557 réponses à ce sujet

[FoFoZem]

The Reapers could be, in strictly a metaphysical sense, gods. Being able to control the lives of organic beings and all

[atheelogos]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

The problem is, we don't know if he "dies". He could have slipped into a coma. ((Maybe I'm wrong?)) Then, we know that he was "put back together". But I've read that this is more of a medical thing than a resurrection thing. You know, those convenient sci-fi vats of nutrient "cure all".

You know what WOULD be interesting though?

If they said that Shepard "went" somewhere but left it confusing as to whether or not he went on to an "afterlife" or went deeper into his subconcious and started "living" the information from the Prothean relays.

Between the original forums and here, I must have made this point like 5 times, but what the hell.

200 years ago was CPR used? No. Is it used today? Of course. If CPR was around a long time ago countless lives would have been extended. It's only logical to assume science and medicine will continue to evolve. Situations will arise 100 years from now where people will be resuscitated through means that would have been impossible/unknowable today.

You might like this vid here. Skip to about a minute in
www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par atheelogos, 21 janvier 2010 - 02:35 .

[ToastyToci]

Stanley Woo wrote...

I'm not sure if it's been brought up already, but how do players here feel about the way religion was handled in Dragon Age: Origins--a fictional monotheism which could very easily be compared to real-world religions?

It is interesting and engaging? Does it seem preachy or modeled too closely on a real-world religion? Did you even notice? Did you want to learn more about it?

And to keep it on topic for the forum: What kind of religion system do you think would fit in well with the Mass Effect universe? What role would a modern-day Earth religion deity play for a space-faring, alien-meeting human?

And thank you all for keeping it mature and professional. I appreciate that.

I think religion worked very well in DAO. "The Maker" resembled "God" and it didn't annoyingly model Christianity yet it got the point across.

I don't think there should be religion in the ME universe (well at least, a dominant religion). Too many things change there with space discoveries, the reapers, the collectors, and so on that having a stable religion mixed within a ton of different races seems very difficult.

[VanTesla]

Chained_Creator wrote...

VanTesla wrote...

Chained_Creator wrote...

Borschtbeet wrote...
 We should rely on science
Philosophy=useless drivel.

You do know one of the most well-known philosophers of all time defined the specific purpose peculiar to humans life as "the exercise of reason", right?

And that, advocating relying on science (The exercise of reason to comprehend things as they are) is, at the most basic level, an agreement with that philosopher and the philosophy he espoused?

Delicious.

 Also Philosophy does not have to be about religion and can be about all things of life.

 Some of the best scientists in the worlds history were philosophers.

 I get a bit annoyed when people say bad things about stuff they do not know the first thing about.<_<

I call it the "too lazy, didn't study" corollary to the "tl;dr" 'rule'.

 Well I am a true lazy man but I never start bashing or downing things that I do not know the meaning of until I know it myself. Makes me sad to see it happen daily no matter where I go or what I see. Bashing without knowledge is the first step into a disaster that can spread like wildfire. Well any kind of miscommunication or understanding can be the same.

 Side Note: I am a terrible conversationalist on computers........

[Yojimboo]

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...


There are several severe cases where people say that their bodies almost moved on their own, like rescuing a drunkard from a incoming train.

Psychological field studies are rather interesting to watch.

Yeah, I would think that your brain would focus on a very specific set of instructions, probably adreneline fueled, that evolution has worked out to improve our chances of success in such situations.  Once you make the choice to act, you go in with blinders to everything else.

Back on topic... did you agree or disagree with the idea of religion being in Mass Effect?  In what ways would it help or hurt the game in your opinion?  To me, if nothing else, its a good way to accomplish better character exposition (is that even a proper term?).  It can also add to a story/lore for those that want to see that as well.

I have nothing against religion in Mass Effect but i can't deny the fact that those ideologies are made by human standards. Yes, i do believe extraterrestrial life exists but i probably won't assume they have the same ideologies like we do.

I would be fine if they have a good balance between species without and with a believe system.

Modifié par Yojimboo, 21 janvier 2010 - 02:45 .

[Kileyan]

FoFoZem wrote...

The Reapers could be, in strictly a metaphysical sense, gods. Being able to control the lives of organic beings and all

Reapers come across to me as the automated lab machinery of something more powerful, that is running this galaxy experiment like humans use fruit flies to study dna and evolutionary concepts because of their short life cycles.

I tend to believe our little Mass Effect galaxy is the petri dish of something.

[Frotality]

Yojimboo wrote...

Willowhugger wrote...

Why would it? They basically reconstruct him, trough the means of science. It would throw allot more questions to the religion fraktion.

I'm not sure.  A huge debate in an atheist science fiction discussion group I had friends in was made over transporters in Star Trek and the cloning process in the Sixth Day.  Basically, they questioned whether a human reduced to particles like happens on Star Trek and reconstructed was still "you."  Without a soul, the question of identity was much more pronounced in their opinion.

But yes, I hope there's nightmares during your "ressurection."

Like a Near-Death experience, with no real answers.

Why wouldn't you be yourself? Our memory's and conscious is only a matter of electronic impulses and chemical reactions. Nothing more and nothing less, i can understand your position, the vast unknown of death is a truly scary thing. The only thing i can do is accept that i will go out in a blip when my life ends.

Only death is really certain.

but when certain death becomes reversable, it is a situation that transcends a specific religous belief; the soul in this case can be synonymous with conscious. a clone of you is for all intents and purposes you, but your specific conscious does not control it, it has its own. thus the question is beyond the ability of current science to answer: as with any advancement of knowledge, this redefines some aspect of our perception reality, in this case quite dramatically. the question here is basically whether your original consciousness would be the one in a resurrected body; or if your actual conscious experience would 'die' and a new one is resurrected. this is quite impossible for any outside observer or even the person to answer, for all we know we could 'die' every time we sleep only to have a new conscious, born of the same mind and experiences take its place. this whole paragraph probably didnt explain much of anything to you, and thats the point; the question of conscious is beyond modern knowledge to answer. so far as we know, the technology might one day exist to convert the 20,000 yr old preserved ashes of someone back into the organism it once was, but the question here is whether that person's original experience of life is somehow preserved as well, or if it is 'dead' and a new conscious is born of the same mind. again, this really throws any definition of death out the window because we do not yet posses the knowledge to account for this situation. to quote shiala, it like explaining colour to a creature without eyes; try as you might that creature doesnt posses the necessary tools to completely understand it. in this case death is colour and we are the blind creature. we need new eyes, to put it simply.

[ToastyToci]

Frotality wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

Willowhugger wrote...

Why would it? They basically reconstruct him, trough the means of science. It would throw allot more questions to the religion fraktion.

I'm not sure.  A huge debate in an atheist science fiction discussion group I had friends in was made over transporters in Star Trek and the cloning process in the Sixth Day.  Basically, they questioned whether a human reduced to particles like happens on Star Trek and reconstructed was still "you."  Without a soul, the question of identity was much more pronounced in their opinion.

But yes, I hope there's nightmares during your "ressurection."

Like a Near-Death experience, with no real answers.

Why wouldn't you be yourself? Our memory's and conscious is only a matter of electronic impulses and chemical reactions. Nothing more and nothing less, i can understand your position, the vast unknown of death is a truly scary thing. The only thing i can do is accept that i will go out in a blip when my life ends.

Only death is really certain.

but when certain death becomes reversable, it is a situation that transcends a specific religous belief; the soul in this case can be synonymous with conscious. a clone of you is for all intents and purposes you, but your specific conscious does not control it, it has its own. thus the question is beyond the ability of current science to answer: as with any advancement of knowledge, this redefines some aspect of our perception reality, in this case quite dramatically. the question here is basically whether your original consciousness would be the one in a resurrected body; or if your actual conscious experience would 'die' and a new one is resurrected. this is quite impossible for any outside observer or even the person to answer, for all we know we could 'die' every time we sleep only to have a new conscious, born of the same mind and experiences take its place. this whole paragraph probably didnt explain much of anything to you, and thats the point; the question of conscious is beyond modern knowledge to answer. so far as we know, the technology might one day exist to convert the 20,000 yr old preserved ashes of someone back into the organism it once was, but the question here is whether that person's original experience of life is somehow preserved as well, or if it is 'dead' and a new conscious is born of the same mind. again, this really throws any definition of death out the window because we do not yet posses the knowledge to account for this situation. to quote shiala, it like explaining colour to a creature without eyes; try as you might that creature doesnt posses the necessary tools to completely understand it. in this case death is colour and we are the blind creature. we need new eyes, to put it simply.

I tried to read that I kept getting lost on the third line. Huge wall haha.

[Kelrek]

God has no place in the Future...

[Yojimboo]

Frotality wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

Willowhugger wrote...

Why would it? They basically reconstruct him, trough the means of science. It would throw allot more questions to the religion fraktion.

I'm not sure.  A huge debate in an atheist science fiction discussion group I had friends in was made over transporters in Star Trek and the cloning process in the Sixth Day.  Basically, they questioned whether a human reduced to particles like happens on Star Trek and reconstructed was still "you."  Without a soul, the question of identity was much more pronounced in their opinion.

But yes, I hope there's nightmares during your "ressurection."

Like a Near-Death experience, with no real answers.

Why wouldn't you be yourself? Our memory's and conscious is only a matter of electronic impulses and chemical reactions. Nothing more and nothing less, i can understand your position, the vast unknown of death is a truly scary thing. The only thing i can do is accept that i will go out in a blip when my life ends.

Only death is really certain.

but when certain death becomes reversable, it is a situation that transcends a specific religous belief; the soul in this case can be synonymous with conscious. a clone of you is for all intents and purposes you, but your specific conscious does not control it, it has its own. thus the question is beyond the ability of current science to answer: as with any advancement of knowledge, this redefines some aspect of our perception reality, in this case quite dramatically. the question here is basically whether your original consciousness would be the one in a resurrected body; or if your actual conscious experience would 'die' and a new one is resurrected. this is quite impossible for any outside observer or even the person to answer, for all we know we could 'die' every time we sleep only to have a new conscious, born of the same mind and experiences take its place. this whole paragraph probably didnt explain much of anything to you, and thats the point; the question of conscious is beyond modern knowledge to answer. so far as we know, the technology might one day exist to convert the 20,000 yr old preserved ashes of someone back into the organism it once was, but the question here is whether that person's original experience of life is somehow preserved as well, or if it is 'dead' and a new conscious is born of the same mind. again, this really throws any definition of death out the window because we do not yet posses the knowledge to account for this situation. to quote shiala, it like explaining colour to a creature without eyes; try as you might that creature doesnt posses the necessary tools to completely understand it. in this case death is colour and we are the blind creature. we need new eyes, to put it simply.

Wall of text crits you, you die.

I approve and understand where you are getting at but those are just speculations. Fact of the matter remains biologily speaking we are controlled by those reactions in our body.

[Willowhugger]

Kelrek wrote...

God has no place in the Future...

There's an old saying that mankind visited space and found no God.

I believe the best answer is to go farther.

[Kelrek]

as education, science, and knowledge continue to grow, religion will diminish until it's nothing more than Greek myths.

[Yojimboo]

Willowhugger wrote...

Kelrek wrote...

God has no place in the Future...

There's an old saying that mankind visited space and found no God.

I believe the best answer is to go farther.

Yeah because the universe is rather small huh? Devotion is the furthest away from understanding.

[steve1945]

Kelrek wrote...

God has no place in the Future...

People like you, who completely disregard peoples right to believe in something and live their life the way they wish too, dont belong in the future

[Frotality]

and to answer our resident dev...

im all for religion in games. games like assassin's creed present deeply intriguing interpretations of modern beliefs, and DAO had a wonderfully real world type religion that worked great with the reality based fantasy of the game. i would love to see bioware's own twist on some of the unanswerable questions of life, no doubt. the fact that we can have this discussion without triggering another crusade is proof enough that openly discussing it will become socially tolerable in only a matter of time. a hundered years ago you couldnt even mention any belief in opposition to the flavor of the time without destroying your public image. but civil equality doesnt just come with time. it took a war to end slavery, and it took years of protest to end segregation. hopefully, if the trend follows, we shouldnt have to go thru such dangerous methods to have religious discussion accepted in the media, we are likely on the way already. so go for it Bioware, it...probably wont hurt. really, youll be fine.

[Kileyan]

Kelrek wrote...

God has no place in the Future...

What is god?

Is he not some invisible guy far beyond our understanding that is up in the sky?

We just met a bunch of guys up in the sky that were invisible to us until recently in the ME universe. Some were more advanced than us, but explainable once we understood their science.

Then we met the reapers, a single one was so far beyond us that it controlled peoples minds and only with a little luck was defeated. A single one could have defeated us(they are legion). Now what created the reapers? They didn't evolve naturally, they were tools, created by something else.

I'm not saying what created the reapers is god, but eventually we will find something so far beyond us that to "it", our galaxy is inconsequential.

I posted this once, where you read the story of a dying civilization of peoples who think they are advnanced. Then the story is put in perspective, the civilization was nothing more than a fungus itch on a human being, the story pans out to a view of worlds within worlds.

Yeh I know, the stuff of stoner talks while looking up at the sky:)

I'm just talking Mass Effect perspective, some crazy stuff out there, no reason religion won't flourish in the face of the unknown, rather than die out.

[Kelrek]

steve1945 wrote...

Kelrek wrote...

God has no place in the Future...

People like you, who completely disregard peoples right to believe in something and live their life the way they wish too, dont belong in the future

Wow, nice job putting words in my mouth....I'm fairly certain nowhere did I say that people can't believe and choose how to live their life. I'm all for people having their own opinions and beliefs, seems like youre the one with that problem.

Modifié par Kelrek, 21 janvier 2010 - 03:18 .

[Frotality]

Yojimboo wrote...

Frotality wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

Willowhugger wrote...

Why would it? They basically reconstruct him, trough the means of science. It would throw allot more questions to the religion fraktion.

I'm not sure.  A huge debate in an atheist science fiction discussion group I had friends in was made over transporters in Star Trek and the cloning process in the Sixth Day.  Basically, they questioned whether a human reduced to particles like happens on Star Trek and reconstructed was still "you."  Without a soul, the question of identity was much more pronounced in their opinion.

But yes, I hope there's nightmares during your "ressurection."

Like a Near-Death experience, with no real answers.

Why wouldn't you be yourself? Our memory's and conscious is only a matter of electronic impulses and chemical reactions. Nothing more and nothing less, i can understand your position, the vast unknown of death is a truly scary thing. The only thing i can do is accept that i will go out in a blip when my life ends.

Only death is really certain.

but when certain death becomes reversable, it is a situation that transcends a specific religous belief; the soul in this case can be synonymous with conscious. a clone of you is for all intents and purposes you, but your specific conscious does not control it, it has its own. thus the question is beyond the ability of current science to answer: as with any advancement of knowledge, this redefines some aspect of our perception reality, in this case quite dramatically. the question here is basically whether your original consciousness would be the one in a resurrected body; or if your actual conscious experience would 'die' and a new one is resurrected. this is quite impossible for any outside observer or even the person to answer, for all we know we could 'die' every time we sleep only to have a new conscious, born of the same mind and experiences take its place. this whole paragraph probably didnt explain much of anything to you, and thats the point; the question of conscious is beyond modern knowledge to answer. so far as we know, the technology might one day exist to convert the 20,000 yr old preserved ashes of someone back into the organism it once was, but the question here is whether that person's original experience of life is somehow preserved as well, or if it is 'dead' and a new conscious is born of the same mind. again, this really throws any definition of death out the window because we do not yet posses the knowledge to account for this situation. to quote shiala, it like explaining colour to a creature without eyes; try as you might that creature doesnt posses the necessary tools to completely understand it. in this case death is colour and we are the blind creature. we need new eyes, to put it simply.

Wall of text crits you, you die.

I approve and understand where you are getting at but those are just speculations. Fact of the matter remains biologily speaking we are controlled by those reactions in our body.

well of course, i never questioned that. but newton didnt discover gravity by strictly adhering to modern explanations of the phenomena; gotta speculate if we want to find the answer right?

[Kelrek]

Kileyan wrote...

Kelrek wrote...

God has no place in the Future...

What is god?

Is he not some invisible guy far beyond our understanding that is up in the sky?

We just met a bunch of guys up in the sky that were invisible to us until recently in the ME universe. Some were more advanced than us, but explainable once we understood their science.

Then we met the reapers, a single one was so far beyond us that it controlled peoples minds and only with a little luck was defeated. A single one could have defeated us(they are legion). Now what created the reapers? They didn't evolve naturally, they were tools, created by something else.

I'm not saying what created the reapers is god, but eventually we will find something so far beyond us that to "it", our galaxy is inconsequential.

I posted this once, where you read the story of a dying civilization of peoples who think they are advnanced. Then the story is put in perspective, the civilization was nothing more than a fungus itch on a human being, the story pans out to a view of worlds within worlds.

Yeh I know, the stuff of stoner talks while looking up at the sky:)

I'm just talking Mass Effect perspective, some crazy stuff out there, no reason religion won't flourish in the face of the unknown, rather than die out.

point taken, I can totally see something like that happening. What I mean when I say God is an "unnatural" supreme being that knows and can do all, that ignores evolution and has always existed and created everything.

[Yojimboo]

Frotality wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

Frotality wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

Willowhugger wrote...

Why would it? They basically reconstruct him, trough the means of science. It would throw allot more questions to the religion fraktion.

I'm not sure.  A huge debate in an atheist science fiction discussion group I had friends in was made over transporters in Star Trek and the cloning process in the Sixth Day.  Basically, they questioned whether a human reduced to particles like happens on Star Trek and reconstructed was still "you."  Without a soul, the question of identity was much more pronounced in their opinion.

But yes, I hope there's nightmares during your "ressurection."

Like a Near-Death experience, with no real answers.

Why wouldn't you be yourself? Our memory's and conscious is only a matter of electronic impulses and chemical reactions. Nothing more and nothing less, i can understand your position, the vast unknown of death is a truly scary thing. The only thing i can do is accept that i will go out in a blip when my life ends.

Only death is really certain.

but when certain death becomes reversable, it is a situation that transcends a specific religous belief; the soul in this case can be synonymous with conscious. a clone of you is for all intents and purposes you, but your specific conscious does not control it, it has its own. thus the question is beyond the ability of current science to answer: as with any advancement of knowledge, this redefines some aspect of our perception reality, in this case quite dramatically. the question here is basically whether your original consciousness would be the one in a resurrected body; or if your actual conscious experience would 'die' and a new one is resurrected. this is quite impossible for any outside observer or even the person to answer, for all we know we could 'die' every time we sleep only to have a new conscious, born of the same mind and experiences take its place. this whole paragraph probably didnt explain much of anything to you, and thats the point; the question of conscious is beyond modern knowledge to answer. so far as we know, the technology might one day exist to convert the 20,000 yr old preserved ashes of someone back into the organism it once was, but the question here is whether that person's original experience of life is somehow preserved as well, or if it is 'dead' and a new conscious is born of the same mind. again, this really throws any definition of death out the window because we do not yet posses the knowledge to account for this situation. to quote shiala, it like explaining colour to a creature without eyes; try as you might that creature doesnt posses the necessary tools to completely understand it. in this case death is colour and we are the blind creature. we need new eyes, to put it simply.

Wall of text crits you, you die.

I approve and understand where you are getting at but those are just speculations. Fact of the matter remains biologily speaking we are controlled by those reactions in our body.

well of course, i never questioned that. but newton didnt discover gravity by strictly adhering to modern explanations of the phenomena; gotta speculate if we want to find the answer right?

Of course, i just took the most understandable scientific (that we can understand for now) answer there is. I didn't want to turn it into "meaning of life" discussion ^^.

Modifié par Yojimboo, 21 janvier 2010 - 03:26 .

[steve1945]

Kelrek wrote...

steve1945 wrote...

Kelrek wrote...

God has no place in the Future...

People like you, who completely disregard peoples right to believe in something and live their life the way they wish too, dont belong in the future

Wow, nice job putting words in my mouth....I'm fairly certain nowhere did I say that people can't believe and choose how to live their life. I'm all for people having their own opinions and beliefs, seems like youre the one with that problem.

Just calling you out on your Hypocrisy bro. Now im not fervent believer. Hell im really a athiest if anything. Doesnt mean you can say offensive things like "god has no place in the future" just shows you're not open minded.

The idea you can say such a thing then defend yourself for your views is clear Hypocrisy


Heretic

[Kelrek]

steve1945 wrote...

Kelrek wrote...

steve1945 wrote...

Kelrek wrote...

God has no place in the Future...

People like you, who completely disregard peoples right to believe in something and live their life the way they wish too, dont belong in the future

Wow, nice job putting words in my mouth....I'm fairly certain nowhere did I say that people can't believe and choose how to live their life. I'm all for people having their own opinions and beliefs, seems like youre the one with that problem.

Just calling you out on your Hypocrisy bro. Now im not fervent believer. Hell im really a athiest if anything. Doesnt mean you can say offensive things like "god has no place in the future" just shows you're not open minded.

The idea you can say such a thing then defend yourself for your views is clear Hypocrisy


Heretic

You are grasping at straws my friend, keep using words incorrectly. If you say them enough, they might become true. I guess you dont like people having an opinion, which that is all that it was...

Modifié par Kelrek, 21 janvier 2010 - 03:28 .