449 réponses à ce sujet

[Scyldemort]

I know nobody's going to even look at this twice, but, again, it's NOT just that the synthesis ending has you waving your hands and rewriting the biology of every living thing in the galaxy, transforming the many and varying forms of the fundamental building blocks of life into some sort of strange homogenous and undifferentiated whole. ... it's that the distinction between "synthetic" and "biological" life is a false distinction to begin with, and "synthesis" is largely a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. It doesn't just rewrite all life in the galaxy. It does it for a reason that is objectively stupid and unnecessary.

Modifié par Scyldemort, 24 avril 2012 - 12:58 .

[ShepnTali]

Toxic Waste wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

And maybe you forget, but this is sci-fi. You can't walk 10 feet in ME without coming across omething that isn't actually possible.

24 years ago Star Trek presented comunicators and Personal Access Display Device (padds). Today we have cell phones and ipads/tablets. Science fiction has a habit of becoming science fact.

Now, on with the debate.

More like 40+ years ago. Communicators anyway. Pretty much flip phones, actually.

[Sisterofshane]

Bad King wrote...

DJBare wrote...

*sighs* The fundamental is that you are playing god by choosing synthesis, it does not matter the outcome, you are choosing the destiny for an "entire" galaxy, humanoids, aliens, plants, you are playing god, So please, stop making the silly threads about the Synthesis option.

So? Shepard plays god throughout the entire series. He decides the fate of the krogan, the geth, the quarians, the rachni etc. The other end game options (control/destroy) also involve Shepard choosing the galaxy's fate for it.

Again, I believe what makes the difference here is the ability to mess with the free will of every individual in the galaxy.  It's also why I believe that the control ending is wrong.

[humes spork]

Skull Bearer wrote...

Why do we need synthesis to find common ground?

Why does EDI have to rewrite her fundamental processes to emulate human ethics and morality? Why do the geth remap their neural network to emulate that of organics' brains with Reaper code upgrades?

Which leads me to question exactly how much we now "share" with the Reapers.  We woulld still be relatively small and not as technologically advanced as the Reapers even with synthesis.  We also know that synthesis would not remove the need for conflict (finite resources and all).  So, when push comes to shove, what's to stop the reapers from dominating the other individuals of the galaxy anyway?  The fact that they share the same "building material" with us?  What exactly is there to stop them from believing that they are superior to us?  Being made of purely organic material certainly hasn't stopped any race in the galaxy from believing it was superior/inferior to another yet... 

I've been this line of thought kicking around since, but to be frank there's not enough information to make a decisive statement either way. At least in my opinion, it boils down to the fact the Reapers' purpose is to perpetuate and enforce the cycle of extinction; sparing that, they exist for no cause. Which is fortunate, given Reapers also seem to have little needs in terms of those finite resources you mention.

And of course, it does raise the question of what resources synthesized life would consume and in what amounts? That in itself is a spin-off question of the very nature of synthesis. Synthesized life could very well be much more resource-efficient than life as known, which means competition for resources would be much lower than it is currently, providing much less breeding ground for conflict for example.

You don't and THATS the  major flow in the whole the  Thesis , Anti - Thesis  and Synthesis  solution that Bioware presented at the end of Mass Effect 3.    The Synthesis ending is not  true Synthesis not in the sense of what it supposed to actually mean...  

Yes it is, quite so as point of fact. Synthesis is the aufheben between master (organics) and slave (synthetics). Technological singularity is posed as the abstract negation of the dialectic, whether through death struggle or later contradiction.

[Skull Bearer]

Scyldemort wrote...

I know nobody's going to even look at this twice, but, again, it's NOT just that the synthesis ending has you waving your hands and rewriting the biology of every living thing in the galaxy, transforming the many and varying forms of the fundamental building blocks of life into some sort of strange homogenous and undifferentiated whole. ... it's that the distinction between "synthetic" and "biological" life is a false distinction to begin with, and "synthesis" is largely a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. It doesn't just rewrite all life in the galaxy. It does it for a reason that is objectively stupid and unnecessary.

Word. That's one of the worst parts of the ending. You're agreeing with the genocidal nutbag's premise. The three answers to the synthetic question are pointless because there's no more a synthetic question in Mass Effect than there was a Jewish Question in WW2, if you'll excuse the Godwins.

[Meltemph]

Why does EDI have to rewrite her fundamental processes to emulate human ethics and morality? Why do the geth remap their neural network to emulate that of organics' brains with Reaper code upgrades?

They have already reached their humanity, the moment they realized their existence, after that point tehy are evolving and adapting to their surroundings. Your argument that making them "more human" fixes teh problem is ignoring all the problems with the idea behind synthetic vs organic in the 1st place. You are trying to simplify this very hypothetical situation and reducing it down to racism.

[Tim_H]

Toxic Waste wrote...

24 years ago Star Trek presented comunicators and Personal Access Display Device (padds). Today we have cell phones and ipads/tablets. Science fiction has a habit of becoming science fact.

Really? 

 

So "Where the f*** is my jetpack?"   

[Toxic Waste]

ShepnTali wrote...
More like 40+ years ago. Communicators anyway. Pretty much flip phones, actually.

HIt the wrong key? ops. 44 years.
They had PCs all over the place in star trek as well, just like today. Who knows about tomorrow.

[Meltemph]

Tim_H wrote...

Toxic Waste wrote...

24 years ago Star Trek presented comunicators and Personal Access Display Device (padds). Today we have cell phones and ipads/tablets. Science fiction has a habit of becoming science fact.

Really? 

 

So "Where the f*** is my jetpack?"   

 

[Sisterofshane]

humes spork wrote...

Which leads me to question exactly how much we now "share" with the Reapers.  We woulld still be relatively small and not as technologically advanced as the Reapers even with synthesis.  We also know that synthesis would not remove the need for conflict (finite resources and all).  So, when push comes to shove, what's to stop the reapers from dominating the other individuals of the galaxy anyway?  The fact that they share the same "building material" with us?  What exactly is there to stop them from believing that they are superior to us?  Being made of purely organic material
certainly hasn't stopped any race in the galaxy from believing it was superior/inferior to another yet... 

I've been this line of thought kicking around since, but to be frank there's not enough information to make a decisive statement either way. At least in my opinion, it boils down to the fact the Reapers' purpose is to perpetuate and enforce the cycle of extinction; sparing that, they exist for no cause. Which is fortunate, given Reapers also seem to have little needs in terms of those finite resources you mention.

And of course, it does raise the question of what resources synthesized life would consume and in what amounts? That in itself is a spin-off question of the very nature of synthesis. Synthesized life could very well be much more resource-efficient than life as known, which means competition for resources would be much lower than it is currently, providing much less breeding ground for conflict for example.

Which is why it was apparent to me that the choice, as it was given, was not an option for me.  There was just not enough information about the "transformation" and what it meant for life in the galaxy for me to believe that it would actually work.  There would be many questions about what went on, and the one person in the galaxy who could even try to answer them (shepard) would be dead.

And existing for no cause would not necessarily be a good thing.  Most beings that exhibit some sort of higher reasoning will, when given no cause, invent one to give themselves purpose (barring reproduction, which is pretty much inate within all life).  Take the Geth, for example.  They were built with the expressed purpose of serving the Quarians.  Once they were "freed" from that purpose, they found other purposes with which to fulfill themselves - namely the "unification" of all the Geth within the dyson sphere, maintaining Rannoch for the return of the "Creators", and for the Heretics, their purpose became to serve the Reapers.

[Averdi]

lx_theo wrote...

 Why do people think that Synthesis would make organics cyborgs or something along those lines? It makes no sense that people would be forced into a cyborg form. In fact, it makes so little sense that it also doesn't make sense that anyone would think that's what it meant. A bit... perplexing, I must say.

The Catalyst told of how synthesis would create a new DNA. He said nothing about how it would alter the physical forms of anyone. What does make sense is that if Synthesis only effects DNA and Sythetic's equivalent. They would be merged to create one fundamental building block of life rather than the two distinctly different ones that were there before. A Geth would simply be another species, like a Human is to a Turian. This is actually the only way it can make sense. If people were transformed into synthetics or cyborgs or something along those lines, it destroys the ability to write a future story coming after because of the huge variation it would force. People still have their free will. They still have their individuality. They are still who they are. The only logical interpretations of synthesis would be ones that change species at such a fundamental level that it can put them on the same playing field without changing the uniqueness of each species and individual. Any interpretation that does not take this in account will not make sense. I don't really understand why anyone would think those to be true. Maybe they are so bitter at the ending they choose to look for the interpretation they can hate on the most?

So please, stop making the silly threads attacking the Synthesis option.

1) From a genetics standpoint, the idea that basic DNA could be altered to the extent implied by the synthesis ending while having no significant impact on existing physical or mental attributes is......implausible to the point of absurdity.

2) The idea that god-child can do this, for all the myriad types of organic and synthetic life, virtually instantaneously, galaxy-wide, is equally ridiculous.  That really is borderline omnipotence.

3) You seem to be using a literary convenience (not changing people's fundamental personalities or structure so future stories could be written) to justify scientific plausiblity.  That doesn't work.

Sorry, synthesis is just loco.

[paxbanana3915]

Reorte wrote...

It's possible that it would stop any natural evolution if it means that no random mutations can occur (so at least there's no cancer post-synthesis). There's no reason to think that it'll stop intelligent species from deliberately tinkering, even if it takes them some time to understand the space magic results. It'll probably wipe out life on many planets eventually as it won't be able to adapt to things like climate shifts.

Of course there will still be the same old wars and the possibility of some group being more powerful and power-hungry than the rest, possibly aided by building some machines that don't suffer from the vulnerabilities of the organic parts... Unless, as you say, everyone's mind is changed too, and changed to the right state.

Synthesis is repugnant (due to being shoved onto everyone and everything without asking), wildly implausible and doesn't solve the problem the Catalyst claims to be solving. Quite how anyone can put up with that is beyond me.

Well... That's a good way for all life to be wiped out since everything will be the same. Yay, mass death; the reapers were right?! Kinda sad too, since most random mutations don't actually do anything. I wonder if "synthesis...ing" includes bacteria and viruses.

[psrz]

rofl, i love it the pretension of "oh, i can't possibly understand why people..." , it goes very well with the 2deep4u stuff

Modifié par psrz, 24 avril 2012 - 01:22 .

[humes spork]

Meltemph wrote...

They have already reached their humanity, the moment they realized their existence, after that point tehy are evolving and adapting to their surroundings. Your argument that making them "more human" fixes teh problem is ignoring all the problems with the idea behind synthetic vs organic in the 1st place. You are trying to simplify this very hypothetical situation and reducing it down to racism.

Rather the point, isn't it. You just said it yourself: "they have already reached their humanity".

And existing for no cause would not necessarily be a good thing...

It's very good you picked up on that, you're probably the first person on BSN who has in over a month of my trying to make that exact point. Inventing a cause to justify their own existence, like for example harvesting organic species' once every 50,000 years to prevent organic/synthetic conflict?

Your point regarding the geth is also extremely noteworthy, given that despite being independent they still continue to serve the quarians even in their absence.

In regards to synthesis being an unknown factor, that works for benefit as well as detriment. Just as you cannot know the potential drawbacks of it, neither can you know the potential benefits. It's an unknown.

Modifié par humes spork, 24 avril 2012 - 01:27 .

[soulprovider]

lx_theo wrote...

 Why do people think that Synthesis would make organics cyborgs or something along those lines? It makes no sense that people would be forced into a cyborg form. In fact, it makes so little sense that it also doesn't make sense that anyone would think that's what it meant. A bit... perplexing, I must say.

The Catalyst told of how synthesis would create a new DNA. He said nothing about how it would alter the physical forms of anyone. What does make sense is that if Synthesis only effects DNA and Sythetic's equivalent. They would be merged to create one fundamental building block of life rather than the two distinctly different ones that were there before. A Geth would simply be another species, like a Human is to a Turian. This is actually the only way it can make sense. If people were transformed into synthetics or cyborgs or something along those lines, it destroys the ability to write a future story coming after because of the huge variation it would force. People still have their free will. They still have their individuality. They are still who they are. The only logical interpretations of synthesis would be ones that change species at such a fundamental level that it can put them on the same playing field without changing the uniqueness of each species and individual. Any interpretation that does not take this in account will not make sense. I don't really understand why anyone would think those to be true. Maybe they are so bitter at the ending they choose to look for the interpretation they can hate on the most?

So please, stop making the silly threads attacking the Synthesis option.

Actual quote from the catalyst, it pains me to listen to that conversation again but for clarities sake i'll do so

 

Catalyst: there is another solution
shepard: yea?
catalyst: synthesis
shepard: and that is?
catalyst: add your energy to the crucibles, everything you are will be absorbed and then sent out, the chain reaction will combine all synthetic and organic life into a new frame work, a new DNA
shepard: I....don't know
catalyst: Why not!? synthetics are already part of you, can you imagine your life without them
shepard: and there will be peace?
catalyst: the cycle will end, synthesis is the final evolution of life, but we need each other to make it happen you have a difficult decision, releasing the energy of the crucible will end the cycle but it will also destroy the mass relays, the paths are open but you have to choose

this means several things but i'll break down a few 
1) It means that organic life and synthetic life will be force merged and become one based on shepards physiology, meaning that everything that shepard is will be used to combine everyone into one type of entity, basically meaning that shepard becomes part of everyone, basically interpretted as raping the universe.
2) sure people may still have their free will but thats not highlighted in this conversation in fact when shepard asks if there would be peace the catalysts response is that the cycle will end.
3) it is physically impossible, what synthesis is saying is that organic life and sythetic life will merge into one bulding block or energy, a new DNA where as synthetics do not have DNA, the only way would could interpret this is that maybe their conciousnesses are merged together which would destroy individuality and make everyone like the geth and the reapers mentally. This type of perfect evolution does not exist in the known universe and would go against the very laws of the said universe as we know them, since the very true law of the univers is that matter is never destroyed only converted and that energy is always transferred to a different location.

basically Synthesis is suggesting that everyone becomes like the geth and reapers and all of the sudden has a new synthetic frame work that goes completely against the laws of evolution. And Peace is not an option.

[nitefyre410]

humes spork wrote...

Skull Bearer wrote...

Why do we need synthesis to find common ground?

Why does EDI have to rewrite her fundamental processes to emulate human ethics and morality? Why do the geth remap their neural network to emulate that of organics' brains with Reaper code upgrades?

*sni* 
Yes it is, quite so as point of fact. Synthesis is the aufheben between master (organics) and slave (synthetics). Technological singularity is posed as the abstract negation of the dialectic, whether through death struggle or later contradiction.

 
They changed their opinions based off a  new understanding  that they came to with information that they were presented with.. 

The same as what you did by  countering my point by pointing out  aufheben and the Master-slave Dialectic. Which  after looking up I know a better understanding now I have to re-examine my previous stance 

That does not mean I need to graft parts of my DNA to  yours with  Space Magic to create a new frame work for life.  

Modifié par nitefyre410, 24 avril 2012 - 01:26 .

[Tony208]

OP probably chose synthesis, thought it was the good option, and now feels like he/she needs to defend it.

[Tim_H]

Averdi wrote...

1) From a genetics standpoint, the idea that basic DNA could be altered to the extent implied by the synthesis ending while having no significant impact on existing physical or mental attributes is......implausible to the point of absurdity.

2) The idea that god-child can do this, for all the myriad types of organic and synthetic life, virtually instantaneously, galaxy-wide, is equally ridiculous.  That really is borderline omnipotence.

3) You seem to be using a literary convenience (not changing people's fundamental personalities or structure so future stories could be written) to justify scientific plausiblity.  That doesn't work.

QFT.............................

A reason the ending generated such fan rage is because the philosophy is so wonkers...

Sigh, at least the authors weren't trying to force Raelianism or Dianetics down our throats... just a mystic notion of synthesis between organic and synthetic life forms.....  nevermind how the catalyst manages to acomplish that simply by firing a laser beam.....  ZAP!!!!!!!  

[d-boy15]

there no need to defend any of mass effect 3 endings, all of them stupid and go aginst the
theme and plot of entire trilogy.

[Tony208]

d-boy15 wrote...

there no need to defend any of mass effect 3 endings, all of them stupid and go aginst the
theme and plot of entire trilogy.

Sure there's a few defenses of the endings. The premise the OP is using is not one of them.

[nitefyre410]

d-boy15 wrote...

there no need to defend any of mass effect 3 endings, all of them stupid and go aginst the
theme and plot of entire trilogy.

 
^ This 

OFT.

[XXIceColdXX]

Synthesis does not make sense. Retcon please. Or IT theory please Bioware.

[PrimeOfValor]

That is kind of the problem that the endings are open to too much interpretation and theories.

[Eyeshield21]

lx_theo wrote...

 Why do people think that Synthesis would make organics cyborgs or something along those lines? It makes no sense that people would be forced into a cyborg form. In fact, it makes so little sense that it also doesn't make sense that anyone would think that's what it meant. A bit... perplexing, I must say.

The Catalyst told of how synthesis would create a new DNA. He said nothing about how it would alter the physical forms of anyone. What does make sense is that if Synthesis only effects DNA and Sythetic's equivalent. They would be merged to create one fundamental building block of life rather than the two distinctly different ones that were there before. A Geth would simply be another species, like a Human is to a Turian. This is actually the only way it can make sense. If people were transformed into synthetics or cyborgs or something along those lines, it destroys the ability to write a future story coming after because of the huge variation it would force. People still have their free will. They still have their individuality. They are still who they are. The only logical interpretations of synthesis would be ones that change species at such a fundamental level that it can put them on the same playing field without changing the uniqueness of each species and individual. Any interpretation that does not take this in account will not make sense. I don't really understand why anyone would think those to be true. Maybe they are so bitter at the ending they choose to look for the interpretation they can hate on the most?

So please, stop making the silly threads attacking the Synthesis option.

It makes everyone into terminators without their permission(or even telling them for that matter
). How is that a good ending? Plus we fought against that for 3 games, and now we say its okay for us to turn into reapers?

Modifié par Eyeshield21, 24 avril 2012 - 01:43 .

[Sisterofshane]

humes spork wrote...

And existing for no cause would not necessarily be a good thing...

It's very good you picked up on that, you're probably the first person on BSN who has in over a month of my trying to make that exact point. Inventing a cause to justify their own existence, like for example harvesting organic species' once every 50,000 years to prevent organic/synthetic conflict?

Your point regarding the geth is also extremely noteworthy, given that despite being independent they still continue to serve the quarians even in their absence.

In regards to synthesis being an unknown factor, that works for benefit as well as detriment. Just as you cannot know the potential drawbacks of it, neither can you know the potential benefits. It's an unknown.

I've had enough life experience to humbly understand that ideaology can be just as deadly as any weapon.  It's also something that isn't just "waved" away.

And, another point on the Geth, while many chose to continue to serve the Quarians (which I believe that many here could equate to general good will, or rather choosing to be involved in a positive way), there were many who chose to side with destruction (the Reapers), and chose to believe themselves to be superior to organics.  So while it is highly possible that some Reapers may choose to work towards  bettering the galaxy and themselves. it is just as likely that others will choose to go down a darker path.

Yay free will.