518 réponses à ce sujet

[RatThing]

Cobalt2113 wrote...

Well you have, whether you realise it or not. Unless you wish to state that silicon based life is completely impossible then you're admitting that possibility.

Also who said anything about racism? Certainly not me.

I just don't see why naturally occuring silicon based life would not be organic? I guess we just have a different understanding of organisms.
And I know you didn't mention racism. As I said, I had this discussion before and the thread got locked. That's why I was hoping we could just agree to disagree and move on since this thread isn't even about that. (Yes I know I kinda started, my honest mistake)

Modifié par RatThing, 09 septembre 2013 - 08:11 .

[shodiswe]

Cobalt2113 wrote...

RatThing wrote...

"slaves" were born free, AI were created for a purpose.

So, by that logic a cloned human would have no rights.

Also, slaves wern't born free, as a slave woman got pregnant the slave owner would consider it growth of assets and property. Some wouldn't have the patience to wait and would discard them. Unless you are talkign about people who were caught as grownups.

In ancient rome a halfroman/halfslave male that had been thrown out on the streets and survived to get old enough, could join the legions and become a roman if he survived the time serving with the Legion with "honor".
Someone born a full roman didn't have to earn anything.
Slaves born by slaves remaiend slaves till their death or until they manged to escape outside of Romes borders. Even that was risky and even if they made it outside the borders there were no guarantees others would treat you better.

Modifié par shodiswe, 09 septembre 2013 - 08:34 .

[shodiswe]

RatThing wrote...

Cobalt2113 wrote...

Well you have, whether you realise it or not. Unless you wish to state that silicon based life is completely impossible then you're admitting that possibility.

Also who said anything about racism? Certainly not me.

I just don't see why naturally occuring silicon based life would not be organic? I guess we just have a different understanding of organisms.
And I know you didn't mention racism. As I said, I had this discussion before and the thread got locked. That's why I was hoping we could just agree to disagree and move on since this thread isn't even about that. (Yes I know I kinda started, my honest mistake)

Organic implies the use or carbon as a main ingredient of the structure of the being and it's cells. It if doesn't contain carbon then it's inorganic. Being organic isn't about beiong soft, with the ability to bleed when stabbed, or having DNA.

[andy6915]

David7204 wrote...

Are those not valid generalizations, dreamgazer? Can you point me to Paragon players who assert that Synthetics are not alive? I can point you to plenty of Renegade players who assert they aren't alive.

Me. I'm playing through ME3 again right now, and I told Legion that the fully evolved AI is not alive and agreed with Chakwas over Adams about whether they're alive or not... At the same time, I don't hate AI either. They have rights and freedoms as a sapient being. But alive? Alive means having true biological processes and being something that can occur naturally and doesn't need constructed.  If you need created with artificial stuff, you're not alive no matter how sapient you are.

[shodiswe]

I usualy see this debate as, either you are like me and my kids or you are worth a lot less. And even so if it stands between you or my kids I'll kill you because me and my kin are always more imporant.

Which is why humans consider themselves special compared to other animals, and a lot more special compared to more alien forms of life.
The more like you the more acceptance and the more rights they will have.
That is also the way racism usualy works.

I look out for my own interests, but I don't need any delusions pretending I'm more pure, I just realize that it's about selfinterest. Which is also why people form groups, nations and stick together, for their own protection and interests.

Tali's talk about the Geth being different as a reason to not trust them or why the others life means less when different, is also in line with this. Why would the Geth care about us, they don't need us they are too different, you can't trust them. That's the geist of what Tali said. It's also the way people think when trying to define who their friends or enemies are.

Modifié par shodiswe, 09 septembre 2013 - 08:43 .

[shodiswe]

I prefer the truth even if it's ugly.

[RatThing]

shodiswe wrote...

Organic implies the use or carbon as a main ingredient of the structure of the being and it's cells. It if doesn't contain carbon then it's inorganic. Being organic isn't about beiong soft, with the ability to bleed when stabbed, or having DNA.

 
Where's this definition come from, since for me organic comes from organism. And what does it even matter other than desperately wanting to prove me wrong.  In the end it doesn't even matter since if we talk about organic vs. synthetic it's more about naturally ocurring beings  vs. artificial constructs. 

[shodiswe]

RatThing wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Organic implies the use or carbon as a main ingredient of the structure of the being and it's cells. It if doesn't contain carbon then it's inorganic. Being organic isn't about beiong soft, with the ability to bleed when stabbed, or having DNA.

 
Where's this definition come from, since for me organic comes from organism. And what does it even matter other than desperately wanting to prove me wrong.  In the end it doesn't even matter since if we talk about organic vs. synthetic it's more about naturally ocurring beings  vs. artificial constructs. 

That would be chemistry, but people can use it differently.
http://en.wikipedia....ganic_chemistry
Organic chemistry is usualy the origin of most experiments and theories when it commes to the scientific origins of life. Religious explanations got the chicken and the egg with the creator that was never created.

After all words are but words, meaning is whatever we put into them.

Also, would a natuaraly occuring being have more rights compared to a construct with exactly the same thoughts and capabilites? even if it had been created by another construct? Would it change your mind if what you call inorganic beings actualy could occur natuarly in the universe? Would they suddenly be Organic to you even if they were made of completely different materials then you were used to?

Another question would be, what constitutes natualy occuring?
There is no guarantee that humans would be created again if random chance would populate another planet or earth a second time.

Modifié par shodiswe, 09 septembre 2013 - 09:58 .

[andy6915]

shodiswe wrote...

RatThing wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Organic implies the use or carbon as a main ingredient of the structure of the being and it's cells. It if doesn't contain carbon then it's inorganic. Being organic isn't about beiong soft, with the ability to bleed when stabbed, or having DNA.

 
Where's this definition come from, since for me organic comes from organism. And what does it even matter other than desperately wanting to prove me wrong.  In the end it doesn't even matter since if we talk about organic vs. synthetic it's more about naturally ocurring beings  vs. artificial constructs. 

That would be chemistry, but people can use it differently.

After all words are but words, meaning is whatever we put into them.

Also, would a natuaraly occuring being have more rights compared to a construct with exactly the same thoughts and capabilites? even if it had been created by another construct? Would it change your mind if what you call inorganic beings actualy could occur natuarly in the universe? Would they suddenly be Organic to you even if they were made of completely different materials then you were used to?

In my case, if it was made of actual organic material then I probably would call it alive. Example: Dragon Age, golems aren't alive but Harvesters are. They're both artificial and both golems, but one actually has organs and flesh and cells and the other... Doesn't.

I do wonder though, if a person replaced 90% of their body with mechanical parts, would I consider them still actually alive (figuring out my own position here)? I would consider them alive but I wouldn't call them a living being, if that makes sense. They would be alive to me in that they exist and still are still the person thet once were, but they wouldn't technically be a living being anymore.

[shodiswe]

andy69156915 wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

RatThing wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Organic implies the use or carbon as a main ingredient of the structure of the being and it's cells. It if doesn't contain carbon then it's inorganic. Being organic isn't about beiong soft, with the ability to bleed when stabbed, or having DNA.

 
Where's this definition come from, since for me organic comes from organism. And what does it even matter other than desperately wanting to prove me wrong.  In the end it doesn't even matter since if we talk about organic vs. synthetic it's more about naturally ocurring beings  vs. artificial constructs. 

That would be chemistry, but people can use it differently.

After all words are but words, meaning is whatever we put into them.

Also, would a natuaraly occuring being have more rights compared to a construct with exactly the same thoughts and capabilites? even if it had been created by another construct? Would it change your mind if what you call inorganic beings actualy could occur natuarly in the universe? Would they suddenly be Organic to you even if they were made of completely different materials then you were used to?

In my case, if it was made of actual organic material then I probably would call it alive. Example: Dragon Age, golems aren't alive but Harvesters are. They're both artificial and both golems, but one actually has organs and flesh and cells and the other... Doesn't.

I do wonder though, if a person replaced 90% of their body with mechanical parts, would I consider them still actually alive (figuring out my own position here)? I would consider them alive but I wouldn't call them a living being, if that makes sense. They would be alive to me in that they exist and still are still the person thet once were, but they wouldn't technically be a living being anymore.

I would consider their mental faculty and who they are more imporant when deciding that. Their ability to procreate would have a partial meaning aswell, but just because an old woman is no longer capable of concieving children I doubt people would call her any less alive.

But you know, that's how I see things.

Just because a person has leg and arm replacements that arn't organic and perhaps an artificial heart valve and so on, doesn't nessesarily make a person not alive.

Modifié par shodiswe, 09 septembre 2013 - 10:04 .

[AlexMBrennan]

That would be chemistry, but people can use it differently.

Problem is that the Bioware writers have been using "organic" in a completely different sense all the time; as such, using the correct definition of the term is pointless.

[shodiswe]

When it really commes down to it, I think it would be the mental aspect that decides if someone is alive and their status.

At the same time people tend to throw in a lot of things that are an imporant part of maintaining your organic bodily function, as proof that you are alive, while most synthetics wouldn't need those activities but perhaps other activities to maintain their functionality and "life".

[andy6915]

shodiswe wrote...

I would consider their mental faculty and who they are more imporant when deciding that. Their ability to procreate would have a partial meaning aswell, but just because an old woman is no longer capable of concieving children I doubt people would call her any less alive.

But you know, that's how I see things.

Just because a person has leg and arm replacements that arn't organic and perhaps an artificial heart valve and so on, doesn't nessesarily make a person not alive.

It comes down to percentages. If over 50% of your body is artificial, then that is the point I would say you are technically no longer a physically living being. You would be alive in that you still exist as a person, but that is it (but you wouldn't be dead either, your brain being gone is what I would consider being truly dead). A mere fake leg or heart wouldn't come close to making you no longer alive, not if you still have so much of your own body left.

I almost feel like this is taking a Ghost in the Shell turn to the discussion or something. Good example though. The Major of that series isn't technically alive anymore in that she doesn't have a living body, but she's still alive in that her mind and personality and memories are still there. A human brain inside a robot is still a robot.

[RatThing]

shodiswe wrote...

RatThing wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Organic implies the use or carbon as a main ingredient of the structure of the being and it's cells. It if doesn't contain carbon then it's inorganic. Being organic isn't about beiong soft, with the ability to bleed when stabbed, or having DNA.

 
Where's this definition come from, since for me organic comes from organism. And what does it even matter other than desperately wanting to prove me wrong.  In the end it doesn't even matter since if we talk about organic vs. synthetic it's more about naturally ocurring beings  vs. artificial constructs. 

That would be chemistry, but people can use it differently.
http://en.wikipedia....ganic_chemistry
Organic chemistry is usualy the origin of most experiments and theories when it commes to the scientific origins of life. Religious explanations got the chicken and the egg with the creator that was never created.

After all words are but words, meaning is whatever we put into them.

Also, would a natuaraly occuring being have more rights compared to a construct with exactly the same thoughts and capabilites? even if it had been created by another construct? Would it change your mind if what you call inorganic beings actualy could occur natuarly in the universe? Would they suddenly be Organic to you even if they were made of completely different materials then you were used to?

Another question would be, what constitutes natualy occuring?
There is no guarantee that humans would be created again if random chance would populate another planet or earth a second time.

Look pal, if you want to discuss it that badly then open an appropriate thread for that, you just get this one derailed. As for me, I'm serious about being done with this topic. I'm not Don Quixote to fight against windmills. There's no chance I change your opinion and there's no chance you change mine and we can leave it at that. 

[Sir DeLoria]

shodiswe wrote...

I prefer the truth even if it's ugly.

Your opinion is not the truth. To think that is moronic.

[Sir DeLoria]

shodiswe wrote...
Tali's talk about the Geth being different as a reason to not trust them or why the others life means less when different, is also in line with this. Why would the Geth care about us, they don't need us they are too different, you can't trust them. That's the geist of what Tali said. It's also the way people think when trying to define who their friends or enemies are.

Oh yeah, the poor innocent Geth slaughtered hundreds of millions of civilians and committed cultural genocide. They also attacked anything non-Geth, that even thought of entering the Veil. They also attacked the Citadel, attacked colonies and sold themselves to the Reapers. I'm sure we can trust them.

[jontepwn]

I generally don't care about EDI or the Geth anymore because they die anyway in all my playthroughs. Sorry toasters, I needed to kill the Reapers.

[shodiswe]

Necanor wrote...

shodiswe wrote...
Tali's talk about the Geth being different as a reason to not trust them or why the others life means less when different, is also in line with this. Why would the Geth care about us, they don't need us they are too different, you can't trust them. That's the geist of what Tali said. It's also the way people think when trying to define who their friends or enemies are.

Oh yeah, the poor innocent Geth slaughtered hundreds of millions of civilians and committed cultural genocide. They also attacked anything non-Geth, that even thought of entering the Veil. They also attacked the Citadel, attacked colonies and sold themselves to the Reapers. I'm sure we can trust them.

I know, Tali is as you've said before is your waifu and you hate the Geth for hurting Quarians who merely tried to remove the Geth from existance in a most humane manner and certainly didn't want to talk about for 300 years.

Modifié par shodiswe, 09 septembre 2013 - 10:56 .

[shodiswe]

RatThing wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

RatThing wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Organic implies the use or carbon as a main ingredient of the structure of the being and it's cells. It if doesn't contain carbon then it's inorganic. Being organic isn't about beiong soft, with the ability to bleed when stabbed, or having DNA.

 
Where's this definition come from, since for me organic comes from organism. And what does it even matter other than desperately wanting to prove me wrong.  In the end it doesn't even matter since if we talk about organic vs. synthetic it's more about naturally ocurring beings  vs. artificial constructs. 

That would be chemistry, but people can use it differently.
http://en.wikipedia....ganic_chemistry
Organic chemistry is usualy the origin of most experiments and theories when it commes to the scientific origins of life. Religious explanations got the chicken and the egg with the creator that was never created.

After all words are but words, meaning is whatever we put into them.

Also, would a natuaraly occuring being have more rights compared to a construct with exactly the same thoughts and capabilites? even if it had been created by another construct? Would it change your mind if what you call inorganic beings actualy could occur natuarly in the universe? Would they suddenly be Organic to you even if they were made of completely different materials then you were used to?

Another question would be, what constitutes natualy occuring?
There is no guarantee that humans would be created again if random chance would populate another planet or earth a second time.

Look pal, if you want to discuss it that badly then open an appropriate thread for that, you just get this one derailed. As for me, I'm serious about being done with this topic. I'm not Don Quixote to fight against windmills. There's no chance I change your opinion and there's no chance you change mine and we can leave it at that. 

I've barely touched this thread tbh, no need to be that harsh, I should be able to express my opinion without being called a windmill after a few posts at the end of several pages of other peopels opinions..

[shodiswe]

Necanor wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

I prefer the truth even if it's ugly.

Your opinion is not the truth. To think that is moronic.

Atleast i consider it to requier some kind of observable measurement , to actualy explore each case and claim and debate rather than; I feel that I'm special, others are not, therefor I am and others are not.

Modifié par shodiswe, 09 septembre 2013 - 11:02 .

[Sir DeLoria]

shodiswe wrote...

Necanor wrote...
Oh yeah, the poor innocent Geth slaughtered hundreds of millions of civilians and committed cultural genocide. They also attacked anything non-Geth, that even thought of entering the Veil. They also attacked the Citadel, attacked colonies and sold themselves to the Reapers. I'm sure we can trust them.

I know, Tali is as you've said before is your waifu and you hate the Geth for hurting Quarians who merely tried to remove the Geth from existance in a most humane manner and certainly didn't want to talk about for 300 years.

Well, the Geth kill anything that sets a foot in the Perseus Veil, so I'm sure diplomacy is a valid option.

[shodiswe]

Necanor wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Necanor wrote...
Oh yeah, the poor innocent Geth slaughtered hundreds of millions of civilians and committed cultural genocide. They also attacked anything non-Geth, that even thought of entering the Veil. They also attacked the Citadel, attacked colonies and sold themselves to the Reapers. I'm sure we can trust them.

I know, Tali is as you've said before is your waifu and you hate the Geth for hurting Quarians who merely tried to remove the Geth from existance in a most humane manner and certainly didn't want to talk about for 300 years.

Well, the Geth kill anything that sets a foot in the Perseus Veil, so I'm sure diplomacy is a valid option.

The Quarians had a lot of time before all the Geth decided to take up arms and swiftly eject or kill any and all threats to their continued survival. If you spend months or weeks trying to talk to another set of people into stopping their genoside and their only response is to silence you, then I don't really blame them.

Ugly business that. but really, 300 years later and the only thing on the Quarians minds are, how do we kill more Geth, how can we attack them.
While the Geth are keeping to themselves. Covertly observing the rest of the galaxy over the extranet, seeign that the galaxy isn't a very friedly place.

Modifié par shodiswe, 09 septembre 2013 - 11:06 .

[RatThing]

shodiswe wrote...

I've barely touched this thread tbh, no need to be that harsh, I should be able to express my opinion without being called a windmill after a few posts at the end of several pages of other peopels opinions..

I'm sorry if you perceived that as too harsh. It's just that i've already stated twice I wasn't interested in the continuation of this argument before you quoted me. And "windmill" wasn't directed at you specifically. 

[Sir DeLoria]

shodiswe wrote...
The Quarians had a lot of time before all the Geth decided to take up arms and swiftly eject or kill any and all threats to their continued survival. If you spend months or weeks trying to talk to another set of people into stopping their genoside and their only response is to silence you, then I don't really blame them.

Ugly business that. but really, 300 years later and the only thing on the Quarians minds are, how do we kill more Geth, how can we attack them.
While the Geth are keeping to themselves. Covertly observing the rest of the galaxy over the extranet, seeign that the galaxy isn't a very friedly place.

They only killed threats to their survival? Oh, I didn't know children, infants and literally any civilians, Quarian or not, fell under that category. Ever seen Battleship Potemkin? That's like saying the civilians on the Odessa Staircase were a threat to the poor Cossacks and that's why they needed to be massacred.

The Quarians are so evil for wanting retaliation for the Geth nearly exterminating their race.

[Br3admax]

This thread took way to long to become a geth vs. quarians thread. Why did we even pretend that it was going to be about EDI?