Ce sujet est fermé
Guest_starlitegirlx_*
spotlessvoid wrote...
So starlite and I were playing MP last night and the guy we were playing with was thoughtful, intelligent and seemed like a really nice person. He said he chose synthesis every play through. He seemed pretty unaware though of the foreshadowing and thematic elements despite seeming quite astute. Which got me thinking.
We really need to present our case (DD's quotes are a fantastic start) for this separately than IT. Don't get me wrong, as Simon and Doomsday pointed out to me months ago, the themes and actual hallucination are the bedrock of IT. But the themes stand on their own as nearly irrefutable. I think people would be more receptive to the thematic aspect if we also presented it independent of IT as reference for others
I'm beginning to think behind the preference could be a strong need for a utopian kind of existence. I forget what Epyon said as to why he liked it or if he said anything, but from him I realized that a lot of the control/synthesis likers just want an ending that they enjoy and find something in that to them is good. They might see unity in synthesis rather than what we see. Or they might see some sort of really idealistic evolution. I've always loved Data on Star Trek - TNG, so if that were very prevalent in my mind at the time I made the choice, I would be thinking about how things go awry with his twin who has emotions and how emotions can be a huge source of destruction. I might be thinking no more disease. Friendly Reapers working in harmony and doing good in the galaxy. Maybe thinking of legion and the primes that choose to stand with organics despite that organics tried to annhiliate them. If we were to ignore the reasons why we loathe synthesis, we would see the presentation of synthesis makes it very alluring but only if you are ignoring the down side of it.
To us synthesis is insane or horrific,, but perhaps we are just as guilty of close mindedness by not looking at the reasoning as to why people choose it. To some, there's a psychological connection to it and a reasoning that just skips over or doesn't even acknowledge Saren as an example or the loss of all organic life. They aren't thinking of that side of the coin which is where we are focused. They are thinking of how it could be beneficial without seeing the downside. This is actually quite interesting because it's what people do everyday in different kinds of decision making. Seeing one side only. Not analyzing the pros and cons. And back to indoctriation with this line of thinking - indoctrination tends to present things in the best possible light so you will take that side. It also plays on your fears and uses them as a back up reason as to why the indoctrianted choice or belief is going to avoid all those things you fear or don't like or want. I can think of dozens of commercials that use these tactics just to get you to buy a product. And that's just to buy a product as opposed to the myriad of much more important decisions you make in life.
Perhaps it is equally about the psychological processes that cause one to stand behind a choice as it is a lack of ability to see or understand the symbolism and other evidence IN GAME.
Modifié par starlitegirlx, 30 octobre 2012 - 08:25 .
Retour en haut
