As I said before, I'm not arguing with absolutionists. Some of the most disgusting acts done known to man have been comitted under 'moral' judgements. To try to take a 'moral stance' on this regard as your primary motivator speaks of ignorance I would go out of my way to quietly remove. It is your 'repugnant' speach that further fuels my motivations to choose such an option.
Such is the same problem with those who are against Eugenics. Its is not the pratice of such a thing that is inherently wrong - we actually commit eugenics quite frequently in our society under the guise of various other excuses - and we quite liberally do so in agriculture.
If you wish to dilude yourself into the concept that we as a species do not already 'play god' on an inconceivable scale, that is your lie to feed yourself. I will not shy away from the ugly facts of our reality. And that is the last time I will speak to the 'moral' crowd on the choice. Many 'morals' are subjective, and often wrong as proven within our own history.
You could put all the perspective and information you want into the hands of everyone on every side of every debate, but people still need to have the intellectual integrity to face that information and those perspectives and their implications. And the only way we have to acquire that integrity is by maturing. By having our ideas and perspective challenged, and by admitting when we are in error. And that's process Synthesis completely knee-caps.
Mmm. I disagree. You're making assumption as to the impact synthesis will have on the cognitive developmental process. But you neglect to admit that the process of maturity is not by the rate we receive information, but by the manner in which we
process the information, and the personal adaptation of said info.
For example: "Drinking/Drugs and Driving is bad, it can cause and accident, and kill people."
This information is free and available, and often fed to individuals at any age. Even with Synthesis, or, on the Asair level pre-Synth, Telepathically inferred to an adolescent individual - however, this may not convince said individual from doing said act. To do so is to imply that Synthesis means the end of Free Will, which is an assumption made only by those who are against the very concept on other grounds, and is therefore flawed reasoning.
Synthesis is ultimately an unknown quantity, as to the full extent of its consequences.
However, as an unknown, you should also keep in mind that it is also possible, that such a choice may, in fact, not be a permanent one. In Synthesis, the knowledge of the process of how Synthesis came about is preserved, and can be extrapolated from to halt or possibly even reverse the process, if it is publicly agreed upon that the decision was made in error. All indications is that civilizations do not come to that conclusion, but there may still be outliers that make that decision and do so for themselves on a Micro scale.
Ultimately, you see to come to the conclusion that EDI itself is a unique occurance, or that co-operation between Synthetics and Organics on a micro scale has not previously been achieved. This is limited thinking. The unity between the Geth and Quarians has existed for a month, in the face of three hundred years of separation and conflict. The scars left by that conflict does not simply 'vanish' magically because an Alien had a good speech and stopped a War Monger from dooming his own race. War could just as easily bloom up again between those two species without Shepard to prevent the loss of one of them.
The Catalysts thinking was to provide a more permanent solution. Having failed Synthsis attempts, it opted to impose a very twisted version of Noah's Arc, to preserve the knowledge and information of advanced species for the future.
There's no questioning that the methodology was barbaric. And that the Catalyst's 'solution' was inheriantly flawed. But Synthisis itself may provide an amenity for that.
The Genophage was wrong, and Maelon's Experiements were unethical, but through both, the Krogan had the possibility to reach back to their aincent roots and the genophague was cured with a strong leader to guide the race on a constructive path.
So to can the results of Synthesis turn the morally wrong choice of the Catalyst into a better solution. Not only form the information that was stored there, but from the distinct possibility that the lost races might even be able to be revived from the genetic data stored within the Reapers. Destroying the Reapers destroys that potential.
People seem to think this is a new question. However, this is essentially Pandora's Box - fear of the unknown. You're not wrong to be weary of it, but the ultimate decision lies in the hands of each individual. And my life has taught me to value progress over sanctity, and I'm of the staunch opinion that we, as a species, should really focus quite a bit more on the progress and survival of we, as a species, above our own petty differences.
Retour en haut
