247 réponses à ce sujet

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Reth Shepherd wrote...

@EternalEmbiguity
Question. If Adolf Hitler appeared in front of you, admitted to the slaughter he had caused, BUT he had done it because Jews will inevitably destroy all other races; would you accept his solution to the problem?

No, because he was f*cked up in a lot of other ways.

Also, as I just said.

We don't need to accept their logic. All that's necessary is that they accept it, and that it can make logical sense to them.

H*ll, the reason I picked destroy was because I don't accept his logic. I understand that it IS logic, though.

Just because you believe in something does not make it logical, or even rational.

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

It may very well have proof. The fact that we don't see it's proof doesn't mean it doesn't. But I do think it should have shown the proof.

The problem is that the Starchild did not offer any proof.

If the Starchild had objective evidence to make his argument rational, it should have offered it. It didn't. It isn't up to us to speculate for him as to what its reasoning should be.

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

He literally ends up where he began: You will destroy yourselves through synthetic life, so I must destroy you through synthetic life first.

That is the very epitome of circular reasoning. If there's something more to the equation, they should have added it. Not our problem. If we're to take what the Starchild says at face-value, he is, by definition, being circular.

What are you talking about? That isn't his logic. His logic is, preserve the civilizations.

Civilizations =/= only the people occupying the civilization. The Starchild is destroying culture, individuality, and a multiplicity of other characteristics inherent to a civilization.

That is where you are mistaken.

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Reth Shepherd wrote...

@EternalEmbiguity
Question. If Adolf Hitler appeared in front of you, admitted to the slaughter he had caused, BUT he had done it because Jews will inevitably destroy all other races; would you accept his solution to the problem?

No, because he was f*cked up in a lot of other ways.

Also, as I just said.

We don't need to accept their logic. All that's necessary is that they accept it, and that it can make logical sense to them.

H*ll, the reason I picked destroy was because I don't accept his logic. I understand that it IS logic, though.

Just because you believe in something does not make it logical, or even rational.

Which is why I said it must make logical sense to them. Bolded.

Which is counteracted by the italicized statement. Just because they believe it does not make it logical. 

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Really? Okay, I'll adjust my phrasing to say his logic is to preserve organics.

Even then you are still mistaken. To preserve organics =/= to preserve the physical essence [edited] of organics.

We saw the process, first-hand, of what must occur to create a Reaper. The physical essence [edited] of the constituting species is taken to create the Reaper--they are processed down into grey goo and funnelled into it.

To preserve organics is to preserve what makes an organic life, including its individuality, culture, etc. The multiplicity of the civilization, inherent, is the very same as the multiplicity of the organic life constituting said civilization [edited].

Edited for clarity purposes.

Modifié par wantedman dan, 09 mai 2012 - 04:31 .

[The Night Mammoth]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

That's just it, though: lack of evidence, not false logic. People are confusing them.

Kind of a moot point now. It bases its logic of information we don't have.

Without that supporting evidence throughout the game's narrative it's going to be a flawed conclusion to the game, and I'm pretty sure BioWare aren't going to rewrite the entire series. 

Well, at least to me it'll always be flawed. Best just to remove or ignore this part. 

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

 

wantedman dan wrote...

The problem is that the Starchild did not offer any proof. 

If the Starchild had objective evidence to make his argument rational, it should have offered it. It didn't. It isn't up to us to speculate for him as to what its reasoning should be.

 

wantedman dan wrote...


Which is counteracted by the italicized statement. Just because they believe it does not make it logical. 

Of course. But he has proof. I believe he does.

That seems to be the problem. You're not willing to believe he has proof for his logic. I'm willing to believe he has proof, but just didn't show it.

There's no way of knowing who's right.

No, I'm not willing to believe that its supposed proof is indication of it being correct. 

As a Christian, I can believe that all gays are going to Hell, simply due to the fact that they're gay. I have corresponding proof found in the constituting texts of Christianity; it, however, does not make my assertion remotely correct or logical.

That was a purely hypothetical circumstance, however, with which I completely disagree.

[Kunari801]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

 

wantedman dan wrote...

The problem is that the Starchild did not offer any proof. 

If the Starchild had objective evidence to make his argument rational, it should have offered it. It didn't. It isn't up to us to speculate for him as to what its reasoning should be.

 

wantedman dan wrote...


Which is counteracted by the italicized statement. Just because they believe it does not make it logical. 

Of course. But he has proof. I believe he does.

That seems to be the problem. You're not willing to believe he has proof for his logic. I'm willing to believe he has proof, but just didn't show it.

There's no way of knowing who's right.  

Star-brat's logic is flawed, his entire argument is an appeal to probability fallacy and his "solution" in the Reapers is circular.   Even if you believe his ONE single instance as "proof" that is still only one instance.   

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Even then you are still mistaken. To preserve organics =/= to preserve the physical essence [edited] of organics.

We saw the process, first-hand, of what must occur to create a Reaper. The physical essence [edited] of the constituting species is taken to create the Reaper--they are processed down into grey goo and funnelled into it.

To preserve organics is to preserve what makes an organic life, including its individuality, culture, etc. The multiplicity of the civilization, inherent, is the very same as the multiplicity of the organic life.

Edited for clarity purposes.

Yeah, that's purely opinion.

It may be; this still doesn't counteract the factual notion that the physical essence of an organic =/= the organic itself. 

[Peranor]

TSA_383 wrote...


"Why hello there good sir, I've been commanding the reapers, your enemy for the past several years as they attempt to wipe out all organic life. I'm now going to stand here and explain why it would be a really bad idea to destroy them and you're going to believe EVERY WORD I SAY"

Yeah, doesn't seem a smart idea to me.

lol

Modifié par anorling, 09 mai 2012 - 04:37 .

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

No, I'm not willing to believe that its supposed proof is indication of it being correct. 

As a Christian, I can believe that all gays are going to Hell, simply due to the fact that they're gay. I have corresponding proof found in the constituting texts of Christianity; it, however, does not make my assertion remotely correct or logical.

That was a purely hypothetical circumstance, however, with which I completely disagree.

That's a bad direction to take the conversation.

It's giving context.

We're all adults, here. If you can't take a little bit of discomfort, the door out is located at the top of the thread.

[Dendio1]

httinks2006 wrote...

Why on this insane ravaged F@#$%^&  planet would anyone choose to believe the Starbrat , Starchild , Godchild ,or  Being of light words as law ?
This is the commander , creator of the enemy we have been trying to stop for three games and when it saids you have these choices we do it ?
illiogical , idiotic , stupid , moronic .... etc ... really ?

I absolutely knowmy Shepard would never have giving in to this , damn I've proving quite the opposite for the past two games and five years....

I just finished playing DEUS EX human revolutions where I ran into a similar scenario and trusted the AI when choosing my endings. 

[The Anti-Saint]

The Angry One wrote...


So here are your Reaper leader approved solutions:

- Screw everybody.
- Screw everybody except the Reapers.
- Turn everybody into a Reaper.

Victorious and uplifting!

Heh, that is funny...and sad all at the same time. I think I'll post that quote at work, lol.

[wantedman dan]

Dendio1 wrote...

httinks2006 wrote...

Why on this insane ravaged F@#$%^&  planet would anyone choose to believe the Starbrat , Starchild , Godchild ,or  Being of light words as law ?
This is the commander , creator of the enemy we have been trying to stop for three games and when it saids you have these choices we do it ?
illiogical , idiotic , stupid , moronic .... etc ... really ?

I absolutely knowmy Shepard would never have giving in to this , damn I've proving quite the opposite for the past two games and five years....

I just finished playing DEUS EX human revolutions where I ran into a similar scenario and trusted the AI when choosing my endings. 

That's why you give the information to the people and let them decide.

[wantedman dan]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

It may be; this still doesn't counteract the factual notion that the physical essence of an organic =/= the organic itself. 

And that ^ is also totally opinion.

You don't know what exactly is preserved when an organic is melted down. For all you know, their DNA is still there, for all you know, their individuality exists, for all you know, they are still sentient, just in a different form.

It's all speculation on this point. There is no fact.

It's fairly obvious that, through interactions with three Reapers throughout the course of the games, there is no individuality present from the constituting species. They are formed into a collective consciousness of the Reaper itself. Also, the DNA =/= the organic.

The difference being, my "speculation" is logically and factually based with objective, empirical evidence found within the games, and is given. 

You, and your speculations, cannot enjoy that same luxury.