445 réponses à ce sujet

[Texhnolyze101]

Destroy is the best solution to me because it gets rid of the reapers. I don't really care about controlling them and everybody is perfect as they are so synthesis is pointless.

[Auintus]

essarr71 wrote...

I'd agree.  I figure the interaction is similar to what Javik experiences.  
But, if all they're carrying is an echo, the only loss is that of data.. not life.  In regard to the OP, anyone who holds, say, a history book as having a higher value than a civilization might need to be checked out.  What good is history if no one ever knows about it.  


It certainly backs up the idea of shared knowledge from Synthesis.. however, keep in mind that whatever knowedge thats gained is purely ancient history.  Who came first, etc..  All these cycles were reaped at the same technological point...  There won't be much new things to learn.. except maybe the rituals and customs of long gone societies.

But the Reapers see that life as doomed to end along with the "data" if they do not intervene, cortesy of the synthetic/organic conflict. In their solution, they save one at the expense of the other. They preserve the memory with the intention of returning the memories once they find a more permanent solution.

Ancient history, forgotten rituals, trains of thought. Javik mentions the densorin studied "celestial mechanics and morphological simulations of galactic language," which they'd considered pretty nutty at the time. Maybe nothing would come of it. Or everything would.

[Auintus]

101ezylonhxeT wrote...

Destroy is the best solution to me because it gets rid of the reapers. I don't really care about controlling them and everybody is perfect as they are so synthesis is pointless.

Try this one: "There is always room for improvement."

Modifié par Auintus, 27 mars 2013 - 01:36 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Aaleel wrote...

Canon?  Is this a joke?  As much as the story contradicts itself, canon is pretty much what's happening in whichever of the three games you're playing at the time.

Then why do you reject what the last game is rather clearly trying to establish?

[Aaleel]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Aaleel wrote...

Canon?  Is this a joke?  As much as the story contradicts itself, canon is pretty much what's happening in whichever of the three games you're playing at the time.

Then why do you reject what the last game is rather clearly trying to establish?

What's clearly shown depends on what you want to see. 

There's a distinct difference between soldiers following orders but still having independent thought and puppets on the end of marionette strings.  Clearly I feel it's the former and you the latter. 

Modifié par Aaleel, 27 mars 2013 - 01:48 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

^ Fair enough!

[Alienboy411676]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Alienboy411676 wrote...

Now, are you seriously telling me that after everything Shepard has been through up to those last 5 minutes of ME3, that he should stop and go, "Oh, I'm so sorry Mr. Controller of Galactic Genocide, I guess you're actually 
Mr. Rainbows and Skittles Savior after all.  Of course I won't destroy your giant killer squid machines now that I know they're run by this magical "liquid consciousness" that has no scientific basis in reality.  You say my only two other options (Synthesis and Control) both involve me dying? Well, sure! Thanks for all that enlightening information that conveniently just saved you from me blowing you all to hell.  I'm gonna go jump off this ledge now and kill myself!"

... annnd the Strawman Award of this thread goes to.....

Actually, I fully understand what you're position/argument in this thread is (orginally, that you believe "mercy-killing the Reapers is a nonsense argument), but for some reason my point is not getting across to anyone.  I'll try to state more clearly.  

The general argument in this forum is some believe destroying the Reapers is wrong because they believe the Reapers contain some collective consciousness/the culture of the race they were created from, and those on the opposing side of the argument think that's either a stupid belief or that even if it is true it doesn't matter.  Basically it's people arguing Synthesis/Control against Destroy.

My argument against Synthesis/Control, is that if this was real life, and you actually were Shepard, I do not believe that anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence would even consider Synthesis or Control.  You have been chasing an enemy that has been trying to kill you and everyone you know for the past 3 years.  It finally comes to the point where you have a gun to your enemy's head and your finger on the trigger, ready to end it all, save yourself, your friends, the whole galaxy, and bring redemption to the countless lives lost in previous cycles...

THEN...all of a sudden, completely out of the blue, you're told by your mortal enemy for the past 3 years that the Reapers supposedly "preserve" organic life - a wonderfully convenient excuse suddenly given to you BY THE ENEMY right as you have a gun to its head.  He is then rushing you to make a snap decision: Destroy them, as has been the goal, the HOPE, you have had for the last 3 years, or...actually believe him...and suddenly decide to SAVE them...by killing yourself.  You're standing there, with very few seconds left on the clock, and you must either do as you have planned to do for the last 3 years (destroy your enemy) or, with absolutely NO PROOF from him, believe him, kill yourself, and HOPE that he was telling the truth.   

What person, with any decent-sized brain, would choose the later?  MAYBE if you had time to sit and think about it, discuss it with others, and really give it some thought.  But you can't.  You're being rushed, by him "there is very little time," he says, "You are out of time," he says.  I do not believe that anybody in their right mind, when put in that situation, and faced with that kind of snap decision, would suddenly choose to save his enemy and kill himself with only his enemy's word to go on.  Which is why I believe that any argument for Synthesis/Control, is invalid.   

Now, all this aside...do I always pick destroy?  No, because I happen to be a geth fan and I hate destroying them.  So sometimes I pick Control.  However, I NEVER pick synthesis.  Synthesis is a decision that I would flatly refuse to choose IRL.  For one, I would not believe the Catalyst because he does not back it with any proof.  And for Two, even if I did believe the Catalyst, the choice to force Synthesis on the entire galaxy is flat irresponsible and just wrong.  You are making a decision for every race in the entire galaxy, which is no better than what some have argued on these forums about destroy (that some alien races may choose to live as Reapers, given the choice, but destroy takes that choice away from them)  and I would also like to point out...what about the non-space-faring races?  How would a race only as advanced as humans are now in 2013, cope with synthesis?  They would be lost, confused, and chaos would likely ensue.  They would have no idea how or why it happened, and/or what it even IS.  Synthesis would likely be quite harmful and destructive to some, if not many/all, non-space-faring intelligent races.  

Some of you have argued that some races/people would probably willingly choose to side with the Reapers and become one.  You may be right, but I believe that is exactly what the Reapers should have done in the beginning - if they were really so noble, and deserved salvation, they should not have forced their "solution" on the entire galaxy.  They should have asked, given people the freedom to choose.  Instead, they force it.  Those who would choose it, great for them, but those would NOT want to be Reapers...are either killed or forced to anyway.  THAT is wrong.  A group of people imposing their will on another without their consent is wrong.  It is no better than what the ****s did in WWII, it is no better than what the Christians did in the Crusades.  I believe in free will.  The freedom to CHOOSE.  

Modifié par Alienboy411676, 27 mars 2013 - 02:14 .

[Megaton_Hope]

Auld Wulf wrote...
Sovereign said that each Reaper is a nation.

What, precisely, did he mean by saying that? To me, it seemed simply to be a statement of the superiority of a Reaper's mind to that of a limited creature like The Shepard.

Legion said that the minds are uploaded.

Legion tells us that the Geth will all upload into a Dyson Sphere, and that the Reapers had offered the Geth a Reaper body into which they might upload. (Which the Heretics had agreed to do.) That says nothing about the minds of, let's say, the people from Freedom's Progress or Horizon, who were killed and rendered into raw material by the Collectors. It says only that a Reaper body has a significant storage capacity and processing ability, sufficient to accomodate numerous Geth processes.

The Catalyst tells us that it helps each civilisation to ascend into being a Reaper, and that its primary goal is preservation (not destruction).

It does say that, yes. Personally, I don't see the Catalyst's viewpoint as being entirely trustworthy.

[Steelcan]

Legion also tells us the minds are conjoined Auld Wolf. That seems to imp,y they are forced together into one intelligence.

[Kadi]

Auld Wulf wrote...

Megaton_Hope wrote...

Unless the liquification process is first a consciousness-duplication process [...]

Which it is. Sovereign said that each Reaper is a nation. Legion said that the minds are uploaded. The Catalyst tells us that it helps each civilisation to ascend into being a Reaper, and that its primary goal is preservation (not destruction).

There's plenty to support this in canon. There's nothing to support the notion that people aren't preserved. If you can give me a quote of a character saying that they did the research and no one was preserved, then I'd be happy to look over it. As it is, the only evidence we've seen indicates that minds are preserved. (And possibly conjoined to create a new entity, but that doesn't make the new entity entity 'less alive' in any way.)

Megaton_Hope wrote...

Either way, the person they used to be is finished, over.

Perhaps, but you're still choosing to kill a creature who's never had the chance to act with free will. To me, that's like putting a gun to the head of a baby. I find it repugnant according to my own sense of ethics.

I Have a question regarding this then. Keep in mind I chose Synthesis out of my dream for equalitly.
Why do the Catalyst and the Reapers did all their horrible attacks, murdering people? Thats not preservation. That is taking a race, its culture, everything that it is, mixing it together removing the "human" side from it if you will, and placing it into one nation. and if that nation is lots of reaper varient beings then by no means should they be spared, they do this process violently, forcing the races of the cycle to be harvested, or die. Also I dont think the beings once harvested are mind controlled, Harbinger and Soverign use Indoctrination of lesser minds, and im sure the Catalyst said it controlled them or did the same, but being nursed into thinking like they do, isnt the same as being harvested into one nation created out of the remains of old, because they do what they were created to do, and If they wanted to rebel, id say sure sit them down and talk, but the Catalyst and reapers dont do that, If you are not one of them, you are either forced to be or die. that is their rules. -

If this is what the currect theory discussion of Synthesis vrs - Control/Destroy is all about then its not really a good argument, because this has been done in our history, and we all know which part aswell. Had people not intervined, rebelled said no, you wouldnt have had the choice or even the chance maybe think any other way than their way, without being met with the same violent and unjustified slaughter, or domination.

I chose synthesis, to bring Organics and Synthetics together. to make us all equal, im not ignorant of my action which removes choice from every individual. but Im not slaughtering them all either, to create "my perfect world", acutally doing the opposite. in doing so the reapers are free, and while i dislike that they are created upon the deaths of billions, I see myself as worse than they are killing them after i have nited us all, without the Violent and viscious cycles of death and indoctrinated propaganda. 

The Synthesis i speak of is more one with all, but keeping our indeviduality, the one some of you speak of is Totalitarianism I cant see how living in one nation, under the supreme control of the Catalyst is any other way. and living without freedom, or choice, privacy, isnt quality of life, its like a prison. and those who are harvested, then gelled together into this horrific life, IF they retained individual thought, and their soul so to speak, they would live in resentment etc, till they acted and rebelled (re opening talks with a reaper nation whom freed itself im game for, after all freeing them from the catalyst im sure would provide me with this chance one way or another) But if they did not retain anything, just became apart of this existing monster machine, that does not care for freedom, choice and equality, then it should be killed without mercy, for the sake of the souls whom were harvested at the very least.  - Im not saying all people forced to live and serve should die because their masters ust pay, because people retain choice and freedoms, they retain humanity. but if you loose all that, and become the monster who hunted you and your family, friends ruined you life, then i would do it out of Empathy, and Justice. 


PS this has been a very good read and fun discussion, I dont normally get involved with this kind of thing, at all. so forgive me if i came across difficult, and presumptious just trying to aska  question, and voice an opinion about it in general.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

So I've never really seen killing the Reapers as a "mercy", but I do always destroy them.

There are two outcomes I would have accepted for the Reaper War, the total destruction of the Reapers or their unconditional surrender.

Since I can't get them to surrender extermination it is.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Alienboy411676 wrote...

Actually, I fully understand what you're position/argument in this thread is (orginally, that you believe "mercy-killing the Reapers is a nonsense argument), but for some reason my point is not getting across to anyone.  I'll try to state more clearly.  

The general argument in this forum is some believe destroying the Reapers is wrong because they believe the Reapers contain some collective consciousness/the culture of the race they were created from, and those on the opposing side of the argument think that's either a stupid belief or that even if it is true it doesn't matter.  Basically it's people arguing Synthesis/Control against Destroy.

To clarify, I don't think it's "wrong" to kill them.

However, to do so and justify it as "mercy" is ridiculous and even rather ignorant IMO.

And hearing that claim all too often inspired this thread.

My argument against Synthesis/Control, is

And I hope you realize that the entirety of your post, from here on out, is basically off-topic... right?

Hence the dubious Strawman Award that I bestowed on you. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Not that I won't respond to it or anything. I'm "just saying!"

that if this was real life, and you actually were Shepard, I do not believe that anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence would even consider Synthesis or Control.

I have enough information in the game to choose Synthesis in the game.

If it were real life, things would be different. And yet, it would be the same.

If it were real life, I'd have the freedom to get more info. I'd probably have plenty of time to think (although I probably wouldn't need THAT much time, I'm comfortable enough with making decisions on the fly). Given that, it probably would not play out any differently. I'd just try to make the catalyst sell me on Synthesis a little moreso than I need to be sold on it in-game. Provided I'm able to do that (no reason I shouldn't be, my dialogue isn't limited in real life like it is in a game) then I'm positive I would make the same decision and choose Synthesis.

You have been chasing an enemy that has been trying to kill you and everyone you know for the past 3 years.  It finally comes to the point where you have a gun to your enemy's head and your finger on the trigger, ready to end it all, save yourself, your friends, the whole galaxy,

NOT... synthetic life is eradicated if I go that route.

and bring redemption to the countless lives lost in previous cycles...

THEN...all of a sudden, completely out of the blue, you're told by your mortal enemy for the past 3 years that the Reapers supposedly "preserve" organic life

Supposedly?

Legion established that since ME2.

The Catalyst's claims fit what we already knew to be the case.

- a wonderfully convenient excuse suddenly given to you BY THE ENEMY right as you have a gun to its head.  He is then rushing you to make a snap decision:

There's only a rush if you wish to save people.

Shepard is the one who asks for a history lesson while people are dying.

... on information that's likely not pertinent anyway.

Destroy them, as has been the goal, the HOPE, you have had for the last 3 years, or...actually believe him...and suddenly decide to SAVE them...by killing yourself.  You're standing there, with very few seconds left on the clock, and you must either do as you have planned to do for the last 3 years (destroy your enemy) or, with absolutely NO PROOF from him, believe him, kill yourself, and HOPE that he was telling the truth.

The truth/validity of the info I was given was never in question to me.

What person, with any decent-sized brain, would choose the later?

Someone who's outlook isn't one that invokes concepts of: "enemy" ... "gun-to-head" ... "killing" ... "HOPE" and other words predominantly rooted in pathos rather than logos. The difference between how I think and how you think is stark, from this conversation. I can clearly see why Destroy appeals to you, based on your thought process.

You've stated that you can't imagine that anyone would seriously choose Control or Synthesis. I think, more than that, you simply can't imagine how those people think.

I'm not blaming you or anything. In my case, I have a very complex mind, few can hope to understand things as I do.

MAYBE if you had time to sit and think about it, discuss it with others, and really give it some thought.  But you can't.  You're being rushed, by him "there is very little time," he says, "You are out of time," he says.  I do not believe that anybody in their right mind, when put in that situation, and faced with that kind of snap decision, would suddenly choose to save his enemy and kill himself with only his enemy's word to go on.  Which is why I believe that any argument for Synthesis/Control, is invalid.

There's no reason why, in real life, we would not be afforded more time or the ability to get more information.

Hell, I don't even need that much more time, just *a little* more info to choose it "in real life."

Again, in a video-game, I don't have freedom to say/ask everything on my mind. In real life, I do have that freedom.

[Megaton_Hope]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

In my case, I have a very complex mind, few can hope to understand things as I do.

Not cool.

[Cainhurst Crow]

People should go out and murder burn victims and people with alzheimers disease, even when they tell me not to, becasue it will be a mercy killing.

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 27 mars 2013 - 04:45 .

[Alienboy411676]

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...


To clarify, I don't think it's "wrong" to kill them.

However, to do so and justify it as "mercy" is ridiculous and even rather ignorant IMO.

And hearing that claim all too often inspired this thread.[/quote]

I don't believe it's mercy killing either, because it's quite clear that the Reapers themselves aren't in any pain or being forced to do something against their will.[quote]
[/quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

And I hope you realize that the entirety of your post, from here on out, is basically off-topic... right?

Hence the dubious Strawman Award that I bestowed on you. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Not that I won't respond to it or anything. I'm "just saying!"[/quote]

Then most of the comments on this thread are off-topic, because it's gone from being about mercy-killing, to being another debate about whether destroying the Reapers is right or wrong.
[quote]
[/quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

I have enough information in the game to choose Synthesis in the game.

If it were real life, things would be different. And yet, it would be the same.

If it were real life, I'd have the freedom to get more info. I'd probably have plenty of time to think (although I probably wouldn't need THAT much time, I'm comfortable enough with making decisions on the fly). Given that, it probably would not play out any differently. I'd just try to make the catalyst sell me on Synthesis a little moreso than I need to be sold on it in-game. Provided I'm able to do that (no reason I shouldn't be, my dialogue isn't limited in real life like it is in a game) then I'm positive I would make the same decision and choose Synthesis.[/quote]

You're taking me too literal when I say "real life".  What I mean is, if you were actually Shepard in that exact situation he was.  Shepard was not given a lot of time to think.  Shepard was being rushed by the Catalyst.  And I'm afraid that if it were you and you tried to push him to explain more to you about synthesis, you would be met with the same response Shepard was, basically that "there is not enough time to explain it in detail".  

In either case, I still believe picking synthesis is wrong no matter what, as I explained in my previous post.  Even with the time for him to explain it to you, it is wrong to impose it on the entire galaxy, races that are not even space-faring and know nothing about alien life, as it would likely be dangerous and destructive for them to suddenly have to cope with synthesis.  
[quote]
[/quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

NOT... synthetic life is eradicated if I go that route.[/quote]

Yes, fine, not the ENTIRE galaxy, but this is why I did admit I sometimes pick Control, because I like the Geth and do not like them destroyed.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

Supposedly?

Legion established that since ME2.

The Catalyst's claims fit what we already knew to be the case.[/quote]

Tell me where in ME2 Legion says that the organic life is harvested by the Reapers and stored in Reaper form?  And even if he did, it does not insinuate or prove that the consciousness or the culture of the race is preserved.  

IMO, when anybody in the games talks about the Reapers storing organic life inside themselves, I personally see it as they mean they are storing their collective knowledge and DNA.  That does not mean that anything of that race is "alive" in any sense of the word.
[quote]
[/quote] [quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

There's only a rush if you wish to save people.

Shepard is the one who asks for a history lesson while people are dying.

... on information that's likely not pertinent anyway.[/quote]

I don't understand what your argument here is.  You (Shepard) are being rushed by the Catalyst. He keeps stating that there isn't much time and a decision must be made.  He is not giving you/Shepard a choice of how much time you have, he is specifically counting down, because the Reapers and the united Citadel fleets are still outside fighting, and there isn't much time left before there's nothing left of the fleets.  
[quote]
[/quote][quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

The truth/validity of the info I was given was never in question to me.[/quote]

So you're taking everything the Catalyst is saying at face value, with no evidence to back up his claims?  ...Well, if you believe him, fine, whatever, but I wouldn't.  

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

Someone who's outlook isn't one that invokes concepts of: "enemy" ... "gun-to-head" ... "killing" ... "HOPE" and other words predominantly rooted in pathos rather than logos. The difference between how I think and how you think is stark, from this conversation. I can clearly see why Destroy appeals to you, based on your thought process.

You've stated that you can't imagine that anyone would seriously choose Control or Synthesis. I think, more than that, you simply can't imagine how those people think.

I'm not blaming you or anything. In my case, I have a very complex mind, few can hope to understand things as I do.[/quote]

I already told you that I do sometimes pick Control over Destroy.  I've explained why I don't like synthesis.  I'm not saying that I would pick destroy no matter what IRL.  IRL, I might very well pick Control...IF he provided me evidence to support his claims.  ...Without evidence, I'm just blindly following my own enemy to suicide. I would not give my life, and potentially the rest of the galaxy's in the case that he is lying, so willingly.

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...

There's no reason why, in real life, we would not be afforded more time or the ability to get more information.

Hell, I don't even need that much more time, just *a little* more info to choose it "in real life."

Again, in a video-game, I don't have freedom to say/ask everything on my mind. In real life, I do have that freedom.
[/quote]

Again, you're taking my "real life" statement too literal.  Under different circumstances IRL, you probably would have more time to discuss it, but I'm not talking about a completely different circumstance, I'm talking about the one Shepard is faced with where he has to make a decision in under 10 minutes.  10 minutes, without evidence, is not enough time to make a thoughtful decision that is going to effect the entire rest of the galaxy.  

[Auld Wulf]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

So I've never really seen killing the Reapers as a "mercy", but I do always destroy them.

There are two outcomes I would have accepted for the Reaper War, the total destruction of the Reapers or their unconditional surrender.

Since I can't get them to surrender extermination it is.

S'a silly and fallacious notion, innit?

Considering that the Rrapers are slaves, you don't even get the chance to ask them in anything but Synthesis. So you're killing them before even thinking to ask. And in Synthesis its made clear that A.) they made all information available to the galactic community, and B.) they were clearly absolved of guilt as we see them being a part of the galactic community.

Is admitting that you kill their entire species just because you dislike them so hard? So many nonsensical justifications, just to avoid that.

[Auld Wulf]

Steelcan wrote...

Legion also tells us the minds are conjoined Auld Wolf. That seems to imp,y they are forced together into one intelligence.

Yes, but you're using that to imply that A.) all culture and knowledge is destroyed in the process (which is in conflict with canon), B.) that all the peoples of a civilisation are wiped in the process rather than preserved (Legion wouldn't agree), and C.) that the process of conjoining nullifies life (again, contradicted by canon as Legion shows that Reaper code is in itself a form of life).

The point I'm making here is that conjoined or not, life is life, and that the Reapers continue to possess all the identity of a civilisation either way.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Auld Wulf wrote...

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

So I've never really seen killing the Reapers as a "mercy", but I do always destroy them.

There are two outcomes I would have accepted for the Reaper War, the total destruction of the Reapers or their unconditional surrender.

Since I can't get them to surrender extermination it is.

S'a silly and fallacious notion, innit?

Considering that the Rrapers are slaves, you don't even get the chance to ask them in anything but Synthesis. So you're killing them before even thinking to ask. And in Synthesis its made clear that A.) they made all information available to the galactic community, and B.) they were clearly absolved of guilt as we see them being a part of the galactic community.

Is admitting that you kill their entire species just because you dislike them so hard? So many nonsensical justifications, just to avoid that.

Actually I kill them and their leader Glow Boy for that whole "Millions of years worth of genocide" bit. But hey if you want to call me and evil reaper hating monster I can live with that.

[RiouHotaru]

Megaton_Hope wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...
In truth, I'm still not quite sure about that one. It's never quite made clear if the harvested are still alive and immortalized or if the Reaper takes on a new personality based on them. I sensed, from Legion's (and later, the catalyst's) dialogue that they were going for the former, though, and that's the assumption most seem to work with.

I'm operating based on what I'm shown. Unless the liquification process is first a consciousness-duplication process, then the basic act being performed (rendering down the body as raw material) destroys the consciousness of that person. If it does entail retaining a kind of backup of who a person was at the time they were melted down (which wasn't established in-game), then it would still be a different entity, but it would retain elements of the original person who is now dead.

Either way, the person they used to be is finished, over. That person wasn't linked to millions of other minds inside a giant robot cuttlefish. Wasn't even capable of being. This thing that is, it's got different goals and different beliefs, arrived at from who knows what process of intra-cuttlefish logic and cuttlefish-based perceptions.

As far we know, the minds are intact, the bodies are not.  The Catalyst even states as such, and for the sake of the argument, since we're being meta, Synthesis proves this is the case.  I would only assume that the same process that replaces the Catalyst with Shepard in Control (somehow turning Shepard's memories and experiences into an AI, is the same process used on people who are made into a part of a Reaper.

If you want to destroy the Reapers out of some sentiment, it's revenge, not mercy.

[3DandBeyond]

llandwynwyn wrote...

'Mercy' isn't even a popular argument, so why create this thread?

Actually outside of this thread, I've never even heard the argument used at all.  I've made it here, in consideration of the people (if still in existence) that have been sucked up into reapers, but I've not heard the argument that it's mercy killing used to any extent.

The pre-reaper machines were killers.  The reapers were created initially from those pre-reapers and leviathans (nasty arrogant stupid organics).  Later of course they took in something of the people in other cycles-their organic matter and "minds".  What is left of the people ascended is open to speculation.  If they have some sort of consciousness then it's not logical to consider they still exist as the people they were nor that they'd like to exist in their current state.  If they lack full consciousness, then there existence within the reapers is not germaine to the issue and need not be considered.

That leads to the question of the reapers themselves.  As machines they were killers, so I have no concern for them on that point.  As  far as their scientific value might be considered (that we could learn from them), well they've left tech around, they exist as the compilation of a lot of idiotic choices made from their creation and before-the idea of keeping their tech (which includes the ability to indoctrinate) "alive" constitutes a real threat in many ways.  They are in fact weapons in and of themselves. 

Truth is we don't have any idea what they'd do absent the control of some catalyst or with their "must eat organics" programming shut off when organics are assimilated and no longer exist.  The clues lead to them being highly advanced but warped huge predators in space.  Since they make more of themselves using organic material, there is also nothing to suggest that this wasn't something they did even before becoming reapers-the machines may have needed to kill people in order to replicate or even to maintain their existence. 

The cons in keeping them alive are fully outweighed by the pros in destroying them.

The reapers are a mess of a creation.  As has been said, they are the coffins of trillions of people.  I have no mercy for them because from all I know they have always been killers, controlled or autonomous.  And if kept alive, they'd exist merely to be misused by some future TIM, if nothing else.

[3DandBeyond]

RiouHotaru wrote...


As far we know, the minds are intact, the bodies are not.  The Catalyst even states as such, and for the sake of the argument, since we're being meta, Synthesis proves this is the case.  I would only assume that the same process that replaces the Catalyst with Shepard in Control (somehow turning Shepard's memories and experiences into an AI, is the same process used on people who are made into a part of a Reaper.

If you want to destroy the Reapers out of some sentiment, it's revenge, not mercy.

Well, to be clear, I don't trust a thing the kid says so it's of no consequence IF he says the minds are intact, but he doesn't say that.  He says organics are being preserved, but...he says a lot of things.  He also tries to assert he's not killing people so if you take that to mean he doesn't understand what killing means and he appears to have no emotions or even attempt to understand emotions as EDI does, then his understanding of "preserving" may be limited.  The uploading of the minds of people may merely be the energy contained within or the processing power, nothing more.  Even if that means it's the thoughts and some part of a person's consciousness that is uploaded (memory), that does not mean the person still exists inside a reaper.  Their organic goo is changed to make a reaper and separated from their minds, and this is the kid's idea of preservation.  So his interpretation of preservation of the person is fundamentally flawed.

In meta-gaming we do see a "Shepard" in control, but that is not Shepard intact-that is not even Shepard alone.  Theoretically, thoughts and memories may well one day be uploaded into machines (scientists are considering this now and how it would work), but the mind is a less tangible thing, the consciousness and what it is is largely unknown.  Many theories abound about what it is-the soul or the specific make up of a person's physical brain and the individual synapses that take place within.  It is an unknown.

I just watched an episode of Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman, about whether there's life after death.  In part it questioned what the consciousness/the mind was.  It showed scientists taking living brain cells from rats and connecting them to tech-circuit boards to create what they called Hybrots, if I remember correctly.  The cells could move the Hybrot so the scientists begin to understand the mechanical abilities of brain cells (neurons) taken out of their normal form, but the mind is something different.  So uploading thoughts and memories is the uploading of data and there is no indication in any of this (in ME anywhere or in the endings) that it's possible to transfer the essence of a person.  Even Control hints at Control Shepard not really being Shepard.  In the Wormhole episode they said what should be abundantly clear-our thoughts are intertwined with our emotions and our view of ourselves (our bodies) and our perceptions of the world around us.  What we smell, taste, hear, feel, see, experience and more as well as our self-perception all form our minds and our consciousness.  Remove that and we are just data. 

The only conclusion is that keeping the reapers is more about keeping libraries of information, but if the library at Alexandria was some people sucking monster whose existence thus far was only to suck up the minds and bodies of people, I sincerely doubt people would be so distraught over its destruction.

[Steelcan]

Auld Wulf wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Legion also tells us the minds are conjoined Auld Wolf. That seems to imp,y they are forced together into one intelligence.

Yes, but you're using that to imply that A.) all culture and knowledge is destroyed in the process (which is in conflict with canon), B.) that all the peoples of a civilisation are wiped in the process rather than preserved (Legion wouldn't agree), and C.) that the process of conjoining nullifies life (again, contradicted by canon as Legion shows that Reaper code is in itself a form of life).

The point I'm making here is that conjoined or not, life is life, and that the Reapers continue to possess all the identity of a civilisation either way.

. I'm saying the process eliminates the individual identities used to create the Reaper.  Nothing else.

[George Costanza]

I just kill the Reapers because they're dicks, man.

[Vortex13]

Megaton_Hope wrote...

The people whose bodies were harvested to create the Reapers are dead, because when you're rendered down into a slurry, that's it for your brain activity, which is the place where consciousness resides.

The Reapers may still want to exist, but that's a separate entity from the people whose lives were extinguished to create them.

^ This.

The Reapers are NOT the civilizations that were rendered down and processesed into a Reaper, they are a completely seperate entity. What the race was before being harvested is dead and gone. Sure the Reaper might have access to knowledge of said society, but that's just it, knowledge, facts, an encyclopedia in the form of a giant robot cuttlefish. Sovreign (Nazara) is a new existance from what he was before.

I liken the Reapers to zombies that way, once an infected person turns they are dead and gone, and what is left is a new creature. A zombie might (depending on the setting) have memories of the person before becoming infected, but as a zombie they are not that person. That is not your wife, that is a recently created zombie, it has its own wants and desires (namely brains) and it will fight to preserve (no pun intended) its existence by eating non-infected.

I agree with the OP in the sense that there is no mercy killing involved in Destroy, because the Reapers are their own seperate species; there is no Leviathan Reaper, or Human Reaper, there is only Reapers. Now if one wants to judge them on the atrocities their species has committed, that's fine, but "putting the harvested cycles out of their misery" doesn't work because there is no harvested cycles to be in misery. 

Just my opinion on the matter.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Alienboy411676 wrote...

In either case, I still believe picking synthesis is wrong no matter what, as I explained in my previous post.  Even with the time for him to explain it to you, it is wrong to impose it on the entire galaxy

Moot point, considering every option is imposed in nature....

Destroy: directly imposed death on synthetic life, indirect effects on organics (losing valuable allies).
Control: directly imposed control over Reapers, likely indirect effects on galaxy at large.
Sync: directly imposed change unto organic life, indirect effects on synthetics (gained understanding through us).

Any of these "impositions" can and are easily justified by the fact that it saves all life from imminent death/harvest.

I don't *like* it. In a perfect world, we'd have choices like the last link in my sig, but this isn't a perfect world.

A choice still has to be made.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 27 mars 2013 - 01:43 .