295 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

I'm sorry but I disagree witht this statement, almost nearly every IT Theorist that i've come across gets mad or seem to become enraged when the idea of the IT being false is brought up.

I don't.

It depends on how it's refuted.  I can acknowledge a logical dismissal of the idea, but once the bile-infused rhetoric starts flying about the interpreters essentially being crazy, delusional, and cultists, then people who stick to their idea get defensive---as they should. 

And there's a lot of ridicule circling right now. 

[SubAstris]

dreman9999 wrote...

filetemo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT.
Your problem is that your hung up on the dream theory...There is more then one theory for IT...

with all due respect, every new one is more implausible than the last.

How is it implausible? If your going to say that it is. First you have to say how? Is Shepard immune to Indoctriantion?

Ridiculous strawman

[dreman9999]

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

TiminatorT2000 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

If the EC included IT is would not be because Bioware adopted a fan idea, it would be because it was planned. The evidence didn't accidently get there. And there are far too many coincidences for it to not be intended. .

There's no evidence for IT beyond circumstantial and there are some qoutes from bioware it's self which seem to go against EC being IT.Really it's impossible to go through every bit of IT evidence and disprove it because the evidence changes daily and a lot of it can't be understood without knowledge of software/game development.


My thoughts on the subject are similar to Archengeia on youtube

 

(skip to 27:00)

To me IT seems like a conspiracy theory , the same too many coincidences arguments you make are similar to ones by 9/11 truthers , things like saying that if you fold a bill a certain way it looks like the two towers seems eerily similar to the way some  indoctrination theorists talk about how the tech on the citadel looks similar to that on the shadow brokers ship. 

I ask this to every person who says this....Is it a 
coincidence that TIM controls Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game and every symtom of indoctrintion pops up?

And from this you can ascertain that everything from after the Harbinger scene is not real? You can still believe that Shepard could actually be controlled by TIM (maybe even partly indoctrinated by him) and everything that happened actually did

Again...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT. 

That's theory number 3

And what do you personally think it is?

It doesn't matter, saying one of the theories is possible opens them all up to be possible.
Think of indoctrination with someone have the master key to every door in your house. They can get to every room with no problem.  Whatlimits them to which room they want to go to is themselves.

[dreman9999]

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

filetemo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT.
Your problem is that your hung up on the dream theory...There is more then one theory for IT...

with all due respect, every new one is more implausible than the last.

How is it implausible? If your going to say that it is. First you have to say how? Is Shepard immune to Indoctriantion?

Ridiculous strawman

Asking to why it's implausible is a strawman?

[dreamgazer]

BigGuy28 wrote...

Sticking with something is perfectly fine. The problem starts when you start acting like what you believe is 100% truth and those that don't see it are wrong/idiots. I was fine with the IT and only just disliked it until it's believers started going around talking like it was fact. It very much feels like a cult to me now.

They're interpreting the fiction.  Hence, they're sticking to their interpretation, 100%.  There's nothing wrong with that.

There will always be outliers, ones who can't weigh both sides. And when people get backed further and further into their interpretive corners, especially when they're being berated with negative speech, things get nasty.  

Modifié par dreamgazer, 10 juin 2012 - 05:50 .

[SubAstris]

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

TiminatorT2000 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

If the EC included IT is would not be because Bioware adopted a fan idea, it would be because it was planned. The evidence didn't accidently get there. And there are far too many coincidences for it to not be intended. .

There's no evidence for IT beyond circumstantial and there are some qoutes from bioware it's self which seem to go against EC being IT.Really it's impossible to go through every bit of IT evidence and disprove it because the evidence changes daily and a lot of it can't be understood without knowledge of software/game development.


My thoughts on the subject are similar to Archengeia on youtube

 

(skip to 27:00)

To me IT seems like a conspiracy theory , the same too many coincidences arguments you make are similar to ones by 9/11 truthers , things like saying that if you fold a bill a certain way it looks like the two towers seems eerily similar to the way some  indoctrination theorists talk about how the tech on the citadel looks similar to that on the shadow brokers ship. 

I ask this to every person who says this....Is it a 
coincidence that TIM controls Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game and every symtom of indoctrintion pops up?

And from this you can ascertain that everything from after the Harbinger scene is not real? You can still believe that Shepard could actually be controlled by TIM (maybe even partly indoctrinated by him) and everything that happened actually did

Again...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT. 

That's theory number 3

And what do you personally think it is?

It doesn't matter, saying one of the theories is possible opens them all up to be possible.
Think of indoctrination with someone have the master key to every door in your house. They can get to every room with no problem.  Whatlimits them to which room they want to go to is themselves.

By this you are basically admitting that you don't really care what the evidence is, you just want any one of the three theories to be true as long as it is IT.

[StElmo]

This is how they will do it, my best guess anyway:

1) Expand on the endings with more content (like the normandy crash and more)

2) Leave more clues that indicate IT might still be a good interpretation without ever confirming it.

This is the most realistic approach they will take, but sadly the most insulting and if they did do this, I would never buy a game from them again.

[SubAstris]

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

filetemo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT.
Your problem is that your hung up on the dream theory...There is more then one theory for IT...

with all due respect, every new one is more implausible than the last.

How is it implausible? If your going to say that it is. First you have to say how? Is Shepard immune to Indoctriantion?

Ridiculous strawman

Asking to why it's implausible is a strawman?

It is ridiculous since this is not the view held by many who don't believe IT

[dreman9999]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

But TIM is liturally using indoctrination to control Shepard and Anderson. Every symtom of indoctriantion pops up when TIM controls Shepard. This not a maybe. Shepard literaly can't move and is force to Shoot Anderson via Indoctrination. It can't be more clear. This is what the scene shows. And there is no case of a person with out indoctriantion being controled like that.

lol there is no case of anyone being controlled like that, period. With or without indoctrination.

Also, this: "it's so obvious it couldn't be more clear IT is real" needs to stop. Please realize that if you'd stop posting this non-sense the vitriol towards the IT would decrease significantly.

And since when has direct physical control been a part of reaper indoctrination? TIM isn't subtly planting suggestions in their minds, changing they way they think. He is phyically controlling their movements. He doesn't convince Shepard that shooting Anderson is the right thing to do, he forces Shepard's arm to raise the gun, and forces his finger to pull the trigger. Nothing suggests he has any access to their minds or thoughts.

Nothing we've been told about indoctrination suggests this kind of control. How does he do it? We don't know exactly because the writers don't know themselves, or they figured we didn't need that information. Obviously it has something to do with what Cerberus discovered on Horizon and what TIM implanted himself with. But nothing I see in that scene suggests TIM is indoctrinating Shep and Anderson.

With indoctriantion ...Yes... benezia, Saren, TIM, the salarians on Virmire, and Paul Grayson in me:RETRUIBUTION. Did you miss those?
They all were evetually force to do what they did. Benzia had to let herself get killed to stop it. 
Also, in the codex it' stated to be a mental and physicalcal means of control...
Let me refresh your memory....
http://masseffect.wi...#Indoctrination 

Reaper "indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds, "reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods.  

Ovbiously Shepard doesn't agree with TIM, so he's not being Indoctrinated. If so, he would believe and agree with TIM.

Why don't people understand that the change of morality is the final stage of indoctrination and indoctriantion is in stages? How is this so hard to understand? Also, that the star child is trying to change Shepard's morality.

[dreman9999]

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

TiminatorT2000 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

If the EC included IT is would not be because Bioware adopted a fan idea, it would be because it was planned. The evidence didn't accidently get there. And there are far too many coincidences for it to not be intended. .

There's no evidence for IT beyond circumstantial and there are some qoutes from bioware it's self which seem to go against EC being IT.Really it's impossible to go through every bit of IT evidence and disprove it because the evidence changes daily and a lot of it can't be understood without knowledge of software/game development.


My thoughts on the subject are similar to Archengeia on youtube

 

(skip to 27:00)

To me IT seems like a conspiracy theory , the same too many coincidences arguments you make are similar to ones by 9/11 truthers , things like saying that if you fold a bill a certain way it looks like the two towers seems eerily similar to the way some  indoctrination theorists talk about how the tech on the citadel looks similar to that on the shadow brokers ship. 

I ask this to every person who says this....Is it a 
coincidence that TIM controls Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game and every symtom of indoctrintion pops up?

And from this you can ascertain that everything from after the Harbinger scene is not real? You can still believe that Shepard could actually be controlled by TIM (maybe even partly indoctrinated by him) and everything that happened actually did

Again...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT. 

That's theory number 3

And what do you personally think it is?

It doesn't matter, saying one of the theories is possible opens them all up to be possible.
Think of indoctrination with someone have the master key to every door in your house. They can get to every room with no problem.  Whatlimits them to which room they want to go to is themselves.

By this you are basically admitting that you don't really care what the evidence is, you just want any one of the three theories to be true as long as it is IT.

How? All 3 of the theories use the same evidence.

[dreamgazer]

SubAstris wrote...

By this you are basically admitting that you don't really care what the evidence is, you just want any one of the three theories to be true as long as it is IT.

In essence, I agree with his sentiment.  It's an interpretation of the details, both surreal and lore-based, that are currently open-ended  and without the payoff.  

Whether it leads to any of the three interpretations doesn't really matter, in a general sense---only that the hooks they picked up on were intended.

They're revolving around an idea, not an exact projection of what will absolutely happen.  Indoctrination is the destination, and currently there are a few detours to take that lead to the same location.  

[dreman9999]

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

filetemo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT.
Your problem is that your hung up on the dream theory...There is more then one theory for IT...

with all due respect, every new one is more implausible than the last.

How is it implausible? If your going to say that it is. First you have to say how? Is Shepard immune to Indoctriantion?

Ridiculous strawman

Asking to why it's implausible is a strawman?

It is ridiculous since this is not the view held by many who don't believe IT

Do you understand how little sense that makes? You basicly said that becasue it's not your view....It's wrong.
So please, explain why it's implausible for indoctriantion to happen.

[SubAstris]

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

TiminatorT2000 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

If the EC included IT is would not be because Bioware adopted a fan idea, it would be because it was planned. The evidence didn't accidently get there. And there are far too many coincidences for it to not be intended. .

There's no evidence for IT beyond circumstantial and there are some qoutes from bioware it's self which seem to go against EC being IT.Really it's impossible to go through every bit of IT evidence and disprove it because the evidence changes daily and a lot of it can't be understood without knowledge of software/game development.


My thoughts on the subject are similar to Archengeia on youtube

 

(skip to 27:00)

To me IT seems like a conspiracy theory , the same too many coincidences arguments you make are similar to ones by 9/11 truthers , things like saying that if you fold a bill a certain way it looks like the two towers seems eerily similar to the way some  indoctrination theorists talk about how the tech on the citadel looks similar to that on the shadow brokers ship. 

I ask this to every person who says this....Is it a 
coincidence that TIM controls Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game and every symtom of indoctrintion pops up?

And from this you can ascertain that everything from after the Harbinger scene is not real? You can still believe that Shepard could actually be controlled by TIM (maybe even partly indoctrinated by him) and everything that happened actually did

Again...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT. 

That's theory number 3

And what do you personally think it is?

It doesn't matter, saying one of the theories is possible opens them all up to be possible.
Think of indoctrination with someone have the master key to every door in your house. They can get to every room with no problem.  Whatlimits them to which room they want to go to is themselves.

By this you are basically admitting that you don't really care what the evidence is, you just want any one of the three theories to be true as long as it is IT.

How? All 3 of the theories use the same evidence.

If BW did their job properly it should be obvious which one is correct. If all these theories have as much evidence for them as each other, then BW have failed to communicate their vision correctly.

[SubAstris]

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

filetemo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT.
Your problem is that your hung up on the dream theory...There is more then one theory for IT...

with all due respect, every new one is more implausible than the last.

How is it implausible? If your going to say that it is. First you have to say how? Is Shepard immune to Indoctriantion?

Ridiculous strawman

Asking to why it's implausible is a strawman?

It is ridiculous since this is not the view held by many who don't believe IT

Do you understand how little sense that makes? You basicly said that becasue it's not your view....It's wrong.
So please, explain why it's implausible for indoctriantion to happen.

You don't seem to be getting what I am on about. Indoctrination can happen, whether it does is another matter entirely. Surely even you would agree?

[BatmanTurian]

dreamgazer wrote...

BigGuy28 wrote...

Sticking with something is perfectly fine. The problem starts when you start acting like what you believe is 100% truth and those that don't see it are wrong/idiots. I was fine with the IT and only just disliked it until it's believers started going around talking like it was fact. It very much feels like a cult to me now.

They're interpreting the fiction.  Hence, they're sticking to their interpretation, 100%.  There's nothing wrong with that.

There will always be outliers, ones who can't weigh both sides. And when people get backed further and further into their interpretive corners, especially when they're being berated with negative speech, things get nasty.  

Yes, it gets old that only one side is painted as crazy people who insult others for not believing what they believe. Both sides do it. There isn't a monopoly on a%^holes for either side. Arguably, whether you take the ending literally or metaphorically, they're both valid interpretations. It's when it starts getting into " fan fiction", " cultists" ," zealots ", " conspiracy theorists "  and the like from people who don't agree with IT that it starts getting rediculous. I won't even defend people who believe in IT calling others stupid or whatever. I've fallen into that trap myself when I got defensive about it.

I don't get why people get so angry over an interpretation of a story in a story-based game and feel a need to insult those who think it plausible or vice versa. Both sides get defensive and these boards should be charred with all the flaming going on constantly.

I hope Bioware is f$%^ing happy. <_<

[Vox Draco]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
I'm sorry but I disagree witht this statement, almost nearly every IT Theorist that i've come across gets mad or seem to become enraged when the idea of the IT being false is brought up.

Well, I've seen that sometimes as well, and with other issues/topics too, its an internet-thing. not so much an indoctrination-theory-thing...

Also the usual "arguments" against IT are...rather...lame...and very rarely people actually take the time to really counter the IT-arguments in a discussion-worthy manner. Usually it goes only like this, often brought up in a tone close to insult:

"This means ME3 had no ending"
"Bioware is not that clever, they're too stupid"
"IT is even more stupid than the original endings"
"IT is just (bad) fan-fiction"
"There is no IT, only bad writing and lots of coincidences"
"IT leads to nowhere"
"I hate IT and their cultists"
"IT is only grasping straws"
"IT-supporters are delusional"

Modifié par Vox Draco, 10 juin 2012 - 06:03 .

[dreamgazer]

SubAstris wrote...

If BW did their job properly it should be obvious which one is correct. If all these theories have as much evidence for them as each other, then BW have failed to communicate their vision correctly.

No, it doesn't have to, and it wouldn't be indicative of a failure---flawed, perhaps, but not a failure.  Some people pick up on minimal details and clues in a puzzle; others pick up each and every one along the way.  They both arrive at the same destination.

[StElmo]

Vox Draco wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
I'm sorry but I disagree witht this statement, almost nearly every IT Theorist that i've come across gets mad or seem to become enraged when the idea of the IT being false is brought up.

Well, I've seen that sometimes as well, and with other issues/topics too, its an internet-thing. not so much an indoctrination-theory-thing...

Also the usual "arguments" against IT are...rather...lame...and very rarely people actually take the time to really counter the IT-arguments in a discussion-worthy manner. Usually it goes only like this:

"This means ME3 had no ending"
"Bioware is not that clever, they're too stupid"
"IT is even more stupid than the original endings"
"IT is just (bad) fan-fiction"
"There is no IT, only bad writing and lots of coincidences"
"IT leads to nowhere"
"I hate IT and their cultists"
"IT is only grasping straws"
"IT-supporters are delusional"

I love IT personally, I WANT it to be true.

However, some IT fans are really condescending and very rude and nasty to people who don't believe.

You can't act that way, nobody can act that way, even if the opposition acts that way, that is no excuse to be smug yourself (not directed at you specifically).

[SubAstris]

dreamgazer wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

If BW did their job properly it should be obvious which one is correct. If all these theories have as much evidence for them as each other, then BW have failed to communicate their vision correctly.

No, it doesn't have to, and it wouldn't be indicative of a failure---flawed, perhaps, but not a failure.  Some people pick up on minimal details and clues in a puzzle; others pick up each and every one along the way.  They both arrive at the same destination.

The aim of any storyteller is to communicate their true artistic visions to the audience. If s/he fails to that, in this respect he has failed.

[BatmanTurian]

StElmo wrote...

Vox Draco wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...
I'm sorry but I disagree witht this statement, almost nearly every IT Theorist that i've come across gets mad or seem to become enraged when the idea of the IT being false is brought up.

Well, I've seen that sometimes as well, and with other issues/topics too, its an internet-thing. not so much an indoctrination-theory-thing...

Also the usual "arguments" against IT are...rather...lame...and very rarely people actually take the time to really counter the IT-arguments in a discussion-worthy manner. Usually it goes only like this:

"This means ME3 had no ending"
"Bioware is not that clever, they're too stupid"
"IT is even more stupid than the original endings"
"IT is just (bad) fan-fiction"
"There is no IT, only bad writing and lots of coincidences"
"IT leads to nowhere"
"I hate IT and their cultists"
"IT is only grasping straws"
"IT-supporters are delusional"

I love IT personally, I WANT it to be true.

However, some IT fans are really condescending and very rude and nasty to people who don't believe.

You can't act that way, nobody can act that way, even if the opposition acts that way, that is no excuse to be smug yourself (not directed at you specifically).

Agreed. This board is a mud-flinging field a lot of the time. You can't have a discussion about the ending without both sides devolving into insulting each other. It might first start off as civil (or not) and then just devolve into
" nuh uh "
"yeah huh"
" nuh uh "
"yeah huh"
and then " you're dumb"
" you're delusional"
" you just don't get it"
" you're pathetic"
" you have no imagination" 
" it would be shipped without an ending"
" it builds on the ending"
" Well I think it's just stupid"
" well I think you're stupid"
and the cycle goes on and on.

[BatmanTurian]

SubAstris wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

If BW did their job properly it should be obvious which one is correct. If all these theories have as much evidence for them as each other, then BW have failed to communicate their vision correctly.

No, it doesn't have to, and it wouldn't be indicative of a failure---flawed, perhaps, but not a failure.  Some people pick up on minimal details and clues in a puzzle; others pick up each and every one along the way.  They both arrive at the same destination.

The aim of any storyteller is to communicate their true artistic visions to the audience. If s/he fails to that, in this respect he has failed.

Which is why there will be an EC to explain things?

[dreman9999]

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

TiminatorT2000 wrote...

Makrys wrote...

If the EC included IT is would not be because Bioware adopted a fan idea, it would be because it was planned. The evidence didn't accidently get there. And there are far too many coincidences for it to not be intended. .

There's no evidence for IT beyond circumstantial and there are some qoutes from bioware it's self which seem to go against EC being IT.Really it's impossible to go through every bit of IT evidence and disprove it because the evidence changes daily and a lot of it can't be understood without knowledge of software/game development.


My thoughts on the subject are similar to Archengeia on youtube

 

(skip to 27:00)

To me IT seems like a conspiracy theory , the same too many coincidences arguments you make are similar to ones by 9/11 truthers , things like saying that if you fold a bill a certain way it looks like the two towers seems eerily similar to the way some  indoctrination theorists talk about how the tech on the citadel looks similar to that on the shadow brokers ship. 

I ask this to every person who says this....Is it a 
coincidence that TIM controls Shepard and Anderson at the end of the game and every symtom of indoctrintion pops up?

And from this you can ascertain that everything from after the Harbinger scene is not real? You can still believe that Shepard could actually be controlled by TIM (maybe even partly indoctrinated by him) and everything that happened actually did

Again...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT. 

That's theory number 3

And what do you personally think it is?

It doesn't matter, saying one of the theories is possible opens them all up to be possible.
Think of indoctrination with someone have the master key to every door in your house. They can get to every room with no problem.  Whatlimits them to which room they want to go to is themselves.

By this you are basically admitting that you don't really care what the evidence is, you just want any one of the three theories to be true as long as it is IT.

How? All 3 of the theories use the same evidence.

If BW did their job properly it should be obvious which one is correct. If all these theories have as much evidence for them as each other, then BW have failed to communicate their vision correctly.

So you're one of those people how doesn't get why people think the ending of inception maybe a dream.

[dreamgazer]

SubAstris wrote...

The aim of any storyteller is to communicate their true artistic visions to the audience. If s/he fails to that, in this respect he has failed.

Hence, the destination, and the nature of interpretation. This wouldn't be the first time that a low-lying interpretation might end up being a pertinent and accurate one, an element that people have overlooked and angrily refuted along the way. 

[dreman9999]

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

SubAstris wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

filetemo wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Fun fact...There 3 theories for IT.
Your problem is that your hung up on the dream theory...There is more then one theory for IT...

with all due respect, every new one is more implausible than the last.

How is it implausible? If your going to say that it is. First you have to say how? Is Shepard immune to Indoctriantion?

Ridiculous strawman

Asking to why it's implausible is a strawman?

It is ridiculous since this is not the view held by many who don't believe IT

Do you understand how little sense that makes? You basicly said that becasue it's not your view....It's wrong.
So please, explain why it's implausible for indoctriantion to happen.

You don't seem to be getting what I am on about. Indoctrination can happen, whether it does is another matter entirely. Surely even you would agree?

But Shepard is in the range of objects and beings that can indoctrinate since ME1. He has 3 years of on and off contect wit reaper forces, agents and reaper tech...And some how he didn't get indoctrinated?

Modifié par dreman9999, 10 juin 2012 - 06:14 .

[jla0644]

dreman9999 wrote...

jla0644 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

But TIM is liturally using indoctrination to control Shepard and Anderson. Every symtom of indoctriantion pops up when TIM controls Shepard. This not a maybe. Shepard literaly can't move and is force to Shoot Anderson via Indoctrination. It can't be more clear. This is what the scene shows. And there is no case of a person with out indoctriantion being controled like that.

lol there is no case of anyone being controlled like that, period. With or without indoctrination.

Also, this: "it's so obvious it couldn't be more clear IT is real" needs to stop. Please realize that if you'd stop posting this non-sense the vitriol towards the IT would decrease significantly.

And since when has direct physical control been a part of reaper indoctrination? TIM isn't subtly planting suggestions in their minds, changing they way they think. He is phyically controlling their movements. He doesn't convince Shepard that shooting Anderson is the right thing to do, he forces Shepard's arm to raise the gun, and forces his finger to pull the trigger. Nothing suggests he has any access to their minds or thoughts.

Nothing we've been told about indoctrination suggests this kind of control. How does he do it? We don't know exactly because the writers don't know themselves, or they figured we didn't need that information. Obviously it has something to do with what Cerberus discovered on Horizon and what TIM implanted himself with. But nothing I see in that scene suggests TIM is indoctrinating Shep and Anderson.

With indoctriantion ...Yes... benezia, Saren, TIM, the salarians on Virmire, and Paul Grayson in me:RETRUIBUTION. Did you miss those?
They all were evetually force to do what they did. Benzia had to let herself get killed to stop it. 
Also, in the codex it' stated to be a mental and physicalcal means of control...
Let me refresh your memory....
http://masseffect.wi...#Indoctrination 

Reaper "indoctrination" is an insidious means of corrupting organic minds, "reprogramming" the brain through physical and psychological conditioning using electromagnetic fields, infrasonic and ultrasonic noise, and other subliminal methods.  

None of those people were controlled like TIM was controlling Shepard. Not one of them. They were not puppets whose bodily movements were being actively controlled. They were in effect brainwashed. That's really all Indoctrination is, being convinced that what the Reapers want you to do is what YOU want to do.

And you're misreading that definition. There is nothing in that definition about direct bodily control. "Physical" doesn't mean what you think it means in this case. "Physiological" would probably be a better word to use. Read it again. Here's a hint: the bit about "reprogramming the brain" is what you want to pay attention to.