Fapmaster5000 wrote...
And you completely fail to address any point I raised.
That's because you are not actually raising any points. You are merely presenting your own personal opinions which amounts to "Synthesis is evil because no one other than Shepard had any say in the matter. Therefore, you should not pick it."
Faced with that, what can I do but present my own opinion? That "Nothing matters except the results. If Synthesis improves the galaxy, then it was good. Otherwise, it was wrong."
Your logic justifies any position, so long as the actor in play believes in his or her own actions. Consequences do not matter, reasons do not matter, so long as the deciding actor believes in the his or her choices strongly enough.
Reasons do not matter, no. How many achievements were due to "evil" reasons like greed?
The only things that matters are the consequences. If Synthesis improves the galaxy, Shepard will be called a hero. If not, a monsters.
This is true in everything.
This is a decision reached without debate, without discussion, without any knowledge of what will happen, where the only evidence presented is based on the statements of a being who's object has been your extermination and processing into goop for millions of years, who's entire logic can be destroyed with the simple question, "How do you know this?", and who cannot or will not simply stop killing people when it supposedly realizes that killing people is now pointless.
Why are you assuming that the Catalyst doesn't know what it is doing? It is the oldest form of consciousness in the galaxy. It is obvious that it has witnessed multiple civilizations being destroyed by Synthetics much like the quarians.
The alternative is that it has created a solution for a problem that doesn't exist which is nonsensical.
Also, on what basis do you claim that the Reaper solution is now pointless?
How can you possibly listen to it?
Because it makes sense.
We are all human here on Earth with the same basic needs and we have been unable to end war or suffering.
To assume that something as different as organics and synthetics will manage to mantain a peaceful coexistence without a common threat to force the peace, the Reapers, is naive.
So no, you can't "imagine all the wonders you could create" and then commit every everyone, everywhere, forever, to that fate, not without becoming the greatest villain in the known galaxy, worse than even the Reapers.
See? Personal opinion and an absolute at that.
Forcing the galaxy towards a better future without any loss of life somehow makes you a villain now.
After all, you succeeded where they failed. As I stated before: even bereft of any of its disturbingly "master race" implications, at its core, Synthesis is doing EXACTLY what the Reapers were doing, simply dressed up in prettier clothes.
What the Reapers were doing was saving all organic life in the galaxy by preserving them in Reaper form. It is entirely impossible that, without the Reapers, a Singularity would have already been formed and it would have extermined any semblance of organic life in the galaxy. The Reapers stopped this.
So, if by "prettier clothes" you mean "Saved all life in the galaxy, improved it and did this without any loss of freedom or individuality" then yes, that is what Synthesis does.
And I don't see what is wrong with that.
To get to the top of your post: You never address why the high ground here is wrong, and then you attempt to claim it, without making a single concrete argument beyond extreme moral relativity, might makes right, and a disregard for any point of view beyond your own.
You act based on the claim that forcing something; in this case Synthesis; on the entire galaxy is wrong regardless of one's reasons for doing so and the consequences.
Yes, by picking Synthesis you are ignoring, for a moment, the free will of others in the galaxy. Yes, this could be called "wrong". However, by not picking Synthesis, you could not only be condemning all organic life in the galaxy to extinction at he hands of synthetics and you could be denying them amazing benefits from a symbiotic relationship with the Reapers.
Therefore, I consider it not choosing Synthesis to be "wrong".
Society gets rocked in Destroy. It's not a good ending. An entire species may very well die from it. However, as stated, that species exists in consensus, and chose to enter a fight where the stakes were "we win or we all die". They are soldiers who stepped up to the plate at that point, whose sacrifice will be remembered as the galaxy moves forward, free of the Catalyst's insane troll logic, and decides on their own future.
No, by picking Destroy you are agreeing with the Catalyst that organics and synthetics can never live in peace and, therefore, all synthetic life must be destroyed, Reapers and geth.
Of course, you will disagree with this, thus proving my previous points. Everything is relative, every action can be interpretated differently.
Synthesis agrees with the Catalyst that organic and synthetics will never be at peace therefore, we must blur the differences between us. And no one dies, not even the Reapers who, instead, gain freedom.
It's the only ending that is made based on the objectives of the entire series, "Destroy the Reapers". It's the only ending that doesn't involve gambling that the Catalyst's Space Magic is the future. It's the only ending that doesn't sucker punch the galaxy with Shepard, Space God.
The "objective of the entire series" was "Stop the Reapers".
Mission accomplished, all three endings stop the Reapers.
Synthesis goes even further. You don't just save all life in the galaxy, you improve it.
It's really the only ending that saves humanity, both as a species, and ethically, even at great cost.
Humanity is saved in all the endings except if you pick Destroy with low EMS since it takes Earth with it.
And I couldn't care less about "ethics".
Retour en haut
