MyChemicalBromance wrote...
I just realised, if Mac and Casey are actually Nihilists, then the Retakers sent a bunch of cupcakes to Nihilists.
If I ever start a band, it's going to be called Cupcakes for Nihilists.
Awesome. Can I be the bass player?
MyChemicalBromance wrote...
I just realised, if Mac and Casey are actually Nihilists, then the Retakers sent a bunch of cupcakes to Nihilists.
If I ever start a band, it's going to be called Cupcakes for Nihilists.
Guest_Paulomedi_*
Guest_Rubios_*
even time itself are all constructions of the human mind
Modifié par Rubios, 01 juin 2012 - 08:58 .
Thanks! And if it seems I confused my point. I agree with you that there is qualitatively no difference between synthesis and total freedom. I meant to point that out with the "do I think it will work?" statement.Jostle wrote...
I rather enjoyed your OP overall. I liked that you took a distinctly disparate viewpoint of synthesis, yet stated it held onto the most hope (something not easy to quantify), I liked that you seemed passionate about the ending despite the fact that it ultimately made you unhappy, and I liked the fact that you included a link to "Closer" and ended with a set joke.
I have to disagree with one point you seem to be making with organics and synthetics re:freedom, though. You said it yourself, compared to absolute freedom, comparing the freedom I have to that of a slave's is pointless. Saying that synthetics possess more freedom than organics due to being free from death (by age... Maybe...) isn't really saying anything at all. They are still so far from divine freedom that it hardly matters. There is also the matter of the price of that freedom. Some geth admire organic characteristics that they cannot attain, but may be able to merely emulate. Is their freedom of our idea of mortality worth more freedom points than our freedom to laugh?
I'd disagree with philosophy being a science. Philosophy does acknowledge "truth," whereas science does not. Those that that say science will reveal truth are philosophers, not scientists.Samuel_Valkyrie wrote...
That is not part of your sequence.Fibonacci wrote...
42
I love you.PreciousIsland wrote...
"Don't worry, Donny, these men are cowards."
"Say what you will about the tenets of national socialism, at least it's an ethos."
darkchief10 wrote...
excellent read! it really makes one think about what we truly believe and whether it matters, i do believe that anyone who accepts that life is meaningless will no longer function in society, as nothing you do has any meaning, and good and evil are subjective terms
Ieldra2 wrote...
(1) To die is not an intrinsic attribute of organic life. There are real-life examples to prove this.
I hold no grudges against the illiterate.Awpknivez wrote...
I can't read this, I'm sorry.
No problem, thanks for reading it!RaidShock wrote...
For those doubting it, this is definitely worth the read. Thanks for a very well thought out and written post, Bromance.
SAmaster01 wrote...
A: 'We are all going to die' is such a horrible premise for story people don't write about it for a reason. If this was the Writers intent, they are either terminally stupid, or too artsy for thier own good.
I've seen a few people posting things like this. I don't expect everyone to read the whole post, but please note that not once did I make a qualitative statement about whether or not this was a "good" idea or "good" story telling. I'm just saying what I think it is, and not even trying to state wether or not it "belongs" in the medium. I may have said that I preferred this to a conventional ending, but that's my own preference, not a comment on narrative quality.sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...
You put a lot of thought into this. You're trying to polish a turd. And here I just thought it was a sci-fi action-adventure story... ...Basically it's an "Arnold Movie" that's playable. You start with Arnold. You finish with Arnold. You don't get deep and philosophical with Arnold.
Guest_Sion1138_*
Han Shot First wrote...
Time isn't just a human construct.
Time is fundamental to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which may be one of the most important laws in all of physics. Time is an integral part to how the universe works, as we currently understand it.
Sion1138 wrote...
Han Shot First wrote...
Time isn't just a human construct.
Time is fundamental to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which may be one of the most important laws in all of physics. Time is an integral part to how the universe works, as we currently understand it.
That law gets mentioned so often, it's ridiculous.
I will admit that that scene definitely feels like something that should have been unique to Synthesis. It just makes the other two endings even "worse" if the endings are to be taken at face value.Taboo-XX wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
Taboo-XX wrote...
Bioware was able to do that before, they only failed in execution at the very end. The difference is HOW much you allow the audience to interpret. The ending was not out ending to interpret, which is why it failed in my opinion.
Or if it is out for interpretation, we don't have a clear enough indication that it is.
The relays and the Normandy crash are a tether ball flying around with a clipped string, one that could very well just be a volleyball. I see it as a tether ball, something that needs to be interpreted; others see it as a volleyball, something to be taken independently. BioWare needs to tie that sucker down to interpretation, or make it clear that it's to be knocked around on its own.
And yes, I know that analogies can be a no-no, but I had fun with it and it makes sense to me.
I agree FULLY with this statement. I can only bear the scene in a symbolic sense, as any other interpretation just makes my head hurt.
But if some wish to interpret it literally I have no issue with it.
MyChemicalBromance wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
(1) To die is not an intrinsic attribute of organic life. There are real-life examples to prove this.
I would actually like to see an example of this (not trying to be pretentious, I just haven't heard of one). I'll wait to respond to the others until you finish thinking them out.
That's interesting, and it makes it harder to define what we know as life. Clearly none of human society could exist without memory, something those creatures clearly lack. We acknowledge microscopic life as being alive, but this life could not (with some exceptions) harm synthetic life. Of course, none of those creatures are capable of creating synthetic life either. The "creator" vs "created" actually saves the definition then.ardensia wrote...
MyChemicalBromance wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
(1) To die is not an intrinsic attribute of organic life. There are real-life examples to prove this.
I would actually like to see an example of this (not trying to be pretentious, I just haven't heard of one). I'll wait to respond to the others until you finish thinking them out.
I can handle that one, actually. Immortal jellyfish. Additionally, single-celled organisms are technically immortal, as they simply become more organisms rather than succumbing to non-function due to the wear-down of time. For further reading on living organisms and immortality, see here.
Modifié par Karimloo, 30 juin 2012 - 12:54 .
Well, yeah...Troxa wrote...
No problems, thanks for reading!JShepppp wrote...
I enjoyed the philosophical speak. And your'e right, the EC passes over this, but basically, the Catalyst states that it found a lack of understanding each other is the difficulty with "eternal" peace or something; organics seek perfection thru technology and synthetics thru understanding, or something like that. And synthesis gives them both the "perfection" they're seeking and allows them to understand each other.
Very interesting read. Apologies for being a bit late to this thread lol.
Thanks! NIN is fun if you know what they're getting at (referring to all those people in the comments who think it's about rape).Dendio1 wrote...
Great post OP. That song you linked really drove the point home. Even if it was a bit disturbing, it probably needed to be
PreciousIsland wrote...
"Don't worry, Donny, these men are cowards."
"Say what you will about the tenets of national socialism, at least it's an ethos."
Modifié par Shaleist, 10 juillet 2012 - 01:51 .
Samuel_Valkyrie wrote...
Your metaphysical ramblings on the nature of science and logic are, as a student of philosphy, abominable. However, I stopped reading when you tried to talk Descartes. Clearly, you misunderstood Descartes: His aim was to find a single foundation on which to base true knowledge. A single thing that, even if everything else is a lie is still true.
"I think, therefore I am" means "Even if all that my senses tell me, all that I know, are not true, even if all that I THINK is untrue...there is still a thing, an 'I', that performs the act of thinking". That was the point of Descartes. Not whatever nonsense you're trying to say here.
MyChemicalBromance wrote...
PS
With regards to life being meaningless,
I don’t think anyone can fully internalize the notion, but certainly anyone who did could no longer function in society.