9089 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

[saracen16]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

Even if it is "eugenics", it does not fall under the same category as Social Darwinism.

Modifié par saracen16, 01 juillet 2012 - 02:27 .

[Vigilant111]

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

Even if it is "eugenics", it does not fall under the same category as Social Darwinism.

Isn't that the same thing? Its all about power struggle and about who's better between the synthetics and organics

I need to break into my high school human bio books

[jtav]

Here's the thing: eugenics is generally associated with the death or forced sterilization of undesirables. That is not happening here. I have a chronic illness, I react very differently to the idea of being healed vs, being killed.

[Shaigunjoe]

jtav wrote...

Here's the thing: eugenics is generally associated with the death or forced sterilization of undesirables. That is not happening here. I have a chronic illness, I react very differently to the idea of being healed vs, being killed.

Yea, eugenics wasn't that unpopular until Hitler unleashed his interpretation.  Some people just like to name drop.

[AngryFrozenWater]

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

Even if it is "eugenics", it does not fall under the same category as Social Darwinism.

Nonsense. Eugenics, social Darwinism, bio-social movement, racial hygiene, transhumanism... When you are actively trying to achieve a superior race without their consent then you can call it whatever you want, but its elitist nature make it unaccpetable.

[saracen16]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

Even if it is "eugenics", it does not fall under the same category as Social Darwinism.

Nonsense. Eugenics, social Darwinism, bio-social movement, racial hygiene, transhumanism... When you are actively trying to achieve a superior race without their consent then you can call it whatever you want, but its elitist nature make it unaccpetable.

There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

[Shaigunjoe]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

Even if it is "eugenics", it does not fall under the same category as Social Darwinism.

Nonsense. Eugenics, social Darwinism, bio-social movement, racial hygiene, transhumanism... When you are actively trying to achieve a superior race without their consent then you can call it whatever you want, but its elitist nature make it unaccpetable.

You need to start forming support behind your points instead of just throwing around vocabulary words.  You admit that eugenics, social darwinism..etc is not the issue but rather the lack of consent is the issue, and then you stop.

[Vigilant111]

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

Even if it is "eugenics", it does not fall under the same category as Social Darwinism.

Nonsense. Eugenics, social Darwinism, bio-social movement, racial hygiene, transhumanism... When you are actively trying to achieve a superior race without their consent then you can call it whatever you want, but its elitist nature make it unaccpetable.

There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

I think being elitist is stemming from the opinion that synthetics are indeed superior in term of fire power and efficiency

No, Shepard is not in postion to DECIDE the fate of the galaxy, but merely influence it in a certain way

[AngryFrozenWater]

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

Even if it is "eugenics", it does not fall under the same category as Social Darwinism.

Nonsense. Eugenics, social Darwinism, bio-social movement, racial hygiene, transhumanism... When you are actively trying to achieve a superior race without their consent then you can call it whatever you want, but its elitist nature make it unaccpetable.

There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

It is unacceptable, because none of Shepards allies gave any indication that they wanted to persue that goal. The contrary is true. All pacts involved the desire of the destruction of the reapers. All fought againts control (the Illusive Man's path) and synthesis (Saren's path). All were willing to die for these causes. It is disheartening that EDI narrated the synthesis epilogue, even tough she clearly understood the meaning of Saren's question "Is submission not preferable to extinction?", but it fits the idea of indoctrination to fuel the pipe dream.

It is also unacceptable, because synthesis is a solution to a non-existent problem. Selling the civilizations' rights and racial identities to the brat and become a martyr for a hypothetical cause is not really smart, is it?

It becomes elitist when, given the above, Shepard feels that synthesis is better for everyone.

Edit: No matter how had I try, I keep finding typos in my posts. Sorry about that. English is not my native language.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 01 juillet 2012 - 03:13 .

[Caenis]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

Even if it is "eugenics", it does not fall under the same category as Social Darwinism.

Nonsense. Eugenics, social Darwinism, bio-social movement, racial hygiene, transhumanism... When you are actively trying to achieve a superior race without their consent then you can call it whatever you want, but its elitist nature make it unaccpetable.

Never thought about it in that way before. 

That is actually one of the arguments AGAINST Transhumanism even today, so I can understand (at least the way  it has been put here) why people are against it. There is another link somewhere out there that talked about how humans feared that if 'Transhumanism' were allowed, they would try to kill all humans. Within the context of Mass Effect 3, that is pretty much what happened since Humans by the end of Synthesis no longer exist, not as they once were they are fundamentally different. In one of the XMEN movies, they tried to change everyone to mutants and then tried to have a cure for mutants...I imagine it would be something like that.

My response, *says in my Harbringer voice*:  "THAT WHICH YOU KNOW AS REAPERS ARE YOUR SALVATION THROUGH DESTRUCTION  "

Yep, if Eugenics is what it is then I must say...at the end of the day my Shepard agreed and sided with the Reapers: We are your salvation through destruction, and apparantly (according to the slideshow) everyone agreed and was all happy with the transformation. But of course how could they disagree, they had been transformed, but I bet if you asked any of them if they had any regrets, it would be something similar to Avatar where it would be like: HELL NO, check out these legs! *makes a running leap.* Who wouldn't want to be able to have POWERS LIKE THIS YEAH

I think we object to it because we think 'we' will die, but it's an idea of 'transcendence'. At least within the contexts of this game. It's like it has been put before, people are being 'healed'. We could say that "Nature" practices Eugenics all the time, "Extinction is the rule, evolution is the exception". Shepard is playing the "Catalyst of Nature", speeding up the process of what is believed to be inevitable. Make no mistake HUMANS will go extinct, whether it's through some mass 'energetic catalyst', a nuclear wave, a massive meteorite, what will replace Humans could be something Post-Human that has evolved from Humans, OR it could be some other creature that has no relationship to Human species at all.

Nature can be pretty cruel, sending fires that destroy everything in it's place to create new life. Wiping out whole entire species like the Dinosaurs, and countless others. Humans are no different. Nature does this without thinking (presumably), but when you have the awareness, when you have the knowledge that no one has to die, and there can be salvation without pain...Why not push the fastforward button yourself? Why not be the Catalyst for change?

Modifié par Caenis, 01 juillet 2012 - 03:15 .

[Ieldra]

saracen16 wrote...
There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

Indeed. And actually, every organic is affected in the same way. Sounds like the opposite of racism, elitism or whatever.

[Shaigunjoe]

Ieldra2 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...
There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

Indeed. And actually, every organic is affected in the same way. Sounds like the opposite of racism, elitism or whatever.

Yup, control seems more elitist.

[The Heretic of Time]

This is the only Synthesis ending that I will ever accept in my video-games. ME3's nonsensical bullcrap can't compare to that. Serioulsy, Synthesis is the biggest pile of herrrr derrpppp I've seen in the Mass Effect universe so far. Synthesis and the nonsensical explanation for it by the Catalyst are just completely out of place and do not belong in Mass Effect.

[Enthalpy]

Vigilant111 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

I think being elitist is stemming from the opinion that synthetics are indeed superior in term of fire power and efficiency

No, Shepard is not in postion to DECIDE the fate of the galaxy, but merely influence it in a certain way

If we consider the Reapers and the fully-powered geth dreadnought as examples of synthetic firepower and efficiency, then I think we can conclude that they are indeed superior to organic spaceships. Doesn't mean synthetics are superior to organics in every single way, though. We have yet to see geth art.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Caenis wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Caenis wrote...

I believe that "Transhumanism" is just ONE of many alternative outcomes post-human, and that there are many theories out there that this is just one, and that it doesn't mean that "Transhumanism" is a utopia, it only means that it is utopia to our thinking, but I am sure they come with their own set of problems and will face new problems...as it seems the law of the universe is not "Order", it's a cycle of Chaos and Order....

What you call "transhumanism" is, in the brat's case, eugenics in its purest form forced upon their victims. The brat's earlier attempts already failed. The price for synthesis boggles the mind.

Even if it is "eugenics", it does not fall under the same category as Social Darwinism.

Nonsense. Eugenics, social Darwinism, bio-social movement, racial hygiene, transhumanism... When you are actively trying to achieve a superior race without their consent then you can call it whatever you want, but its elitist nature make it unaccpetable.

Never thought about it in that way before. 

That is actually one of the arguments AGAINST Transhumanism even today, so I can understand (at least the way  it has been put here) why people are against it. There is another link somewhere out there that talked about how humans feared that if 'Transhumanism' were allowed, they would try to kill all humans. Within the context of Mass Effect 3, that is pretty much what happened since Humans by the end of Synthesis no longer exist, not as they once were they are fundamentally different. In one of the XMEN movies, they tried to change everyone to mutants and then tried to have a cure for mutants...I imagine it would be something like that.

My response, *says in my Harbringer voice*:  "THAT WHICH YOU KNOW AS REAPERS ARE YOUR SALVATION THROUGH DESTRUCTION  "

Yep, if Eugenics is what it is then I must say...at the end of the day my Shepard agreed and sided with the Reapers: We are your salvation through destruction, and apparantly (according to the slideshow) everyone agreed and was all happy with the transformation. But of course how could they disagree, they had been transformed, but I bet if you asked any of them if they had any regrets, it would be something similar to Avatar where it would be like: HELL NO, check out these legs! *makes a running leap.* Who wouldn't want to be able to have POWERS LIKE THIS YEAH

I think we object to it because we think 'we' will die, but it's an idea of 'transcendence'. At least within the contexts of this game. It's like it has been put before, people are being 'healed'. We could say that "Nature" practices Eugenics all the time, "Extinction is the rule, evolution is the exception". Shepard is playing the "Catalyst of Nature", speeding up the process of what is believed to be inevitable. Make no mistake HUMANS will go extinct, whether it's through some mass 'energetic catalyst', a nuclear wave, a massive meteorite, what will replace Humans could be something Post-Human that has evolved from Humans, OR it could be some other creature that has no relationship to Human species at all.

Nature can be pretty cruel, sending fires that destroy everything in it's place to create new life. Wiping out whole entire species like the Dinosaurs, and countless others. Humans are no different. Nature does this without thinking (presumably), but when you have the awareness, when you have the knowledge that no one has to die, and there can be salvation without pain...Why not push the fastforward button yourself? Why not be the Catalyst for change?

About your last question: Yeah. Why not, right? Ghehe. I have to give you the same answer as the one to which you replied.

And about nature's involvement: Well... We can't fight natural disasters and we can't fight natural evolution. But we must have a choice in synthesis. It is one in which we do have a saying.

And about speeding up the process: You assume that synthesis lies in the future. Assume that it is then only if the races desire synthesis then my Shepard is all for it. But the choice had to be theirs. They gave no such indication. So, it is still the same answer as the one you replied to.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 01 juillet 2012 - 03:38 .

[Vigilant111]

Enthalpy wrote...

Vigilant111 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

I think being elitist is stemming from the opinion that synthetics are indeed superior in term of fire power and efficiency

No, Shepard is not in postion to DECIDE the fate of the galaxy, but merely influence it in a certain way

If we consider the Reapers and the fully-powered geth dreadnought as examples of synthetic firepower and efficiency, then I think we can conclude that they are indeed superior to organic spaceships. Doesn't mean synthetics are superior to organics in every single way, though. We have yet to see geth art.

Yes, they are indeed superior yet we killed one of them throughout the game, and it only takes one, they are superior yes, but they are not invincible, well, not in ME anyway

[AngryFrozenWater]

Ieldra2 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...
There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

Indeed. And actually, every organic is affected in the same way. Sounds like the opposite of racism, elitism or whatever.

It is elitist when nobody desires synthesis, but Shepard. And it is elitist when Shepard is the only one or a member of a small group who believes that it is better for the races. Why not simply admit your Shepard is an elitists? In that case you are clear. What's the problem with it? It feels like a homephobe is angry because people confront him with his homophobic behavior.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 01 juillet 2012 - 03:48 .

[Xilizhra]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...
There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

Indeed. And actually, every organic is affected in the same way. Sounds like the opposite of racism, elitism or whatever.

It is elitist when nobody desires synthesis, but Shepard. And it is elitist when Shepard is the only one or a member of a small group who believes that it is better for the races. Why not simply admit your Shepard is an elitists? In that case you are clear. What's the problem with it? It feels like a homephobe is angry because people confront him with his homophobic behavior.

It's not elitist, it's the fact that Shepard absolutely cannot, given the circumstances, accept input from anyone else. She can't accept input on whether everyone wants to die, whether they want to exterminate the geth, whether they want to live under Reaper guns forever, anything. This is a non-argument because it applies to every ending.

[saracen16]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...


It is unacceptable, because none of Shepards allies gave any indication that they wanted to persue that goal.

The same can be said for the decision to save or sacrifice the Council, save or kill the Rachni queen, or even destroy or preserve the Collector Base, or every other bloody decision in the Mass Effect universe. Circumstances did not allow "phoning a friend" or "getting help from the audience". I agree that the decision does sound forced, but then so is the decision to refuse because refusing the Crucible means defying the orders of your superiors and knowingly letting the Reapers win in this cycle. Each choice has a balance of consequences.

The contrary is true. All pacts involved the desire of the destruction of the reapers. All fought againts control (the Illusive Man's path) and synthesis (Saren's path). All were willing to die for these causes. It is disheartening that EDI narrated the synthesis epilogue, even tough she clearly understood the meaning of Saren's question "Is submission not preferable to extinction?", but it fits the idea of indoctrination to fuel the pipe dream.

How do you know that? The galaxy wants to defeat the Reapers, not necessarily destroy them. You don't fight a war to commit genocide. You fight to survive, and if removing the Reapers out of the equation is what it takes in any shape or form, then, in the Catalyst's words, so be it. And you're making a generalized assumption: many of those who are fighting are not willing to die. And you're making a generalized assumption about the galaxy wanting to die for the cause. The warriors of the galaxy signed on to fight the Reapers, but not all of them are willing to die. Neither are the civilians back home, who want to preserve their race (ala. the Krogans ["My people had enough bad luck in our time."]). 

It is also unacceptable, because synthesis is a solution to a non-existent problem. Selling the civilizations' rights and racial identities to the brat and become a martyr for a hypothetical cause is not really smart, is it?

The cause is not hypothetical. It has been tried and tested and supported. Organics wish to maintain control of synthetics and also advance them to a point where they can be of great assistance. However, for this to be possible, synthetics must evolve. Eventually, all societal tasks will be delegated to them, and organics will be seen as obsolete. Conflict will result. The difference between organic and synthetic will always eventually lead to a conflict at some point, regardless of what happens between the geth and the quarians, and what happened between the Metacons and the Protheans. The postulate isn't that conflict is impossible, but rather that conflict is inevitable in any shape or form. To resolve this conflict, synthesis is the only true answer.

It becomes elitist when, given the above, Shepard feels that synthesis is better for everyone.

The same can be said for sacrificing the Council, with Shepard going against the wishes of the galactic community to destroy Sovereign and save his fleets.

Edit: No matter how had I try, I keep finding typos in my posts. Sorry about that. English is not my native language.

No worries.

Modifié par saracen16, 01 juillet 2012 - 05:25 .

[Vigilant111]

Xilizhra wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

saracen16 wrote...
There is nothing elitist about Shepard making that decision. He is in a position that demands he decided the fate of the galaxy.

Indeed. And actually, every organic is affected in the same way. Sounds like the opposite of racism, elitism or whatever.

It is elitist when nobody desires synthesis, but Shepard. And it is elitist when Shepard is the only one or a member of a small group who believes that it is better for the races. Why not simply admit your Shepard is an elitists? In that case you are clear. What's the problem with it? It feels like a homephobe is angry because people confront him with his homophobic behavior.

It's not elitist, it's the fact that Shepard absolutely cannot, given the circumstances, accept input from anyone else. She can't accept input on whether everyone wants to die, whether they want to exterminate the geth, whether they want to live under Reaper guns forever, anything. This is a non-argument because it applies to every ending.

Shepard doesn't have to get the input now, can choose other options and decide later

I think you have confused the context of what being an elitist means, in synthesis, Shepard is perceiving the synthetics as the better and carry the qualities that will ensure organic survival, but that is subjective, it is one person's opinion only

[Xilizhra]

Shepard doesn't have to get the input now, can choose other options and decide later

So you're trying to call in a vote from the entire galaxy while Earth is burning?

[Vigilant111]

Xilizhra wrote...

Shepard doesn't have to get the input now, can choose other options and decide later

So you're trying to call in a vote from the entire galaxy while Earth is burning?

No, I am asking u to choose something else, this is a political hot potato that Shepard is not required to handle

[saracen16]

Xilizhra wrote...

Shepard doesn't have to get the input now, can choose other options and decide later

So you're trying to call in a vote from the entire galaxy while Earth is burning?

Exactly. There is no time to choose. The fleets are being decimated by the Reapers, and for every minute wasted, the Reapers gather strength and more people die. Even if he tries something else that is not as guaranteed to work as the Crucible, it would be a longshot and a waste of time.

[saracen16]

Vigilant111 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Shepard doesn't have to get the input now, can choose other options and decide later

So you're trying to call in a vote from the entire galaxy while Earth is burning?

No, I am asking u to choose something else, this is a political hot potato that Shepard is not required to handle

He IS required to handle it, and his qualifications are irrelevant. He is in a position to make that choice given the circumstances, and HE HAS TO because NO ONE ELSE is there.