"No gods or kings, only man"
- Thread starter nixubaby
- Start date
Recommended Videos
For every city to exist it requires food and somehting to trade. Thus outside towns are required to keep it flowing. It is possible, so long as there was enough food kicking about to support a populous, but trade would be a problem. I suppose it's possible but resources would always be limited to the the nearby mines and so forth. So it could exist but other towns would NEED to develop in order to continue development as a form of trading i.e., you can have this metal, if we can have that food. Rapture COULD exist, but other towns would need to exist too. Then for rapture to be maintained as the main city, it would have to be central to all of this.
I don't think it's possible.
For one, it couldn't be run by the people for the people, because some people have people problems.
And then you couldn't even think about introducing weapons to the matter... You've played Bioshock, you understand why.
It'd have to be strictly regulated to make sure no one's fucking it up, so that eliminates the freedom aspect of it Rapture tried to capture.
So what you'd end up with is a force-peaceful military zone with Big Brother watching you 24/7.
For one, it couldn't be run by the people for the people, because some people have people problems.
And then you couldn't even think about introducing weapons to the matter... You've played Bioshock, you understand why.
It'd have to be strictly regulated to make sure no one's fucking it up, so that eliminates the freedom aspect of it Rapture tried to capture.
So what you'd end up with is a force-peaceful military zone with Big Brother watching you 24/7.
Umm, short answer: No.
Long answer: Ok, well the rules would need to be tweaked a little. There would need to be some manner of governing body; not a group of men in suits who say "this is what we want you to do, you do it", but rather the community gathers and decides collectively on how the society functions and progresses. As for the whole "where the strong are not constrained by the weak" thing, I think in the right context that could mean that government funding would be highly favourable in the R&D department, aiming towards development, rather than wasting a large portion of funding on people who would, by choice, live purely off of government funding.
TL;DR: If our Rapture was a commnity of hard working researchers who had morals, then yes.
EDIT: I realised that my definition of Rapture would also fit a definition of Eureka.
Long answer: Ok, well the rules would need to be tweaked a little. There would need to be some manner of governing body; not a group of men in suits who say "this is what we want you to do, you do it", but rather the community gathers and decides collectively on how the society functions and progresses. As for the whole "where the strong are not constrained by the weak" thing, I think in the right context that could mean that government funding would be highly favourable in the R&D department, aiming towards development, rather than wasting a large portion of funding on people who would, by choice, live purely off of government funding.
TL;DR: If our Rapture was a commnity of hard working researchers who had morals, then yes.
EDIT: I realised that my definition of Rapture would also fit a definition of Eureka.
let me give you a example form one of Bioshock audio dairies: there will always be somebody to clean the rich man's toilet. in other words: as long as one person feels better than the other person we never will have a utopia.
No! Here's some reasons:
1) Freedom without ethics is an evil in itself.
2) When a man is entiteled to the sweat of his brow. Envy is bredm and envy leads to evil.
3) We have examples that anarchy, (A soceity without an leading authority) leads to chaos.
1) Freedom without ethics is an evil in itself.
2) When a man is entiteled to the sweat of his brow. Envy is bredm and envy leads to evil.
3) We have examples that anarchy, (A soceity without an leading authority) leads to chaos.
It would be impossible. Fontaine put it better, but I can't find the exact quotation right now. It went something like "They come here thinking they'll be [insert desirable job description here], but they always forget that someone has to [insert total failure of a career here]."
But one thing both Bioshock games have done extremely well as an idea, is showing that no form of government is, not only not perfect, but has obligatory negatives and big ones at that. We have all kinds of people is Rapture, people who were unsatisfied with the form of government they came from, capitalism, fascism, comunism, and went to Rapture in search of a Utopia, one that almost worked for a short while but ultimately brought more evil to it's people and humanity itself, than any other form of government.
Oh and one more thing......the idea that people no matter how much they evolve or where the are will allways be assholes.
Oh and one more thing......the idea that people no matter how much they evolve or where the are will allways be assholes.
"It might sound good in theory but how about in practice" is pretty much the whole thing behind Bioshock 1 and 2.
Bioshock 1: Well, what if we did away with all the political interference that holds people back and let them just take what they can for themselves? Wouldn't this supercharge the advancement of humankind?
No, apparently what happens is that one talented crook can undermine the whole thing.
Bioshock 2: Well, how about we go the opposite direction then? How about everybody is completely selfless and sacrifices everything for the benefit of others?
No, taken too far into the extreme what happens is that you basically try to turn people into faceless mindless grunts and no truly exceptional individual (such as Lamb's daughter) will allow that.
The answer is supposed to be that adhering absolutely to any one ideal will get you in trouble.
Bioshock 1: Well, what if we did away with all the political interference that holds people back and let them just take what they can for themselves? Wouldn't this supercharge the advancement of humankind?
No, apparently what happens is that one talented crook can undermine the whole thing.
Bioshock 2: Well, how about we go the opposite direction then? How about everybody is completely selfless and sacrifices everything for the benefit of others?
No, taken too far into the extreme what happens is that you basically try to turn people into faceless mindless grunts and no truly exceptional individual (such as Lamb's daughter) will allow that.
The answer is supposed to be that adhering absolutely to any one ideal will get you in trouble.
Wait, wait, wait.
You did play through all of Bioshock and Bioshock 2?
And you wonder if its possible for a utopia like Rapture or Andrew Ryan's vision to be possible?...
Might want to play the game again
You did play through all of Bioshock and Bioshock 2?
And you wonder if its possible for a utopia like Rapture or Andrew Ryan's vision to be possible?...
Might want to play the game again
After my Ideology the theory of a working Rapture isn't even near a utopia. It's not good or perfect, not even in theory.
No. This is the POINT of Bioshock.nixubaby said:
Rapture is a city where the citizens are actively encouraged to be amoral. As a result, they tear themselves apart like genetically-engineered rats in an art-deco sack.
It is a fundamentally flawed city from the beginning and this is why it fails. It was meant to be a city where great minds can be great, unhampered by the not-great. Except SOMEONE has to mop the floors and clean the toilets. We can't ALL be genius artists or brain surgeons or beauty queens or rocket scientists. A society has to be build from the ground up, not the top down.
This is the thing with any occurence of "utopia". Everyone knows that it means an ideal society - literally "good place". However, it was constructed to also be a pun. The other way to read it is "eutopia" - "No Place". The very word "utopia", in other words, means a city that embodies an ideal that is impossible to actually attain.
ITT weak minded people ;p
In short, I believe it would work.
Andrew Ryan's dream failed not because of greed or evil, but because ADAM made it impossible to maintain any order and from that moment on he was dealing with crack addicts with powers of gods. That would screw up any system.
Ryan's dream would work, and it would work very efficiently but it would be a cruel and unforgiving system filled with misery. A world where everyone is responsible only for their own actions and can do whatever they want until it doesn?t affect others is a world where people would work. Why? They would work or they would starve. The only problem is that managers of that system would need power to deal with ones who failed and don't want to suffer the consequences and just die. Many would at first, later people would adapt. And those who would survive would certainly be worthy individuals.
I hate when people think that with no social any system would fail. If you are able to deal with idiots and weaklings it would work perfectly. Not that the economy would fail. It would be stronger than ever.
In short, I believe it would work.
Andrew Ryan's dream failed not because of greed or evil, but because ADAM made it impossible to maintain any order and from that moment on he was dealing with crack addicts with powers of gods. That would screw up any system.
Ryan's dream would work, and it would work very efficiently but it would be a cruel and unforgiving system filled with misery. A world where everyone is responsible only for their own actions and can do whatever they want until it doesn?t affect others is a world where people would work. Why? They would work or they would starve. The only problem is that managers of that system would need power to deal with ones who failed and don't want to suffer the consequences and just die. Many would at first, later people would adapt. And those who would survive would certainly be worthy individuals.
I hate when people think that with no social any system would fail. If you are able to deal with idiots and weaklings it would work perfectly. Not that the economy would fail. It would be stronger than ever.
The point of bioshock is that if crack instead of destroing your body would give you superpowers, society would fall. It's a valid point. But don't be naive in givin bioshock setup a deeper meaning. If ADAM would fall into hands of people it would destroy any system. The thing is there is NO WAY to have a cheap way to turn yourself into god. In "ral rapture" even assuming ADAM existed, it would be insanely expensive and only a chosen few would afford it. Then they would turn insane and be taken away and society would move on.Leodiensian said: