General Star Trek thread

SarahBM

If only the ethics module in college had used the prime directive as an example. Maybe then I would have understood ethics better. Ha ha.

dr.fuzzenstein

SarahBM wrote: »

If only the ethics module in college had used the prime directive as an example. Maybe then I would have understood ethics better. Ha ha.

I think that's actually spot on. You could certainly do worse than follow Star Trek guidelines. Just be aware that others don't. To me that's the center point of Gene Roddenberry's vision. A future where people have overcome greed, violence, selfishness and basically gaining for themselves at the expense of others.
You will read over and over again how that idea is stupid, unworkable, idealistic crap and unrealistic. But that is only so because of who we are. it's funny that this simple idea is so far advanced of who and what we are as to be downright offensive for some people. So people want the darkness and the violence, maybe it makes for better TV, or at least it does when you're on that lower frequency.
I believe it may be possible, but I also believe that we're not ready for that.
When people say that it can't work, it is because WE as a people are stupid, greedy, selfish, violent and we seek power over other people. That last one is particularly strange to me. Why do we need to assert our power over everything? Why can some people not sleep unless they have other people subservient to them?
When people say it doesn't work, well think about why not. It maybe be hundreds of thousands of years before we learn to live together without bashing each other's heads in. I know I said all this before, but I'm still with Q on that one.

SarahBM

I know exactly what you mean. humans are inherently selfish and only do things that will benefit themselves. If you think about it, we are in danger of becoming the Ferangi. For me they embody a large amount of what is wrong with modern western society. I'm sure if you try hard enough, the Rules of Acquisition can be applied to most capitalist dealings. I for one would prefer a less materialistic society, but we dont necessarily have to give up all our worldly possessions to do that. Share the love! That's what I say.
The biggest problem for our society to overcome is intolerance. Then materialism/greed/selfishness. Or maybe the other way around.

Indricotherium

SarahBM wrote: »

Personally I don't think I could live with the death of the Ocompa on my conscience of I had used the array to get back to earth.
Plus how long was it going to take them to figure out how to reprogram it to send them home. The Kazon would have returned on force and perhaps have destroyed Voyager before they could manage to escape. I agree with the captain.
But that's not to say I am right.

Starfleet captains are obliged to uphold the Prime Directive, at all costs.

Janeway decided the best way to uphold the prime directive was to interfere further in the natural development of the region, and to then proceed to cut a swathe of interference across a quadrant.

To totally uphold the prime directive the correct action, in my view, would have been to destroy voyager along with the caretaker array.

However, I would probably have used the array to get home, and left the Kason / Occompa to their own devices. I justify this on the basis that the Caretaker interfered initially, altering the natural progression of the Kazon in the region.

I also reckon the Ocompa were fairly shortly wiped out anyway, by the other factions in the region, once Voyager left.

It's the lesser of two evils.

dr.fuzzenstein

it's one thing that bothers me about Janeway. In the beginning she was almost Stalinistic in her obedience to the rules, later on she relaxed, but I absolutely dislike the fact that she completely throws them overboard in the end. It was a betrayal of the integrity of her character, there was no need for the writers to corrupt her so entirely. WWJLD? (what would Jean Luc do?)

Myrddin

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

it's one thing that bothers me about Janeway. In the beginning she was almost Stalinistic in her obedience to the rules, later on she relaxed, but I absolutely dislike the fact that she completely throws them overboard in the end. It was a betrayal of the integrity of her character, there was no need for the writers to corrupt her so entirely. WWJLD? (what would Jean Luc do?)

I think the message they were going for, was a good one, albeit the writing & progression were off so the message was lost along the way. You have an idealistic Captain who upheld the prime directive at the beginning, & stranded her crew as a result. Over time, the consequences & weight of this decision weighed heavily on her shoulders, and she became more focused on getting her crew home, rather than blindly following the prime directive. I think this in itself shows a very human quality, and something we could all envisage actually happening in such circumstances. For that, I feel they didn't betray the integrity of her character, they just failed to effectively portray how she suffered with this guilt for years, ultimately making it look like she just betrayed her principles on a whim.

They should have made this guilt a more overt & obvious trait of Janeway's, even behind closed doors through Captains logs etc. The audience then would have been much less forgiving of her changes throughout the show, as the underlying theme of her drive would have been more obvious, & even something the audience could have connected with. I'll do a Voyager run through myself at some stage, but I don't recall her being as bad as what is generally made out. At the start she has a crew, by the end, she has a family. It's really the writers that failed here, not the character.

dr.fuzzenstein

That's my point. Of course she was supposed to start out rigid and blindly following the rules (a trait that I despise) and gradually mellow out a bit.
But towards the end she went too far IMO, what with the Borg and I don't want to go into too much detail now for those who are watching it.
The writers could have reigned her in just a little bit, have her remember that principles are there for a reason. I am the first to advocate forgetting the rules when they don't fit the scenario, but it has to be done ultimately with respect for those same rules. Not even Kirk would have gone that far. So I think it was a bit unfitting and jarring with her character.

Indricotherium

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

it's one thing that bothers me about Janeway. In the beginning she was almost Stalinistic in her obedience to the rules, later on she relaxed, but I absolutely dislike the fact that she completely throws them overboard in the end. It was a betrayal of the integrity of her character, there was no need for the writers to corrupt her so entirely. WWJLD? (what would Jean Luc do?)

It's worth noting that as of Nemesis, Picard, who generally upholds the Prime Directive, is slumming it as a lowly captain, whereas Janeway who willfully breaks it in order to save herself a bit of guilt, has been promoted.

Owryan

Surely one of those starfleet engineers could have rigged a torpedo or power overload to go off once Voyager was sent back to the Alpha Quadrant, could ve spared me from watching that show lol

Myrddin

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Not even Kirk would have gone that far. So I think it was a bit unfitting and jarring with her character.

My Voyager memory isn't as rounded as the other shows, remind me a little - is this where she forms an alliance with the Borg to get through their space?

Indricotherium

Janeway is a very poor captain in my opinion.

I'll put my thoughts on her poor ability at / suitability as captain together later, but for now there are just a few stand out reasons:

1) suffers from serious and extended bouts of depression,

2) Multiple and persistent breaches, and poor interpretation of the Prime Directive,

3) Engages in the annihilation of a species to save ~15 of her crew.

Myrddin

Indricotherium wrote: »

1) suffers from serious and extended bouts of depression

Isn't there only one example of this, in the 'void'. It isn't depression either, it's the sheer nothingness that puts her face to face with the decision she made that stranded them there. It's profound guilt, not depression.

2) Multiple and persistent breaches, and poor interpretation of the Prime Directive

There's debate in this, on a case by case basis.

3) Engages in the annihilation of a species to save ~15 of her crew.

What is this in relation to?

dr.fuzzenstein

Myrddin wrote: »

Isn't there only one example of this, in the 'void'. It isn't depression either, it's the sheer nothingness that puts her face to face with the decision she made that stranded them there. It's profound guilt, not depression.



There's debate in this, on a case by case basis.



What is this in relation to?

The aforementioned Borg alliance.
I don't think Janeway is a bad captain by any stretch of the imagination. Some people seriously have it in for her. I hated her initially, but I like the fact that she is seriously dangerous when backed into a corner or out of coffee.
Interesting factoid:
For those of you who wondered what Columbo's wife looked like, just look at Janeway.

Myrddin

Indricotherium wrote: »

3) Engages in the annihilation of a species to save ~15 of her crew.

Myrddin wrote: »

What is this in relation to?

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

The aforementioned Borg alliance

What species was annihilated?

Indricotherium

Myrddin wrote: »

What species was annihilated?

The Borg were annihilated in the last episode of Voyager.

Myrddin

Indricotherium wrote: »

The Borg were annihilated in the last episode of Voyager.

Oh, I see. So millions/billions of forcibly kidnapped cybernetic zombies from a multitude of actual races were shut down. Maybe you need to consider the Borg a 'species' in the first place to shed a tear for them. I'd argue those individuals were killed long before Janeway arrived in the Delta Quadrant.

dr.fuzzenstein

There's also the matter of species 8472.

Indricotherium

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

There's also the matter of species 8472.

A war crime for sure

Myrddin

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

There's also the matter of species 8472.

A species bent on, and I quote, "purging" all life in the galaxy. Granted, the Borg started the conflict, but apart from developing the only effective weapon against 8472, remind me a little of what Janeway did wrong here (I genuinely can't remember). I remember her using that weapon in fluidic space, but from memory, the ship wasn't meant to be taken there so it wasn't a premeditated attack. Didn't she also try her best to reason with 8472, & the only thing that got their attention, was the weapon? She ultimately forged an alliance with them, no doubt saving millions/billions of lives too no?

dr.fuzzenstein

Indricotherium wrote: »

A war crime for sure

The whole Species 8472 and Borg saga was not great. Maybe it was to show just how determined/desperate Janeway was to get home, maybe the writers painted themselves into a corner, or possibly someone at the network said "hurry up and wrap this thing up already", so they had to find a "shortcut".
But:
Apart from that I would rate Janeway very highly as a captain. She certainly can be abrasive and authoritarian, but she always cares for her crew but not at the expense of others, which is why the whole Borg/Species 8472 things doesn't quite fit. The Janeway that destroyed the Caretaker's array would not have forged and alliance with the Borg or helped defeat species 8472.
However, it could be argued both were necessary, not just for her crew, but for the safety of the entire galaxy, because both would have eventually eliminated/assimilated most civilisations in it.
just saying she should have kept out of it is maybe incredibly shortsighted and would have led to billions of deaths and the destruction of countless worlds later on.

Indricotherium

Myrddin wrote: »

Maybe you need to consider the Borg a 'species' in the first place to shed a tear for them.

Where does this line of reasoning end?

The Federation is exploring space, and meeting strange new types of life at every turn.

Where do you draw the line? The Bynars? they share a hive mind, their sentience is acknowledged.

the founders, share a hive state similar to the Borg, they are definitely sentient.

The Crystalline Entity? It is a ravenous world eating beast, yet it's sentience is acknowledged.

It's a slippery slope to go down picking and choosing what is and isn't fair game for extermination. The Borg eliminated, sure why not the Klingons, it's only a matter of time before they kick off again......

Myrddin

Indricotherium wrote: »

Where does this line of reasoning end?

The Federation is exploring space, and meeting strange new types of life at every turn.

Where do you draw the line? The Bynars? they share a hive mind, their sentience is acknowledged.

the founders, share a hive state similar to the Borg, they are definitely sentient.

The Crystalline Entity? It is a ravenous world eating beast, yet it's sentience is acknowledged.

It's a slippery slope to go down picking and choosing what is and isn't fair game for extermination. The Borg eliminated, sure why not the Klingons, it's only a matter of time before they kick off again......

You seem fairly set in your understanding of Trek, & it's an understanding I don't share. You've raised some interesting points in this & other threads, but in my opinion, you've what I can only describe as bizarre turns too (wolf 359 being a false flag incident for example). So I don't think we're ever really going to agree on much, you see the Federation as a malevolent, sprawling empire that conquers what it wants, how it wants, if & when it wants. I see it as an alliance for the common good of its members, imparting respect to non members where no alliance is wanted, and something founded on peaceful, diplomatic, and just morals. Sure, there's some blotch marks like Section 31, Insurrection, & other examples...but on the whole, do I really think the likes of Picard & Spok got things so badly wrong and were "playing for the wrong side"? No, not at all I don't, sorry. There are far too many examples of the Federation being a positive, benign 'force', to let the bad examples sway my opinion of it.

As for the Borg, they're the 24th century's equivalent of zombies. The person was forcibly taken, their identity deleted, their body changed, and they carry out the will of malevolent computer program. Sure, they've a collective consciousness, but that consciousness is limited to attack, defend, assimilate, regenerate, & so forth. Are they sentient? In my opinion, no, not as drones. They exhibit and express zero awareness of anything other than their robotic tasks. The Borg Queen, I'd define as sentient though. Does this make them a race/species? Again, in my opinion, no, they're not a race/species. An abducted human who is turned into a drone is still a human in my eyes, biologically speaking. The person, however, is lost forever (Picard being the sole exception, but he was rescued in time)...killed essentially, & replaced with a mindless automaton. That's not a race, it's mass murder by assimilation.

The Bynars, the Founders, the Crystalline Entity, & the Klingons...they've all got one thing in common...they are who they are. They were born that way & will die that way. The Borg however, are very different & cannot be compared to any other race. Unless you cheer the zombies on in zombie films, calling the human survivors murderers, I think this much is very obvious.

SarahBM

Myrddin wrote: »

You seem fairly set in your understanding of Trek, & it's an understanding I don't share. You've raised some interesting points in this & other threads, but in my opinion, you've what I can only describe as bizarre turns too (wolf 359 being a false flag incident for example). So I don't think we're ever really going to agree on much, you see the Federation as a malevolent, sprawling empire that conquers what it wants, how it wants, if & when it wants. I see it as an alliance for the common good of its members, imparting respect to non members where no alliance is wanted, and something founded on peaceful, diplomatic, and just morals. Sure, there's some blotch marks like Section 31, Insurrection, & other examples...but on the whole, do I really think the likes of Picard & Spok got things so badly wrong and were "playing for the wrong side"? No, not at all I don't, sorry. There are far too many examples of the Federation being a positive, benign 'force', to let the bad examples sway my opinion of it.

As for the Borg, they're the 24th century's equivalent of zombies. The person was forcibly taken, their identity deleted, their body changed, and they carry out the will of malevolent computer program. Sure, they've a collective consciousness, but that consciousness is limited to attack, defend, assimilate, regenerate, & so forth. Are they sentient? In my opinion, no, not as drones. They exhibit and express zero awareness of anything other than their robotic tasks. The Borg Queen, I'd define as sentient though. Does this make them a race/species? Again, in my opinion, no, they're not a race/species. An abducted human who is turned into a drone is still a human in my eyes, biologically speaking. The person, however, is lost forever (Picard being the sole exception, but he was rescued in time)...killed essentially, & replaced with a mindless automaton. That's not a race, it's mass murder by assimilation.

The Bynars, the Founders, the Crystalline Entity, & the Klingons...they've all got one thing in common...they are who they are. They were born that way & will die that way. The Borg however, are very different & cannot be compared to any other race. Unless you cheer the zombies on in zombie films, calling the human survivors murderers, I think this much is very obvious.

You forgotten the most important person in this topic 're the Borg - Seven of Nine. She had her humanity restored when removed from the collective.
I think, but I might be wrong that the Queen controls the Borg. I dont but the whole Hive mind thing.
I am loving this Janeway debate. By all means continue!!!

Myrddin

SarahBM wrote: »

You forgotten the most important person in this topic 're the Borg - Seven of Nine. She had her humanity restored when removed from the collective.

Much the same as Hugh. My point is, the person who existed before assimilation, is never recovered. That person is gone forever (except where rescue is fast ie Picard), murdered if you will. Sure, it's possible to liberate assimilated drones, & they can regain some humanity, albeit as a totally different person who has lost all memory of their life beforehand. In their drone state, the Borg in my opinion, are merely extensions of a computer program, not a race. Onaka Hansen died the day she was abducted & assimilated. 7, is not Onaka...she may look like her & possess fleeting memories etc, but had Onaka not been assimilated, she wouldn't have been like 7.

I think, but I might be wrong that the Queen controls the Borg. I dont but the whole Hive mind thing.

Well to invoke Hugh again, the hive mind thing definitely exists. As we seen in BoBW though, it's broken down into several sections, defence, offence, assimilate, regenerate etc - it's not as if they're discussing the finer points of art, or philosophy. The hive mind from what I gather, is the constant flow of information between drone and the Queen. I think the Borg can operate within set parameters outside of the influence of the Queen, such as assimilating, regenerating, attacking etc...but the Queen can exert direct control then, over ships & even individual drones if needs be. It's an interesting dynamic, but again, the Queen aside, it's entirely computer driven.

SarahBM

Excellent point. Begs the question, where did the Borg come from? Was it an artificial intelligence that suddenly tried to take over the galaxy?
I am looking forward to Voyager. :-)
I had forgotten the goings on in the caretaker.

Myrddin

SarahBM wrote: »

Excellent point. Begs the question, where did the Borg come from? Was it an artificial intelligence that suddenly tried to take over the galaxy?

There's no canon explanation currently. If I were to guess, I'd say they started out as a regular culture & civilisation that began using cybernetic enhancements. Over time, Their desire to expand & gather new technology became their focus, with more & more enhancements coming thick & fast. Eventually, their humanity would have been lost, & they became driven purely by programming. The Queen could have emerged as an attempt to 'upload' themselves into the grid. Hard to say, but safe bet that they began as a biological culture I think. Those original Borg would be all long gone, with only assimilated drones now left.

Myrddin

^^ Actually, you have me thinking about the origins of the Borg now I've always just had a concept of a culture growing more & more dependant on cybernetics, to the point of becoming more robotic as time passes, ultimately losing itself in the process. I never really thought much about an AI taking over, by its own accord. Interesting. Further, I suppose they could even have been a weapon at one point, used by one warring side against another...eventually assimilating anything & everything.

Give over with the Borg being a race FFS. They are enslavement of several races

SarahBM

I know the Borg are not a race now, as they have assimilated numerous other species. But they must have begun somewhere. What was the original species that began it all?!??
As Spock would say, fascinating!

Not you Sarah, the people claiming genocide on the behalf of the Borg