The Indoctrination Theory and Refuse

Eryri wrote:

DoomsdayDevice wrote:

I am saying that Shepard only wakes up/survives in high EMS destroy. In mid/low-EMS destroy, Shepard resists the indoctrination, but he dies. Only the Shepard who does every possible thing has a chance of waking up.

Makes sense. low ems destroy is a moral, but not a physical victory, in that Shepard dies free.

Out of interest, what's the total number of assets you can get from Leviathan and Omega? Are they enough to push you over the 4000 ems threshold for the breath scene in the original cut? If so that lends credence to the Puzzle Theory - only someone who had either experienced everything in ME3 and its DLC, (or played MP) would have a chance of surviving.

I had 3800 EMS without multiplayer (so, 50% readiness) before Leviathan and Omega. I'm guessing doing Leviathan and Omega would be enough to give you 200 EMS. I haven't checked though, but I'm guessing it should be enough. Not that it really matters now that the bar has been lowered by EC.

AxStapleton wrote:Yeah, I believe that in Refuse, Shepard has locked into Refusing to use the Crucible, their mind made up, as with any of the choices, so it "powers down".

Yes, exactly. We have to remember that the ending is symbolic, it's a metaphor.

Restrider wrote:

IronicParticle wrote:@DD: The whole problem with this, is we know he can stop Shepard from picking Destroy. He does so in Refuse.

But isn't that triggered only when you make a choice (including Refuse here)?
As far as I know, once you have gone to the Control prongs, you cannot return to any other choice and vice versa (this led to a Critical Mission Failure, because the Crucible was allegedly destroyed; you could call it the Refuse BETA; did they change that with the EC?).
Once Refuse is locked, the choices are locked aswell.
But this is triggered by yourself making a choice (again, Refuse included).

First off no, in the other endings the other options are still open, they never power down. You are only locked onto the option because of the cutscene in those endings. So nope, the crucible shutting down is not relative to Shepard's mind locking down. But why would it? It's not like those 3 choices are a part of Shepard's mind otherwise you have to accept the other 2, Control and Synthesis, as Shepard's mind.

Speaking of which, by choosing Destroy you accept that premise. Destroy is a physical separate manifestation, by accepting everything external to Shepard in the attempt as a part of him, that includes Synthesis and Control. Either everything external is a part of Shepard, or everything external is not a part of him/her.

You know though there is way more in support of Refuse than there is Destroy, I'm sad to have to admit that. I've been hoping you guys could throw out better refutations and arguments at times, but you don't succeed.

Destroy is the untrustworthy one.

Destroy the only one that sounds similar to Shepard's resolve while also making a compromise. Refuse doesn't compromise.

Destroy makes no sense, the Catalyst not only is neutral about being Destroyed but also neutral to an ending where he fails whatever his objective is. But he hates the ending where ALLEGEDLY the cycle continues? I stress the word allegedly, if it's true then he should be happy, it being false is the only reason he could possibly dislike it.

Destroy can be manipulated by the Reapers, the crucible shutting down is irrelevant to Shepard's mind shutting down. This doubles over because there is no reason for his mind to do such an unnecessary thing, it apparently didn't need to do it in the other endings which could ONLY be because Shepard doesn't change his mind at the last second in those endings. But if his mind locks down in Refuse just like the other endings, then there is no need to make it shut down because he is going to stick to Refuse anyways.

etc, etc.

Come on guys. I wish I could be supporting Destroy, or at least refuting Refuse arguments right now but if I did that then nobody would be arguing on Refuse's behalf. So try a little harder to break these points down? No offense, maybe I'd do no better :l

Well, points in favour of Destroy would be:

1. The Breath Scene.
2. The fact that Destroy wasn't a solution, then the game would've had no correct ending in the original version.
3. The Guardian acknowledging Shepard's intent to destroy the Reapers ("I know you have been thinking about destroying us").
4. In general the distinctiveness of Destroy compared to Synthesis/Control (huskification, throwing away the gun...).

I have also counter-arguments for these points:

1. It could just be an easter-egg.
2. BW not wanting to have only one correct way (e.g. everyone was wrong; only a few less than others].
3. This acknowledgement being part of the mind-games.
4. Okay, here I have no idea why that would be the case.

All in all I am not too convinced by what I have posted as counter-arguments.

Here is another thought experiment:
What would have been your choice, if you played the game the first time and the EC was included? Try to be honest here.

Restrider wrote:

Here is another thought experiment:
What would have been your choice, if you played the game the first time and the EC was included? Try to be honest here.

Uhm...good question and it also depends on what type of character we play. Since my first playthrough was a full Paragon I think it would be really hard to decide, that's for sure. Ultimately I think I would have picked Destroy, though Control would be a close second, since that particular Shepard of mine it's unselfish, it would make perfect sense for him to sacrifice himself to save the Geth and EDI, and guarding the Galaxy for eternity.

Restrider wrote:

Here is another thought experiment:
What would have been your choice, if you played the game the first time and the EC was included? Try to be honest here.

Synthesis

Restrider wrote:

Here is another thought experiment:
What would have been your choice, if you played the game the first time and the EC was included? Try to be honest here.

I don't know, are we talking after having played ME1 and ME2 or just ME3 alone?

If with the other two games I don't know...I picked Destroy without the EC and have not done a EC play through (I quit the moment i saw the extraction scene). Perhaps EC would have swayed me towards Synthesis (Control has always been out of the question, utterly).

Without ME1 and 2? Anything might happen, most likely Synthesis though.

It's basically as if you played your first playthrough, only with the addition of a possible Refuse option.

IronicParticle wrote:You know though there is way more in support of Refuse than there is Destroy, I'm sad to have to admit that. I've been hoping you guys could throw out better refutations and arguments at times, but you don't succeed.

You've got to be kidding me.

I 'd like you to go look at the ultimate quotes selection, check out the number of quotes in support of destroy, then come up with a number of quotes in support of refuse that's at least half as long as the list for destroy is. Then we'll talk.

Also: "Stand in the ashes of a trillion dead souls and ask the ghosts if honour matters. The silence is your answer."

Gonna chime in :D

If you're talking classic IT, then you're talking about a mental battle between Harbinger and Shepard. It's a battle of resolve.

We know Saren lost that battle with Harbinger - he became convinced that hope was lost, that the only thing to do was to accept the Reaper's ultimate victory, and in doing so he accepted their will. He accepted the vision of "the strengths of both and the weaknesses of none" - no-one on this site will need me to explain that any further.

You guys aren't arguing in favour of Synth or Con so I'll skip them. But how does Saren's resolve compare with Destroy and Refuse?

Saren gives in to fear. Refuse Shepard certainly doesn't. Shepard firmly believes that nothing more could be done. Destroy Shepard, if anything, succumbs to fear more, as the sacrifice of other allies is deemed a harsh necessity in winning the war.

Still, the resolve of Destroy Shepard is to do everything possible to stop the Reapers. Refuse Shepard uses these words, but they're a little hollow - the crucible was there ready to stop the Reapers, yet Shepard refused to use it.

We're talking about resolve, but does submission to fear resolve this problem? Saren succumbed to fear, but in doing so he aligned himself with the Reapers. He accepted that nothing he could do would stop them.

What about TIM? Most accept he was, at some point, indoctrinated. Was he scared? Sure. So was Liara, Garrus, even EDI. But TIM 'sacrificed too much' to do fight the Reapers. He didn't submit to the Reapers, but he did submit to their methods, and his goals inadvertently became theirs - to dominate, harness, control the galaxy.

Looking at Destroy, Shepard is willing to make a sacrifice that is highly morally dubious. Whereas Refuse Shepard makes no special deal with the Reapers.

But what does Refuse Shepard do? Gives up. Make no mistake, that is precisely what Refuse Shepard does. Accepts the slaughter, accepts the failure. Accepts, like Saren and, imo, like TIM, that the Reapers cannot be destroyed. Shepard here, instead of sacrificing morals, sacrifices everybody, and accepts that no-one can be saved.

Remember we're talking about escaping an indoctrination attempt - a battle of resolve. Shepard loses to indoctrination if resolve against the Reapers is lost. Each person in the galaxy cannot know that the Reapers can be stopped, but they each hope that the Reapers can be stopped. Con and Synth Shepards still have hope, but their resolve is changed, shifted. But Refuse Shepard has no hope. Shepard has lost resolve completely. Shepard has been talked out of doing what needs to be done to stop the Reapers.

That, plus the existence of the Breath Scene and the reasons why IT emerged in the first place, is why I think that Destroy is surely at least more in support of breaking indoctrination than Refuse, if not the only way.

I maintain that Shep wakes up in high EMS destroy because she knows she did everything she could to stop the Reapers. There is hope in the mind, it refuses to believe Shepard is dead.

In refuse, Shep knows she doomed the cycle, hence why she will not wake up. There is no hope in the mind, it accepts that Shepard is dead.

Restrider wrote:
Here is another thought experiment:
What would have been your choice, if you played the game the first time and the EC was included? Try to be honest here.

Destroy... almost positive.

The EC dialogue with Starbaby almost made me switch to Red, but I chose Green again because I felt I had to stay true to my "original" decision, and because I was just more interested/curious to see its outcome.

That's actually the opposite of what happened the first time. I was intrigued by Synthesis but figured I'd just keep it simple, go Destroy and maybe reconsider on another play (or youtube it, which I did).

I might have changed my mind later, but I remember that after my first EC play, I was leaning Destroy.

Restrider wrote:Well, points in favour of Destroy would be:

1. The Breath Scene.
2. The fact that Destroy wasn't a solution, then the game would've had no correct ending in the original version.
3. The Guardian acknowledging Shepard's intent to destroy the Reapers ("I know you have been thinking about destroying us").
4. In general the distinctiveness of Destroy compared to Synthesis/Control (huskification, throwing away the gun...).

I have also counter-arguments for these points:

1. It could just be an easter-egg.
2. BW not wanting to have only one correct way (e.g. everyone was wrong; only a few less than others].
3. This acknowledgement being part of the mind-games.
4. Okay, here I have no idea why that would be the case.

All in all I am not too convinced by what I have posted as counter-arguments.

Here is another thought experiment:
What would have been your choice, if you played the game the first time and the EC was included? Try to be honest here.

Without knowing about IT? Refuse, actually. I don't really want to get into the long details. I picked Destroy for reasons outweighed by Refuse and the EC, so had I played the EC first time I'd pick Refuse.

Anyways, I think I've had enough speculations... March 5th we find out one way or another so now that the answer has a date, I will wait patiently.

In response to Refuse giving up:

Death is not failure, it's not losing and it's not giving up. A man once said "Only the living seem to have a problem with death, that seems to be the only saga that's left." He's right, we are not animals anymore so why do we cower and hide to live another day just so we can die another day? Why do we care so damn much about life. Is that what is important to you? Simple way to show you that it's not, would you do the worst possible thing you can imagine if it saves your life? Yes? Get some help, you are beyond a sociopath. No? Congrats, that's your Humanity. You know what's funny? We call it our "Humanity" to recognize that all Humans when uncorrupted are like that. That means me, you, your dad, the guy down the street, Commander Shepard, the cable guy, and everyone else who is Human... we all are like that. There are things so horrible we would not do just to live, it's an inevitable aspect to being Human.

Now I'm not saying Destroy is as bad as doing whatever the worst thing is you can imagine. That was just an example to prove ALL HUMANS hold the same resolve in the bigger picture. Whether a product of our genes, or a byproduct of intelligence. A deviance from such, is sociopathic, inhumane, etc. "No matter the cost" Only a sociopath has this kind of resolve, so are we arguing Shepard is a sociopath? I mean damn, I thought PTSD made no sense because he was still allowed in the military(among other reasons), is hackett so desperate he needs crazy nutcases in his army?

Refuse is not giving up BECAUSE you remain human. I'd consider Destroy giving up... your humanity. See what I did there? If it's about Resolve, what does that say about Destroy and giving up your Humanity?? Also, it's not morally dubious, dubious is making it sound too trivial. It's many levels above dubious in terms of being immoral.

I support Destroy because I dunno, guess it kinda stuck after reading everything IT related since 99% of it is biased towards Destroy anyways. It has some good lore arguments, and my support for Refuse assumes a lot of things. Though the stuff involving psychology SHOULD be relevant because doesn't someone in Bioware have a degree in psychology?

Anyways, done with the speculations as I said. No need to speculate, just wait till March 5th and whatever happens we will actually know.

IronicParticle wrote:In response to Refuse giving up:

Ok...

Shepard isn't hiding like a coward trying to save his or her own life... the choice is made to save all lives across the galaxy. And Shepard does not expect to survive. Bringing up some saying about people trying to stay alive shows that you have missed the point of both what we're talking about here and the very quote you brought up.

If you think that "giving up your humanity" is stopping the death, liquification, enslavement and hunting down of trillions of lives across the galaxy, how do you consider the choice of a single individual to allow all those things to happen for the sake of preserving his or her own moral pride?

What with Citadel DLC being so close now this whole argument seems pretty moot, and tbh I have no great interest in continuing it, but the style of your response astounds me I must say.

Yeah, needless to say, I'm with Davik on this in all respects.

The problem here is that you can't blame someone for failing if they tried their best to do the right thing. If you think becoming a monster is the best you can do, then you are a pathetic human being. The galaxy consented to the risks you mentioned... "liquification, enslavement and hunting down of trillions of lives across the galaxy" If they didn't want it to happen they could've hid in some remote corner of the galaxy.

They are here out of their own free will for 1 thing only, the future. they are here to fight for their own future as well to defend the future of everyone else. You don't just back-stab the Geth by taking their future children away... you back-stab all organics by accepting such a sacrifice on their behalf. I sure as hell would not be willing to accept the sacrifice of the Geth's future just so I can live, in fact if I was an organic fighting in the war, I'd want to do the reverse... sacrifice myself to save the future of the Geth and Humanity and the Turians and the Quarians, etc alike

I'm pretty sure this is what a hero would do, not Destroy. Is Shepard not the hero?

The reason I could be wrong is because this is all fiction, so it could follow nonsensical and illogical rules. In the ME universe, the morally right thing could be exactly what would be wrong in the real world. But Bioware's writers don't seem to work like that, they seem to specifically reflect real world morality and ethics.

Edit: I suffer from conduct disorder. So if I am very blunt or offensive, I can't help it. The best you can do is just go with it and make sense of my points... or just ignore me, whatever.

Also, Leviathans show how easy it is to hide from the Reapers. So it is actually a viable "solution".

but deep down you should be aware that the galaxy knows they could do that, but because so many have suffered and because the Reapers will keep reaping, life will be pretty fucking miserable for them and their future children as well. So they already prefer death to living miserable, however nobody is in this alone. If the Geth lose their chance at a better future just so we can have ours, what right do we have to our own future? Why didn't we sacrifice our future for the Geth? Or why didn't we all just fight to defend all of our futures?

You are talking to the Reapers face to face, and they let you destroy them if you sacrifice the freedom of the Geth... in the words of Joker "WHAT THE SHIT!?"

I'd just like to point out that in Destroy, you are swallowing your pride and accepting a solution presented by the Catalyst because you want to destroy the Reapers, no matter what. You're saying that you're willing to accept a solution presented by you by the leader of the Reapers (who everyone wants to pepper with bullets) if it means that your goals of saving the galaxy and your friends are ultimately achieved. You really don't want to deal with Starbrat, and you want to tell him where to shove it, but you'll stomach it so you can get this one goal accomplished, for the good of everyone. Sound familiar?

Refuse, on the other hand, is a bull-headed, stubborn option that says that you will never, EVER compromise with the Reapers at all. You reject everything they are and everything they say. You are willing to let the entire galaxy die if it just means that you never give anything, anything at all, to the Reapers. Selfish, yes. Ideological, yes. Mind-blowingly stupid, definitely. But is that a bad thing? Maybe being stubborn is the only way to win. Maybe refusing to be swayed or persuaded by something as easily twisted as logic is the only way to defeat the Reapers. Just some food for thought.

(Note: this doesn't actually represent my current perspective. I'm of the opinion that Refuse is actually slightly worse than Destroy, I just don't want to make Ironic Particle argue against you guys all by himself. :) )

And to begin a fruitful discussion again, I'd like to reset this thread to the last reasonable post:

Lokanaiya wrote:I'd just like to point out that in Destroy, you are swallowing your pride and accepting a solution presented by the Catalyst because you want to destroy the Reapers, no matter what. You're saying that you're willing to accept a solution presented by you by the leader of the Reapers (who everyone wants to pepper with bullets) if it means that your goals of saving the galaxy and your friends are ultimately achieved. You really don't want to deal with Starbrat, and you want to tell him where to shove it, but you'll stomach it so you can get this one goal accomplished, for the good of everyone. Sound familiar?

Refuse, on the other hand, is a bull-headed, stubborn option that says that you will never, EVER compromise with the Reapers at all. You reject everything they are and everything they say. You are willing to let the entire galaxy die if it just means that you never give anything, anything at all, to the Reapers. Selfish, yes. Ideological, yes. Mind-blowingly stupid, definitely. But is that a bad thing? Maybe being stubborn is the only way to win. Maybe refusing to be swayed or persuaded by something as easily twisted as logic is the only way to defeat the Reapers. Just some food for thought.

(Note: this doesn't actually represent my current perspective. I'm of the opinion that Refuse is actually slightly worse than Destroy, I just don't want to make Ironic Particle argue against you guys all by himself. :) )

The bolded part basically sums up why in my first playthrough I chose Refuse.
Despite all the hints that point at Destroy being the only/best solution (no need to list them up again, I am sure everyone knows them), there is still a little bit of doubt left for me.

DoomsdayDevice wrote:

IronicParticle wrote:You know though there is way more in support of Refuse than there is Destroy, I'm sad to have to admit that. I've been hoping you guys could throw out better refutations and arguments at times, but you don't succeed.

You've got to be kidding me.

I 'd like you to go look at the ultimate quotes selection, check out the number of quotes in support of destroy, then come up with a number of quotes in support of refuse that's at least half as long as the list for destroy is. Then we'll talk.

Also: "Stand in the ashes of a trillion dead souls and ask the ghosts if honour matters. The silence is your answer."

How did I not see you mention the list of destroy quotes? Just for future reference, unless a destroy supporting quote is strictly "no matter the cost" it supports Refuse as much as it does Destroy. Refuse is a destroy ending, just because we see the galaxy fail at it because of depressed Shepard/Reaper suggestions, doesn't mean the galaxy wasn't trying to destroy the Reapers.

Refuse is a destroy ending, remember that folks.

A lot of those destroy quotes are about being prepared to make sacrifices though.

DoomsdayDevice wrote:A lot of those destroy quotes are about being prepared to make sacrifices though.

And I'm pretty sure it means the heroic kinds of sacrifices you have the right to make in the first place. Like what is seen in Refuse, not Destroy. Destroy is Saren type sacrifice.