1256 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@AngryFrozenWater:

(1) There is no need to prevent the creation of new synthetics. This was explained countless times on these threads. Read the damned OP. The point is to make organic-origin life able to keep up with synthetic-origin life in order not to be destroyed should conflict arise, and to give synthetic-origin life better understanding of organic-origin life.
(Yes, this means that the post-Synthesis galaxy isn't necessarily more peaceful than the pre-Synthesis one. But it was never the goal to make eternal peace or something. Just to prevent the extinction scenario)

(2) There is no genetic rewrite! The "new...DNA" is a metaphor. It's rather obvious from the pause, even if the fact that "hybrid DNA" makes no sense doesn't give you pause. 

And why *this* very simple reasoning has gone over your head, AngryFrozenWater, I have no idea.

1). That is your interpretation. You claim that synthesis is supposed to be the (ultimate?) defense against synthetics. Even if that is true that does not change the fact that there has to be a reason for synthesis to work in *your* scenario. To gain that advantage the new resulting race has to be improved in such a way that it becomes "the final evolution of life". Whether or not true DNA is used, there has to be a transformation. And whether you like it or not that has the very same implications as in the other scenario. Somehow the physiology and the thought processes must be improved to become "the final evolution of life". Otherwise nothing has been gained and we do not want them to climb down the evolution ladder, do we? An no matter what, the races never asked for that change. They are forced in that new situation. Their "enlightment" is still a violation of their right of self-determination and with obvious implications to their free will.

2). If the merge between organics and synthetics has to become fact then (as I understand your point of view) DNA needs to cease to exist in order to be replaced by that new framework that somehow magically replaces that DNA. That means the orginal races, as defined by the old tradional DNA, have become extinct, and have been replaced by something else, that magically did not die in the transformation. Because there are no bodies it does not mean there is no genocide.

BTW: What was up with your reading skills in that other post? You know, that long list of assumptions you have made about my post? Do you even read what people write, or do you feel you do not need to?

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 14 juin 2012 - 01:23 .

[Ieldra]

Aurora313 wrote...

Very simply, how I've interpretted the endings based on what I've seen in-game.

Synthesis = Ultimate embrace of the unknown and change. Sacrificing a single being for the betterment of the whole. (Legion's ideals and incidentally the reason for his sacrifice.)

Control = Shepard becomes the puppetmaster of the Reapers and the new Catalyst. We see them leave, but we don't know if they'll come back. Shepard is not incorruptible. (Illusive Man's ending.)

Destroy = Genocide of Synthetic life, including EDI, the Geth and most tech that the galaxy relied on. The Reapers are still a race, like it or not. The term 'genocide' still applies to them. (Anderson's ending.)

A paragon Shepard is deadset on offering redemption to every enemy he encounters, why should the Reapers any different? The Geth nearly exterminated the Quarians in the Morning War. Yet, Shepard can broker peace or even opt to help them. Why should the Repears be treated differently? .

I can understand people wishing to destroy the Reapers because it was Anderson's dying wish. Objectively, the Reapers are abominations, they're mass murders. But Subjectively, they are slaves to the Catalyst as much as everyone else is.

I agree, that's what I thought when I saw the endings first. Everything else is just an elaboration on that.

[The Night Mammoth]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

There really is only one.

Shepard being in a difficult position having to weigh what she knows and choose what seems best, and you choosing to gamble with synthesis. 

Any other defense is just headcanon, and so negligible.

And that's one pretty big, significant defense. How much more does one need? It's not like Destroy and Control entail no gambling at all.

Never said otherwise, I don't think either other choice can be defended that well without resorting to a sibjective interpretation of the consequences, which is futile when everyone does it. 

[InHarmsWay]

Aurora313 wrote...
The Reapers are still a race, like it or not. The term 'genocide' still applies to them.

As does it apply to wiping out small pox.

But I don't see anyone bemoaning the fact it's gone from the world (save for a few smaples).

Modifié par InHarmsWay, 14 juin 2012 - 02:01 .

[jtav]

Belisarius09 wrote...

@op

your decision was bad and you should feel bad

numerous reasons have repeatedly been listed over and over again as to why synthesis is just pure ****ing evil. why you felt the need to make this thread again for the 50th time I don't know.

Two reasons: Ieldra asked for posts he could quote or link in his thread. I obliged him. And I am sick of being told that the choice I made using my RL ethics is evil. I say it is not evil. It is good.

[jtav]

InHarmsWay wrote...

Aurora313 wrote...
The Reapers are still a race, like it or not. The term 'genocide' still applies to them.

As does it apply to wiping out small pox.

But I don't see anyone bemoaning the fact it's gone from the world (save for a few smaples).

Viruses aren't sentient.

[The Night Mammoth]

memorysquid wrote...

The three Reapers you speak to are not individuals; they are insofar as the game designers revealed it, some form of collective intellect.  

To create three individuals. Are you sure you played the other two games? 

Sovereign was intimidating in how certain and logical his personality was. Harbinger had an obvious fixation with Shepard, and we know from the Reaper on Rannoch that Harbinger speaks of you to the others, so they're not a giant collective intelligence like the Geth, they're individuals.

And of course, Sovereign tells you that on Virmire.

Further, as the game itself reveals, they are being controlled by the Catalyst.  As Saren also was, although he thought himself free despite being indoctrinated, as well as TIM.  That the Reapers were unaware of the Catalyst's influence on them is immaterial to it having influence, which the cutscenes after Shep's choice reveal it did have.

Both were individuals, like the Reapers. Saren still had his own ideals, and so did the Illusive Man.

[The Night Mammoth]

jtav wrote...

InHarmsWay wrote...

Aurora313 wrote...
The Reapers are still a race, like it or not. The term 'genocide' still applies to them.

As does it apply to wiping out small pox.

But I don't see anyone bemoaning the fact it's gone from the world (save for a few smaples).

Viruses aren't sentient.

You'd have no problem wiping out entire species of bacteria then? Or single celled organisms? 

[jtav]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

jtav wrote...

InHarmsWay wrote...

Aurora313 wrote...
The Reapers are still a race, like it or not. The term 'genocide' still applies to them.

As does it apply to wiping out small pox.

But I don't see anyone bemoaning the fact it's gone from the world (save for a few smaples).

Viruses aren't sentient.

You'd have no problem wiping out entire species of bacteria then? Or single celled organisms? 

Keeping in mind issues of prudence related to not wanting to cause environmental damage, no I don't. I consider evey disease eradicated a victory.

[The Night Mammoth]

Heeden wrote...

The idea of conflict between synthetics and organics is mentioned a few times in Mass Effect, there is a race called the Quarians who accidently did a Skynet and a Prothean (ancient race from a previous cycle) mentions a race in his time who accidently created their own destruction. You'll also notice a fairly wide-spread paranoia about thinking-machines, in fact a rogue-AI you can find on the Citadel is so convinced organics hate synthetics it self-destructs in an attempt to kill you.

All irrelevant to the point. 

Have synthetics ever expressed the motive, or ability, to wipe out all organic life? No. 
Are synthetics universally hostile? No, quite the opposite. 
Has the Catalyst ever been proven correct? Since organic life exists, that'll be another no. 

I find it hard to believe you only thought the Reapers were harvesting because they were monsters. For me the biggest mystery was the Reapers' motivation - if they had just been scary pointless robots I would have been incredibly disappointed. Villains who's only motivation is "because evil" just wouldn't fit in to the kind of sci-fi setting Mass Effect is modelled on.

Oh sure, given them a motive. 

Preferrably one that makes sense and is consistent with their representation throughout the story, unlike what we're given. 

Consistent with the lore as presented.

That wouldn't be the word I'd use, but it's still your headcanon. 

Still a lack of understanding, worse a lack of desire to understand,

Strawman! I'd be perfectly happy to discover more about them so long as it made sense. 

makes you dismiss them as lesser beings who's extermination is not a moral decision.

I don't think it's specifically an imorral one. They're monsters that want to kill, torture, corrupt and enslave, that's all they exist for and they express no particular want to change. 

[antares_sublight]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

jtav wrote...

Viruses aren't sentient.

You'd have no problem wiping out entire species of bacteria then? Or single celled organisms? 

Bacteria? It goes well beyond that, countless species flora and fauna across the galaxy are gone forever after Synthesis.

Pro-Synthite monsters like leldra2 like to say that "no one has changed". Yet the process of Synthesis REQUIRES drastic personality changes. People are no longer who they were before, they metaphorically die from their former selves. You know, like someone with major chemical imbalance in their brains will behave like a totally different person. leldra's parasitic nanites are infecting every living organism from the crabs at the bottom of the sea to the tallest trees to every animal everywhere to each sentient and semi-sentient creature.

For Synthesis to actually do what it's supposed to do MANDATES a change in the way sentient's behave, what they understand, what they believe, what their goals are. They're being mind-controlled by these parasite nanites. If Synthesis didn't alter people's minds (as pro-synthites have acknowledged before, but they shiftily keep retconning even their own statements), then either it wouldn't work or you have to say that the nanites FORCE physical changes on all life in the galaxy. So, you either have drastic personality changes

These nanites infect the body and have to draw energy from somewhere, meaning the host organism's energy requirements have risen, for every organism on a planet, for every planet in the galaxy.

You also cannot be serious when pro-synthites say that these nanite parasites wouldn't affect the biochemistry of the organism... that's absurd. Keeping these things from being attacked by the immune system would necessitate large biochemical changes in the organism, which so easily affects personality as well.

[Ieldra]

@AngryFrozenWater:
It was my "standard list of things Synthesis doesn't do", not restricted to the things you said.

As for your points:
(2) The thing is, the divide between organics and synthetics does not exist on the biochemical level. There can be no such thing as a "hybrid DNA-analogue" because the difference lies in design, not in biochemistry. I could build a synthetic from organic carbon compounds and it would still be a synthetic. I could grow an organic with silicon-based chemistry and it would still be organic. That's why I see no way out of interpreting the "new....DNA" as a metaphor if you want to create a coherent picture. If you disagree, please tell me how "hybrid DNA" makes any sense.

(1) There is no final evolution of life. Life changes until it dies, unless you take deliberate and ongoing steps to prevent it. There is change, yes, but there is no need for contents of thought processes to be affected. All that's needed is the integration of synthetic aspects, in whichever form they may come. You may think faster, but your thoughts are still your own, your memories are still your own, your continuity of identity is retained. You'd think those who designed the Synthesis wouldn't make any unneeded changes.
Yes, I am making that change without asking anyone. But that does not destroy anyone's ability to make choices. They just don't get to make a choice about this one thing. See jtav's OP about why that's still preferable to the alternatives in some people's view. I understand if you don't agree with jtav and me here, that's clearly the most problematic aspect of the decision, but I find it justifiable in the context of the situation we find ourselves in at the end of ME3.

Edit:
You could like the change to building new interfaces into a computer. The pre-Synthesis functionality (biochemistry) stays the same, but there are new proteins to interface with the synthetic aspects.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 14 juin 2012 - 02:22 .

[The Night Mammoth]

jtav wrote...

Keeping in mind issues of prudence related to not wanting to cause environmental damage, no I don't.

Great! Here, have some anti-bacterial spray, have fun killing the Earth's global ecosystem!

[antares_sublight]

jtav wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

jtav wrote...

InHarmsWay wrote...

Aurora313 wrote...
The Reapers are still a race, like it or not. The term 'genocide' still applies to them.

As does it apply to wiping out small pox.

But I don't see anyone bemoaning the fact it's gone from the world (save for a few smaples).

Viruses aren't sentient.

You'd have no problem wiping out entire species of bacteria then? Or single celled organisms? 

Keeping in mind issues of prudence related to not wanting to cause environmental damage, no I don't. I consider evey disease eradicated a victory.

You're the one who says Synthesis means every life form gets immunity to poison, right? What about all the species that depend on toxins to hunt and eat, or depend on toxins for defense?

[clennon8]

Pro-Synth steps to winning an argument:
1) Ignore canon and make a bunch of pie-in-the-sky assertions about Synthesis.
2) Denounce anything that paints Synthesis in a negative light as "cheap demagoguery."
3) Profit!

[antares_sublight]

Ieldra2 wrote...
That's why I see no way out of interpreting the "new....DNA" as a metaphor if you want to create a coherent picture. If you disagree, please tell me how "hybrid DNA" makes any sense.

That's the root of your problem. It doesn't make any sense. BioWare is a big group of idiots. It's totally indefensible and you look like an insane fool by throwing out what little in-game canon there is and inserting your fanfiction and calling it coherent and obvious.

Ieldra2 wrote...
Yes, I am making that change without asking anyone. But that does not destroy anyone's ability to make choices. They just don't get to make a choice about this one thing.

Just this "oooooooone liiiiiiiiittle" thing...

[Heeden]

akenn312 wrote...

I would think this is your fallacy

I think Synthesis is good
I think Bioware is good
Therefore they can never accidentally put in a fascist theme.

Interesting that even when the definition is staring you in the face you cannot see how Fascism can be interpreted in this and how it relates to the synthesis choice.

Except I do see themes that have echoes of fascist ideals, and I in no way think they are put there by accident. Turians have a highly disciplined, militarised society with a strong sense of national duty that is very similar to the fascist ideal. Salarians actively practice eugenics. Citadel-space is ruled by an elite caste (the three council races) and wishes to keep itself pure from the foreign influence of AI.

Sorry but I know history and just because you say "Nothing to see here" does not mean it's not there. Just because you want this choice to look positive does not mean it can't be seen in another way. 

The problem is fascism goes completely against pretty much all the themes of Synthesis. Control and Destroy yes - those are two words very much associated fascist regimes - but if you want to theorise on a totalitarian down-side to Synthesis I'd try imagining the stagnation of a "perfect" communist dystopia, where equality becomes mundanity and the galaxy exists in a cloud of grey apathy.

[Taboo]

The fascism is in the thematic material of the choice. Pay attention. The term is fascist aesthetics.

Aesthetics. 

2001 has those aesthetics. Dirty Harry has those aesthetics. The Dark Knight has those aesthetics. Eyes Wide Shut has those aesthetics. Saving Private Ryan has those aesthetics. 300 has those aesthetics. Die Hard has those aesthetics. The Wild Bunch has those aesthetics.

Aesthetics.

Fascist art embodies, and I quote, from Susan Sontag's Fascist Aesthetics

 “unlimited aspiration toward the high mystic goal, both beautiful and terrifying.”  "It celebrates the rebirth of the body and of community..."

That's what Synthesis is. A high mystic goal and the rebirth of the body AND community.

That idea of a "perfect body" fits well in the line of Fascist art.



This isn't a ****ing joke. I'm dead serious.

[akenn312]

Heeden wrote...
Except I do see themes that have echoes of fascist ideals, and I in no way think they are put there by accident. Turians have a highly disciplined, militarised society with a strong sense of national duty that is very similar to the fascist ideal. Salarians actively practice eugenics. Citadel-space is ruled by an elite caste (the three council races) and wishes to keep itself pure from the foreign influence of AI.

How is merging synthetics and organics into a new framework not playing around with eugenics? It is very much playing around with eugenics, but now on a galactic scale. How is creating a new "DNA framework" not purging all foreign influences? It's the same exact thing but fit into a sci-fi universe. You are purging the "Chaos" that changes organics from what they were out of fear of something that you think will save them by merging all the organics and synthetics together.

Even worse you are doing it to every living thing in the galaxy even the ones that wouldn't be harvested. Human, Krogan. Yags, Frogs, worms. You are not giving them any choice in the matter you are forcing them all to conform into this new framework to stop a possible degeneration from synthetics. Which is not actually proven. It is just done out of fear that they will do it.

None of the choices are above fascist ideals, actually in my opinion they all are. The only one that can be interpreted as not falling in that category is the choice of Destroy… if the Geth are already dead. The foreign influence was already gone and you did not force anyone to change into anything to make sure the foreign influence of chaos and creation of synthetics will not return. You force nothing on anyone and achieve your goal and more important you don't have to play galactic space god.

Heeden wrote...
The problem is fascism goes completely against pretty much all the themes of Synthesis. Control and Destroy yes - those are two words very much associated fascist regimes - but if you want to theorise on a totalitarian down-side to Synthesis I'd try imagining the stagnation of a "perfect" communist dystopia, where equality becomes mundanity and the galaxy exists in a cloud of grey apathy.

No the word Synthesis can fit in the fascist theme too. As we saw in the definition.

Either way. You have no right to change everyone in the Galaxy. No one has still proven how that is ethical either especially when what the Catalyst tells you is a fallacy. No matter what you choose the galaxy is okay in the end because the Stargazer scene shows us this. There is no new singularity, no synthetic overthrow, no Reaper return, so no need for Synthesis. You just choose it to play god out of fear something might happen that never does. You do this because you want to change everyone, not because you have to do it.

[Taboo]

 It's an existential fear, nothing more. You play around with something you have no right to.

Counter my points Synthesis people, do not continue to ignore them. If you want to run around promoting it I see no reason to not run around doing the opposite.

Some quotes from A Clockwork Orange.

From the prison chaplain:

"When a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man."

"Does God want goodness or the choice of goodness? Is a man who chooses to be bad perhaps in some way better than a man who has the good imposed upon him?"

“Choice... He has no real choice, has he? Self-interest, the fear of physical pain drove him to that grotesque act of self-abasement. Its insincerity was clearly to be seen. He ceases to be a wrongdoer. He ceases also to be a creature capable of moral choice."

You have no right to remove suspicion and fear. That's absurd. People have every right to choose what they want. Making organics the equals to Synthetics does JUST that. They have no choice, they merely have to accept it. Absolutely abhorrent.

[Heeden]

[quote]akenn312 wrote...

[quote]How is merging synthetics and organics into a new framework not playing around with eugenics? It is very much playing around with eugenics, but now on a galactic scale. How is creating a new "DNA framework" not purging all foreign influences? It's the same exact thing but fit into a sci-fi universe. You are purging the "Chaos" that changes organics from what they were out of fear of something that you think will save them by merging all the organics and synthetics together. [/quote]

"The chain reaction will combine all synthetic and organic life in to a new framework. A new...DNA."

DNA is analagous to the "new framework", it does not mean the literal replacement of genetic material. The literal interpretation "combine all synthetic and organic life in to a new DNA" would be gathering all biological and technological organisms and rearranging their molecules in to chains of deoxyrinonucleic acid.

That's not to say Synthesis doesn't involve some form of genetic alteration but it is as much head-canon as psychic wi-fi or nanites, and as a theory it lacks any real precedent in-game whilst failing to explain how it could help prevent the Catalyst's problem.

Synthesis doesn't purge chaos, that would be impossible without changing the basic state of the universe. It evolves life so it is no longer at the mercy of said chaos, the same way evolving to an extra-planetary state makes a civilisation no longer completely at the mercy of planet-wide extinction events.

[quote]None of the choices are above fascist ideals, actually in my opinion they all are. The only one that can be interpreted as not falling in that category is the choice of Destroy… if the Geth are already dead. The foreign influence was already gone and you did not force anyone to change into anything to make sure the foreign influence of chaos and creation of synthetics will not return. You force nothing on anyone and achieve your goal and more important you don't have to play galactic space god. [/quote]

Except Destroy also has you commiting genocide on the Reapers, purging their foreign influence of AI from the galaxy leaving it for the purity of organic life.

[quote]No the word Synthesis can fit in the fascist theme too. As we saw in the definition. [/quote]

If your argument boils down to the word synthesis having several meanings there's little point in continuing.

[quote]Either way. You have no right to change everyone in the Galaxy. No one has still proven how that is ethical either especially when what the Catalyst tells you is a fallacy. No matter what you choose the galaxy is okay in the end because the Stargazer scene shows us this. There is no new singularity, no synthetic overthrow, no Reaper return, so no need for Synthesis. You just choose it to play god out of fear something might happen that never does. You do this because you want to change everyone, not because you have to do it.
[/quote]

The choices are genocide, enslavement or mandatory change, none of them are exactly pretty but none of them have to be completely grim-dark either.

[TLOMetal]

as good a description as any ts. i went with synth first for some of the reasons mentioned ( without any knowledge of leaked scripts or what the ending would actually entail or do outside the catalyst) and i felt it was a decent choice, though i wish i knew what, if anything it actually did.

[Taboo]

Kind of like how everyone commited genocide against the Collectors?

OH WAIT. THAT'S TOTALLY OKAY ISN'T IT?

Stop throwing out crap at people. Destroying the Reapers is no different than that.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 14 juin 2012 - 08:32 .

[Zix13]

TL;DR version of orignial post: because I got high. 

Modifié par Zix13, 14 juin 2012 - 08:38 .

[akenn312]

Heeden wrote...
"The chain reaction will combine all synthetic and organic life in to a new framework. A new...DNA."

DNA is analagous to the "new framework", it does not mean the literal replacement of genetic material. The literal interpretation "combine all synthetic and organic life in to a new DNA" would be gathering all biological and technological organisms and rearranging their molecules in to chains of deoxyrinonucleic acid.

That's not to say Synthesis doesn't involve some form of genetic alteration but it is as much head-canon as psychic wi-fi or nanites, and as a theory it lacks any real precedent in-game whilst failing to explain how it could help prevent the Catalyst's problem.

Synthesis doesn't purge chaos, that would be impossible without changing the basic state of the universe. It evolves life so it is no longer at the mercy of said chaos, the same way evolving to an extra-planetary state makes a civilisation no longer completely at the mercy of planet-wide extinction events.

That is complete utter nonsense and you know it. Creating a new framework or a new DNA is a literal replacement of genetic material. You are replacing what was already there with something new. You are forcing genetic alliteration and that is eugenics.

You are changing the basic state of the universe. What the heck do you think destroying Relays and merging all synthetic life and all organic life is?  C'mon.

Heeden wrote...
Except Destroy also has you commiting genocide on the Reapers, purging their foreign influence of AI from the galaxy leaving it for the purity of organic life.

Are you really serious? Awww poor Reapers. If I kill them i'm committing genocide? No I am not, they are attacking organics there is nothing wrong with organics defending themselves. The results have nothing to do with it, again it's the choice too destroy the Geth that makes it genocide. Which connects to the ethical implication just like in Synthesis. You are killing the Geth because of the fear they will destroy all organics that comes from the Catalyst's fallacy. You are killing them out of fear. You are playing god with synthesis out of fear. You are Controlling the Reapers out of fear.

Heeden wrote...
If your argument boils down to the word synthesis having several meanings there's little point in continuing.

Oh I agree there is no point in continuing, but here is a interesting fact, try googling the term fascist synthesis. The term and the word synthesis comes up in many discussions along with fascism. So maybe you are not all knowing about the fascism ideology and what words and symbols it contains. By your logic you stated you only saw the words Control and Destroy heavily in fascist ideology so that's why you consider those choices fascist, so by your logic that means Synthesis can be related in the same way since it is a word seen in fascism ideology just as much.

Heeden wrote...
The choices are genocide, enslavement or mandatory change, none of them are exactly pretty but none of them have to be completely grim-dark either.

Nope there is not a mandatory change. The Stargazer scene disproves this. You get the same result no matter what you do. There is not a Reaper return, no synthetic uprising, no need to subject synthesis on the galaxy. The boy and his grandpa are on the same planet and Shepard is still the same legendary figure.

Again you do this because you want to see everyone changed. Not because it's mandatory.

Modifié par akenn312, 14 juin 2012 - 08:58 .