Just like everybody else, I hate that Synthesis affects every being in the galaxy. Such an act is indeed a violation of the self-determination of all beings because the decision is made for them.
However, if you take the EC literally, then you have to accept that Synthesis ultimately bestows more self-determination upon sapient beings than most have ever had. A post-Synthesis galaxy allows all beings with enough knowledge and ambition to shape themselves in any way that they wish. Thus, it's unlikely that pre-spaceflight civilizations will benefit from Synthesis until they reach a certain level of technological advancement. This ensures that they will progress at a steady rate.
A literal interpretation of Synthesis suggests that sapient beings are given more power than they lose. Yes, they have no say in the initial decision, but they are forcibly given the ability to forge their own destinies. No longer will they be bound to natural limits on their physical and mental development. It's far more likely that Synthesis will promote genetic and ideological diversity than widespread homogenization.
Yes, it's creepy, but it's supposed to be. It's a revolution, a leap into the unknown. The old order produced cosmic tyrants like the Leviathans and the Reapers. What the new order will produce is completely unknown, but it's likely that individual beings will have a greater command of their personal destinies. A galactic dictatorship will be harder to maintain in a Synthesized galaxy. Again, this assumes a literal interpretation of the EC.
It's not that Nature is bad, but that it's neutral. Nature just is, and has no morality. As sapient and sentient beings, however, we assign our own meaning to Nature, and exploit it for ourselves. And in the most technical sense, we are the universe. We are the universe's consciousness. The universe experiences its existence through beings like us. Synthesis simply enhances our ability to perceive ourselves on a larger cosmic scale. Thus, one gains a greater understanding of one's place in the cosmos.
Synthesis also acknowledges that your physical make-up doesn't really matter. It doesn't matter if you are made of organic parts or synthetic parts. What's important is who you are. The personhood of synthetics is affirmed with this choice, despite some possible narrative inconsistencies. Still, I find it difficult to argue for the legitimacy of synthetic life when I choose to be the cause of their extinction and associate myself with people who confidently argue that synthetics were never really alive. I suppose, however, that if I can validate a thematic paradox for Synthesis, others can validate a thematic paradox for Destroy.
It seems to me that Synthesis is more of a celebration of self-determination than a violation of it. It's a strange paradox, but I think a reasonable mixture of literal interpretation and headcanon can make Synthesis a more appealing choice.
Modifié par CosmicGnosis, 17 octobre 2012 - 05:53 .
Retour en haut
