see peaceful Geth, the issue is: How we would use our synthetic helpers? We would create a rush for resources and leave all planets barren as we fight over the control of resources and all life would be lost.

So *any* civilization that is capable of creating synthetics is a threat to *all* present and future races.

And as synthetics represent order they don't overstep their bounds, this is why Reapers don't rebel.

Synthesis ending can mean: Organics would understand their bounds well, and stay in line, while synthetics would learn more about hope, emotions, feelings, etc. And as we would have a society where we have sustainable cultures, we wouldn't have a cycle of extinction.

The "god child" can be called nature. Reapers can be "evolution". And we can say: Any race that uses up too much resources and isn't sustainable kills itself. We see a repeating pattern. Wake up. Creating synthetics means we can doom ourself much faster, and with this Nature can't adapt to save more life.

[Unit-Alpha]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

Except what's the point? I mean, what's the motivation behind the Reapers themselves? They have no personal stake in any of this. For all they care, they could sit out in dark space, drinking margaritas.

That's a very strange criticism.  Clearly they do greatly desire that the technological singularity is never achieved.  Personally I suspect that's why the Catalyst was created in the first place.

Unit-Alpha wrote...
Besides, by giving organics many of the keys to create these "deadly" synthetics, they are just shooting themselves in the metaphorical foot. 

The synthetics aren't created by the Citadel or the relay network.  I think we can all accept that organics will create synthetics if left to their own devices.  That's not the Reapers rigging the game, it's people inventing robots to do tasks.

Unit-Alpha wrote...
And if the AI god child is controlling them, then why would we accept the logic of a synthetic, which is gonna seek to preserve its kind?

The Catalyst clearly does not seek to preserve all synthetics.  In fact it is attempting to ensure that synthetics that could wipe out organic civilisation are never born.

The point is any sentient being, at its basest level, seeks to continue its own kind. If Reapers live forever, then what's the point of "reproducing"? It's not like they do much other than wipe out synthetic life.

I concede the second point to a degree. However, it is obvious that synthetics have developed at an accelerated rate due to inter-species cooperation, which is prompted by the... relay network.

Except it doesn't wipe out synthetics instead. If they are the real problem, why not go after them? Because they are preserving their own kind. You're still synthetics killing organics to protect organics from other synthetics. How does that make sense?

Modifié par Unit-Alpha, 26 mars 2012 - 02:28 .

[Tocquevillain]

[quote]Sainta117 wrote...

[quote]Tocquevillain wrote...

[quote]Cosmar wrote...
(snip)

It seems that by and large Bioware's intent was not understood by the audience. 

[/quote]

And how do you know that *you* understand it correctly? The majority of people appear to stand on the other side (as do I). Unless you're just that smart, what makes you think that you have the direct pipeline to Bioware's collective brain while the rest of us wallow in ignorance?

[/quote]

My opinion is you're wrong and it's founded on what I *think* Bioware intended. Just like you have an opinion. That's all.

It's been said again and again. Reapers don't kill all life, they kill advanced organics so that organics don't develop AI that gets out of control and kills everything, so that there is no more living life in the galaxy.

That's all. It's like a controlled demolition. They built the system, they're managing the system.

In fact, it's just like the machines from the Matrix. They've created a system of control that promises a degree of security for organics. Every so often though, they extract their pint of blood.

[Admiral H. Cain]

Cazlee wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Cazlee wrote...

Maybe not in this galaxy.  You don't know what the catalyst knows, it has billions of years of experience on us.

All I know is that all the evidence in the game contradicts him.
Look at Rannoch. No, don't even bother with the Quarians. The Geth had total supremacy over Rannoch for 3 centuries and... there are still birds in the sky.

The Geth literally wouldn't harm a fly.

It has only been 50,000 years. Perhaps the reapers are guarding against something they believe is inevitable, and they might even have a damn good reason.

I just want to reiterate that the logic is not circular.  It may not be correct or right, but it isn't circular. We can disagree about the truth of the logic while still both accepting that the logic itself is fine.

Yes, it is. 

Once again:

Circular Reasoning – supporting a premise with the premise rather than a conclusion.  

The Catalyst's argument is as follows: 

He created the Reapers (advanced synthetics) to destroy and thereby prevent advanced organics from creating advanced synthetics which would then in turn destroy organics. 

So, he created a hyper advanced race of synthetics to kill organics. 

Why?

So that advanced organics would not create advanced synthetics which would then kill organics. 

He actually DID what he was trying to prevent, sort of, maybe.

Where is the conclusion?

Modifié par Admiral H. Cain, 26 mars 2012 - 02:31 .

[beank]

Can someone link me to a script? It has been some time since i finished the game and cant remember the conversation all that well....

I would like to read it before I contribute....

[Tocquevillain]

[quote]Admiral H. Cain wrote...

[quote]Athro wrote...

Actually it still is circular logic.

Synthetics destroy advanced civilisations (organic and synthetic alike) before they create synthetic life that will destroy all organics. However the Reapers have set the universe up with the Citadel and Mass Relays so as to guide civilisations into developing in a cyclical pattern. So this then becomes a case of their solution being to a problem they created themselves. Rather than leave civilisations alone, they are guiding them to follow the same patterns and mistakes over and over again. Right, imposing ORDER on CHAOS. Machine thinking.

Except, of course, that there is no evidence that a war between organic and synthetic is inevitable even within their own cyclical trap that they have built. Got the hammer? It looks like a nail. Machines see possibilities and act on them.

Then you have the question of - The Reapers are synthetic life forms. So by the Starchild's logic they will inevitably wipe out all organic life anyway. He never offers an explanation that makes them exempt from this premise. No, because the Reapers have set themselves up as caretakers; they will never wipe out all organic life. I'm not sure where you got that idea, but you're clearly wrong!

This also completely ignores questions such as "why do the Reapers need to torture and violate the minds of these civilisations in the process." Or "why do the Reapers commit such heinous atrocities?" Again, does a machine worry about concepts of human suffering? "Violating" them, and "torturing" them, are not parts of machine vocabulary. That's the whole "incomprehensible part", you can't really describe them because all you have are human words, and they're not human. They're machine, with motives that are based on imposing control to prevent chaos. How it happens is unimportant. Garrus even notes on the Normandy that he understands how efficient they are, by turning people into husks to fight friends and family.

Because it's not sufficient to say "they are alien." Intelligence can get broader in scale, but empathy is still possible further up the chain. The Reapers are so unempathetic and psychopathic in their means that it stretches credibility that they are just an alien intelligence that doesn't get it. They *know* exactly what they are doing, and that is not the sign of a stable or benevolent race. They are willfully psychopathic and evil. "Empty  is still possible further up the chain"? Ok, in Mass Effect, they decided these particular machines didn't have any empathy, just like the Machines in the Matrix, just like the Terminator, just like every other depiction of machines in popular media. Why can't you accept that instead of trying to reach for an explanation? Again, in my opinion, it's because we're human, and they're  not.

So again, the logic is full of fallacies. The Starchild doesn't just resort to circular logic - although part of his argument is indeed circular - he also commits fallacies of appeals to authority (I'm so ancient, I just know what I'm talking about so shut up), Slippery Slope (Synthetics and Organics are so different that eventually they will wipe out all organic life in the universe despite this having *never* happened yet because there is still organic life in the universe...)  along with some just absurd claims "synthetic organic hybrids are the final point of evolution." I think he's suggesting everyone turn into husk-lite. Who knows the specifics though? 

[/quote]

[Digifi]

Didn't read the whole thread so I'm not sure if somebody said this: If the Catalyst is an advanced synthetic, and it came to the conclusion to not wipe out all organic life, just life that would create synthetics, then why wouldn't the advanced synthetics created by the organics not come to the same conclusion as the Catalyst?

In fact, the Geth don't wipe out all of the organic life on Rannoch, just the Quarians, and even then, they left some of them alive to escape (the first time, I won't bring up the current status and introduce that mess in here). I think the Catalyst needs to redesign a couple of circuits because he's got some wires crossed.

[Mallissin]

WHY DON'T THE REAPERS ONLY KILL SYNTHETICS?

Because it's circular logic. OP loses. /thread