That's incredibly conceited of the creative staff of Trek if they think they can "Will the future" into existence by writing a fictional future to portray on TV.
That's not how reality works.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
That's not how reality works.
That's not what they're doing or what I meant.
That's been the opinion for several decades now. Communicators, and Stephen Hawking visiting the warp drive and saying he's working on that, has fed in to that mythos. Everything Trek has done has supposedly "predicted the future" and has been used to keep Trek moving in some ways, because it "inspires" engineers or astronauts.
The Star Trek future doesn't have to be our future, to inspire people to become "Engineers" or "Astronauts".
People will do that anyways just seeing good examples of characters doing that job.
MythBusters is literally proof of that.
Same with Trek, just because Trek isn't our future, doesn't mean it won't inspire others to join a STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, Math) based major or job in the future.
Remember, ALOT of people have to die in the Eugenics War, 2nd American Civil War, WW3, before they make "First Contact".
I'd rather avoid ALL 3x of those wars, and still somehow have humanity make a "Warp Drive" in the future & make "First Contact".
Humanity can do better than Star Trek's portrayal of Humanities History to the Stars IMO.
What Star Trek (and a lot of SF) does is sit in the present and ask "what will the future be like?" That future can be tomorrow, next year, the next decade or the next millennium. All from the perspective of today. What it doesn't do is look backwards. It's not about "what if Hitler won WWII" or adhering to a vision of the 1990s written in the 1960s. That's counter productive.
Those are different types of Sci-Fi stories as well.
Yes there are different types of SF stories. Your point?
When people are saying that "Star Trek's history is not our history" at this point they are contemplating a Star Trek where our current lives never happened because the world was devastated by WWII thirty years ago.
That's getting into For All Mankind territory.
OTOH, another solution would be to stop talking about the 21st century!
That's getting into For All Mankind territory.
OTOH, another solution would be to stop talking about the 21st century!
True. That's why it slides up the timeline.
Gotta have our trapped in the present episodes.
You're going to run out of room since "First Contact" Day is coming.
April 4-5, 2063
We're on Dec, 2024.
There's a finite amount of sliding you can do before it becomes un-believable.
38 years 3 months 19 days to be exact.
How do you know? I personally plan to be there in Bozeman to greet our new Vulcan friends.
We got 38 years before that becomes an issue. And since I'll be 78 years old in April 2063, I suspect I'll have more pressing concerns to deal with.
Have fun, I hope you won't be disappointed if they don't show up.
I'll just be glad to make it to 78 years old.
I'd be 88 years, 5 months and 3 days old.
Not that I've counted.
Not that I've counted.
Other shows have inspired many people to pursue careers in Aerospace, Science, Engineering, etc.
e.g. MythBusters.
Star Trek is just one of many great shows to do so.
The Star Trek "Future" doesn't have to be our future to inspire.
That's my point.
We don't need to depend on Sci-Fi shows or naratives to better our selves.
Your point is valid.
It isn't my point. Star Trek is stuck so far up its history of glory days of inspiring current future tech that it can't imagine not doing so. It's absurd.
No TV show should be the inspiration to better ourselves. Humans have other ways to find that inspiration. I agree on that point. But it's not the point I was making and irrelevant to how humans are inspired.
Similar threads
- Locked
