9087 réponses à ce sujet

[Vigilant111]

@Ymladdych
But you have proven my point. You are assuming that the problem could have been worked out without the Catalyst's intervention and the Reaper cycles. This goes against the narrative: that in this case there is no solution without the Catalyst and the Reaper cycle, and the Decision Chamber encounter with Shepard.

I realise why people want to believe this, but surely we can accept that there could exist some conflicts that are irreconcilable without drastic intervention. The Synthetic Organic conflict is MEU is supposedly one of these.

That is why I say that people want a different story, one where as Iakus and others have argued the Catalyst is wrong/broken and is simply overcome.

 

The theme of Organic/Synthetic conflict is actually quite common, and I don't know what kind of a "different" story people would want

 

However, I do understand we are in a bit of a deadlock in terms of securing each race's future, as it seems the rise of one is the fall of the other thus precluding a chance of peaceful co-existence. Still, I hold reservation on implementing synthesis as solution because so much is unknown about the nature of organic and synthetic psyche and their respective strengths and weaknesses relative to a race's survivability. Note, the words strength and weakness should be in quotes because they are relative terms and are circumstantial, just because the Catalyst says a synthetic being having the ability to feel jealousy is somehow a "strength" doesn't mean it really is

[Iakus]

The free will argument is only an issue with the current generation. The next generation will have no such regrets.

 

Sure, because they will have grown up not realizing what "The Shepard" traded away.  Which is in itself a tragedy. 

[SwobyJ]

Well I'd certainly say it displays an amazing level of arrogance.

 

And taking your above post. Let's be honest. What it's doing is holding the galaxy hostage to force your imput. It realizes for the first time in its existence it needs organic help to fulfill its purpose and it's going to make sure it gets it. No retreat, no debate. Give me what I want or die. It's a horribly callus entity that is deserving of precisely zero sympathy.

Yes, we are NEVER supposed to see the Reapers as good guys. EVER.

 

Just as we would never see the Rachni as good guys during the War, even if there was an 11th hour negotiation from a Queen, while Rachni continue to ravage the galaxy.

Just as we would never see the Krogan as good guys during the Rebellion, even if there was an 11th hour negotiation with a leading Warlord, while Krogan continue to ravage the galaxy.

 

But for example, do you kill Petrovsky now because you can? Or do you keep him for the potential benefit he may bring, as he gets to have his own benefits from that?

 

Are you there to destroy all Reapers no matter the cost? Or are you there to stop the Reapers and bring their information to the table?

 

There is no "Reapers stop Reaping and realize how bad they were" choice. Synthesis is *after* the fact, not during it. It's to illustrate that maybe the Reapers can understand the wrongs they have been doing, if there is integration with organics in a more peaceful way.

 

But then again, I often don't consider it real

[Ryriena]

Sure, because they will have grown up not realizing what "The Shepard" traded away. Which is in itself a tragedy.

Because the Shepard trade away their rights as Organics for a little bit of security. That's wrong and has been wrong since even the founding fathers of America. Thanks you Ben Franklin for giving us that warning all those years ago. Oh wait.."

[SwobyJ]

But Shepard is transhuman.

 

Oh wait, he doesn't have a synthetic brain. *bangs head against wall*

 

Currently we use the definition of transhuman to be anyone transitional to posthuman. So yeah, we even use examples of artificial hearts and limbs as transhuman.

 

But not all agree with that.

 

If one gets a single computer chip implant, does that mean they're going to head towards being posthuman? No, it doesn't. In fact, they can live another few decades, and die. No posthuman happening.

 

So while we could consider ourselves to be in or heading towards a transhuman society, it may be more subjective whether an individual is transhuman.

 

The key indicator, instead of limbs and organs, would specifically be the brain. Once the brain has become synthetic, the identity must change along with it. You're no longer *allowed* to think of yourself as only human, but you *must* be on the path to posthuman identity.

 

In that sense, Shepard is always human until the end of ME3.

He can then make the decision to die(?) and may be rebirthed as a human (or close to it) in Destroy. *takes breath*

Or he can make the decision to die and be ascended as a transhuman (or close to it) in Control.

Or he can make the decision to die and transcend mortality as a posthuman essence (or close to it) in Synthesis.

 

 

From our modern perspective pretty much anyone with extensive cybernetics would be transhuman, but I'm not so sure if that'd be the case a century from now. People with a couple implants certainly are not popularly considered to be transhuman, and that's because they have no intention to move into a posthuman state. They want to stay human. There's no 'trans' happening.

 

A bit controversial (so I apologize in advance), but transgender is defined in a similar way. If you're just putting on the clothing and looks and feel of another gender, you're NOT transgender. You may even just be a 'drag queen'. If you're doing so in the intent of becoming the other gender, then you're transgender. Transsexual is a version of this which includes the sexual organs. If you're transgender or transsexual, it doesn't specifically matter what clothing you're wearing, what hormones you are taking, what behavior you are picking up, what you're doing to your genitals, etc. What matters is where you're *going*. (Male to Female, Female to Male, Male/Female to Other)

 

As long as Shepard intends on being human, 'organic/human energy' is what he'll remain as. And he did - up until the Crucible.

 

Don't take this as me defending the writing btw. It's just my opinion that I've gained since before ME3 was even released.

[SwobyJ]

Because the Shepard trade away their rights as Organics for a little bit of security. That's wrong and has been wrong since even the founding fathers of America. Thanks you Ben Franklin for giving us that warning all those years ago. Oh wait.."

 

The Constitution itself is a form of security against both anarchy and another form of dominion (British).

 

Ben Franklin was clearly speaking rhetorically.

 

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

 

Essential.

Little temporary.

 

It isn't a message against safety/security itself.

 

What would be automatically wrong in Mass Effect?

-Destroying the entire galaxy to kill all the Reapers (this isn't even done in Refuse)

-Letting the Reapers with a change of heart rule us (without Shepard taking Control)

-Merging with the Reapers into husks (without Shepard changing everything)

 

Clearly we don't see the entire galaxy die, and even Refuse has everyone die by the Reapers, not Shepard's hand.

Clearly we don't see the Reapers do a heel turn and have the Catalyst rule over organics.

Clearly we don't see everyone get huskified.

 

There are similar actions, yes, but just as you accept the rule of the American Government and the States, that is the *little* (not essential) Liberty traded away for the *essential* (not little) Security. That security being the End of the Cycles.

 

 

 

The quote was about taxation for the sake of national defense anyway. Taxing people (losing essential Liberty lol) to protect borders (little temporary Safety lol). Something people don't think twice about now, including yourself most likely.

 

Just felt like rolling with it regardless.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Actually the narrative showed that the galaxy was trapped in a cycle.  History was made cyclical by the Reapers.  Civilizations were channeled down the paths of development the Reapers wanted, and were harvested at a certain point.  We were trapped in a cage.  Made dependant on the technology the Reapers provided.

 

The goal (to me) was to break free of that cage.  To let the people of the galaxy develop down the paths they chose for themselves.  To no longer be dependant on artifacts form the past, but to look ahead.  Synthesis seemed to do the exact opposite.  the galaxy was, again, dependant on a relic of the past (the Crucible) to be used in order to shortcut their way to a path of development established by the Reapers as the "best course"

 

It's pretty much validating the concept of robbing people of free will, of being able to choose their own lives.

 

I "liked" this post, though I don't agree, mainly because it goes to show that this story has different meanings for different people (and so some endings fit better thematically for some than they do for others).

 

Personally, while I agree the galaxies were caged, I also felt like we were able to turn some of those things to our favor as well. In short, I agree with TIM. I mean, I don't think control is the means to survival, but I do agree with the principle of exploring these things  rather than destroying them out of fear or visceral reasons. And there have been enough positive examples to dispel the silly notion of an indoctrinated slippery-slope involved.

 

To that the last part, none of us are truly "free" IMO.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 You're my guy, SwobyJ! Ya beat me to it.

 

Security and liberty are opposing values, and both can get bad if you allow for too much of them, but both are needed.

 

Security from the Reapers is hardly "a little bit."

[SwobyJ]

Truly and absolutely 'free' is to run around as an animal throwing and eating our poo.

 

Or at least it once was. (It can't be that anymore.)

 

Then, you know, we gradually learned to manipulate others for what is regarded as better ends.

 

The example of canine domestication is a good one. Sure, we could have left all of them to be wolves. Okay. Let nature sort them out.

Or we could domesticate them and provide greater safety (much lower rate of death even with euthanization taken into account) even if it meant things like selective breeding.

 

There is always that battle between the concepts of freedom/chaos and security/order. But we've seen nothing that is 100% either.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Sure, because they will have grown up not realizing what "The Shepard" traded away.  Which is in itself a tragedy. 

 

Not at all. What exactly did 'the Shepard' trade away? 

[MassivelyEffective0730]

It's pretty much validating the concept of robbing people of free will, of being able to choose their own lives.

 

I think it's a valid concept.

 

IMO, when people are given free will, they inevitably abuse it and misuse it.

[DeinonSlayer]

I think it's a valid concept.

IMO, when people are given free will, they inevitably abuse it and misuse it.

Does that mean The Shepard's abuses of free will are the only tolerable ones?

I agree people abuse it. It's simply a fact of life. The consequences are on them. Lotta problems these days seem to stem from trying to shield people from the consequences of their actions.

[Ryriena]

They aren't in the contents of Ben Franklins speech opposing values. Yeah their one in the same your taking away your right of free will to fell secure this is like those that are willing to give up rights in order to fell secure. He was saying this within itself is that your giving up on the freewill of the people in order to feel safer in your own little world. It's just like those giving up your constitutional rights for being safe which is fundamentally flawed within its own rights.

[jtav]

I'd be much more sympathetic to the freedom argument if the entire trilogy didn't consist of Shepard making huge decisions while the rest of the galaxy is too incompetent to operate a blanket.

[SwobyJ]

They aren't in the contents of Ben Franklins speech opposing values. Yeah their one in the same your taking away your right of free will to fell secure this is like those that are willing to give up rights in order to fell secure. He was saying this within itself is that your giving up on the freewill of the people in order to feel safer in your own little world. It's just like those giving up your constitutional rights for being safe which is fundamentally flawed within its own rights.

 

Damn those amendments.

[SwobyJ]

I'd be much more sympathetic to the freedom argument if the entire trilogy didn't consist of Shepard making huge decisions while the rest of the galaxy is too incompetent to operate a blanket.

 

That's what I mean by the trilogy being Renegade-basic.

 

Oh it's about freedom all right - SHEPARD'S freedom.

[DeinonSlayer]

I'd be much more sympathetic to the freedom argument if the entire trilogy didn't consist of Shepard making huge decisions while the rest of the galaxy is too incompetent to operate a blanket.

Reminds me of that Jeff Dunham sketch, what did people do with the gas caps for their cars before they made those nice little holding racks for them?

*stands with the cap in hand, wailing incoherently*
*licks the back of the cap*

...ahem.

In some circumstances, absolutely - freedom is a detriment to success. You need structure. However, putting all decisions in the hands of one person, with all underlings obeying to the letter with no individual initiative, is less efficient than a model allowing for freer decision making within. Need to find a middle ground to achieve the best results.

[jtav]

Reminds me of that Jeff Dunham sketch, what did people do with the gas caps for their cars before they made those nice little holding racks for them?

*stands with the cap in hand, wailing incoherently*
*licks the back of the cap*

...ahem.

In some circumstances, absolutely - freedom is a detriment to success. You need structure. However, putting all decisions in the hands of one person, with all underlings obeying to the letter with no individual initiative, is less efficient than a model allowing for freer decision making within. Need to find a middle ground to achieve the best results.

Reminds me of that Jeff Dunham sketch, what did people do with the gas caps for their cars before they made those nice little holding racks for them?

*stands with the cap in hand, wailing incoherently*
*licks the back of the cap*

...ahem.

In some circumstances, absolutely - freedom is a detriment to success. You need structure. However, putting all decisions in the hands of one person, with all underlings obeying to the letter with no individual initiative, is less efficient than a model allowing for freer decision making within. Need to find a middle ground to achieve the best results.

IRL, I'd agree. In ME, the writers have such open contempt for things that don't involve brute force and the power fantasy is so strong, that part of the reason I choose Synth is because, yes, I do think ME-ians need their brains rewired.

[SwobyJ]

I don't think it is open contempt. In fact, I think they prefer the opposite to what you said. Shepard is just a certain kind of character with a certain story.

[Ryriena]

Damn those amendments.

And you missed the point. Look at the rights we've given up freely after 9/11 for this example it's basically him saying those that take away the rights of the people for their own security deserve neither. In other words those that don't respect the free will of the people to chose for themselves, what they think is best for them deserve the same fate as those that want to take away our freewill. It's the basics of why he fought the British and rallied the Americans to do so in the revolution. In essence, it's the same damn thing as to why Shepard fought and rallied the galaxy to stop the reapers.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

So you chose this travesty out of hate and/or contempt for ME universe and its inhabitants. This is so fitting it's uncanny.

 

Reported.

[jtav]

I'm going to regret responding seriously, but what the heck, maybe it'll be fodder for those debating in good faith.

The ME-verse revolves around Shepard, with it sometimes seeming solely like problems exist so she can solve them. It is a world where science and political prowess is not held in high regard, where the civilians (and the non-Shep associated military) is shortsighted or evil. It is in short, not a very pleasant place for someone like me. Synthesis is in some way, the opposite, with a techno;ogical and cultural flourishing even among cultures previously written off as brutish. And as a person struggling with a disability, those maskless quarians have a special resonance.

[Iakus]

So you chose this travesty out of hate and/or contempt for ME universe and its inhabitants. This is so fitting it's uncanny.

Woah, ease up there!

 

Jtav is actually a reasonable Synthesis supporter.  She recognizes that it's a pretty dissonant choice given how the ME-verse works.  If she chooses it because it's outcome is more to her taste than the setting itself is, that's at least an honest response.

[Iakus]

I'm going to regret responding seriously, but what the heck, maybe it'll be fodder for those debating in good faith.

The ME-verse revolves around Shepard, with it sometimes seeming solely like problems exist so she can solve them. It is a world where science and political prowess is not held in high regard, where the civilians (and the non-Shep associated military) is shortsighted or evil. It is in short, not a very pleasant place for someone like me. Synthesis is in some way, the opposite, with a techno;ogical and cultural flourishing even among cultures previously written off as brutish. And as a person struggling with a disability, those maskless quarians have a special resonance.

 

And this is why I dislike any of the endings.

 

I have faith that the galaxy could grow and change if it wasn't so stagnated on tech that's been essentially handed to them by the relays and "Prothean artifacts".  I think this technological and cultural flourishing could come about without forcible gene therapy of the entire galaxy, but if the Reapers simply backed off and let the galaxy think on their own.

[SwobyJ]

And you missed the point. Look at the rights we've given up freely after 9/11 for this example it's basically him saying those that take away the rights of the people for their own security deserve neither. In other words those that don't respect the free will of the people to chose for themselves, what they think is best for them deserve the same fate as those that want to take away our freewill. It's the basics of why he fought the British and rallied the Americans to do so in the revolution. In essence, it's the same damn thing as to why Shepard fought and rallied the galaxy to stop the reapers.

 

You seem to highly romanticize history.