I think you're talking to the wrong people. And it's your choice for just focusing on it.
I don't know. Next time you think of a bible thumper, envision MLK Jr. or something. It might ease the pain.
If only those that are as benevolent as him were as vocal and outspoken as those that are not, the world would be a better place. As it were, both today (and pretty much always) their voices are drowned out by the noise of the latter.
I think you're just talking to uneducated people who justify whatever they do. You could easily find the same behavior in slavers... like border smugglers, who treat migrants as cattle. Or any one who strips dignity from life (including animals). People who do awful things go out of their way to justify them.
I'm not keen on Genesis myself, but those passages aren't about torture. It was about stewardship of the world. You could also call that anthropocentric, but it's not the same as you said. It was written at a time when agriculture was just picking up and humans were building civilization. And the middle east back then wasn't torturing animals. They barely ate animals like the modern world does. And they didn't torture them. The Jewish in particular made a big deal out of, say, Passover dinner. It wasn't some daily, industrialized thing to them.
Anyhow, hopefully we can get on topic.
You miss the point. What I'm saying is nature does preserve everyone it doesn't mean that it should keep everyone safe from extinction or guarantee us that nature will keep us safe from dying. Death is a natural part of life that we all have to accept but it doesn't mean it's the end but move on to another life after next.I don't know why you would resist the inevitable.
You were the one saying that nature exists to preserve everybody, not me.
Modifié par N7Phantom, 01 avril 2016 - 06:10 .
If the humans or Council species or whomever do behave like imperialists in Andromeda, I hope at least that the natives are portrayed as being in an earlier state of technological development. If there is anything like technological parity a ragtag collection of refugees shouldn't be showing up and running the place.
Otherwise the Humans Are Special trope would be cranked up to levels that exceeded Cerberus' writer's pet status.
AVE CAESAR - MORITVRI TE SALVTANT
*snip*
Ben Hur did it better. 
I'm not keen on Genesis myself, but those passages aren't about torture. It was about stewardship of the world. You could also call that anthropocentric, but it's not the same as you said. It was written at a time when agriculture was just picking up and humans were building civilization. And the middle east back then wasn't torturing animals. They barely ate animals like the modern world does. And they didn't torture them. The Jewish in particular made a big deal out of, say, Passover dinner. It wasn't some daily, industrialized thing to them.
Yeah, I'm an atheist but I don't see the necessary connection between Christianity and anti-environmentalism. Humanity being stewards of the Earth and all of God's creatures was always my interpretation of that religion in regard to the ecosystem.
In fairness to Kabooom, some American Christians are weird, in that due to the bipartisan structure of the electoral system, the nation's political makeup has the religious right in a strange marriage with the capitalist class. We're talking the types of people who simultaneously hold the view that Jesus was the most virtuous person in history, but that things like socialism are evil, and accumulating wealth is a virtue (despite the whole "camel through the eye of a needle is more likely than rich man in heaven" thing). This leads to some odd, Christianity based defenses of the environmentally harming practices of things like nonrenewable energy companies, that don't seem to have much scriptural basis.
Lol wut. What kind of Bible-thumping anthropocentric BS is this.
[...]
Note: I realize one can be anthropocentric and not a Bible-thumper. I was only half joking. Although, statistically, those that think we have a divine license to pollute and torture animals are a bit more prevalent than those that just think humans are the ****-legit.
Hmmm, while I agree with your sentiment in principle, I am not sure it was a justified response in this instance. Let's look at the conversation that lead us here:
Nature exist to preserve everyone. This planet is for everyone not just humans.
Humans are the superior species, the planet and everything on it is ours to do whatever we want
Out of these two lines, I think DRT's line makes more sense. One doesn't have to be a "bible-thumper" to acknowladge the simple fact that for the moment, humans are the dominant species on the planet with technology and control over their environment, far superior to any other. Thus, we do have the opportunity to do whatever we want, and we do just that, even if it is messing ourselves up in the long run. There is no inherent moral point associated with these facts or DTR's statement. Maybe he didn't mean it like that, I don't know that (and I am too lazy to go through all his other posts to get an idea of his personality) but just from that statement, I'd say it's tough to tell.
On the other hand, I find the notion rather quaint that it is somehow the purpose of nature to preserve everyone. Clearly, that's anthropomorphising "nature" quite a bit.
Overall, I agree with DRT's statement and I think as a consequence of it, we should act responsibly in such a way that we can maintain that status of our species within the ecosystem. Unfortunately, that is not happening at the moment but that's another matter.
This thread went totally sideways, didnt it.
With that, I agree (but it's a fun discussion, at least until some mod decides to lock the thread).
That was years ago in game time, and besides... I just hate humans. If this game is another "Humanity, **** yeah!" then I'm out.Why would they be? We let their planet burn for a planet that some Shepards weren't even from.
That was years ago in game time, and besides... I just hate humans. If this game is another "Humanity, **** yeah!" then I'm out.
Go live on the moon then traitor.
So the plot will be about finding lebensraum for humanity?
Good.
Go live on the moon then traitor.
I like to RP human supremacists, but not when they are dominant species. It's like outrunning handicapped. You feel like an idiot and jerk.
So we're basically the aliens from Independence Day, except that because it's from our POV, we're the good guys?
On the other hand, I find the notion rather quaint that it is somehow the purpose of nature to preserve everyone. Clearly, that's anthropomorphising "nature" quite a bit.
I also find that it still places humanity on a weird pedestal relative to nature. It's not a manifest destiny idea, but it still makes nature subordinate to us and in "need" of our protection. But that's silly. Maybe we wipe ourselves out through sheer stupidity and short-sightedness. Cyanobacteria probably don't give a fig, and the fact that we think of certain kinds of life and certain types of biospheres as the ones that matter (and are thereby "worth" preserving) is still anthropocentric.
Exactly.the servey was nothing new only ask the player about some thing and ask if they will buy the game. we could say that the leak 6 month ago was correct and the presence of cerberus i think too when i read this
That was years ago in game time, and besides... I just hate humans. If this game is another "Humanity, **** yeah!" then I'm out.
So the plot will be about finding lebensraum for humanity?
Good.
Now we just need some spiffy outfits by Hugo Boss. 
If were conquering the natives, we may as well look our best!
Now we just need some spiffy outfits by Hugo Boss.
If were conquering the natives, we may as well look our best!
Did you know Hugo Boss designed the Nazi SS uniforms? Among other things.
Not exactly the best designer for this subject... I think.
Also, I just Godwin'ed the thread, I guess. If someone else already hasn't.
Arguing, I think. I'm just angry because I like aliens, and ME2 and ME3 (to a lesser extent ME1) were so heavy handed about "Humans are special and/or superior to everyone."Not sure if you're arguing or agreeing with what I said. Lol
Did you know Hugo Boss designed the Nazi SS uniforms? Among other things.
Not exactly the best designer for this subject... I think.
Also, I just Godwin'ed the thread, I guess. If someone else already hasn't.
Indeed I did. When Tyrannosaurus Rex mentioned "lebensraum" I figured he was going for the Nazi angle, possibly sarcastically, so I threw that in as a joke.
Personally, I doubt Bioware is going to go the "humans as conquerors" route for ME:A.
You also said that Nature exists to preserve everyone. Now rather than opting for the obvious route of mentioning the mass extinction events that wiped out the vast majority of life on Earth before Humans were even a thing on 5 separate occasions I'm gonna mention the Pandas.
A species dying out because it's literally too lazy to have sex to repopulate.
Are we talking about the significant portion of BSN'ers who obsess over videogame romance?
Are we talking about the significant portion of BSN'ers who obsess over videogame romance?
I also find that it still places humanity on a weird pedestal relative to nature. It's not a manifest destiny idea, but it still makes nature subordinate to us and in "need" of our protection. But that's silly. Maybe we wipe ourselves out through sheer stupidity and short-sightedness. Cyanobacteria probably don't give a fig, and the fact that we think of certain kinds of life and certain types of biospheres as the ones that matter (and are thereby "worth" preserving) is still anthropocentric.
Right, like it's not universally acknowledged that sugar gliders and red pandas don't matter more than tarantulas and gnats.
HOW CAN YOU SAY NO TO THIS? A FACE EVEN A KROGAN WOULD LOVE?!
The reason why Elk is destroying the vegetation is because people keep killing wolves and other predators that prevents them from doing their purpose that nature put them there for a reason to reduce the elk population to prevent them from getting out of hand. And that is true that Aztecs were extremely violent I would be lying if I said no. And there is something I never understand about why they're extremely violent but I think it's something what they open them pyramids and let something out who claim themselves as so-called "gods" and twists them to worship and sacrifice and kill. I believe that whatever entities that they worshipped as gods I think they're demons. But the thing that all colored people have one thing in common: They never spread across the globe to mass global genocide and convert other people to have their culture and beliefs against their will.Elk were stripping away the vegetation of Yellowstone until the reintroduction of wolves.
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q
Indigenous peoples were often just as warlike or brutal as the Europeans who later conquered them. The Aztecs for example, rather than completely conquer their chief rival Tlaxcala, kept them in a perpetually weakened state and fought them often in a practice known as Flower Wars, the main purpose the capturing of Tlaxcalan warriors to sacrifice to the Aztec gods. The Aztecs were so despised for their brutality that when the Conquistadors arrived Tlaxcala allied with them against the Aztecs. Cortes had thousands of native allies in addition to the few hundred Conquistadors under his command, and probably would not have conquered Tenochtitlan without them.
The main difference between the Europeans and the indigenous peoples they encountered during the Age of Sail was that the Europeans had ships with which to sail the world, and guns, horses, and weapons and armor made of steel, while the natives did not. The natives were at a large technological disadvantage, but on the whole they weren't any less warlike.
Humans are the same unfortunately. We're all a bunch of violent apes.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
