View Single Post
Old February 15 2013, 12:59 AM   #49
Lord Prancer The 5th
Rear Admiral
 
Lord Prancer The 5th's Avatar
 
Location: Mach5 doesn't like sand. It's coarse and irritating, and it gets everywhere.
Re: Why do so many people rag on "Dear doctor"

Christopher wrote: View Post
You know perfectly well I'm saying nothing of the kind. I'm saying fiction is allowed to make breaks from reality, and that Star Trek has already made many breaks from reality that are far more ludicrous than this particular one.
Yeah, but I don't think the writers were consciously making a "break from reality" here. Humanoid aliens, warp, teleportation, they're all plot devices without which a space opera such as Star Trek couldn't function, and our dogmatic acceptance of these "ludicrous" concepts is crucial for our immersion in these stories. Theory of evolution is no such concept. This is a real-life scientific concept, a well defined one, and Dear Doctor presented a fake version of it.

In order to suspend disbelief in this case, we need to assume that the theory of evolution in Star Trek, and the one in real life are not one and the same. It's almost like saying that Humans of Star Trek breathe methane gas instead of oxygen, and we're fine with it.

Christopher wrote: View Post
Because that was a pop-culture invention based on a '60s Time-Life book illustration speculating about what humans might evolve into in a million years. UFO reports have always shown a marked lack of imagination, with descriptions consistently copying whatever the dominant mass-media image of aliens was at the time -- little green men in the late '40s, scary monsters in the B-movie '50s, idealized humans in the early '60s when TV aliens were just actors in funny costumes, etc. By the '70s the "Grey" image had gotten into pop culture and movies like Close Encounters reinforced it to the point that it became self-perpetuating.
It's okay, I was joking there. Interesting observations nevertheless.

Christopher wrote: View Post
Seriously? You need to ask?
Yes, I do. I'm a hardline skeptic by nature, but I don't dismiss parapsychology lightly. I guess I may have read too much Erich Von Daniken garbage as a kid.

Christopher wrote: View Post
But there's a difference between a story where you disagree with the characters' choices and a bad story. If anything, many of the best stories are the ones that challenge our morals, that face us with characters making choices that we feel are wrong or that make us uncomfortable. As I've said, I'm not crazy about the decision the characters make in "Dear Doctor," but I still think it's a good episode, partly because it dares to be challenging and take us out of our comfort zone.
A good dilemma story is the one that makes you think and prompts brainstorming, like "In The Pale Moonlight". Thousands of Trekkies out there are still debating over Ben Sisko's crime out of necessity. Does the end justify the means? Can he REALLY live with it? The debate will go on forever, and we'll never get the definitive answer.

But this? Phlox was exposed as an ethically bankrupt dilettante, and Archer was an irresponsible schmuck for not seeking second opinion. There's no ambiguity here. There's no dilemma. There's just ignorance.
__________________
"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines."
― Bertrand Russell
Lord Prancer The 5th is offline   Reply With Quote