Which Affinity do you think you'll try first? (the unimformed gut reaction edition)

[HorseshoeHermit]

Ooh, an ideological tussle! What fun!

An interesting point of view, but I don't think you're giving Purity enough credit. You assume the philosophy is completely adamant to change, but it's not. Both Harmony and Supremacy seek to shed humanity in favour of something else. In the former's case, it's a case of extreme adaptation to the planet, mostly forsaking our roots. The latter gradually does away with flesh, which sure enough is disadvantageous compared to a resilient inorganic body or perhaps a reinforced server in some bunker, purely from the cold, logical perspective. But in the process we lose much of what makes us human, because being human isn't about cold, precise logic.

I didn't say anything about cold, precise logic.
You are only begging the question of "Humanity's" value. I see Humanity as a vehicle transporting a far more valuable good. I'm not going to jump the gun and say it is our brain, as our understanding of "brain" and "mind" would surely change with such futuristic knowledge. But I think Humanity is temporary if we want it to be. It is one of many possible kinds of houses for the real gem of our race. At the very least, it is "disadvantageous compared to a resilient inorganic body."

Consider this. If Humankind has a birthright, must it not be because of something in us beyond what is in the other animals, as no same birthright belongs to them? And if it is something not shared by those other species, then it is an anomaly to say it is something about just one species. It must be something in another aspect of description of man, that goes beyond zoology.

If there is no such "birthright" nonsense, then I turn that on you and ask "then what does it matter what happens to our 'Humanity' ?"

In essence, Purity keeps both nature and technology servants of humanity instead of the other way round. It adapts the environment to us instead of having us adapt to it, but without losing sight of who we are. I would say both Harmony and Supremacy are more desparately survivalist than Purity, given they go to extremes to endure, no matter the cost to our humanity. Harmony has us become something else, neither human nor alien, whereas Supremacy's rampant technological escalation, possibly leading to a singularity, likely philosophically simplifies what it is that defines us to an extreme.

I'll grant you that the tools of 'Supremacy', that sort of technological position, make possible a kind of oppression from philosophical crudeness. Just as the evils within man from any era have found new and creative ways to prolong disparity and injustice. You don't confront evil by shutting your eyes

If flesh isn't a substantial part of our humanity, is it just the brain? Is it not even that? Does it come down to the soul, which Supremacists will surely boil down, ad absurdum, to software? Is that really all that we are?

But you've got to admit you're running away with conclusions here.

I wasn't arguing for one position being more survivalist than another. I understand all three as being answers to the survival question, answers to "What are we?", the question we don't ask explicitly but is implicit in our orientation of self to future.

Let's remember, not any of the affinities becomes a monolithic thing that defines the Beyond Earth culture. It is a very important part of it, one of our convictions, our firm answers to the possibilities uncovered by technology, but there is still everyday life, there is still expression, the arts, the search for spiritual meaning; the struggle of rich and poor (probably), all those moving pieces that make up life.

 

[JokerJace]

What it is to be human is a very complex and ultimately deeply philosophical matter, and surely it'd be close to impossible to draw a line between who's human and who's not, once we start delving into cybernetic and genetic modification. I suppose that on practical terms, in Purity factions it'll come down to outlawing certain technologies. But I can't make any sense of your initial premise. Can I just say my neighbour's dog is human? That an apple is human? That my desk is human? Perhaps you just didn't express it correctly.

Assinging human attributes to animals and inanimate objects is a very common thing in literature and art. In the case of animals even in politics. I actually thank you for the example, as it shows how far the word can be stretched. As I said, it is completely arbitrary. And an ideologie that is based on such a freely interpretable term is bound to be indistinguishable from a religion and could easily attract the same followers as stem-cell research opposers for example. These are also people who struggle with technological advancement because of their own understanding of what "human" is and their associated fears. Typically these people are known to be very religious. And as I don't like this outlook on our future, my vote goes to Supremacy.

 

[Lord Shadow]

Hermi, I was explaining my point of view in relation to yours, not attempting to directly counter your every argument. I know you didn't mention cold, hard logic or the measure of survivalism in each faction. That said...

You are only begging the question of "Humanity's" value. I see Humanity as a vehicle transporting a far more valuable good. I'm not going to jump the gun and say it is our brain, as our understanding of "brain" and "mind" would surely change with such futuristic knowledge. But I think Humanity is temporary if we want it to be. It is one of many possible kinds of houses for the real gem of our race. At the very least, it is "disadvantageous compared to a resilient inorganic body."

Consider this. If Humankind has a birthright, must it not be because of something in us beyond what is in the other animals, as no same birthright belongs to them? And if it is something not shared by those other species, then it is an anomaly to say it is something about just one species. It must be something in another aspect of description of man, that goes beyond zoology.

If there is no such "birthright" nonsense, then I turn that on you and ask "then what does it matter what happens to our 'Humanity' ?"

What if that something being transported is our humanity? Being human is not just having a human body. That's a critical part, to be sure, and to what extent is certainly debatable, but our humanity goes beyond it.

I'll grant you that the tools of 'Supremacy', that sort of technological position, make possible a kind of oppression from philosophical crudeness. Just as the evils within man from any era have found new and creative ways to prolong disparity and injustice. You don't confront evil by shutting your eyes

I'm not sure where you're going with this, or whether you're assuming Purity factions are necessarily arch-conservative and ultra-isolationist.

Let's remember, not any of the affinities becomes a monolithic thing that defines the Beyond Earth culture. It is a very important part of it, one of our convictions, our firm answers to the possibilities uncovered by technology, but there is still everyday life, there is still expression, the arts, the search for spiritual meaning; the struggle of rich and poor (probably), all those moving pieces that make up life.

Of course, I agree.

Assinging human attributes to animals and inanimate objects is a very common thing in literature and art. In the case of animals even in politics. I actually thank you for the example, as it shows how far the word can be stretched. As I said, it is completely arbitrary. And an ideologie that is based on such a freely interpretable term is bound to be indistinguishable from a religion and could easily attract the same followers as stem-cell research opposers for example. These are also people who struggle with technological advancement because of their own understanding of what "human" is and their associated fears. Typically these people are known to be very religious. And as I don't like this outlook on our future, my vote goes to Supremacy.

I think you've missed the point again, and it seems you're trying really hard to make Purity seem particularly religious and (by your definition of such, I feel) non-sensical. Beyond the fact that Purity has a very practical side (dominate the environment and terraform the planet into a new Earth), the truth is, and the devs themselves have said it, all three affinities are philosophical pseudo-religions. They're overarching moral/ethical outlooks on the future of human civilization.

Of course even within each camp there can be various levels of radicalization, but even Supremacy could be used by some as a means to deify technology above all things, or accidentally create and be subjected by their own machine gods. And just because Purity factions would be against uploading their minds to a monolithic megaserver/robotic body, or become alien hybrids doesn't mean they'd just as easily shun cybernetic implants or gene therapy or advanced medicine. People keep trying to paint them as fervent Space Amish or something.

 

[Freedom Geek]

As a firm transhumanist I'm a fan of Supremacy. Harmony is second and Purity a distant third.

I just hope that they'll be room for expressing our version of these affinities through the virtues system or what have you - I want my supremacy to be more akin to The Culture, Cybran Nation or Autonomist Alliance than the Borg, TITANs or cybermen.

I must also admit to being a little surprised and dismayed by the amount of people calling transhumanism or the technologies it relies upon creepy, abominable, etc. I guess most discussions of these sorts of issues tend to attract people who are sufficiently transhumanistic to be interested in discussing these issues - a selection bias of sorts.

 

[Jman5]

Purity most likely, but maybe Supremacy. Harmony rubs me the wrong way, but maybe I'll play it if the gameplay itself proves to be more fun.

 

[Migoooy]

so, what i'm getting from this discussion is that purity is probably going to be against changing your body. i wonder, though, if they're going to explain why someone might pick purity before somebody else picks something else. or maybe, since it's in the future, people have already started using the others.
purity = nazis?

Not from what I understand Purity seems to make the perfect human. I don't think they would kill the imperfect but use stem cells or gene manipulation to make you perfect

 

[ptoss1]

Supremacy = Avatar Marines

Purity = SPARTAN Program

Harmony = Zerg/Human hybrids

 

[JokerJace]

I think you've missed the point again, and it seems you're trying really hard to make Purity seem particularly religious and (by your definition of such, I feel) non-sensical. Beyond the fact that Purity has a very practical side (dominate the environment and terraform the planet into a new Earth), the truth is, and the devs themselves have said it, all three affinities are philosophical pseudo-religions. They're overarching moral/ethical outlooks on the future of human civilization.

Of course even within each camp there can be various levels of radicalization, but even Supremacy could be used by some as a means to deify technology above all things, or accidentally create and be subjected by their own machine gods. And just because Purity factions would be against uploading their minds to a monolithic megaserver/robotic body, or become alien hybrids doesn't mean they'd just as easily shun cybernetic implants or gene therapy or advanced medicine. People keep trying to paint them as fervent Space Amish or something.

Of course all of the affinities are beliefs to a certain extent. But you are right, I feel that Purity is more so. While I think that Harmony has the highest probability to develope a worshiping sub cult at some point, Purity is the only one that subordinates practical thoughts to their philosophical root idea. And on top of that you have that blurry term "human", which is a lot less stalwart orientation than the concepts of technological advancement and enviromental adaptation. If the scale for metathesiophobia is adequately adjusted to the future, you could certainly call impassioned Purity followers... well, maybe not Space Amish, but certainly christian fundamentalists of their time.

 

[Lord Shadow]

Of course all of the affinities are beliefs to a certain extent. But you are right, I feel that Purity is more so. While I think that Harmony has the highest probability to develope a worshiping sub cult at some point, Purity is the only one that subordinates practical thoughts to their philosophical root idea. And on top of that you have that blurry term "human", which is a lot less stalwart orientation than the concepts of technological advancement and enviromental adaptation. If the scale for metathesiophobia is adequately adjusted to the future, you could certainly call impassioned Purity followers... well, maybe not Space Amish, but certainly christian fundamentalists of their time.

I don't think that's the case. Shaping the environment instead of shaping ourselves to deal better with it is ultimately no less practical, with the right technology. It's mostly what we've been doing our entire history. Every affinity makes a decision to forego something to pursue its goals. Just like Purists avoid extreme changes to our species as a whole, Supremacists avoid perfecting biology to replace it entirely instead, and Harmonists might shun advanced machines altogether.

 

[JokerJace]

Harmony and Supremacy prefer certain approaches, it is rather a matter of focus. Purity on the other hand is primary about rejecting something that is based on fears. The emphasis is on saying "no" to something. It is pretty easy to draw parallels to religious movements.

 

[Civ'ed]

Purity on the other hand is primary about rejecting something that is based on fears.

How do you know it's fear? How do you know it's not, say, confidence that humanity doesn't need augmentation?

 

[Karl0413]

Harmony and Supremacy prefer certain approaches, it is rather a matter of focus. Purity on the other hand is primary about rejecting something that is based on fears. The emphasis is on saying "no" to something.

Something the devs highlighted in their recent blog:

What would a person aligned with this Affinity say to someone aligned with the others?

“Get off my lawn.”



No, sorry. Every faction is going to tell every other faction to get the hell off their land and then try and take their neighbors land. Also, both Purity and Supremacy are united in their desire to conquer the planet and reshape it in their image as opposed to adapting to the planet. Yet, I don't see you making the argument that Supremacy is primarily about rejecting something based on fear (and someone can rather easily make the argument that a faction trying to make itself immortal by fusing with advanced technology is very much motivated by a fear of death or actually living their lives period). In fact, the only affinity that is actually embracing the unknown and the alien is Harmony.

 

[Lord Shadow]

Harmony and Supremacy prefer certain approaches, it is rather a matter of focus. Purity on the other hand is primary about rejecting something that is based on fears. The emphasis is on saying "no" to something. It is pretty easy to draw parallels to religious movements.

It's not about preferences but strong beliefs, and there's no reason to believe one affinity is necessarily more dogmatic/reasonable than another. You keep trying to impose a certain religious layer specifically on Purity, and I'm not sure it's there any more noticeably than in the other affinities. They say "no" to other philosophies just as fervently, because without ideological focus, they won't reach their ultimate goals.

 

[kwidem]

.

 

[AriochIV]

However did you gather that?

The implication of "racial purity." The general notion that the Purity player is inflexible, hostile to the native environment, and committed not just to a traditional notion of humanity, but an idealized one. In other words, right-wing ultra-nationalists.

Hopefully you won't be forced to play that way, but that's certainly the spin that been put on Purity by the developers.

 

[Lancor]

The implication of "racial purity." The general notion that the Purity player is inflexible, hostile to the native environment, and committed not just to a traditional notion of humanity, but an idealized one. In other words, right-wing ultra-nationalists.

Hopefully you won't be forced to play that way, but that's certainly the spin that been put on Purity by the developers.

I would not call it right wing to stay true to your traditions, bodies and social heritage. It could lead that way, sure. But politics are still in the game. So a communist purity, democratic supremacy and fashist harmony playthrough anybody?

 

[JokerJace]

Something the devs highlighted in their recent blog:

What would a person aligned with this Affinity say to someone aligned with the others?

“Get off my lawn.”



No, sorry. Every faction is going to tell every other faction to get the hell off their land and then try and take their neighbors land. Also, both Purity and Supremacy are united in their desire to conquer the planet and reshape it in their image as opposed to adapting to the planet. Yet, I don't see you making the argument that Supremacy is primarily about rejecting something based on fear (and someone can rather easily make the argument that a faction trying to make itself immortal by fusing with advanced technology is very much motivated by a fear of death or actually living their lives period). In fact, the only affinity that is actually embracing the unknown and the alien is Harmony.

Purity is based on restrictions. Why do you impose restrictions on yourself if not to prevent something from happening? But you could also call it caution, I have no problem with that. Yet I think it has a very different character than the example you gave. That way you could easily make the argument that any action taken by any living being is motivated by fear.

The implication of "racial purity." The general notion that the Purity player is inflexible, hostile to the native environment, and committed not just to a traditional notion of humanity, but an idealized one. In other words, right-wing ultra-nationalists.

Hopefully you won't be forced to play that way, but that's certainly the spin that been put on Purity by the developers.

I agree.

How do you know it's fear? How do you know it's not, say, confidence that humanity doesn't need augmentation?

That wouldn't result in a vehement rejection. It would still allow for experimentation with those ideas, even if only for verification.

It's not about preferences but strong beliefs, and there's no reason to believe one affinity is necessarily more dogmatic/reasonable than another. You keep trying to impose a certain religious layer specifically on Purity, and I'm not sure it's there any more noticeably than in the other affinities. They say "no" to other philosophies just as fervently, because without ideological focus, they won't reach their ultimate goals.

I actually don't think they do that. I think Supremacy and Harmony are more like general directions - with many possibilities of self reflection and fine tuning along the way, while Purity sets a lot of self imposed rules/restrictions right at the beginning of the journey (without even knowing what they might learn along the way). It has this VERY vague concept of what it means to be human and subordinates everything else to it. Every faction says "no" to something at some point, because there are alternatives they value more. True. But that is only relevant if something contradicts itself and they have to find the right thing by relying on your philisophie. I understand Purity a bit differently. As I understand them, they start by defining right and wrong. It simply seems a lot more dogmatic to me. No adaptive approach there, just a set of restrictions.

 

[Karl0413]

Purity is based on restrictions. Why do you impose restrictions on yourself if not to prevent something from happening? But you could also call it caution, I have no problem with that. Yet I think it has a very different character than the example you gave. That way you could easily make the argument that any action taken by any living being is motivated by fear.

But aren't Supremacy and Harmony both restricting themselves? Supremacy is restricting xeno-biological research in favor of cybernetics; Harmony is vice-versa. And explain how Supremacy is a very different character than Purity; both are focusing on specific research (Purity: terraforming, floatstone applications; Supremacy: Cybernetics, Robotoics) at the expense of other things. Both ideologies can be characterized as being motivated by fear or motivated by what they believe is best for Humanity as a whole. And you act like restrictions on human behavior or human technology are a bad thing; does that mean restrictions against murder or nuclear weapons are bad?

That wouldn't result in a vehement rejection. It would still allow for experimentation with those ideas, even if only for verification.

Developers have stated there is overlap in the tech-web between the three affinities and they have also stated Purity has a concept of idealized humanity and that they do things like gene-therapy to eliminate diseases and birth defects or improve base-line human capabilities or extend life expectancy. So odds are Purity did experiment somewhat but decided the end result would be detrimental to humanity as a whole.

I actually don't think they do that. I think Supremacy and Harmony are more like general directions - with many possibilities of self reflection and fine tuning along the way, while Purity sets a lot of self imposed rules/restrictions right at the beginning of the journey (without even knowing what they might learn along the way). It has this VERY vague concept of what it means to be human and subordinates everything else to it. Every faction says "no" to something at some point, because there are alternatives they value more. True. But that is only relevant if something contradicts itself and they have to find the right thing by relying on your philisophie. I understand Purity a bit differently. As I understand them, they start by defining right and wrong. It simply seems a lot more dogmatic to me. No adaptive approach there, just a set of restrictions.

The problem here is that the developers have stated that your affinity is determined by your actions, your reactions to quests and the random events. Your affinity is not determined at the start of the game but by your reaction to the planet. Nor is it like Purity is not advancing technologically, to win the game their way they have to invent and build FTL technology, not exactly a small feat there, and they have unique techs that Supremacy and Harmony don't.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

What if that something being transported is our humanity? Being human is not just having a human body. That's a critical part, to be sure, and to what extent is certainly debatable, but our humanity goes beyond it.

I don't understand.

I'm not sure where you're going with this, or whether you're assuming Purity factions are necessarily arch-conservative and ultra-isolationist.

Where I was going with it was answering some of the battery of charges against the supremacy ideology. Specifically, that supremacy is "desperate" in its motivation, that they suffer a "cost" to our Humanity (the meaning of which is still in question), and a likelihood of philosophical simplification of our identity under the supremacist banner.

To the last, I say I understand that cautious feeling, that danger sense, but the claim is entirely reversible. Not a single one of the affinities is immune to the criticism that, under its banner, ideologues might convince people they are something they are not. Do you imagine the supremacists beginning a dark page of history as, like Stalinist Russia, the twisted conception of life owing to some men becomes the suffering of an entire people when made state policy? Under supremacy, yes, there is an excision of these unwanted parts to our forms and brains, and a revolution of an economy probably based on machine labor, which a lazy citizenry might allow to become a totalitarian regime. But all of the affinities are a choice to not be the other ones. Could not harmony, being economically stagnant, bring social mobility down as well? Reviving social caste systems? In purity, where is the freedom of transhumanists? People who have the means and the wealth to give themselves changes they want, will the purists always save them from the dangerous life on the margins a minority always has?

To the first, desperation is the theme of the game, I say. Giving yourself a future, an alternative to extinction, is desperate. I have no trouble being called desperate in the face of that responsibility, nor afraid of death.

Of course even within each camp there can be various levels of radicalization, but even Supremacy could be used by some as a means to deify technology above all things, or accidentally create and be subjected by their own machine gods. And just because Purity factions would be against uploading their minds to a monolithic megaserver/robotic body, or become alien hybrids doesn't mean they'd just as easily shun cybernetic implants or gene therapy or advanced medicine. People keep trying to paint them as fervent Space Amish or something.

Sure. And they're not.

 

[Lord Shadow]

The implication of "racial purity." The general notion that the Purity player is inflexible, hostile to the native environment, and committed not just to a traditional notion of humanity, but an idealized one. In other words, right-wing ultra-nationalists.

The concept of "racial purity" I understand, but as for being inflexible and committed to an idealized notion of humanity... well, that could easily be applied to either of the other two affinities.

I don't understand.

Well, you said our humanity was carrying something more valuable, equating humanity to our body instead of the combination of both body and mind, and I explained those two elements can't be divorced from each other without our humanity being diminished. One might argue that mind is more important than body, but I don't believe we'd remain ourselves after discarding our natural vessels.

Where I was going with it was answering some of the battery of charges against the supremacy ideology. Specifically, that supremacy is "desperate" in its motivation, that they suffer a "cost" to our Humanity (the meaning of which is still in question), and a likelihood of philosophical simplification of our identity under the supremacist banner.

To the last, I say I understand that cautious feeling, that danger sense, but the claim is entirely reversible. Not a single one of the affinities is immune to the criticism that, under its banner, ideologues might convince people they are something they are not. Do you imagine the supremacists beginning a dark page of history as, like Stalinist Russia, the twisted conception of life owing to some men becomes the suffering of an entire people when made state policy? Under supremacy, yes, there is an excision of these unwanted parts to our forms and brains, and a revolution of an economy probably based on machine labor, which a lazy citizenry might allow to become a totalitarian regime. But all of the affinities are a choice to not be the other ones. Could not harmony, being economically stagnant, bring social mobility down as well? Reviving social caste systems? In purity, where is the freedom of transhumanists? People who have the means and the wealth to give themselves changes they want, will the purists always save them from the dangerous life on the margins a minority always has?

I was trying not to bring politics onto the table, since I see them running parallel to these philosophical/scientific affinities. Any affinity can be anything from freedom-loving to oppressive. I think the affinities assume groups of like-minded individuals, all of whom support the 'party line', so to speak. A transhumanist in a Purity faction would have no more/less freedom than a anti-transhumanist in a comparable Supremacy/Harmony society. The management of dissenters would vary depending on how authoritarian the local government is, regardless of affinity.

There is a certain level of authoritarianism in every case, however, and dissenters would have difficulty integrating to their society if they don't share the same ideals. They could be anything from exiled to indoctrinated or executed. Oddly enough, I believe Purity would be the most manageable for dissenters: they might have to keep their ideas to themselves, but at worst they'd be denied the extensive cybernetic replacements they desire, or banned from conducting in-depth research into alien life. It gets awkward in Harmony, where their lack of interest in communing with the alien environment would get them shunned, or worse if they start rejecting the mandatory injections of alien DNA for the general mutation of the populace. Similarly, I don't think a dissenting individual would fare well at all among Supremacist peers, refusing to have his mind uploaded or biological body replaced by a robotic shell.