Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: *slight spoilers* The prisoner.
  • Subject: *slight spoilers* The prisoner.
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: *slight spoilers* The prisoner.

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: Traxus 04
The Precursors were so powerful that the Flood were not a serious problem to them. They simply looked around until they found creatures with a natural resiliency to the Flood infection - and they found the sea scorpion thing, which had Flood killing antibodies.

I need to see a quote supporting that.

Posted by: Traxus 04
When they left our galaxy, for whatever reason, they left a specimen in stasis, which contained the antibodies, should anyone need them in future fights with The Flood.

Refer to previous point.

Posted by: Traxus 04
The one thing that did remain, of course, was the captive/specimen.

Is there evidence to suggest that the Captive is the source of the cure?

Posted by: Traxus 04
But the humans were in no mood to let the Forerunners find it, under the circumstances. Except they couldn't destroy it either - Precursor tech is indestructible.

Soooo they were left with one option: deception.

This all rests on the Captive being the source, which is not proven.

Posted by: Traxus 04
They built a fake 'communications device' which seemingly allowed conversation with the Captive, but actually only 'received' things that the humans had programmed it to say. They programmed it to say this dude was the last Precursor, that Forerunners had betrayed the Precursors long ago, and that The Flood was their revenge.

Is it implied anywhere that it was fake? I could say that it was Harry Potters wand and that would hold as much weight as what you suggest because there is no evidence - implicit or otherwise.

Posted by: Traxus 04
However there is no DIRECT suggestion that the cure and Captive are related.

And yet that is the sole premise for your entire argument.

Posted by: Traxus 04
The only real good hint was that Didact can't understand how the human communication device is pushing through Precursor technology.

There could not have been that much of a difference between the Forerunner and Humanity in terms of science and technology. Humanity held for 50 years against the full might of the Forerunner at just one planet after having already most likely exhausted their resources fighting the Flood. You are placing the Forerunner on too high a plateau. Also, just because it does not seem likely does not mean that it cannot be true. You think that it is unlikely, so therefore the device must be fake? Well, I posit that it is actually magic, and inside the device is Sauron's One Ring. Prove me wrong.

Joking obviously, but there is nothing to suggest one over the other.

I looked at the second page of chapter 22, and found nothing to suggest that the communication device was fake and that the Captive was the cure.

  • 01.27.2011 8:25 PM PDT

Why are you so obsessed with proof? We're talking about a work of fiction and we're predicting what will essentially be a plot-twist in the upcoming sequels. Of course there's no direct proof! That would spoil the twist. All you can do is look for strange patterns and think up a solution that would satisfy all conditions, provide the necessary causality.

It's like if you got 3/4s through the Usual Suspects and guessed who Kaizer Soze was, it would all make sense, but you would have no 'proof.'

The humans have a device that penetrates the Precursor technology, I find this strange, the Didact finds this strange, and the Didact found his conversation with the Captive strange. Precursor technology is far in advance of humans or forerunners, or anyone. Simplest explanation is that Didact didn't really talk to the Captive, he was fooled by his enemies, the humans.

Occam's razor anyone?

Chapter 22 doesn't explain the link between the Captive and the cure, but it does explain how the humans kept the Flood cure a secret from the Forerunners. If you project a little from there you can see why they might want to trick the Forerunners with respect to the Captive.

  • 01.27.2011 8:48 PM PDT

Mingo: Oh, phew. Sorry I came across a bit hostile, I've been nerdraging at Traxus for a while now.

[Edited on 01.27.2011 9:18 PM PST]

  • 01.27.2011 9:17 PM PDT

Occam's razor is a principle which recommends selecting the theory that makes the fewest new assumptions, when the hypotheses are equal in other respects.

So if Humanity found a way to partially pierce the Precursor stasis and communicate, Occum's Razor would have you conclude they somehow did.

Not create the assumption that Humanity had a long delayed plan to sick the Flood on the Forerunner. And so built a fake device. To trick them. Many assumptions, here.

The 'Razor' is a principle that lends to simpler theories, not more elaborate. And the simplest theory here is they did exactly what the narrator says.

I recommend you read up on things before you use them to further your arguments.

[Edited on 01.27.2011 9:26 PM PST]

  • 01.27.2011 9:24 PM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: Traxus 04
Why are you so obsessed with proof? We're talking about a work of fiction and we're predicting what will essentially be a plot-twist in the upcoming sequels. Of course there's no direct proof! That would spoil the twist. All you can do is look for strange patterns and think up a solution that would satisfy all conditions, provide the necessary causality.

I am looking for direct proof supporting your premise, not necessarily anything relating directly to your conclusion. You conclude that the Captive ultimately said nothing to the Humans. That is what this thread is about and that is what you tried to put across as fact in your first post. I do not need to see an explicit reference to that, but the basis for your argument should be based upon something that is verifiable and not assumption itself.

Posted by: Traxus 04
The humans have a device that penetrates the Precursor technology, I find this strange, the Didact finds this strange, and the Didact found his conversation with the Captive strange. Precursor technology is far in advance of humans or forerunners, or anyone. Simplest explanation is that Didact didn't really talk to the Captive, he was fooled by his enemies, the humans.

Occam's razor anyone?

Umm no. The simplest explanation is that they did indeed penetrate the precursor technology. As forthnback has brought up, Occam's Razor is a principle of selecting the theory which presents the fewest assumptions; The most succinct explanation.

If it was found out that the Captive was the source of the Cure then it would not immediately spoil the plot-twist, if it is indeed to happen, because one must still make the connection from that to the other events in the story in order to conclude that the Captive ultimately said nothing and that it was all an elaborate trick on Humanitys part. That would be a little better because then at least we would KNOW that the Captive was the source, and not be basing an assumption on an assumption.

  • 01.28.2011 9:45 AM PDT

I like turtles

How is this known?
Posted by: Traxus 04
We worked out the answer a couple of hours ago.

The prisoner didn't say anything to the humans, or to Didact. The prisoner is dead (obviously. how could he still be alive?); he's just a preserved specimen. The humans used his DNA to create a flood-killing virus though.

When the humans were defeated by the -blam!-Runners, they wanted to keep the Flood cure a secret. So they made up some silly stories to tell the Forerunners, and even planted a fake communication device inside the prison, so that the Forerunner would think they were talking to the Prisoner.

There's nothing he could say to make people commit suicide. It was all just FUD/propaganda

How is this known?

  • 01.28.2011 9:49 AM PDT

I like turtles


Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: Traxus 04
The prisoner is dead (obviously. how could he still be alive?); he's just a preserved specimen.

How is it obvious?

Posted by: Traxus 04
The humans used his DNA to create a flood-killing virus though.

They did?

I don't think the humans ever actually breached the prison with The Captive in it, I think they just conversed with it.

  • 01.28.2011 9:56 AM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: SoApS pistol
Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: Traxus 04
The prisoner is dead (obviously. how could he still be alive?); he's just a preserved specimen.

How is it obvious?

Posted by: Traxus 04
The humans used his DNA to create a flood-killing virus though.

They did?

I don't think the humans ever actually breached the prison with The Captive in it, I think they just conversed with it.

Making the extraction of any biological material impossible.



You have contradicted yourself Traxis. You claim that the Humans could not have possibly penetrated the Capsule to only communicate, but yet you advocate that they were somehow able to remove a sample from the specimen, which would require a physical breach of the capsule.

And don't say they scanned it. That is still a breach. If they could transmit a scan in there then it is not out of the question to say that they could transmit a conversation in there.

  • 01.28.2011 10:23 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Both optimists and pessimists contribute to our society. The optimist invents the airplane and the pessimist the parachute. " ~Gil Stern

"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." ~Albert Einstein

"What did I just drink?"~Socrates

Buyer's Guide: Headphones|Google Chrome Themes|Arena Spreadsheet

Posted by: anton1792
Making the extraction of any biological material impossible.



You have contradicted yourself Traxis. You claim that the Humans could not have possibly penetrated the Capsule to only communicate, but yet you advocate that they were somehow able to remove a sample from the specimen, which would require a physical breach of the capsule.

And don't say they scanned it. That is still a breach. If they could transmit a scan in there then it is not out of the question to say that they could transmit a conversation in there.


But Anton! They clearly never talked to the prisoner!! The Humans just committed suicide on their own and Didact just made up a conversation that he had with the prisoner!

Q.E.D- No one ever talked to the prisoner!

  • 01.28.2011 10:47 AM PDT

I like turtles


Posted by: drummer0702
Posted by: anton1792
Making the extraction of any biological material impossible.



You have contradicted yourself Traxis. You claim that the Humans could not have possibly penetrated the Capsule to only communicate, but yet you advocate that they were somehow able to remove a sample from the specimen, which would require a physical breach of the capsule.

And don't say they scanned it. That is still a breach. If they could transmit a scan in there then it is not out of the question to say that they could transmit a conversation in there.


But Anton! They clearly never talked to the prisoner!! The Humans just committed suicide on their own and Didact just made up a conversation that he had with the prisoner!

Q.E.D- No one ever talked to the prisoner!

If Didatct never talked to it, then there would be no ending of Cryptum.

I have proof of this, you have an assumption.

  • 01.28.2011 11:04 AM PDT

And So Forerunner And Flood Became One.

Am I the only that has a problem with the captive being precursor? I'd rather not derive from a scorpion monster.

Posted by: anton1792
You have contradicted yourself Traxis. You claim that the Humans could not have possibly penetrated the Capsule to only communicate, but yet you advocate that they were somehow able to remove a sample from the specimen, which would require a physical breach of the capsule.

This.

  • 01.28.2011 11:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Both optimists and pessimists contribute to our society. The optimist invents the airplane and the pessimist the parachute. " ~Gil Stern

"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." ~Albert Einstein

"What did I just drink?"~Socrates

Buyer's Guide: Headphones|Google Chrome Themes|Arena Spreadsheet

Posted by: SoApS pistol
If Didatct never talked to it, then there would be no ending of Cryptum.

I have proof of this, you have an assumption.


I really don't know how I could have conveyed my sarcasm anymore blatantly than I did... Maybe I should alternate with capital letters every other letter. LiKe TiS?

  • 01.28.2011 11:08 AM PDT

I like turtles


Posted by: drummer0702
Posted by: SoApS pistol
If Didatct never talked to it, then there would be no ending of Cryptum.

I have proof of this, you have an assumption.


I really don't know how I could have conveyed my sarcasm anymore blatantly than I did... Maybe I should alternate with capital letters every other letter. LiKe TiS?

Sarcasm is usually conveyed in the tone of VOICE. I certainly didn't HEAR you.

  • 01.28.2011 11:15 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Both optimists and pessimists contribute to our society. The optimist invents the airplane and the pessimist the parachute. " ~Gil Stern

"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." ~Albert Einstein

"What did I just drink?"~Socrates

Buyer's Guide: Headphones|Google Chrome Themes|Arena Spreadsheet

Posted by: SoApS pistol

Sarcasm is usually conveyed in the tone of VOICE. I certainly didn't HEAR you.


Sorry, I'll speak louder next time.

Realistically, the Humans and Didact obviously spoke with the prisoner. Also, there are far more logical argument for the prisoner to not be Precursor than there are for it being one.

  • 01.28.2011 11:16 AM PDT

I like turtles


Posted by: drummer0702
Posted by: SoApS pistol

Sarcasm is usually conveyed in the tone of VOICE. I certainly didn't HEAR you.


Sorry, I'll speak louder next time.

Realistically, the Humans and Didact obviously spoke with the prisoner. Also, there are far more logical argument for the prisoner to not be Precursor than there are for it being one.

Agreed.

  • 01.28.2011 11:18 AM PDT

Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: Traxus 04
Why are you so obsessed with proof? We're talking about a work of fiction and we're predicting what will essentially be a plot-twist in the upcoming sequels. Of course there's no direct proof! That would spoil the twist. All you can do is look for strange patterns and think up a solution that would satisfy all conditions, provide the necessary causality.

I am looking for direct proof supporting your premise, not necessarily anything relating directly to your conclusion. You conclude that the Captive ultimately said nothing to the Humans. That is what this thread is about and that is what you tried to put across as fact in your first post. I do not need to see an explicit reference to that, but the basis for your argument should be based upon something that is verifiable and not assumption itself.

If it was found out that the Captive was the source of the Cure then it would not immediately spoil the plot-twist, if it is indeed to happen, because one must still make the connection from that to the other events in the story in order to conclude that the Captive ultimately said nothing and that it was all an elaborate trick on Humanitys part. That would be a little better because then at least we would KNOW that the Captive was the source, and not be basing an assumption on an assumption.


It would spoil the (supposed) plot twist though. If we knew the cure came from the Captive, then Bornstellar/Forerunners would know, so there could be know plot-twist. Even if there was just a bigger clue rather than explicit knowledge, it would immediately point to why the Forerunners weren't studying the Captive for the cure, making the plot-twist (that the humans were trying to smokescreen them) too obvious.

The one clue that we do get is that the Captive doesn't communicate freely: he usually talks jibberish, is incapable of actual 'real' conversation, can only be reached via a mysterious human device (think about it: why introduce the human device at all? the author could have just written a Precursor communication device into the story), and only has anything intelligible to say on one subject, the Flood. That's enough to infer/predict future revelations from.


Posted by: Traxus 04
The humans have a device that penetrates the Precursor technology, I find this strange, the Didact finds this strange, and the Didact found his conversation with the Captive strange. Precursor technology is far in advance of humans or forerunners, or anyone. Simplest explanation is that Didact didn't really talk to the Captive, he was fooled by his enemies, the humans.

Occam's razor anyone?

Umm no. The simplest explanation is that they did indeed penetrate the precursor technology. As forthnback has brought up, Occam's Razor is a principle of selecting the theory which presents the fewest assumptions; The most succinct explanation.



Do yourself a favour and ignore everything forthnback says: this is a poster whose vitriolic attacks on my posts have continued for days on the premise that 'the humans DID tell the Forerunner their cure, according to Cryptum' - and when I finally throw him the page reference to disprove that, he just switches to another misguided tangent to avoid embarrassment.

So now we have the Occam's Razor tangent. Sadly it is no more insightful. Occam's Razor only works when you give each hypothesis an equal starting point. In this case what we need to establish is the irrefutable parts of the scenario:

- Didact remembers hearing the Captive speak
- the words delivered were to the effect that Captive was the last Precursor, the Forerunners betrayed the Precursors, and the Flood is their revenge/answer

What you immediately do is make the two unwitting assumptions that a) it really was the Captive speaking and b) the words were true. Those then lead to more assumptions, such as that the humans had developed methods that circumvented Precursor tech, that the Forerunners could really destroy the tier-0 Precursors, that the Precursors would release an indiscriminate weapon as revenge against one race, indeed that the Precursor is still alive after millions of years in a box. All of which are rather problematic.

My version, on the other hand, makes a different, simpler, more plausible assumption to start with: that Didact was tricked. From there everything else flows naturally: the humans have good reason generally to mislead him/Forerunners, and could have had a special motive in the case of the Captive.

To say that the simplest hypothesis is that 'what the character/narrator said is correct' is beyond puerile. For a start, we don't have an omniscient narrator, we have a 1st person narrative, and here an account relayed through another character, partly drawing from stories he'd been told elsewhere. By that logic, if Gravemind said 'I am Santa Claus,' Occam's razor would say this was most likely true, and not a)lying or b)metaphorical.

[Edited on 01.28.2011 12:13 PM PST]

  • 01.28.2011 12:04 PM PDT

re: scanning the Captive but not talking to him

Hehe, I was wondering when someone was going to point this out. However since they definitely can see the Captive in his cage, without any extra technology, why wouldn't they be able also to scan him? It's the communicating back and forth, messages originating from inside the prison, that appears to be the impossible part.

Alternatively, you could postulate that the humans did figure out how to open up the cage, and they did so and took a sample from the Specimen, but they didn't want the Forerunners to gain access, so they resealed the prison with a fake communication device inside it. That fits well with my theory without changing anything else i think.

[Edited on 01.28.2011 12:33 PM PST]

  • 01.28.2011 12:11 PM PDT

Yeah, we still believe in all the things that we stood by before.
I know, to everything we've seen here, maybe even more.
I know we're not the only ones and we were not the first.
And unapologetically we stand behind each word.

Posted by: Traxus 04
Ok pal I'm gonna try to get this straight. So your trying to tell me that the Prisoner is not in fact alive but he died, right? And that someone thought it would be funny to put a prerecorded voice in its cage so it could "speak", right? And his prerecorded voice caused the people to commit suicide, or are the suicides a cover up? I cant remember with all the stuff thats been said in this thread.
I'm trying to be open minded about this but please answer me this. If the prisoner is indeed dead then how in Satan's cookies could it break out of its prison, hitch a ride on a Halo ring, and corrupt an AI by talking to it for 43(?) years. Last time I checked corpses couldn't do that. But please by all means if you have answers to these questions post 'em. And at forthnback , don't worry about coming off a little hostile bro. I feel your pain.

[Edited on 01.28.2011 2:13 PM PST]

  • 01.28.2011 2:12 PM PDT

I like turtles


Posted by: Traxus 04
Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: Traxus 04
Why are you so obsessed with proof? We're talking about a work of fiction and we're predicting what will essentially be a plot-twist in the upcoming sequels. Of course there's no direct proof! That would spoil the twist. All you can do is look for strange patterns and think up a solution that would satisfy all conditions, provide the necessary causality.

I am looking for direct proof supporting your premise, not necessarily anything relating directly to your conclusion. You conclude that the Captive ultimately said nothing to the Humans. That is what this thread is about and that is what you tried to put across as fact in your first post. I do not need to see an explicit reference to that, but the basis for your argument should be based upon something that is verifiable and not assumption itself.

If it was found out that the Captive was the source of the Cure then it would not immediately spoil the plot-twist, if it is indeed to happen, because one must still make the connection from that to the other events in the story in order to conclude that the Captive ultimately said nothing and that it was all an elaborate trick on Humanitys part. That would be a little better because then at least we would KNOW that the Captive was the source, and not be basing an assumption on an assumption.


It would spoil the (supposed) plot twist though. If we knew the cure came from the Captive, then Bornstellar/Forerunners would know, so there could be know plot-twist. Even if there was just a bigger clue rather than explicit knowledge, it would immediately point to why the Forerunners weren't studying the Captive for the cure, making the plot-twist (that the humans were trying to smokescreen them) too obvious.

The one clue that we do get is that the Captive doesn't communicate freely: he usually talks jibberish, is incapable of actual 'real' conversation, can only be reached via a mysterious human device (think about it: why introduce the human device at all? the author could have just written a Precursor communication device into the story), and only has anything intelligible to say on one subject, the Flood. That's enough to infer/predict future revelations from.


Posted by: Traxus 04
The humans have a device that penetrates the Precursor technology, I find this strange, the Didact finds this strange, and the Didact found his conversation with the Captive strange. Precursor technology is far in advance of humans or forerunners, or anyone. Simplest explanation is that Didact didn't really talk to the Captive, he was fooled by his enemies, the humans.

Occam's razor anyone?

Umm no. The simplest explanation is that they did indeed penetrate the precursor technology. As forthnback has brought up, Occam's Razor is a principle of selecting the theory which presents the fewest assumptions; The most succinct explanation.



Do yourself a favour and ignore everything forthnback says: this is a poster whose vitriolic attacks on my posts have continued for days on the premise that 'the humans DID tell the Forerunner their cure, according to Cryptum' - and when I finally throw him the page reference to disprove that, he just switches to another misguided tangent to avoid embarrassment.

So now we have the Occam's Razor tangent. Sadly it is no more insightful. Occam's Razor only works when you give each hypothesis an equal starting point. In this case what we need to establish is the irrefutable parts of the scenario:

- Didact remembers hearing the Captive speak
- the words delivered were to the effect that Captive was the last Precursor, the Forerunners betrayed the Precursors, and the Flood is their revenge/answer

What you immediately do is make the two unwitting assumptions that a) it really was the Captive speaking and b) the words were true. Those then lead to more assumptions, such as that the humans had developed methods that circumvented Precursor tech, that the Forerunners could really destroy the tier-0 Precursors, that the Precursors would release an indiscriminate weapon as revenge against one race, indeed that the Precursor is still alive after millions of years in a box. All of which are rather problematic.

My version, on the other hand, makes a different, simpler, more plausible assumption to start with: that Didact was tricked. From there everything else flows naturally: the humans have good reason generally to mislead him/Forerunners, and could have had a special motive in the case of the Captive.

To say that the simplest hypothesis is that 'what the character/narrator said is correct' is beyond puerile. For a start, we don't have an omniscient narrator, we have a 1st person narrative, and here an account relayed through another character, partly drawing from stories he'd been told elsewhere. By that logic, if Gravemind said 'I am Santa Claus,' Occam's razor would say this was most likely true, and not a)lying or b)metaphorical.

I suppose you wrote the book and are now working on the second book now, aren't you?

  • 01.28.2011 2:18 PM PDT

I am the PHILOSORAPTOR!


Posted by: Traxus 04
What i'm suggesting is this:

The Precursors were so powerful that the Flood were not a serious problem to them. They simply looked around until they found creatures with a natural resiliency to the Flood infection - and they found the sea scorpion thing, which had Flood killing antibodies.

When they left our galaxy, for whatever reason, they left a specimen in stasis, which contained the antibodies, should anyone need them in future fights with The Flood.

When the ancient humans got into war with the Flood, they studied the specimen (the Captive) and obtained the necessary antibodies. The antibodies were injected into millions of humans, who were then sent to counter-infect the Flood and kill it off. The humans died too, of course, along with the anti-bodies. Thus no trace was left of the Flood cells (destroyed) or the anti-bodies (died out after their hosts died).

The one thing that did remain, of course, was the captive/specimen. But the humans were in no mood to let the Forerunners find it, under the circumstances. Except they couldn't destroy it either - Precursor tech is indestructible.

Soooo they were left with one option: deception. They built a fake 'communications device' which seemingly allowed conversation with the Captive, but actually only 'received' things that the humans had programmed it to say. They programmed it to say this dude was the last Precursor, that Forerunners had betrayed the Precursors long ago, and that The Flood was their revenge.

This would have two results
a) Forerunner religion would be undermined, possibly causing civil war (like what happened with the Covenant)
b) Forerunners would be afraid of the Captive and refrain from studying it or trying to release/retrieve it

Now for THIS to be kept a secret by the humans would be a much simpler exercise: the scientist or small research team would have gotten the 'cure' fit-for-purpose directly from the Captive/specimen, and then they would have set about infecting/vaccinating many people. Only one person (or a few) need know where the cure came from (compared with a massive research effort to independently engineer a cure), and the vaccination equipment could be destroyed after use, and the anti-bodies die out in their hosts eventually. No way for the Forerunners to work out what was going on, even if they could capture humans and read their memories.

Remember that the Didact says although he spoke to the Captive, it wasn't a 'real conversation'... like it was scripted. Oh a nd it does say in Cryptum that humanity were 'understandably reluctant to reveal the secret' of how they defeated the Flood, and that they 'distributed it amongst themselves' and the secret was 'impenetrable to our techniques.' So the Forerunners did look, they just mysteriously couldn't find it anywhere. The explanation must be able to explain this clandestine secrecy, even the face of literally 'mind-reading' equipment.

However there is no DIRECT suggestion that the cure and Captive are related. The only real good hint was that Didact can't understand how the human communication device is pushing through Precursor technology. But it just fits very well. You got to admit though, mind****ing the Forerunners with a fake message from the Precursors is a brilliant 'up yours' on humanity's part, if it's true. FUD at its best.

Dude, who the hell gave you these ideas?
My younger brother has a better knowledge of Halo than you do.
He's only 8.
Point is: you are -blam!- stupid.

  • 01.28.2011 5:06 PM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: Traxus 04
It would spoil the (supposed) plot twist though. If we knew the cure came from the Captive, then Bornstellar/Forerunners would know, so there could be know plot-twist. Even if there was just a bigger clue rather than explicit knowledge, it would immediately point to why the Forerunners weren't studying the Captive for the cure, making the plot-twist (that the humans were trying to smokescreen them) too obvious.

Let's not use a plot twist as justification because let's face it, we do not know if that is going to happen or not; We are not the author.

If we knew that the Captive was the source, then one could imagine that it would be obfuscated by Humanity, thus revealing why the Forerunner never found out about it. However, one would still have to concoct the idea that the communication device was in fact fake, the conversations fake and that the captive ultimately said nothing; The Human scientists therefore committing suicide to prevent the Forerunner from obtaining the knowledge about the cure. Given the fake communication device or the captive being the source then it would be a solid idea I think.

Now let's just agree to disagree on this next part, because it is down to matters of opinion. Whether or not knowing about at least one of these (The Captive I'll say, as it points to your theory less than the device being fake) spoils it depends entirely on you. You would still have to connect that to the other things by concluding that the device was fake and the Didact's conversation being programmed. Then you would know whether it was a trick or not.

You asked me earlier whether or not I would appreciate that over the alternative: Not really. The idea that this captive holds knowledge of the Flood so deeply horrifying adds a whole new level to the Haloverse, I think.

Posted by: Traxus 04
The one clue that we do get is that the Captive doesn't communicate freely: he usually talks jibberish, is incapable of actual 'real' conversation, can only be reached via a mysterious human device (think about it: why introduce the human device at all? the author could have just written a Precursor communication device into the story), and only has anything intelligible to say on one subject, the Flood. That's enough to infer/predict future revelations from.

If no one ever talked to it, and it never really spoke to them by being behind a (supposedly) impenetrable Precursor barrier, then this is a null point. If it cannot speak, then it does not talk gibberish, it does not say anything about the Flood; It does not say anything. For Humanity to known about it talking gibberish, they had to have had a means to communicate. The thing I cannot get my head around is why Humanity would draw attention to it like that by saying that it knows something about the Flood. Now, the Forerunner know that they can get a lead on the Flood by beginning with the Captive. If Humanity wanted to keep the source of the cure a secret, they would not want the Forerunner to know this. In trying to drive someone away you make them more curious.

About the Human device: The author is perhaps wishing to show the theme of the intuitiveness of Humanity that 343I/Bungie has been shovelling around for the past 10 years. Also, a Precursor device would make very little sense: Why would the Precursor leave a way to breach the containment of something that they wanted incarcerated?

Posted by: Traxus 04
So now we have the Occam's Razor tangent. Sadly it is no more insightful. Occam's Razor only works when you give each hypothesis an equal starting point. In this case what we need to establish is the irrefutable parts of the scenario:

- Didact remembers hearing the Captive speak
- the words delivered were to the effect that Captive was the last Precursor, the Forerunners betrayed the Precursors, and the Flood is their revenge/answer

It does not say that the Flood is their answer. That is not irrefutable, the other two are though.

Posted by: Traxus 04
What you immediately do is make the two unwitting assumptions that a) it really was the Captive speaking and b) the words were true. Those then lead to more assumptions, such as that the humans had developed methods that circumvented Precursor tech, that the Forerunners could really destroy the tier-0 Precursors, that the Precursors would release an indiscriminate weapon as revenge against one race, indeed that the Precursor is still alive after millions of years in a box. All of which are rather problematic.

My version, on the other hand, makes a different, simpler, more plausible assumption to start with: that Didact was tricked. From there everything else flows naturally: the humans have good reason generally to mislead him/Forerunners, and could have had a special motive in the case of the Captive.

To say that the simplest hypothesis is that 'what the character/narrator said is correct' is beyond puerile. For a start, we don't have an omniscient narrator, we have a 1st person narrative, and here an account relayed through another character, partly drawing from stories he'd been told elsewhere. By that logic, if Gravemind said 'I am Santa Claus,' Occam's razor would say this was most likely true, and not a)lying or b)metaphorical.

That analogy is not accurate because there exists evidence that says otherwise, thus giving one a reason to deny its absolute truth. There is no assumption.

As this is fiction, there is no reason to doubt anything that the narrator says as there is no evidence in contrast to it. If you start calling into question the truth of certain parts of the novel then you may as well throw the entire thing out as there is no reason to pick and choose: Why this part and not that part? etc.

Posted by: Traxus 04
Hehe, I was wondering when someone was going to point this out. However since they definitely can see the Captive in his cage, without any extra technology, why wouldn't they be able also to scan him? It's the communicating back and forth, messages originating from inside the prison, that appears to be the impossible part.

A scan requires information to be sent back to the point of origin. Thus a scan will go in, and go back out. Communication is entirely possible.

Posted by: Traxus 04
Alternatively, you could postulate that the humans did figure out how to open up the cage, and they did so and took a sample from the Specimen, but they didn't want the Forerunners to gain access, so they resealed the prison with a fake communication device inside it. That fits well with my theory without changing anything else i think.

Which is in contrast to the second point of your argument in that it seems unlikely for Humanity to breach the capsule, thus meaning that the device must be fake. If they can get in, then a device that can communicate inside the capsule is possible, so the device does not have to be fake.

  • 01.28.2011 5:08 PM PDT

I like turtles

I don't even remember the book ever stating the reason the Captive was dangerous. If someone someone could enlighten me, that would be great.

  • 01.28.2011 5:34 PM PDT

Ok this is starting to go round in circles, so I'll reply briefly.

The Captive did not necessarily speak to Mendicant Bias for 43 years. It could be that when MB opened his cage and found the cure, Gravemind (NOT the captive) immediately contacted him to try and talk him out of using it.

The author could have written that communication was built into the prison, rather than added by humans: look at our prisons, they incarcerate people but they don't stop us from communicating with them.

If this plot twist happens as predicted, then the lack of 'proof' is not surprising. The author only wants to give as little information as possible, so that when the twist comes it 'fits' with what you know, and you go '...but of course! Why didn't I see it!' He absolutely does not want to give so many clues that most people work out the twist in advance. Instead he leaves many things vague so that unless you make a bunch of suppositions, you'll never work it out.

The stories about the people killing themselves, there's no reason to treat them as fact. We do know that the humans commited suicide en masse rather than be captured by the Forerunner, so it would be hard for the Forerunners to build an accurate picture of what happened, with so many witnesses dead.

The humans cannot destroy the prison, because it is Precursor technology, so they cannot avoid the Forerunners finding it and examining it. If the prison contains information/secrets they want to hide from the Forerunners, their only option would be to fool them.

If you can look at the Captive, then you can scan it too. It's the same principle: electromagnetic radiation entering then bouncing back.

Lastly, we can believe that everything Bornstellar says is spoken in earnest (not in all books, but in this one, probably), but that does not mean he has been given accurate information in the first place. If it was a 3rd person narrator, then yes, you could assume all information was accurate, unless spoken by a character. But in this case we're dealing with tales from unreliable sources. Didact said he spoke to the Captive, and told that to Bornstellar. But if Didact had been tricked, then how would he know any better? How would Born know any better?

  • 01.28.2011 7:14 PM PDT

Dark Neptune, a young amateur astronomer whose gaming life is no different from other teenagers of his age, though he controls it more strictly then others.


Posted by: Traxus 04
Ok this is starting to go round in circles, so I'll reply briefly.

The Captive did not necessarily speak to Mendicant Bias for 43 years. It could be that when MB opened his cage and found the cure, Gravemind (NOT the captive) immediately contacted him to try and talk him out of using it.

The author could have written that communication was built into the prison, rather than added by humans: look at our prisons, they incarcerate people but they don't stop us from communicating with them.

If this plot twist happens as predicted, then the lack of 'proof' is not surprising. The author only wants to give as little information as possible, so that when the twist comes it 'fits' with what you know, and you go '...but of course! Why didn't I see it!' He absolutely does not want to give so many clues that most people work out the twist in advance. Instead he leaves many things vague so that unless you make a bunch of suppositions, you'll never work it out.

The stories about the people killing themselves, there's no reason to treat them as fact. We do know that the humans commited suicide en masse rather than be captured by the Forerunner, so it would be hard for the Forerunners to build an accurate picture of what happened, with so many witnesses dead.

The humans cannot destroy the prison, because it is Precursor technology, so they cannot avoid the Forerunners finding it and examining it. If the prison contains information/secrets they want to hide from the Forerunners, their only option would be to fool them.

If you can look at the Captive, then you can scan it too. It's the same principle: electromagnetic radiation entering then bouncing back.

Lastly, we can believe that everything Bornstellar says is spoken in earnest (not in all books, but in this one, probably), but that does not mean he has been given accurate information in the first place. If it was a 3rd person narrator, then yes, you could assume all information was accurate, unless spoken by a character. But in this case we're dealing with tales from unreliable sources. Didact said he spoke to the Captive, and told that to Bornstellar. But if Didact had been tricked, then how would he know any better? How would Born know any better?


Someone didn't paid attention in school when his teacher taught the enitre class the meaning of the English word, "Fact".

  • 01.28.2011 7:43 PM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: Traxus 04
Ok this is starting to go round in circles

Let's just agree to disagree then.

Although could you at least not introduce your idea as if it were fact? At least say something like "This is a theory" rather than "We worked out the answer an hour ago. He never said anything. Obviously" and such. If there is anything to be learned from this then it is that things are far from certain.

;)

  • 01.28.2011 7:55 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3