The Measure of a Man

[sonak]

My two cents:



First, I think the premise is questionable, in that Starfleet would have considered the question of Data's sentience BEFORE he joined. This like having Data voluntarily join an organization as a member in good standing, and then YEARS LATER Starfleet says "Nope, now we're going to have a ruling to determine if you are our property."


Wait, WHAT????????


Secondly, I think Riker actually presents a more topical and better case. After all, Picard's references to slavery are moving, but not relevant to the question of Data's sentience since people don't consider say, computers to be enslaved. And he uses Data referring to himself as "I" as an argument, when a computer can easily be programmed to refer to itself as "I."


(Don't get me wrong, I like the character of Data a lot.)

 

[exodus]

I agree that it's a great episode. Seems to be one of the more universally liked eps by fans from what I can tell. It was very well done, and is definitely one of the major standout eps in a pretty weak season 2.

I thought Voyager did a pretty good job with it as well when they gave The Doctor pretty much the same treatment in "Author, Author".

I always found "Author, Author" a play on irony, more than the fight for rights. The Doc makes a play about how he's not seen as real, only to be denied his rights over his work because he isn't seen as real.


BTW, I just realized your avatar is of WEEN.
Very cool.

 

[DevilEyes]

My two cents:



First, I think the premise is questionable, in that Starfleet would have considered the question of Data's sentience BEFORE he joined. This like having Data voluntarily join an organization as a member in good standing, and then YEARS LATER Starfleet says "Nope, now we're going to have a ruling to determine if you are our property."


Wait, WHAT????????


Secondly, I think Riker actually presents a more topical and better case. After all, Picard's references to slavery are moving, but not relevant to the question of Data's sentience since people don't consider say, computers to be enslaved. And he uses Data referring to himself as "I" as an argument, when a computer can easily be programmed to refer to itself as "I."

Not really. Picard presented as topical and more convincing argument, since - before he moved to the issue of slavery - he first presented evidence that Data was sentient, that he had his own thoughts, sentiments and desires (his desire to be recognized as a free being, loyalty and friendships with the crew, feelings for Tasha...)

From what I remember, Riker's argument was basically just that Data was a machine because he was made of non-organic parts that could be removed without him feeling any pain, and that he could be turned off. None of which speaks to the point of sentience at all. Yes, Data is a machine, but nobody was questioning that, the issue was if he was a sentient machine.

 

[Joeman]

I always found "Author, Author" a play on irony, more than the fight for rights. The Doc makes a play about how he's not seen as real, only to be denied his rights over his work because he isn't seen as real.

I hear ya. I just meant that they're quite similar. Both are artificial beings with their rights in question, at least to an extent. It's kind of like Voyager's "Tuvix" and Enterprise's "Similitude". I just can't help but notice the obvious parallels between them.

BTW, I just realized your avatar is of WEEN.
Very cool.

hehe Charlie "Brown". I love it.

One other person mentioned that not long after I joined here. Like I told that person, now I automatically know that you're cool.

 

[Joshonator]

Derek Jacobi's 1980 BBC version of Hamlet.

Nothing can touch that performance. It's a shame that it's impossible to get a copy of it

 

[exodus]

hehe Charlie "Brown". I love it.

One other person mentioned that not long after I joined here. Like I told that person, now I automatically know that you're cool.

I try.

 

[exodus]

My two cents:



First, I think the premise is questionable, in that Starfleet would have considered the question of Data's sentience BEFORE he joined.


Secondly, I think Riker actually presents a more topical and better case. After all, Picard's references to slavery are moving, but not relevant to the question of Data's sentience since people don't consider say, computers to be enslaved. And he uses Data referring to himself as "I" as an argument, when a computer can easily be programmed to refer to itself as "I."


(Don't get me wrong, I like the character of Data a lot.)

Good counter arguement.
Riker would be proud.

 

[Non-Beard Riker]

The points Riker made were non-sense, just as the basic set-up of the story.

 

[Willieck]

My two cents:



First, I think the premise is questionable, in that Starfleet would have considered the question of Data's sentience BEFORE he joined.


Secondly, I think Riker actually presents a more topical and better case. After all, Picard's references to slavery are moving, but not relevant to the question of Data's sentience since people don't consider say, computers to be enslaved. And he uses Data referring to himself as "I" as an argument, when a computer can easily be programmed to refer to itself as "I."


(Don't get me wrong, I like the character of Data a lot.)

Good counter arguement.
Riker would be proud.

But surely that is the whole point of the episode. Apparently Data's sentience had NOT been considered beforehand. It had probably just not cropped up but even if, the the sake of argument, it had, then it had certainly not been the subject of a legal process such as the one which took place on the Enterprise.

Secondly, of course computers are not enslaved; they are definitely machines whereas IF Data was classed as sentient and IF other "Datas" were created then if they were not allowed free will they would indeed be enslaved.

 

[exodus]

My two cents:



First, I think the premise is questionable, in that Starfleet would have considered the question of Data's sentience BEFORE he joined.


Secondly, I think Riker actually presents a more topical and better case. After all, Picard's references to slavery are moving, but not relevant to the question of Data's sentience since people don't consider say, computers to be enslaved. And he uses Data referring to himself as "I" as an argument, when a computer can easily be programmed to refer to itself as "I."


(Don't get me wrong, I like the character of Data a lot.)

Good counter arguement.
Riker would be proud.

But surely that is the whole point of the episode. Apparently Data's sentience had NOT been considered beforehand. It had probably just not cropped up but even if, the the sake of argument, it had, then it had certainly not been the subject of a legal process such as the one which took place on the Enterprise.

Secondly, of course computers are not enslaved; they are definitely machines whereas IF Data was classed as sentient and IF other "Datas" were created then if they were not allowed free will they would indeed be enslaved.

I just find the fact that never questioned that aspect of Data very odd. Take for example C-3PO in Star Wars. Despite all that we know of him & R2, Lucas states that they aren't sentient. Yet, Data acts no different than C-3PO.
We've seen even as far back as TOS, if they come across anything that makes first contact with them they question it's sentience, even if it's a nebula or nanites but not Data? If Data's rights of equality have to be questioned in a court of law, then does he really have free will? The trial even ended with the question: "what is Data?" If C-3PO is not sentient due to him being property, then if Data's civil rights are in question, is he property too? If Picard hadn't stepped up, what would have stopped Starfleet from dismantling him? If it hadn't been for the trial, it seems like Data wouldn't have any civil rights.

...but I guess that's a part of human arrogance. As in, if it looks like us then it must be like us and never to question it unless given reason otherwise.

 

[Warped9]

My two cents:



First, I think the premise is questionable, in that Starfleet would have considered the question of Data's sentience BEFORE he joined. This like having Data voluntarily join an organization as a member in good standing, and then YEARS LATER Starfleet says "Nope, now we're going to have a ruling to determine if you are our property."


Wait, WHAT????????


Secondly, I think Riker actually presents a more topical and better case. After all, Picard's references to slavery are moving, but not relevant to the question of Data's sentience since people don't consider say, computers to be enslaved. And he uses Data referring to himself as "I" as an argument, when a computer can easily be programmed to refer to itself as "I."


(Don't get me wrong, I like the character of Data a lot.)

This is a good point. I like TMOAM immensely as a well told story, but it has a conceptual flaw though one already established in the series.

Data has been with Starfleet and amongst humanity for several years before we meet him aboard the Enterprise. Many of the things he experienced in the series he should already have encountered earlier. He should have been a more fleshed out character before we meet him. But as Data was introduced there were a lot of gaps in his understanding of humanity that didn't make sense after already so many years involved with humans.

Also, I agree the question of his sentience should already have been addressed when he joined Starfleet.

 

[exodus]

My two cents:



First, I think the premise is questionable, in that Starfleet would have considered the question of Data's sentience BEFORE he joined. This like having Data voluntarily join an organization as a member in good standing, and then YEARS LATER Starfleet says "Nope, now we're going to have a ruling to determine if you are our property."


Wait, WHAT????????


Secondly, I think Riker actually presents a more topical and better case. After all, Picard's references to slavery are moving, but not relevant to the question of Data's sentience since people don't consider say, computers to be enslaved. And he uses Data referring to himself as "I" as an argument, when a computer can easily be programmed to refer to itself as "I."


(Don't get me wrong, I like the character of Data a lot.)

This is a good point. I like TMOAM immensely as a well told story, but it has a conceptual flaw though one already established in the series.

Data has been with Starfleet and amongst humanity for several years before we meet him aboard the Enterprise. Many of the things he experienced in the series he should already have encountered earlier. He should have been a more fleshed out character before we meet him. But as Data was introduced there were a lot of gaps in his understanding of humanity that didn't make sense after already so many years involved with humans.

Also, I agree the question of his sentience should already have been addressed when he joined Starfleet.

Exactly.

While I understand it made for great drama to "grow up" with Data, for him to go thru the Academy full of young cadets and still not understand humor? They must of had a field day with him.

 

[Red Ranger]

My two cents:



First, I think the premise is questionable, in that Starfleet would have considered the question of Data's sentience BEFORE he joined. This like having Data voluntarily join an organization as a member in good standing, and then YEARS LATER Starfleet says "Nope, now we're going to have a ruling to determine if you are our property."


Wait, WHAT????????


Secondly, I think Riker actually presents a more topical and better case. After all, Picard's references to slavery are moving, but not relevant to the question of Data's sentience since people don't consider say, computers to be enslaved. And he uses Data referring to himself as "I" as an argument, when a computer can easily be programmed to refer to itself as "I."


(Don't get me wrong, I like the character of Data a lot.)

This is a good point. I like TMOAM immensely as a well told story, but it has a conceptual flaw though one already established in the series.

Data has been with Starfleet and amongst humanity for several years before we meet him aboard the Enterprise. Many of the things he experienced in the series he should already have encountered earlier. He should have been a more fleshed out character before we meet him. But as Data was introduced there were a lot of gaps in his understanding of humanity that didn't make sense after already so many years involved with humans.

Also, I agree the question of his sentience should already have been addressed when he joined Starfleet.

Exactly.

While I understand it made for great drama to "grow up" with Data, for him to go thru the Academy full of young cadets and still not understand humor? They must of had a field day with him.

I always wanted to write a fanfic about Data where we find that sometime before he joined Enterprise, he was involved in an accident that destroyed a part of his memory, and that part was his "humor subroutine," erasing what he learned over the course of a few decades about human humor as well as other human expressions/idioms. My fanfic would deal with some officers doubting Data could be reintegrated into Starfleet as a result, but Picard poo-poohing that notion.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Christopher L. Bennett addressed the question about Data's development in his novel The Buried Age, which takes place between the time Picard lost the Stargazer and when he took command of the Enterprise. As I recall, Data was largely sequestered in solitary assignments for most of his Starfleet career because he made the humans around him rather uncomfortable.

 

[Warped9]

Christopher L. Bennett addressed the question about Data's development in his novel The Buried Age, which takes place between the time Picard lost the Stargazer and when he took command of the Enterprise. As I recall, Data was largely sequestered in solitary assignments for most of his Starfleet career because he made the humans around him rather uncomfortable.

Hmm. This actually sounds like an interesting story. I may check this out.

 

[Forbin]

Derek Jacobi's 1980 BBC version of Hamlet.

Nothing can touch that performance. It's a shame that it's impossible to get a copy of it

You can!

It's available in a "tragedy-pack" from PBS.

The other plays in the pack pale in comparison

 

[Joshonator]

wow its really out in dvd, i'm gonna seriously consider getting this!

 

[Forbin]

I like that version so much, I once found out a friend at a video lab had access to a 3/4" U-Matic broadcast cassette copy, and begged him to dub it to VHS for me. It would only play on one of my VHS decks. GOD was I happy when I found it on DVD!!

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Christopher L. Bennett addressed the question about Data's development in his novel The Buried Age, which takes place between the time Picard lost the Stargazer and when he took command of the Enterprise. As I recall, Data was largely sequestered in solitary assignments for most of his Starfleet career because he made the humans around him rather uncomfortable.

Hmm. This actually sounds like an interesting story. I may check this out.

It's definitely a good story, Warped9, but keep in mind that it focuses mainly on Picard during the years preceeding TNG. Data doesn't show up until rather late in the novel, IIRC.

 

[Warped9]

Christopher L. Bennett addressed the question about Data's development in his novel The Buried Age, which takes place between the time Picard lost the Stargazer and when he took command of the Enterprise. As I recall, Data was largely sequestered in solitary assignments for most of his Starfleet career because he made the humans around him rather uncomfortable.

Hmm. This actually sounds like an interesting story. I may check this out.

It's definitely a good story, Warped9, but keep in mind that it focuses mainly on Picard during the years preceeding TNG. Data doesn't show up until rather late in the novel, IIRC.

That's not bad either.