|
|
Post by kuatorises on Feb 16, 2017 19:55:36 GMT
I was watching an episode of TNG about two weeks ago. It was about Worf’s adoptive brother, who was a human. He was living on a planet with his native people, who were not aware that he came from another planet, nor were they aware that space travel existed.
There were storms that were going to wipe out their existence. The Enterprise were not going to do anything about it because Picard said it would violate the Prime Directive. Worf’s brother is appalled by this and beams them aboard the enterprise; Picard is appalled by. As much as I love me some Jean-Luc, allowing an entire civilization to die because of a rule is ridiculous.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2017 23:20:44 GMT
I think it's a decent idea mostly, but that was a rather weird example of following the letter of the law to an extreme where it does far more harm than good.
|
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Feb 20, 2017 16:56:11 GMT
I think it's a decent idea mostly, but that was a rather weird example of following the letter of the law to an extreme where it does far more harm than good. I can actually agree that is a nice idea in theory, however I don't think that's a bad example. I think it's a good example that shows how extreme and rigid the rule is. It reminds me a lot of some Libertarian ideas. It sounds good on the surface, but when you start to read the fine print, it borders on insane. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2017 18:24:51 GMT
There's a lot we don't know about the Prime Directive, but it's at least implied that it wasn't actually especially extreme and rigid most of the time.
Look at Paradise Syndrome. It's an almost identical situation, with a primitive planet threatened with extinction due to an impending natural disaster - an asteroid strike. Nobody so much as suggests that the Prime Directive requires them to leave the locals to die. Instead they practically wreck their ship trying to stop it.
Or check out The Apple. Kirk ignores the PD and deliberately destroys what is arguably a utopian society because he deems that it is not progressing in the way he would prefer. We see no action taken against him because of this.
In A Taste of Armageddon, the Federation sends the Enterprise to open diplomatic relations with Eminiar - literally at gunpoint, if necessary.
Even in TNG, Picard was said to have violated the Prime Directive no less than nine times during his career. His only defence was that he felt those situations warranted exceptions - and Starfleet evidently agreed, since he was a highly regarded captain. Yet we actually see one of the times when he does violate the Prime Directive, and his reason is that Wesley was about to be executed for committing a crime that Picard thought to be unjust by Picard's standard. This despite statements that Starfleet personnel swear that they will sacrifice their lives and their entire ship and crew if necessary, to avoid violating the Prime Directive.
So no, the Prime Directive is actually not especially extreme or rigid 99% of the time. Homeward and Pen Pals are rare examples where the PD is expected to be applied in ways that are obviously utterly beyond the pale. They are the exception, not the rule.
|
|
bb15
Sophomore
@bb15
Posts: 220
Likes: 63
|
Post by bb15 on Feb 21, 2017 8:47:43 GMT
I think it's a decent idea mostly, but that was a rather weird example of following the letter of the law to an extreme where it does far more harm than good. In the TV series Picard was often too strict with the Prime Directive. Then in the movie Insurrection he said the heck with that. Let's mess around with these people. Imo at least, BB ;-) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2017 13:24:55 GMT
Sometimes he wasn't strict enough, IMO. Like the one with the Edo. No way he should have saved Wesley.
|
|
bb15
Sophomore
@bb15
Posts: 220
Likes: 63
|
Post by bb15 on Feb 21, 2017 23:10:39 GMT
Sometimes he wasn't strict enough, IMO. Like the one with the Edo. No way he should have saved Wesley. Oh my gosh, Wesley. Where to begin with that kid who wasn't old enough to drive a car but piloted a starship! Imo at least, BB ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Feb 21, 2017 23:30:11 GMT
I think it's a decent idea mostly, but that was a rather weird example of following the letter of the law to an extreme where it does far more harm than good. In the TV series Picard was often too strict with the Prime Directive. Then in the movie Insurrection he said the heck with that. Let's mess around with these people. Imo at least, BB ;-) One of his trademarks was just that, which is why (some) fans were livid at Insurrection and Nemesis. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 2:43:10 GMT
Sometimes he wasn't strict enough, IMO. Like the one with the Edo. No way he should have saved Wesley. Oh my gosh, Wesley. Where to begin with that kid who wasn't old enough to drive a car but piloted a starship! Imo at least, BB ;-) You know the idea of TNG was that Wesley, Riker and Picard were essentially the same character at three different life stages. Wesley, the boy genius. Riker, when he's in his "shoot em up and then screw the green skinned alien babes" phase, then Picard as the same person who had achieved the maturity and wisdom of age. Unfortunately, Wesley was a bit of a jerk. They fell into the classic trap of trying to make him look smart by making everyone around him into morons. Wil Wheaton seems like a very cool guy, though. |
|
bb15
Sophomore
@bb15
Posts: 220
Likes: 63
|
Post by bb15 on Feb 22, 2017 5:15:06 GMT
Oh my gosh, Wesley. Where to begin with that kid who wasn't old enough to drive a car but piloted a starship! Imo at least, BB ;-) You know the idea of TNG was that Wesley, Riker and Picard were essentially the same character at three different life stages. Wesley, the boy genius. Riker, when he's in his "shoot em up and then screw the green skinned alien babes" phase, then Picard as the same person who had achieved the maturity and wisdom of age. Unfortunately, Wesley was a bit of a jerk. They fell into the classic trap of trying to make him look smart by making everyone around him into morons. Wil Wheaton seems like a very cool guy, though. Your description sounds right. Also agreed that Wesley got away with too much but I have no problem with Wil. Imo at least, BB ;-) |
|
appletart
New Member
@appletart
Posts: 18
Likes: 8
 
|
Post by appletart on Feb 23, 2017 0:46:28 GMT
The Prime Directive was made to be broken.  It reminds me of people filming documentaries or nature films. They don't interfere. I sometimes shout at my television for someone to help the dying animal, but they just keep filming. I kind of get it, but boy, I don't think I could follow the Prime Directive. |
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 16, 2017 15:13:41 GMT
The Prime Directive was made to be broken. It reminds me of people filming documentaries or nature films. They don't interfere. I sometimes shout at my television for someone to help the dying animal, but they just keep filming. I kind of get it, but boy, I don't think I could follow the Prime Directive.The irony is the crew doesn't allow nature to take its course when it affects themselves. They wouldn't just sit back and let each other die. |
|
|
|
Post by jaystarstar on Mar 16, 2017 18:13:13 GMT
Technically -- biologically -- you're "breaking the Prime Directive" by interacting with any alien species at all. Even to "covertly" monitor them may have effects on their culture.
Presumably the instinct toward self-preservation and species propagation is inherent among all sentient entities, and virtually all species would take any action within their technological ability to ensure their own survival in an extinction situation. So for superior Federation societies to allow such a species to be extinguished by non-intervention with external events to comply with the PD, would in fact amount to passive genocide.
It could actually be argued, in "PD Article 2," that not only are technologically superior species permitted to intervene within their capabilities in extinction situations when lesser-developed societies face lethal danger, they are ethically directed to do so.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2017 2:43:08 GMT
Its not perfect, Once Voyagers Harry Kim said that theres more pros than cons with the Prime directive.
You have to understand about the Prime directive is that Starfleet may be more advanced than a civilization in the bronze age- but that doesn't make Picard + Co gods. Its not their responsibility to play God, either. They are there to observe and learn- not interfere. I think its a good thing.
Watch the episode ( not film) First Contact. You will learn why its not a good thing to break the Prime Directive
Also watch Who Watches The Watchers- another excellent ep explaining the horrors of meddling with an unenlightened civilization, even if it accidental.
Starfleet cant expose and interfere with the natural courses of a civilizations history if they are pre warp. It causes too many problems
To instantly transform a society with technology would be harmful and it would be destructive. They need to progress at their own pace
Heres a scenario for you, If an alien civilization, came to earth 5000 years and gave the Egyptians particle weapons and taught them to split the atom, I assure you that mankind wouldn't be around right now. We would have destroyed each other long before Christ was born.
|
|
It reminds me of people filming documentaries or nature films. They don't interfere. I sometimes shout at my television for someone to help the dying animal, but they just keep filming. I kind of get it, but boy, I don't think I could follow the Prime Directive.