It isn't saying that its indestructible. It's saying that bone trauma is more easily healed via medigel instead of conventional methods. So breaks happen much less. That's not indestructable. That's just making sure that there's really good bones.
By reinforcing the skeleton with a synthetic weave, bones can be made almost unbreakable.
Lol and then people are bothered with the endings, yet eat this crap like it's cake.
So if I just work out hard enough, I get a nigh indestructible skeleton?
I'm talking about the Fitness bonus in ME3 which reads, "Put on some muscle and become fearless in close-quarters combat." (and it's also called Fitness).
I'm talking about the Fitness bonus in ME3 which reads, "Put on some muscle and become fearless in close-quarters combat." (and it's also called Fitness).
Oh then I misunderstood. I thought you meant that those upgrades were gained naturally in between ME2 and ME3 by working out.
Which it kinda does say.
By reinforcing the skeleton with a synthetic weave, bones can be made almost unbreakable.
Yes. Unbreakable. A break is a specific condition. Fractures may still occur. One can avoid a break with: quick medigel treatment + more muscle to absorb shock + better armor with related bonuses (and maybe such abilities like Fortification).
Synthetic weave is a transhuman toned upgrade (YES), that still doesn't even replace the skeleton, but augments it so it can give similar effects that the above list would give. Of course the mix of both makes you quite the tank (Soldier/Fitness + Synthetic Weave).
I know what it is. I know what it implies. It doesn't make Shepard automatically transhuman, same as many technological-to-biology treatments don't. What it does do, is allow the player to view Shepard in an increasingly transhuman light. You're also given the freedom to already consider Shepard as transhuman (which is why I don't actually outright disagree with you) "If I accept this tech, why can't I accept ____?" The final turning point being the last choice of the trilogy, where mind upload/copying may occur and one can't even delude themselves at that point that Shepard is human if he picks Control. At that point, he is absolutely transhuman, regarding his past self as a separate being.
On the other hand, Destroy is a Shepard prepared for all of his upgrades ("partly synthetic"*) to be destroyed. Even if they were somehow turned back on, with Shepard surviving in some Lazarus Project 2.0, Shepard has made the moral statement that he is going to be human.
*Partly synthetic for Shepard does not = transhuman. Having a fake arm doesn't make one *a* transhuman by itself. It means you got an attachment that isn't organic.
Yes. Unbreakable. A break is a specific condition. Fractures may still occur. One can avoid a break with: quick medigel treatment + more muscle to absorb shock + better armor with related bonuses (and maybe such abilities like Fortification).
Synthetic weave is a transhuman toned upgrade (YES), that still doesn't even replace the skeleton, but augments it so it can give similar effects that the above list would give. Of course the mix of both makes you quite the tank (Soldier/Fitness + Synthetic Weave).
I know what it is. I know what it implies. It doesn't make Shepard automatically transhuman, same as many technological-to-biology treatments don't. What it does do, is allow the player to view Shepard in an increasingly transhuman light. You're also given the freedom to already consider Shepard as transhuman (which is why I don't actually outright disagree with you) "If I accept this tech, why can't I accept ____?" The final turning point being the last choice of the trilogy, where mind upload/copying may occur and one can't even delude themselves at that point that Shepard is human if he picks Control.
Meh we're gonna disagree endlessly on this. I think any augmentation beyond normal capabilities is transhumanist, you think someone has to be not-human to be transhuman.
I'm not really sure if I'd consider gene therapy transhuman though, because that changes normal human capabilities by changing the default parameters of normal human capabilities. If done correctly, the children of these people will have the same abilities as their parents. Combining a human with tech does not does not make their children come out of the womb infused with tech. Though you could maybe change the womb so much that it would infuse the embryo with tech.
And now I'm confused.
edit: so many spelling mistakes I'm thinking of going back to school
edit@your edit: no it does not. It does not exceed normal human capabilities. It exceeds that specific human's capabilities, but not everyone else who doesn't have the tech.
Well I also put a separation between something being transhumanIST and something being A transhuman. So I even agree that any augmentation beyond normal human capacities is transhumanIST. I just don't think it makes one an outright transhuman. A bit similar to how I consider many things to be humanist, but one can be a human without being of or in any connection to humanism.
Gene therapy by itself isn't transhuman. Playing with genetic alteration beyond 'defined' human capabilities is. For example, one could genetically alter things to the point of growing two tails, and it'd be hard to not call it transhuman by that point, even if those tails barely change your capability otherwise.
But yeah it can get complicated. Personally, I think that if a human is genetically altered to both accept and infuse itself with tech in a seamless fashion, then it is already POSThuman. That's the general thing we see with the Collectors, some hints of the start of it with Peace Quarians, and Synthesis. Transhuman indicates a transitory state where there is more difficulty and elimination of the (previous) self (so Husks, or at least the partial husks, fit this a little better than Collectors), whereas posthuman is the eventual new self that no longer needs to give up anything. For the record, Collectors are a crappy form of postorganics. Harbinger sucks.
There's many things to compare to this. Humanism can be the Thesis, Transhuman can be the Antithesis, and well, Synthesis is the Synthesis. One clings to the familiar Thesis and struggles toward/is dragged towards the Antithesis, all for the eventual compromise, balance, and goal of the Synthesis. And that's just one way to put it.
This doesn't mean that the Synthesis is the outright ideal *state*. Just that it is the ideal *solution* for the *most people*. Such it is more IRL with posthumanism. If we all have tech as ingrained in us and our genetics, does that mean that the human race is technically extinct? At least with transhumanism, we see a (even if decreasing) attachment to the human, but we have no idea what would happen once the posthuman state occurs. Transcendence was a bad film, but it showed one of the more typical views of what could happen when a transhuman mind gets enough power to initiate posthumanity.
I don't think it makes the human race extinct, then we have just changed the definition of human.
I don't think it makes the human race extinct, then we have just changed the definition of human.
That's the more optimistic look at it, and one that I also share. And maybe the Mass Effect leads.
Just at the same time, you'll find those more attached to the human, who will be 100% sure that posthumanity is ruination of the species (which in at least some ways it might be).
And at the same same time, you'll find those who may end up being fine with just states of transhumanism, but believing posthuman to be that bridge too far (even if them being transhuman means that they're on their way towards some form of it regardless).
I get the sense that the Mass Effect trilogy has exclusively (aside from the Rannoch Peace and Synthesis-sorta cases) shown horror shows with tech advancement creating monsters, but that future games will be more varied in how this is approached.
But that goes back to my 'Red-to-Blue Era Theory'.. or whatever I decide to call it at a given day.
That's the more optimistic look at it, and one that I also share. And maybe the Mass Effect leads.
Just at the same time, you'll find those more attached to the human, who will be 100% sure that posthumanity is ruination of the species (which in at least some ways it might be).
And at the same same time, you'll find those who may end up being fine with just states of transhumanism, but believing posthuman to be that bridge too far (even if them being transhuman means that they're on their way towards some form of it regardless).
I get the sense that the Mass Effect trilogy has exclusively (aside from the Rannoch Peace and Synthesis-sorta cases) shown horror shows with tech advancement creating monsters, but that future games will be more varied in how this is approached.
But that goes back to my 'Red-to-Blue Era Theory'.. or whatever I decide to call it at a given day.
But those will mostly be the same people that think that taking someone off life support is playing God. Like putting someone on life support is not playing God.
I can't take those people seriously.
But those will mostly be the same people that think that taking someone off life support is playing God. Like putting someone on life support is not playing God.
I can't take those people seriously.
That's what it eventually comes to.
"Yeah that's really nice and all that you find a sacredness to a very defined view of life... but [insert logic]."
Have you actually tried to understand, though?
I don't like this synthesis outcome, I reject it along with almost all the rest of "ME3" and a single mention of it infuriates me.
That said, I did act unkind in this thread a couple of pages before. Massively wasn't far off calling me a flamer before, since I did come here for a cheap laugh as I have no interest in discussing this madness seriously.
Hence, my apologies. Especially to jtav.
I don't like this synthesis outcome, I reject it along with almost all the rest of "ME3" and a single mention of it infuriates me.
That said, I did act unkind in this thread a couple of pages before. Massively wasn't far off calling me a flamer before, since I did come here for a cheap laugh as I have no interest in discussing this madness seriously.
Hence, my apologies. Especially to jtav.
Synthesis.
Synthesis.
We shall say "Synthesis" again to you... if you do not appease us.
We shall say "Synthesis" again to you... if you do not appease us.
I have nothing more to say to you. If you shoot me, my team's ready to... [THUMP] WAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaah!
This was very obvious in ME2, and obviously intended to be visible given the relevant scenes, for instance on Omega, on Zaeed's LM or in the aftermath of the Human Reaper fight. I wonder why they made a 180° turn away from that in ME3.About the transhuman debate, Shepard is transhuman by any reasonable definition of the term. She exhibits feats of strength beyond normal human parameters, can shake off poison, and can use the Widow and Claymore before they're modified for human use.
We all lie to ourselves to deal with horror.
We all lie to ourselves to deal with horror.
You`'ll have to explain that statement
TBH, I don't think transhumanism was really a dominant theme in Mass Effect. As a theme it was sort of slipped in under the radar for people who knew of such things to notice. All the augmentations are presented in terms of advanced medicine or technology so as not to tackle the subject directly.
However, there is this image which appears to show some very sophisticated implants/augmentation.
All I see are some lines and circles
Transhumanism is not a dominant theme in the Mass Effect trilogy, no. It just ramps up in core scenes more and more, and the potential to explore the idea of transhumanism increases more and more.
Or you can just have Low EMS, only Destroy available, and shoot the tube. You don't hear or see much about transhumanism then (just as one example).
But anyway, it is never dominant. It does bump up in ME2, but then ME3 more sneaks it into things without it being core to the experience, for the most part.
"We all lie to ourselves to deal with horror."
That line is from Bailey, and it's in a part of the game in which all the dialogue is about "people having their heads up their asses", "maintaining the illusion of control", "it looks pretty, calm and peaceful, but it's not real... it's all just an illusion", "it's like everything back on Earth was just some kind of nightmare", "They're in for a rude awakening", and lots more of that kind of jazz.
But I'm sure that all doesn't mean anything,
Oh man, these games.
What if the interpretation is: Sentient beings (robots, cyborgs, organics, or simulations) don't spend a lot of time thinking about whether they are "alive" or "transhuman" in their day-to-day? They just... are. And they have other more pressing matters to worry about, until they get confronted with an image of their creation (ie, Shepard on Cronos Station).
[Edited]
Retour en haut