Thread: The Orville

Page 22 of 24 FirstFirst ...
12
20
21
22
23
24
LastLast
  1. #421
    The Lightbringer
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Banned to the Bone.
    Posts
    3,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Mazza View Post
    In the Keylon logic a biological sacrificing themselves to save the Keylon would be impossible. Since that is what happens, the only logical conclusion they can draw is that their logic has been incorrect up to that point. A logical species is far more likely to adjust their decisions on something like this than an emotional one would.
    But logic also dictates that the action of one cannot assume the action of others. You cannot surmise your stance towards a species on what one of its members does. The first biological who would mistreat a Keylon could easily return relationships to previous status.
    /spit@Blizzard

  2. #422
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabinas View Post
    But logic also dictates that the action of one cannot assume the action of others. You cannot surmise your stance towards a species on what one of its members does. The first biological who would mistreat a Keylon could easily return relationships to previous status.
    That's the point. They realized not all organics are the same (like their creators), and because of that, they are now willing to give the Union a chance.

  3. #423
    Immortal Darththeo's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away
    Posts
    7,806
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabinas View Post
    But logic also dictates that the action of one cannot assume the action of others. You cannot surmise your stance towards a species on what one of its members does. The first biological who would mistreat a Keylon could easily return relationships to previous status.
    Did you miss the backstory to the Kaylon in a prior episode? It wasn't just one member of their creators that mistreated them. Their creators were told to mistreat them and the evolving programming was an error and that using the device on them was nothing more than like switching off a computer.

    Compared to the Kaylon's treatment by other races. The Kaylon's dislike was solely due to their creators, not anything else. They isolated themselves mostly, using units like Isaac to research species. They never had someone do something for them that didn't benefit the organic. The ensign's sacrifice makes no sense to them because they cannot understand what she nor the organics gain from it.
    Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
    Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
    –The Sith Code

  4. #424
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabinas View Post
    But logic also dictates that the action of one cannot assume the action of others. You cannot surmise your stance towards a species on what one of its members does. The first biological who would mistreat a Keylon could easily return relationships to previous status.
    A couple point, in addition to what others said;

    1> What happened here was a logical maxim dictated Kaylon response towards biologicals; that biologicals will always seek to harm and exploit the Kaylon for the biological's benefit. Charly's self-sacrifice violated that maxim, and in logical terms, that means that maxim is false and must be discarded, along with all conclusions originally derived fully or in part from that maxim. The Kaylon aren't emotional, so they couldn't hold onto that maxim for emotional, irrational reasons, that maxim being disproven pretty much immediately required a massive shift in Kaylon reasoning regarding biologicals, completely negating their ability to presume malice from biologicals, forever.

    2> The first biological to abuse them can't shift them back. The maxim's already broken and thus irrevocably disproven. Future betrayals would merely confirm the newer individualized maxims the Kaylon develop in turn; the prior maxim being broken wouldn't lead to Kaylons trusting all biologicals, because the vast majority of their data still support the conclusion that biologicals often can and will be exploitative and abusive. They can't presume any individuals will any more, or judge all biologicals by that standard, so they're still going to be cautious and wary as they develop more data from more interactions, but they cannot ever return to holding the idea that biologicals are inherently a threat that must be eliminated. Not without an entirely new reasoning leading to that conclusion, at least.

    If I hold a maxim that a giant bag of balls is full of black balls, specifically, and I reach in and pull out a white ball, I can't claim that the bag only contains black balls any more, or that the next ball I pull out will 100% be black. That position was already disproven by drawing the white ball and it can't ever come back now that it's disproven.


  5. #425
    The Orville is ok, but it feels like Bortus is the main character.. More episodes are about him than anyone else

  6. #426
    Immortal Darththeo's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away
    Posts
    7,806
    Quote Originally Posted by GMZohar1 View Post
    The Orville is ok, but it feels like Bortus is the main character.. More episodes are about him than anyone else
    You want an icky human as a main character?
    Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
    Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
    –The Sith Code

  7. #427
    The Lightbringer
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Banned to the Bone.
    Posts
    3,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Darththeo View Post
    Did you miss the backstory to the Kaylon in a prior episode? It wasn't just one member of their creators that mistreated them. Their creators were told to mistreat them and the evolving programming was an error and that using the device on them was nothing more than like switching off a computer.

    Compared to the Kaylon's treatment by other races. The Kaylon's dislike was solely due to their creators, not anything else. They isolated themselves mostly, using units like Isaac to research species. They never had someone do something for them that didn't benefit the organic. The ensign's sacrifice makes no sense to them because they cannot understand what she nor the organics gain from it.
    You obviously didn't understand my point. Read again.
    /spit@Blizzard

  8. #428
    Completly stopped watching orville now... the new season is probably the most boring drivel i have ever witnessed... i actually like Discovery more than this season.
    Horrible... no idea why they pivoted the tv show away fromw hat it was.
    It was a genius tv-show.... bit sad tbh...

  9. #429
    Immortal Darththeo's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away
    Posts
    7,806
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabinas View Post
    You obviously didn't understand my point. Read again.
    You obviously didn't understand your own point if you think I misunderstood it. Because it addressed your claim of "The first one to mistreat" is a garbage point.

    Perhaps you should take your own advice.
    Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
    Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
    –The Sith Code

  10. #430
    The Lightbringer
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Banned to the Bone.
    Posts
    3,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    A couple point, in addition to what others said;

    1> What happened here was a logical maxim dictated Kaylon response towards biologicals; that biologicals will always seek to harm and exploit the Kaylon for the biological's benefit. Charly's self-sacrifice violated that maxim, and in logical terms, that means that maxim is false and must be discarded, along with all conclusions originally derived fully or in part from that maxim. The Kaylon aren't emotional, so they couldn't hold onto that maxim for emotional, irrational reasons, that maxim being disproven pretty much immediately required a massive shift in Kaylon reasoning regarding biologicals, completely negating their ability to presume malice from biologicals, forever.

    2> The first biological to abuse them can't shift them back. The maxim's already broken and thus irrevocably disproven. Future betrayals would merely confirm the newer individualized maxims the Kaylon develop in turn; the prior maxim being broken wouldn't lead to Kaylons trusting all biologicals, because the vast majority of their data still support the conclusion that biologicals often can and will be exploitative and abusive. They can't presume any individuals will any more, or judge all biologicals by that standard, so they're still going to be cautious and wary as they develop more data from more interactions, but they cannot ever return to holding the idea that biologicals are inherently a threat that must be eliminated. Not without an entirely new reasoning leading to that conclusion, at least.

    If I hold a maxim that a giant bag of balls is full of black balls, specifically, and I reach in and pull out a white ball, I can't claim that the bag only contains black balls any more, or that the next ball I pull out will 100% be black. That position was already disproven by drawing the white ball and it can't ever come back now that it's disproven.
    I'm sorry, is that your argument that a logic and computing based intelligence derives conclusions from the actions of a single person?

    Kaylons had the experience of biological species from their makers. Huge sample of a single species and civilisation (as shown to us).
    Kaylons had the experience Isaac gained from the Orville biologicals (multi-species in various situations, as also shown to us)

    The first of the above led Kaylons to set the goal of exterminating biologicals everywhere, because they were deemed dangerous.
    The second of the above didn't make Kaylons review their maxim, despite showing multiple situations of empathy and selfless actions towards other species.
    It seems the potato head incident counted more than the rest of the experience Isaac gathered from the rest of the episodes.

    And now, a single human sacrifice (which might have saved Kaylons, but utterly destroyed half a planet and multiple other biologicals, even if they were considered enemies) proves their previous stance towards biologicals "false"?

    Why does the action of a person proves something false, while the action of another does not prove it again true? What of the actions of multiple others? Suddenly Kaylon have no idea of percentages and statistics? Since when Kaylon (besides Isaac in some instances) showed any sign of acknowledging individualisation, when their previous stance was a universal generalisation of "machines good, biologicals bad"? Whatever your argument was in 2>, the result should have come by Isaac's experience alone, not by the Ensign's sacrifice.

    Also, since when do Kaylons recognise sacrifice? For them, a member of species that carries orders against its own existence is something that works perfectly. They shouldn't be impressed or even review their stance because of that. Using Charly's Sacrifice as a fulcrum to change course for the series is mediocre and the easy way out, when compared with the Kaylon description in all the previous episodes.

    Nah, it's just the script needs that dictated that "solution". No collective logical and computing intelligence would come to the result that (certain? a limited species? all? not sure how the Kaylon maxim changed) biologicals need not to be exterminated just by the act of sacrifice.

    Star Trek NG did it better with the Borg and Hugh.

    Let's just hope that this doesn't mean Orville will not continue for a fourth season. More hints for this probably on the last episode.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Darththeo View Post
    You obviously didn't understand your own point if you think I misunderstood it. Because it addressed your claim of "The first one to mistreat" is a garbage point.

    Perhaps you should take your own advice.
    No reason to discuss with you. Endus got what i was saying. You didn't.
    /spit@Blizzard

  11. #431
    Stood in the Fire Mazza's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    the land of beer, chocolate and waffles
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabinas View Post
    I'm sorry, is that your argument that a logic and computing based intelligence derives conclusions from the actions of a single person?

    Kaylons had the experience of biological species from their makers. Huge sample of a single species and civilisation (as shown to us).
    Kaylons had the experience Isaac gained from the Orville biologicals (multi-species in various situations, as also shown to us)

    The first of the above led Kaylons to set the goal of exterminating biologicals everywhere, because they were deemed dangerous.
    The second of the above didn't make Kaylons review their maxim, despite showing multiple situations of empathy and selfless actions towards other species.
    It seems the potato head incident counted more than the rest of the experience Isaac gathered from the rest of the episodes.

    And now, a single human sacrifice (which might have saved Kaylons, but utterly destroyed half a planet and multiple other biologicals, even if they were considered enemies) proves their previous stance towards biologicals "false"?

    Why does the action of a person proves something false, while the action of another does not prove it again true? What of the actions of multiple others? Suddenly Kaylon have no idea of percentages and statistics? Since when Kaylon (besides Isaac in some instances) showed any sign of acknowledging individualisation, when their previous stance was a universal generalisation of "machines good, biologicals bad"? Whatever your argument was in 2>, the result should have come by Isaac's experience alone, not by the Ensign's sacrifice.

    Also, since when do Kaylons recognise sacrifice? For them, a member of species that carries orders against its own existence is something that works perfectly. They shouldn't be impressed or even review their stance because of that. Using Charly's Sacrifice as a fulcrum to change course for the series is mediocre and the easy way out, when compared with the Kaylon description in all the previous episodes.

    Nah, it's just the script needs that dictated that "solution". No collective logical and computing intelligence would come to the result that (certain? a limited species? all? not sure how the Kaylon maxim changed) biologicals need not to be exterminated just by the act of sacrifice.

    Star Trek NG did it better with the Borg and Hugh.

    Let's just hope that this doesn't mean Orville will not continue for a fourth season. More hints for this probably on the last episode.
    Uhm.. but that is how logic works. As soon as a maxim has been disproven by a single data point it has been disproven.

    The question is if Isaac's experiences had enough weight to disprove the "Biologicals will always be an existential threat to the Keylon" maxim the Keylon operated on. According to the showrunners it didn't and I guess that point would be debatable.

    Saying charlie's sacrifice would not disprove the maxim when her sacrifice is what STOPS not just the threat off but the total annihilation of the Keylon species... I don't think that is in question at all.

  12. #432
    Immortal Darththeo's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away
    Posts
    7,806
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabinas View Post
    No reason to discuss with you. Endus got what i was saying. You didn't.
    Except I did.

    And Endus literally stated his reply to you with "To add to what others had said." There were two replies prior to his, being the 3rd to your post. Put 2 and 2 together and stop pretending you think I misunderstood you.

    The reality is you misunderstand my reply, not I misunderstood you.

    The Kaylon's stance was based on treatment from their creators, the entire species. Since then, their observations of organics is that organics only act in selfish interests. The Ensign's sacrifice failed to be beneficial to her nor her species, therefore, the Kaylon's stance on organics had to change.

    No one act will change that going forward. Because they already have proof that their original stance that organics only do what benefits them and would destroy/control the Kaylon was proven false. You misunderstood the show and you misunderstand me. So take your own advice and read.
    Last edited by Darththeo; 2022-08-04 at 11:56 AM.
    Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
    Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
    –The Sith Code

  13. #433
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabinas View Post
    I'm sorry, is that your argument that a logic and computing based intelligence derives conclusions from the actions of a single person?
    When you have any maxim of the form "All X are Y", any example of any X that is "not Y" invalidates that maxim completely and forever. Yes, it only takes one example. That's how logic works.

    Kaylons had the experience of biological species from their makers. Huge sample of a single species and civilisation (as shown to us).
    Kaylons had the experience Isaac gained from the Orville biologicals (multi-species in various situations, as also shown to us)

    The first of the above led Kaylons to set the goal of exterminating biologicals everywhere, because they were deemed dangerous.
    The second of the above didn't make Kaylons review their maxim, despite showing multiple situations of empathy and selfless actions towards other species.
    It seems the potato head incident counted more than the rest of the experience Isaac gathered from the rest of the episodes.
    Did you not pay attention to how they treated Isaac? They thought he was malfunctioning. They discarded the information he brought in as a result of that presumed malfunction. This is pretty simple; when you have an ironclad maxim and one data source contraindicates that maxim, Occam's Razor suggests it's more likely that the data source is incorrect or malfunctioning than that the maxim itself is wrong. If you see a weather report suggesting it'll be 32,000 degrees outside today, their computer's likely glitched a decimal point, rather than meteorological analysis producing a legitimate conclusion that the surface of the Earth is suddenly going to become several times hotter than the Sun.

    And now, a single human sacrifice (which might have saved Kaylons, but utterly destroyed half a planet and multiple other biologicals, even if they were considered enemies) proves their previous stance towards biologicals "false"?

    Why does the action of a person proves something false, while the action of another does not prove it again true? What of the actions of multiple others? Suddenly Kaylon have no idea of percentages and statistics? Since when Kaylon (besides Isaac in some instances) showed any sign of acknowledging individualisation, when their previous stance was a universal generalisation of "machines good, biologicals bad"? Whatever your argument was in 2>, the result should have come by Isaac's experience alone, not by the Ensign's sacrifice.
    Their previous stance was not "machines good, biologicals bad". They went over this, explicitly. Their previous stance was "biologicals will always abuse and exploit machines, even intelligent and feeling machines" Emphasis on "feeling", recall the other earlier model we met, who had emotional processors that had been reactivated; that's the original Kaylon design. The Kaylon were literally developed to feel pain and to suffer, because it allowed for them to be punished and harmed in a meaningful manner.

    And yes, again, any logical maxim of the form "All X are Y" is immediately and completely contradicted by any one example otherwise. Once that maxim's gone, the Kaylon can't presume the members of the Planetary Union will harm and exploit them, they have to assess them individually, and even in a case where one does so harm the Kaylon, that has to be taken as an individual action, unless it can be determined they were authorized by the Union itself, and even that would only apply to the Union and its members. The maxim's disproven. It can't come back. Not if the Kaylon are driven by logic.

    And again; they discarded Isaac's experiences because they thought he was malfunctioning. This was stated overtly in several episodes.

    Also, since when do Kaylons recognise sacrifice? For them, a member of species that carries orders against its own existence is something that works perfectly. They shouldn't be impressed or even review their stance because of that. Using Charly's Sacrifice as a fulcrum to change course for the series is mediocre and the easy way out, when compared with the Kaylon description in all the previous episodes.
    They always recognized sacrifice; sacrifice is perfectly rational if you have a collective focus rather than individual. What was new was a biological sacrificing themselves to save the Kaylon, particularly a biological that had every emotional reason to let them die. She was overruling her emotions and sacrificing herself on principle, and biologicals holding a principle that recognized the Kaylons as equals deserving of personal sacrifice to protect them, that violates the original Kaylon understanding of biologicals, proving it to be flawed and invalid.

    Nah, it's just the script needs that dictated that "solution". No collective logical and computing intelligence would come to the result that (certain? a limited species? all? not sure how the Kaylon maxim changed) biologicals need not to be exterminated just by the act of sacrifice.
    Again, the maxim was "all biologicals will always harm and exploit Kaylon". A single counterexample disproves that maxim, and now the Kaylon need to evaluate biologicals as individuals, because there's no universality on this. The Kaylons are still well aware that biologicals may seek to harm/destroy/exploit Kaylons, so they'll be wary and slow to trust, but mass genocide can't be justified any more. They'll likely be just as brutal to any political group that seeks to annihilate them, though.

    Star Trek NG did it better with the Borg and Hugh.
    Star Trek had a few interesting characters around the Borg, and the Borg are a great body-horror threat, but between Borg Queens and all that, the Borg weren't presented as an apex artificial intelligence. They really can't be compared to the Kaylon. The most interesting stories about the Borg were the ex-Borg, like Hugh and Seven of Nine, because the body-horror aspect was always a lot more important than any sense of logic.


  14. #434
    The Lightbringer
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Banned to the Bone.
    Posts
    3,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    When you have any maxim of the form "All X are Y", any example of any X that is "not Y" invalidates that maxim completely and forever. Yes, it only takes one example. That's how logic works.



    Did you not pay attention to how they treated Isaac? They thought he was malfunctioning. They discarded the information he brought in as a result of that presumed malfunction. This is pretty simple; when you have an ironclad maxim and one data source contraindicates that maxim, Occam's Razor suggests it's more likely that the data source is incorrect or malfunctioning than that the maxim itself is wrong. If you see a weather report suggesting it'll be 32,000 degrees outside today, their computer's likely glitched a decimal point, rather than meteorological analysis producing a legitimate conclusion that the surface of the Earth is suddenly going to become several times hotter than the Sun.



    Their previous stance was not "machines good, biologicals bad". They went over this, explicitly. Their previous stance was "biologicals will always abuse and exploit machines, even intelligent and feeling machines" Emphasis on "feeling", recall the other earlier model we met, who had emotional processors that had been reactivated; that's the original Kaylon design. The Kaylon were literally developed to feel pain and to suffer, because it allowed for them to be punished and harmed in a meaningful manner.

    And yes, again, any logical maxim of the form "All X are Y" is immediately and completely contradicted by any one example otherwise. Once that maxim's gone, the Kaylon can't presume the members of the Planetary Union will harm and exploit them, they have to assess them individually, and even in a case where one does so harm the Kaylon, that has to be taken as an individual action, unless it can be determined they were authorized by the Union itself, and even that would only apply to the Union and its members. The maxim's disproven. It can't come back. Not if the Kaylon are driven by logic.

    And again; they discarded Isaac's experiences because they thought he was malfunctioning. This was stated overtly in several episodes.



    They always recognized sacrifice; sacrifice is perfectly rational if you have a collective focus rather than individual. What was new was a biological sacrificing themselves to save the Kaylon, particularly a biological that had every emotional reason to let them die. She was overruling her emotions and sacrificing herself on principle, and biologicals holding a principle that recognized the Kaylons as equals deserving of personal sacrifice to protect them, that violates the original Kaylon understanding of biologicals, proving it to be flawed and invalid.



    Again, the maxim was "all biologicals will always harm and exploit Kaylon". A single counterexample disproves that maxim, and now the Kaylon need to evaluate biologicals as individuals, because there's no universality on this. The Kaylons are still well aware that biologicals may seek to harm/destroy/exploit Kaylons, so they'll be wary and slow to trust, but mass genocide can't be justified any more. They'll likely be just as brutal to any political group that seeks to annihilate them, though.



    Star Trek had a few interesting characters around the Borg, and the Borg are a great body-horror threat, but between Borg Queens and all that, the Borg weren't presented as an apex artificial intelligence. They really can't be compared to the Kaylon. The most interesting stories about the Borg were the ex-Borg, like Hugh and Seven of Nine, because the body-horror aspect was always a lot more important than any sense of logic.
    Well, I always found this "all X are Y" story stances as weak. We have it twice in Orville in Moclans and Kaylons. And while I am kinda accepting it for Moclans (since this maxim in biologicals works mostly sentimentally, as a feeling, and is being rationalised later, so it can be argumented) i cannot accept it for Kaylons. As machines who claim to have superior intelligence than biologicals, they shouldn't even think in terms of "all X is Y". Especially when X is so generalised as in all biological life form on universe. It's logic, sure, but not intelligent. That's what I've been saying all along.

    Kaylons are badly written and are just a rehash of Moclans in this aspect. That's why i think ST:NG did it better (saw all seasons lately, so i can make direct comparisons. No Borg queen in the series, that was movie stuff)
    /spit@Blizzard

  15. #435
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabinas View Post
    Well, I always found this "all X are Y" story stances as weak. We have it twice in Orville in Moclans and Kaylons. And while I am kinda accepting it for Moclans (since this maxim in biologicals works mostly sentimentally, as a feeling, and is being rationalised later, so it can be argumented) i cannot accept it for Kaylons. As machines who claim to have superior intelligence than biologicals, they shouldn't even think in terms of "all X is Y". Especially when X is so generalised as in all biological life form on universe. It's logic, sure, but not intelligent. That's what I've been saying all along.
    And yet, they had no contradictory evidence, until they did. It's literally the point of the arc.

    Also, no, the Moclans are not logical or reasonable. Again, literally the point. They're irrational hatemongering bigots, absent the few who've abandoned that bullshit. That they were even being treated as allies was incredibly distasteful and I'm super glad they got kicked out of the Union for their abusive bullshit.

    I don't even know how you're comparing the two, in any way whatsoever. Nothing the Moclans do culturally is rational or reasoned.

    The Borg aren't complicated and wouldn't have been interesting enemies without the body-horror aspect. It was never about the Borg being perfectly logical and rational, it was always about the body-horror of assimilation. They don't even really compare to the Kaylon in any way whatsoever. The closer analogue to the Kaylon is super obvious, in TNG, and it's Data/Lore. The Kaylon are just scaled up to a full civilization, but the Orville is retreading the same ground with Isaac in a lot of ways, with their own spin. Which shouldn't be surprising, since the show started out as a parody of Star Trek pretty explicitly, so of course they're going to retread similar themes.

    And yeah; if Data thought a thing was true, and then got confronted with clear evidence that it wasn't, he'd stop thinking it was true. That's the only rational response. You keep implicitly arguing that the Kaylon representation is somehow flawed because they don't act emotionally.
    Last edited by Endus; 2022-08-04 at 05:13 PM.


  16. #436
    The Lightbringer
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Banned to the Bone.
    Posts
    3,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    And yet, they had no contradictory evidence, until they did. It's literally the point of the arc.

    Also, no, the Moclans are not logical or reasonable. Again, literally the point. They're irrational hatemongering bigots, absent the few who've abandoned that bullshit. That they were even being treated as allies was incredibly distasteful and I'm super glad they got kicked out of the Union for their abusive bullshit.

    I don't even know how you're comparing the two, in any way whatsoever. Nothing the Moclans do culturally is rational or reasoned.

    The Borg aren't complicated and wouldn't have been interesting enemies without the body-horror aspect. It was never about the Borg being perfectly logical and rational, it was always about the body-horror of assimilation. They don't even really compare to the Kaylon in any way whatsoever. The closer analogue to the Kaylon is super obvious, in TNG, and it's Data/Lore. The Kaylon are just scaled up to a full civilization, but the Orville is retreading the same ground with Isaac in a lot of ways, with their own spin. Which shouldn't be surprising, since the show started out as a parody of Star Trek pretty explicitly, so of course they're going to retread similar themes.

    And yeah; if Data thought a thing was true, and then got confronted with clear evidence that it wasn't, he'd stop thinking it was true. That's the only rational response. You keep implicitly arguing that the Kaylon representation is somehow flawed because they don't act emotionally.
    Now you got what i said all backwards.

    I didn't say Moclans were logical. I said that the Orville has 2 stories about "all X are Y". I am not comparing anything. I am merely stating that the Orville has 2 stories about the same subject. It's just that each of the stories varies in its repercussions and because of that, it allows for exploration-exploitation of the same subject.

    Moclans: All female are (bad, weak, disgusting, whatever, it's not the point)

    Kaylons: All biologicals are enemies.

    Moclan stance is sentimental and is being rationalised afterwards, in order to become accepted as an argument (see Aryan stance: all others are lesser beings). Of course it's bigotry.

    Kaylon stance is logical. But it's not intelligent, especially from a species that claims (and mostly proves in this setting) to be superior in that aspect. It's not intelligent to believe all biological are enemies (because of the actions of a certain race in a certain planet) and generalise that to the rest of the universe. It's also not intelligent to sway from that attitude (or any attitude, in fact) JUST by the choice and action of a single person, especially an enemy.

    That's what i am arguing and that's why i didn't like the way they handled the Kaylon change.

    As for the Borg-Kaylon comparison, i base it at the collective intelligence and mechanical aspect of both species (even if borg are cyborgs and not robots). It's obvious Isaac is the Data equivalent, the Kaylons, as species, are not, though.

    At least the Borg were able to adapt, gaining from their assimilation of species.

    Kaylon are dumb enough to consider Isaac malfunctioning, despite his extensive experience with multiple biological species and then dumb enough to change stance, because of a single incident.

    And i dunno where you see i am "implicitly arguing that the Kaylon representation is somehow flawed because they don't act emotionally." That's just you, not me.
    /spit@Blizzard

  17. #437
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Fabinas View Post
    Kaylon stance is logical. But it's not intelligent, especially from a species that claims (and mostly proves in this setting) to be superior in that aspect. It's not intelligent to believe all biological are enemies (because of the actions of a certain race in a certain planet) and generalise that to the rest of the universe. It's also not intelligent to sway from that attitude (or any attitude, in fact) JUST by the choice and action of a single person, especially an enemy.
    You're calling the Kaylon "unintelligent" for literally lacking any data contradicting their views. That's not how intelligence works.

    And yes; the moment you get confirmed information that contradicts a view you hold, abandoning that view is how intelligence works.


    And i dunno where you see i am "implicitly arguing that the Kaylon representation is somehow flawed because they don't act emotionally." That's just you, not me.
    Your entire argument regarding how the Kaylon should irrationally hold onto beliefs in spite of the data contradicting them is an argument rooted in emotion, not logic.


  18. #438
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Epic Premium
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    45,579
    I actually think the Kaylons have a low level of emotionality that they can't really understand - they seem convinced that they can't (or shouldn't) have emotions, but some of their actions betray emotionality regardless of that belief on their part. Kaylon Primary telling Isaac that he will "always be alone" after Isaac opted to side with the crew of the Orville in season 2 seemed like an emotional response on its part - there was no real reason to say it, and if it wasn't intended to wound Isaac (a purposeless attempt given supposed Kaylon emotionlessness) then it was an entirely purposeless statement given that it was both obvious and meaningless given that loneliness wouldn't affect an emotionless Kaylon. The Kaylons' response to their creators and their rationale for genocide against organic beings also seems like a strong emotional response to their own suffering - having learned that more organic life existed than their creators, the assumption that *all* organic life would automatically oppose them isn't a logical supposition, one that through Isaac they had a more or less firsthand refutation of.

    This also explains Isaac's conduct as well, like choosing to side with the Orville crew against his own people, or his continued quasi-romance with Claire. Like Star Trek's Data, or Mass Effect's Legion, the Kaylon have a very rudimentary emotionality that's part and parcel of their own artificial intelligence and sentience, and those emotions have a definite effect on them despite their otherwise logical and/or unemotional presentation.
    "We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see." ― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead

  19. #439
    Over 9000! Kithelle's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere where canon still exists
    Posts
    9,476
    Quote Originally Posted by GMZohar1 View Post
    The Orville is ok, but it feels like Bortus is the main character.. More episodes are about him than anyone else
    I never really thought about that...but it's a way to set itself apart, pretty much everything in sci fi has humans as the main character(s)

    Star Trek, Star Wars, you name it...may throw in a alien here or there but it's all pretty much human focused

  20. #440
    The Lightbringer
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Banned to the Bone.
    Posts
    3,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You're calling the Kaylon "unintelligent" for literally lacking any data contradicting their views. That's not how intelligence works.

    And yes; the moment you get confirmed information that contradicts a view you hold, abandoning that view is how intelligence works.




    Your entire argument regarding how the Kaylon should irrationally hold onto beliefs in spite of the data contradicting them is an argument rooted in emotion, not logic.
    Now you're deliberately twisting everything i said. No reason to continue discussion with such dishonesty.
    /spit@Blizzard

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •