1357 réponses à ce sujet

[SubAstris]

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

CavScout wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

One may disagree with the Catalyst, but the logic it uses is not circular.... you may what to use a dictionary.

Wut? I think youre confused....

Like IT, just because you think it doesn't make it true.

The Catalyst doesn't use circular logic for why the Reapers do what they do.

Are you out of your mind?

read this SLOWLY...............created Synthetics to wipe out organics, to stop the organics from creating synthetics, that would destroy organics.

That hurts just typing it out. sheesh!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

How about you actually reply instead of copy pasting something unrelated.

It is incredibly useful. Clearly this commenter doesn't know what a basic fallacy s/he is making

[balance5050]

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...


Catalyst says Shepherd will die due to his synthetic implant if he chooses destroy.

Shepherd doesn't die in destroy


Catalyst found to be lying.

Undeniable evidence.

He says that he is PARTLY synthetic...he never says he will die

But why say that at all if not to make dissuade you from choosing destroy?

He is explaining the problems of choosing destroy, just as with control he subtly implies that maybe the races would not be able to control the Reapers and Synthesis violates free will

Actually he says absolutly nothing negative about control or synthesis besides that you will die. Don't make stuff up dude.

Doesn't say anything explicitly about Synthesis, but definitely gives reason for potential problems with control, "if you think you can control us"

So you're sayin that he doesn't explicitly say you can control him? So there is a reason to think that he's not sure?

[Sable Phoenix]

SubAstris wrote...

He is not a Reaper. He controls the Reapers. Evidence in game

If you want to go that route, we never actually see him controlling the Reapers.  He only claims he does.

What evidence?

[DTKT]

How do you explain both leaked scripts not including the IT? I would like to remind you that the second leak included all 3 endings.

[OH-UP-THIS!]

SubAstris wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I would say that the little dude who controls them seems kinda awe inspiring if you think about it no?

Are control and synthesis not portaryed as optimal compared to destroy?

No

No again, at least not by the Catalyst. It depends on the priorities and thoughts of one's Shepard

So it comes down to what the player knows and believes.... thank you.

Good to see you conceded that the Catalyst doesn't try to persuade you to choose one option or another

OH yes he most certainly does TRY to direct your choice, or more importantly tries to DISSUADE you from choosing Destroy. I will not explain this further, if'n you paid attention to that star-Twit you'd understand this premise.

If you can't provide evidence for your view, there is frankly no point espousing it

OH FFS, did you not listen to that little idiot?   He clearly states "if you choose Destroy, you wipe out ALL synthetic life", IE: EDI,and the Geth, and "even you are part synthetic".

Starting to remember now? That is dissuasion/don't do it!!

[ev76]

Cavscout did you choose control?or Synthesis?

[CavScout]

ohupthis wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Like IT, just because you think it doesn't make it true.

The Catalyst doesn't use circular logic for why the Reapers do what they do.

Are you out of your mind?

read this SLOWLY...............created Synthetics to wipe out organics, to stop the organics from creating synthetics, that would destroy organics.

That hurts just typing it out. sheesh!!

You may want to go back and play the game SLOWLY. The Catalyst is trying to prevent the extinction of ALL organics, not specific civilizations.


PS: Do you even know what circular logic is?

[balance5050]

SubAstris wrote...

It is incredibly useful. Clearly this commenter doesn't know what a basic fallacy s/he is making

It's unrelated because this commentator is right.

The reapers, don't want organics to be killed by sythetics, so they kill organics so they don't make synthetics. Sounds like they just don't want any competition to me.

[SubAstris]

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...


Catalyst says Shepherd will die due to his synthetic implant if he chooses destroy.

Shepherd doesn't die in destroy


Catalyst found to be lying.

Undeniable evidence.

He says that he is PARTLY synthetic...he never says he will die

But why say that at all if not to make dissuade you from choosing destroy?

He is explaining the problems of choosing destroy, just as with control he subtly implies that maybe the races would not be able to control the Reapers and Synthesis violates free will

Actually he says absolutly nothing negative about control or synthesis besides that you will die. Don't make stuff up dude.

Doesn't say anything explicitly about Synthesis, but definitely gives reason for potential problems with control, "if you think you can control us"

So you're sayin that he doesn't explicitly say you can control him? So there is a reason to think that he's not sure?

No, he's not a Reaper anyway

[balance5050]

CavScout wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Like IT, just because you think it doesn't make it true.

The Catalyst doesn't use circular logic for why the Reapers do what they do.

Are you out of your mind?

read this SLOWLY...............created Synthetics to wipe out organics, to stop the organics from creating synthetics, that would destroy organics.

That hurts just typing it out. sheesh!!

You may want to go back and play the game SLOWLY. The Catalyst is trying to prevent the extinction of ALL organics, not specific civilizations.


PS: Do you even know what circular logic is?

Yep, because organics are crops essentially, they don't want all oganics destroyed because their fuel would be gone.

HMM. I wonder how many times all organics have gone extinct so we can justify his statment, oh yeah. ORGANICS ARE STILL AROUND SO THE PROBLEM IS NON EXISTENT.

[CavScout]

Sable Phoenix wrote...

CavScout wrote...
I addressed what you wrote.

Ugh.  No, you didn't.  Your link had zero relevance.

Scientific falsifiability is irrelevant.  Scientific falsifiability is what Russell's teapot deals with explicitly.  Thus, your citation of Russell's teapot is irrelevant.

Falsifiability is hardly irrelevant, especially when folks are trying to say that if you can't disprove IT it therefore is as likely to be true as anything else. I can see why you want it to be irrelevant.

[ThinkIntegral]

ohupthis wrote...

OH FFS, did you not listen to that little idiot?   He clearly states "if you choose Destroy, you wipe out ALL synthetic life", IE: EDI,and the Geth, and "even you are part synthetic".

Starting to remember now? That is dissuasion/don't do it!!

And yet, despite that attempt to dissuade, it still lets you kill it...

Modifié par ThinkIntegral, 05 mai 2012 - 09:21 .

[balance5050]

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...


Catalyst says Shepherd will die due to his synthetic implant if he chooses destroy.

Shepherd doesn't die in destroy


Catalyst found to be lying.

Undeniable evidence.

He says that he is PARTLY synthetic...he never says he will die

But why say that at all if not to make dissuade you from choosing destroy?

He is explaining the problems of choosing destroy, just as with control he subtly implies that maybe the races would not be able to control the Reapers and Synthesis violates free will

Actually he says absolutly nothing negative about control or synthesis besides that you will die. Don't make stuff up dude.

Doesn't say anything explicitly about Synthesis, but definitely gives reason for potential problems with control, "if you think you can control us"

So you're sayin that he doesn't explicitly say you can control him? So there is a reason to think that he's not sure?

No, he's not a Reaper anyway

You just said -

"definitely gives reason for potential problems with control, ""if you think you can control us" 

What's the potential problem beside NOT BEING ABLE TO CONTROL THE REAPERS?

Modifié par balance5050, 05 mai 2012 - 09:20 .

[SubAstris]

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

It is incredibly useful. Clearly this commenter doesn't know what a basic fallacy s/he is making

It's unrelated because this commentator is right.

The reapers, don't want organics to be killed by sythetics, so they kill organics so they don't make synthetics. Sounds like they just don't want any competition to me.

That is an over-simplification of the purpose of the Reapers. They kill advanced organic life so that it can't be at a stage where it creates AI capable of killing all life in the universe (kinda like the "Grey Goo Theory"). Your misunderstand of the basis of the Reapers might be the one of the main reasons you like IT.

[p__q]

ohupthis wrote...


Are you out of your mind?

read this SLOWLY...............created Synthetics to wipe out organics, to stop the organics from creating synthetics, that would destroy organics.

That hurts just typing it out. sheesh!!

I was just lurking this and feel awkward jumping in but I just wanted to point out the catalyst says that synthetics would eventually wipe out organics, what the reapers do is different they only cull advanced civilastions, they clearly do not wipe out organics completely as the cycle has being going for an incredible amount of time, I'm not saying it's good writing but there is nothing to say that the catalyst isn't correct and that without the reapers organics would eventually create synthetics that would exterminate all organic life in the galaxy from Asari to Thresher maws, extermination of organics and the culling of advanced organics are two clearly different concepts

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
Again, you can not show that it is lying...

On a side note, you don't see the irony of critiquing a "magic floating elevator" while spending your every waking minute supporting a "charm spell" that tricked us all in our gameplay of ME3?

No magic in the ME universe.

There's plenty of "magic" in ME... starting with the magical power of Indoctrination.

Modifié par CavScout, 05 mai 2012 - 09:27 .

[CavScout]

Sable Phoenix wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

He is not a Reaper. He controls the Reapers. Evidence in game

If you want to go that route, we never actually see him controlling the Reapers.  He only claims he does.

What evidence?

Your 'route' says what happens in game isn't even evidence for what happens in game....

[OH-UP-THIS!]

*snip*

Hence the real reason WHY Shep is STILL IN LONDON!!!!!!!!! FRAK!!!!!!!!!!

we never entered that beam, AHH! We haven't fired the REAL Crucible, just what Harby wants us to see.

imagination is a terrible thing to waste, unless you haven't one at all.[/quote]

yes, that's my point. TIM's using indoc tech to control you so whether it's real or not, you're indoctrinated before you meet the starchild. However, indoctrination doesn't work that way, so the encounter isn't real.

[/quote]


Because you're IMAGINING the whole scene, from the Harby blast onwards, it's not real only implanted thoughts, hence the Destroy option, Breaks the Indoc, we wake up in London, and still have a Crucible to fire.

[SubAstris]

ohupthis wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

ohupthis wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I would say that the little dude who controls them seems kinda awe inspiring if you think about it no?

Are control and synthesis not portaryed as optimal compared to destroy?

No

No again, at least not by the Catalyst. It depends on the priorities and thoughts of one's Shepard

So it comes down to what the player knows and believes.... thank you.

Good to see you conceded that the Catalyst doesn't try to persuade you to choose one option or another

OH yes he most certainly does TRY to direct your choice, or more importantly tries to DISSUADE you from choosing Destroy. I will not explain this further, if'n you paid attention to that star-Twit you'd understand this premise.

If you can't provide evidence for your view, there is frankly no point espousing it

OH FFS, did you not listen to that little idiot?   He clearly states "if you choose Destroy, you wipe out ALL synthetic life", IE: EDI,and the Geth, and "even you are part synthetic".

Starting to remember now? That is dissuasion/don't do it!!

Yes, and?

[KingZayd]

CavScout wrote...

KingZayd wrote...

ThinkIntegral wrote...
You know if it was lying or even wanted to lie, it wouldn't even have bother to lift Shepard to the outside on the bottom of the Presidium. The Reapers were already winning.  In other words, why even bother to fool Shepard when it was already winning?

If it wasn't lying it had no reason to bring Shepard upstairs either. The only answer that makes sense is indoctrination.

No, it's not the "only" answer. It could, be as the game plays out, Shep makes it the Crucible and the Catalyst simply gives him the available options.

he only "makes it" up there, because the Starchild chooses to bring Shepard upstairs. If it isn't the only answer that makes sense, what is another one?

[CavScout]

ev76 wrote...

Cavscout did you choose control?or Synthesis?

I selected destroy. Why?

[balance5050]

SubAstris wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

It is incredibly useful. Clearly this commenter doesn't know what a basic fallacy s/he is making

It's unrelated because this commentator is right.

The reapers, don't want organics to be killed by sythetics, so they kill organics so they don't make synthetics. Sounds like they just don't want any competition to me.

That is an over-simplification of the purpose of the Reapers. They kill advanced organic life so that it can't be at a stage where it creates AI capable of killing all life in the universe (kinda like the "Grey Goo Theory"). Your misunderstand of the basis of the Reapers might be the one of the main reasons you like IT.

The metacon war shows that they have gotten to that stage before and organics resolved it on they're own, rendering the starkids purpose for the reapers usleless and based on an event that MAY happen.

[OH-UP-THIS!]

pottman wrote...

Leafs43 wrote...

pottman wrote...

Why the sudden militant action ITers?

When being harsh to a troll, is that being considered militant?

So, you're saying people with different opinions are trolls?

that depends on the amount of idiotic nonsense spewed forth as anti-IT.

[SubAstris]

[quote]balance5050 wrote...


[/quote]

You just said -

"definitely gives reason for potential problems with control, ""if you think you can control us" 

What's the potential problem beside NOT BEING ABLE TO CONTROL THE REAPERS?
[/quote]

Sorry, I'm not with you

[CavScout]

balance5050 wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You may want to go back and play the game SLOWLY. The Catalyst is trying to prevent the extinction of ALL organics, not specific civilizations.


PS: Do you even know what circular logic is?

Yep, because organics are crops essentially, they don't want all oganics destroyed because their fuel would be gone.

HMM. I wonder how many times all organics have gone extinct so we can justify his statment, oh yeah. ORGANICS ARE STILL AROUND SO THE PROBLEM IS NON EXISTENT.

Fuel? What are you making up now? I know you can't show the supposed "circular logic" of the Catalyst, I am just not sure what this virtual tantrum is supposed to show?