410 réponses à ce sujet

[The Night Mammoth]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
As I have stated time and TIME again. All Synthesis is is a way to remove an existential fear. That's what transhumanism is as well. You want to transcend your body because you're afraid of dying.

There is no evidence anywhere that Synthesis makes anyone immortal.

But....what if it does? Death is an insult of fate. At the moment we must live with it, but why shouldn't we find a way around it? There are practical problems, yes, but practical problems exist to be solved.

Rapidly expanding populations. We would destroy our planet given immortality.

Being immortal would literally change everything about everything that is humanity with unknown effects. 

As for transcending my body, I'd rather be immortal in my own self-rejuvenating body.

I'd rather live a happy and fulffiling life and die than live an infinite yet meaningless existence. 

[kookie28]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
As I have stated time and TIME again. All Synthesis is is a way to remove an existential fear. That's what transhumanism is as well. You want to transcend your body because you're afraid of dying.

There is no evidence anywhere that Synthesis makes anyone immortal.

But....what if it does? Death is an insult of fate. At the moment we must live with it, but why shouldn't we find a way around it? There are practical problems, yes, but practical problems exist to be solved.

As for transcending my body, I'd rather be immortal in my own self-rejuvenating body.

. . .Which is why I won't choose Control.

[kookie28]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...
As I have stated time and TIME again. All Synthesis is is a way to remove an existential fear. That's what transhumanism is as well. You want to transcend your body because you're afraid of dying.

There is no evidence anywhere that Synthesis makes anyone immortal.

But....what if it does? Death is an insult of fate. At the moment we must live with it, but why shouldn't we find a way around it? There are practical problems, yes, but practical problems exist to be solved.

Rapidly expanding populations. We would destroy our planet given immortality.

Being immortal would literally change everything about everything that is humanity with unknown effects. 

As for transcending my body, I'd rather be immortal in my own self-rejuvenating body.

I'd rather live a happy and fulffiling life and die than live an infinite yet meaningless existence. 

That will be a lot harder to say when you're 60+ and on your death bed.

Everyone always wants more at the end.

[The Night Mammoth]

kookie28 wrote...

That will be a lot harder to say when you're 60+ and on your death bed.

Everyone always wants more at the end.

Everyone? 

All the relatives I've had that are no longer here wanted nothing more than to pass away peacefully with the family around them, knowing their lives had been good, and full. 

Of course it's easy to judge when you're young. 

And I judge that living a meaningless infinite existence doesn't sound appealing. 

[kookie28]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

kookie28 wrote...

That will be a lot harder to say when you're 60+ and on your death bed.

Everyone always wants more at the end.

Everyone? 

All the relatives I've had that are no longer here wanted nothing more than to pass away peacefully with the family around them, knowing their lives had been good, and full. 

Of course it's easy to judge when you're young. 

And I judge that living a meaningless infinite existence doesn't sound appealing. 

Meaningless?

So if you were given eternal life, you'd just sit back and do absolutely nothing for eternity?

Nobody said you'd become immortal through Synthesis anyway.

Modifié par kookie28, 01 juin 2012 - 11:07 .

[Ieldra]

The Night Mammoth wrote...
Rapidly expanding populations. We would destroy our planet given immortality.

Yes, that's one of the practical problems I mentioned.

Being immortal would literally change everything about everything that is humanity with unknown effects.

Everything? I very much doubt that. But yeah,the change would be drastic. So what?

I'd rather live a happy and fulffiling life and die than live an infinite yet meaningless existence.

When you're tired of life, which would possibly happen to many eventually, you can die voluntarily. So what's the problem? And there's no reason why a life of a million years should be less meaningful than a life of 100.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 01 juin 2012 - 11:08 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Being immortal would literally change everything about everything that is humanity with unknown effects.

Everything? I very much doubt that. But yeah,the change would be drastic. So what?

So what? 

Immortality becoming a reality would uproot the foundations of human existence. 

Everything about us is based on our species having finite time on this plain of existence. The ramifications of changing that would bring society to its knees. Maybe what rises from the ashes would be great, more likely it would be anarchy. 

I'd rather live a happy and fulffiling life and die than live an infinite yet meaningless existence.

When you're tired of life, which would possibly happen to many eventually, you can die voluntarily. So what's the problem? And there's no reason why a life of a million years should be less meaningful than a life of 100.

Then it's not immortality it's living longer and being able to euthanize yourself willy-nilly. 

[Jadebaby]

mass perfection wrote...

  A lot of you guys believe Synthesis is evil and doesn't solve the Synthetic vs. Organic conflict,but it does indeed.




Now that Mr.Kaku has explained that merging with the machines will open a new era and why he believes we should embrace the tech. singularity and that's what Synthesis does.Merges us with the machines.

 When Mr.Kaku said that merging with the machines will make us like the gods and we'll evolve beyond human standards means the Starchild was correct when he said Synthesis is the final evolution of life.

So you're taking what someone in real life thinks about the technology singularity and applying it to a video game?

I suppose you also think that synthesis can be achieved by a man or woman jumping into a beam, disintegrating them and shooting their respective genetic make-up across the entire galaxy?

Also, while I respect your opinion you thread title suggests you don't respect others.. You should probably think about that.

[kookie28]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Being immortal would literally change everything about everything that is humanity with unknown effects.

Everything? I very much doubt that. But yeah,the change would be drastic. So what?

So what? 

Immortality becoming a reality would uproot the foundations of human existence. 

Everything about us is based on our species having finite time on this plain of existence. The ramifications of changing that would bring society to its knees. Maybe what rises from the ashes would be great, more likely it would be anarchy. 

I'd rather live a happy and fulffiling life and die than live an infinite yet meaningless existence.

When you're tired of life, which would possibly happen to many eventually, you can die voluntarily. So what's the problem? And there's no reason why a life of a million years should be less meaningful than a life of 100.

Then it's not immortality it's living longer and being able to euthanize yourself willy-nilly. 

Yes, controlling when you die is such a horrible, HORRIBLE thing.

Morals morals blah blah . . .

[Jadebaby]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

And I judge that living a meaningless infinite existence doesn't sound appealing. 

Oh, no there's lots of meaning... You get to come back every 50,000 years to kill all advanced organic life.

Anyone figured out how control stops the singularity uprising yet?

No? Oh that's right, even if you think you know, you don't. The only people that can answer ANY of the detailed questions about the endings are Bioware writers. Period!

[The Night Mammoth]

kookie28 wrote...

Yes, controlling when you die is such a horrible, HORRIBLE thing.

Morals morals blah blah . . .

You've jumped ahead and moved on to another point.

I don't think that's bad. 

Immortality is an entire different idea. 

[kookie28]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

mass perfection wrote...

  A lot of you guys believe Synthesis is evil and doesn't solve the Synthetic vs. Organic conflict,but it does indeed.




Now that Mr.Kaku has explained that merging with the machines will open a new era and why he believes we should embrace the tech. singularity and that's what Synthesis does.Merges us with the machines.

 When Mr.Kaku said that merging with the machines will make us like the gods and we'll evolve beyond human standards means the Starchild was correct when he said Synthesis is the final evolution of life.

So you're taking what someone in real life thinks about the technology singularity and applying it to a video game?

I suppose you also think that synthesis can be achieved by a man or woman jumping into a beam, disintegrating them and shooting their respective genetic make-up across the entire galaxy?

Also, while I respect your opinion you thread title suggests you don't respect others.. You should probably think about that.

Kind of like, "You failed the test," "Synthesis is immoral," and some others the word filter won't let me post.

[Jadebaby]

kookie28 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

mass perfection wrote...

  A lot of you guys believe Synthesis is evil and doesn't solve the Synthetic vs. Organic conflict,but it does indeed.




Now that Mr.Kaku has explained that merging with the machines will open a new era and why he believes we should embrace the tech. singularity and that's what Synthesis does.Merges us with the machines.

 When Mr.Kaku said that merging with the machines will make us like the gods and we'll evolve beyond human standards means the Starchild was correct when he said Synthesis is the final evolution of life.

So you're taking what someone in real life thinks about the technology singularity and applying it to a video game?

I suppose you also think that synthesis can be achieved by a man or woman jumping into a beam, disintegrating them and shooting their respective genetic make-up across the entire galaxy?

Also, while I respect your opinion you thread title suggests you don't respect others.. You should probably think about that.

Kind of like, "You failed the test," "Synthesis is immoral," and some others the word filter won't let me post.

And they are no better... But it's just circle-logic what the OP in this thread is doing. You guys debate your a**es off about so many different things related to the endings.. and all because the writers were too sloppy to explain it themselves.

[AtlasMickey]

InHarmsWay wrote...

Hearing the phrase "the final step of evolution" and "apex of evolution" made me pick destroy right away. Anyone with a basic understanding of evolution will realize that those two phrases are completely and utter bull ****. There is no final stage of evolution. There is no apex. If what the Catalyst claims is true, then that means that no life (everything from humans to microbes) can no longer adapt. Without the ability of adaptation, life will die out because it is unable to adapt to changes within its environment. A plague could wipe everyone out. Considering that everything is part machine, a computer virus could wipe us out.

I refuse to accept bad science.

You're halfway there. You're correct that evolution doesn't necessarily imply an end or apex, but you're wrong in believing that it is the only means of adaptation. 

[Taboo]

Not being able to to evolve and adapt and better myself sounds pretty depressing. Stagnation would be terrible.

[DJBare]

Ieldra2 wrote...
When you're tired of life, which would possibly happen to many eventually, you can die voluntarily. So what's the problem? And there's no reason why a life of a million years should be less meaningful than a life of 100.

Which means self preservation must have been removed by synthesis?, the only people who want to end life voluntarily are normally quite desperate, not a nice way to die,if their self preservation instinct is strong then they will suffer a long time depression before finally becoming desperate enough, sounds like hell to me.

[ZIPO396]

Everyone only thinks of big killer robots when they think of synthetics wiping out organics. Why don't we think of those wonderful nanites or why not smaller robots we can't really detect that could then go on and say replicate by breaking down other material like say the Human/synthetic hybrids/planets/everything. The Catalysts solution doesn't stop Hybrids from making something like that either.

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Not being able to to evolve and adapt and better myself sounds pretty depressing. Stagnation would be terrible.

It's not "stagnation." It merely puts the tools to adapt in your hands, rather than them being slow, cosmic dice rolls.

Synthetics have total control over their own evolution - are they stagnant?

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Not being able to to evolve and adapt and better myself sounds pretty depressing. Stagnation would be terrible.

It's not "stagnation." It merely puts the tools to adapt in your hands, rather than them being slow, cosmic dice rolls.

Synthetics have total control over their own evolution - are they stagnant?

I like the way I am now, thanks. I don't have time for such nonsense.

[PsyrenY]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I like the way I am now, thanks. I don't have time for such nonsense.

Then don't change a thing. The point is that you can, should you change your mind later.

Levelling the playing field does not force you to kick the ball, it just enables you to.

[Taboo]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I like the way I am now, thanks. I don't have time for such nonsense.

Then don't change a thing. The point is that you can, should you change your mind later.

Levelling the playing field does not force you to kick the ball, it just enables you to.

I don't want that option. I don't want the possibility. At all.

[Tealjaker94]

The funny thing is the guy who started this thread no longer supports synthesis.

[ZIPO396]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I like the way I am now, thanks. I don't have time for such nonsense.

Then don't change a thing. The point is that you can, should you change your mind later.

Levelling the playing field does not force you to kick the ball, it just enables you to.

Actually you're just speculating that it would "level the playing field". Pure synthetics could still possibly have an advantage they could have a disadvantage. We can't know for sure.

[Taboo]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

The funny thing is the guy who started this thread no longer supports synthesis.

Are you serious?

LOL.

[Sisterofshane]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I like the way I am now, thanks. I don't have time for such nonsense.

Then don't change a thing. The point is that you can, should you change your mind later.

Levelling the playing field does not force you to kick the ball, it just enables you to.

I don't want that option. I don't want the possibility. At all.

People talk about transhumanism as if it can be enacted as easily as you put on your pants.  The fact of the matter is that the idea of abandoning the body as apart of one's identity and "self" is not something you just switch on.

Forcing this change on a multitude of people is not going to go well, despite how beneficial you feel it might be.