I know Preston says that the Railroad sounds like a nice organization and he gets pissed at you if you destroy them. To answer the question though, I don't remember because I never heard her say that. Assuming she did and assuming they would, I guess it wouldn't matter. The fact remains that you can be in harmony with those two organizations, so if people are unhappy about assisting the Railroad they must be a minority. Keep in mind that the whole goal of the Railroad is to get synths OUT of the Commonwealth, which is something that I imagine pleases a great many people.

As to your last point, you could say the same about any human being. The value that life has is the value we place in it.

I didn't know there was a way to evacuate the airship. Instead by wearing BoS gear I had looted while securing the vertibird, I managed to talk my way past the guards and plant the bombs.

I never encountered any family in the BoS. no children.

Did you actually look at the scribes at the lab? They are children. And I suppose all those toys on the ground are just for decoration

But the RR only considers Gen 3's people worth saving, NOT Gen 1 and Gen 2 synths. Valentine is clearly a prototype, and is probably something like Gen 2.5, so he really wouldn't qualify would he?

Frankly the RR attitude with regard to Gen 1 and 2 synths, compared to Gen 3 synths, reminds me an awful lot of certain ideologies that are despised. In fact, by destroying the Institute the RR are effectively committing genocide on the synths. Genocide, as defined by the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, being comprised of any of 4 elements: killing members of a group/indirect methods of destruction, withdrawing of the conditions of life in which people need to live, preventing births of the group, forcible removal of children of a group to be raised in an amongst another group. The qualification being the intention to destroy a group in whole or in part (and they definitely plan to do the latter, if not the former). The RR actions satisfy : killing members of a group, preventing births, and forcible removal of children.

Of course thats only if you buy that synths are people, and the RR certainly does when it comes to Gen 3's. Since this convention is from the 1940's we can be pretty sure it existed in Fallouts timeline too. When you consider their stance is different on Gen 1's and 2's their morality gets murkier too.

I certainly don't consider them to be a morally "good" faction, particularly since I don't judge their morality based on the morality of other factions. They are definitely grey, if a lighter shade than the BOS or Institute.

Deacon mentions there is contention within the Railroad about what constitutes a "synth worth saving" for lack of a better term. Gen 2s are the ones you are blasting away most of the time I believe (someone correct me if I'm wrong) and Gen 1s are really rough, I don't believe they even have a coating for their chassis. They are just the mechanical nuts and bolts.

To me the issue isn't what generation they are or what they look like, it all comes down to the idea of possessing a soul. In all my interactions with Valentine, it is very clear that he is a person, not a thing. So regardless of where he falls on the generational timeline, I would consider him a synth worth saving. If Gen 1s and 2s lack that personhood, then it makes sense to me that there is contention about whether or not those synths are actually worth the time to try and save.

Also, I think it needs to be firmly grasped that the creation of an artificial life and/or intelligence is something that has no true real world corollary. Popular movies and fiction (of which we can include Fallout) have delved into the realities and evils that would arise from these types of advances and so they serve as sort of fertile ground for discussion. I find it highly improbable that we will ever create a true A.I., but cloning could certainly be possible. And how will we treat clones? If you've never seen Moon with Sam Rockwell, I think you should give it a watch. Very heart wrenching and thought provoking. That to me at least parallels slightly the situation we have here. I have several theories for why the Institute was even trying to make synths, none of them pleasant, but the intent of their creation is subordinate to the reality that they are essentially people. Even if you uploaded their consciousnesses to a calculator, that would not make them less human, it would just mean their physical form is not human. It is a concept most people aren't comfortable with, but I think the two biggest reasons people don't like synths is because 1) they are BoS bros and its part of their M.O. to hate/kill them so what can you do and/or 2) the idea of synths are so unsettling and it is simply a fear of the unknown response. It might be a threat so we have to destroy it now! Both strike me as weak reasonings, the first being especially egregious.

Synths don't have children (not sure if they are incapable of it since they are mostly biological human material) and as for killing members of a group, the RR does if we are counting Gen 1s and 2s, but that is always in self-defense, so we would be talking about preventing births in this case. Again, as I said before, I'm not sure that the substance of this provision or law necessarily correlates well with the scenario we have presented by the Institute and the creation of synths. It is very true that the Institute is the only organization capable of creating new synths, but you would have to ask the question: do synths want to form their own society? And most pertinent: can they reproduce with other human beings? How human they actually are is never directly addressed but you can obviously have six with a synth, so if they are human enough to conceive, then I think this is a completely moot point. I mean that is the whole goal isn't it? Get them out of the Institute, give them a new identity, and then send them outside of the Commonwealth. In the end, they shouldn't realize that they aren't human and they should be able to do whatever they want. Knowing that is the end goal of the Railroad makes me more comfortable in supporting them. If they were trying to make some kind of New World Order with the synths (which is something I suspect the Institute is(was) trying to do) then I'd be hesitant.

I think the key to this question is an unspoken statement that the leaders of the Railroad never make. They know synths aren't natural. They know that the people of the Commonwealth don't want them in their home. However, they recognize that synths are persons and therefore should have all the rights entitled to persons. You can't tell me that they don't recognize that destroying the Institute is going to make it so there are no more synths to save, and that's because saving synths is not their business. This is a humanitarian underground movement, not an organization with a yearly quota. And that's what confuses me when people say the Railroad has short sighted goals... duh lol. Their goal is short sighted because it is readily obtainable. Destroy the Institute and free synths. End. They might re-purpose themselves afterwards, but they could just as easily say: "job done, go home everyone".

So, in essence, I don't consider it a genocide because if they can mate with human beings and conceive, it isn't really preventing birth. Obviously, true synths cannot be made anymore, but I'm not so sure that is something even synths would want. Most importantly, this is completely new ground and as I said before, I'm not sure how we apply an international law like the one you mentioned to this fictional, hypothetical scenario. It doesn't seem as though it lines up quite as nicely.

Deacon also mentions that the contention is a divide that they do not discuss, and specifically mentions synths like Glory as the ones who view the Gen 1 and Gen 2 synths as people. Others argue that only Gen 3s are worth saving because they look like people, not necessarily because they are more intelligent. Glory identifies the synths you fight in your first mission together, who have chassis coverings, as Gen 1's. Because of this the distinction is clearly not as simple as we are lead to believe, since Glory herself is a synth that makes her the authority.

To you perhaps, to me perhaps, but not to the Railroad. Remember we are discussing the Railroads morality, and that needs to be considered in a vacuum outside of comparisons to other factions or our own personal preferences. What does the RR believe? They believe that Gen 3s (by virtue of appearing human) are people and need to be saved. Gen 3's, period. Valentine clearly isn't a Gen 3, but has a personality. Other synths, who would understand better than people, consider Gen 1's and 2's to be worthy of personhood. It's the human element of the RR that gets in the way of that.

I actually am fascinated by the topic. It really all depends how you define intelligence as to whether AI will/does exist. I would argue that learning software like Siri, or Cortana, are VI which are simply a step toward true AI. Self awareness is generally the standard we use when we consider if AI has occurred, though there are arguments as to whether this should be the standard. AI will certainly exist soon, but definitely within our lifetime, if we use sentience as the baseline. Remember that chimpanzees, dolphins, bonobos and crows are all considered sentient (and self aware), and all live in social groups that approximates societies. Some dolphin studies actually suggest their societal hierarchy is as complex, or more so, than human hierarchies. Their brains are certainly more evolutionarily advanced than ours, but so were neanderthals and cro-magnon mans. Sorry, got a little off topic...

**edit: reproduction inserted**
You have to consider that they do not reproduce biologically, as such the manner in which they have "children" is not the same as biological entities. Gen 3's are assembled bone by bone and muscle strand by muscle strand (H2-22 IIRC). By destroying these facilities you are destroying their ability to reproduce, the biological equivalent would be taking a "race" of people are removing the ovaries of every female of the "race" (destroying the mechanism of production).

Of course they recognize that, and this is precisely the problem. If they recognize there will be no more synths to save, than they also recognize that there will be no more synths once this generation dies off. I don't have to make the argument that synths are people and thus the convention applies, the RAILROAD makes the argument that they are people. As such it isn't new ground, it's old ground because intent is the most important element in both domestic and international crime. It means they intentionally destroyed the means for the synths to reproduce. We'll put aside the master race argument that they essentially make, Gen 3's being the master race of the nation of synths. If the RR realized that destruction of the Institute would prevent further synths from being created, if the RR knew that by reprogramming synths to forget who they were would destroy who they were as a people, and if the RR intentionally killed synths trying to protect their reproductive facilities than they are war criminals guilty of genocide.

But lets give them a chance, lets say they weren't aware of the consequences of their actions. Well they would still be guilty of the crime of extermination, found in provisions even older than the UN convention on genocide. So they're still war criminals, which makes it incredibly hard for me to see them as the "good" guys. The only "good" faction might be the Minutemen, the RR certainly isn't morally superior to the BoS or the Institute.

(I had a much more concise argument that was wiped out when I hit "add reply" and Bethesda's security provisions popped up and kicked me back to the main forum page)

I'm going to quote part of what I've said elsewhere.

More and more I think the RR are nuts. It actually started with one of the initial conversations with Deacon. How the RR itself couldn't decide if Gen 1 and Gen 2 should be accepted, and then the discussion goes further into "what about Mr. Handy's? What about Turrets?" It became clear to me early on that when 'man' decides that he'll determine what is and isn't alive, the line gets moved around a lot. Which says a lot actually since if you are actually talking about life and what is and what isn't, the last thing you want is a grey movable line. Eventually I have to side with the creators. If the creators say it isn't alive, then it isn't alive. How on earth can I actually argue with the creators? They created something that mimics life, and did a good job of it. That doesn't mean it's alive ... it just means they did a good job of mimicking life. Why should I let myself fall for it if I know the creator's intent? I'd just be fooling myself.

OMG Synth = Toasters..

Railroad = Toaster lovers!!

Why would I want to help a couple people hidding in a basemant that want to help toasters. With all the commonwealths issues we want to help out some robots.. Screw other humans. These toasters think they are human..

I honestly dont know why we couldn't have just ignored them if we choose BOS. Once the institute is dealt with there is no railroad to worried about.

I think one of the reasons the RR is given the appearance of good guys initially fighting slavery with no immediately apparent bad side is because we are given a pretty negative initial view of Synths in game...

Other than Valentine all the obvious Synths (level 1 and 2) try to kill you and are apparently causing atrocities on behalf of the Institute. People are fearful of kidnappings and being replaced, one random encounter is two identical people claiming the other is a Synth and if you succeed all the Charisma check the genuine synth reveals himself and asks you to help kill the other guy! Essentially the Insitute = Synths = bad news is the message I got from the game.

If the RR came off as morally ambiguous from the start what would be the motivation in helping them at all? As it is the game asks you to make a big leap when answering the RR's initial question without ever trying to explain anything good or neutral about synths (or if it did I missed it in my play through). I had real trouble with that question and if I had been role playing rather than just trying to see everything in the game I think I would have answered no as the game had given not reason to say yes at that point (other than trying to con your way into the RR)...

I found and joined the RR mostly due to curiosity although I get the impression the game would have pushed you to find them at some point.

Looking back I think the Minute Men where the only genuine "good guys" faction... or the least morally ambiguous one if you prefer...

The BoS don't just want to destroy the Institute. They want to track down and destroy all Synths (level 3 mostly I guess) as abominations. They know the RR would oppose that and have demonstrated they are capable guerrillas fighters and thus want to take them out when they have the opportunity...

it would be better if i had the choice to pop all 3 sides and have my MM steal tech from all sides so i become the power house of Boston

I think we're worried about sentience here.. not whether they're alive or not, although similar arguments apply either way.

There is no definite line. Nature just doesn't work that way. Do you consider a monkey sentient? What about a rat? What about a roach? There is no objective line that can be drawn by any science we know of, which leaves people to drawing subjective lines.. which will change from moment to moment and person to person. As we can't even solve the problem for biological entities, machines introduce a whole new realm of trouble. Most people would agree toasters and turrets aren't sentient. Some will take Cogsworth's and Curie's emotion as a sign of sentience, as they exceed their Mr. Handy origins. Most will say Curie is sentient after moving to a synth body and gaining much deeper emotions. Most will say Nick Valentine is sentient. In the end, you have to decide for yourself. Morality isn't objective.

If you do think synths are all just toasters, there is a scary question you might ask yourself. Are you just a toaster made of biological components?

You could jump off into the world of the metaphysical and try to claim that while synths are smart, complex, and see to have emotion, that they don't have souls like us pure-bred humans. Since you can't prove that a soul exists, you're entirely in the realm of drawing subjective lines with that line of thinking. Similar arguments have been used to justify racial genocide in the past. If you convince people your opponents don't have a soul, it's much easier to drive your people to do terrible things to them.

Draw your own line and deal with the consequences!

Except the line the creators made. You conveniently cut that out of my quote. I'm not going to argue with people much smarter than I am who make Synths about that a Synth is. They win. No argument I could make would stand. It would be like me wanting to believe there is a Big Foot, just because I really, really, really want there to be.

They're generally making clones with an extra computer part in their brain. It's all human bones, nerves, flesh, just without the benefit of a womb. But it's a moot point anyways - creation/use of synths is the least barbaric thing that the Institute has done.

But that is part of the intentional ambiguity here. They make many of the scientists out to be highly arrogant, refusing to recognise that they have accidentally created real people in the lab. Just because they built them they believe them to be inferior. Just because they know how they work and can wipe and recreate their memories they look at them as being slightly more advanced machines. It is the stereotypical "science doesn't know what it has done" story... The ambiguity is what allows for this discussion...

I have to wonder why the Institute would create level 3 synths in the first place. Other than a few specialist infiltrators for the outside world, what is the point of mass producing them?

You assume incorrectly that the creators agree on a single line. They don't. If you walk around and talk to them and look through their computer logs, it's clear they don't agree on a single line. You can even hear scripted random discussions between scientists on the issue. The creators support my assertion that the line is subjective, when in all their grand intelligence and knowledge, they can't agree on a single line to draw.

I know this was from a few pages ago, but Harkness was clearly trying to escape as we see in the holotapes found scattered all over the Capital Wasteland. He even bluntly says, "I'm escaping the Commonwealth ... I'm a synthetic man, a slave. ... Self-determination is not a malfunction!" And he was once a Courser.

Doesn't that tell you something?

I'll say that Valentine and Curie are different because one is a machine with the memories of a once living good man and the other is a true AI created with love and 200 years of growth. Synth!Shaun is also unique because he was created with the express purpose of being 'alive'. If anything these three are where the BoS' true fears lie because just like there can be good and bad people there can be good and bad Synths. And bad Synths is something to be scared of. The toasters coming out of the Institute's assembly line that the Railroad insists are 'slaves' are little more than defective products.

That's what I said, that Coursers have as much self-determination as rank and file synths. I'm not sure what it's supposed to tell me? Considering the contents of my post - that X6 is a bad person because he chooses to remain a Courser, unlike Harkness?

Please clarify?