Zerg Rush - Fan Film

[Visions of Khas]

wIIKUpryl2Q

[Gradius]

Mom should have hidden with the kid in the tube. And zerg should be able to rip through that tube anyway. :P

Loved the animation and dark ending. xD

[The_Blade]

Awesome!

[Nissa]

The animation and stuff were well done, but the needless violence wasn't all that entertaining. That, and it's kinda hard to enjoy a film when you know the characters are dead the very second you see them.

[DemolitionSquid]

I'm surprised they killed the kid at the end. Everything is too PC these days, nice to see something more accurate.

[Nissa]

I'm surprised they killed the kid at the end. Everything is too PC these days, nice to see something more accurate.

Accurate, yes, but completely expected. Boring, even. Not that the kid living would have made it more interesting, though. Really, why was a mom and a kid out in the middle of nowhere? Why didn't the Zerg just rip everything to shreds?

[DemolitionSquid]

Accurate, yes, but completely expected. Boring, even. Not that the kid living would have made it more interesting, though. Really, why was a mom and a kid out in the middle of nowhere? Why didn't the Zerg just rip everything to shreds?

1. They lived on a farm on a backwater planet harvesting vespene. That was obvious from just watching the video.

2. Zerg kill people and spread creep, but they don't level every building around them. SC maps are covered in Terran and Protoss structure doodads that the Zerg completely ignore.

[Nissa]

1. They lived on a farm on a backwater planet harvesting vespene. That was obvious from just watching the video.

Baka. That doesn't mean that a vulnerable woman and a little kid would have apparently no contact at all with anyone, particularly in a world where violent aliens exist and they have no bomb shelter, and only one gun. That's just asking to be dead.


2. Zerg kill people and spread creep, but they don't level every building around them. SC maps are covered in Terran and Protoss structure doodads that the Zerg completely ignore.

Baka-sama. Given that Zerg probably have a keen sense of smell and there was a huge gap of light in the door where they could see the kid, they would have torn up that frail aluminum (?) like it was nobody's business. Well, not that it would be easy to animate, but y'know.

[DemolitionSquid]

Did you even watch the video?

1. They did have contact. Dropships flew over, and there was Terran outpost just a few clicks away that lifted off as the alarm was sounding. There were even siege tanks firing.

2. If you're just talking about the silo the kid hid in, then yes, it probably should have been torn open and the kid been eaten earlier. But my point about Zerg not razing every structure still stands.

Right baka-t you.

[Visions of Khas]

the needless violence wasn't all that entertaining.
Nissa... you realize you're on a forum devoted to a game that's devoted to senseless violence, right?

http://images.mystockphoto.com/files/previews/2a6/potd-40148-pc-starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty-general-zeratul-vs-hydralisk-wol-starcraft-ii-zerg-wiki-guide-701164.jpg

[DemolitionSquid]

Nissa... you realize you're on a forum devoted to a game that's devoted to senseless violence, right?

http://images.mystockphoto.com/files/previews/2a6/potd-40148-pc-starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty-general-zeratul-vs-hydralisk-wol-starcraft-ii-zerg-wiki-guide-701164.jpg

What she doesn't realize is that all violence is senseless.

[Turalyon]

The animation and stuff were well done, but the needless violence wasn't all that entertaining.

That, and it's kinda hard to enjoy a film when you know the characters are dead the very second you see them.

I would find it disturbing if anyone ever admitted that seeing a kid being ripped into by a monster "entertaining".

Besides, "needless violence" and Zerg (and Starcraft in general) kinda go hand-in-hand, so I don't know what else you were expecting going into it. It's a fan film - doesn't have to have some deeper meaning to it.

[DemolitionSquid]

I would find it disturbing if anyone ever admitted that seeing a kid being ripped into by a monster "entertaining".

Depends on the kid.

http://mostfamousperson.net/JustinBieber.png

[Nissa]

What she doesn't realize is that all violence is senseless.

Actually, not all of it is. Like, if I murdered a rapist, that's not at all senseless. But it wouldn't be entertaining either, I suppose.

[DemolitionSquid]

Actually, not all of it is. Like, if I murdered a rapist, that's not at all senseless. But it wouldn't be entertaining either, I suppose.

You missed the point. In that scenario, the rape was senseless in the first place.

[Nissa]

You missed the point. In that scenario, the rape was senseless in the first place.

And his murder is not senseless, but still quite violent. Quite.

*sips tea*

[DemolitionSquid]

And his murder is not senseless, but still quite violent. Quite.

*sips tea*

It is senseless. Its ALL senseless. If no one did anything violent then there'd be no reason to reciprocate the violence. The fact that most of humanity can't seem to grasp this simple concept is truly depressing and why we have no right to consider ourselves better than animals.

[Turalyon]

Depends on the kid.

http://mostfamousperson.net/JustinBieber.png

"That" ain't a kid.

[Visions of Khas]

If no one did anything violent then there'd be no reason to reciprocate the violence. The fact that most of humanity can't seem to grasp this simple concept is truly depressing and why we have no right to consider ourselves better than animals.

Unfortunately this is only partly true -- and not by much. Violence is part of an evolution of escalation, and is a resort in times of extreme stress. Moreover we're wired for it; there's a complex interrelationship between violence and our serotonin and dopamine system.

We are animals whose lymbic system can be moderated by a prefrontal cortex. And history shows how great we are at moderation.

[RODTHEGOD]

It is senseless. Its ALL senseless. If no one did anything violent then there'd be no reason to reciprocate the violence. The fact that most of humanity can't seem to grasp this simple concept is truly depressing and why we have no right to consider ourselves better than animals.

So you think violence is the root of all evil? People can do plenty of evil things without being violent at all.

- - - Updated - - -


It is senseless. Its ALL senseless. If no one did anything violent then there'd be no reason to reciprocate the violence. The fact that most of humanity can't seem to grasp this simple concept is truly depressing and why we have no right to consider ourselves better than animals.

So you think violence is the root of all evil? People can do plenty of evil things without being violent at all.

[DemolitionSquid]

Unfortunately this is only partly true -- and not by much. Violence is part of an evolution of escalation, and is a resort in times of extreme stress. Moreover we're wired for it; there's a complex interrelationship between violence and our serotonin and dopamine system.

We are animals whose lymbic system can be moderated by a prefrontal cortex. And history shows how great we are at moderation.

You're talking about instinctual violence, killing for food. That kind of violence cannot be helped in the natural world. I'm talking about violence between humans who have free will and choice. Every person on this planet could choose, right now, not to intentionally hurt any other ever again. Doing so is in fact the only logical option because history has proven that the greatest accomplishments are achieved through communal effort - aka working together gets shit done. The fact that we instead have pointless wars and let each other suffer out of greed/sexism/racism is proof we're still enslaved to primal violent instincts and have thus not intellectually elevated ourselves as far as we'd like to think.


So you think violence is the root of all evil? People can do plenty of evil things without being violent at all.

Of course I don't think that. Good and evil do not exist. There is merely power, how one wields it, and how that action is interpreted by a viewer. Like light-speed relativity.

[Nissa]

Ah, I see. You are judging violence by your own worldview. While I agree that humanity is not naturally enlightened, or in Roddenberry-like progress toward godhood, violence has a place. There's a time for war and a time for peace. While a violent person might begin violence senselessly, it is quite sensible to shut down such a person, in whatever way is pragmatic and ethical.

*sips some tea*

[DemolitionSquid]

There's a time for war...

No, there isn't.

[RODTHEGOD]

Of course I don't think that. Good and evil do not exist. There is merely power, how one wields it, and how that action is interpreted by a viewer. Like light-speed relativity.

You say that. Then you condemn violence as if it was evil and unnatural. You can't have it both ways.

- - - Updated - - -


Of course I don't think that. Good and evil do not exist. There is merely power, how one wields it, and how that action is interpreted by a viewer. Like light-speed relativity.

You say that. Then you condemn violence as if it was evil and unnatural. You can't have it both ways.

[DemolitionSquid]

You say that. Then you condemn violence as if it was evil and unnatural. You can't have it both ways.

Your reading comprehension needs work. Violence in the natural world between different species cannot be helped. Carnivores don't choose to be carnivores, prey don't choose to be prey. Animals don't have free will, merely the instinct to survive by eating whatever they evolved to eat. Sometimes, members of the same species will fight each other for dominance and territory. But that's also just primal instinct, where the strong survive to pass on their genes. Its pure anarchy.

Humans are different. We've evolved beyond mere instincts. We can choose, to follow our instincts, or to find another path. We've chosen to form a society, with rules that stop the primal anarchy. We've moved beyond survival of the fittest, by creating social safety nets like health care and public education, to create survival of all. Its still not perfect, we still have poverty and hunger, but its a start.

What I'm saying is, there are more things we can still choose to do, against the primal violent anarchy of our evolution. We can acknowledge that we accomplish more together than apart. We can acknowledge that if we stopped killing each other and instead nurtured each other, we'd be truly unstoppable. Unfortunately, right now mankind's greatest enemy is himself.

[RODTHEGOD]

Your reading comprehension needs work. Violence in the natural world between different species cannot be helped. Carnivores don't choose to be carnivores, prey don't choose to be prey. Animals don't have free will, merely the instinct to survive by eating whatever they evolved to eat. Sometimes, members of the same species will fight each other for dominance and territory. But that's also just primal instinct, where the strong survive to pass on their genes. Its pure anarchy.

Humans are different. We've evolved beyond mere instincts. We can choose, to follow our instincts, or to find another path. We've chosen to form a society, with rules that stop the primal anarchy. We've moved beyond survival of the fittest, by creating social safety nets like health care and public education, to create survival of all. Its still not perfect, we still have poverty and hunger, but its a start.

What I'm saying is, there are more things we can still choose to do, against the primal violent anarchy of our evolution. We can acknowledge that we accomplish more together than apart. We can acknowledge that if we stopped killing each other and instead nurtured each other, we'd be truly unstoppable. Unfortunately, right now mankind's greatest enemy is himself.

I disagree. I think many of the problems in the western world today are because many people have forgotten the laws that govern life and death. We've become so disconnected from what it means to survive that we are nothing more than livestock; cows chewing on pellets in our stalls, waiting for our next farts. We don't know how to feed ourselves, bandage ourselves, shelter ourselves, defend ourselves, reproduce ourselves. All the issues that actually matter. No, we are declawed and castrated from birth to crawl to the nearest authority begging "please sir, can I have some more." You say violence is bad, that we must transcend our meager bodies to feel the warming light of Ecstasy, like a vegetable. You are a member of a cult if you believe that dogma. I will not drink that Kool-aid. My question to you is, who are you that I must bow so low?

- - - Updated - - -


Your reading comprehension needs work. Violence in the natural world between different species cannot be helped. Carnivores don't choose to be carnivores, prey don't choose to be prey. Animals don't have free will, merely the instinct to survive by eating whatever they evolved to eat. Sometimes, members of the same species will fight each other for dominance and territory. But that's also just primal instinct, where the strong survive to pass on their genes. Its pure anarchy.

Humans are different. We've evolved beyond mere instincts. We can choose, to follow our instincts, or to find another path. We've chosen to form a society, with rules that stop the primal anarchy. We've moved beyond survival of the fittest, by creating social safety nets like health care and public education, to create survival of all. Its still not perfect, we still have poverty and hunger, but its a start.

What I'm saying is, there are more things we can still choose to do, against the primal violent anarchy of our evolution. We can acknowledge that we accomplish more together than apart. We can acknowledge that if we stopped killing each other and instead nurtured each other, we'd be truly unstoppable. Unfortunately, right now mankind's greatest enemy is himself.

I disagree. I think many of the problems in the western world today are because many people have forgotten the laws that govern life and death. We've become so disconnected from what it means to survive that we are nothing more than livestock; cows chewing on pellets, waiting for our next fart. We don't know how to feed ourselves, bandage ourselves, shelter ourselves, defend ourselves, reproduce ourselves. All the issues that actually matter. No, we are declawed and castrated from birth to crawl to the nearest authority begging "please sir, can I have some more." You say violence is bad, that we must transcend our meager bodies to feel the warming light of Ecstasy, like a vegetable. You are a member of a cult if you believe that dogma. I will not drink that Kool-aid. My question to you is, who are you that I must bow so low?

[Turalyon]

Wow, this fan film is way deeper than I thought.....

[Visions of Khas]

My question to you is, who are you that I must bow so low?

The Game of Thrones thread is over there, Lord of Castemere. :P

[Nissa]

No, there isn't.

You deserve to be slapped. Enjoy your nazi government. Enjoy an entire Korean peninsula subjugated to the north's tyranny. Many times, wars mean a nation is capable of resisting a monster. Read a book before your brain rots.

[DemolitionSquid]

I disagree. I think many of the problems in the western world today are because many people have forgotten the laws that govern life and death. We've become so disconnected from what it means to survive that we are nothing more than livestock; cows chewing on pellets in our stalls, waiting for our next farts. We don't know how to feed ourselves, bandage ourselves, shelter ourselves, defend ourselves, reproduce ourselves. All the issues that actually matter. No, we are declawed and castrated from birth to crawl to the nearest authority begging "please sir, can I have some more." You say violence is bad, that we must transcend our meager bodies to feel the warming light of Ecstasy, like a vegetable. You are a member of a cult if you believe that dogma. I will not drink that Kool-aid. My question to you is, who are you that I must bow so low?

I'm not asking you to bow to me. Where the hell did you get that from? How exactly is advocating giving everyone an equal chance to grow regardless of the success or failure of their parents part of a cult mentality? Unless you believe socialist policies like universal health care are the same as ritualistic mass suicide by poisoned fruit-punch? What we must "transcend" is the "me, me, me" mentality that controls our society, and turn it into an "us" mentality.


You deserve to be slapped. Enjoy your nazi government. Enjoy an entire Korean peninsula subjugated to the north's tyranny. Many times, wars mean a nation is capable of resisting a monster. Read a book before your brain rots.

That you keep missing the point is proof what I said is true, that humanity is not as advanced as it vainly believes. Use simple logic. If no one hurt anyone else to begin with, then there's no need for reciprocal violence. You assume I'm saying don't fight oppression, like the Nazi and DPRK regimes. This is absurdly wrong. What I'm saying is, they should not be oppressing in the first place. It's counter intuitive. The DPRK is stuck in the 60's and the laughing stock of the entire "civilized" world. If it would simply work together with everyone else then everyone would benefit.

Violence and war between humans has no logical purpose. Mankind has the ability to discuss and debate differences, to reach compromise and mutual understanding through logic. Instead, we still let ourselves be driven by entirely illogical primal instincts and reject our free will to choose, which is proof mankind is still merely another animal and has no right to claim its superior to any other.

[RODTHEGOD]

I'm not asking you to bow to me. Where the hell did you get that from? How exactly is advocating giving everyone an equal chance to grow regardless of the success or failure of their parents part of a cult mentality? Unless you believe socialist policies like universal health care are the same as ritualistic mass suicide by poisoned fruit-punch? What we must "transcend" is the "me, me, me" mentality that controls our society, and turn it into an "us" mentality.

No, you're not asking, you're telling me to bow to you. I don't want to be your livestock. The only thing you advocate is turning people into cattle. Who are you to dictate that everything must be authorized by you, that we all must wait in line for you, that we must pay a tax on everything to you, that when there is something strange in the neighborhood, who am I going to call? You. People are quite capable of fending for themselves. Who are you to throw us in a prison we can never escape from? "For your own good" is the justification of all the worst Tyrants in history. As I said, I don't want your so called "health care." I want to learn to bandage my own wounds. The laws of life and death don't go away. Those are Eternal truths and they are self-evident. You don't have to be smart, or strong, or fast, or big or even sentient to know those truths. I will not drink your Kool-aid. I'll ask again. Who are you that I must bow so low?

- - - Updated - - -


I'm not asking you to bow to me. Where the hell did you get that from? How exactly is advocating giving everyone an equal chance to grow regardless of the success or failure of their parents part of a cult mentality? Unless you believe socialist policies like universal health care are the same as ritualistic mass suicide by poisoned fruit-punch? What we must "transcend" is the "me, me, me" mentality that controls our society, and turn it into an "us" mentality.

No, you're not asking, you're telling me to bow to you. I don't want to be your livestock. The only thing you advocate is turning people into cattle. Who are you to dictate that everything must be authorized by you, that we all must wait in line for you, that we must pay a tax on everything to you, that when there is something strange in the neighborhood, who am I going to call? You. People are quite capable of fending for themselves. Who are you to throw us in a prison we can never escape from? "For your own good" is the justification of all the worst Tyrants in history. As I said, I don't want your so called "health care." I want to learn to bandage my own wounds. The laws of life and death don't go away. Those are Eternal truths and they are self-evident. You don't have to be smart, or strong, or fast, or big or even sentient to know those truths. I will not drink your Kool-aid. I'll ask again. Who are you that I must bow so low?

[Gradius]

^----slight overreaction much?

[DemolitionSquid]

No, you're not asking, you're telling me to bow to you. I don't want to be your livestock. The only thing you advocate is turning people into cattle. Who are you to dictate that everything must be authorized by you, that we all must wait in line for you, that we must pay a tax on everything to you, that when there is something strange in the neighborhood, who am I going to call? You. People are quite capable of fending for themselves. Who are you to throw us in a prison we can never escape from? "For your own good" is the justification of all the worst Tyrants in history. As I said, I don't want your so called "health care." I want to learn to bandage my own wounds. The laws of life and death don't go away. Those are Eternal truths and they are self-evident. You don't have to be smart, or strong, or fast, or big or even sentient to know those truths. I will not drink your Kool-aid. I'll ask again. Who are you that I must bow so low?

What the heck is with the aggressive attitude? How are you so wrongly interpreting what I'm saying? I never once said "for your own good." I implied "for the good of all." You're totally free to "bandage your own wounds." Why would I try to stop you from doing that? What I'm saying is that you doing so shouldn't preclude others from learning to do the same. Sadly that's how our society currently is, "I'm the only one who matters and everyone else can go fuck themselves" is the current standard and its both repulsive and illogical.

A society cannot function if it is not social. A civilization cannot function if it is not civil. Its not about being FORCED to pay taxes so others can get social benefits, like emergency health care or public transit. Its about CHOOSING to pay taxes - because you acknowledge the benefit of having more people living happier lives.

You keep talking about "eternal truths," what exactly do you mean? That we all die eventually? Obvious. That survival of the fittest is how the last 2 billion years of evolution functioned? Clearly. I've never denied these facts. I've only stated that humanity has reached the tipping point where it can surpass natural evolution and primal instincts and instead direct its own future like no living being has before. It simply has to acknowledge its own potential.

[Robear]

y'all spiral into a lot of unexpected topics

Back to the video for a second, why do you think Blizzard paid them to make this video at this time? (The same youtubers do plenty of their own original special effects shorts, but are no strangers to being paid by game companies to make viral ad-esque videos, e.g. this donkey kong thing (http://www.rocketjump.com/?video=gorilla-wayfare-ft-hawp), Metal Gear Sunrising (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meJckIFWFR0) or this Resident Evil thing. (http://www.rocketjump.com/?video=resident-evil-down-with-the-sickness)

But why right now? I guess they announced that preview campaign thing around the same time, but this video doesn't even tie into anything Protoss-y or LotV-related (probably because they didn't want to give their unreleased models to FreddieW and co, and just gave them the existing campaign ones from WoL.) I'm surprised they wouldn't have tried to time it to LotV's release or something, this is a slightly dead time for Starcraft with Blizzard focusing so much on HotS.

[DemolitionSquid]

Back to the video for a second, why do you think Blizzard paid them to make this video at this time?

Whoa, wait, what? Where does it say Blizzard paid them anything? This was a fan film. In the YT description they merely thanked Blizzard for creating SC.

[Turalyon]

But why right now?

Um, because free publicity is never a bad thing for them? It's a way to both give kudos to fans and to pat themselves on the back for making something that inspired other people.

I doubt Blizz paid for any of these works. It's just them spotlighting fan-made creations, whether it be fan-made campaigns in Arcade to things like Carbot Animations' "Starcrafts" toons and this very fan-film we're talking about.

[Nissa]

I'm not asking you to bow to me. Where the hell did you get that from? How exactly is advocating giving everyone an equal chance to grow regardless of the success or failure of their parents part of a cult mentality? Unless you believe socialist policies like universal health care are the same as ritualistic mass suicide by poisoned fruit-punch? What we must "transcend" is the "me, me, me" mentality that controls our society, and turn it into an "us" mentality.



That you keep missing the point is proof what I said is true, that humanity is not as advanced as it vainly believes. Use simple logic. If no one hurt anyone else to begin with, then there's no need for reciprocal violence. You assume I'm saying don't fight oppression, like the Nazi and DPRK regimes. This is absurdly wrong. What I'm saying is, they should not be oppressing in the first place. It's counter intuitive. The DPRK is stuck in the 60's and the laughing stock of the entire "civilized" world. If it would simply work together with everyone else then everyone would benefit.

Violence and war between humans has no logical purpose. Mankind has the ability to discuss and debate differences, to reach compromise and mutual understanding through logic. Instead, we still let ourselves be driven by entirely illogical primal instincts and reject our free will to choose, which is proof mankind is still merely another animal and has no right to claim its superior to any other.

Before I continue, let me apologize for my reaction. I get pissed off at times.

I do understand your point. Trust me, I don't believe humans are advanced at all. I don't believe in physical evolution, but I've noticed that some people that do (mostly idealist types) act as though a certain moral evolution exists. As though humans are progressively more good and less barbaric over time. This view is subtly present in Star Trek the Next Generation. Because morals are not genetically related, and not even knowledge related, there is no way for humans to improve this way over time.

I know you're trying to say that wars wouldn't happen if people were moral in the first place. Understand my point, though. While the first part may be "senseless" (and not even then -- some wars are started by a need for resources, or independence from an outside government), the responding violence to protect someone from an enemy is far from senseless.

[Visions of Khas]

Trust me, I don't believe humans are advanced at all.

I agree! Again, we're simply primates with a big prefrontal cortex and high degree of social intelligence. This is what distinguishes humans from other animals, but is not enough of a distinction to place us in our own special category. We are animals, clear and simple.


I don't believe in physical evolution


Should... we create another topic about this? Umm...


but I've noticed that some people that do (mostly idealist types) act as though a certain moral evolution exists. As though humans are progressively more good and less barbaric over time. This view is subtly present in Star Trek the Next Generation. Because morals are not genetically related, and not even knowledge related, there is no way for humans to improve this way over time.

Morality and culture are tied to our instincts and strengths in social cognition. You'll find altruism, deceit, and political maneuvering in many animals, and these modes of behaviors sometimes differ from one community to another, such that I'd argue many animals have their own society and culture. There is a link between nature and "morality", but morality isn't some transcendental entity. It is simply a construct and tool.

From the vantage point of memetics, culture, and necessarily morality and values, change over time. So, strictly speaking, morality does evolve, but not teleologically toward some transcendent moral singularity.

[DemolitionSquid]

Before I continue, let me apologize for my reaction. I get pissed off at times.

I do understand your point. Trust me, I don't believe humans are advanced at all. I don't believe in physical evolution, but I've noticed that some people that do (mostly idealist types) act as though a certain moral evolution exists. As though humans are progressively more good and less barbaric over time. This view is subtly present in Star Trek the Next Generation. Because morals are not genetically related, and not even knowledge related, there is no way for humans to improve this way over time.

I know you're trying to say that wars wouldn't happen if people were moral in the first place. Understand my point, though. While the first part may be "senseless" (and not even then -- some wars are started by a need for resources, or independence from an outside government), the responding violence to protect someone from an enemy is far from senseless.

1. Evolution is fact. Even the Pope acknowledges it. All I have to do is point to my Golden Retriever (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Retriever#Origins_and_history), a breed of dog that did not exist 200 years ago. Paleontologists just discovered a new Turtle "missing link (http://io9.com/this-transitional-turtle-is-the-stuff-of-creationist-1714158371)."

2. Morality is a human construct, based around the ideas of good and evil, which as I've stated before do not exist. What I'm saying is that humanity has the potential for absolute logic ignoring emotion and instinct, and that the natural conclusion of that logic is that the best way for humanity to progress and survive is to stop fighting and work together. I'm loathe to use this term, but we must nurture the "divinity" of mankind, mankind's limitless potential as the sole sapient lifeform with the ability for logical reason and possession of free will.

[Turalyon]

^ Part of the problem about free will is that it must necessitate deviancy as being possible, such that the idea of there being only one logical solution that everyone must "choose" (not much of choice if there's only one way is there?) to obtain "progress" (by what does one measure this as and is the value of this the same for everyone else?) is an unrealistically idealised notion.

Starcraft shows us two ways in which a species can collectively progress through the Protoss and Zerg but that even they are limited. The former have a natural empathy towards each of their kind and although they went into massive conflict when they chose to lose this empathy, when they got it back their society was fine but actually stagnated by the time we see them in the current time instead of progressing endlessly as your idealised notion would tend to suggest. The latter has a natural hive-mind and they made great strides in their progress but that doesn't mean it can't make mistakes (it's not perfect as much as it likes to believe) or is the ideal philosophy since it does not acknowledge and/or denies the existence of other systems of progress that also work by taking them over with the only means they have at their disposal.

It's curious to note that the introduction of individualism within these two systems (the Dark Templar for the former and Kerrigan for the latter) as a way of continuing progress is met with disdain by the majority because it leads to internal and potentially bloody conflict and yet is lauded by the most progressive thinker of their species at the time (Tass for the former and the Overmind for the latter). This would seem to indicate that real and continual "progress" is only possible with conflict of some sort and at some basic level.

[DemolitionSquid]

^ Part of the problem about free will is that it must necessitate deviancy as being possible, such that the idea of there being only one logical solution that everyone must "choose" (not much of choice if there's only one way is there?) to obtain "progress" (by what does one measure this as and is the value of this the same for everyone else?) is an unrealistically idealised notion.

Starcraft shows us two ways in which a species can collectively progress through the Protoss and Zerg but that even they are limited. The former have a natural empathy towards each of their kind and although they went into massive conflict when they chose to lose this empathy, when they got it back their society was fine but actually stagnated by the time we see them in the current time instead of progressing endlessly as your idealised notion would tend to suggest. The latter has a natural hive-mind and they made great strides in their progress but that doesn't mean it can't make mistakes (it's not perfect as much as it likes to believe) or is the ideal philosophy since it does not acknowledge and/or denies the existence of other systems of progress that also work by taking them over with the only means they have at their disposal.

It's curious to note that the introduction of individualism within these two systems (the Dark Templar for the former and Kerrigan for the latter) as a way of continuing progress is met with disdain by the majority because it leads to internal and potentially bloody conflict and yet is lauded by the most progressive thinker of their species at the time (Tass for the former and the Overmind for the latter). This would seem to indicate that real and continual "progress" is only possible with conflict of some sort and at some basic level.

You can't use StarCraft as a example of logical violence because both species are fictional and created with the intent of conflict.

Free will and choice are the option to overrule primal base instincts with logic and reason. Thus there is a correct choice that everyone should choose: logic and reason over primal base instincts. What makes it choice is that there are still two options.

"Progress" is a vague concept, true, with many different directions. However, there is one universal goal.

I ask you: what is the most valuable thing in the universe?

Water? Gold? Knowledge? Free will? No.

The answer is obviously, simply, life itself. Because only life can attribute value to itself, other life, and the environment it lives in.

So, it necessitates that the absolute base goal of all life is the propagation and continued existence of life. In the natural world, this sometimes requires sacrifice, true. Viruses kill other creatures as they reproduce inside cells. Parents will eat their own young to ensure they can reproduce again, and that their strongest offspring flee.

Humanity has the same, innate goal. As an aside, Abrahamic religion may be wrong on many, many things, but the drive to have lots of children is not one. Its when the enforcement of that belief creates young who cannot be properly nurtured, often due to poverty, and then discourages curiosity and experimentation, that things go astray.

What mankind can choose is to limit sacrifice as much as possible. It is said, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. As such, sacrifices must still be made and I cannot deny that. But those are in extreme survival circumstances, emergencies.

They do not include war. War is not sacrifice, it is greed. Someone wants something - land, resources, power. Instead of coming to a mutually beneficial arrangement through trade and unity, they choose division and death so they can acquire said thing and not share it. For war to be sacrifice, it would have to be against a foe that is not capable of logical discourse - unsapient, or so completely alien that both sides cannot ever understand eachother.

Which brings us back to StarCraft. 3 alien species, fighting over resources. If they could not communicate, then perhaps war is truly inevitable. But that is not the case. All 3 species could communicate with each other, sapient, possessing of logic and filled with free will. They could of held discourse. They could have found a solution that benefitted everyone. They chose not to, and I will forever maintain that was the wrong choice.

[Turalyon]

You can't use StarCraft as a example of logical violence because both species are fictional and created with the intent of conflict.

Why not? The notion of human society having the capability to become a true eudamonia is just as fictional and idealised.


Free will and choice are the option to overrule primal base instincts with logic and reason. Thus there is a correct choice that everyone should choose: logic and reason over primal base instincts. What makes it choice is that there are still two options.

The point of free will and having a "choice" is independent on whether that choice is ultimately deemed good or bad. If there is only one proposed way for progress/correct answer, it's not really a choice is it? One shouldn't lament others making so-called "bad choices" that limit progress yet in the same vein praise free will as being the answer because part of having free will means that any choice is potentially equally justified/unjustified. As such, "being logical and reasonable to progress" is not really a choice for one to make.


I ask you: what is the most valuable thing in the universe?

The problem is not the question itself but the bolded part. You can wax lyrical and claim something to be universally logical, but everyone deems themselves logical...


So, it necessitates that the absolute base goal of all life is the propagation and continued existence of life. In the natural world, this sometimes requires sacrifice, true. Viruses kill other creatures as they reproduce inside cells. Parents will eat their own young to ensure they can reproduce again, and that their strongest offspring flee.

You're almost right. The goal of life is propagation and continued existence of me and mine, not life in general or in all it's variety/splendour.


What mankind can choose is to limit sacrifice as much as possible. It is said, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. As such, sacrifices must still be made and I cannot deny that. But those are in extreme survival circumstances, emergencies.

This, like all ideals, is fine and good. However, is it reasonable to suppose that this be universally accepted as being of the utmost priority at all times for each and every individual though? Maybe, maybe not. I don't know nor do I pretend to know better.

As to sacrifice, it kinda depends on what you define what that is. It is not always limited to do-or-die sceanrios as you suggest. There will always be a measure of this required to ensure progress since most people are happy with the way things are/dislike change and only those who are willing to create conflict can shake things up or even begin to promote change.


They do not include war. War is not sacrifice, it is greed. Someone wants something - land, resources, power. Instead of coming to a mutually beneficial arrangement through trade and unity, they choose division and death so they can acquire said thing and not share it. For war to be sacrifice, it would have to be against a foe that is not capable of logical discourse - unsapient, or so completely alien that both sides cannot ever understand eachother.

And yet, progress is still made despite wars (and some would say, in part, due to war).


Which brings us back to StarCraft. 3 alien species, fighting over resources. If they could not communicate, then perhaps war is truly inevitable. But that is not the case. All 3 species could communicate with each other, sapient, possessing of logic and filled with free will. They could of held discourse. They could have found a solution that benefitted everyone. They chose not to, and I will forever maintain that was the wrong choice.

I wasn't talking about conflict between the species but rather the progress and conflict within the species. The Protoss are a rough representation of your idealised notion of a society coming together to progress where there was a communal empathic link that should have solved all their internal problems, however, free will was there downfall because they still had a choice to become selfish. The eventual solution to this was to restrict their selfishness and become stoically stringent to a new order - which then fell apart again due to the free-will to make choices. As you can see, nothing is perfect/ideal but keep note, that progress still occurred despite those upheavals! One could say that those internal conflicts were probably good for their society as a whole in the long-run ultimately... if not for the Zerg killing them and all.

The Zerg are the ultimate solution to the problems the Protoss had in terms of continuous progression as a society since everyone amongst the Zerg are willing to work for a common good. It's just that the common good is Zerg-centred - everything else is irrelevent or soon to be Zerg and hence, they have no need to communicate with non-Zerg. This is the problem of an idealised society that promotes the agenda of a singular species as a whole - it can only be myopic to that society's needs. So instead of being selfish on an individual level, it is now selfish on a much larger level. Sure the Zerg are an extreme example, but given that people are inherently selfish on an individual level and in groups, having humanity working as a whole (if such a thing came true) would just gives us license to be more "speciest" not less.

The conflict between the races is understandable given that the root problems exist within (and perhaps always will) the races themselves. The Zerg are not negotiable and the Protoss are hardly any better than humans in terms of social evolution despite their many other outward advancements/advantages. The Terrans are just another by-product in a long-line of human society's inhumanity to each other, so there isn't much enlightenment to be had there. Negotiations will be pointless since neither of the species will trully and fully get what they each want since the only possible way for them to stop all conflicts is to stop wanting. Yeah, how reasonable is that? :p

[Visions of Khas]

DemolitionSquid;

I wish Vulcans existed, Demo, but we are flesh and bone. We are not computers, but rather walking chemistry sets, with vaguely malleable and definitely fallible neurons in lieu of transistors and microchips, whose currency are glutamate, dopamine, GABA, and seratonin. What you're asking for Christian Bale's world of Equilibrium.

The best we can hope for is moderation. We need to use our emotions, because at our core that is who and what we are. Take the Alzheimer's patient, take a baby. Do they think, reason, rationalize? No, because for them emotion rules. (Trust me on this, I've worked with plenty of both.) Because for them the prefrontal cortex is either in development or in recession. When you strip that particular evolutionary quirk from the human brain, Demo, you know exactly what exists for us all, deep down: the lizard brain full of fear and hope and love and hate.

The absolute best we can do is learn to moderate that. So we need to learn both rationalization, and to use our emotions in positive, nurturing ways.

We cannot divorce ourselves from emotion.



(...but if we ever do, I guess we've got gun kata to look forward to.)

[DemolitionSquid]

The absolute best we can do is learn to moderate that. So we need to learn both rationalization, and to use our emotions in positive, nurturing ways.

We cannot divorce ourselves from emotion.

I never claimed we could, nor we should. What I've been saying is we can better choose how to act upon those emotions through logic. Its the difference between being scared to cross a bridge and thus not crossing it, and being scared to cross a bridge but still crossing it because you can logical determine the benefit of crossing.

[Visions of Khas]

Its the difference between being scared to cross a bridge and thus not crossing it, and being scared to cross a bridge but still crossing it because you can logical determine the benefit of crossing.

A heavy cost. I pay it gladly.

[KaiserStratosTygo]

Damn, you'd never get this kind of crazy, deep, shit on B.NET.

What the fk was going on here?

[DemolitionSquid]

Damn, you'd never get this kind of crazy, deep, shit on B.NET.

What the fk was going on here?

Complete and utter boredom combined with abject cynicism.

[Nissa]

Complete and utter boredom combined with abject cynicism.

That should be the motto of sclegacy. That's us in every thread.