How do Reavers pilot ships, them being insane cannibals and such?
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Thursday, December 2, 2021 20:06
VIEWED: 48258
PAGE 9 of 19
Remember what LOUIS VUITTON said: "It's in the bag!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Remember what LOUIS VUITTON said: "It's in the bag!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Remember what LOUIS VUITTON said: "It's in the bag!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Erm, no. I'm saying Joss's explination for where they came from, and their behaviour don't mesh. I'm saying he, as a falible human being, albiet a talented one, made a mistake. Your argument invites the assumption that there is no such thing as a plot hole.
The only vaguely reliable thing we are told in the show or movie about where the Reavers came from is that due to the Pax, "Their aggressor response increased... beyond madness..."
Other characters say things about them, but the woman who reports on the Pax is the only one whose information goes beyond hearsay, legend and campfire stories. That woman doesn't give us much to go on. She's probably never studied a specimen, or observed Reaver behavior over a long period, so her observational evidence is pretty limited.
That leaves a huge amount of unanswered questions regarding Reaver limits, attitudes, abilities and society (if any).
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
We see them do it therefore they can etc, is a post hoc and flawed analysis, is all.
So, "we see monkeys use tools, therefore monkeys can use tools" is a post hoc fallacy? Are you sure you aren't stretching the definition of a post hoc fallacy a bit far? Post hoc is a fallacy of cause and effect. There is no cause and effect being stated in "We see them do it therefore they can".
Reavers pilot ships. Reavers build things onto their ships. Reavers build traps.
Reavers do not always attack instantly when they observe prey. Reavers leave behind constructions that exhibit industry (the bodies in the hold in "Bushwacked" -- unless the survivor did that). Reavers don't always kill everyone (unless the man in "Bushwacked" watched from somewhere and the Reavers didn't find him).
These are observable facts. The facts win. If what we're told disagrees with the observable facts then the information we are given is incorrect or incomplete, or the observation is flawed in some way.
(EDIT: Excepting those occasions in fiction when both the observation and the source of information are unimpeachable (such as an omniscient narrator) -- then it's just crappy writing. :) )
Now, for a theory, based on nothing but it being 1:21 am when I start writing it:
Reavers are driven by rage, but the rage can be satiated. Much like a pyromaniac gets some pleasure and relief from burning something, Reavers get pleasure and relief* from destroying, consuming and violating things. The rage never goes away, but it subsides to levels where it doesn't need to be served. The rage has not destroyed the ability of Reavers to build tools and traps, or to use ships. The rage drives them, but it has destroyed them. (Think people on a bizarre combination of PCP, Meth and maybe a little 'roid rage for flavor.) (Okay, alot of 'roid rage...)
(*"Relief" is a subjective term here.)
Reavers find clean and symmetrical things to be unpleasant (the opposite of most people). This includes human symmetry -- which is why they disfigure themselves. This also, as a by-product, makes it easier to identify outsiders. It's also why they don't kill each other: why violate what's already been violated? (Pyromanics don't usually torch buildings that have already been burned to the ground...)
Reavers have a preference for live meat, which may be the related to the impulse toward violence -- dead men don't fight back and by their very nature are already destroyed. It's unclear how long a body can be dead before Reavers are unwilling to eat it, if they eat non-human meat, or if they ever eat other foods when desperate for nourishment.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ok I'll get into the fray on this one... too much intermingling of science with science fiction...
Ok ~ a brain-altering chemical is introduced into the air supply on Miranda. Designed to effect the region of the brain directly linked to aggression. The chemical interacts with other chemicals unique to the planet's atmosphere, and the end-result becomes something the Alliance Gestapo didn't plan for. 30 million people become sedate and lose all motivation... even their basic motor skills (thus becoming prime candidates for employment at the Department of Motor Vehicles). A small percentage have an opposite reaction to the chemical (per the movie ~ 1/10th of 1 percent ~ i.e. the 30,000 reavers).
My theory: basic motor skills and cognitive abilities remain intact among the 1/10th of a percent. However... that region of the brain that controls their libidinous and aggressive impulses has been reversed in function ~ versus being destroyed in most of the populace.
Voila. You got yerself rapist cannibals.
This is the singlemost absurd discussion I've ever been in.
XG
No such thing as gravity. The "Earth-that-was" just sucks.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
DreamTrove:
Quote:
Originally posted by DreamTrove:
I don't mean to be hostile or flame you, I'm just pretty sure that my posts were valid and I have plenty to back them up, but they are essentially only fan theories. Post you opposing ones. You just gave me too many attacks to respond to at any more length. If you have a specific gripe, post the one thing that's bugging you and I'll try to explain where I'm coming from.
Firstly, I'm sorry if I offended you, it was not my intention. I was not attacking you, your points maybe, but not you. The same goes for this post.
As for my theories, well, they're simple really. That the original explanation for Reavers. They were created by people being driven mad on the edge of space (see below) no PAX required.
Quote:
1. I know this stuff all ready, I'm not speaking from a position of ignorance here.
I would really like to see your evidence, as no canon FireFly sets out Reavers as being the same as River. Nor is it mentioned or implied that Reavers are telepathic. If I have over looked something I would like to know.
Quote:
2. I know a heck of a lot about the underlying science here, and I think Joss' scenario as laid out in the movie is spot on.
As in parapsychology and psi? I know the underlying science extremely well myself. I'm not disputing that in anyway. I'm disputing that the Reavers are capable of it on any meaningful level. I also think the argument of 'they must be telepathic' is clutching a straws some what.
Quote:
3. River wasn't made to kill reavers, she was made to be like a reaver, to add their abilities to an alliance assassin.
I don't see it. A Reaver isn't an assassin. More-over any government would love a practically invincible telepathic assassin, whether Reavers existed or not.
I'm sorry I just don't see the reasoning behind the argument that River = Reaver.
Quote:
4. Someone make the analogy of sharks and reavers, I think by what we see, it's a good one. Obviously sharks are dumb, they don't have brains. But the similarity exists.
My assertion was that pack behaviours were a product of greater intelligence, not telepathy, nothing more.
Quote:
Story is problem solving by proxy, omniscient characters already know the answers ergo omniscience is the opposite of story.
Oh, I see what you mean, good point. I don't think that counts for River though. It adds a lot to the storyline that she can know a great deal about what’s going on around her, but can't articulate those insights in meaningful ways.
Quote:
1. Insanity. It's not the same thing as stupidity, it's not even related. It's like assuming someone is fat on the basis that you know their height and nothing else.
I never said insane was stupid. You misunderstand my point. I said that Reavers were beyond insane, that the explanation for their existence (i.e. PAX) would prevent them using their intelligence for high-level reasoning (required to build weapons, run ships, etc). It would also prevent the emergence of 'Reaver society' or any level of teamwork what so ever (including pack hunting).
Quote:
2. Writing. There are many things which work in stories, and many which do not.
Not sure what your point is here, can you elaborate please?
Quote:
3. Joss. Joss might make errors, but he doesn't make a lot of them. He's incredibly diligent. Anything which on the surface appears to be an error has to be examined very closely, because chance are it's not. Many people on the IMDb boards leapt to the conclusion that Joss made a goof.
Where as others are leaping to the conclusion that he didn't (and indeed in some cases couldn't!)
. I'll believe that this isn't a plot hole when Joss shows an interesting and believable Reaver society, and how the PAX can produce the emergent behaviours required.Teraph:
Quote:
Originally posted by Teraph:
The only vaguely reliable thing we are told in the show or movie about where the Reavers came from is tNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by XeroGravity:
This is the singlemost absurd discussion I've ever been in.
If you don't like the discussion, don't contribute. That remark is simply Trollish.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you Beeeer Milkshakes!
Even though I might, even though I try,
I can't
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Say I wrote a Zombie film, and in that film I explained that Zombies were rage filled beasts. That they were incapable of high-level reasoning and only 'lived' to kill. Then I had them driving a car and talking about today's weather. That would be a plot hole. It is also what people here are suggesting for Reavers.
No canonical source says they are incapable of high-level reasoning. No source even implies it. The actions in the movie and the show flat out contradict it (as you have said) and the origin implies it isn’t the case.*
You made up the idea that they are mindless killing machines, and as you have pointed out that idea does not remotely fit into the Firefly-Serenity continuity. As such perhaps you should make up a new idea.
-
*The origin is that a drug was created to weed out aggression (nothing about intelligence) and it worked but also weeded out ambition, sexual desire, hunger, and motivation in general. In a small percent of the population it had the reverse effect, thus it made it so that those people were very aggressive, very lustful, and very motivated (my god look how motivated the bastards are).
The movie practically went out of its way to say that there was no effect on intelligence or cooperation. It made sure to only say that their aggression was pushed “beyond madness.”
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:
You made up the idea that they are mindless killing machines, and as you have pointed out that idea does not remotely fit into the Firefly-Serenity continuity. As such perhaps you should make up a new idea.
NO the FILM made up that idea. The only time their mental reasoning is mentioned in both the series and the film is too say they have none. My assertion is that they do, but that the PAX doesn't allow for their emergent behaviours. Read my posts. I quite clearly say my only problem with the Reavers is that the PAX is an insufficient explanation.
Quote:
It made sure to only say that their aggression was pushed “beyond madness.”
Right, so people who's aggression has been pushed beyond madness would be able to act in a cooperative manner?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you Beeeer Milkshakes!
Even though I might, even though I try,
I can't
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Yes, exactly. People aren't capable of rational problem solving or thinking when angry.
I really want to know what world you are living in, because it is not the one I’m in.
Ok, first thing:
Aggression does not equal anger.
Second:
Rational decision making is often hindered by anger, but rational problem solving isn’t hindered nearly as much. I’m afraid I can’t give an example because I don’t know which type of problem solving you mean. I can tell you that in areas from calculus to navigation to skiing to laptop troubleshooting anger isn’t much of a hindrance.
Quote:And yet the majority of people who do do not get into accidents.
I sure as hell wouldn't want to drive a car when angry.
Quote:Nothing about that implies a lack of the skills you claim they lack.
Anger beyond madness is the key. I'm saying that the PAX makes them not insane, but beyond insane. Alien.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME