RadicalDisconnect wrote...
I would say that the negative reaction towards synthesis is a testament to Bioware's poor writing and exposition of that ending. However, if we are to imagine things in universe, we have to wonder if we want to view it from the writer's point of view, or from our point of view. There is not correct answer to this one.
My interpretation is that only the war between synthetics and organics are settled for the most part. Warfare between different factions over resources, interests, and what not will likely remain.
Indeed. But further, regarding the author’s intent, we can be at ease for, while I’m sure they have their personal preference, they also wanted us to fill the blanks in the way we would find more satisfying. They expected and encouraged headcanon, (especially evident in the Destroy ending where Shepard supposedly lives, where everything is left to the player). The result is that our interpretation is just conditioned by what is actually shown, and not by their preferred interpretation of those events.
Good point, but the ending seems to show that most, if not all, are content with the change, although it wasn't seemless. Again, if rumors are true, there is a version of synthesis where EDI says that not everyone will immediately accept the change. Again, this is something we'll unfortunately have to look from the writer's perspective and intentions. Lame, I know.
Well, taking in consideration human nature, what is shown implies something that is simple an impossibility to happen. The idea of forced change is naturally abhorrent. Some would be philosophical about it and consider the advantages offered advantageous, others would consider the disadvantages outweigh the advantages and refuse it; other would refuse them on principle, regardless.
Change can be imposed, but liking change cannot. If there is no significant opposition, then something is necessarily conditioning it. This is why a override thought system becomes a possibility; specially in the light of the catalyst preferred modus operandi: indoctrination.
Such process would explain the widespread acceptance and it is consistent with what we know the Catalyst can do. In fact, in light of EDI's monologue, (where opposition seems nonexistent or is apparently quickly overcome), it becomes more likely, imo.
I don’t doubt this was not the author’s intent, but in light of their encouragement to fill the blanks, and considering that it seems consistent with what is shown and what we know of the Catalyst, it becomes a strong, an valid, possibility.
Note: I wasn’t aware of other versions of EDI’s monologue, thanks for bringing that up
Personally, I don’t think it would change the equation: the acceptance of the entire population of a forced change is too unbelievable, imo, and suggests a mild form of indoctrination, with the most resilient individuals resisting longer, but eventually succumbing.
If we are to take the Starchild's assertions at face value (something I'm not fond of), then the point of synthesis is inevitable. Even if it isn't, I don't see that the reapers would destroy anyone who attempts to reverse. Well, at least the ones who don't threaten other synthesized individuals.
Even if synthesis is inevitable in the long run it does not mean it is inevitable in the short run. The Catalyst cares not about such “insignificant” details as what individuals and even populations may want at a given time. He thinks in terms of the log run but, for us, organics, as Keynes once put: “in the long run we will all be dead.” It is not the reality we live in. In the reality of the “now” opposition would be inevitable.
The entire theory of assured organic destruction he postulated as true seems to be based in a very simple idea: “if anything has a non zero chance of occurrence, given an infinite amount of time, it will occur.” (It is a faulty logic but it seems to be his premise).
The existence of a relatively large population of organics would create a non-zero possibility of conflict with the quasi-synthetics. Worse, there is a non-zero chance of the quasi-organics to side with their organic “cousins,” dragging the entire galaxy into the war he wishes to avoid. As such, how small this chance is, is actually irrelevant. If it exists it must occur given enough time. (Well, according to the Catalyst).
This he cannot allow, so the reverted cannot be allowed to exist. Actual evidence that such would be how he would act exists:
The catalyst could have allowed organic civilizations to exist, only intervening in the case of actual conflict with synthetics, but he will not take that approach. He will kill them all first: “he makes a desert and calls it peace.”
The only way to avert this would be to make sure that reversal would not be possible in the first place, and the best solution I can think of is a mild form of indoctrination.
Thought of rebellion against synthesis is really touched on. However, perhaps we can look at it this way. Using additional "benefits" of synthesis is purely optional, and those who prefer not to use them have the choice. Again, if that other version of EDI's monologue exists, then it suggests that indeed, not everyone is immediately pleased with the changes, but eventually accepted them.
There. My response probably isn't as well thought-out as yours, and I might've made a ton of fallacies. But hey, I'm no philosopher. This is just a fun friendly discussion. Again, my main gripe against synthesis is that it's fantastic and non-sensical, which is the reason many of these arguments begin in the first place. I think this is the fault of Bioware.
Personally, I don’t believe that offering more advantages as an incentive to embrace synthesis would work either; it could diminish the number of those that reject synthesis, but would not reduce their numbers to zero; and the Catalyst operates with absolutes and infinity. A smaller chance of occurrence is still a chance, and given time, it will occur, and such is not acceptable.
A Switch off button for synthesis while keeping it inactive would also go against his goals, as it would amount to reversal. Again, I believe it would not be acceptable for him.
Oh, and by the way, you make excellent points. Most enjoyable.
Retour en haut
that and while it works for Deus Ex it just plain doesn't work for ME. Even if it wasn't half assed. 
:
