27 réponses à ce sujet

[RedIntifada]

How is it when you rescue Liara she is able to just assert "I know there were species before the Protheans... I have no proof but I am sure?" What sort of lame scientist does that? "I have no proof but my decades of research have lead me to that conclusion." What sort of research? What sort of things had lead her to believe that? She then makes the rather bold claim that other Asari scientists don't listen to her because "she is young." Other Asari scientists wouldn't listen because she has no evidence to back up her claim.

[neubourn]

Im sure the archaeologists who studied the pyramids also made some claims and assumptions before the discovery of the rosetta stone.

[Kileyan]

RedIntifada wrote...
What sort of lame scientist does that?

In this case, a correct one.

[oXPsYXo]

I believe the proper term for it is a "Theory."

[Thomas O]

You will find out a lot of these answers when you play me2.

[Daerog]

Likely she found some stuff that was from the prothean timeperiod but didn't exactly fit the prothean culture as far as she knew. Shepard also finds stuff that predates the protheans on some planets that you can't land on.

A bunch of hunches w/o any clear proof.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Valheras wrote...

Reminds me of Shepards conversations with the council.

Awesome point.

[TriggerHappy64]

oXPsYXo wrote...

I believe the proper term for it is a "Theory."

Theories are based on evidence and data, not random speculation.

[Frotality]

"Asari scientists wouldn't listen because she has no evidence to back up her claim."

uh..yea? she has no proof; she acknowledges that, and thats why no one takes her seriously; young buck with no proof comes making outrageous claims about a major archeological subject, people arent gonna take her seriously. shes a hopeful youth, and her theory isnt exactly the most credible...but its true, so while she certainly has some things to learn about the scientific method, shes proven that she can draw amazingly accurate conclusions from little information, and that makes her a great prodigy of science. you can bet people laughed at einstein, newton, and hawking, but they proved their conclusions in the end, and it wasnt exactly an easy or quick process.

[Haasth]

You don't really know if she has absolutely no evidence. You can't really go into a deep conversation with her asking why she came to that conclusion and how now can you? Sure she probably has no hard evidence but regardless, she is obviously correct so she did something right in those 50 years.

Modifié par Haasth, 23 janvier 2010 - 12:24 .

[GnusmasTHX]

TriggerHappy64 wrote...

oXPsYXo wrote...

I believe the proper term for it is a "Theory."

Theories are based on evidence and data, not random speculation.

I don't know how much Liara knew, but there is certainly evidence of races before the Protheans.

[jlb524]

TriggerHappy64 wrote...

oXPsYXo wrote...

I believe the proper term for it is a "Theory."

Theories are based on evidence and data, not random speculation.

I wouldn't say her speculation was random.  She may not have had exact evidence to prove her theories but she did gather data and evidence throughout her studies that could lead one to believe the Protheans suffered mass extinction and that this follows some kind of cycle.  The evidence she did find just didn't absolutely confirm it...

[vhatever]

RedIntifada wrote...

How is it when you rescue Liara she is able to just assert "I know there were species before the Protheans... I have no proof but I am sure?" What sort of lame scientist does that? "I have no proof but my decades of research have lead me to that conclusion." What sort of research? What sort of things had lead her to believe that? She then makes the rather bold claim that other Asari scientists don't listen to her because "she is young." Other Asari scientists wouldn't listen because she has no evidence to back up her claim.

It's a hypothesis resulting from inductive reasoning., an important part of the scientific method. Technically, it's impossible to "prove" anything in a historical context, unless someone invents a time machine.

[RedIntifada]

Sure not all proof is definitive but I would have expected something like DaerogTheDhampir says "stuff that was from the prothean timeperiod but didn't exactly fit the prothean culture" etc. But she doesn't present that proof instead she has none.



In film terms you need a "McGuffin" i.e. an object that could really be anything simply for the purpose of forwarding plot, otherwise it is random speculation.



On Shepard and the council I agree there are similarities but we know where Shepard got his evidence from. Although you would hope there would be more dialogue options to reflect you being more sympathetic to the council not accepting your dreams as prophecy.

[Lightice_av]

Liara is making a hypothesis based on incomplete evidence. Scientists do those all the time. Sometimes they get confirmed, other times they get disproved. There's nothing odd or unusual about what she's doing. By publishing a hypothesis she's inviting others to look out for evidence to either support or debunk her claims, speeding the research process. Again, this is a very common thing to do in the scientific circles.

[Haasth]

Lightice_av wrote...

Liara is making a hypothesis based on incomplete evidence. Scientists do those all the time. Sometimes they get confirmed, other times they get disproved. There's nothing odd or unusual about what she's doing. By publishing a hypothesis she's inviting others to look out for evidence to either support or debunk her claims, speeding the research process. Again, this is a very common thing to do in the scientific circles.

Exactly. 

[Nightwriter]

She can't have intuition?

She had an instinct about it. I'll buy that. I've had lots of hunches and intuitive feelings that I couldn't certifiably explain. When you know, you know. You get a sense about it. It's not a science.

[Inarai]

I think what she was saying is that she was without empirical evidence. No writings of an ancient civilization, or anything. Rather, she made an induction based on the pattern she saw with the Protheans and extrapolated from there.



I think she was acting more certain than she had cause to, but people do that.

[vhatever]

Frotality wrote...

"Asari scientists wouldn't listen because she has no evidence to back up her claim."

uh..yea? she has no proof; she acknowledges that, and thats why no one takes her seriously; young buck with no proof comes making outrageous claims about a major archeological subject, people arent gonna take her seriously. shes a hopeful youth, and her theory isnt exactly the most credible...but its true, so while she certainly has some things to learn about the scientific method, shes proven that she can draw amazingly accurate conclusions from little information, and that makes her a great prodigy of science. you can bet people laughed at einstein, newton, and hawking, but they proved their conclusions in the end, and it wasnt exactly an easy or quick process.

Those are some horrible examples. Newton was completely wrong, Einsten mostly wrong, and Hawking completely unproven.

A better example is evolution, as it has not and probably never will be proven, but that does not stop scientists  and most people from accepting it as being factual.

[RyuKazuha]

There are actually a lot of well renown scientist searching for things they've no proof of until today. It's not lame to pursue proving a new theory, instead, for a scientist it's REALLY lame to just further the evidence of theories that are already assumed to be true.

[Nightwriter]

vhatever wrote...

Frotality wrote...

"Asari scientists wouldn't listen because she has no evidence to back up her claim."

uh..yea? she has no proof; she acknowledges that, and thats why no one takes her seriously; young buck with no proof comes making outrageous claims about a major archeological subject, people arent gonna take her seriously. shes a hopeful youth, and her theory isnt exactly the most credible...but its true, so while she certainly has some things to learn about the scientific method, shes proven that she can draw amazingly accurate conclusions from little information, and that makes her a great prodigy of science. you can bet people laughed at einstein, newton, and hawking, but they proved their conclusions in the end, and it wasnt exactly an easy or quick process.

Those are some horrible examples. Newton was completely wrong, Einsten mostly wrong, and Hawking completely unproven.

What?

[Marcus Aurelius]

Wow this thread makes me angry as an archaeologist I can say theories like Liara's are what drives us to discover the truth behind a civilization of the past. To outline an idea one must first come with a logical answer, a lot has been found on gut feeling and hunches. To many this seems odd but many theories without no initial proof have later been proven or reformatted. Case in point the archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann went off a hunch and passages from Homer's Illiad and the Odyssey and found what turned out to Homeric Troy. There are plenty of other instances of this.

[Emperor Mars]

Captain Cosmos wrote...

Wow this thread makes me angry as an archaeologist I can say theories like Liara's are what drives us to discover the truth behind a civilization of the past. To outline an idea one must first come with a logical answer, a lot has been found on gut feeling and hunches. To many this seems odd but many theories without no initial proof have later been proven or reformatted. Case in point the archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann went off a hunch and passages from Homer's Illiad and the Odyssey and found what turned out to Homeric Troy. There are plenty of other instances of this.

Boom, headshot:lol:

I have tried to add to this, but I cant think of anything that makes it better, this hits the argument on the head.

[vashts1985]

Nightwriter wrote...

vhatever wrote...

Frotality wrote...

"Asari scientists wouldn't listen because she has no evidence to back up her claim."

uh..yea? she has no proof; she acknowledges that, and thats why no one takes her seriously; young buck with no proof comes making outrageous claims about a major archeological subject, people arent gonna take her seriously. shes a hopeful youth, and her theory isnt exactly the most credible...but its true, so while she certainly has some things to learn about the scientific method, shes proven that she can draw amazingly accurate conclusions from little information, and that makes her a great prodigy of science. you can bet people laughed at einstein, newton, and hawking, but they proved their conclusions in the end, and it wasnt exactly an easy or quick process.

Those are some horrible examples. Newton was completely wrong, Einsten mostly wrong, and Hawking completely unproven.

What?

same here, id love for you to explain to us what led you to those conclusions.
i mean claiming that modern physics is based on lies.....quite a strong accusation right there