Completely agreed. As Janeway said in "THE OMEGA DIRECTIVE", there are some lines that should never be crossed.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Completely agreed. As Janeway said in "THE OMEGA DIRECTIVE", there are some lines that should never be crossed.
So, across four hundred years, across hundreds of species, there are four instances of it going badly. We also see with Dr. Bashir that it can go very right. Commander Una, serves Starfleet with distinction. But there's no sense in mentioning when it goes right, because Earth had a bad experience.
It also seems that Doctor Crusher was playing with Genetic Engineering in "Genesis"...
...one or all, she was attempting to manipulate Barclay's dormant genes. Which means that ban is pretty much bullshit. It is just a hammer for the Federation to use on people they don't want to associate with.
The Next Generation Transcripts - Genesis (chakoteya.net)
I said, "Let's see some examples." 'Some examples'... you realize that already means I wasn't going to list everything, right? And by the way, some examples killed millions. That's not small potatoes.
And thank you for listing another example and helping to make my point for me... "Genesis".
Not only did it have a massively unintended side effect, but it killed at least one crewman. (The conn officer on the bridge.) Who knows how many others were also killed?
There are also likely other instances in that universe where screwing with genetics goes horribly wrong, but we are not going to see them all because we have yet to see a series called STAR TREK: FIXING GENETIC ENGINEERING SCREWUPS.
Yeah, people die. Just like Henry Archer died due to the Federation ban on Genetic Engineering. Or, poor Thad Riker when the Federation went with an all-or-nothing AI ban due to the attack on Mars.
The Federation is just as dogmatically all or nothing as their 20th century counterparts. Which is a shame.
It made perfect sense for Earth in the 21st century going into the 22nd to have a complete ban on genetic resequencing, engineering and selective breeding due to the carnage and 37 million deaths of the Eugenics Wars. But once the Federation was formed and Earth joined a union that included species that had experienced far more peaceful and successful dalliances with genetic engineering it might have made a lot more sense to not impose a UFP-wide ban based on the tragic experiences of pre-warp humanity.
37 million dead is a lot. The third-highest death toll of any conflict in Earth history up to the time of First Contact. Still. The entire Federation shouldn't do without technology and its applications to better the quality of lives because Earth let genetic supermen seize power in 40 nations and decide to try to kill one another.
37 million dead is a lot. The third-highest death toll of any conflict in Earth history up to the time of First Contact. Still. The entire Federation shouldn't do without technology and its applications to better the quality of lives because Earth let genetic supermen seize power in 40 nations and decide to try to kill one another.
Which we see them do in Voyager.
So it's not all.or nothing. It's highly selective, carefully vetted process that does not seek to augment human ability.
There are limits and those should be understood based on history.
Being prepared is reasonable.
So it's not all.or nothing. It's highly selective, carefully vetted process that does not seek to augment human ability.
There are limits and those should be understood based on history.
The Federation cannot control what happens outside their borders.
Being prepared is reasonable.
Except, they use treatments in limited sense based on their history. Saying you should go all.in on genetic engineering because history should not inform current choice is just as dumb as a blanket ban.
Last edited:
I'm not sure anyone would disagree with the idea of banning selective breeding.
Yet another reason to excise TWOK from canon.
Either one works.Another reason to excise canon.
Personally, I think TWOKs shadow has grown too long and proven more onerous as a burden than a celebrated piece of Trek history.
Probably would help if they didn't keep trying to remake it over and over again.
We know a lot of species can interbreed, so that suggests DNA compatibility. Now suppose that such species both keep swapping genes _and_ keep optimising their gene sequences over the centuries, wouldn't that mean that ultimately, all separate species disappear and we'll be left with one or just a few 'optimal' gene templates?
The future historian who traveled back in the time pod in "Future Tense(ENT)" was found to have the genetic markers of about nine different species when Phlox examined his corpse. Assuming he originated in the Federation of the distant future then by the time the historian journeyed back to 2152 interbreeding was probably a common thing.
If you look at it in the bigger scope, the genetic engineering ban fits with the general philosophy of the Prime Directive.
The Prime Directive says Starfleet is forbidden from interfering in the “natural development” of a species. What would genetic engineering within a species be? An artificial manipulation of a species that would interfere in its natural development.
If you place the natural development of a species as the most important value of your culture, it fits that Federation philosophy would extend the macro view that they apply to outside cultures to their view of what’s best on a smaller level internally.
I also think the general view of eugenics/genetic engineering of the franchise gets to some of Roddenberry’s ideas about social evolution. To me, Star Trek is about a future version of humanity that’s able to overcome and figure some things out to be better. Not a version of humanity that used a petri dish to alter itself in order to be better.
The Prime Directive says Starfleet is forbidden from interfering in the “natural development” of a species. What would genetic engineering within a species be? An artificial manipulation of a species that would interfere in its natural development.
If you place the natural development of a species as the most important value of your culture, it fits that Federation philosophy would extend the macro view that they apply to outside cultures to their view of what’s best on a smaller level internally.
I also think the general view of eugenics/genetic engineering of the franchise gets to some of Roddenberry’s ideas about social evolution. To me, Star Trek is about a future version of humanity that’s able to overcome and figure some things out to be better. Not a version of humanity that used a petri dish to alter itself in order to be better.
Last edited:
^Minor remark, I don't think we know for sure he was a historian. It's only what Archer presupposes, because Daniels told him some future historians did that. Otherwise, I agree with your post and I was also thinking about that episode even before you mentioned it.
Pretty much everything interferes with the natural development of a species.
But Starfleet isn't the entire Federation. Starfleet isn't allowed to interfere in the natural development of a species. But when a species (Federation or otherwise) chooses to do it to itself, I don't think the Prime Directive can prohibit that - perhaps a Federation wide ban does prohibit it for Federation species, though.
Instead of a blanket ban on all genetic engineering and allowing such a ban to prohibit an entire civilization from joining the Federation, make such bans more pointed and limited.
A nuclear weapons ban is a good example. No I do not recall humanity in Trek banning nuclear weapons, but let's say they did. Should such a ban extend to all forms of nuclear technology? Should such a ban be broad and include nuclear power?
Surely it's possible to ban the weaponizing of genetic modifications while allowing other forms of genetic engineering, especially if that technology is used to save lives and repair damage.
The AI or synth ban was also cited as a blanket ban that needn't have gone as far or be as broad as it was.
Now give us the same list regarding the transporter, holodecks, or warp reactors. Seriously, the way that holodeck breaks down and allows risk of life or bodily harm should result in it's removal. Heck, those exploding consoles are deadly enough.
Similar threads
- Locked
