I was trying to distill the essence of Trek's many ethical dilemmas into categories. Is there any I've left out?
Best and Worst Treatment of Ethical Dilemmas
- Thread starter DonIago
- Start date
Do you feel Seven was treated unduly harshly by Janeway when she beamed the 8472 over to the Hirogen ship so that they'd stop pursuing Voyager?
That was a great example of someone actually doing the non-Trekkian but probably 'right' thing.
Less favorably, there's Kila Marr's unilateral decision to shatter the Crystalline Entity.
I don't agree. There are rules for the conduct of war, beyond not starting one. Not targeting civilians or medical units, taking enemies who have surrendered as prisoners, treating prisoners humanely.
That's reasonable and good... if the other side is also following rules of conduct in war. When they stop doing that (if they ever did to begin with), it's survival by any means necessary.
Look at Bajor during the Occupation. The Resistance did take out many civilian Cardassians. And maimed who knows how many others. (Silaran Prin from "THE DARKNESS AND THE LIGHT", for example.) But they had no choice, because the Cardassians were brutal.
Also because the Cardassians chose to be on Bajor. But it is still a debatable ethical point.
It seemed less like actual punishment and more just establishing that she didn't trust Seven anymore. If a crew member disobeys orders, they lose the captain's trust.
It was certainly the greatest good for the greatest number.
That was a revenge killing.
The Enterprise was in a position where it could destroy the Entity if communication could not be established, or if it refused to stop glomming inhabited worlds. Ergo, while they needed to be willing and prepared to destroy the thing. BUT, with potential communication established, it wasn't the time to destroy it.
War is a brutal, ugly thing. And what the Bajorans were doing was waging asymmetric war against a heavily armed military occupation. Some collateral damage was inevitable.
I will never understand the arguments against Insurrection, especially when compared to other Star Trek films. It is a completely harmless little film that would never have been able to get out of the shadow cast by First Contact, and certainly didn't kill the franchise dead like Nemesis did. And as far as "raising some complex moral arguments and then burying them under an action-adventure film" goes, I would like to point out that the beloved Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan does exactly the same thing. Only in my personal opinion, at least Insurrection keeps its eye on the ball; TWOK introduced the massively powerful Genesis device, then debated about the ethical ramifications of using such a device for what, 5 minutes? Then it went straight to moustache twirling villain hellbent on revenge territory and never really came back.
This is NOT to say that Insurrection is a better film than TWOK, nor is that something I believe myself (neither film is my favorite or least favorite). But I just find it ironic that the most beloved and most hated Star Trek films both handle ethical issues, and the most beloved one botches the attempt while the most hated one at least makes an attempt to say something meaningful, even if it's a tired retread of better stories.
SNW's “Ad Astra per Aspera”
I know some people love the episode, and think it's a strong message. But I really, really, really don’t like SNW’s “Ad Astra per Aspera,” since it doesn't even acknowledge the argument put forward by DS9's "Doctor Bashir, I Presume?" while trying to damn the Federation by tying the genetic engineering ban to an allegory about discrimination.
SNW totally ignores the possibility genetic engineering technology robs children of their agency to be who they are, and instead allows parents (and others) to assign identity to children. It’s the reason Dr. Bashir resents his parents. They didn’t accept him for who he was, and instead basically did the 24th century equivalent of conversion therapy. Except instead of “praying the gay away,” they used science to create the child they wanted.
SNW wants us to cheer on Number One and see her as a victim of the Federation. But the episode stops short of questioning whether what her parents did was child abuse? What they're using the character to advocate as being acceptable is as antithetical to the idea of what minority groups have been fighting for in terms of acceptance and individual agency as I can imagine.
I know some people love the episode, and think it's a strong message. But I really, really, really don’t like SNW’s “Ad Astra per Aspera,” since it doesn't even acknowledge the argument put forward by DS9's "Doctor Bashir, I Presume?" while trying to damn the Federation by tying the genetic engineering ban to an allegory about discrimination.
SNW totally ignores the possibility genetic engineering technology robs children of their agency to be who they are, and instead allows parents (and others) to assign identity to children. It’s the reason Dr. Bashir resents his parents. They didn’t accept him for who he was, and instead basically did the 24th century equivalent of conversion therapy. Except instead of “praying the gay away,” they used science to create the child they wanted.
SNW wants us to cheer on Number One and see her as a victim of the Federation. But the episode stops short of questioning whether what her parents did was child abuse? What they're using the character to advocate as being acceptable is as antithetical to the idea of what minority groups have been fighting for in terms of acceptance and individual agency as I can imagine.
It wasn't the greatest idea to make an episode in a prequel painting the Federation as being wrong about something that isn't going change in 100 years and none of the heroes have a problem with.
The worst thing about genetic enhancement is that it's a genie in a bottle... once it becomes legal, people who aren't enhanced won't be able to compete with those who are. For your child to have any kind of success, you'll HAVE to manipulate his genes.
The anti-engineering laws create a firewall against that, and that firewall needs to be protected.
The anti-engineering laws create a firewall against that, and that firewall needs to be protected.
Could Bashir's parents had sought to cure Julian's condition without upgrading him to exceptionality, or was it a choice between genius or struggling, no average possible?
We don't even know how severely struggling he was. I'm assuming genetic adjustment can be used to correct extreme disabilities, just not mediocre performance.
It's been mentioned a few times that genetic alterations to fix problems is legal. Chakotay had treatment to prevent a problem that causes hallucinations and the Doctor fixed B'Elanna's daughter's spine.
If there are two treatments and one is genetic editing and the other isn't, is the non-genetic option always favored in the Federation?
B'Elanna's daughter only inherited the genetic problem because B'Elanna herself had surgery instead, but the Doctor went straight to the genetic option so it seems like it's the favoured one. Fix the problem before it becomes a problem.
