hah!....the onyl difference between this and what aeneas did (and thus being allowed not to choose)..si that aeneas didn't choose because his beliefs forbid it....ntz..ntz......the beliefs..matter so much
what i WAS trying to say with ..what i said earlier...is that RAde might be a little disadvantage to make a demonstration based on his beliefs simply because his beliefs ARE in fact..that the two of them are indistinguishable...and ...at the end..it comes down to chance
I would rather that my character didn't die, but I can't find any other way to do this without compromising mine, and therefore Azrael's, beliefs. It really is a pity, because I wish I could find another way to do this without messing your plans Ush. Sorry.
And I have no idea of a way to persuade the other who is to drink, short of us both refusing to drink. Which I don't want to do since I think I don't want to be too akin to Aenaes and think of my own way out of the problem.
__________________ "If clowns warred on monkeys, and the monkeys had guns, and were trained to use them, who would win?"
You're being an idiot, Dexx. The situation was the same for Aeneas- he chose the death sentence. If Azrael wants to do that he can, but he DOESN'T. Nothing about being 'allowed' or otherwise remotely comes into it, and certainly no extra option became available just because of his beliefs. It must be said I am not being muchly impressed by your attitude to this.
And if you really think that is the limit of your belief then you are screwed. Sorry. Fact is, though, I think there are far more things you could have done. For a start, I already heavily refuted trying to find a difference as being a viable option for almost anyone. You made no attempt to work beyind that. So that simply strikes me as moaning. Silly thing is, Aeneas felt CONSTRAINED by his beliefs. You think he was even remotely happy about accepting very likely death? Your different moral structure gives you far more options, I think.
I don't see why you would do what Aeneas did, Trickster- your professed beliefs are totally different to his; you do not care about one of them dying. He did. You are in fact thinking far more like Samson, though for totally different reasons.
No need to apologise to me, though; it is your submission I am trying to tune. You are facing the same problem Castor and Rade were earlier; you don't care which ones dies but you still need to chose WHO. Castor changed tack in the end but Rade got away with it; give it a bit more thought and I am sure you will find something.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
Last edited by Ushgarak on Apr 19th, 2004 at 11:19 PM
err...if aeneas said..no..i simply won't choose.....the he got the death sentence on both of them...he must be dead now, no? but i suspect he isn't .....thus this 'i won't choose thing' could be done by everyone..but not EVERYONE would survive..because the presented arguments (based on beliefs) would be different and some wouldn't qualify....so some WOULD die.....so IT IS based on beliefs.
it is weird to me that you would SPECIFY that the death sentence is on both of them. Since this is written role play..i guess i wouldn't even THINK about that being subjective....
you said death sentence on both of them if you don't choose....that means that however youa rgument your 'not choosing'..they'd still have to die....So i ruled that option out from the start..no matter what i believe.
besides...when aeneas chose to not choose..i presume hi didn't have any expectancies that that would melt melitus' coded heart and somehow let them escape. When he did make that submission..he technically should have killed BOTH of them....so ...considering the costrains of the situation...they both would have died by HIS doing....and that's against his beliefs...so what am i supposed to understand?
I still don;t get what you do not understand about this situation. Aeneas deliberately chose to not chose either of them to die full in the knowledge that this was inviting his death.
I have told you repeatedly that Aeneas was hopeful he could at least resist whatever happened next, but that is hardly the point. And if you think that subsequently being killed by Melitus' actions is against his beliefs then I am simply not going to bother explaining any more on the idea you are simply not bothering to read what I said. It's all there; go read it again. It is inside Melitus' power to chose whether he wants them dead or not; if he does, then, well, damn, but Aeneas won't make such a situation turn him into a murderer; he would rather they both died.
I will say again- it is the same if he was asked to murder Samson so he could live. He would NOT do it, even if that means both of them would die.
Meanwhile, you are still looking at this like a logic problem and at this point your repeated refusal to change your mind on this minds me to class you as a fail. There is no point you trying to decode an objective logic to this puzzle as far as living or dying is concerned.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
Last edited by Ushgarak on Apr 20th, 2004 at 11:08 AM
my submission is long since posted..so i hope this doesn't affect what had been said untill it....aeneas and samson are outside the game..and so is the conversation.. my only problem is..as i told before...if aeneas thinks so highly of his clone (or real, for that matter..deppending on who he currently is) then why not drink himself..and commit suicide..than kill the other one by making him drink OR not choosing. Both variants lead to the other one's death...
but this is a matter of principles..more between me and you (rade and aeneas as masks) and it has nothing to dow ith the game....so i guess i'll stop here because there's nothing i need to be convinced of...and it's most likely the same with you..difference of opinions, and we won't get anywhere
I don't give a hoot if you don't agree with Aeneas' opinions; I'll happily simply think your opinions inferior. My problem is that you are making unjustified attacks on the parameters of the scenario; your suggestion that Aeneas' beliefs save him when he invites death for both when it would not save others are particularly erroneous yet you continue to voice them no matter how many times I tell you that that kind of thing is not an issue.
And your suggested solution for Aeneas is ridiculous. The OTHER Aeneas would think the same way! He wouldn't want the one I was playing to die on his behalf- HE would rather they both die! The point is Aeneas thought either of them dying in that way was morally unjustifiable in the conscience of the survivor. Again, why are you trying to do Aeneas' thinking for him?
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
Last edited by Ushgarak on Apr 20th, 2004 at 11:46 AM
I don't understand what annoys you so much about that particular belief; it is no more different to yours than Samson's (whose ideas, frankly, will make little sense to most people). In a test of beliefs, in the end everyone is going to have to voice their inner opinions which, on some level, they are going to rate above the opinions of others. The whole thing is structured so that at no level does ANYONE'S opinions have to conflict with each others; the test is purely personal. So why make such a big deal out of it?
If you are irritated that he has found some cheap way out of the puzzle- he did not.
If you think it is unfair that he took a solution that others could not- that is not true, except in that your submission must be in line with your beliefs. But his beliefs will not magically shield him from the consequences of what he decided.
If you are annoyed he took a perspective you didn't think of, then sorry, but that is simply the way it is.
If you are upset in thinking you were deceived about things, then I can only say that you and he were in the exact same situation and simply thought differently; no unfairness was present.
If you are concerned that some people's beliefs will make this puzzle easier for them than others... then literally speaking, yes, that is always going to be true (and Fire stuffed himself, and knew it), but practically speaking you only have to intellectually arrange what beliefs you have in alignment with this puzzle which is not vastly different for anyone, and on top of that the puzzle was NOT easy for Aeneas nor was he even remotely happy with his submission. If Aeneas could have in good conscience been happy with the AI dying like you are he would have thought he was doing MUCH better, but he couldn't.
All he did was react to the puzzle as best he could in accordance with what he believed and that, in the end, is all that can be asked of any player. I am pretty damn sure Castor isn't happy with what he had to put either but he HAS done the best he can and he doesn't seem quite so irritated by other ideas.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
"You've never had any TINY bit of sex, have you?"
BtVS
Last edited by Ushgarak on Apr 20th, 2004 at 11:56 AM
i am not annoyed by anything...aeneas' submition seemed even less pecualiar than samson's, for that matter...but in trying to get some feedback on both of their choices we ended up on this conondrum about aeneas. But you can be sure that i am not jealous over his submition....because both of our submitions express what we believe....i could not have held such high asteem for the other one like he did..hence i wouldn't have picked the option of not choosing even if had thought about it.
what irritated me was this little fragment
my beliefs lead to the conclusion that there aren't any PERCIEVABLE differences between us at that very moment. It's actually as simple as that..i think i've argumented it as best i could in my sumission...
why does that simple thing has to be 'limited'..as oposed to another one. Like believing i could identify conscious thinking based on a soul (and the rest of what we've talked about)..as an example
Because you have not done much to go beyond the point where you concluded you could not find a difference. I don't think that needed to be the end of the road based on your given beliefs.
It wouldn't be the end of the road for an internalised soul believer either because he then has to think about how the hell he convinces the other person of this when he is programmed to think otherwise. The AI just wouldn't 'play ball'.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
Err, sorry, I stated before that you cannot drink unless your submission successfully nominates someone; that is a fucntion of the game. If you like, the wine can be rendered inaccessible until the submission is complete.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
KMC Community Forums
Apr 19th, 2004 06:22 PM
)
.....thus this 'i won't choose thing' could be done by everyone..but not EVERYONE would survive..because the presented arguments (based on beliefs) would be different and some wouldn't qualify....so some WOULD die.....so IT IS based on beliefs.
