55528 réponses à ce sujet

[Dwailing]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Sorry but I still can't see any holes in its logic.

The thing it's trying to prevent has never happened before.

This doesn't make it impossible. I haven't been to Japan, is it impossible for me to ever be there?
You don't know if it would have happened long ago if the Reapers wouldn't have prevented it.

Wait, Megumi, how can you be AGREEING with ReaperBieber's logic?

Because the logic in itself is flawless, the morality isn't.

How is the logic flawless?  The QUARIANS were responsible for starting the war with the Geth.  The Geth didn't rebel, they fought to SURVIVE, like any organic race would have.  And based on what I've seen of them, I do not believe that they would have rebelled otherwise.

[MaximizedAction]

Dwailing wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Sorry but I still can't see any holes in its logic.

The thing it's trying to prevent has never happened before.

This doesn't make it impossible. I haven't been to Japan, is it impossible for me to ever be there?
You don't know if it would have happened long ago if the Reapers wouldn't have prevented it.

Wait, Megumi, how can you be AGREEING with ReaperBieber's logic?

Haha, see? That's what I meant.
We have no way of checking what the real goal of the Reapers is. And either agreeing with it or not depends on every individual. And with the Reapers at your doorstep, indoctrination becomes realtive, because indoctrination is easy to judge from the outside.

In ME1/2 times agreeing with anything stated by the Reapers would've been stated as indoctrination. In ME3 it's a different story. Now the Reaper's might be telling the truth.

Whether it matters or not, depends on you and your understanding of morality.

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 28 mai 2012 - 06:57 .

[balance5050]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Sorry but I still can't see any holes in its logic.

"The created wil always rebel against their creator."

In our cycle the Geth can make peace with the Quarians, so obviously it's not always but on sometimes.

In the last cycle the Xha'til were actually organics who implanted themselves to survive their crappy planet, they basically "created themselves" and and didn't really become a threat to anyone until the reapers indoctrinated them all, THEN the protheans ignited their sun.

You cannot know what the Geth would have done after they achieved construction of their superstructre. They didn't exterminate all Quarians because they couldn't know what effect it would have with their limited abilities as stated by Legion. There is nothing stopping them from getting that ability and deeming the Quarians as bacteria that is to be vanquished.
You simply cannot deny the possibility that in the end the Reapers were just working for the greater good.

Actually I can deny that with every fiber of my being.... The Geth have proven since the day that they became sentient the imprtance of life. Some died trying to protect their Quarian masters for crying out loud, they're not just going to turn into some mindless killing thing because THEY ARE LOGICAL SENTIENT BEINGS.

I thought you were on board with us here? Can't you see that the whole scene is just a ruse?

Modifié par balance5050, 28 mai 2012 - 06:59 .

[MegumiAzusa]

byne wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Sorry but I still can't see any holes in its logic.

The thing it's trying to prevent has never happened before.

This doesn't make it impossible. I haven't been to Japan, is it impossible for me to ever be there?
You don't know if it would have happened long ago if the Reapers wouldn't have prevented it.

Its also not impossible that the Reapers will eventually turn on the Catalyst, but I dont see him killing every single Reaper every 50,000 years to be certain it doesnt happen.

You can make an argument that anything is theoretically possible.

Even if you assume that given infinite time, there is a 100% chance that it will happen, you have to take into account that we dont have infinite time. Even spacefaring civilizations can go extinct naturally, without Reaper intervention.

As for the last part, that we dont know it wouldnt have already happened if the Reapers werent preventing it, you're right.

Thats why I bought my character in WoW an Infallible Tikbalang Ward. Ever since I bought it, not a single tikbalang has stolen my character away to the treetops.

While you could attribute this to the fact that tikbalangs do not in fact exist in WoW, I prefer to believe it is my trusty amulet keeping them away.

We don't have infinite time, but as stated throughout ME1 to ME3: the Reapers and Synthetics don't care about time and are called immortal.
I could also argue that they are using organic stuff to build a Reaper as to build them as a hybrid of synthetics and organics, making them no true synthetics and thus don't necessarily rebel against their creators.

[blooregard]

I just thought of something. What if the "real" names of the Reapers are the races that create them (Sovereign was created from the Nazara or how we killed the first version of Human)

[MegumiAzusa]

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Sorry but I still can't see any holes in its logic.

"The created wil always rebel against their creator."

In our cycle the Geth can make peace with the Quarians, so obviously it's not always but on sometimes.

In the last cycle the Xha'til were actually organics who implanted themselves to survive their crappy planet, they basically "created themselves" and and didn't really become a threat to anyone until the reapers indoctrinated them all, THEN the protheans ignited their sun.

You cannot know what the Geth would have done after they achieved construction of their superstructre. They didn't exterminate all Quarians because they couldn't know what effect it would have with their limited abilities as stated by Legion. There is nothing stopping them from getting that ability and deeming the Quarians as bacteria that is to be vanquished.
You simply cannot deny the possibility that in the end the Reapers were just working for the greater good.

Actually I can deny that with every fiber of my being.... The Geth have proven since the day that they became sentient the imprtance of life. Some died trying to protect their Quarian masters for crying out loud, they're not just going to turn into some mindless killing thing because THEY ARE LOGICAL SENTIENT BEINGS.

I thought you were on board with us here? Can't you see that the whole scene is just a ruse?

I don't agree with it, and in my opinion it just lies, but you can neither prove nor disprove the logic presented at that point of the game.

Modifié par MegumiAzusa, 28 mai 2012 - 07:04 .

[balance5050]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I thought you were on board with us here? Can't you see that the whole scene is just a ruse?

I don't agree with it, and in my opinion it just lies, but you can neither prove nor disprove the logic presented at that point of the game.

Why would you trust the logic of a liar? Faulty logic is faulty.

Modifié par balance5050, 28 mai 2012 - 07:06 .

[byne]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

byne wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Sorry but I still can't see any holes in its logic.

The thing it's trying to prevent has never happened before.

This doesn't make it impossible. I haven't been to Japan, is it impossible for me to ever be there?
You don't know if it would have happened long ago if the Reapers wouldn't have prevented it.

Its also not impossible that the Reapers will eventually turn on the Catalyst, but I dont see him killing every single Reaper every 50,000 years to be certain it doesnt happen.

You can make an argument that anything is theoretically possible.

Even if you assume that given infinite time, there is a 100% chance that it will happen, you have to take into account that we dont have infinite time. Even spacefaring civilizations can go extinct naturally, without Reaper intervention.

As for the last part, that we dont know it wouldnt have already happened if the Reapers werent preventing it, you're right.

Thats why I bought my character in WoW an Infallible Tikbalang Ward. Ever since I bought it, not a single tikbalang has stolen my character away to the treetops.

While you could attribute this to the fact that tikbalangs do not in fact exist in WoW, I prefer to believe it is my trusty amulet keeping them away.

We don't have infinite time, but as stated throughout ME1 to ME3: the Reapers and Synthetics don't care about time and are called immortal.
I could also argue that they are using organic stuff to build a Reaper as to build them as a hybrid of synthetics and organics, making them no true synthetics and thus don't necessarily rebel against their creators.

Even the Reapers dont have infinite time. The universe isnt going to be here forever.

Also godchild doesnt say synthetics will rebel against their creators, he says the created will always rebel against their creators.

The Reapers are created beings, they will rebel against godchild according to his own logic.

The zha'til, the synthetics in Javik's cycle, were actually AIs that had taken over the bodies of their organic creators.

They were, to use Saren's words, 'organic and machine intertwined, a union of flesh and steel, the strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither.'

They were basically synthesis, but achieved by organics instead of forced by the Reapers.

The Reapers destroyed them anyways.

Edit: the point about the zha'til isnt really relevant to the discussion I'm having with you I dont think. I kind of got sidetracked.

Its still a good counterpoint to the people who think the Reapers will just leave us alone in synthesis though.

Modifié par byne, 28 mai 2012 - 07:07 .

[MegumiAzusa]

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I thought you were on board with us here? Can't you see that the whole scene is just a ruse?

I don't agree with it, and in my opinion it just lies, but you can neither prove nor disprove the logic presented at that point of the game.

Why would you trust the logic of a liar?

I only said the logic in itself is flawless. Just because you lie you don't have to be illogical.

[BleedingUranium]

pirate1802 wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Rosewind wrote...

Corik wrote...

BleedingUranium wrote...

Not IT related at all, but since we're talking about voice actors, does anyone else find it odd the VAs for Garrus, Ashley, & Kaiden don't voice anyone in MP?

If they did we couldn't speculate about them recording more lines for the main characters!!!

Nah, now seriously... I don't find it odd. In fact, I find odd that mr Meer is the one resposible for voicing the vorcha xD

Vorcha are awesome, I still want to play a varren in the next cycle

Biotic Varren!

Also, does anyone know who voices the Turian in MP? I think it's Tarquin Victus. Everyone else is the main character for each faction.

Does Hale also voice the human female characters?

It's the hardest to tell, but I'm 95% sure it's her. Some of the grunts and such from rolling, talking cover, and getting hit are the clearest examples

[Dwailing]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Sorry but I still can't see any holes in its logic.

"The created wil always rebel against their creator."

In our cycle the Geth can make peace with the Quarians, so obviously it's not always but on sometimes.

In the last cycle the Xha'til were actually organics who implanted themselves to survive their crappy planet, they basically "created themselves" and and didn't really become a threat to anyone until the reapers indoctrinated them all, THEN the protheans ignited their sun.

You cannot know what the Geth would have done after they achieved construction of their superstructre. They didn't exterminate all Quarians because they couldn't know what effect it would have with their limited abilities as stated by Legion. There is nothing stopping them from getting that ability and deeming the Quarians as bacteria that is to be vanquished.
You simply cannot deny the possibility that in the end the Reapers were just working for the greater good.

Actually I can deny that with every fiber of my being.... The Geth have proven since the day that they became sentient the imprtance of life. Some died trying to protect their Quarian masters for crying out loud, they're not just going to turn into some mindless killing thing because THEY ARE LOGICAL SENTIENT BEINGS.

I thought you were on board with us here? Can't you see that the whole scene is just a ruse?

I don't agree with it, and in my opinion it just lies, but you can neither prove or disprove the logic presented at that point of the game.

I should point out that you might want to clarify whether the element in the argument you're refering to is the validity of the argument or the truth of the argument.  If it's the validity, then, simply put, let me refer you to this: 


If you're refering to the actual TRUTH of the argument, then I agree that it is possible that it could, theoretically, happen.  But technically, I could spontaniously combust right now, or Chuck Norris could come and smash my face into the keyboard, or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.  Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

Modifié par Dwailing, 28 mai 2012 - 07:10 .

[balance5050]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I thought you were on board with us here? Can't you see that the whole scene is just a ruse?

I don't agree with it, and in my opinion it just lies, but you can neither prove nor disprove the logic presented at that point of the game.

Why would you trust the logic of a liar?

I only said the logic in itself is flawless. Just because you lie you don't have to be illogical.

Flawless? You have got to be kidding, it's faulty logic because the source can't be trusted.

[MegumiAzusa]

Dwailing wrote...
If you're refering to the actual TRUTH of the argument, then I agree that it is possible that it could, theoretically, happen.  But technically, I could spontaniously combust right now, or Chuck Norris could come and smash my face into the keyboard, or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.  Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

Over the course of billions of years the statistical probability gets pretty high. If the chance of this probability isn't exactly zero it is enough for the logic to be correct.

[Dwailing]

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I thought you were on board with us here? Can't you see that the whole scene is just a ruse?

I don't agree with it, and in my opinion it just lies, but you can neither prove nor disprove the logic presented at that point of the game.

Why would you trust the logic of a liar?

I only said the logic in itself is flawless. Just because you lie you don't have to be illogical.

Flawless? You have got to be kidding, it's faulty logic because the source can't be trusted.

Uh, not to be a buzzkill or anything, but even a liar could come up with an argument that is logically sound.  As long as he doesn't break any of the Seven Rules for Valid Categorical Syllogisms, and avoids commiting any falacies, the argument would be perfectly logical.  Whether it would be true or not is another matter entirely.  And considering that I just finished a course on Formal Logic, which is the study of the structure of arguments, I think I know what I'm talking about. 

[MegumiAzusa]

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I thought you were on board with us here? Can't you see that the whole scene is just a ruse?

I don't agree with it, and in my opinion it just lies, but you can neither prove nor disprove the logic presented at that point of the game.

Why would you trust the logic of a liar?

I only said the logic in itself is flawless. Just because you lie you don't have to be illogical.

Flawless? You have got to be kidding, it's faulty logic because the source can't be trusted.

It doesn't matter if the source can be trusted or not.

[Big Bad]

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

I thought you were on board with us here? Can't you see that the whole scene is just a ruse?

I don't agree with it, and in my opinion it just lies, but you can neither prove nor disprove the logic presented at that point of the game.

Why would you trust the logic of a liar?

I only said the logic in itself is flawless. Just because you lie you don't have to be illogical.

Flawless? You have got to be kidding, it's faulty logic because the source can't be trusted.

I'm no logic expert, but I think it would be better to say that the Catalyst's argument relies heavily on quite a few unjustified assumptions.  I think overall, the argument is ridiculous because of these assumptions, but I'm not sure whether or not the logical flow of the argument itself is wrong.  But again, I really don't know much about logic, so I could be wrong.

[MaximizedAction]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...
If you're refering to the actual TRUTH of the argument, then I agree that it is possible that it could, theoretically, happen.  But technically, I could spontaniously combust right now, or Chuck Norris could come and smash my face into the keyboard, or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.  Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

Over the course of billions of years the statistical probability gets pretty high. If the chance of this probability isn't exactly zero it is enough for the logic to be correct.

That is indeed correct. By saying "always", Starbinger didn't specify when. He might just as well say, "Apes will always write Hamlet".

Modifié par MaximizedAction, 28 mai 2012 - 07:18 .

[balance5050]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...
If you're refering to the actual TRUTH of the argument, then I agree that it is possible that it could, theoretically, happen.  But technically, I could spontaniously combust right now, or Chuck Norris could come and smash my face into the keyboard, or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.  Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

Over the course of billions of years the statistical probability gets pretty high. If the chance of this probability isn't exactly zero it is enough for the logic to be correct.

No, new species rise and fall all the time, the odds are far greater that the Krogans would kill everything. Sentient organics and sentient synthetics is a distinction that is made only by physical attributes, much like racism. There will always be war for as long as there is life.

[Dwailing]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...
If you're refering to the actual TRUTH of the argument, then I agree that it is possible that it could, theoretically, happen.  But technically, I could spontaniously combust right now, or Chuck Norris could come and smash my face into the keyboard, or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.  Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

Over the course of billions of years the statistical probability gets pretty high. If the chance of this probability isn't exactly zero it is enough for the logic to be correct.

Actually, the odds of something happening DON'T increase the longer something doesn't happen.  May I refer you to the Gambler's Fallacy? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy 

[byne]

Dwailing wrote...

or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.

Now thats what I call a sticky situation!

Dwailing wrote...

Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

"I take exception to your assertion that we were warned this was a possibility. I would like to remind the Sub-committee members, that anything is possible. Some things are probable. This is, what is. And my agency as it always has, will continue to deal with what is... until it is no more." - Dr Leonard Church.

Modifié par byne, 28 mai 2012 - 07:18 .

[BleedingUranium]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...
If you're refering to the actual TRUTH of the argument, then I agree that it is possible that it could, theoretically, happen.  But technically, I could spontaniously combust right now, or Chuck Norris could come and smash my face into the keyboard, or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.  Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

Over the course of billions of years the statistical probability gets pretty high. If the chance of this probability isn't exactly zero it is enough for the logic to be correct.

There's no point arguing from that "infinite time" point because, not only is there not infinite time, in that scenario everything will happen. So, if you are saying that as a result synthetics will destroy all organics, you also have to say that organics will destroy all synthetics, the Earth will be destroyed and will be remade exactly as before, I will die and be reborn, we will find the Asari in real life, I could go on...

[MegumiAzusa]

Dwailing wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...
If you're refering to the actual TRUTH of the argument, then I agree that it is possible that it could, theoretically, happen.  But technically, I could spontaniously combust right now, or Chuck Norris could come and smash my face into the keyboard, or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.  Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

Over the course of billions of years the statistical probability gets pretty high. If the chance of this probability isn't exactly zero it is enough for the logic to be correct.

Actually, the odds of something happening DON'T increase the longer something doesn't happen.  May I refer you to the Gambler's Fallacy? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

I expressively said STATISTICAL probability, which does increase.

[Big Bad]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...
If you're refering to the actual TRUTH of the argument, then I agree that it is possible that it could, theoretically, happen.  But technically, I could spontaniously combust right now, or Chuck Norris could come and smash my face into the keyboard, or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.  Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

Over the course of billions of years the statistical probability gets pretty high. If the chance of this probability isn't exactly zero it is enough for the logic to be correct.

But that's true of pretty much anything - given enough time, some organic species will probably create a weapon capable of destroying the universe.  Should we kill all organics now in order to prevent this from happening?  If not, why is the Reaper cycle different.  Don't say that the genocide of organics by synthetics is more likely to occur, because we.don't.know.that.  To accept the validity of the catalyst's argument, you have to take pretty much everything he tells you on faith - I'm not willing to do that.

[Dwailing]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Dwailing wrote...
If you're refering to the actual TRUTH of the argument, then I agree that it is possible that it could, theoretically, happen.  But technically, I could spontaniously combust right now, or Chuck Norris could come and smash my face into the keyboard, or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.  Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

Over the course of billions of years the statistical probability gets pretty high. If the chance of this probability isn't exactly zero it is enough for the logic to be correct.

Actually, the odds of something happening DON'T increase the longer something doesn't happen.  May I refer you to the Gambler's Fallacy? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

I expressively said STATISTICAL probability, which does increase.

Please, inform me as to why the statistical probability would increase.

[BleedingUranium]

byne wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

or an ice cream truck could fall out of the sky and crush me and my house.

Now thats what I call a sticky situation!

Dwailing wrote...

Anything is POSSIBLE, but whether it's PROBABLE is another matter entirely.

"I take exception to your assertion that we were warned this was a possibility. I would like to remind the Sub-committee members, that anything is possible. Some things are probable. This is, what is. And my agency as it always has, will continue to deal with what is... until it is no more." - Dr Leonard Church.

Season 10 tonight Byne