maskormenace | 25 ⚜ Video

Entry tags:

25 ⚜ Video

[Crane sends the address out at 3pm sharp. He stands hunched against a wall with a bundle of files in his arms. Those with an eye for detail might notice math problems on a public whiteboard on the right; peppered with numerous red corrections that range from simple corrections to veiled insults.]

What affect have our ambassadors had on our lives?

[He turns his attention to the camera, eyes hooded. His tone is calm and polite but with a measure of boredom to it.]

Do we possess the same rights as native people? Does the government provide adequate care? Is it safe where we live? [In Maurtia Falls especially.] Who enacts the laws that rule our lives? Who legislates for education and social security? Ambassadors are our representatives - yet they are intimately acquainted with the culture of our hosts. Does this cozy arrangement mean they are politically trusted because they don't ask questions and challenge official stories? In simple terms, what do our ambassadors do for us?

[His fingertips grasp his chin.]

Also, one last question: who amongst us might earn your future nomination? Count Dooku, perhaps? Now there's a man with a political mind...

[Koma-san June 2016. Never forget.]

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I don't have enough information yet to make an accurate assessment of this place, the imports, or the government here. I only know of my own galaxy and it's history. How that history affects this one is still undetermined.

You are quite right. There's no telling at this moment. [A shrug.] Though there is information to be gleaned from the names of your people here. There is a history behind a name, after all.

The "names of my people?"

[He could assume he means the ones from the same galaxy, but what's so unusual about their names?]

People from home.

[Yes, he does mean the ones from the same galaxy.]

Human behavior is predictable. But equally it is repetitive. One can take the name of a human from your galaxy and comfortably predict their behavior here, far far from home.

I agree. Assuming they have no intent on changing their ways, they can be presumed to continue on with the same goals in mind. Someone who wants power will continue to want power, and someone who wants money will not suddenly cease wanting it. Considering the lengths humans will go to pursue their goals, it is much harder for them to let go of them.

[Unlike himself. He doesn't have anything he would consider a "goal" exactly.
He has one real loyalty, and that's to someone he doesn't even think is here. ]

Though that may be the case, human goals, and the choices made to achieve them, can be altered. Undesirable aims and behaviors are replaceable with favorable outcomes - namely through positive and negative reinforcement.

[Punishment isn't just a pretty word.]

[What a very... Imperial thing to say.]

How do you define "undesirable"?

Behavior that is destructive to society and the self. Isolation, lying, assumptions about others and the self, aggression, co-dependency...

[Behavior that's negative as he views it.]

Bad habits, really.

I assume you're proposing that a doctor like yourself would be the one deciding if someone's "bad habits" qualify them for needing reinforcement.

[Well, yes.]

Considering numerous criminals feign insanity to avoid responsibility for their actions? Yes.

Or would you prefer such judgment is given over to those unqualified to make it?

I think an unbiased but informed being would be the most qualified individual to make that kind of judgement.

That's an admirable ideal. But anyone can be informed of the aspects of behavior without understanding their nuances. All in all, not a single being can exist without bias. Including myself.

[Which is BS cause he's FLAWLESS and perfectly in control, but hey if it stops this thing arguing...]

A droid could.

[As flawless as a robot, Crane??]

Not me. I also have bias, enough that would hinder my judgement. But it's less bias than I believe you have.

[Brutal honesty sure doesn't help one make friends, that's for sure.]

[Disrespect. It doesn't agitate him like it used to. It's honest. Replying with smooth oratory would be more insulting, honestly.]

What evidence do you have for that assertion?

[As flawless as a robot, yes.]

Edited 2017-04-15 15:00 (UTC)

To bring up "criminals feigning insanity" as a cause for needing invasive tactics in mental reform, when it is a highly specific type of criminal who would do that, along with my doubts on the use of the word "numerous," leads me to believe you have a higher form of bias against those who would lie, even if they aren't criminals.

[Crane sighs.]

That's your perspective. Though it might be accurate to admit your reasoning is different to mine on account of your programming, your perspective is no less informed by your experience. You exhibit no less bias - primarily against those with a different perspective to your own. Can you be certain that your perspective is the correct one?

I agree that I also have some bias against those who don't listen to me, because I was made for strategic planning and decisive course action. If I finish my calculations, then my assumptions made can be considered statistically accurate. Ignoring my assessments would be without logic.

Any discrepancy in my assessments is formed by my loyalty protocols overriding them. Which I won't deny causes my perspective to be incorrect at times. I don't disagree I wouldn't be fit for making judgement calls on someone's state of mind unless I already knew them well enough.

Very well. If I may remark - do I presume correctly that your remit of strategic planning and decisive action was not intended for passing observation on the mental health of criminals? It seems from your statements that is as it is.

[He pauses for a moment.]

You are correct. In terms of what I was intended for, my thoughts on how to go through with the actual reformation of mental health in criminals is without knowledge of the field, and therefore inconsequential.

I see. Then perhaps you are unfit for making judgment calls on a criminal's state of mind, period. The stated aims of imprisonment, and treatment, are supposed to be recovery and rehabilitation, after all.

Also correct, if the individual in question isn't one I already have taken extensive notes on.

[ He thinks only of Cassian, in this moment. He would never let someone else make a judgement call on what would be best for Cassian unless he also trusted them without question. ]

[Crane catches onto the issue and immediately drags it out for investigation.]

A personal connection. Ruling on the mental health of a confidant... that's quite unethical, you know.

[Lectured on ethics by Jonathan Crane = wth look at yourself.]

[Too bad he doesn't know Crane's bullshit better, because he actually gives this a thought.]

If I didn't have the best in mind for them, then it would be. But I do. So it's not.

[Does that sound defensive? It probably sounds a little defensive.]

Edited 2017-04-20 14:03 (UTC)

[Congratulations! It sounds defensive.]

It undermines the boundaries of the physician-patient relationship. Trust. Informed consent. Your behavior is highly untoward. And here it's quite unacceptable.

Trust is exactly the reason why my behavior is just fine, thank you very much-

[Emotional outburst: had.

Unacceptable behavior: stated.

Repercussions of this conversation coming back to bite him later: 36.3%]

... This is all, of course... hypothetical.

[Lie: attempted.]

(no subject)

restingstitchface - 2017-04-22 14:12 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

reexamined - 2017-04-23 11:39 (UTC) - Expand

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only