While viewing information about transhumanism i found (most likely) the origin of the naming of levithan and sovereign. Which is also related to the ending.
it´s in german language. If you want to find english sources, try Thomas Hobbes Leviathan.
Even thought the ending did not satisfied me emotionaly, i still consider the included concept to be very interesting.
I think Thane even mentions Thomas Hobbes in ME2, its possible that someone at Bioware took it as an inspiration.
here´s a english version:
basicly he stats that without a (strong) (monarchic) gouverment (=sovereign) there would be chaos (everyone fighting everyone).
I guess thomas hobbes therefore is the one how provides a point of not choosing destroy, because then the krogen take over austrila, and everyone is fighting everyone just again (chaos).
If you don´t believe that, hence disagreen with thomas hobbes, you reject a sovereign state. Is this sovereign speaking if you refuse?
As I said, I've only read summaries, and that was some time ago. I only mentioned it because such an interpretation was possible, not that it's the key to anything. But anyway:
- The Catalyst's belief in the ineviatability of conflict between Organic and Synthetic corresponds to Hobbes' idea of "war of all against all" as the natural state of things. Also, there are conflicts within the Organic and Synthetic groups as well.
- I agree that the Catalyst does not rule by social contract, but is instead following the first natural law Hobbes identifies: work towards peace, even if using all the tools of war to do so (i.e. the Reapers). It is acting like a Soverign in that it is trying to protect it's realm, but does so imperfectly.
- The thing that - for Hobbes - typifies the position of Soverign is Judgement; the Soverign is given the power over the state so that he may resolve disputes and have the power to enforce them. This is what the Catalyst believes it has done with the Cycles, and this is what Shepard spends ME3 doing (resolving centuries-old disputes, proving his ability to judge.)
- For Hobbes, the Commonwealth (i.e. the State, Realm etc.) is created when people pledge alligence to an individual in exchange for security. Throughout ME3, the various groups pledge their support to Shepard specifically, i.e. their support is given because of him, because of what he's done.
- The final choice the Catalyst offers Shepard is the current ruler (the Catalyst) choosing Shepard as his successor, and allowing him absolute power, even if that doesn't turn out well for the Catalyst or the Reapers. Shepard is offered the decision not just because he is standing in a particular place at a particular time, but also because of the reasons why he is standing there (i.e. because he solved the particular conflicts that allowed him to build his alliance).
But, as previously stated, you don't need to have read [short summaries of] 17th Century political texts [a while ago] in order to explain the ending of ME3. You just need to have played the earlier games.
interesting.
Nr. 3 Judgement is what i identify as violance. In Non-violant communication its stated clear that judgment is the beginning of violance.
On the other hand, states rule by judgement (judges).
Thomas Hobbes ideas seems to be the philosphy we are indoctrinated to.
Leviathan is a sea monster that is referenced in the biblical book of Job (chapter 41), which is widely considered to be one of the earliest books of the Bible to be transmitted in written form (so it's OLD).
Sovereign is simply an English word that means supreme ruler.
I really don't think you need to look any further than this to understand the symbolism of the names.
Leviathan is a sea monster that is referenced in the biblical book of Job (chapter 41), which is widely considered to be one of the earliest books of the Bible to be transmitted in written form (so it's OLD).
Sovereign is simply an English word that means supreme ruler.
I really don't think you need to look any further than this to understand the symbolism of the names.
There is more to that than just the names. Hobbes description of the primitive state indeed sounds very much like the catalysts description of the chaos of organic-synthetic conflicts. And his (Hobbes) conclusion, that only a sovereign leader can bring order to the chaos, also reminds of Sovereigns outlook ("We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution").
And that makes the 3 ending options actually more interesting. So Destroy would be the return to the primitive state where everyone is fighting everyone. As the catalyst says, the chaos will return. Control gives the galaxy a new supreme leader who guarantees stability to the price of freedom. So what would Synthesis be then? Would this be the state of democracy and division of powers the narrator is talking about in the end (german clip)? Where everyone is equal before the law? Well ............. I'm still shooting the tube!
Exatcly.
What Synthesis to me is Enlighenment (We are all one, so hurting the other equals hurting yourselve). I am into the enlightenment / non-violant movement a bit and there is a idea of creating order by the new, so called "sociocracy". Feel free to google /youtube it.
Basicly i see the problem in a absolut sovereign (Controle) that, guess what, if the guy is having a bad day he can actually hurt the people. I know everyone likes shepard since we played him, but what if the sovereign is using his absolute power e.g. to get rid of all weak/handicaped people? So going beyond Hobbes (Controle) seems to be nessecary.
Sociocracy on the other hand means that everyone is equal (power with, instead of power over). Everyone can contribute to problem solutions and sociaty building (just like the reaper did to help rebuilding the galaxy). Many voices, all enriching us.
In Sociocracy (which some people see as a successor to democracy) individuell people may overvote the majority. (Consent) But only if there would strongly be harmed by the group decision. Preventing bulling around minorities.
Otherwise to set decisions are done by the majority and people with no real big reason to veto that cannot stopp a decision for small personal reasons.
There are also some elements of hierachy, where if one decision cylce is unable to come to a decision the next higher takes over. Also people get roles assign and work autonomous (hierachical) there.
Button line it´s to include ALL and let all Contribute for a mutual better world.
It also makes sense to me that there is a 3rd color indroduced. Blue and Red for Renegade and Paragon are a polarity. At the end Blue and Red shifted, becoming relative. For peace, it´s nessecary to transent the idea of right and wrong. Of a good guy and a bad guy. There are simply guys, who are equal. Even the reaper.
After all we tried to finde mutual solution to the geth and quarian confrict (and many others). Overcoming their enemy images. Overcoming one´s own enemy image (reeeaper), just makes sense to me.
(even though i still have a lot technical problems with the endings narrative process).
What do you think?
While the symbolic character of the ending choices is surely interesting I can not ignore the actual consequence. Synthesis is a serious interference with nature and a violation of the right of bodily integrity and self-determination of every being in the galaxy.
While the symbolic character of the ending choices is surely interesting I can not ignore the actual consequence. Synthesis is a serious interference with nature and a violation of the right of bodily integrity and self-determination of every being in the galaxy.
Things worked out well, though, unlike those human children who were "accidentally" exposed to Element Zero and developed tumours.
"Why didn't you do this before?"
"We have tried a similar solution in the past, but it has always failed."
"Why?"
"The organics were not ready. It is not something that can be... forced. But you are different. You are ready."
Now that last remark was interesting. Did the crucible actually get constructed once before and attached to the Citadel? We never really got to explore that. We don't know what happened. We have to take everything on faith. I bet the Catalyst thought they were different and ready each of the other times that it failed, too.
I think that these discussions are starting to become a desperate way of trying to make sense out of a sh*tty ending to the story. They're starting to remind me of a college professor analyzing the symbolism in a comic book and what the writer "really meant" when the writer was just writing characters doing sh*t. The author would get an "F" on a report for his/her own work because there was no symbolism.
Sovereign was already explained - each a nation, free of all weakness.
Harbinger - a person or thing that announces or signals the approach of another. "I am the harbinger of your perfection." Hey, the reapers are coming here to make all of you perfect.
Simple.
"Why didn't you do this before?"
"We have tried a similar solution in the past, but it has always failed."
"Why?"
"The organics were not ready. It is not something that can be... forced. But you are different. You are ready."
Now that last remark was interesting. Did the crucible actually get constructed once before and attached to the Citadel? We never really got to explore that. We don't know what happened. We have to take everything on faith. I bet the Catalyst thought they were different and ready each of the other times that it failed, too.
According to the Leviathan the crucible has never been finished before.
Shepard: "What do you know about the crucible".
Leviathan: "We have watched its construction before. It has never been completed. ... It's outcome is unknown." (Leviathan DLC).
https://www.youtube....h?v=Yvta3K0aqlU
Okay, but maybe the reapers built something similar just to try this synthesis?
There is more to that than just the names. Hobbes description of the primitive state indeed sounds very much like the catalysts description of the chaos of organic-synthetic conflicts. And his (Hobbes) conclusion, that only a sovereign leader can bring order to the chaos, also reminds of Sovereigns outlook ("We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution").
And that makes the 3 ending options actually more interesting. So Destroy would be the return to the primitive state where everyone is fighting everyone. As the catalyst says, the chaos will return. Control gives the galaxy a new supreme leader who guarantees stability to the price of freedom. So what would Synthesis be then? Would this be the state of democracy and division of powers the narrator is talking about in the end (german clip)? Where everyone is equal before the law? Well ............. I'm still shooting the tube!
Is this not your natural state? 
Retour en haut