RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,763
Posts: 5,216,580
Members: 24,217
Currently online: 808
Newest member: Vger23

TrekToday headlines

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

Kirk’s Well Wishes To Kirk
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Quinto In New Starz Series
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Star Trek: Horizon Film
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14

Star Trek: Fleet Captains Game Expansion
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 10 2009, 11:00 PM   #31
john titor
Captain
 
Location: the universe
Re: The Borg, a defence

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
john titor wrote: View Post

That aren't evil because its not relevant to them.
I have a feeling most evil people in the real world also don't find it relevant that they are evil. They are doing what they need to do to fulfill their own agenda. The Borg are sentient. Just because they may not recognize or they may not care that what they're doing is evil doesn't suddenly make it not evil. I'm sure their victims would consider them evil.

You say they're in tune with nature, but I just don't see it. Nature is about things happening naturally. Being abducted and then enslaved just so the Collective can get a little smarter is not natural. Do you get angry at a lion when it kills an antelope? No, because the lion needs to eat to survive. Do the Borg need to assimilate to survive? No, they don't. Hell, do they even need to assimilate in order to fulfill their goals? NO. They could, like so many other species, learn and grow by more traditional means.
Yep, this proves my point that the fed are died in the wool conservative stick in the muds.

Why is survival the end point of nature? The borg are the new extrapolation of natural theory.

Come on, there's got to be a few other borg supporters out there?
john titor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2009, 11:02 PM   #32
JustKate
Rear Admiral
 
JustKate's Avatar
 
Location: Indiana, USA
Re: The Borg, a defence

^ Oh, probably not many!

And once again, the Borg aren't "nature." An earthquake is "nature." The Borg are people.
JustKate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2009, 11:04 PM   #33
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: The Borg, a defence

john titor wrote: View Post

This would apply to alpha quadrant species. Note that not all species share this lineage, like the Q, the wormhole aliens and so forth. Choice is irrelevant to the borg, they are a program.
But the Borg aren't a program. They have said themselves that they began as flesh and blood creatures that eventually started adding technology to themselves. They still think. The Collective still has free will. They can decide whether or not to assimilate something (as we have seen them do). They aren't some mindless natural disaster that happens to assimilate people. They do it because they want to.
__________________
I am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2009, 11:09 PM   #34
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
 
Re: The Borg, a defence

john titor wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
So, you were not joking. Unbelievable.

The borg is sentient - a giant consciousness. That means that the collective understands its actions and their consequences, that it has a free will. That means that the concepts of "good" and "evil" are applicable to him. And that means that the collective is completely evil.

Am I applying human morality to him? Of course I am!
But, as myself - and other posters in this thread - mentioned - this type of morality belongs not only to humans. It belongs to every sentient species that has learned to cooperate, that created a civilization.
A species that has borg-like morality will never develop beyond savagery.

You're actually saying that human concepts are not applicable to the borg because they "improve and grow"?
MIGHT DOES NOT MAKE RIGHT, john titor.
It doesn't matter that they "improve and grow". It doesn't matter that they are stronger. They are still evil.
That aren't evil because its not relevant to them. You're still assuming that because they are sentient they must have human sentience, in other words they must possess the faculties which enable them to appreciate concepts such as good and evil. I'm arguing that their continual expansion is in tune with the philosophy of the universe, that they are at one with nature.
Obviously, consciousness is another concept that eludes you.
Any sentient being has the ability to understand his/her actions and their consequences, and has free will. That's an intrinsic part of consciousness - it doesn't matter how "different" this sentience is.

That's why the concepts of "good" and "evil" are applicable to any sentient being - including the borg.

"That aren't evil because its not relevant to them."
THAT DOES NOT MAKE THEM NOT EVIL!
I'll quote myself - maybe you'll actually read what I wrote this time:

Exploitation is irrelevant to them? Good and evil are irrelevant to them? Genocide is irrelevant to them?
So what?
A sociopath may not care about good/evil. That doesn't make him any less evil.
A genocidal creep may not care about his victims. That doesn't make him any less evil.
The borg "are most in tune with the universe as a place where if something is deficient it is removed or assimilated and improved." "their continual expansion is in tune with the philosophy of the universe," and "they are at one with nature."

What nonsense.

The universe is not sentient. It works according to the laws of physics - that means there is nothing "deficient" to be "removed" or "improved". Something "deficient" is something that doesn't follow the laws of nature - an impossibility.
The universe (the laws of nature) favours the development of complexity, of life. It favours diversity.
The universe does not have a philosophy - it's not sentient, remember? And the universe does not encourage continual expansion!

None of these apply to the borg.

Last edited by ProtoAvatar; June 10 2009 at 11:28 PM.
ProtoAvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2009, 11:30 PM   #35
john titor
Captain
 
Location: the universe
Re: The Borg, a defence

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
john titor wrote: View Post

This would apply to alpha quadrant species. Note that not all species share this lineage, like the Q, the wormhole aliens and so forth. Choice is irrelevant to the borg, they are a program.
But the Borg aren't a program. They have said themselves that they began as flesh and blood creatures that eventually started adding technology to themselves. They still think. The Collective still has free will. They can decide whether or not to assimilate something (as we have seen them do). They aren't some mindless natural disaster that happens to assimilate people. They do it because they want to.
They started as people, then they became a program. We are mostly a collection of algorithims, they just went all the way. They are following the dictates of their input.

ProtoAvatar wrote:
Obviously, consciousness is another concept that eludes you.
Any sentient being has the ability to understand his/her actions and their consequences, and has free will. That's an intrinsic part of consciousness - it doesn't matter how "different" this sentience is.

That's why the concepts of "good" and "evil" are applicable to any sentient being - including the borg.
Lol, sentience and moral concepts aren't intertwined by necessity. Free will doesn't pressupose good or evil just as sight doesn't pressupose seeing ultraviolet.

ProtoAvatar wrote:
"That aren't evil because its not relevant to them."
THAT DOES NOT MAKE THEM NOT EVIL!
I'll quote myself - maybe you'll actually read what I wrote this time:
Exploitation is irrelevant to them? Good and evil are irrelevant to them? Genocide is irrelevant to them?
So what?
A sociopath may not care about good/evil. That doesn't make him any less evil.
A genocidal creep may not care about his victims. That doesn't make him any less evil.
No, you see a sociopath knows what good and evil are, for the borg the concept doesn't even occur, its irrelevant.

What nonsense.

ProtoAvatar wrote:
The universe is not sentient. It works according to the laws of physics - that means there is nothing "deficient" to be "removed" or "improved". Something "deficient" is something that doesn't follow the laws of nature - an impossibility.
The universe does not have a philosophy - it's not sentient, remember? And the universe does not encourage continual expansion!
None of these apply to the borg.

Yawn, debating over the meaning of words used. Ok basically when I mean philosophy of the cosmos, I don't mean sentience. I mean it in a platonic sense. I'm discussing the axioms which govern existence and which manifest themselves in the behaviour of everything, asteroids, planets, particles and species.

Something thats deficient doesn't automatically mean it contradicts physical laws. Sheesh, I was talking about the natural evolution of the borg which is constantly refining itself.

I've already answered the universe not encouraging continual expansion.
john titor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2009, 11:43 PM   #36
JustKate
Rear Admiral
 
JustKate's Avatar
 
Location: Indiana, USA
Re: The Borg, a defence

Speaking for myself, John, I have to say that we are all starting to repeat ourselves, so while I think your argument is extremely weak, I realize there's no way to convince you of that. I've already stated my objections, and I see no point in doing so again. So I'm going to bow out here, unless somebody comes up with something new.

I don't know where you get the idea that the Borg are a program instead of a group of people, but even if that's the case...who wrote the program? People. It has to be because otherwise, why does the collective knowledge change - why does the "program" revise itself? - once they assimilate a new species? So if they are people, in the fullest sense of the word, they are therefore responsible for their actions. And if they are responsible, they can't really be compared to asteroids.
JustKate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2009, 11:51 PM   #37
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: The Borg, a defence

If the Borg were coming to my planet to assimilate me (rape me, kill me, or anything else of equal consequence), and I tell them "No, please, don't do that" and they proceed to do it anyway, I would think they were evil.

I don't care if they disagree or if they don't care or if they don't even have a concept of right and wrong. What they did was evil.

Again, they're not doing it because they need to. They're doing it because they're selfish and are putting their desires over that of the rest of universe.
__________________
I am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2009, 11:53 PM   #38
JustKate
Rear Admiral
 
JustKate's Avatar
 
Location: Indiana, USA
Re: The Borg, a defence

^ Yeah. I mean, one could say that the Nazis at least had some reason for beginning their conquest - they were money and resource poor. Not that that's any excuse, but it is a fact. But the Borg don't have that excuse. They conquer...because they want to. Which is pretty much how the Nazis ended up, now that I think about it.
JustKate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 10 2009, 11:59 PM   #39
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
 
Re: The Borg, a defence

john titor wrote: View Post

They started as people, then they became a program. We are mostly a collection of algorithims, they just went all the way. They are following the dictates of their input.

Lol, sentience and moral concepts aren't intertwined by necessity. Free will doesn't pressupose good or evil just as sight doesn't pressupose seeing ultraviolet.

No, you see a sociopath knows what good and evil are, for the borg the concept doesn't even occur, its irrelevant.

None of these apply to the borg.

Yawn, debating over the meaning of words used. Ok basically when I mean philosophy of the cosmos, I don't mean sentience. I mean it in a platonic sense. I'm discussing the axioms which govern existence and which manifest themselves in the behaviour of everything, asteroids, planets, particles and species.

Something thats deficient doesn't automatically mean it contradicts physical laws. Sheesh, I was talking about the natural evolution of the borg which is constantly refining itself.

I've already answered the universe not encouraging continual expansion.
The borg were explicitly established as being sentient in "Q Who", "The Gift" and about 10 other episodes.
And sentience and morality ARE INTERTWINED BY NECESSITY. As I said, the notion of consciousness eludes you.

The borg certainly know what good and evil are - they assimilated the information over and over again - they just don't care. They are sociopaths.

The universe (the laws of nature) favours the development of complexity, of life. It favours diversity - the complete opposite of the borg.

The universe does not refine itself. The laws of physics don't change.

And the evolution of life - made possible by nature - is diversity. That's why earth is not populated solely by cockroaches (arguably, the toughest lifeforms) - nature doesn't allow it. Again - the complete opposite of the borg.
ProtoAvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 11 2009, 12:04 AM   #40
ltcmmanderdata
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: The Borg, a defence

interesting defense of the borg.it would've been interesting to see the borg become like what your talking about here.maybe there could be borg hives which function the way you speak of here?i appreciate your op.
ltcmmanderdata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 11 2009, 01:03 AM   #41
SFRabid
Commodore
 
SFRabid's Avatar
 
Re: The Borg, a defence

For me the Borg went into decline with the introduction of the Queen. That was a fundamental change in what made up the Borg. They were more interesting before there was a central authority figure.
SFRabid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 11 2009, 01:51 AM   #42
Cyke101
Rear Admiral
 
Cyke101's Avatar
 
Re: The Borg, a defence

john titor wrote: View Post
You see you're personifying the borg and giving it human qualities.
Seeing as how the Borg are portrayed by people, given dialogue by people, and motivate themselves by going after people, I can't see why this is a bad thing.

It seems like you're confusing the Borg for Galactus, frankly. I came into this thread expecting a defense of why they were good villains (at least in concept), not why their actions should be justified.
__________________
“You do not use science in order to prove yourself right, you use science in order to become right.”
Cyke101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 11 2009, 02:08 AM   #43
roguephoenix
Captain
 
roguephoenix's Avatar
 
Re: The Borg, a defence

borg are not logical (then again logic can be very subjective). they like to think they are, but their actions speak otherwise. they are driven by emotion even if they don't know it because if they were driven by pure logic, they would be more powerful than they are now and they would own most of the galaxy.
__________________
Please have mercy! No more Wolvercrap! Or Twitlight! (yes that's how it should be spelled)
roguephoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 11 2009, 02:54 AM   #44
Myasishchev
Rear Admiral
 
Myasishchev's Avatar
 
Location: America after the rain
Re: The Borg, a defence

I'll say that the Borg would have been vastly more interesting if presented in a more understanding light. They probably think about human rights in the same fashion that we think about, say, cats' rights.

I own a cat and if she were a sapient life form, I should be hauled before a tribunal immediately. Seen in the most negative light, I falsely imprison her, I punish her for things she cannot be held morally responsibly for, I deny her conjugal visits, and I even plan on mutilating her reproductive tract. In order to continue to do these things, I am morally obligated only to maintain her physical existence and not be wantonly cruel to her.

To the Borg overmind, our limited perceptions are objects. But as faintly sapient life forms, we deserve to be graduated to the Collective, even though we cannot recognize it, and kept generally safe so long as it does not threaten the Collective. Since my cat is sentient (she can feel), and I do actually love her, I do a lot more than I am merely obligated to--but she is not my equal, and she is not qualified to make decisions even when they affect only her.

Imagine if you saw a bunch of retarded children playing on a cliff, and every now and again, one fell off, lost forever, briefly mourned by the other retarded children before they recommenced their reckless play. Shouldn't you try to stop them, and put them somewhere safer?

We must look much like retarded children, dangers to ourselves and others, to an immortal, transhuman intelligence like the Borg.

Now bear in mind this is all in an alternate universe where the Borg don't suck remarkably hard.
__________________

Myasishchev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 11 2009, 04:02 AM   #45
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: The Borg, a defence

This thread is a joke, right? I mean, I see how you can admire what the Borg try to achieve, but it is impossible to defend their methods. The Borg are essentially a lesson in absolutism.

Sci wrote: View Post
Can I just say, I love that smiley!
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:28 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.