Should Geth have Rights? (Spoilers)

#261merc_ninePosted 6/22/2012 9:03:08 AM
That what the whole debate is really about. If they are machines, then they dont deserve rights and they cant truly be alive, just really good at faking it. SO destroying them shouldn't be a big deal.
#262merc_ninePosted 6/22/2012 9:36:54 AM
http://kotaku.com/5920559/expanded-mass-effect-3-ending-coming-on-june-26
#263EmptyBladePosted 6/22/2012 10:16:22 AM(edited)
merc_nine posted...
That what the whole debate is really about. If they are machines, then they dont deserve rights and they cant truly be alive, just really good at faking it. SO destroying them shouldn't be a big deal.


In a discussion about whether machines can have rights, your logic is: machines are machines so they don't have rights. That doesn't prove anything.

Furthermore, whether or not they have rights, it is not even logical to do it, as I've stated repeatedly now. A species whose default stance is "kill all the things that might be threats" is doomed to destruction, because IT is a threat, and now because of that everyone has to respond to that, so now everyone is a threat. You turn things into threats that didn't have to be. If you cause the guarantee that we must be at war with every AI, then the reapers are right, they will eventually destroy us. The only way to prevent that is to grow in peace. That's been the fundamental building block that allows us to achieve civilization as we have it today.

You could do with being a little more logical yourself.

merc_nine posted...
Why did they attack the Quarians in ME2 on Halestrom? Why did they not take the Aleria in ME2 and just leave?


Those are heretic geth, this was explained to us in the game. The reapers sent the heretics there to investigate the dark energy phenomenon going on, because in ME2 the dark energy ending was still the intended ending. They even cite Haelstrom specifically in the Dark Energy ending writeup.


And I ask again, what reason do you have to think they'd WANT to fight us? You assign them human traits by assuming they would. It is not logical for them to attack us. It is not logical for you to say we should attack them. You would only be providing a precedent to tell the next AI to rise up that WE are dangerous and should be destroyed.
#264merc_ninePosted 6/22/2012 12:14:46 PM
WANT has nothing to do with it.
#265EmptyBladePosted 6/22/2012 12:33:30 PM
So pretty much not gonna respond to any of my points?

There are more graceful ways to concede.
#266BhelliumPosted 6/22/2012 12:39:28 PM
If there is one thing this topic has taught us, it's that there needs to be a ME: Morning War spin-off.
---
P&L: Deal w/it
Cookie if you get the reference
#267DestinPosted 6/22/2012 12:44:22 PM
Bhellium posted...
If there is one thing this topic has taught us, it's that there needs to be a ME: Morning War spin-off.


it'll end up like that BSG spin-off, Caprica.
---
Destin the Valiant
#268BhelliumPosted 6/22/2012 12:45:54 PM
Destin posted...

it'll end up like that BSG spin-off, Caprica.


Possibly, only saw the first episode.
I'm just going to go out on a limb though and suggest that the inevitable steamy romance scenes don't involve Geth.

No matter how much we might want them to.
---
P&L: Deal w/it
Cookie if you get the reference
#269merc_ninePosted 6/22/2012 12:47:51 PM
EmptyBlade posted...
So pretty much not gonna respond to any of my points?

There are more graceful ways to concede.


Sorry, Im trying to work in between explaining every sentence you take out of context
#270EmptyBladePosted 6/22/2012 12:54:58 PM(edited)
merc_nine posted...
EmptyBlade posted...
So pretty much not gonna respond to any of my points?

There are more graceful ways to concede.


Sorry, Im trying to work in between explaining every sentence you take out of context


That's hilariously ironic. I look forward to hearing exactly what the missing context was and how my response fails to take it into account. Especially considering that I was responding to one or two line posts.