After many years, I decided to watch Nothing Human again tonight, feeling in the mood for some thought-provoking Trek. And from the plot outline (I remembered close to nothing about the actual episode) I thought this might qualify. But I come away from it disappointed and I'd like to hear your thoughts on this show.
I admired what Jeri Taylor was trying to say here, talking about the ethics of profiting from knowledge that was gained by the killing of innocent people. However, I felt that the conceit of using a hologram undermined the whole idea. How could a hologram programmed by the Doctor be held responsible for what the person on who it was modeled did?
(As an aside, many good and valid questions about many other problematic aspects of the episode, including how the hologram could be so perfect, are raised in this review here:
http://www.jammersreviews.com/st-voy/s5/nothing.php
But I would like to stick to the above for now and accept that Harry Kim and the Doctor are just such geniuses at holoprogramming that the Cardassian is simply a great surgeon.)
I wondered, if this holographic version of a mass murderer is being held responsible for what the original person did and gets deleted for it in the end - despite being an obvious asset to the crew, especially the understaffed Sickbay that always seems to need the helmsman's help - how come no one ever questions Seven of Nine's frequent use of Borg technology or knowledge the Borg acquired by assimilating (i.e. killing) Species #xxx? Wouldn't that be the exact same dilemma? The knowledge is available only because people died at the hands of the Borg giving it up? Isn't that unethical as well?
Wouldn't the Krell hologram have been another interesting resocialization project for Voyager's crew, much like Seven? Or are there double standards?
Was B'Elanna bigoted in the extreme to back off from medical assistance because her doctor's assistant looked like a Cardassian? (She didn't wait for confirmation that he (respectively the Cardassian he was modelled on) had actually done something eveil...)
Any thoughts about this?
I admired what Jeri Taylor was trying to say here, talking about the ethics of profiting from knowledge that was gained by the killing of innocent people. However, I felt that the conceit of using a hologram undermined the whole idea. How could a hologram programmed by the Doctor be held responsible for what the person on who it was modeled did?
(As an aside, many good and valid questions about many other problematic aspects of the episode, including how the hologram could be so perfect, are raised in this review here:
http://www.jammersreviews.com/st-voy/s5/nothing.php
But I would like to stick to the above for now and accept that Harry Kim and the Doctor are just such geniuses at holoprogramming that the Cardassian is simply a great surgeon.)
I wondered, if this holographic version of a mass murderer is being held responsible for what the original person did and gets deleted for it in the end - despite being an obvious asset to the crew, especially the understaffed Sickbay that always seems to need the helmsman's help - how come no one ever questions Seven of Nine's frequent use of Borg technology or knowledge the Borg acquired by assimilating (i.e. killing) Species #xxx? Wouldn't that be the exact same dilemma? The knowledge is available only because people died at the hands of the Borg giving it up? Isn't that unethical as well?
Wouldn't the Krell hologram have been another interesting resocialization project for Voyager's crew, much like Seven? Or are there double standards?
Was B'Elanna bigoted in the extreme to back off from medical assistance because her doctor's assistant looked like a Cardassian? (She didn't wait for confirmation that he (respectively the Cardassian he was modelled on) had actually done something eveil...)
Any thoughts about this?