265 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

arial wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

"Without us Synthetics would destroy all organics"

And how does the quarians eliminating the geth disprove that?

"Synthetics" does not mean "geth".

Destroying the geth proves that organics are not doomed to synthetics.

that is until a more powerful Synthetic race is created, one that we can not defeat

. Conjecture

[drayfish]

VLX11387 wrote...

Damn dray, I thought you disappeared after the thread on your article. Glad you're back nonetheless ^^

Thanks - very kind of you to say.  Nope, I still drop in from time to time.

[Steelcan]

davishepard wrote...
The quarian destroyed the geth, this time (going along with this possible outcome to the war). This time. It does nothing to disprove Catalyst logic. Its only a recent event. Again, it has saw it before. Do you think that the Catalyst would came up with such a drastic solution as the cycles if it didn't thought it was the only option? The Catalyst was created to solve a problem, and it is why it presents the new options made possible by the Crucible. It wants to solve the problem it was created to solve.

It says that this happened before. What good would do if it said that X synthetics destroyed Y organics in the 25523rd cycle? Would you require recorded evidence along with it? Maybe recorded statements from a species that saw it all happen from a safe distance?

There is no evidence to disprove its claims. It has events from eons before to back up what it says. It has saw it, and has no reason to lie.

. There is no evidence to back up his claims, and I count two pieces of evidence against him.

one is a Quarian possibility of victory on Rannoch.  The other is Javik's "Metacon War". He says that organics had turned the tide and were winning, then the reapers showed up.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

"It is not a thing you can comprehend." --------> "We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill you later."

It's so ****ing stupid and anyone who defends this nonsense is probably not capable of critical thinking. That goes double for the writers who convinced themselves that circular logic was brilliant and that other people "just don't get it" and aren't as deep as them. That's the way it's presented in the game and it's insulting.

[CaptainZaysh]

Steelcan wrote...

Actually since the Catalyst's argument is absolutist he needs to not have any counter examples. words like "inevitable" show that he believes that there is a 100% chance of synthetics destroying organics, a Quarian victory proves this wrong.

That's absolute bulls**t.

"Without us synthetics would destroy all organics" does not mean "no synthetic race will ever be defeated by an organic race".  They are two completely different statements.

[The Night Mammoth]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Exactly. There's nothing complicated about it. It's just plain stupid and doesn't make any sense to a sane person.

It might be more complicated than you think, because you didn't get it.

The Reapers are not here to kill you so you don't make synthetics that kill you.  They are here to kill you so you don't make synthetics that kill everybody.

That's not difficult to comprehend, that's an incredibly simple motivation, at its most basic level when stripped of its context.

It's when context is added, and all the other details, like what the Reapers are, their origins, their actions since the Catalyst was made, why it was made in the first place, that cause it to no longer make any sense. 

On Lovecraft though; it's not the same thing. Lovecraft intentionally didn't explain the motivations or natures of the various cosmic horrors in his fiction, so it's perfectly acceptable to say it' all beyond our comprehension. Things cease to be beyond human comprehension when a human f*cking explains everything about them. So Lovecraft didn't try, and thus, the mystery is preserved.  

[CaptainZaysh]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill you later."

It's so ****ing stupid and anyone who defends this nonsense is probably not capable of critical thinking.

It is nonsense, but it's your nonsense.  That is not the plot.

This is the plot:

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill everyone later."

Do you see the difference?

[Reorte]

davishepard wrote...

The quarian destroyed the geth, this time (going along with this possible outcome to the war). This time. It does nothing to disprove Catalyst logic. Its only a recent event. Again, it has saw it before. Do you think that the Catalyst would came up with such a drastic solution as the cycles if it didn't thought it was the only option? The Catalyst was created to solve a problem, and it is why it presents the new options made possible by the Crucible. It wants to solve the problem it was created to solve.

Then it needs to provide evidence that it's right, and it does not. What it says sounds unconvincing if you put a little thought into it and what little evidence we do have is contrary to it. Furthermore, whilst providing such evidence would at least make its claims consistent it would still be a failure if the evidence describes events which appear wildly implausible. Whilst an author can always claim whatever he feels like is true within his story in order to justify his characters' actions and motivations if those truth in universe seem ridiculous then I'll still dismiss the whole lot as a pile of badly-written junk. Let's say Anderson's plan was for everyone to charge stark naked at the Reapers and to beat them to death with their bare hands. The game claims Anderson is a military genius, and backs that up by his plan working. Is Anderson a military genius as claimed (after all, everything he does works even if it seems to us that it shouldn't - beyond our comprehension?)

If a character is supposed to be a superintelligent genius then it has to act like one. That's probably impossible to write properly unless you're also a superintelligent genius. Simple claims of authority don't cut the mustard with an intelligent, questioning audience.

Modifié par Reorte, 16 janvier 2013 - 02:09 .

[Wayning_Star]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Exactly. There's nothing complicated about it. It's just plain stupid and doesn't make any sense to a sane person.

It might be more complicated than you think, because you didn't get it.

The Reapers are not here to kill you so you don't make synthetics that kill you.  They are here to kill you so you don't make synthetics that kill everybody.

the word harvest should really replace kill. Just for clarity. IN the reaper and catalyst system, harvest isn't killing. But the geth on the war path do kill,not harvest.

[Steelcan]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Actually since the Catalyst's argument is absolutist he needs to not have any counter examples. words like "inevitable" show that he believes that there is a 100% chance of synthetics destroying organics, a Quarian victory proves this wrong.

That's absolute bulls**t.

"Without us synthetics would destroy all organics" does not mean "no synthetic race will ever be defeated by an organic race".  They are two completely different statements.

. Well he doesn't say that now does he.  He only says ALL organics WILL be destroyed, and he's wrong about that.

[The Night Mammoth]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill you later."

It's so ****ing stupid and anyone who defends this nonsense is probably not capable of critical thinking.

It is nonsense, but it's your nonsense.  That is not the plot.

This is the plot:

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill everyone later."

Do you see the difference?

That's not 'the plot', that's the motivation of the antagonist. 

[EpicBoot2daFace]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill you later."

It's so ****ing stupid and anyone who defends this nonsense is probably not capable of critical thinking.

It is nonsense, but it's your nonsense.  That is not the plot.

This is the plot:

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill everyone later."

Do you see the difference?

Where is the evidence to support that synthetics are going to kill all organics without the reaper's intervention?

[Enhanced]

Steelcan wrote...

davishepard wrote...
The quarian destroyed the geth, this time (going along with this possible outcome to the war). This time. It does nothing to disprove Catalyst logic. Its only a recent event. Again, it has saw it before. Do you think that the Catalyst would came up with such a drastic solution as the cycles if it didn't thought it was the only option? The Catalyst was created to solve a problem, and it is why it presents the new options made possible by the Crucible. It wants to solve the problem it was created to solve.

It says that this happened before. What good would do if it said that X synthetics destroyed Y organics in the 25523rd cycle? Would you require recorded evidence along with it? Maybe recorded statements from a species that saw it all happen from a safe distance?

There is no evidence to disprove its claims. It has events from eons before to back up what it says. It has saw it, and has no reason to lie.

. There is no evidence to back up his claims, and I count two pieces of evidence against him.

one is a Quarian possibility of victory on Rannoch.  The other is Javik's "Metacon War". He says that organics had turned the tide and were winning, then the reapers showed up.

Leviathans?

[arial]

Reorte wrote...

davishepard wrote...

The quarian destroyed the geth, this time (going along with this possible outcome to the war). This time. It does nothing to disprove Catalyst logic. Its only a recent event. Again, it has saw it before. Do you think that the Catalyst would came up with such a drastic solution as the cycles if it didn't thought it was the only option? The Catalyst was created to solve a problem, and it is why it presents the new options made possible by the Crucible. It wants to solve the problem it was created to solve.

Then it needs to provide evidence that it's right, and it does not. What it says sounds unconvincing if you put a little thought into it and what little evidence we do have is contrary to it. Furthermore, whilst providing such evidence would at least make its claims consistent it would still be a failure if the evidence describes events which appear wildly implausible. Whilst an author can always claim whatever he feels like is true within his story in order to justify his characters' actions and motivations if those truth in universe seem ridiculous then I'll still dismiss the whole lot as a pile of badly-written junk.

If a character is supposed to be a superintelligent genius then it has to act like one. That's probably impossible to write properly unless you're also a superintelligent genius. Simple claims of authority don't cut the mustard with an intelligent, questioning audience.

Catalysts evidence would make no sense to us either as we have no knowledge of previous cycles (with the exception to minimum knowledge of the Protheans).

It would be like writing a university thesis on the history of psychology, and focusing entirely on the mental state of organic creatures pre-big bang.

It would make zero sense to anyone, because we have no clue what came before the big bang.

[CaptainZaysh]

Steelcan wrote...

Well he doesn't say that now does he.  He only says ALL organics WILL be destroyed, and he's wrong about that.

It's not wrong, since it doesn't specify a time frame.  You can only be sure it was wrong when all organics are destroyed by something non-synthetic.

[Reorte]

Steelcan wrote...

 Well he doesn't say that now does he.  He only says ALL organics WILL be destroyed, and he's wrong about that.

Not necessarily wrong but there's no evidence to suggest he's right and what little we do know leans in the opposite direction.

[Wayning_Star]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill you later."

It's so ****ing stupid and anyone who defends this nonsense is probably not capable of critical thinking.

It is nonsense, but it's your nonsense.  That is not the plot.

This is the plot:

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill everyone later."

Do you see the difference?

Where is the evidence to support that synthetics are going to kill all organics without the reaper's intervention?

the catalyst vs leviathan..

[GreyLycanTrope]

CaptainZaysh wrote...
It is nonsense, but it's your nonsense.  That is not the plot.

This is the plot:

"We build synthetics to kill you now so synthetics you build don't kill everyone later."

Do you see the difference?

Not really still a fallacy.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 16 janvier 2013 - 02:13 .

[Meltemph]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Well he doesn't say that now does he.  He only says ALL organics WILL be destroyed, and he's wrong about that.

It's not wrong, since it doesn't specify a time frame.  You can only be sure it was wrong when all organics are destroyed by something non-synthetic.

But he cant prove he is right either, until synthetics destroy all organics.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Wayning_Star wrote...
the catalyst vs leviathan..

And the Geth can still get killed over Rannoch regardless.

[Wayning_Star]

you all know you can be absolutely incorrect and still know that you are absolutely correct.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Well he doesn't say that now does he.  He only says ALL organics WILL be destroyed, and he's wrong about that.

It's not wrong, since it doesn't specify a time frame.  You can only be sure it was wrong when all organics are destroyed by something non-synthetic.

The reaper on Rannoch pointed to the geth/quarian conflict as proof that synthetics and organics will always be at war. Two minutes later they were at peace with each other. The reapers are clearly wrong and by definition, so is the catalyst since it's the one directing the reapers.

[CaptainZaysh]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Where is the evidence to support that synthetics are going to kill all organics without the reaper's intervention?

Here

[Reorte]

arial wrote...
Catalysts evidence would make no sense to us either as we have no knowledge of previous cycles (with the exception to minimum knowledge of the Protheans).

It would be like writing a university thesis on the history of psychology, and focusing entirely on the mental state of organic creatures pre-big bang.

It would make zero sense to anyone, because we have no clue what came before the big bang.

Then it needs to provide the context too. It's making a far-fetched claim and not offering anything to back it up. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof, without that the more likely hypothesis is that it's either malfunctioning or was programmed by an idiot in the first place. I didn't get an explanation I didn't understand, I got one that didn't make sense.

[Meltemph]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Where is the evidence to support that synthetics are going to kill all organics without the reaper's intervention?

Here

The implications of a tech singularity being describable as violent...well is just silly posturing, since the event itself is an unknown.

Modifié par Meltemph, 16 janvier 2013 - 02:17 .