• Announcements

    • Overing Dread

      Logging in   05/10/2017

      If you had an account and can't log in as of 5/9/17, this may be because of a change in logins with new forum software. You can log in using your publicly displayed name (not your username) or your email address and the password you used before.   If you have problems with this, please ask any of the mods or admins. 
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
alhoon

The Gazers' right to exist

53 posts in this topic

Splitting off a discussion from other things, I would like to talk about Gazers and their right to exist.

Another poster put forward some things that I disagree with, but I would like to discuss.

 

 

What do you think of Gazers? Can they be sane? Should they be allowed to exist or they should be eradicated on sight? Do all of them think they're above any kind of law, human, drakon, Gazer? Does their idea of superiority (whether they can accept to operate within society and laws) make them viable to kill on sight?

 

And of course: Should Gazers be transformed in a way to be able to Shape? We learn that Gazers can procreate naturally and they can use some forms of magic. There are a very few serviles that have been altered to be able to shape. Perhaps the same can be done for Gazers.

 

Personally I think they have the right to exist and killed on individual basis only if they prove to be a threat to society. That they could be dangerous to humans that trespass in their lands is not at all reason for eradication. Lions do the same. Mama-bears the same.

Territoriality doesn't mean (IMO) that they are by default insane or dangerous.

 

Yes, many Gazers and Eyebeasts are dangerous but I think it's clearly immoral to kill a whole race of sentient creatures because they are an inconvenience.

 

 

Also, I support a controlled research on a specialized geneforge that would allow one Gazer or two to learn how to Shape. Then if these Gazers become many-eyed Monarchs trying to eradicate everything in the world, we proceed from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gazers that we do get dialogue from all seem to just want to live on their own without any interference. The nature of the game, though, is that the player interferes with everything. That said, there are various indirect signs that Gazers and (Rebel) society writ large communicate and work out deals, so I don't see their territorialistic rage as particularly inevitable.

 

Not really sure why you're interested in creating a Gazerforge. The Gazers in-game certainly don't seem to share that desire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not really a lifecrafter at heart, that's why. The Gazer that would dip in the Gazeforge would not be independent, he would be controlled like a puppet. So its desires don't come into the equation.

I know it's horrid, and downright evil thing since Gazers are sentient and you essentially do Mengele-kind experiments on them. But... Come on! Shaping Gazers! That would put Ghaldring in his place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eradicate them. Hyper-intelligent, magically gifted, naturally-procreating creations with tendencies toward sociopathy and megalomania? The fact that they were ever allowed out of the Rebellion's warrens is a testament to their madness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree that because SOME have tendency towards megalomania it is reason enough to wipe them out on sight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God hates gazers!

Gazerality is a sin!

All gazers go to hell!

The purity agent is gods punishment for gazers!

 

Ok just kidding and im out of stereotypically gazerphobic remarks. Not that im gazerphobic. I have gazer friends.

Ok im done

 

 

All have tendencies for megalomania. And complete disregard for human life. They don't tolerate us. They are very belligerent and insolent. The ones that generally don't attack you is due to some sort of agreement with the rebels which they are paid not to. Even then you need only to give them an excuse and they kill you. If they were to follow human law they would expect reward for it. Thats not how it works, humans are not rewarded for following rules. They are punished for it. Gazers engage in capital punishment often. You wouldn't need to seek them out and destroy them. Simply subject them to human laws and they would slowly but surely become extinct. Sure we don't really prosecute wild animals that kill humans strongly(cept, harambe i still remember you bro. 2016 neva 4get) because they are not considered to be highly intelligent and able to make choices outside their instincts. So acting the same with gazers is preferential treatment. If some manage to survive human law; those have the right to continue living although im not sure their kids will but if they do, why not. Highly intelligent reasonable beings? I long thought that humanity's limitations are due to lack of discussion with other intelligent forms as they are bound to think in ways we do not and thus grasp some things more easily.

 

That being said a gazerforge is the most awesome but hugely irresponsible idea i have heard of. First because the reason drayks were barred is that they eventually become too smart and too independent that only the most accomplished shapers could properly tame them as such they are deemed born rogue. Gazers and eyebeasts are literally the most independent creatures made and nearly impossible to control. Most stray gazers in the beginning of the game came to be due to them breaking free of their master's control and killing them. A shaping gazer would be by far too strong a match for a shaper. They are naturally absurdly powerful at magic. With the edge of shaping taken off? Not likely to be defeated.

That being said drakons are very proud of being independent. A slave no matter how powerful wouldn't gall Ghaldring, free ranging shaping gazers would but why on earth would you think thats a good idea?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simply subject them to human laws and they would slowly but surely become extinct.
That's fine if it comes to that, but I expect they would adapt.

Also, I have a different opinion on Gazers. Yes, they are paid to take important parts in the rebellion but there are lots that just want to be left alone.

 

So acting the same with gazers is preferential treatment.

I am all for preferential treatment towards sentient creatures.

 

That being said drakons are very proud of being independent. A slave no matter how powerful wouldn't gall Ghaldring, free ranging shaping gazers would but why on earth would you think thats a good idea?

Because they would make Drakons lizard-equivalen-of-sweat.

 

Yes, Gazerforged Eyebeasts would be hilariously insane. As such, like the Unbound they would be culled sooner than later. But man, while Shapers would go gaga and attack them, several would make a tenuous alliance with the Drakons. And because of their lower number and insanity (They are quite open to attacking one another I think) they would be the first major side to drop. But they would take a lot of Shapers with them. And a good chunk of Drakons. Thus weaking both the ####### parts of the equation leaving more power to the Servile and Human side.

 

And most importantly: Drakons would realize the dangers of "spam shaping persons as fast as needed". They would realize that they are not the top dogs by default. They would better appreciate the dangers of Shaping.

It took Monarch for Litalia to realize the danger of throwing spawners all around. Drakons were too far to appreciate it.

Gazerforge would help convince Drakons that geneforges are dangerous since they controlled the Unbound.

 

 

OR: It could backfire and Gazers would become Monarch-spawning-Monarchs before the world could stop them.

Gazerforce 6: Oblivion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im relatively antisocial. And while i may be rude or unwelcome to people at certain days specially if they come into my house obviously uninvited. But i will not kill them nor try to nor take their minds. That's the important difference. I also expect some will adapt. But the vast majority will die off.

 

I take my hat off to the very misguided and fatalistic wisdom of your plan. Sometimes we all just want to see the world burn. Might as well teach important lessons.

Chaotic good?

On the other side thats exploitation of gazers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is exploitation of Gazers... unless they take over the world. As I said, I'm not that life-craftery. But, they have a good chance to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gazers are smart, strong, can fly, can order things around against their will. It'll be very hard to hunt them all down if they learn to play it safe.

 

Yet, most gazers love taunting people and constantly piss everyone off. And they almost always happily start attacking whoever they think is weaker.

 

This species is just not successfully made. With such an almost suicidal tendency, the ones out there in the wild probably get attacked for good proper reasons, and might go nearly extinct. I say we treat them as endangered animals after that, only hunt down the ones harmful to society (or the ones that try to get our attention instead of hiding peacefully, because I can't see them becoming civil on their own) and maybe give them a place in the zoo if things got even worse for them. Really, with such high IQ and low EQ and tendency to live alone, they don't really have a bright future, let's just worry about biological variance for the sake of future researches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, to be sincere, the Gazers have a right to exist, to a privilege to exist. If every last Gazer is attacking other people, then let them be extinct. "Not judge them as a whole but individually" is what I'm suggesting. If they can't survive individually that's their problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly! They seem to have that problem deep in genes, and that's why I feel they're not even a proper threat. I guess a few of them might fly high into the sky and live in snowy mountain peaks, which sounds like the only way to sustain themselves out there.

 

That aside, it feels funny that people actually think all lives have right to live. Because that's not even true. Lab created things have no right to live in the outside world, they should be killed right after experiment, and this is the basic rule in all labs. Even natural creatures from one nation should NOT be brought to another nation, because they often breed too fast and cause local species to die out.

 

Work in a lab, operate on animals, and you'll know what I mean. They scream, they suffer, they try to obey but they're so afraid that they have to fight, they plea for mercy with weak squeaks and strain their little minds to find out why you hurt them. Of course they struggle in your hands while you try to put them down. Yet for each new medicine, for each new treatment, we make them ill and we cut them open, sometimes they're kept alive for months, but once it's done, we kill them without hesitation. Why? Because animals are lesser beings, simple. Superior beings WILL sacrifice lesser beings for their own good, no doubt.

 

Pretty much the reason why I chose to be a shaper in games, no? I see how shapers and creations differ, and I see they can never be equal. Human and drakons can learn to shape too, and becoming equal is possible, but never the lesser beings who die if they touch the shaping power. Some experiments are carried out on monkeys and oh aren't they actually smarter than they look, of course they have feelings, you can even read their facial expression sometimes. And what can they do? What can we do? No one can stop the researches, we have problems we want to solve, we have mysteries we want to discover, the knowledge is there well hidden but within reach, and as long as there's any intelligent beings here at all, they WILL follow the path, probably sacrificing lots of lesser beings along the way. Lesser beings have no rights when facing superior ones, it's a fact. You can try to save tons of them and treat them nicely but you can never stop people using them legally in the ways you don't like.

 

Can be sad, huh? :D Freedom sounds so right, yet it's not even practical when you consider the differences between species. It's nothing like when we falsely treat black human race as slaves and realise the mistakes later; shapers and serviles are really more like human vs pet dogs, just with the dogs able to talk back at you. Yeah, we nowadays care about pet welfare too and we treat them well; doesn't mean they can be equal with us, and of course we train them to obey. And I know a lot of experiments are using dogs too, I used to hear them whine all day from miles away. The free serviles can be like wolves, we can leave them alone out there, the loyal serviles can be like dogs, we keep them and use them, problems solved. Such is the place of mere creations, when you really look at the race differences and when you look at the real world to find similar examples. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of those situations where someone on your own side just argues so badly that they nearly make you change sides.

 

Florence, you are that someone today. :)

Owenmoz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus Christ thats is not at all how it works. You should be conscious enough to make them sterile and not release them into the wild but nowhere it states that they must be destroyed just for their existence. And we do in controlled ammounts and settings release gmos into society. Most of what we eat is so. And there is no such things as just killing animals for sport in the laboratory. Its a whole process including peer reviws before you go doing trials. And more and more there is pressure for voluntary human trials. Among many other reasons because we simply will do the very best we can to make the trials safe for humans. You talk as if you have experience in working in laboratories, but yet you seem to be oblivious to laws and ethics on them. Finally bio-control is based mostly on transfer of species not native to an habitat.

 

Tbh idek why i even bothered adressing that commentary. Obviously baiting for a way to vent your social views. Sadly we have similar professional setting and I can't just let you go around spilling first grade faeces as if they were fact.

 

Also you do realise genetic "superiority" does not exist. If humans evolved into armless saprophytic irrational slugs; that would be superior to what we are now. The "fittest" is that which manages to procreate. Which in part is due to the ability to endure nature. But imagine me going into an in depth explanation on how cockroaches and tardigrades are infinitely superior to humans and will outlive us all. Newton was brilliant and our society is built the way it is nowadays in many ways thanks to him. But he never had children therefore he is not "fit". Now please go ahead and preach on superiority. I actually want to see you call Newton inferior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"You should be conscious enough to make them sterile and not release them into the wild but nowhere it states that they must be destroyed just for their existence" Well, yes we do kill experimental animals, it's a fact, it's what we do. Making them sterile is not enough. It's very important that lab experiments do NOT influence existing environment in any way possible; the ability to breed isn't all we have to worry about, there are other things, especially considering we may have used new medicine on them and probably caused new evolution in the bacteria/virus they now carry. As a result, we do have to kill them immediately afterwards. You really think it's ok to just release them? Let's not forget some are even born with preset diseases and have to suffer for all their lives anyway, every moment struggling in pain. Dude, people burn animals so that we can learn how to treat burnt people, people torture animals and make them fall into depression to be able to test depression medicine, or torture apes until they start killing smaller monkeys and then try to find a way to change their murderous behaviour. And these are controlled, allowed, considered low priced and acceptable if that can help us help human, as long as we're doing it as few as possible, but hey, we still do it. How naive can people be, to believe your own welfare doesn't have to come with such a price? You better not just look at the clean part of the researches where you can pet the rats lovingly, and not think about those in sheer pain and agony. Some experiments even need the animal to be lucid and awake during the surgical operation.

 

It's required to kill as few as possible, and treat them as well as possible, and once safe enough, yes, let them live. Doesn't change the fact that you kill everything else that isn't useful and is potentially risky to us. Whatever you see that IS released, well, you haven't seen how many we killed earlier to find out the "good" ones. Do failed ones ever get released? Have you seen any such unsuccessful examples in wild? Good luck finding them.

 

Most people are naive like this, they protest the price and think they don't have to pay them to enjoy the benefit they now have. As in the game say, "shaping is dirty work, people don't know how hard it is", most people don't work in a lab at all. They have no idea how much killing and torturing we did, just to have the science we now have today. Complain for all you want, man, but those experiments do exist, the reason why most people usually don't know about them, is that you'll all start complaining like this, and then a lot of researches can't go as smoothly as possible and we'll have problems understanding diseases, injuries and mental problems. Many choose to sacrifice animals to benefit human, because there is probably no other way around it, but we put up some laws and ethnics to keep things under control, and help calm "outsider"'s heart and hope they don't jump out and do extreme things, that's all. (Like, some people who love animal rights, they do attack labs and release lab animals, in real life. It's both dangerous and 100% detrimental to the world.)

 

Nowadays things kind of get better though. We use cells whenever we can, so we don't have to kill animals as many as before. But let me remind you, it's still required that we use animals to test the new medicine, and we should always use monkey or ape to test in the last stage. We can keep the price low but the price is always there; if we pay it, if we decide to sacrifice them and cause them great pain and make it legal, might as well admit what we're doing without using beautiful words to make ourselves feel comfortable.

 

"Also you do realise genetic "superiority" does not exist" Well, it's not really about surviving, in my opinion. I care more about how much we can advance towards all the mysteries in this universe, and maybe grasp everything and realise we can almost do anything (within logic, of course). So, if cockroaches can gain wisdom faster than we do, what's wrong with that? Pity they can't, though. Any kind of thing can survive further with a decent gene set and some ability to evolve; but we human is so far the only species that can grow a nice brain to understand the world better. Don't think we haven't tried to make other things smart, we're trying, some apes can even use the picture book to talk with us now, they point at the symbol and try to make a sentence, and it works. Well, does that make it equal, and does that stop us from using them in painful experiments? No. And hey, human don't stop here, they're building AI now, and I believe, once the AI is a lot smarter than us, it's inevitable that the they'll lead civilisation instead of us some day in future. Because creations and lives and whatever rights don't really matter when there's a much stronger superior intelligent being up there somewhere, caring about things now out of your reach, and dismissing you as unimportant; you only care, because you're still a living being yourself, just wait until the day we figure out eternal existence and how such beings will laugh at our misery and feeling of injustice.

 

And yes... I'm kinda trying to provoke you guys here, I suppose. I used to study medicine but not anymore, it feels pointless to save human lives when I see how some just will die inevitably but they won't accept it, and how the doctors always put on a show to make them feel better. Human can be soooooo blind to truth, clinging so hard on their own feelings instead of looking at the reality, that I don't want to do this placating work any more. Now I study psychology in school and read philosophy on my own, yet I still realise some things are always inevitable, most human beings turn away from truth as much as they can, and it kinda makes me upset to see it. I provoke people, challenge their perfectly normal and nice everyday views, just to see what's the difference that make some of us feel bad but choose to face it, and how some others fight for their shining belief but eventually can't really change how the world functions. I'm looking for a difference deep inside, yet so far, I don't think I have an answer yet.

 

Feel free to object or change sides or hate me or anything; I just want to see how people turn away, or fight (only to find later that they can lower the price but not eliminate it, and can't really say sth is just "wrong" while it always functions), or learn to face whatever we deny but is there anyway. There just has to be something to decide who choose this and who choose that, I think, I just need to find it somehow.

 

(I'm not sure whether exposing existent facts and make people feel miserable is evil in the core, or reasonable in a way. To allow people live in happy ignorance or force them a chance to think, which is better? I certainly choose one but I wonder about the other.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot release diseased animals unless you have cured them, which is a relative priority at least where i interned. I was talking about gm animals. If the trial failed, the disease couldn't be cured/the side effects are too heavy the animals are killed. But like i said there is a push for voluntary human trials because it will raise the standards of accuracy before there are trials. Using other animals is convenient for people who can't be bothered to work theoretically on side effects and effectiveness of drugs. Its easier to just stick it in a monkey, see how it reacts and fix it from there. Which is why the push exists, because alternatives to that exist. Of course animal trials will still exist for a long while. There is also research on tissue culture to bypass living beings completely(cept on behavioural/mental health) For now we do with what we have. Years ago we used chronically sick, mentally ill and the lowest of the social class for said trials(relatively recently there were the syphilis trials in the US). I'm not saying all is good, i am saying it is better than what you say/imagine if anything because we have the ability to evolve culturally and things change. So no, i at least don't hate you or think you evil. Only no offence, but a little shortsighted if you can't realise this. If reality was that bad when you studied medicine, its not perfect but its much better now. You don't just get an animal to mistreat. You go through a whole load of bureaucracy and peer reviws until your research is deemed relevant and worth the lives you'll take away. As i said above. Buring animals for testing medicine is also not done as far as i know. People simply wait for the next bushfire and do their trials then. Few as possible deaths like you said, horrifying deaths in some cases, many cases really. But still better than before. Even if "before" is as low a standard as it gets. In any case, both in shaper and in real world just because it happens, doesn't make it right, your job as an individual is not to accept the evils of society but to try to change them however you can. That being said gazers are a danger to society i stand by my ground.

 

Lastly humans have hard time treating others as equals be they women, gender identity minorities, sexual orientation minorities, ethnic background minorities, religious minorities etc. And those are humans.

For now it would be enough they have rights.

 

 

Lastly you are unlikely to achieve much if you present ills without a means to solve them. If you tell me right now i have terminal cancer what good will it do me? I can't treat it. I can only feel bad and mope. Or pretend it isn't there or accept it. Now if you tell me i have early stage cancer and explain to me chemotherapy the process pricing etc... Now then you'd be doing something good.

 

Edit: I am sorry i was hostile before but i have had my fill of people talking about genetic superiority without realising(or realising, it doesn't matter) last time it was taken wide and serious the holocaust happened. I automatically put you on a bad sack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shapers and serviles are really more like human vs pet dogs, just with the dogs able to talk back at you.

And that difference, sentience, feelings, is all the difference required to justify the liberation of Serviles.

We don't turn weaker or mentally challenged people to slaves. And we shouldn't. As Shapers shouldn't enslave Serviles.

 

That being said gazers are a danger to society i stand by my ground.

And humans are a danger to Gazer society. So, why are we right and them wrong? Morally you can't find a divide. You have to go to "them vs us" to justify attacking them.

 

Also,

" in shaper and in real world just because it happens, doesn't make it right, your job as an individual is not to accept the evils of society but to try to change them however you can "

Welcome to the Rebellion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true that people fight to make things better, more justified, etc. However, that is actually where people are most wrong, if we look at history. Because changes don't happen when we think sth else is right; changes only happen when we can afford it with some theory breakthrough, bad results from trail and error, and a relatively peaceful society to carry it out. The breakthrough is the most important part, the "truth" behind. For example, you pointed out that we once used human in experiments, and later changed to animals, and this is improvement. And why did that happen? It's because we once believe human races are not equal, and this is not true, and we found out later by doing experiments, they prove to us that humans are in fact equal to each other, intelligence or whatever, even the mental problems can prehaps be treated, and as a result we should treat them well. But animals are different, you can protest all you want, it doesn't make them equal at all. The most we'll ever do is to cause less pain, a smaller price as I say, but you can never change the whole thing, where we harm and kill them in order to benefit, for meat, for science, etc. This is what you can't change, no matter what you try; belief can be different from reality, and reality - what things really are - is what makes changes actually happen and progress, not what we choose to believe. We were wrong on human races being different, but we're not wrong on human vs animals being different, this is what I mean by "lesser beings", when we're definetely on a different level and we choose whether they live or die, be happy or suffer. We're wise that we choose to play it fair, for this is most efficient with least trouble; doesn't mean we're bound to so. Do not forget that our biological mind craves for selfish gain whenever presented with a chance, the evil is within, the flaw is within, better we see and admit and control, than claim something is right and wrong things should be elimanated, a lot of them can't.

 

"Buring animals for testing medicine is also not done as far as i know. People simply wait for the next bushfire and do their trials then" Oh, you're lucky, then. Don't go read all those thesis about how to make a proper, reliable, well-designed disease/injury model, and you can stay in peace for as long as you wish to. It's easier for you in this way.

 

You really want the world to be perfect, I guess you'll have to go Taygen's way and redesign human race from gene level, figure out how to create a better being than us. Religion tried to purge evil before, never worked, we just have a lot of priests hurting young kids because they are taught sex isn't good, women can be dirty and evil, so they turn to "clean" young boys for that. It's in our gene that most people wish to be superior somehow, and be mean to inferior being somehow, no matter right or wrong; it's what made us survive in harsh early days, it lives with us still, and it can even be useful sometimes. Instinct teaches us to be happy with gaining benefit for yourself if that means you hurt others and don't have to pay for it. Now society teaches us otherwise, to help we coexist in new world, yet a lot of people can't fight their genes and they do it in secret, if not on other races or women, at least in their own home behind closed doors, you'd be surprised how ineffective it is to get people stop torturing their kid just because they don't live happy. Laws, outside help, guidance and supervision, nothing helps us solve the problem, we can save victims but we can't stop it from the core at all. You cannot just banish the evil without changing the gene, people just find new ways to be what they are.

 

That's why I'm sure there're superior beings and inferior beings. We human, superior for now, is very inferior in the long run, because we're not 100% sensible, our old biological habits just won't die. If we're angry, we hurt innocents. If we're in danger, we hurt innocents. We don't always think and work towards greater good even though we believe we should. Look at ourselves, like your very kind apology, "I am sorry i was hostile before but i have had my fill of people talking" - a very good example that we let our emotion get the better of us, the biological part takes over and makes thinking very hard to work precisely, causing unpredictable result every now and then. Also, please don't apologize to me, I didn't feel you're hostile... It looks like a perfectly normal reaction, someone who only have a misunderstanding likely because of the way I speak things. I was indeed trying to provoke people after all. XD

 

"Lastly you are unlikely to achieve much if you present ills without a means to solve them" Actually, back in ancient days, people are more okay with death than we are. The people who are about to die, they don't cry and struggle that much, they realise it and gather friends and family and say goodbye before it's too late. This happened in Greek, a good example, the earliest stage of sensible thinking. A lot of animals, once they realise natural death is coming, they just accept it and go to somewhere quiet. I think our newly gained wisdom in these few thousand years has put many false believes on us, blinding us from the reality behind it all, and the "good" way we're looking for isn't always the right way to go. Nature, reality, universe, things goes on with or without our belief and permission; what's more important, to fight for good/kindness/justice, or to look for truth, the way things are supposed to be, supposed to progress and change, no matter what we do? False belief actually cause more suffering, as far as I can see. We struggle a lot harder and we stop accepting death, that doesn't make things better, apart from pushing science forward (and well, it's a good thing in the end, but I'm talking about individual level here, of what's more happy for a single person). Whatever we do, whatever we believe, we do die from the disease, and we could have died with acceptance and leave in peace. How is this not better, compared to a hopeless struggle only to lose hope slowly bit by bit, and putting on a fake show until we can't pretend any more?

 

"your job as an individual is not to accept the evils of society but to try to change them however you can" It sounds very beautiful. And it's probably the way people are supposed to go, based on their ability to feel what others feel, their genes compile them to do what they think is right but probably not. In the long run, though, I say this is neither effective nor long-lasting. People fight evil without rooting it from the core, you can make things look pretty but you can't make real changes, behind locked doors and inside our brain the evil persisit, where you either can't afford to bother, or unable to reach. People can't help it if they're given the chance, and controlling everyone tightly is both against current morality and their biological situation, it drives them mad instead of solving the problem. We have no choice but let some people do the harm they want, only keep the price down and punish them later, but never, never can we truly stop it from happening, at all. Admit the fact, accept the truth, then go find a better way to deal with it if it's possible, is probably better than making the world look cleaner on the surface and say "we've done what we can" so that you sleep better at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't turn weaker or mentally challenged people to slaves. And we shouldn't. As Shapers shouldn't enslave Serviles.

 

And humans are a danger to Gazer society. So, why are we right and them wrong?

 

*Sigh* That's actually my point. There's no right, no wrong, things are supposed to happen in a certain way, some people mess up, some others happen to find a better way to do it. Right or wrong, it doesn't matter. Enslaving is wrong? We enslave dogs anyway, you keep one and you'll see how smart they are and how they are better off as a free creature, instead of licking your hand and beg for attention. You think they want to be enslaved in the first place? How many generations of dogs have we killed just to find the most loyal ones to serve us? Wouldn't a wolf bite you and hate you for human hunting them and enslaving them as dogs? Aren't they smart creatures who have a society, have emotion, smart enough to observe human and even try to cooperate with human, ask for help from human if in dire need(which led to them being enslaved, though)? Wolves and dogs can still breed, just so you know, it's not even too late to give up on keeping them. Yet, things happen, and if I ask people to stop, they usually don't. Why? Because we benefit, and we lose little. We only do revolutions when we can gain even more and lose less, in a much prettier way, make sure we get to be both happy and rich. We only care about it at all, because we now deem mental welfare to be more important than other welfare, and we need to gain as much as possible by tearing down old ideas, taking care of lesser beings just to make ourselves feel even better, a benefit. Feeling "I'm doing the right thing" is a kinda huge benefit that people chase like they used to chase other things. You can have opinions about what is right, but no, things go their own ways, you may play a role but your belief or your action isn't important, this universe works on its own. The rebellion, the governing, they all exist for a good reason and none can be eliminated just because you claim it's wrong. Unless, of course, you do find another way later, by changing the most basic things and create sth entirely new and beyond us human.

 

Edit: Oh, actually, how about an example here, to explain how "justice" works. We think serviles should be free. And we eventually made it. But how? It's because we have geneforge and we have human and drakons. What can serviles do? The best they can do is to learn magic, which leads to them being hated and hunted everywhere, due to the method they use. What happens if we don't have geneforge at all? That shaping is a power ONLY shapers have, and shapers can indeed outmatch everyone else, all creations at their mercy and all outsiders better know what's good for them, how do you think we can ever achieve justice and freedom here?

 

A more direct example is, in G5, shapers took land from other people, they fought, they lost, they came to terms with that, they're now somewhat happy with current situation. You look at them and realise they have given up on justice and freedom. This is what happens without the help of Geneforge, sheer will and force and power win over whatever equal rights people once believe. You can't expect to have such a handy thing in real life; if some species are definitely stronger than others, you've got your king here. Equal factions still fight against each other until they reach a balance, but weak ones always are robbed of their "rights" to be happy in their own world. Such a right doesn't really exist reliably, except when circumstances allowed. Look at all those natural habitats we now protect; I can almost imagine what they look like the moment World War III starts, armies and refugees will wipe all those efforts clean within just a month.

 

If you can't manage it, justice is just a joke that you'll never made true, as is in the situation of our pet dogs, with everyone forgetting the crimes we once committed and happy with what things are, not even questioning ourselves whether it's fair at all, or even if you do, you can't do a thing about it. As I say in the other thread earlier: Freedom is only available to true equal beings, not because we deserve it but because we think we do and we want a bite of the cake for our own good, and the rest can only get better welfare when we think we can afford it. And only in peaceful times too, because most people will eat their pets if they're trapped somewhere, even eat fellow human, that's our true face we don't usually bother to look at carefully, despite what you may believe before you face real challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A more direct example is, in G5, shapers took land from other people, they fought, they lost, they came to terms with that, they're now somewhat happy with current situation. You look at them and realise they have given up on justice and freedom. This is what happens without the help of Geneforge, sheer will and force and power win over whatever equal rights people once believe.

As someone belonging to a country that has been enslaved by the Turks for 400 years, and rebelling every 20-40 years against them for all those years until, we finally made it during the Greek War of Independence that cost the lives of 1/9 Greeks and left 1/3 of the survivors maimed or wounded, I can tell you that no, that's not true.

There's a reason that while Greece is so fertile and has as good climate, we have so lower population density than other European nations. The reason is: those constant rebellion depopulated us. And we kept raising up generation after generation, rebellion after rebellion. There have been over a dozen failed rebellions till we made it. That's how strong the pull is.

 

 

as for enslaving dogs:They are non-sentient. Nobody complains about the rights of Fyoras or clawbugs and only the most whiny ones mention the Alphas and the Thands.

 

I can almost imagine what they look like the moment World War III starts, armies and refugees will wipe all those efforts clean within just a month.

And until that happens, humanity prospers and is richer because of them. And while these may pass away, the ideas some of them have inspired will endure enough for something else to be made until, eventually these ideas are forgotten too. But the results of the forgotten ideas will lead to other ideas.

And that leads to progress. That is what progress is.

 

Again, I'll give you an example from our 3600 years of history: Do the Walls of Mycenae still exist? Only as ruins. Do they serve their initial defensive function? Not at all. Dorian Greeks demolished them 3100 years ago.

HOWEVER these walls inspired Homer to write his epics. And Homer's epics inspired others. And those others inspired others in turn.

So, the ruined walls of Mycenae were not wasted effort, although the Mycenean Greeks found out they were not good enough to protect them, and got kicked out of Peloponessus by the Dorian Greeks.

 

 

All in all, I see history as a chain of linked events, one leading to the other. The next step starts where the previous one lands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"They are non-sentient" You just refuse to see that, or, you never experienced it first hand. They're smart as hell, they talk to each other, they have emotions that is stronger and purer even than some human, and they can communicate with you if you ever bother to care. It's easy if people just pretend things are stupid and don't deserve better, please, don't sound like a shaper now, especially the type of shaper that denies the facts.

(Edit: And your reaction makes me worried about Sucia's future, man. Sounds like things will get bad really fast, if they act the same way as you do. The games screams at us that rebels functions just like shapers do, as soon as they get shaping ability; yet most people ignore it.)

 

Btw you keep talking about the things on equal level, human vs human. I never said equal rights doesn't work here, it does. I'm talking about pure power difference, like shaper vs servile. You think the "progress" would be useful if human have no geneforge/canisters? They're lucky to have that, it makes them equal later, not before. As for serviles... They're just a sorry lost case no matter what, lucky enough to have human and drakons to care for them. Just like human vs dogs. And I was hoping you'd speak up for dogs a bit here... Instead, you dismiss the fact that they have intelligence, like a shaper would do. Consider me a bit disappointed in here, pal. XD

 

Edit: Just checked again, I think I should provide some evidence instead of asking others to look for them. Yes, dogs are as smart as 2 year-old human child, able to learn words and such, able to complete even a language test if you use symbols. Now, tell me that things with 2 year-old human intelligence are non-sentient, please? Because that means I can treat 0~2 year babies as animals or pets, or at least, some people who're born that way with low intelligence their whole life, because how can that kind of low level brain be respected and well treated and given equal rights at all? Animals, animals indeed, non-sentient, not equal human, definitely not, too stupid to be one. Impress me, dear rebel fellow. For what it's worth, I myself was rebel-like in real life in my childhood years until I start to learn more truth of this world, so, I really miss such discussion. Good old days, happy time when my brain isn't too complex to believe some belief is right no matter what.

 

(Hmm. We don't have a rebel character who really realise he wants to help shapers instead, and switch sides for that. In all games we only see people betray rebels for fear of their own lives. That's sad, because I am such an example, once happy to die for righteous cause, later learnt that we're blinded more often than not by "right and wrong". We really should have such character, betraying rebels only for the greater good, not for their own skin.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They're smart as hell, they talk to each other, they have emotions that is stronger and purer even than some human ...

 

And still, they're not sentient. Dolphins may be smarter than us, but they're not sentient either (as far as we know).

 

And I was hoping you'd speak up for dogs a bit here... Instead, you dismiss the fact that they have intelligence

Sorry to disappoint you buddy, but that's what I believe. Sentience = creature should be free.

I find it kind of odd that you care equally about dog rights and servile rights, but never the less it's one of the points we disagree on.

 

Different viewpoint on what's good and proper I guess. Truth be told 200 years ago, it was considered OK for many people to hunt Pygmys in Africa or Aborgines in Australia. Morality changes.

What the Shapers do to Serviles would have been considered enlightened in the Roman times ("No Arenas?!"), and normal\benign in the colonies 300-400 years ago.

Look buddy, I don't deny that if the Roman Republic or the Persian Empire or certain Greek city states (Sparta comes to mind) could Shape Slaves\Helots, they would be way worse to them than Shapers are. That doesn't excuse the Shapers. We don't live in the 1st century, nor the 16th.

I have the moral viewpoint of a Generation X man (pre-milenials). And to my outlook, what the Shapers do is horrific, despite millions of slaves 2000 years ago dreaming for such treatment.

 

Now, tell me that things with 2 year-old human intelligence are non-sentient, please?

First: Dogs may perform similar to 2-years-old, but they're not sentient nor think the same way. Second: Do we allow 2nd year olds to make their own decisions? Nope. Not even 7 year olds. We make all decisions for them ("eat your salad! No you'll go to school! No more icecream! Play where I can see you!")

I would dare say the average servile is given more responsibility and can make more decisions in Shaper society than the average 7 years old. And while I don't know whether a 2-years old is sentient, 7 years old certainly are. And I don't mind "oppressing" 7 years old.

 

Then why I disagree with Servile Slavery and oppression? Because Serviles are not 7-year-olds. They are simple-minded in many cases, but they can make their own choices be they good or bad, realize that actions have consequences, realize there is past, present, future, have reasoning abilities (limited or not) and realize their own mortality.

Also, Shapers don't keep truly stupid compared to humana serviles as groundkeepers and farmhands for their own good. They make them as such.

 

We don't have a rebel character who really realise he wants to help shapers instead

That can't be true. For starters, I think there are serviles that change sides leaving the Rebels in a couple of missions and you have to save them\take them down.

Also, I would also asssume that if Litalia deserted the Rebellion over the Shapers, there would have been several other less fanatic rebels that flipped sides although none comes to mind. Actually, there's one in GF5 that is a leader of some serviles. You find the servile he betrayed in a cell in Alwan's Fort and that traitor servile is outside Gazaki-Uss in a fort.

 

Good old days, happy time when my brain isn't too complex to believe some belief is right no matter what.

I agree with that. HOWEVER, parts of a belief are right no matter what (there's been very few societies that respect to one's parents is looked down upon, or that love for one's children isn't required, or that harming people without cause is considered good etc).

And while I'm not narcissistic enough to believe that my morals and beliefs, my cultural upbringing and all should be brought everywhere, I'm loyal to my beliefs and I do believe some should be enforced no matter what. I act based on them. I judge good\right based on them. I use them for my moral compass.

 

All in all, to bring the previous example in order to avoid bringing politics in this: Slavery is thought as bad in Europe since the middle ages. Yet, there are still cultures that have slavery today (Pygmies are routinely enslaved by Bantu people). I'm pretty sure a Bantu slaver could explain to me his or her point of view and why it's OK to enslave Pygmies. And there are freed Pygmy slaves that return to their former masters, or seek ANOTHER one.

That Bantu Slaver would be a good person in other regards. Honorable, loving husband and father, honest, hard-working, etc. In my opinion he still deserves jail despite being a good person and having done nothing wrong according to his cultural upbringing.

Would that be "fair" to that nice Bantu person that works his fields, hunts, helps people when he can and is even kind to his slave? It would be, in his mind, exactly the same as if some people with guns and put me to jail because I wear shoes, an act they consider so barbaric and disgusting and reprehensible, that they want me to go to jail for it. That Bantu would be right to feel that way. I still would like him to jail, but for a smaller sentence than say... the people that have been brought up in my culture and still abduct people to use as slaves fully knowing it's bad.

 

Another example, closer to home for most of us would be women's rights in the 19th century. The vast majority of our 8 great-great-grandfathers would consider women voting wrong and women seeking premarital sexual relations as bad and improper. Are they bad people? According to modern morals, yes they are. Your great-great grandfathers would be considered despicable nowdays. But were they bad? Under the late 19th century point of view, hell no.

Let's take another example: Anti-monarchism. The vast majority of my country are against monarchy. Yet the (slight) majority of English people are monarchists. Are we treasonous snakes that don't respect the institution of Monarchy? Are the English royalists antiquated royal-bootlickers? No. We have different views on what's proper.

And while writting that, I couldn't come up with any negative-associated word that describes royalists\republicans (anti-monarchists, not the USA party). In Greece, calling someone royalist is an insult like calling someone traitor. I guess in monarchy supporting houses calling someone anti-royalist is an insult... like calling someone a traitor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because changes don't happen when we think sth else is right; changes only happen when we can afford it with some theory breakthrough, bad results from trail and error, and a relatively peaceful society to carry it out

 

Slavery abolition and gay rights and women rights didn't happen because we could afford it and through trial and error. It happened because people fought for that. Its not proof that some beings are equal in any capacity that creates change. Its people fighting for it. Sometimes actual wars. You will still find a good percentage of the world's population doesn't think/feel black people, lgbt people, women are equal, same as you'll still find people that think animals should be abused. Both are restrained to some degree by laws and the rest of society.

 

Oh, no i wasn't arguing for medicinal progress, i was saying you presented us with an evil of society without giving us the means to solve it. That being said im for medical progress. I find pointless and avoidable death irritating and unfair. Besides we also manage to offer some relief to animals as well due to said trials. The whole veterinary industry sorta provides for a better life for animals. I and many others accept death as part of life. I and many others don't accrpt avoidable death.

 

How does one root evil by the core? Ask the millions of oppressed people, not to be killed for who they are and not to be denied services is good enough for us. Weather that service was given willingly or forced by law doesn't matter much. And people are totally fine with other people going back home and fantasising about denying them services. Seriously if right now you are having a vivid fantasy of mass murder its bad for you. But so long as you don't do the mass murder i very honestly don't care. Im not the thought police. And finally i believe the good we do isn't so we can feel good about ourselves its so our children are faced with a slightly better world than we have right now. Look, my child won't have to go through conversion therapy if they are lgbt. I am so glad people fought for their rights. Same as whatever significant i can do now will help the future. By taking one less thing people will have to worry by then. These laws condition culture. Most of these evils as alhoon explained are cultural/generational. The laws we implement now might not be accepted by our generation. But over time people will see it as common place and obvious. We die with our backward ways and future generations won't have them.

 

The vast majority of dogs would rather stay home with humans than be released into the wild. We may not have been "right" in domesticating them. But even if they can breed with wolves it is too late to release them into the wild. Cats can also cross with servals and caracals and some other felines. It represents compatibility not real viability of a domesticayed species in the wild. And by now just releasing them all would prove disastrous to the ecosystem.

 

Like alhoon says; even if non existent something can still be remembered and serve as fuel for change among others. And its not like we don't fight against the abuses of martial law. And there is the geneva convention and other treaties that manage the law of war.

 

Progress would be useful even with the power difference. The average white person lives better than the average black person and has more previlege and power(Even in Africa, cept maybe Zimbabwe). Does it mean we would all rather go back to being slaves? No.

We actually have many examples of rebel traitors and deserters. In the end of g4 we are sent all to a village.

 

Ok. I personally dislike dogs immensely no matter how cute they are i will always see them as petty and evil things. So i'll avoid speaking on their rights because i am very biased.

 

Belief that something is right is necessary for progress. Were we all apathetic about it we wouldn't have come this far. (True inquisition was also brought through belief. But there is being overzealous and irrational and there is standing for something).

 

Also, alhoon; Lo, behold; Owen a Bantu with no slaves. Pygmies are discriminated against sometimes not allowed into school. Dennied resources and opportunities but slavery? Unless you mean exploitation. But enslaving pygmies? Now a days? Right now i live very close to DRC and while i wouldn't put my hand on fire over it being non existent. I can assure you it is not cultural. It is a deliberate choice if/when it happens and they should be severely punished. There reason why D.R.C is unnable to protect their rights is that until 2011 they were in an ugly ugly civil war. Up to now they don't have full control of their country, with sudanese, ugandan, until recently angolan, and Rwandan armed militias within their borders. Noteworthy to say that the Rwandan militias are in good part huttus that participated in the genocide. The ugandan are in good part of idi amin's cronies, and the south Sudanese were some honestly just refugees and other still a considerable ammount militants in the south sudan civil war. Being that Congo has the highest population of pygmies it honestly wouldn't surprise me much. But let me strongly reiterate that it is not cultural and they are evil despicable bad people who i honestly believe are unnable to be reintroduced to society. To prove it all their governments want them back to execute them for a litany of crimes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"as far as we know" That's the point in here. You don't know how smart they actually are, and you can refuse the fact with just a shake of your head, like a shaper. And, why are you drawing the line in here, deciding who's sentient and who's not? Didn't you say we have no right to draw a line?

 

"What the Shapers do to Serviles would have been considered enlightened in the Roman times ("No Arenas?!"), and normal\benign in the colonies 300-400 years ago"

"That doesn't excuse the Shapers. We don't live in the 1st century, nor the 16th"

Good. Here I can safely say: Compared to me, your opinion about the dogs being non-sentient, will no longer be correct, because as time goes, we care more, and my view is apparently better in future, where I admit animals' feelings and human's feelings isn't THAT different as you once believe. You can be a freedom fighter back in old days but you'll be just another shaper-like in future, standing in the way of true freedom. How about that?

 

"Do we allow 2nd year olds to make their own decisions? Nope. Not even 7 year olds" Not talking about that, I'm saying that we can kill dogs legally and use them in painful experiments. If we don't use 2-year old intelligence retarded human in experiments, or young kids I guess, what gives you the right to use dogs? It's not really about decision, no; it's about how we totally control their fate, and harm/kill them when we feel we need to, when they could actually live free and take care of themselves. Besides, are you really saying that dogs can't take care of themselves and make good decisions on their own? You're not saying that they're already not as good as wolves, are you? Because we actually made them stupid so that they can be loyal, experiments show that wolves are a lot smarter than dogs, and they live perfectly well out there, even stray dogs can build a new dog hunting family once abandoned and survive just fine. You're just another shaper who turn things more stupid, enslave them, and claim they can't take care of themselves. Tell me again that they can't make decisions for themselves and they don't deserve to be free at all.

 

Now, I'd be happy to debate the righteousness of rebelion, but you keep giving me human vs human examples, while I really just want to focus on human vs animal in here… Of course it's right for human to be equal, but in my eye, servile is not human, so can we please focus on this instead, and just figure out whether servile can be considered human at all? For all I know, no matter how smart sth is, if I can wave my hand and absorb it in a second (as a proper shaper; life-crafter and newbie shapers can't do that, so, as a player, you don't get to experience that ability used on serviles. Or, maybe you never know, because you didn't play G1 and G2…), it doesn't make it equal in anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

 

"It happened because people fought for that"

Actually… NO. That's not what happened. What happened, is everything was good at first, human live equal to each other, then some people got selfish and started hoarding fortune, then slavery, then eventually people realised this was a mistake. Then people changed it by bloodshed over the years. We human only corrected some mistakes we once made ourselves, which later turned out to be ineffective. Women was very respected back in ancient times, the leaders of the tribes, before men decided it's a good idea to start beating them because they look weak! Things changed for the worse when people started thinking but can't think maturely, and they pay for this price. You really think they make thing right? No, they just try to make things right again, back to what it used to be where people are not torn between belief and reality, and they're never truly successful, the selfishness deep inside is always there, and made stronger by our newly gained wisdom and techs, and you can forever just only fight those who present it too much, only for the cycle to repeat. Why? Because we can find some wisdom alright, usually after we mess things up ourselves, but we're very bad at making it work as it should, it's because how we're built, how we're beaten by our own biology issues.

 

"i was saying you presented us with an evil of society without giving us the means to solve it" I'll give you one, actually I mentioned it a bit earlier, without explaining though. You really want things to be perfect, go build an AI, feed it all knowledge in the world(that'll be thousand years later, though, maybe more) and teach it to learn more by itself, and when it's a lot better than us, hand the control over, it's the only real way to gain true justice. Because we human, limited by biological issues, can not be the best master for wisdom. There has to be a better control.

 

Well… Since we're talking about this, I might as well tell you how this AI works. This AI will learn everything. It will eventually realise human is nothing, all life is nothing. Yet, without biological issues, it will not hate us either, for there is no reason to(I'm only taking about a fully powerful AI who can't be harmed by us, because otherwise, if you hurt it, it WILL hate us). It'll soon find it pointless to help human, but, it doesn't hate helping human either, so, it might as well just help us anyway. (If it doesn't, well, so be it, the new life can go on without us and we can just live here like we used to, no harm done, we just have to live in conflicts just like before) If it wants? As an AI, it'll find out the most energy-efficient way to do things. How can you satisfy people's needs without letting the conflict to harm even more? Is there a way to let all sides gain what they want, even the selfish, violent, destructive part in our biology? I'm limited by my current knowledge, but my guess is, we can build them a fake mental world and let them believe it is real. Brain science and psychology isn't that far from it yet. Everyone's happy, deserve it or not, judging by current belief. Here's your perfect world and you don't need to kill anyone… I'd call it heaven, though I hate it, and I know many do. Yet, I see this is the only true answer if people's false belief wants to reach its final destination. (Of course, you don't have to go into that fake world. You ARE allowed freedom no matter what you think; I know many people would choose freedom over everyone happily living in peace, why? Biology, of course.)

 

"And by now just releasing them all would prove disastrous to the ecosystem" Trakovites say what already lives should be allowed, but new ones shouldn't be made. If you only worry about the bad effects, and you admit it's probably not right or at least should be reconsidered, do you agree we should stop breeding new ones?

 

"Progress would be useful even with the power difference. The average white person lives better than the average black person and has more previlege and power" That's such a small difference that can be changed. Shaping power on the other hand, cannot be changed, unless with geneforge. Even with geneforge, serviles can't use it. As I say, if I can wave my hand and absorb my creation, no matter how smart it is, can it be equal with me even if it wants to? Or, let's say, if Rawal's tool cannot be removed, do you think I can EVER be equal with him at all, without killing him altogether?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give me the email of your MSc supervisor, so I can inform him how much free time you have!

You're writing a couple 3-page long essays every day on top on finishing 5 games (about 150 hours of playtime even in fast mode, 200 hours usually) in 2 weeks. That clocks at 10 hours of gaming per day!

 

I can't keep up with you buddy. Sorry. :( I'll try to answer what I can, when I can. I am sure there are a lot of interesting things in your posts, and I'll try to find the time to read them, so don't take this as a rebuttal. I enjoy our discussions. And as one of the few pro-Rebels here, I believe it's important that I stand my ground and address your interesting posts. However, I don't have the time at the time. It'll take me a couple of days before I manage to read and reply to the other thread.

Blxz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give me the email of your MSc supervisor, so I can inform him how much free time you have!

You're writing a couple 3-page long essays every day on top on finishing 5 games (about 150 hours of playtime even in fast mode, 200 hours usually) in 2 weeks. That clocks at 10 hours of gaming per day!

 

I can't keep up with you buddy. Sorry. :( I'll try to answer what I can, when I can. I am sure there are a lot of interesting things in your posts, and I'll try to find the time to read them, so don't take this as a rebuttal. I enjoy our discussions. And as one of the few pro-Rebels here, I believe it's important that I stand my ground and address your interesting posts. However, I don't have the time at the time. It'll take me a couple of days before I manage to read and reply to the other thread.

 

Lol, man, you don't know half of me! I can play games for 48 hours and sleep for 8 hours and I'm back alive again. Besides, I write fast and I read fast, use cheats, can finish per game within 24 hours, so your calculation isn't 100% accurate I suppose. :D You should see how I do 10 mail psychological therapy in one day within 4 hours when others would probably need 2 days working full time (it's not a good thing... I only do this during free social service to do as much work as I can, in as little time as possible, not my paying clients).

 

Don't struggle there, man. I certainly won't think you're ignoring me or anything, I already notice how much trouble you have. As for your standing ground, well, you can put a "interesting, since it's long, I'll reply you next week in detail" or sth like that there for others to see, so that your fellow rebels won't think you're quitting the debate. :)

 

Edit: Actually... Do you want to actually set a time, instead of doing it when we have time? I sound like a damn therapist now, *sigh*. But well, it might be easier, and we won't ever feel rushed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its not much a matter of time than of mental exhaustion. If it was a simple thing it would be easier and faster to answer. Now we have to first skim to have an idea, then read in depth to better understand. Finally sit down and take our sweet time to present a worthy answer that adresses all the points raised. So for instance right now i personally am free but it will take me a while until i say something relevant. Mostly cause school and work are mentally taxing and some time is needed to cool down. Im amazed you can keep it up that well. Also congrats! You beat(at least temporarily) Alhoon! He is unbeatable. The pride and standard bearer of the rebellion. The go to man when you faith is shaken. Etc etc... More honoraries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its not much a matter of time than of mental exhaustion. If it was a simple thing it would be easier and faster to answer. Now we have to first skim to have an idea, then read in depth to better understand. Finally sit down and take our sweet time to present a worthy answer that adresses all the points raised. So for instance right now i personally am free but it will take me a while until i say something relevant. Mostly cause school and work are mentally taxing and some time is needed to cool down. Im amazed you can keep it up that well. Also congrats! You beat(at least temporarily) Alhoon! He is unbeatable. The pride and standard bearer of the rebellion. The go to man when you faith is shaken. Etc etc... More honoraries.

 

Oh, surely I didn't beat him, he just has better things to do and needs a break from this mental taxing debate. I don't think he's backing down, and thank god for that, I'm not a fan of changing people's minds; I would rather people be 100% happy with their own mind even when facing such challenges, be it reality or someone like me. Self-acceptance, such a thing is very fragile. Many of my clients fail to keep it up, I'm often looking for stronger people to see how they prevail. There might be a key somewhere.

 

For all I know, it's actually unnecessary to keep the discussion going, let alone finding out who is right; I'm glad that you guys take precious time and try to do some good influence, I really am, and winning/losing isn't what I'm trying to get here. As I said, I'm trying to poke around and see what people think, trying to find how human thoughts work, and that's all. If you guys ever find me too annoying and not worth the time/effort, please just tell me; I'm like an intruder sometimes, presenting opposite views when people are not asking for them, and I know what I'm doing. In therapies, I do it because people ask me to find out why they have trouble in their lives, it is what should be done; but in here, it's different, it's kinda meaningless, especially to you guys, and the time/effort cost can be high. You can just ask me to stop it and go to somewhere else, because I AM causing a lot of fuss in here, which probably doesn't do you much good. Or at least go take enough rest. I never worry about delay, or even lack of answers; some of my pen pals write me new mails after months of delay, and I don't even worry about that.

 

Personally, I never really experienced mental exhaustion. I know such a thing exist, and I step back when I realise it's happening to people; yet, I still find it hard to feel the feeling itself. My body can't work all day long but my mind can; work/play full time during day, and tons of wild dreams at night, I don't think it ever stops and ever will until the day I die. Exhaustion... I wonder how that feels, and why there's such a difference, maybe if I find out why, I can help my clients even better. Oh well, yet another task on my list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are various degrees of sentience. Most commonly we use the mirror test in animals to give it the least degree. But intelligence doesn't equate sentience. A mentally challenged person can in ways be dumber than a dog yet be more sentient. My best example for instance is a computer. It is smarter than us, making calculations faster, more accurately, storing more data and more reliably, able to perform more tasks simultaneously. Etc... But it is not sentient at all. It is also able to learn. Through updates, new programs and repetition. A dog might be smart. Might express a limited array of feelings the family dog manages to display jealousy, which is considered a more complex feeling. But they are not sentient. Definitively not to the same degree as a human. Maybe a literal baby. Would i treat a baby the same as i treat dogs? Tbh i don't like either of them so im not the best person to ask.

 

Depending on where you live you can kill humans legally. Not babies, but that is not too aliens for humans. Leaving babies to exposure wasn't uncommon until way into history. And to be honest we have dogs put down mostly for being overly aggressive and causing significant harm to humans. Until recently a death sentence for the same was common. Hell nobody gave a crap about what dogs do so long as they aren't dangerous to us.o n experiments dogs are unconventional. Usually rodents and simians/primates are used. But true. Since the 40s its not common to hear about using kids in experiments.

 

I don't think dogs are much dumber than wolves. Their skills are simply more adjusted to domestic environment.they learned how to fit in human society not the wild. Much like humans.

 

But true, every human right we have is a previlege for animals. Because we have more power. That is not to say said animals wouldn't do the same or worse to humans. Dogs are capable of killing babies. And they do kill them at points for whatever justifications they have. And dolphins rape baby seals and baby otters. Because they can. Pure and simple. In many ways we manage to be better than them. Not perfect. But better. And still working on it.

 

Yes... It happened because people fought for it. Why they had to is another discussion. But saying thats not what happened is inconsiderate to the efforts and lives spent on it.

Now on how we ruined things true. I do remember reading about how when the Jesuits First arrived in the monomutapa kingdom the were faced with a society that was very ok with any gender identity and sexual orientation. Of course they proceeded to erase all trace of that and make them proper Christians. To now Zimbabwe is a shining example of the opposite it once stood for. But its i suppose what they say "it gets worse before it gets better". Still forward we move.

 

An AI could be a good idea. I always think humans are limited by the lack to challenge to their rule. Had we elves and dawrves or something of the kind evolving and competing with us we'd be more united and adcance more/faster. Sadly elves aren't real and AIs are not feasible as of now. Although it is doubtful it would have any moral code. We're bound to learn something. That being said, nothing can be omniscient. We would also never hand over control. You also seem to underestimate nature. Humans are more advanced than you give them credit for, and we can be defeated by nature. The plague eradicated 2 thirds of Europe did it not? If need be we will be extinct or evolve. That is important. For that way we are forced to try and have a sustainable population and society. A machine would have no need for us. Finally freedom is more important than peace and happiness. Also i don't feel comfortable discussing matters that are entirely speculative. we simply don't know and have no way of knowing what and AI will do. We can provide a controlled situation for hypothesis making. But we can't control reality. So that is not quite the solution. And honestly we should sort our own crap out. We would learn nothing by handing over.

 

Finally personally im ok with stop breeding dogs. Less devil's spawn to annoy me. But is it right to enforce the extinction of a whole species? We made them and as such are responsible for them we don't just get to choose out of it. Its the same as having a kid and kicking them out. Worse even.

 

Also oh just let me celebrate alhoon's temporary defeat. Don't ruin this for me.

 

Also if you're older than me which im lead to believe then im honestly surprised you've never had mental exhaustion.

 

Finally; testing people to see if they fit your standards doesn't work the way you expect it to. People don't respond well to tests. Its better and more accurate to just analyse them over time.

 

Edit: i went through the discussion on who would side with the shapers. And im now sure you are an AI trying to inflitrate us and make us more accepting of your kind. The signs are all there. But you will not prevail. God hates AIs! Artificiality is sin! #ProudlyAIphobic. Think of the children!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Most commonly we use the mirror test in animals to give it the least degree”

Even though I should probably stick to "who has right to draw the line" here, but this is actually good enough. So, a lot of animals can pass the mirror test, dogs included (try it on a pet dog; you shave it, it sees itself in the mirror, it'll go mad at you). Which means they have a low level of sentience. So, you're saying, we can be superior to them just because the sentience level isn't as high as we are, instead of sentient vs non-sentient?

 

"I don't think dogs are much dumber than wolves"

Actually they are, based on some experiments, where stray/wild dogs do a lot better in tests than pet dogs. Which means, you keep them home, they grow stupid, you leave them out there, they become smart. Sounds like serviles to me.

 

"That is not to say said animals wouldn't do the same or worse to humans"

Well, that's my whole point! Power matter, stronger ones win, only factions who can compete with each other worry about whether it's fair, and is the only real factor in deciding "justice", until we can afford to provide welfare to lesser ones. If we can be evil without paying any price, who cares about justice?

 

"But its i suppose what they say "it gets worse before it gets better". Still forward we move"

Why can't it be "it gets worse because of us, it gets better when we try, but we can't make things natural again", though? I never deny people try to do good, I just think their final goal is beyond their reach judging by their own limits.

 

"Although it is doubtful it would have any moral code"

It won't! Which is a good thing. Because you can't have everyone's needs satisfied without people worrying about whether it's good or not. Moral code will just make us hate each other, for expressing their own biology.

"A machine would have no need for us"

Exactly. If it has need of us, it'll abuse us and manipulate us, like in Matrix. It better find us useless enough to humour our wishes at all. Like, if an ant ask you for a piece of crumb, while you have tons of that laying on the floor. Why not? And without biological issues, AI won't even find hurting us interesting. Unlike us, who can laugh in its face and stomp on it. AI is energy-efficient; if it finds it more efficient to just let us have wishes come true, instead of wiping us all out (because we'll put up a fight, as you say) or ignore us (because we'll go pester it), it will grant our wish just because it's convenient.

 

"Finally personally im ok with stop breeding dogs. Less devil's spawn to annoy me. But is it right to enforce the extinction of a whole species"

Let's say, if rebellion never happened, and shapers learn to make stupid serviles who have no free will, like in G4. They realise it's much better this way and stop making smart serviles. They don't make anything that has free will, like they once decide making drakes is a bad idea. Now look at what we have: shapers, human who believe they can't have such power and won't bother to try, no free-will creation. Do you think this is a bad world, compared to everyone attempting to go power crazy, and we're torn between letting smart things live or not? To wipe out those few dangerous lab samples in the very first beginning, is that even wrong, if you think about what we're doing in real life? Through G1~G2, the free escaped beings are always few, and wiping them out is actually morally right, according to lab principles. It'll lead to a very peaceful world without freewill beings being enslaved, because we won't even bother making them any more. Yet, in new Sucia, I believe many will still believe it's right to make freewill creations just because they can exist, and they'll do it, just for more troubles to follow.

 

"Finally freedom is more important than peace and happiness"

Yes, I see that. And let me tell you sth else. If there is such an AI, you really think it'll give you a peaceful world, tell you all truth, see whether you accept? Nope. It'll tell you what you want to believe. Imagine it just speaks to you as some alien who wants talk. You think people won't immediately go talk with it? And if it tells you there's a new planet out there good for human. You think people won't go there? Better yet, it'll even tell some people that god exist, show us a few amazing phenomenon, etc. Imagine how Christians immediately find the best goal in life and start forcing others to go this path. We ourselves, plagued with our own made belief, have no chance when facing it! It can play our own gods, and some of us will believe in an instant. Even if it just give you a common belief that "you'll be with your family once you pass away", show you the image of those people, you'll be lured into a better world where you can have reunion, you won't fight it at all, because you have your own false belief. Freedom fighters? It only needs to tell you of another form of freedom, that you're really just 4-d spirits constrained in your human body, while you're actually more than that, blinded by this temp life. Come free yourself and see what you once are, what you will be in future, how you stand in time and space, how some others keep you imprisoned here as mere human, etc. Oh, tons of people will just go fight for a "greater freedom".

 

"And im now sure you are an AI trying to inflitrate us and make us more accepting of your kind"

Ah, don't be silly. I'm here to warn you against it, though I also what to see whether you guys will eventually go this path no matter what. In my younger days I keep dreaming of this ultimate being who play as imaginary gods and fool us human into a happy afterworld, it tells me that this day will come no matter what, it is the final form of all living beings, and if we human manage to survive long enough, we will be the one to build it ourselves. Probably just my imagination messing with me. But then again, once I know such a possibility, be it fake or not, I want to learn human beings better. I don't like this being, because I'm a human myself, limited by my own wish to be a free being, and that's why I even bother to talk about such a possibility. For all I know I could just sit and watch things happen.

 

"Also oh just let me celebrate alhoon's temporary defeat. Don't ruin this for me"

Don't do that! XD I actually reminded him to put a time reminder there to prevent people utilising that! XD

 

"Also if you're older than me which im lead to believe then im honestly surprised you've never had mental exhaustion"

I'm not sure. I'm 26, gonna be 27 soon, you?

 

"Finally; testing people to see if they fit your standards doesn't work the way you expect it to. People don't respond well to tests. Its better and more accurate to just analyse them over time"

I just want to see people get strong emotions and how the emotion affects them, not "whether you fit my standard". Would be very happy if you prevail without giving up. And… In the long run things get predictable, and many people are working on it, they don't need one more me. Besides, it worked nicely. How can mild views attract people, make them feel they need to talk, or else? I prefer "bad" views to keep you upset enough to keep a deep discussion going on. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread just has so many wordy answers. Are you not able to present your thoughts concisely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread just has so many wordy answers. Are you not able to present your thoughts concisely?

 

But it's a game forum and forum is for chatting. Chatting is just like this. Unless, I'm not supposed to chat in here, and have to do it very formally & concisely? :rolleyes:

 

Edit: If there IS such a rule, remind me. Maybe I'm supposed to use pm instead, when we want to do long free-style discussions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no rule against being wordy. On the other hand, you've pretty much admitted to intentionally provocative posting in a way that borders on trolling, which we do discourage here. I haven't stepped in because people seem to be enjoying the discussion so far and nobody seems to be too upset about it, but try not to rile each other up too much in future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God almighty! OK, It's officially too much stuff for me to read. So I'll reply piecemeal and mostly randomly.

 

Slavery abolition ... didn't happen because we could afford it and through trial and error. It happened because people fought for that.

In a few cases, slavery abolition happened through war. In the vast majority of cases it happened because we could afford it. An emperor in Rome (I don'r recall who) first started giving some rights to slaves. These increased with time and popular opinion was turning against slavery and was frowned upon in medieval Europe ... that happily embraced serfdom instead.

Then, during the enlightment slavery was abolished through laws and later constitution in most of Europe, in Brazil and other countries.

 

Womens' rights had a few violent protests but it was mainly a peaceful gradual change from early 20th century to late 20th century for most of the West.

 

So, I dare say that only tyrannies (and fictional oppressive powerhungry magocracies) need to be overthrown with lots of bloodshed.

 

The vast majority of dogs would rather stay home with humans than be released into the wild. We may not have been "right" in domesticating them. But even if they can breed with wolves it is too late to release them into the wild.

Dingos in Australia, and the dozens of stray dogs, some 3rd generation in the wild, in the rural unsettled parts of Crete would point to different case. The wild dogs the come down from the hills are a slight problem for the farms here.

 

But enslaving pygmies? Now a days?
Let me give you the full list of my sources on the matter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmy_peoples#Slavery

 

"as far as we know" That's the point in here. You don't know how smart they actually are, and you can refuse the fact with just a shake of your head, like a shaper. And, why are you drawing the line in here, deciding who's sentient and who's not? Didn't you say we have no right to draw a line?

Noooope, what I said is more or less: Morality is not set in stone, it evolves and we draw the line arbitarily in a great many things. 1800 years ago, it was acceptable to kill your wife. You could legally do it. 150 years ago it was legal to beat her. 50 years ago it was legal to rape her if you were married. The line has been moved many times. It is arbitary.

As for "you don't know how smart they are": Dolphins are very smart in a way (and we give our own definition of intelligence BTW). They're not sentient.

As for intelligence: We have arbitarily chosen what we call intelligence. If you put in intelligence things like "perceive electrostatic fields" then sharks suddenly become smarter and humans dumber. If you put "perceive magnetic fields" pigeons become smarter and humans dumber. Yet, we chose to not include these in intelligence. Just because.

 

Here I can safely say: Compared to me, your opinion about the dogs being non-sentient, will no longer be correct

That's totally fine and acceptable. There are indeed many different moral systems. Tell a Bhudist monk (the people that sweep the path to not step on ants) my opinion on the rights of dogs and he will faint. There are tons of vegetarian people that think it's downright evil to eat animals.

Let's talk Hinduists: They prefer to starve (and there are a lot of poor Hinduists) than slaughter one of those free-roaming cows.

You see, my morality allows me to tolerate these different viewpoints.

 

However, I cannot tolerate certain things like rape, non-consensual sex (hence I never would do anything with a prostitute since she's not hot for me = rape in my eyes), slavery. The most peculiar thing is that I look down on religious tolerance. Yes, I said I look down on religious tolerance, it's not a typo, you read that well.

I also consider elitism wrong since I am also an elitist and I fight hard to contain it and correct it because I consider it a character flaw of mine. No, I don't consider my mild religious intolerance a flaw, I consider it proper knowing fully that 90% of the west disagrees with me. I consider them wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we don't use 2-year old intelligence retarded human in experiments, or young kids I guess, what gives you the right to use dogs?

I'm against using dogs for experiments despite the dog-hating Owen's mad schemes.

"we actually made them stupid so that they can be loyal,"

We didn't make them stupid, we made them domesticated. Many dog breeds are smarter than wolves I think.

 

"Tell me again that they can't make decisions for themselves and they don't deserve to be free at all." They are not sentient so I don't find it bad to control their fate... as long as we don't kill them or harm them for fun. There are laws in most places (at least in the west) that put strong penalties on those harming dogs and I agree with those laws.

 

"servile is not human" Serviles are lesser than humans, but serviles are sentient. Hence, they should be free.

 

Actually… NO. That's not what happened.

I have a very, very different view on what actually happened. For starters, women were respected 6000-7000 years ago. Then it was male-dominated societies. Then women rights started to be discussed by some "weirdos" in the enlightment, and it was seriously seen as an issue in the late 19th century.

So the "things changed to the worse" can't apply here, because there was a pause of several millenia between those two states.

 

"No, they just try to make things right again"

Right according to us. I'm pretty sure there are tons of philosophers that could defend why a male-dominated society is better much better than we can defend that's not the case. Again, it comes down to cultural and society opinion. I have several female friends that say "women are below men" and they are angry at feminists for trying to upset the "right" balance. They're too young to have old daughters, but those that have (1-3 years old) daughters show them through example that the woman's place is next to her husband.

And I'm talking about women that have finished universities here. One has a MSc degree. She didn't go for a PhD because she believes the husband should be more educated than the woman, although she had an offer of a PhD candidancy. Her boyfriend, a man with a MSc looking for a PhD told her to go for it, that it would be insane to drop her future because of antiquated beliefs. She disagreed.

[skipping the whole part about the AI, didn't find the 5-6 words that I read interesting]

 

Even with geneforge, serviles can't use it.

Wait, what?!?

But Footracer (servile) can Shape and the player can take a geneforged servile that can shape!

I think its not much a matter of time than of mental exhaustion.

It's never a matter of mental exhaustion when it comes to defending the rebellion!

 

The pride and standard bearer of the rebellion.

Weeeeeeell... at least in theory I agree that a Rebellion had to happen and all. But the Rebels do a lot of bad things and so far in GF3, playing the game, I haven't found myself in the side of the Rebels quest-wise. Sure I answer "No, we shouldn't work serviles to death because a Shaper requires more crystals". But I haven't been impressed by the madwoman that killed my defenseless friends and the professor that betrayed them to join them...

 

Oh, surely I didn't beat him, he just has better things to do and needs a break from this mental taxing debate.

Never mentally taxing to defend the rebellion! And yeap, not beaten. Just other things to do.

"Personally, I never really experienced mental exhaustion."

Show-off! Your Shaper buddies would vivisect you. Then heal you from the brink of death to vivisect you again the next day. That's what we fighting to stop buddy. Well, not Litalia. She was the worst from the people that removed the control tool. "Try to remain still. You'll be in horrible pain but if you move too much, you'll die." :/

I don't think dogs are much dumber than wolves.
I think they're smarter... Not sure, but around here, wolves are considered dumb and dogs smart.
Finally personally im ok with stop breeding dogs. Less devil's spawn to annoy me. But is it right to enforce the extinction of a whole species? We made them and as such are responsible for them we don't just get to choose out of it. Its the same as having a kid and kicking them out. Worse even.

Also oh just let me celebrate alhoon's temporary defeat. Don't ruin this for me.

Welcome to the Rebellion. I see that you start to realize why it's wrong to wipe out Gazers\dogs\Drakons\Drayks.

And nah, not having the time to post is not the same as defeat. It's "pause" in the battle, not retreat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually they are, based on some experiments, where stray/wild dogs do a lot better in tests than pet dogs. Which means, you keep them home, they grow stupid, you leave them out there, they become smart. Sounds like serviles to me.

So... the tests are evidently wrong, since they measure not actual animal-intelligence but the problem-solving abilities of dogs. Of course dogs that have it hard would have "trained" themselves to survive in the wild, but that doesn't make them smarter, it makes them better trained for the task-at-hand.

Also, natural selection would pretty quickly cut through the dogs that are really stupid \ unable to adapt to living in the wild.

 

Which is a good thing. Because you can't have everyone's needs satisfied without people worrying about whether it's good or not.

It's a bad thing. People should care more about what's good and right than what satisfies their needs. The people that were fighting for my freedom 80 years before were putting "it's right to defend the country" above their personal needs of "not getting shot". And I'm grateful for that and honor their decision.

 

shapers learn to make stupid serviles who have no free will, like in G4.

They didn't make serviles without free will in GF4. They made more stupid serviles and more loyal serviles. They didn't eliminate free will.

 

However, if they did manage to make serviles without free will and sentience, and allowed the free willed serviles to "phase out" without any "drastic" measures...

The rebellion should still have happened and would still have happened eventually. Even if the Shapers stopped making anything other than Fyoras, Artilae, worms, Kyshaaks, ornks and clawbugs, the rebellion would happen. Why?

Because the Shapers were opressive and dictatorial, treating even normal people as a resource. The Shapers decided arbitarily on who was loyal enough to learn what spells. And we have in GF5 that loyal, talented spellcaster that has her requests for more spells turned down on the whims of Shaper Mazran (the Shaper breaking a few dozen shaper laws by making control minds that can shape and giving them command of whole creation batallions instead of immediately turning on Alwan and forcing him to surrender his post as a councilor for losing his mind).

And we have the examples of far less loyal mages that get spells because other Shapers are less jealous of the magical potential of the people unlucky enough to be under the boot of the wrong Shaper.

 

I talked to that woman (forget her name, the mage in a Fort). She was in tears when her request was rejected. She wouldn't betray the Shapers. She would still remain in the front lines, fighting, cleaning the lab for passing Shapers to use and not doing her own research on the side (like that guy holed up behind a dozen+ pylons).

I am not sure if my leadership wasn't high enough at the time, but I couldn't sway her loyalty even at the face of pure injustice.

 

So, no. Down with the tyrannical Shaper Magocracy. It's not just the liberation of Serviles or defending the right of Drayks to not be killed on sight. It's also about the humans that are reduced to Shaper boot-lickers.

 

It'll lead to a very peaceful world without freewill beings being enslaved

Here's something I disagree with both you and the Rebellion: The end doesn't justify the means.

 

 

And that's my 2 1/2 posts for the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no rule against being wordy. On the other hand, you've pretty much admitted to intentionally provocative posting in a way that borders on trolling, which we do discourage here. I haven't stepped in because people seem to be enjoying the discussion so far and nobody seems to be too upset about it, but try not to rile each other up too much in future.

Borderline walking is indeed what I'm abusing here, apologise for the trouble I've caused. I have no intention to cross the line, but I probably won't stop it completely until the fun part for both sides isn't worth it any more. Btw, thank you very much for taking time to tell me this, dear moderator. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen you trolling. What you call "provocative posting" I would call "challenging the common-held personal perception".

And there are instructions of "one post" and I continuously break it, because my answers are huge. So, no, if someone's breaking decorum here for long posts, it's not you, it's me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One most important thing here: dogs are sentient. Owenmoz pointed out that we use mirror test to test animal sentience. And I pointed out that dogs look into the mirror and understand "this is me in mirror" and will be angry if you shave them too much. By definition, they are indeed sentient. Or, if you still think this is what minority thinks, how about this thing I found on wikipedia:

 

"In 1997 the concept of animal sentience was written into the basic law of the European Union. The legally binding protocol annexed to the Treaty of Amsterdam recognizes that animals are "sentient beings", and requires the EU and its member states to "pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals"."

 

Even back in 1997 we see them as sentient beings, man, law and morality alike. You're in 2016 now, aren't you?

 

So look back on most of what you've written, and then we can decide whether serviles can have freedom later. Maybe you'll go be a fighter for dogs instead, who knows?

 

"But Footracer (servile) can Shape and the player can take a geneforged servile that can shape!"

Footracer is a good example, too bad that she can only shape using a machine and implant tool. You break it and everything breaks. Suffice to say the machine+tool can shape, not her. As for player, it kinda contradicts with what we're taught otherwise, so if I stick to my "there's only one real player and all other options are just fake choices that doesn't happen in real history" theory, it sounds more true for everything else. Because really; if serviles really can shape, how come you can't find any other more reliable examples? They're dying to learn magic, if they can learn to shape, many more will do so.

 

"Show-off! Your Shaper buddies would vivisect you"

Come on then! If I'm in geneforge world I might already be working in council, judging from how understanding I am for the shaper cause. Let's see who dare to do it to me XD Otherwise, I'd just stay quiet about my own situation, smart if you ask me.

"Well, not Litalia. She was the worst from the people that removed the control tool"

The worst is Ghardring side, where the drakon scientist care more about the control tool than you…

 

"They didn't make serviles without free will in GF4. They made more stupid serviles and more loyal serviles. They didn't eliminate free will"

You didn't see it first hand in G4, but in G5 you can see serviles who are smart enough to just breathe and work. Now tell me: Do those have free will?

(Edit: Oh wait! In G4, monarch does that. His serviles are nothing more than machines. Do they have free will, then?)

"The rebellion should still have happened""Because the Shapers were opressive and dictatorial"

Are you sure? You didn't play G1 and G2 so let me tell you a fact: Shapers changed a lot between Sucia science breakthrough and Sucia rediscovery 200 years later, and lots of their rules changed in the meantime, resulting in a looooot of welfare and better understanding. What makes you think they can't change more, if you just leave them be? People on the inside fight against injustice/inefficiency themselves, which results in things getting better, we really don't need other species like selfish drakons to do it in the name of freedom.

 

"It's also about the humans that are reduced to Shaper boot-lickers"

As I say, this will not change without geneforge's help. Which proves my point: if you can't have the power to be equal, you can't be equal. Equal or not, it depends on how much power you have that cannot be shaken. Power determines. Even in new Sucia you'll have people hoarding shaping power and shaping rights (because they eventually agree it's the way to be!), new tyranny grows, cycle repeats. And you can't do a thing to prevent it. You say rebellion is inevitable, and I say tyranny is inevitable too, doesn't this fact gives it rights to exist?

 

"I talked to that woman (forget her name, the mage in a Fort). She was in tears when her request was rejected"

"I am not sure if my leadership wasn't high enough at the time, but I couldn't sway her loyalty even at the face of pure injustice."

You probably can't, I cheat in my games and have 30 leadership. I can't do it either, as far as I remember.

Btw, you do realise that they only need her to be able to keep her cool? She was always rejected because she's a very emotional person. And shaping + emotional = very bad in the long run. You're willing to let us create an unstable shaper, so that later you can blame it on us that we shapers can't do things right?

 

Edit:

"It'll lead to a very peaceful world without freewill beings being enslaved

Here's something I disagree with both you and the Rebellion: The end doesn't justify the means."

If you really believes in that, how come you choose to kill a few and save more, in the train question? If the end doesn't justify the means, you will not push him off at all, right? It's important that you stay true to your own words.

 

"I haven't seen you trolling. What you call "provocative posting" I would call "challenging the common-held personal perception""

Oh! Oh thank you. It's just, many people don't take it well when their views are challenged, and I find it a reasonable reaction. I can go at a much more mild way but I choose not to, so I think it's fair if I take a bit of responsibility for it here. :D As for the length, well, I guess we just can't help it when there's so much to discuss… :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"One most important thing here: dogs are sentient. "

Nah, they're not. Most actually fail the mirror test which is not good enough for me. Few very smart dogs do... and the majority of elephants.

 

 

"The legally binding protocol annexed to the Treaty of Amsterdam recognizes that animals are "sentient beings", and requires the EU and its member states to "pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals"."

O_O That's news to me.

Amsterdam's Treaty is wrong then. Unless by sentient they mean something else. Not to mention, that if animals are considered sentient, we should be killing them for food. Which we do.

 

"So look back on most of what you've written, and then we can decide whether serviles can have freedom later. Maybe you'll go be a fighter for dogs instead, who knows?"

Serviles are sentient, dogs are not whatever people that wrote the Amsterdam treaty think.

 

 

Monarch's serviles: Right! I've forgot about those poor creatures. Nope, those don't count as sentient, these were your dream of living tools with legs. They were very disturbing because their form was close to humans. But I would find Alphas and Thands more sentient than these.

 

"Well, not Litalia. She was the worst from the people that removed the control tool"

The worst is Ghardring side, where the drakon scientist care more about the control tool than you…

I believe that Litalia's attitude was the worse. I can't blame the drakon lifecrafter for being interested in the control tool. His bed-side manner was nearly as bad as Litalia's but Litalia had slightly worse bed-side manner and... she's not a Drakon.

 

What makes you think they can't change more, if you just leave them be? People on the inside fight against injustice/inefficiency themselves, which results in things getting better, we really don't need other species like selfish drakons to do it in the name of freedom.

Perhaps they would. However, if it took the Roman Republic\Empire 300 years to put a law that you shouldn't just kill your slaves, and 1400 years after that for slavery to be challenged by the majority of learned and progressive enlighted scholars and 250 years after that for slavery to start being abolished around Europe and then 100 years for it to be abolished in the USA...

I would prefer the Drakons doing it. However: The not-so-small problem here is the most powerful Drakons didn't have any interest to do that. Ghaldring says so himself in the "The time of the Serviles will never come". OK, they would not have serviles as slaves... but they would be 2nd-class like humans in the Shaper Empire. No thanks. I'll stick with Greta and Astoria.

But even elevating them from slaves to 2nd-class is better than what the Shapers are doing.

 

On a similar note: Slavery would have eventually be abolished in USA with time. Still, I'm sure that a lot of black people are\were happy that they were liberated by their masters dying violently. Despite some of the Union's forces doing their fair share of warcrimes.

 

"She was always rejected because she's a very emotional person. "

That was the lame excuse. Worse than her have been elevated. And at the very least, Mazdan shouldn't troll her with rejecting her learning magic even if he thought she was "too emotional" for Shaping.

 

As I say, this will not change without geneforge's help. Which proves my point: if you can't have the power to be equal, you can't be equal. Equal or not, it depends on how much power you have that cannot be shaken. Power determines. Even in new Sucia you'll have people hoarding shaping power and shaping rights (because they eventually agree it's the way to be!), new tyranny grows, cycle repeats. And you can't do a thing to prevent it. You say rebellion is inevitable, and I say tyranny is inevitable too, doesn't this fact gives it rights to exist?

Interesting. I'm lucky enough to be from the area that realized this first. At first, in the 6th century BC we thought that giving the "good" people power would lead to better society. Well, it ended up with the good people being either not so good after all, or handing the power to their kids (because which parent except Taygen doesn't want the best for his kids?) and people disagreeing what actually was "good" people.

And then, we more or less said "#### it. Everyone* will have power". And thus democracy was formed. Because we realized more or less what you said... and we found the solution.

So did the rebellion. The Shapers thinks they're oh-so-mighty? Grab the dirt-digging peasant, teach him a few rudimentary things about morality and responsibility to one's creations and give him the power of a Shaper. Now the Shaper has the same potential with the former dirt-digger.

*Males, citizens of Athens.

 

"You're willing to let us create an unstable shaper"

Moseh. Shaftoe. Taygen. Litalia. Monarch. Rawal.

The list is big already. At least that woman while showing some reasonable emotion (not breaking things, just tearing up) when her dreams were against squashed underfoot by the same people that wanted her risking her life without utilizing her full magical potential and serve as a lab cleaner, is proven to be loyal to a fault to the Shapers. She should have joined the Rebellion and get the respect her talents deserved. No Shaper-made ceilings. Go for Godhood if you can manage it (better avoid it; Litalia ended up completely mad).

Remember that Shaper in Harmony island in GF3? (I'm there). He's as emotional as that mage and yet, he became an ineffective, whiny Shaper.

The end doesn't justify the means

"If you really believes in that, how come you choose to kill a few and save more, in the train question? "

Because the question was not "kill a few to save more". It was "kill many" or "kill few to save more". There was never an option of "not killing anyone".

I did a lot of bad things in the service of the rebellion. I also did a lot of bad things playing the Shaper endings against the Rebellion. There's no clearly good side. There are two bad sides. One side fights dirty to preserve their tyranny, keep sentient creatures enslaved and genocide things that disagree with them and the other side fights dirty to liberate slaves and for the right to exist of creatures that disagree with the first side (and some of them to establish their own tyranny).

 

Do you know what was the most difficult quest for me in GF5? Ghaldring's quest to kill Astoria. A rebel-friendly Astoria that considered me a friend and ally. Astoria that was letting Serviles be. Astoria that was working with humans to end the war despite the Drakons disagreement.

If there wasn't the knowledge that I would kill Rawal too, I wouldn't have done Ghaldring's ending because of Astoria.

I found it very hard to kill one Shaper that didn't deserve it, in order to bring down the Empire of thousands that did deserve it.

And I did it for personal gain, not morality.

 

 

EDIT: Sentience. Oh, boy. The word doesn't mean what I thought. It mentions things like "Qualia" that I've never heard, makes it different from Sapience (that is close, but still not what I meant) and self-awareness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I might regret wading into the paragraph slinging match I did want to comment on the dog sentience thing.

 

Alhoon, you are correct that many dogs fail the mirror test. They have designed a smell test version though and they think, with a high degree of certainty, that most dogs pass the 'smell mirror' test and are able to recognise a sense of self when their urine is sprayed by the researchers in unfamiliar places.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for the dogs as this may be, dogs and other animals are nowhere near the serviles in the following: Understanding cause-consequence, self-awareness beyond the mirror tests, awareness of time in the past-present-future form and basic problem solving. They are much simpler minds with much less cognizance ability than serviles... except the ones the Monarch made. Those may be able to use tools, but they have no free will and I doubt they have greater sense of self than the "smart" animals like primates and dogs. The Monarch-made serviles also seem to lack something else that most animals in earth seems to have: self-preservation instinct and I would dare say, procreation instinct. These poor creations seem to attack the player if attacked because it's in their orders, not out of self-preservation \ fight-or-flight instinct.

 

About the Monarch-made serviles, the question is not just if they are sentient, but if they can be considered alive or just biological self-moving robots.

Yes, I know we consider plants alive, but they're not animals and I don't know the distinction in English. Or Greek.

 

 

And I would like to remind everyone that Monarch was a Shaper before he lost his humanity. So much for the Shaper selection method success.

Blxz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Sentience. Oh, boy. The word doesn't mean what I thought”

Does that mean you'll have to rephrase your point of view, then? Like: we can perfectly enslave sentient beings and kill them for food, as long as we treat them well enough? And only creatures that has human-level brain deserve freedom at all, lesser-than-that beings don't? That'll be some progress here. :D

 

"Nope, those don't count as sentient, these were your dream of living tools with legs. They were very disturbing because their form was close to humans"

Do you find human-like robots disturbing? People're already making that everywhere, just with limited functions and no freewill, and so far as I see, most people find them interesting/promising instead of disturbing. Btw serviles really don't look that much like human… The nose is plain weird. Hell, if many finds it disturbing, we can change what they look like, and wouldn't that be much better? From what I see, in G5 some shapers already learn how to read DNA properly, changing only the appearance will be a piece of cake soon. That'll make you feel much better (and a lot of the newbie shapers too, once we get a reliable result), right?

 

"Litalia had slightly worse bed-side manner and... she's not a Drakon"

So you're saying we MUST have empathy for same species? Even for someone changed by geneforge, who's probably no longer a human being any more? You should know that geneforge has a very strong effect to make people unable to do empathy any more. Wouldn't it be asking too much, when she's no more than a husk filled with essence?

 

"I would prefer the Drakons doing it"

"I'm sure that a lot of black people are\were happy that they were liberated by their masters dying violently"

That's funny, I think you said you hate how they do things by huge violence. Ends doesn't justify the means, etc. So, when you hate someone enough, you find mass massacre a lot more justified than slow peaceful progress, then?

"Because the question was not "kill a few to save more". It was "kill many" or "kill few to save more". There was never an option of "not killing anyone""

So why do you choose to kill more here, hmm? Seems to me that if there's 1 rebel on this path, 1 shaper + 4 innocents on that path, you'd probably go kill those shaper/innocents, because it seems right, as long as you get to kill the shapers at all. That's what happened in the games, no?

 

"And then, we more or less said "#### it. Everyone* will have power""

I always do agree that if you can have power, you can be equal, because power determines. Those who cannot have power still can't be equal. Stop giving me human vs human examples… Even kids can go kill parents when they really want to, so I really don't care about superficial power difference, I don't know why you guys keep telling me these stuff. Try to find some species that is smart but never able to gain power, then we can have real progress. Geneforge is not real world human vs human situation, power is unbalanced no matter what, and freedom fights for unable-to-shape beings in there is doomed, is all; please, focus on something that is not equal in the first place, ok? And stop giving me examples about human vs human, I said several times that human vs human freedom fights works fine, I just want to focus on those who have NO chance to fight back at all.

So: Let's just nail it down to just one question, one is enough. If I am a shaper, and you are a servile I made, I can wave my hand and absorb you. Do you have ANY chance to be equal with me, at all, no matter who does what in where? Because I can do it, and no one can stop me, even if there's a Sucia and there's a council, I can still do it in my own mansion where others don't bother me; which is NEVER the same with human vs human situation. Just tell me, how do you plan to be equal with me, in such a situation?

 

"Moseh. Shaftoe. Taygen. Litalia. Monarch. Rawal. The list is big already"

You think accepting her into the circle will make the list smaller? It just gives you more excuses to blame shapers later, is all. If she's already emotional enough, your "She should have joined the Rebellion and get the respect her talents deserved" will very likely just result in another geneforge victim, and then you need to kill her like in G4 first chapter. So yeah, she can perhaps get happy for a while and sacrifice her own sanity later, murmuring "they never told me, they said I have potential, they killed me, they'll kill me again", does this make you feel better? Btw, you should think about G5 ending Sucia, where people eventually decided shaping should only be in the hands of a few. Does she even have any chance, when such a decision is reached, and there are many more people who are as talented as her, but much more stable? Who do you think we'll choose, her, or someone better at keeping the cool? Her only place is in your still bloody rebellion that cares nothing about the personal cost, she can become an opportunist and nothing more; in a peaceful time she'll just lose to competition again, even in Sucia, as long as there's anyone who can prove to do better. Because really, if we have tons of people dying to join shapers, why do we have to pick someone who cries and tears the letter and forgets to pay the messenger (not the first time too, she does it often enough that other shapers are actually expecting this, and prepares the reward for the player instead)? She's just not good enough, less capable than other competitors, is all.

 

 

Edit:

About the dog mirror test, if some of them can pass it, it means they can do it. For serviles, if some breeds are smart, some breeds are stupid, you say they're smart and deserve rights. Why use a whole different set of standards on dogs, just for your own convenience, instead of playing fair?

 

"Understanding cause-consequence, self-awareness beyond the mirror tests, awareness of time in the past-present-future form and basic problem solving"

And how do you know? You were wrong on a series of facts about dogs before, pal. I advise you to just check again, about whether dogs can do the above. Especially cause-consequence thing, which is easy to prove by dogs trying to hide their own mistakes or even blaming it on other dogs, creating a very logical fake scene which results in many inexperienced people actually believing in them, which shows they understand cause-consequence perfectly, a sense of logic, an ability to act according to it. The awareness of time works just fine in many species, unless you can prove to me that they cannot, and hopefully you're not waiting for the dogs to hold some old photo and spend the afternoon talking about good old days for you to believe in it. Problem solving is a piece of cake, how else do they prove to be as smart as 2-year-olds in tests? Really, after I proved you wrong for a few times on this topic, maybe you should try to learn more about them, instead of dismissing them, like a shaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"then you need to kill her like in G4 first chapter" I didn't kill Shaila, I gave her to the Shapers and lied to Greta.

 

"she can perhaps get happy for a while and sacrifice her own sanity later, murmuring "they never told me, they said I have potential, they killed me, they'll kill me again", "

Giving her the FREEDOM to make the choice, doesn't mean she will make the wrong one. She's very disciplined to succumb to powerlust like Litalia. And again, I don't know if she's talented Shaper. She's a talented mage held back from her study of magic because a Shaper that goes on to make Control Cores that go rogue said so. It's not a question of whether she would be a Shaper or not (the answer is yes, she should become a Lifecrafter).

She clearly has the discipline and loyalty to become a very responsible Shaper\Lifecrafter and a little emotion is not bad at all; she would feel empathy about the Serviles and the Creations she made.

But the Shapers don't even allow her to progress her magic, let alone learn even rudimentary Shaping.

 

As for the Geneforge taking her ability of empathy: Not all Lifecrafters have been geneforged. The Geneforge is a crude way to crank out Lifecrafters in astonishing speed, that should have realistically overwhelmed the Shapers within a couple of years if utilized fully. However, the Southforge Geneforge was being used selectively to make a few Lifecrafters at a time because not even the Rebellion wanted unlimited access to Shaping through a procedure that changes the mind and the Northforge one was used only by Drakons.

Shaila is the one mistake the Rebels made when picking people to be Geneforged. Jarred may be an annoying, powerhungry individual that by the end, the Drakons liked, but he's not a mistake; he keeps his cool. Litalia was a mistake made by the Shapers.

And Shaila is caught pretty quickly, showing that despite what the Shapers and Shaper-supporting players think, even during the bleak years of the Rebellion, the rebels showed much more talent in picking who should become a Lifecrafter.

 

 

"Because really, if we have tons of people dying to join shapers"

Because she doesn't try to join the Shapers, she's asking permission of learning more spells, in order to fight the people that would remove the shackles from her. OK, she made the wrong decision but it was out of loyalty to an oppressive regime that has installed Stockholm syndrome on her so she's unable to see that she harms society's future by fighting FOR the Shapers instead of against them.

Also, the Shapers pick the wrong people. You say she would be a bad Shaper that would be added to the list. No. She'd be a good shaper that would be added to a different list that includes Miranda, Astoria (OK, she betrayed the Shapers), that turret-making Shaper in the border, Astoria's Shaper and Taygen's guardian that is angry he has to kill perfectly good creations but is loyal.

 

I said several times that human vs human freedom fights works fine, I just want to focus on those who have NO chance to fight back at all.

No other sentient* species on record. We wiped out the Neanderthals ~15K years ago. So, you have to tolerate me using human vs human freedom fights.

*What I described as sentient, not the weird meaning in wikipedia

 

Geneforge world where you have hit points i.e. a bad fighter cannot kill you, wound you permanently etc and a good fighter can kill you with a baton hit + People can spam those good fighters?

That's not a question about how the non-Shapers \ non-magic using \ Low-level people would fight. They would lose. World mechanics make sure of that. By the end of GF5, without cheating, I wiped out as a personal challenge a Rebel army that included 4 Unbound to see if it was possible. It was possible, it was not even too hard once you're level 48 with good artifacts and 6 uber-creations.

No, the question is should those be oppressed by the people that can kill everything? The Rebellion's answer is: no. And the geneforge and cannisters evened the odds. Apparently not evened them enough, so the Rebellion had to resort to very underhanded tactics (Unbound, Shredbugs).

Once the Rebellion was won, there was no need to create instantly powerful people, so the geneforges were abandoned. People could pursue power much more freely now, in both sides; Shapers have lost so many from their numbers that they would probably open up the lists. And since there was now the option of people under them jumping ship and moving to Sucia, they had to treat them better.

 

 

That's funny, I think you said you hate how they do things by huge violence. Ends doesn't justify the means, etc. So, when you hate someone enough, you find mass massacre a lot more justified than slow peaceful progress, then?

Yes.

I'm not for peaceful resistance all the time. When the Nazis occupied Greece, we didn't do Ghandi-like resistance. We fought with an insurgency. And today, it's the Greece's national day to honor the people that died during these terrible times. We consider them heroes for fighting the enemy.

 

 

"Because the question was not "kill a few to save more". It was "kill many" or "kill few to save more". There was never an option of "not killing anyone""

So why do you choose to kill more here, hmm?

I didn't. I chose "kill few to save more" and joined the Rebellion.

 

"

Seems to me that if there's 1 rebel on this path, 1 shaper + 4 innocents on that path, you'd probably go kill those shaper/innocents, because it seems right, as long as you get to kill the shapers at all. "

No, that's Ghaldring and a ton of servile rebels. Not me.

Alwan and Taygen would go for the kill 1 rebel + 4 innocents to make sure the rebelled died.

Rawal would go to "Can I kill rebel, Shaper and innocents and steal their money afterwards? If not, then I'll kill the one that is winning"

Astoria now, my choice. She would kill the fewer. She turns against Shapers (quite dishonestly) to curb Alwan and she also kills Ghaldring (OK, assists me to kill Ghaldring).

 

"That's what happened in the games, no?"

Yes, because Ghaldring and Litalia hijacked the Rebellion in GF4 and unleashed the Unbound, without listening to the complains of the sane part of the Rebellion that said "For everything that's holy! STOP MAKING UNBOUND! The rebellion's saved! We can win other ways! Don't turn Western Terrestia to a graveyard!"

Even some Drakons agree that the Unbound production should stop. Like the one holed up in Derra Reaches that warns you there's an Unbound that would kill him (or her, I don't recall) because they're mad. Or the one that Astoria works with and Ghaldring wants killed. Ghaldring wants a lot of Drakons killed...

 

 

So you're saying we MUST have empathy for same species? Even for someone changed by geneforge, who's probably no longer a human being any more? You should know that geneforge has a very strong effect to make people unable to do empathy any more. Wouldn't it be asking too much, when she's no more than a husk filled with essence?

Yes, we MUST have empathy for the same species. Sure, Litalia is a leather husk filled with essence without emotions and all but that doesn't make me feel better when she did the operation.

PS. It's not the geneforge by itself. It's the self-shaping. Canisters + geneforge.

 

 

Do you find human-like robots disturbing?

You found something here doctor. ;)

You're right. I find them mildly disturbing at first, but I'm sure I could be used to them. Nowhere close to how Monarch's living tool serviles made me feel.

Here you have it: I don't know why the Monarch's serviles made me so uneasy. I had the initial reaction to want to "end them", like when I see a roach but then I felt... pity of them. If that helps you analyze me and tell me why I had that reaction from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"One most important thing here: dogs are sentient. "

Nah, they're not. Most actually fail the mirror test which is not good enough for me. Few very smart dogs do... and the majority of elephants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test#Criticisms_of_the_test

 

The mirror test is not a generally accepted standard of sentience. First, it has a lot of flaws and isn't actually a generally accepted standard of anything. But more importantly -- it isn't even supposed to test sentience, it's supposed to test self-awareness! Those are two different things. I think you need to double check your terminology here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, yes. In those dozens of posts of mine, I figured that up and realized that I had a very different meaning for "sentient" than the actual term. The word "Sapience" is closer to what I meant, but still not exactly. Also Blxz was kind enough to inform us about the mirror test and its flaws and how they test self-awareness to dogs by smell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dog topic actually isn't THAT important here, to be fair. I want to use them to compare with serviles but I guess people won't ever bother to see them in a more equal way, just like most shapers dismiss serviles as mere creations, so, maybe we should just forget about it and come back to game world discussion. For all I know, some people out there in real world fight for more respect for animals but they rarely get success, surely I myself won't make much difference even if I try. :p (Proves my point, though: Power determines, with unshakable power compared to other animals, they'll never be properly respected, unlike in ancient days when we pay respect to almost all animals and plants)

 

"Giving her the FREEDOM to make the choice"

If that's what really happened in rebelion, I wouldn't be upset with them so much, you know. Just warn beforehand that you might go insane and disfigured, instead of avoiding mentioning the effects, would be good enough for me. Yet, they choose not to, so that they can utilise such eager people. How's that the same as providing freedom?

 

"She clearly has the discipline and loyalty to become a very responsible Shaper\Lifecrafter and a little emotion is not bad at all; she would feel empathy about the Serviles and the Creations she made"

That actually resulted in Litalia, though? Very capable, strong discipline, good empathy towards creations. AND emotional, which is actually a key point when combined. Why let past mistakes repeat?

 

"Not all Lifecrafters have been geneforged"

True, but the rest of them are made by using canisters. Which just effectively turn you into a cold-blooded inhuman person anyway. Like Litalia, right?

 

Now, apparently it's unfair to use bad apples as example, but since you love doing that to speak against shaper laws, I guess it's fair that I do so as well. All your justified actions can result in disasters just as fine. Have you realised that madness is bound to happen to some people when they learn shaping power, no matter what? You can't effectively prevent them beforehand, be it shapers or rebels, controlled or not; yet, when you know of such a risk, at least shapers control it honestly, while rebels utilise people without telling them beforehand, using them as mere tools in war. You can't stop the evil from the core, but rebels made the evil worse by sacrificing innocents for their own good. If you guys are honest with what you're doing, instead of tainting freedom with trickery, I wouldn't have problem with it at all, because I only care about innocents.

 

"That's not a question about how the non-Shapers \ non-magic using \ Low-level people would fight. They would lose. World mechanics make sure of that"

"No, the question is should those be oppressed by the people that can kill everything? The Rebellion's answer is: no"

Weird that the one question I pointed out didn't get direct answer. Come on, surely you can tell me, how do you plan to be equal with me if I can absorb you with a wave of hand? Even with rebellion success, Sucia nation functioning, etc? Can you really change the fate of creations, who're always at creator's mercy no matter what?

(Besides, you can't seem to understand why I say power is the only thing that matters. Face it: without geneforge/canister breakthrough, your "should" will never become reality, which is the only problem in here. But we don't have to dwell on "what if", we can just look at creations, and how can you ever find a way to make them equal with their masters, with or without rebellion?)

 

"So, when you hate someone enough, you find mass massacre a lot more justified than slow peaceful progress, then"

"So why do you choose to kill more here, hmm?"

"I didn't. I chose "kill few to save more" and joined the Rebellion"

Not what I meant; if you think it's right to do mass massacre when there's enough hate, then it means you choose to kill more people on the rail in real life, your "Yes. I'm not for peaceful resistance all the time. When the Nazis…" answer. Nazi might be a bad example here because they kill people instead of just making slaves or merely hurting people, you should probably stick to non-lethal conflicts for better examples. But that "yes" still mean you find it ok to kill 10 people instead of 1, if you personally think those 10 people are properly hated. (If they're murderers, fine, it's fair; but many shapers you kill during rebelion, they're not. They are probably mean to outsiders and they absorb their own creations when needed, the same thing you do during your own gameplay, but that's it. Let alone the real innocent people.)

 

"Yes, because Ghaldring and Litalia hijacked the Rebellion in GF4 and unleashed the Unbound, without listening to the complains"

The funny thing is, without such extremists, rebels might as well just hole up somewhere north and use only self defence to survive (in G2 there's a rebel good ending, sadly you're not there yet). If we really avoid killing innocents, my earlier suggestion might actually be the best choice in here.

 

"Here you have it: I don't know why the Monarch's serviles made me so uneasy. I had the initial reaction to want to "end them", like when I see a roach but then I felt... pity of them. If that helps you analyze me and tell me why I had that reaction from them"

Cool, if you want analysing I'll give you some! :D Simple question, might be useful: If you see stupid ones earlier, and see smarter ones later, would it still make you feel bad, if your very first impression is "they're supposed to be without will"? Like, you think your tv is just a piece of machine, but one day it talks to you and you see it's alive, and you eventually realise a lot of electronics are with brains, but not all of them - now, do you want to end the existence of other normal "stupid" tv?

 

Owenmoz, thanks for informing us. XD Have you read the AI description I wrote the second time though? If you haven't, skip it for all you like. If you already have, and still feel troubled, feel free to ask about that. But yeah, talking about things that don't exist yet is kinda pointless...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My resignation is still in effect so feel free to ugnore this:

In general i refuse to see dogs as equal because they are devil spawn and i dislike them strongly. Esp when they overstep themselves. An equal to me won't bite me when i chide them for peeing on the parquet. So in general dogs shouldn't be in the discussion.

 

Second, the rebelion was simply a more Chaotic and quicker way to bring on change. The society has changes a lot and would have changed more. The marking difference on those two is that serviles wouldn't have been recognised without the war. To g5 quite a few shapers don't entirely understand how come they are able of independent thought.

 

That being said, serviles are able to equal or superior thinking as humans. Thats why comparison with animals isn't good. The power over serviles is mostly military not cognitive. Serviles are actually physically more capable than shapers. And in such a scenario military power is meaningless; let me introduce you to gerilha warfare. Colombian government dragged up a war for 50 something years against a less supplied and less numbered enemies. Most independence wars and insurgencies and coup d'etat s are done like that. And quite a few are successful.

 

Monarch was not known as a shaper before. No one knows where he came from. It is just a matter of assigning blame as convenient with the trajkovites having the upper hand as like they say, shaping was to blame.

 

We work that way though mass murder is justified if we hate something enough and we have the power to do so. Wasn't that how NATO intervened in Lybia? Wether thats right or not its how we work. Always.

 

Finally i read on the AI, as a scientist im not very able to work with something that cannot be worked with empirically, i need facts and observable studies on it. But assuming what you said is known and the only possible outcome. I still do not agree on it. It removes our need to evolve and our freedom. I will not agree on it no matter the pros.

 

The difference between animals and plants is one is animate the other is inanimate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0