• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The multiverse abhors a vacuum...Trek's Trek

Yes, a few robots did appear. But aside from androids such as Data, we didn't see much like Robbie the robot, R2D2, or the robot from Lost in Space.
 
Is that the difference?

I always confuse my robots, my androids and whatnots.

Technically, an android is a humanlike robot, but generally "robot" is reserved for the non-human-appearing ones (per the convention established by Edmond Hamilton's Captain Future pulp novels).
 
Details of our space opera....

Like fashion in BSG, capes are popular.

Star Wars style 'droids are common.

The weapons are called "blasters."

Travel is through hyperspace.
 
You seem very certain of this. I think that when we finally learn to communicate with the whales, they will disagree with your stance.

Whales may be intelligent, but they will never develop a civilization. First, they lack dexterous hands (or any similar thing) to manipulate objects. And second, which is the backbone element that helped us to develop tools that could not be simply found in the wild? Fire. You won't find any fire under the sea. Without fire, you can be a race of Einsteins and yet you would never get to the Copper Age.

Trek doesn't have robots? :vulcan:

Depends on the definition. As pointed, we have androids like Data. We also have hard-light holograms like the Doctor, who can fit the basic definition even if their building is not that of traditional robots. And considering that robots don't have to be humanoid, perhaps the ship's "computer" may also count?

In Voyager, they once found a case of two rival worlds that built robot armies, both worlds organic populations were long extinct but the robots were still fighting on.
 
Last edited:
Whales may be intelligent, but they will never develop a civilization. First, they lack dexterous hands (or any similar thing) to manipulate objects. And second, which is the backbone element that helped us to develop tools that could not be simply found in the wild? Fire. You won't find any fire under the sea. Without fire, you can be a race of Einsteins and yet you would never get to the Copper Age.
That's rather humanity-centric to assume they need physical technology to have a civilization, or even fire.

Think of all the intelligent aliens in Trek who don't need these things, yet who would argue that they're not a civilization? You need the social things as well, and it's pretty obvious that whales have some of what we would deem necessary from a social aspect to be civilized.
 
That's rather humanity-centric to assume they need physical technology to have a civilization, or even fire.

Think of all the intelligent aliens in Trek who don't need these things, yet who would argue that they're not a civilization? You need the social things as well, and it's pretty obvious that whales have some of what we would deem necessary from a social aspect to be civilized.

1tcqfoa.jpg


It is perfectly fine to consider alternative ways for an intelligent species to develop a civilization... but they have to be workable ones.
bcb78fd4cb4398c0958e4a4331e78b29add3ddb8d667206be00028d44e0a3d38.jpg
 
It is perfectly fine to consider alternative ways for an intelligent species to develop a civilization... but they have to be workable ones.

I think it might be possible for a species in an environment where fire can't occur (either underwater or in a different atmosphere) to devise alternatives. I once wrote a story (unpublished) about such a species that got its heat from geothermal sources. I think I once had an idea for a species that invented parabolic mirrors to focus sunlight, maybe carved from crystal or something.

One can also question how the word "civilization" is being defined. Literally, the word refers to a community that builds and inhabits cities, but it can be used more generally to mean any large-scale social organization that generates and preserves cultural knowledge, ideas, and innovation. The question is, is material technology the only standard by which civilization can be defined? If a species has a complex culture based on communication, ritual, and the verbal transmission of knowledge from generation to generation, could that be considered a form of civilization?
 
1tcqfoa.jpg


It is perfectly fine to consider alternative ways for an intelligent species to develop a civilization... but they have to be workable ones.
bcb78fd4cb4398c0958e4a4331e78b29add3ddb8d667206be00028d44e0a3d38.jpg
:vulcan:

Condescension is not required.

I put on my anthropologist's hat when considering such things, and the fact is that humans are not the only animals who transmit ideas, knowledge, and culture to others of their species. Tools may be part of it (crows use tools), but it's not required.

We're on a Star Trek forum, and leaving aside the question of who built the probe in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, it's whale culture that's part of the movie's focus. George and Gracie aren't being asked to do anything but communicate verbally. It's not like they need a microphone or subspace radio.

I think it might be possible for a species in an environment where fire can't occur (either underwater or in a different atmosphere) to devise alternatives. I once wrote a story (unpublished) about such a species that got its heat from geothermal sources. I think I once had an idea for a species that invented parabolic mirrors to focus sunlight, maybe carved from crystal or something.

One can also question how the word "civilization" is being defined. Literally, the word refers to a community that builds and inhabits cities, but it can be used more generally to mean any large-scale social organization that generates and preserves cultural knowledge, ideas, and innovation. The question is, is material technology the only standard by which civilization can be defined? If a species has a complex culture based on communication, ritual, and the verbal transmission of knowledge from generation to generation, could that be considered a form of civilization?
Thank you, @Christopher.

Yes, I think it's valid to consider civilization to be other than the use of what we think of as technology.
 
As I recall, the dolphins of Shark Bay, Australia, are tool users. Probing the sea floor with sponges-to flush prey-while avoiding injury from rocks or coral.

Cetaceans have big brains, and are known to have cultures.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top