Ce sujet est fermé
paxxton wrote...
Fine. Let me just say that the word "often" introduces ambiguity into that definition. I suppose it comes from the fact that people's views and opinions aren't mathematically exact/strict and differ somewhat unpredictably.
HellishFiend wrote...
Rosewind wrote...
I chose Destroy first time and didn't even feel bad, well I did but Shepard is N7 she/he makes the hard choices sometimes you have to make the hard choice to kill 10 million so 20 million can live.
Yep, nowhere is this highlighted better in ME3 than in the friendship conversation you have with Vega in your quarters. That specific topic is raised, and while you can offer a couple of different opinions, the point of hard choices being part of the job is very clear.
balance5050 wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
Rosewind wrote...
I chose Destroy first time and didn't even feel bad, well I did but Shepard is N7 she/he makes the hard choices sometimes you have to make the hard choice to kill 10 million so 20 million can live.
Yep, nowhere is this highlighted better in ME3 than in the friendship conversation you have with Vega in your quarters. That specific topic is raised, and while you can offer a couple of different opinions, the point of hard choices being part of the job is very clear.
And don't forget that both EDI and the Geth are willing to give their lives for the cause... also Garrus reassures you in this with his talks of "deadly calculus" or whatever...
balance5050 wrote...
And don't forget that both EDI and the Geth are willing to give their lives for the cause... also Garrus reassures you in this with his talks of "deadly calculus" or whatever...
I forgot to add that the word " often" might have been added there to make the definition more inclusive just in case and could be omitted in favor of my point.HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
Fine. Let me just say that the word "often" introduces ambiguity into that definition. I suppose it comes from the fact that people's views and opinions aren't mathematically exact/strict and differ somewhat unpredictably.
Now we're starting to get into the flaws of the English language in general, and that's a topic for another forum entirely.
jk
paxxton wrote...
Fine. Let me just say that the word "often" introduces ambiguity into that definition. I suppose it comes from the fact that people's views and opinions aren't mathematically exact/strict and differ somewhat unpredictably.HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."
Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often".
I'm going to have to say that I'm done trying to explain it. I dont need you to agree with me to know that I'm right about this.
I will say this though, "often" is the easier of the two words to understand, and yet you are completely ignoring it by skipping it and underlining/bolding the part after it. If I often eat pizza, does that mean I always eat pizza? Come on, paxxton.
But in any case, like I said, I'd like to move on from this topic.
balance5050 wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
Rosewind wrote...
I chose Destroy first time and didn't even feel bad, well I did but Shepard is N7 she/he makes the hard choices sometimes you have to make the hard choice to kill 10 million so 20 million can live.
Yep, nowhere is this highlighted better in ME3 than in the friendship conversation you have with Vega in your quarters. That specific topic is raised, and while you can offer a couple of different opinions, the point of hard choices being part of the job is very clear.
And don't forget that both EDI and the Geth are willing to give their lives for the cause... also Garrus reassures you in this with his talks of "deadly calculus" or whatever...
Modifié par Turbo_J, 06 juin 2012 - 08:40 .
Where do you stand on this topic?EpyonX3 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
Fine. Let me just say that the word "often" introduces ambiguity into that definition. I suppose it comes from the fact that people's views and opinions aren't mathematically exact/strict and differ somewhat unpredictably.HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."
Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often".
I'm going to have to say that I'm done trying to explain it. I dont need you to agree with me to know that I'm right about this.
I will say this though, "often" is the easier of the two words to understand, and yet you are completely ignoring it by skipping it and underlining/bolding the part after it. If I often eat pizza, does that mean I always eat pizza? Come on, paxxton.
But in any case, like I said, I'd like to move on from this topic.
I remember this. This was a pretty intersting conversation. It ultimately leads to people acepting their own definitions.
Modifié par paxxton, 06 juin 2012 - 08:43 .
EpyonX3 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
Fine. Let me just say that the word "often" introduces ambiguity into that definition. I suppose it comes from the fact that people's views and opinions aren't mathematically exact/strict and differ somewhat unpredictably.HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."
Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often".
I'm going to have to say that I'm done trying to explain it. I dont need you to agree with me to know that I'm right about this.
I will say this though, "often" is the easier of the two words to understand, and yet you are completely ignoring it by skipping it and underlining/bolding the part after it. If I often eat pizza, does that mean I always eat pizza? Come on, paxxton.
But in any case, like I said, I'd like to move on from this topic.
I remember this. This was a pretty intersting conversation. It ultimately leads to people acepting their own definitions.
Modifié par Turbo_J, 06 juin 2012 - 08:42 .
balance5050 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."
Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often".
No one really questions Shepard.... Shepard asks the questions here.....
Modifié par EpyonX3, 06 juin 2012 - 08:43 .
Modifié par balance5050, 06 juin 2012 - 08:43 .
HellishFiend wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
And don't forget that both EDI and the Geth are willing to give their lives for the cause... also Garrus reassures you in this with his talks of "deadly calculus" or whatever...
Yes, EDI explicitly states she would rather die than serve a Reaper purpose, and it is strongly implied that the Geth would do the same. Legion states that a big part of the reason they turned to the Reapers for aid was because their decision making ability had been compromised and reduced to a basic instinct for survival. Once in full control of their decision making ability at all times, the Prime in London states that "there will be no more compromise with the Old Machines".
EpyonX3 wrote...
I remember this. This was a pretty intersting conversation. It ultimately leads to people acepting their own definitions.
balance5050 wrote...
Can we stop with the semantics, it's absolutely pointless...
Rosewind wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
And don't forget that both EDI and the Geth are willing to give their lives for the cause... also Garrus reassures you in this with his talks of "deadly calculus" or whatever...
Yes, EDI explicitly states she would rather die than serve a Reaper purpose, and it is strongly implied that the Geth would do the same. Legion states that a big part of the reason they turned to the Reapers for aid was because their decision making ability had been compromised and reduced to a basic instinct for survival. Once in full control of their decision making ability at all times, the Prime in London states that "there will be no more compromise with the Old Machines".
Where did you get all that about the geth? I don't remeber Legion saying that or a prime in london?
Rosewind wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
And don't forget that both EDI and the Geth are willing to give their lives for the cause... also Garrus reassures you in this with his talks of "deadly calculus" or whatever...
Yes, EDI explicitly states she would rather die than serve a Reaper purpose, and it is strongly implied that the Geth would do the same. Legion states that a big part of the reason they turned to the Reapers for aid was because their decision making ability had been compromised and reduced to a basic instinct for survival. Once in full control of their decision making ability at all times, the Prime in London states that "there will be no more compromise with the Old Machines".
Where did you get all that about the geth? I don't remeber Legion saying that or a prime in london?
EpyonX3 wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."
Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often".
No one really questions Shepard.... Shepard asks the questions here.....
So when you have the option to kill wrex on virmire, Modin on Tuchunka, Ashley/Kaiden on the Citadel it's because the indoctrination failed? I thought it was because people respected his opinions based on trust, relationship and rank.
HellishFiend wrote...
EpyonX3 wrote...
I remember this. This was a pretty intersting conversation. It ultimately leads to people acepting their own definitions.
One of the flaws of the English language is that not only can a word have multiple definitions, but a definition can have multiple words as well. This results in situations where a variety of words can be used to describe any given situation, some stronger, more accurate, and more properly descriptive than others, but all of them ultimately correct.
The word indoctrination (not the proper noun) is one of those words that can fit into a wide array of situations, but is not necessarily the most applicable.
GreenFlag wrote...
Is this true?
That is awesome
Turbo_J wrote...
The implants help the enemy too, unless Shepard is in 'control' oooo, if you recall my saying: Oh great, I'm my own crew's worst nightmare. - about 30 pages ago.
Now, you guys just may have broken something wide open.
I used to kid about Shep being a collector in ME2 - running around doing the good half of Collector work, forming a team.
What if that is THE main reason Harbinger wants Shepard so badly... that ability to have people follow you without any 'goddam' reason at all.
Shep would improve the Reapers indoctrination ability; when used to 'upgrade' billions upon billions of programs... That would mean that someone with a will many times stronger than Shepard would have to come along in a cycle to even have a glimmer of hope at stopping the Reapers.
balance5050 wrote...
EpyonX3 wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
paxxton wrote...
It is not how learning or talking with people works [bolded and underlined part in my previous post].HellishFiend wrote...
paxxton wrote...
Via Wikipedia:
"Indoctrination is the process of inculcatingideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned."
Perhaps you also need to look up the definition of "inculating" and "often".
No one really questions Shepard.... Shepard asks the questions here.....
So when you have the option to kill wrex on virmire, Modin on Tuchunka, Ashley/Kaiden on the Citadel it's because the indoctrination failed? I thought it was because people respected his opinions based on trust, relationship and rank.
What the hell Epyon? Read my posts and you see that I don't think indoctrination is the right word, it's more like trust in Shepard, trust in hope, it's more like anti indoctrination...
You're doing the pointed questions thing again.....
Rosewind wrote...
GreenFlag wrote...
Is this true?
That is awesome
What is true? That is the full image for the background for the Silver level in Multi Player just a drawing they using to look pretty.
Rosewind wrote...
HellishFiend wrote...
balance5050 wrote...
And don't forget that both EDI and the Geth are willing to give their lives for the cause... also Garrus reassures you in this with his talks of "deadly calculus" or whatever...
Yes, EDI explicitly states she would rather die than serve a Reaper purpose, and it is strongly implied that the Geth would do the same. Legion states that a big part of the reason they turned to the Reapers for aid was because their decision making ability had been compromised and reduced to a basic instinct for survival. Once in full control of their decision making ability at all times, the Prime in London states that "there will be no more compromise with the Old Machines".
Where did you get all that about the geth? I don't remeber Legion saying that or a prime in london?
MaximizedAction wrote...
Turbo_J wrote...
The implants help the enemy too, unless Shepard is in 'control' oooo, if you recall my saying: Oh great, I'm my own crew's worst nightmare. - about 30 pages ago.
Now, you guys just may have broken something wide open.
I used to kid about Shep being a collector in ME2 - running around doing the good half of Collector work, forming a team.
What if that is THE main reason Harbinger wants Shepard so badly... that ability to have people follow you without any 'goddam' reason at all.
Shep would improve the Reapers indoctrination ability; when used to 'upgrade' billions upon billions of programs... That would mean that someone with a will many times stronger than Shepard would have to come along in a cycle to even have a glimmer of hope at stopping the Reapers.
Anderson: "The entire galaxy united. Too bad it took the Reapers to bring us together."
Garrus: "Shepard's the one who brought them together."
Anderson: "That's exactly what I meant."
Retour en haut
