Prime Directive problem with "Homeward"

[Start Wreck]

I think you're supposed to have a problem with the prime directive in this episode.

[BillJ]

Start Wreck wrote:

---

I think you're supposed to have a problem with the prime directive in this episode.

I don't think so. Because we have the ending where Picard waxes philosophical about the tragedy of the Boralaan dying alone because of what Nikolai had done. But I always thought the guy died knowing his village was saved.

[sonak]

Mr_Homn wrote:

---

I agree. I agree with the prime directive in this case. If a primitive culture is doomed due to the natural way of things, it's not the federation's obligation to save them.

so...do you oppose trying to cure "natural" diseases as well? After all, disease is the "natural way of things."

What makes it different about being a primitive culture, as long as the Federation has the resources and knowledge to save them?

[R. Star]

Another episode with this concept is Pen Pals. While the same conclusion is reached that it's basically Federation doctorine to let a primitive species doomed to natural extinction die out rather than intervene, the main characters actually do debate the morality of it rather than just accept it.

[Dream]

R. Star wrote:

---

Another episode with this concept is Pen Pals. While the same conclusion is reached that it's basically Federation doctorine to let a primitive species doomed to natural extinction die out rather than intervene, the main characters actually do debate the morality of it rather than just accept it.

"The Prime Directive is not just a set of rules; it is a philosophy... and a very correct one. History has proven again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous."

Picard's own words in Pen Pals.

He was going to leave the system until of course Data decided to play the message from the little girl. I wouldn't be surprised if Picard somehow forgot to note his actions in his logs.

[R. Star]

When Janeway threw that one out to a doomed species Paris retored with, "They're all going to die. What can be worse than that?"

As far as I can see it's a good question.

[Jonas Grumby]

I think TNG consistently handled the Prime Directive pretty badly, but "Homeward" is definitely the most vomit-inducing episode of the bunch.

Actually, I think TOS had the better idea of how to use the Prime Directive (although I know those who want to nail down all things Trek won't like it): Keep it vague, and only trot it out when you need an excuse to tie the heroes' hands.

[JarodRussell]

I there's alien life out there, and if Earth was going to be devastated by disaster tomorrow, I don't expect them to help us.

So I don't see a problem with the Prime Directive forbidding it. It creates more problems than it solves. It's shown in Homeward. One guy was so overwhelmed by the Enterprise that he killed himself.

"The Prime Directive is not just a set of rules; it is a philosophy... and a very correct one. History has proven again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous."

He says an even more important thing: the Prime Directive is supposed to protect THEM. Whatever they do, eventually they are responsible for the fate of the civilization.

[R. Star]

Yeah I never got why the Trek writers went this direction with it. It's meant to stop the Federation from becoming the exploiters, even with the best of intentions. It's not meant as some catchall absolution of any responsibility whatsoever. TNG did this a few times and Voyager went crazy with using the Prime Directive as an excuse to let people die.

Literally the way they cite it, if I see a pregnant woman hanging from a cliff about to fall, I should let her fall because her baby might grow up to be Hitler.

[BillJ]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

I there's alien life out there, and if Earth was going to be devastated by disaster tomorrow, I don't expect them to help us.

So I don't see a problem with the Prime Directive forbidding it. It creates more problems than it solves. It's shown in Homeward. One guy was so overwhelmed by the Enterprise that he killed himself.

He says an even more important thing: the Prime Directive is supposed to protect THEM. Whatever they do, eventually they are responsible for the fate of the civilization.

Then the Federation shouldn't be invading the space and infiltrating the societies of those less advanced.

[Holdfast]

I like the principle of the Prime Directive, partly because without it, you have no end of situations Starfleet could potentially get involved in.

It essentially asks, "what is humanity's role in the universe?"

Or, to what extent should humanity (or at least, Starfleet as a quasi-military branch of the UFP) be responsible for other races and what should be left to chance/fate/design/whatever-you-call-it?

Personally, I do not like the idea of humanity assuming responsibility for junior races development, as this results in unpredictable moral obligations and practical consequences. Should Starfleet have to constantly have to deal with this, potentially creating economic impacts on the UFP?

(yeah, yeah, they allegedly don't use money, but clearly they still have resource limitations: despite fusion & transporter tech, it is still possible to fight a war of attrition against them viz. the Dominion War.)

The PD is a (by and large) ethical, practical & common-sense way of restricting what situations Starfleet officers - as a proxy of the UFP government - assume such potentially unending responsibilities. Of course, there are situations where individual Captains can breach it at their discretion. They then have to later justify it to Starfleet/UFP and such a breach is noted as part of their personal record (I'm sure several eps across the various series either imply or outright say that).

I think Picard handled the situation in Homeward appropriately, given the circumstances he was placed in.

[Jeyl]

chrinFinity wrote:

---

I don't follow what you mean about "Dear Doctor," there is no Prime Directive during the time of Enterprise.

Archer: "Someday my people are going to come up with some sort of a doctrine: something that tells us what we can and can't do out here – should and shouldn't do. But until somebody tells me that they've drafted that directive, I'm going to have to remind myself every day that we didn't come out here to play God."

Just as bad.

[sonak]

Jeyl wrote:

---

Archer: "Someday my people are going to come up with some sort of a doctrine: something that tells us what we can and can't do out here – should and shouldn't do. But until somebody tells me that they've drafted that directive, I'm going to have to remind myself every day that we didn't come out here to play God."

Just as bad.

not only that, but you had the irony of having characters who WERE playing God by deciding that one of the species was somehow destined to become the "superior" one or something, use the excuse of NOT wanting to play God to "justify" their actions.

[JarodRussell]

NASA is breaking the Prime Directive right now. They didn't sterilize Curiosity properly, potentially contaminating Mars.

[Holdfast]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

NASA is breaking the Prime Directive right now. They didn't sterilize Curiosity properly, potentially contaminating Mars.

We need to kill the tripods.