My Response To Q In All Good Things

[Starborn Dragon]

Q told Picard:

Exactly. For that one fraction of a second, you were open to options you had never considered. *That* is the exploration that awaits you. Not mapping stars and studying nebulae, but charting the unknown possibilities of existence.

But if that were me, here's what I would have said to Q.

"Q, one of humanity's biggest failings is that to explore the within, we have to explore the without. Is is the observation of the without that helps us realize the explorations of the within.

"And this is evident in this universe you created for me."

Which is true, for most of us, at least, with those of us who do have aspirations to grow and to become a better person.

We can only observe and reflect our surroundings.

And that is what drives us to explore.

 

[T'Girl]

one of humanity's biggest failings is that to explore the within, we have to explore the without. Is is the observation of the without that helps us realize the explorations of the within

I don't believe I could agree with that.

First off, why do you view your statement as a sign of failure?

 

[2takesfrakes]

In the Sixties, who could even pretend to have a chance at going into Low Earth Orbit, to say nothing of a trip to the Moon? Nobody. Who can visit the trenches of the Ocean Floor with a semi-robotic pressure suit, or specialised submerisble? Nobody. Even the big, bad world has become so small, now, thanks to the Internet and ease of travel. And these destinations, outside of their natural wonders and touristy cultural displays are much more similar than dissimilar: skyscrapers, traffic, clubs, restraunts, shops and vending machines. The wilds aren't even wild anymore, they're all so carefully managed because of Humanity's encroachments.

In short, there's not much (accessible) virgin territory in the world, what's left to really "explore" and find enlightenment - or anything truly meaningful - with? It comes down to you, then, who you are. Self-knowledge, testing your own limits, is what allows you to adapt and overcome. And there are many avenues towards acheiving this objective and actually increases your perceived value to those you want to be accepted by ... even desired by. Religion, for example, and keeping fit and facing personal fear. Yes, the way STAR TREK presents this message, it can seem kind of corny, or weird, or pretentious ... but it's also an important Human truth.

 

[Starborn Dragon]

one of humanity's biggest failings is that to explore the within, we have to explore the without. Is is the observation of the without that helps us realize the explorations of the within

I don't believe I could agree with that.

First off, why do you view your statement as a sign of failure?

Because to explore the within, and to grow as a person is something most people won't or can't do.

Most people have no incentive to do so, so they won't. They just want to live their own lives.

 

[mos6507]

Most people have no incentive to do so, so they won't. They just want to live their own lives.

In another thread people are vehement that Trek should shed its overly-pretentious social engineering baggage, though. We're living in a very cynical era where it's frowned upon to make any sort of idealistic soap-box like statement and we amuse ourselves dropping one-liner insults into FB comments. In that respect, Trek is really not fashionable, which is why the Trek that's popular these days feels foreign to the older fans.

We're a very divided society in a way that is even worse then the 60s. In the 60s you had Woodstock and sit-ins. These days people just retreat to their silos and hurl insults.

But the reason All Good Things sticks out is because it had the guts to be Unfashionable and to double-down on the 60s idealism, because that's the foundation of Trek and they wanted to go out reaffirming it.

I think a lot of the hand-wringing people do over what form Trek should take in the future is because we've changed, and maybe not for the better.

 

[Starborn Dragon]

Actually it's still those same people from the sixties and seventies who are polarizing America now, and their children will continue the trend.

It's ironic, since then they were all about rebelling against the man.

Now that they're the man they won't let people rebel against them.

 

[Sistrin]

My problem with that episode was how Q had to lead Picard around by the nose in order to get him to realize anything.

 

[Anwar]

My problem with that episode was how Q had to lead Picard around by the nose in order to get him to realize anything.

Picard's had his mind messed with enough throughout the series it's not unreasonable for him to assumed he really was just hallucinating and not time traveling.

 

[FormerLurker]

Or that instead of bouncing Picard around space/time, Q was dropping him into a pocket universe to mess with him until he could produce an answer that Q found acceptable.

 

[JTShanks]

Most people have no incentive to do so, so they won't. They just want to live their own lives.

In another thread people are vehement that Trek should shed its overly-pretentious social engineering baggage, though. We're living in a very cynical era where it's frowned upon to make any sort of idealistic soap-box like statement and we amuse ourselves dropping one-liner insults into FB comments. In that respect, Trek is really not fashionable, which is why the Trek that's popular these days feels foreign to the older fans.

We're a very divided society in a way that is even worse then the 60s. In the 60s you had Woodstock and sit-ins. These days people just retreat to their silos and hurl insults.

But the reason All Good Things sticks out is because it had the guts to be Unfashionable and to double-down on the 60s idealism, because that's the foundation of Trek and they wanted to go out reaffirming it.

I think a lot of the hand-wringing people do over what form Trek should take in the future is because we've changed, and maybe not for the better.

You hit the nail on the head there, and I vehemently disagree with the people who say it should ditch that and move on to something else.

I mean when did people adapt this notion that they should not better themselves, when did people think that all of a sudden that they should not better themselves or strive for perfection because absolute perfection is unobtainable?

 

[JTShanks]

one of humanity's biggest failings is that to explore the within, we have to explore the without. Is is the observation of the without that helps us realize the explorations of the within

I don't believe I could agree with that.

First off, why do you view your statement as a sign of failure?

I didn't see it as a sign of failure to be honest, I saw it as a fundamental human flaw that plagues most sentient life as well, but also an advantage that we have over the likes of the Q Continuum because they may never know the feeling or emotional turmoil or exhilaration of learning how to go forward as an existential finite life-form through life experiences.

Never to laugh and experience love and joy like rolling down a grassy hill with your loved one and experiencing the embracement of themselves upon you. And experiencing the sadness, devastation and mourning of that same loved one who's similarly finite existence had ended, knowing you must continue and move on from those experiences and learn how to deal with them as well.

"What a piece of work is man? How noble in reason; how infinite in faculty, in form, in moving, how express and admirable, in apprehension, like an angel or like a god."

 

[Starborn Dragon]

one of humanity's biggest failings is that to explore the within, we have to explore the without. Is is the observation of the without that helps us realize the explorations of the within

I don't believe I could agree with that.

First off, why do you view your statement as a sign of failure?

I didn't see it as a sign of failure to be honest, I saw it as a fundamental human flaw that plagues most sentient life as well, but also an advantage that we have over the likes of the Q Continuum because they may never know the feeling or emotional turmoil or exhilaration of learning how to go forward as an existential finite life-form through life experiences.

Never to laugh and experience love and joy like rolling down a grassy hill with your loved one and experiencing the embracement of themselves upon you. And experiencing the sadness, devastation and mourning of that same loved one who's similarly finite existence had ended, knowing you must continue and move on from those experiences and learn how to deal with them as well.

"What a piece of work is man? How noble in reason; how infinite in faculty, in form, in moving, how express and admirable, in apprehension, like an angel or like a god."

You do know that Shakespeare quote is sarcasm, don't you?

 

[bbailey861]

one of humanity's biggest failings is that to explore the within, we have to explore the without. Is is the observation of the without that helps us realize the explorations of the within

I don't believe I could agree with that.

First off, why do you view your statement as a sign of failure?

I have to agree with T'Girl, especially in the world of TNG. Picard had previously (many times, I believe) extolled how far humans had come from their past. I don't think he would have said the opposite and said we were full of failings. Not perfect, to be sure, but not full of inner failings. At the time, I recall enjoying how TNG wrapped up, really completing the circle of that bit of story telling.

 

[FormerLurker]

I don't believe I could agree with that.

First off, why do you view your statement as a sign of failure?

I didn't see it as a sign of failure to be honest, I saw it as a fundamental human flaw that plagues most sentient life as well, but also an advantage that we have over the likes of the Q Continuum because they may never know the feeling or emotional turmoil or exhilaration of learning how to go forward as an existential finite life-form through life experiences.

Never to laugh and experience love and joy like rolling down a grassy hill with your loved one and experiencing the embracement of themselves upon you. And experiencing the sadness, devastation and mourning of that same loved one who's similarly finite existence had ended, knowing you must continue and move on from those experiences and learn how to deal with them as well.

"What a piece of work is man? How noble in reason; how infinite in faculty, in form, in moving, how express and admirable, in apprehension, like an angel or like a god."

You do know that Shakespeare quote is sarcasm, don't you?

The character may have meant it sarcastically, but that doesn't invalidate the quote as being a truth about the human condition. And what is Star Trek, than an exploration of the human condition?

 

[T'Girl]

I mean when did people adapt this notion that they should not better themselves

And what is Star Trek, than an exploration of the human condition?

The second would be far more important and interesting than the first. A voyage of discovery into who we are as a people.

And who would be the person or agency that defines what constitutes "better?"

Most people have no incentive to do so, so they won't. They just want to live their own lives.

Learn to love yourself, not change yourself to accommodate some externally imposed vision of what you should be.

Many people place no importance in "to grow as a person," while improving the situation/comforts of their lives and the lives of their family would be of much more priority.

 

[BeatleJWOL]

My problem with that episode was how Q had to lead Picard around by the nose in order to get him to realize anything.

Picard's had his mind messed with enough throughout the series it's not unreasonable for him to assumed he really was just hallucinating and not time traveling.

Or that instead of bouncing Picard around space/time, Q was dropping him into a pocket universe to mess with him until he could produce an answer that Q found acceptable.

That seemed to be the point of the "primordial soup" scene; Q pointing out that he is in fact quite serious this time.

 

[T'Girl]

^ Nah, it was just Q being his usual jackass self.

Likely it was Q that created the anomaly in the first place just to mess with Picard.

 

[Lance]

Actually it's still those same people from the sixties and seventies who are polarizing America now, and their children will continue the trend.

It's ironic, since then they were all about rebelling against the man.

Now that they're the man they won't let people rebel against them.

Absolutely. This is a truism. Almost nobody, I find, ever wants to acknowledge that the hippies of the sixties became the yuppies of the eighties. The peaceniks who spoke out against the controlling influence of 'The Man' have ultimately became the biggest coporate sludge in our modern world; they have, in essence, become 'The Man'. Those who talked about Free Love are the same guys who propogated pornography into the industry it is today. The people who marched on Washinton rallying against Vietnam were some of the same people who sent the country into Iraq. The power system itself is a corrupting influence; it eats away at the pureness and idealology of those who enter into it, because power comes through a betrayal of hope.

The worst aspects of humanity are cyclical. We are idealistic in our youth, but pesimistic in our adulthood, and so the generations turn, and so history repeats, and so we never really progress.

As much as I love Star Trek, it is for the above reasons that I place its utopia firmly into the realms of a fantasy fictional universe, not something I can ever see humanity ever truly rising to. But to get back on topic, Q's test was to show Picard that humanity, even in the enlightened 24th century, still has places to go, it still needs to open it's mind to the possibilities in order to move forward. Q effectively wanted to prove that humans are falliable, but that they can look beyond their preconditioned notions... if only they allow themselves to.

 

[jimbotron]

The plot of this episode does not stand up to scrutiny. Q "helps" Picard by having him move through time to prevent the anomaly and save humanity. But Picard is who CAUSES the anomaly BECAUSE he is moving through time. It's not like it was going to happen on its own, because season 1 Picard already had nothing to do with creating it. That became Q's doing. Was future Picard just going to randomly start the anti-time anomaly on his own? According to that timeline, he was retired and mentally unfit for command.

Also, the episode says three Enterprises initiated the anomaly. It was two Enterprises and the Pasteur, psh.

And if they had done it properly, the Pasteur and future Enterprise would have found the anomaly and see it close. Instead they first find nothing, shoot a beam, and then find the anomaly formed a few hours later. That's not how time works, Braga.

 

[Anwar]

The plot of this episode does not stand up to scrutiny. Q "helps" Picard by having him move through time to prevent the anomaly and save humanity. But Picard is who CAUSES the anomaly BECAUSE he is moving through time. It's not like it was going to happen on its own, because season 1 Picard already had nothing to do with creating it. That became Q's doing. Was future Picard just going to randomly start the anti-time anomaly on his own? According to that timeline, he was retired and mentally unfit for command.

Also, the episode says three Enterprises initiated the anomaly. It was two Enterprises and the Pasteur, psh.

And if they had done it properly, the Pasteur and future Enterprise would have found the anomaly and see it close. Instead they first find nothing, shoot a beam, and then find the anomaly formed a few hours later. That's not how time works, Braga.

You're assuming Picard was really in the future, and this whole thing wasn't just some mental simulation Q put him in that he was controlling the whole time.