336 réponses à ce sujet

[MisterJB]

ElitePinecone wrote...
So... Shepard as a paternalistic benevolant dictator? Shepard knows best, because those silly organics who might care about something as precious as their own immutable existence could complain if they were abruptly transformed into an organic-synthetic hybrid via glowy space magic with mechanical parts and holograms on their skin? Or those synthetics who just worked so hard to achieve their own existence on their own terms are irretrivably transformed because Shepard and a space-god think it's a good idea? 

If something's done without informed consent, it's morally indefensible. 

The results are more important than the means through which they were achieved.
Let's say that Synthesis can elevate the lifespan of an average salarian to 150 years. At the expense of nothing without leaving a single member of the community behind.
 Does it matter if this was done without their consent? They're still living an extra 90 years.

(ps: How have the krogan not cannibalized themselves to extinction? A lifespan of a thousand years coupled with 10 000 babies per female per year...)

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Not even my ultra renegade Shepard is that arrogant.

Was he arrogant enough to nuke 300k Batarians? Or unilaterally decide the fate of the Rachni?

YOU are also digging your own hole. You have the worst ability to make inferences I've ever seen.

I am literally awestuck when you make posts like these.

I'm going to have to write them down.

[dreman9999]

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Not even my ultra renegade Shepard is that arrogant.

Was he arrogant enough to nuke 300k Batarians? Or unilaterally decide the fate of the Rachni?

Paragon Shpe also nuke 300 Batarians. 

[PsyrenY]

dreman9999 wrote...

Paragon Shpe also nuke 300 Batarians. 

Yes, exactly.

Taboo-XX wrote...

I am literally awestuck when you make posts like these.

I'm going to have to write them down.

Go right ahead, I stand by what I said. Writing facts down doesn't change them.

[ElitePinecone]

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Not even my ultra renegade Shepard is that arrogant.

Was he arrogant enough to nuke 300k Batarians? Or unilaterally decide the fate of the Rachni?

She.

And those are (imo) stupid writing railroads. If there was a choice to refer the rachni decision to someone who actually knew something about them, (asari xenobiologists?) I'd have taken it. The fact that the writing backs Shepard into a corner doesn't make it defensible. 

[dreman9999]

MisterJB wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...
So... Shepard as a paternalistic benevolant dictator? Shepard knows best, because those silly organics who might care about something as precious as their own immutable existence could complain if they were abruptly transformed into an organic-synthetic hybrid via glowy space magic with mechanical parts and holograms on their skin? Or those synthetics who just worked so hard to achieve their own existence on their own terms are irretrivably transformed because Shepard and a space-god think it's a good idea? 

If something's done without informed consent, it's morally indefensible. 

The results are more important than the means through which they were achieved.
Let's say that Synthesis can elevate the lifespan of an average salarian to 150 years. At the expense of nothing without leaving a single member of the community behind.
 Does it matter if this was done without their consent? They're still living an extra 90 years.

(ps: How have the krogan not cannibalized themselves to extinction? A lifespan of a thousand years coupled with 10 000 babies per female per year...)

Wasn't ME3 showing how narrow minded that look into evolution is. The reaper saw them selves as the pinnical of evolution  butone was downed by a super maw....What does that say?

[Subject M]

Sometimes the situation is the main problem. An action that might be viewed as wrong or evil can be the only way out, like in this current bad ending. Synthesis might be the lesser evil in the long run. Yes its still an grotesquely invasive procedure that violates the self determination of every sentient being in the galaxy, but the circumstances are truly extraordinary. If the catalyst is right, and there is no other solutions then the three solutions, synthesis is the only one that seemingly addresses the root problem. Control allows Shepard to "control" the Reapers (somehow) and that means that the they can deal with the problem if it surfaces (if an AI starts to go on a killing spree, the Shep-reapers can swoop down and destroy this threat before retreating back to dark space or whatever). Destroy does nothing but destroy the synthetics.

Modifié par Subject M, 01 mai 2012 - 05:22 .

[alsonamedbort]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Not even my ultra renegade Shepard is that arrogant.

Was he arrogant enough to nuke 300k Batarians? Or unilaterally decide the fate of the Rachni?

YOU are also digging your own hole. You have the worst ability to make inferences I've ever seen.

I am literally awestuck when you make posts like these.

I'm going to have to write them down.

Is that really helpful or constructive in any way in furthering this debate?

[M Hedonist]

adneate wrote...

As far as I'm concerned Synthesis boils down to one single question, Do the hybrids have free will?

If the answer is yes then Synthesis solves nothing since the hybrids have total free will they can do whatever they want, including things that are stupid and bad. They could make pure synthetics simply because even though it doesn't tire them or exhaust them they don't like cutting grass or doing menial tasks. They can kill each other because someone has something they want or their just jealous for many of the same reasons we are. As true individuals they capable of the exact same compassion and barbarism that we are now.

If the answer is no then they are all effectively prisoners to the will of another, their lives are fundamentally less diverse and less "organic" than ours. They do not fail, they do not experience loss or many other emotions since their existence and morality is imposed by an outside force. They are not asked to comply to told why they simply obey blindly, they are more pathetic and salves in a more fundamental state than could ever be thought possible. The live their lives in world of illusion, a literal allegory of the cave. One in which there is nobody who can drag them back into the painful light of the real.

Worst thing about is that we can't possibly know which one of these two is true because the Catalyst barely even gives us information about Synthesis and its consequences. Shepard is literally playing god when he is picking Synthesis. The results may advance the galaxy, but it also may irreversibly doom all life forever. Nobody should be allowed to make a decision that affects all life in the galaxy based on so little information. Period.

[Tom Lehrer]

MisterJB wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...
So... Shepard as a paternalistic benevolant dictator? Shepard knows best, because those silly organics who might care about something as precious as their own immutable existence could complain if they were abruptly transformed into an organic-synthetic hybrid via glowy space magic with mechanical parts and holograms on their skin? Or those synthetics who just worked so hard to achieve their own existence on their own terms are irretrivably transformed because Shepard and a space-god think it's a good idea? 

If something's done without informed consent, it's morally indefensible. 

The results are more important than the means through which they were achieved.
Let's say that Synthesis can elevate the lifespan of an average salarian to 150 years. At the expense of nothing without leaving a single member of the community behind.
 Does it matter if this was done without their consent? They're still living an extra 90 years.

(ps: How have the krogan not cannibalized themselves to extinction? A lifespan of a thousand years coupled with 10 000 babies per female per year...)

You are taking control of their own bodies away from them by force. In the real world that is a crime that will get you some serious jail time.

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Paragon Shpe also nuke 300 Batarians. 

Yes, exactly.

Taboo-XX wrote...

I am literally awestuck when you make posts like these.

I'm going to have to write them down.

Go right ahead, I stand by what I said. Writing facts down doesn't change them.

You don't.......make........inferences.........at all. You literally suggested in a previous post that people who didn't like having their DNA rewritten could have it reveresed. I cannot fathom how you came to this conclusion or how you plan on explaining yourself. You have continuously avoided the question when it is presented to you. 

Do you approach everything like a husk. No emotion at all?

[ElitePinecone]

MisterJB wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...
So... Shepard as a paternalistic benevolant dictator? Shepard knows best, because those silly organics who might care about something as precious as their own immutable existence could complain if they were abruptly transformed into an organic-synthetic hybrid via glowy space magic with mechanical parts and holograms on their skin? Or those synthetics who just worked so hard to achieve their own existence on their own terms are irretrivably transformed because Shepard and a space-god think it's a good idea? 

If something's done without informed consent, it's morally indefensible. 

The results are more important than the means through which they were achieved.
Let's say that Synthesis can elevate the lifespan of an average salarian to 150 years. At the expense of nothing without leaving a single member of the community behind.
 Does it matter if this was done without their consent? They're still living an extra 90 years.

(ps: How have the krogan not cannibalized themselves to extinction? A lifespan of a thousand years coupled with 10 000 babies per female per year...)

We're getting into actual philosophy here, which might even be what the devs intended. 

I happen to find utilitarianism morally repugnent. The ends never justify the means. It's better to lose than to achieve a good result with terrible methods.

In the end, Synthesis is probably the most Renegade decision in the game - the benefits of everyone becoming a hybrid are taken as justification for sacrificing the free will of the entire galaxy and arbitrarily deciding that massive universal genetic rewriting is a good idea. 

(We're going to fundamentally disagree, which is awesome in itself. And I don't think this argument would end if people hold such contrasting opinions.)

[MisterJB]

The Angry One wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

And, if nothing else, the physical benefits Synthesis can grant are simply far too good to pass up.

You mean like curing Joker?

OH WAIT.

It takes hours for Reaper technology to fully rewrite the genetic code of an organic being and turn him or her into an Husk or an Adjuntant.
Who's to say the same doesn't apply?

Or it could simply be a failure of presentation from Bioware. Ultimately, the physical benefits Reaper technology can grant are undeniable. It is not unreasonable to hope they will be included with Synthesis.

As an aside, your avatar is most appropriate for your stance. Bravo.

I saw living people in the Synthesis ending. I saw a synthetic who seemed even more alive than before when she adopted the common organic gesture of resting her head on the should of someone she had affection for?
What did you see? Husks?

Eain wrote...
How exactly are any of them more powerful? Just curious?

"Retribution". Grayson could heal bullet wounds and shattered bones in a matter of hours. His reflexs and strength were so improved that he could, accuratelly, fire two assault rifles at once.
Cerberus videologs state that Cerberus troops can outfight any Alliance soldier short of an N7 like Shepard, Vega or Leng.
Saren. Everything he did during the final boss fight on ME1.

[Bill Casey]

Subject M wrote...

Synthesis might be the lesser evil in the long run.

It's not...

[MisterJB]

Taboo-XX wrote...
Keep digging your hole mate.

Do you actually have a point to make or simply like to pretend you do while trying to sound "witty"?

[Taboo]

MisterJB wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...
So... Shepard as a paternalistic benevolant dictator? Shepard knows best, because those silly organics who might care about something as precious as their own immutable existence could complain if they were abruptly transformed into an organic-synthetic hybrid via glowy space magic with mechanical parts and holograms on their skin? Or those synthetics who just worked so hard to achieve their own existence on their own terms are irretrivably transformed because Shepard and a space-god think it's a good idea? 

If something's done without informed consent, it's morally indefensible. 

The results are more important than the means through which they were achieved.
Let's say that Synthesis can elevate the lifespan of an average salarian to 150 years. At the expense of nothing without leaving a single member of the community behind.
 Does it matter if this was done without their consent? They're still living an extra 90 years.

(ps: How have the krogan not cannibalized themselves to extinction? A lifespan of a thousand years coupled with 10 000 babies per female per year...)

The......the implications. My god. I can't......I can't even.

It makes me want to put my head in my hands and ****ing cry. This type of logic is so cold it's not even funny.

[Taboo]

MisterJB wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
Keep digging your hole mate.

Do you actually have a point to make or simply like to pretend you do while trying to sound "witty"?

I have been for a month.

You have not been participating in the conversation.

[PsyrenY]

ElitePinecone wrote...

And those are (imo) stupid writing railroads. If there was a choice to refer the rachni decision to someone who actually knew something about them, (asari xenobiologists?) I'd have taken it. The fact that the writing backs Shepard into a corner doesn't make it defensible. 

You can't have total freedom in a video game, no matter how much you'd like to. ME gives you more freedom than most, but it still has to be constrained.

And if you recall, no matter what your choice is with the Rachni the Council is pissed at you anyway.

Taboo-XX wrote...

You don't.......make........inferences.........at all. You literally suggested in a previous post that people who didn't like having their DNA rewritten could have it reveresed. I cannot fathom how you came to this conclusion or how you plan on explaining yourself. You have continuously avoided the question when it is presented to you. 

Do you approach everything like a husk. No emotion at all?

From where I'm sitting, futzing with everyone's DNA beats them being reaped/dead. Destroy involves genocide and Control is too vague.

[MisterJB]

Taboo-XX wrote...
The......the implications. My god. I can't......I can't even.

It makes me want to put my head in my hands and ****ing cry. This type of logic is so cold it's not even funny.

It may be cold but that doesn't mean it is wrong.

Taboo-XX wrote...
I have been for a month.

You have not been participating in the conversation.

I am now. Please make your point.
Or don't but then stop talking as if you know something that we don't.

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...

And those are (imo) stupid writing railroads. If there was a choice to refer the rachni decision to someone who actually knew something about them, (asari xenobiologists?) I'd have taken it. The fact that the writing backs Shepard into a corner doesn't make it defensible. 

You can't have total freedom in a video game, no matter how much you'd like to. ME gives you more freedom than most, but it still has to be constrained.

And if you recall, no matter what your choice is with the Rachni the Council is pissed at you anyway.

Taboo-XX wrote...

You don't.......make........inferences.........at all. You literally suggested in a previous post that people who didn't like having their DNA rewritten could have it reveresed. I cannot fathom how you came to this conclusion or how you plan on explaining yourself. You have continuously avoided the question when it is presented to you. 

Do you approach everything like a husk. No emotion at all?

From where I'm sitting, futzing with everyone's DNA beats them being reaped/dead. Destroy involves genocide and Control is too vague.

They are dead. They are no longer themselves, free will or not.

The universe is chaotic by nature and has allowed life to evolve as a result. You do not simply rewrite the way the universe has worked for billions of years. Chaos has allowed us to be the way we are today. If, in a thousand years a singularity will happen and synthetics will wipe out organics then so be it. This is the way the universe works and how it should always be. None of the choices are ethical, they all simply come down to a matter of taste.

[guacamayus]

I think Sovereign lied to him because it doesn't make sense. The Crucible is the only thing that can cause a real synthesis, the Catalyst probably didn't know about it back then. Think about it, the Catalyst thinks synthesis is the way to go, then why the need to create the reapers and harvest advanced species if synthesis was a possibility all along?
In my opinion Saren believed that because he was being indoctrinated, mental gymnastics to justify his actions.

[Subject M]

Sauruz wrote...

adneate wrote...

As far as I'm concerned Synthesis boils down to one single question, Do the hybrids have free will?

If the answer is yes then Synthesis solves nothing since the hybrids have total free will they can do whatever they want, including things that are stupid and bad. They could make pure synthetics simply because even though it doesn't tire them or exhaust them they don't like cutting grass or doing menial tasks. They can kill each other because someone has something they want or their just jealous for many of the same reasons we are. As true individuals they capable of the exact same compassion and barbarism that we are now.

If the answer is no then they are all effectively prisoners to the will of another, their lives are fundamentally less diverse and less "organic" than ours. They do not fail, they do not experience loss or many other emotions since their existence and morality is imposed by an outside force. They are not asked to comply to told why they simply obey blindly, they are more pathetic and salves in a more fundamental state than could ever be thought possible. The live their lives in world of illusion, a literal allegory of the cave. One in which there is nobody who can drag them back into the painful light of the real.

Worst thing about is that we can't possibly know which one of these two is true because the Catalyst barely even gives us information about Synthesis and its consequences. Shepard is literally playing god when he is picking Synthesis. The results may advance the galaxy, but it also may irreversibly doom all life forever. Nobody should be allowed to make a decision that affects all life in the galaxy based on so little information. Period.

The catalyst claims that the problem is that the created will always rebel against their creators and that synthetics will destroy all organics. What this means is that the two life-forms are incompatible. It has not that much to do with notions of free will unless one counts the will determined by who you are and how you work as incompatible with "free will".

If the conflict is always sparked by organics panicking (as exemplified in the ME story) or that organics always will create synthetics, this could, from a certain perspective and definition, be viewed as a sign of organics not having "free will" to begin with. And so on and so forth.  Synthesis seem to remove "the incompaible other" from the playing field by adding the unique characteristics from the one to the other and vice versa.

Modifié par Subject M, 01 mai 2012 - 05:37 .

[Taboo]

MisterJB wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
The......the implications. My god. I can't......I can't even.

It makes me want to put my head in my hands and ****ing cry. This type of logic is so cold it's not even funny.

It may be cold but that doesn't mean it is wrong.

Taboo-XX wrote...
I have been for a month.

You have not been participating in the conversation.

I am now. Please make your point.
Or don't but then stop talking as if you know something that we don't.

Please go to the topic on Synthesis I created. We have some wonderful people on both sides making good points, including actual Biologists.

The implications behind the choice are cold. It is not one man's descision to make.

[Subject M]

Bill Casey wrote...

Subject M wrote...

Synthesis might be the lesser evil in the long run.

It's not...

because....?

[M Hedonist]

Optimystic_X wrote...

From where I'm sitting, futzing with everyone's DNA beats them being reaped/dead. Destroy involves genocide and Control is too vague.

Synthesis is way more vague than control. Control is a fairly basic concept, if anything it's just too good to be true and there's something Catalyst isn't telling you. But you can't possibly know what Synthesis does without using your own headcanon.