View Single Post
Old July 6 2009, 02:22 AM   #602
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Star Trek: Destiny Book 3: Lost Souls - (SPOILERS)

Sci wrote: View Post
I would argue that accepting your limitations is not the same thing as submitting to them and allowing them to rule your life, because I would argue that if you do not accept your limitations, you will never truly understand yourself -- and therefore will never know which parts of your nature can be changed to become stronger.
Of course you're right. There's a huge, huge difference between knowing your limits and not even trying. It's good to strive to achieve things, but if you run across something that you can't achieve no matter what, then it's just wasted energy to keep butting your head against that brick wall. And wasting energy on a futile goal is just as useless as wasting it by not trying in the first place. As with most things in life, the answer is not at the extremes but in the middle ground between them. Relentlessly directing all your energy at an unattainable goal is mere fanaticism. An effective use of energy includes an understanding of when not to exert it, when to save it for other, more constructive ends.

As for the question of how there can be hope in the face of such despair... Trent, I'm not trying to insult you, but I really question how you can claim to believe in the idea of hope for a better future if the fact that people suffer can so completely undo your belief that life can improve. How is it genuine optimism if there is no hope for a better future just because bad things, of whatever magnitude, have happened? I would argue that genuine optimism means cultivating an attitude of hope independent of circumstance -- means recognizing that all conditions are temporary and no conditions are permanent, and that therefore conditions can be changed for the better, even when those conditions seem overwhelming.
Absolutely. Remember that the whole historical premise of Star Trek is that its idealistic future for Earth only came about in the wake of great suffering and despair. Things got so bad in the Eugenics Wars and WWIII that humans decided it was time to make a fundamental change in how they behaved. So things got better only after they got worse first. You can see a similar pattern in Vulcan history; it was the near-destruction of their civilization that led them to embrace logic and achieve two millennia of peace. Also, the Federation arose from the ashes of the Earth-Romulan War. ST is full of instances of optimistic futures arising in the wake of terrible destruction. It's woven into the tapestry of the Trek universe. Roddenberry believed we could build Utopia, but he was convinced we'd have to go through hell to get there (see also Genesis II/Planet Earth).



ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote: View Post
I question ProtoAvatar's assumption that a thalaron weapon would even work on the Borg.
It's not my assumption. It's 7 of 9's - who knows more about the borg than me, you or any other real person can ever hope to find out.
She knows as much as a drone would know. Which is considerable compared to an outsider's knowledge, but hardly omniscient. And the events of Before Dishonor are not conjecture; within the context of the post-NEM TNG book line, they're historical fact. We know what can happen when Borg technology is deprived of its organic half, and we know it's potentially even worse than the intact Borg.

Besides, who's to say Seven of Nine thinks more clearly about the Borg than Picard does? She was a victim of them for far longer than he was, and she's long since outgrown her Stockholm Syndrome. Individual opinions don't trump documented evidence, because individuals can have any number of reasons for holding biased or distorted opinions.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote