Geth are not people. They are machines. They don't have souls. I see people on the forums saying how if you chose to destroy the geth on legion's loyalty mission you are committing genocide. No? Its a freaking machine, its not alive. It never was alive. It never will be alive. It is a robot that has the ability to adapt to its surroundings. Thats it. Nothing more.
Why do people treat geth as if they are real people.
Débuté par
badjezus007
, mars 08 2010 10:09
Retour en haut
#3
Guest_Darht Jayder_*
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:10
Guest_Darht Jayder_*
Guest_Darht Jayder_*
-
- Guests
there is already this discussion in the Quarians got what they deserved thread. Just saying.
#4
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:11
Big Yam
-
- Members
- 295 messages
I agree with the OP. The Geth have no more right to exist than my keyboard.
#5
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:12
UsagiVindaloo
-
- Members
- 500 messages
It's because we all watched Star Trek: The Next Generation. :-)
Seriously, I think that might be part of it... for me, it didn't even occur to me not to consider the geth as "real people" because I have this Star Trek background that shows how machines, robots, androids, etc can be individuals in their own right and can, in every way that counts, be just like us in terms of self awareness, learning, and even metaphysical thought (e.g. the geth asking if they have a soul).
The quarian treatment of the geth was, in my mind, horrible (though they didn't deserve what happened to them); it was the only time I got actually pissy with Tali in ME1. Perhaps they were created as tools, but Tali herself says the quarians realized the geth had gained self awareness. Rather than nurturing that self awareness and treating it as a new species (or, at the very least, an entirely new kind of mechanical entity), they tried to shut everything off and return it to the way it was.
Seriously, I think that might be part of it... for me, it didn't even occur to me not to consider the geth as "real people" because I have this Star Trek background that shows how machines, robots, androids, etc can be individuals in their own right and can, in every way that counts, be just like us in terms of self awareness, learning, and even metaphysical thought (e.g. the geth asking if they have a soul).
The quarian treatment of the geth was, in my mind, horrible (though they didn't deserve what happened to them); it was the only time I got actually pissy with Tali in ME1. Perhaps they were created as tools, but Tali herself says the quarians realized the geth had gained self awareness. Rather than nurturing that self awareness and treating it as a new species (or, at the very least, an entirely new kind of mechanical entity), they tried to shut everything off and return it to the way it was.
Modifié par UsagiVindaloo, 08 mars 2010 - 10:15 .
#7
Guest_Darht Jayder_*
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:14
Guest_Darht Jayder_*
Guest_Darht Jayder_*
-
- Guests
That's okay....they probably feel the same way about you.Big Yam wrote...
I agree with the OP. The Geth have no more right to exist than my keyboard.
signed by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Geth(PETG)
#8
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:16
NKKKK
-
- Members
- 2 960 messages
Why do people treat the op as a real person?
#9
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:16
RyrineaNara
-
- Members
- 2 199 messages
This is awsome another trekie!UsagiVindaloo wrote...
It's because we all watched Star Trek: The Next Generation. :-)
Seriously, I think that might be part of it... for me, it didn't even occur to me not to consider the geth as "real people" because I have this Star Trek background that shows how machines, robots, androids, etc can be individuals in their own right and can, in every way that counts, be just like us in terms of self awareness, learning, and even metaphysical thought (e.g. the geth asking if they have a soul).
The quarian treatment of the geth was, in my mind, horrible (though they didn't deserve what happened to them); it was the only time I got actually pissy with Tali in ME1. Perhaps they were created as tools, but Tali herself says the quarians realized the geth had gained self awareness. Rather than nurturing that self awareness and treating it as a new species (or, at the very least, an entirely new kind of mechanical entity), they tried to shut everything off and return it to the way it was.
#10
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:16
Toxik King
-
- Members
- 158 messages
UsagiVindaloo wrote...
cuz Isaac Asimov rules and star trek is gay.
Also, kinda wierd to treat anyone in a game like a real person.
#11
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:17
izmirtheastarach
-
- Members
- 5 298 messages
This seems a pretty clear cut issue. Either you believe the Geth are a sentient species, or you don't. One is the Paragon path, the other is the Renegade. Personally, I am fully on board with the Paragon path. The Geth are not hostile. The Heretics were, but they have been dealt with either way.
The Quarians created the Geth, and when they started to show signs of sentience, they tried to kill them. They panicked. If they hadn't attacked, there would have been no war. I am really looking forward to negotiating peace between the two peoples in ME3.
The Quarians created the Geth, and when they started to show signs of sentience, they tried to kill them. They panicked. If they hadn't attacked, there would have been no war. I am really looking forward to negotiating peace between the two peoples in ME3.
#12
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:19
DarthCaine
-
- Members
- 7 175 messages
Do you have any proof that people have "souls" ? The only difference I see is that they're mechanical and we're organics
What defines being alive? Plants are alive and do they have "souls" ?
What defines being alive? Plants are alive and do they have "souls" ?
Modifié par DarthCaine, 08 mars 2010 - 10:20 .
#13
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:20
Flamewielder
-
- Members
- 1 475 messages
Recommended reading:
Check out Turing (mathematician) and Turing Test, for an objective assessment of what constitutes the difference (or rather the lack thereof) between a sentient machine and a sentient organic.
Since I do not think the OP can scientifically prove he has a soul, why should a soul be required for a machine to be sentient? That's a debate theologians have yet to settle... and theology isn't science.
But from a theological perspective, if God created man and then decided He'd made him too smart, would He cast Man out of Paradise? What's that? He did? Boy, am I glad He didn't decide to pull the plug!!!
Check out Turing (mathematician) and Turing Test, for an objective assessment of what constitutes the difference (or rather the lack thereof) between a sentient machine and a sentient organic.
Since I do not think the OP can scientifically prove he has a soul, why should a soul be required for a machine to be sentient? That's a debate theologians have yet to settle... and theology isn't science.
But from a theological perspective, if God created man and then decided He'd made him too smart, would He cast Man out of Paradise? What's that? He did? Boy, am I glad He didn't decide to pull the plug!!!
Modifié par Flamewielder, 08 mars 2010 - 10:31 .
#14
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:21
Onyx Jaguar
-
- Members
- 13 003 messages
Good, I was hoping my comment wouldn't seem out of place. If I said that anywhere else people would start freaking out.
#15
Guest_Darht Jayder_*
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:21
Guest_Darht Jayder_*
Guest_Darht Jayder_*
-
- Guests
Who says machines can't have souls?
#16
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:22
RyrineaNara
-
- Members
- 2 199 messages
As someone who is a star trek lover as well I have a few examples.
To the op question, would you treat someone like Data as not real or not able to live, because he is a machine. I think what the Quarian did to the Geth were wrong, but I like Tail that was the only thing I was pissed at her for.
Puls I was raised on Star Trek, and they did tell you that even Machines could have minds of their own. For another machine that was alive the Hologram Doctor on star trek
To the op question, would you treat someone like Data as not real or not able to live, because he is a machine. I think what the Quarian did to the Geth were wrong, but I like Tail that was the only thing I was pissed at her for.
Puls I was raised on Star Trek, and they did tell you that even Machines could have minds of their own. For another machine that was alive the Hologram Doctor on star trek
Modifié par RyrineaNara, 08 mars 2010 - 10:25 .
#17
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:22
DarthCaine
-
- Members
- 7 175 messages
Well actually this might be the start of a religios thread flame war, take coverOnyx Jaguar wrote...
Good, I was hoping my comment wouldn't seem out of place. If I said that anywhere else people would start freaking out.
#18
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:26
S Atomeha
-
- Members
- 847 messages
if someone or something can decide how they feel on a topic doesn't that make them sentient?
#19
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:29
izmirtheastarach
-
- Members
- 5 298 messages
DarthCaine wrote...
Do you have any proof that people have "souls" ? The only difference I see is that they're mechanical and we're organics
What defines being alive? Plants are alive and do they have "souls" ?
That is a great rebuttal. Turns the question right around on the OP. What do souls have to do with the argument anyways?
#20
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:31
UsagiVindaloo
-
- Members
- 500 messages
Toxik King wrote...
UsagiVindaloo wrote...
cuz Isaac Asimov rules and star trek isgaybad.
*cough* Fixed for offensiveness. <_<
I admit my Isaac Asimov is not what it should be - read some of him when I was a teenager but not recently. So yes, probably he's a better example. Having said that, he contributed a lot to Star Trek in terms of how it envisions mechanical beings, so it's not like one is bad and one is good... they're both coming from the same place.
Modifié par UsagiVindaloo, 08 mars 2010 - 10:33 .
#21
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:32
Big Yam
-
- Members
- 295 messages
It's because we all watched Star Trek: The Next Generation.
heh Data crossed my mind when people on this board started going off how the Geth are real people.
Quite frankly, I thought Data and the whole idea about a robot finding it's humanity was played out twenty years ago. The Star Trek admirals should have gotten their way and made an army of Datas to do all the dangerous work.
#22
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:34
UsagiVindaloo
-
- Members
- 500 messages
Big Yam wrote...
It's because we all watched Star Trek: The Next Generation.
heh Data crossed my mind when people on this board started going off how the Geth are real people.
Quite frankly, I thought Data and the whole idea about a robot finding it's humanity was played out twenty years ago. The Star Trek admirals should have gotten their way and made an army of Datas to do all the dangerous work.
Actually, didn't they sort of play with that with the holographic doctor on Voyager? I seem to recall there being a plot thread about how the Federation was now using holograms and whatnot to do dangerous work like mining.
#23
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:35
Kerilus
-
- Members
- 827 messages
Soul is always a touchy subject. Christians still believe animals don't have souls. Racists think people of different colour don't have a soul. And some people think boring people are soulless.izmirtheastarach wrote...
DarthCaine wrote...
Do you have any proof that people have "souls" ? The only difference I see is that they're mechanical and we're organics
What defines being alive? Plants are alive and do they have "souls" ?
That is a great rebuttal. Turns the question right around on the OP. What do souls have to do with the argument anyways?
Modifié par Kerilus, 08 mars 2010 - 10:37 .
#24
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:36
Louis deGuerre
-
- Members
- 640 messages
Flamewielder wrote...
Recommended reading:
Check out Turing (mathematician) and Turing Test, for an objective assessment of what constitutes the difference (or rather the lack thereof) between a sentient machine and a sentient organic.
Since I do not think the OP can scientifically prove he has a soul, why should a soul be required for a machine to be sentient? That's a debate theologians have yet to settle... and theology isn't science.
But from a theological perspective, if God created man and then decided He'd made him too smart, would He cast Man out of Paradise? What's that? He did? Boy, am I glad He didn't decide to pull the plug!!!
Actually, Turing, while awesome, did not have a lot to say about that.
A much better read would be "Godel, Escher, Bach" by Douglas Hofstadter.
For an AI student the difference between people and machines is a matter of mechanics.
#25
Posté 08 mars 2010 - 10:36
Flamewielder
-
- Members
- 1 475 messages
UsagiVindaloo wrote...
[*cough* Fixed for offensiveness. <_<
I admit my Isaac Asimov is not what it should be - read some of him when I was a teenager but not recently. So yes, probably he's a better example. Having said that, he contributed a lot to Star Trek in terms of how it envisions mechanical beings, so it's not like one is bad and one is good... they're both coming from the same place.
Asimov's Bicentenial Man centers precisely on this debate, so add it to the list along with Turing's papers on artificial intelligence. AND Asimov was a good friend of Gene Roddenbery, by the way...
