Well that would be a form of population control, in the mind of Landru's system.You leave them in a state where they are essentially zombies, with periods of terrifying violence,
Well that would be a form of population control, in the mind of Landru's system.You leave them in a state where they are essentially zombies, with periods of terrifying violence,
Well that would be a form of population control, in the mind of Landru's system.
The question would be: since they are essentially human, is it right to leave them in that state?
Aliens don't like being called Human.
See what happens if you bungle an Asians ethnicity.
Not good.
Are you arguing against the prime directive?
Aliens don't like being called Human.
I've always argued against the Prime Directive. At least, the interpretation that makes any help any evil thing to do.
In the case of Landru, these are the descendants of the descendants of the descendants, who had no say in its implementation. Add to that, there was an underground attempting to overthrow Landru, so I tend to think Kirk made the right decision.
In the terms of a "pre-warp" society, a fundamental rule of a superior society not interfering with the natural development of an inferior or growing society must be enforced. Which is why I liked TNG's episode "First Contact".Are you arguing against the prime directive?
Not sure what you're referring to.
In the terms of a "pre-warp" society, a fundamental rule of a superior society not interfering with the natural development of an inferior or growing society must be enforced. Which is why I liked TNG's episode "First Contact".
But in the case of stagnant societies like those presented in "Archons" and "Apple", non-interference should be on a "case-by-case" basis. Much more deliberation would have taken place at the Federation Council level than shown (but that would've made for boring TV).
Have you ever told an Australian that she sounds and acts like a New Zealander?
Try it some time.
Enjoy the feeling of your testicles becoming detached.
No, provided that that society's needs are being met, and resources are being replenished without waste or loss.Being stagnant is not necessarily bad.
Then you must hate it when Picard advocates doing nothing when entire planets die.
Or STID when Kirk gets demoted for helping people not to go extinct.
As much as I enjoyed the episodes where Kirk talked/beat a computer to death, the ramifications of what he did always stuck in the back of my mind.
Those societies may have been stagnant, but they were (mostly) perpetual.
They could have been awoken at any point over the next ten thousand years.
That is Dr. McCoy's argument in "Apple".I dislike both of those instances.
But, there are ramifications to doing nothing as well. More generations of humans/aliens living in a world where they never grow nor learn, all so they can serve a machine.
Feeling uncomfortable with "superior interference", I'm almost inclined to agree with Spock.
I am not sure I agree with you about "The Apple". For all intents and purposes the people were happy. I am guessing that once they find out that they are growing old and feeble and getting sick and forced to toil all day for food and some of then start dying, they won't be so happy.How can they be "happy" when they've only ever experienced one way of living and never having the knowledge or choice of anything else. It is one thing to want to have a certain type of society, but when you are born into something and never have a choice for anything else, that would classify as a torturous stagnation in my book.
Eve not taking a bite of the apple would've led to a special kind of Hell.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.