What is the rationale behind the trend of novels to refer to the calendar year as 2381 CE versus AD? Are we so politcally correct aht we can't say AD anymore? Are readers that offended by AD, and if so why? I'm not a fan of this movement in general, and not just in Trek, to remove any reference to God, and no I am not talking about religion but God. We can keep the year but not the signifcance of it? Elucidate please, and preferably with intelligent discourse.
AD versus Common Era
- Thread starter Ultramann
- Start date
- Status
It doesn't make any difference whether they refer to the year as AD or CE.
What makes you think this has anything to do with God? If you're so concerned about intelligent discourse, you should leave out the inflammatory rhetoric about "political correctness" and people being "offended."
Christians aren't the only people in the world. There are nearly seven billion people living on the planet Earth today, and at most 2.2 billion, about a third, are Christian. So why should Star Trek, a series which is supposed to be about all of humanity rather than just Christendom, use a calendrical label like "Anno Domini?" Sure, it's still the same calendar, but that calendar is widely accepted around the world for historical reasons, and there's no reason why it has to be designated with religious or Christian imagery.
It's ridiculous to say that God is somehow being excluded just because not everyone on the planet shares your God. You're free to believe whatever you want, but so is everyone else, and if other people who aren't Christians prefer to use a secular label for their calendar, that doesn't hurt you in any way. Inclusiveness is not intolerance. You're perfectly free to use "AD" in your own life and affairs. But it's not appropriate for something more universal in its focus, such as formal scholarship or a science fiction franchise set in a globalized, secular future.
Christians aren't the only people in the world. There are nearly seven billion people living on the planet Earth today, and at most 2.2 billion, about a third, are Christian. So why should Star Trek, a series which is supposed to be about all of humanity rather than just Christendom, use a calendrical label like "Anno Domini?" Sure, it's still the same calendar, but that calendar is widely accepted around the world for historical reasons, and there's no reason why it has to be designated with religious or Christian imagery.
It's ridiculous to say that God is somehow being excluded just because not everyone on the planet shares your God. You're free to believe whatever you want, but so is everyone else, and if other people who aren't Christians prefer to use a secular label for their calendar, that doesn't hurt you in any way. Inclusiveness is not intolerance. You're perfectly free to use "AD" in your own life and affairs. But it's not appropriate for something more universal in its focus, such as formal scholarship or a science fiction franchise set in a globalized, secular future.
Even as a believer, the fact that the acuracy of the AD dating system is highly questionable makes me somewhat uncaring about the idea of CE, even though I'm sure the moving force behind it is hyper-political correctness and hatred of Christianity.
^"Hatred" has nothing to do with it! Again, inclusion is not intolerance. It's simply acknowledging that most human beings are not Christian, and they have a right to be given consideration too. You don't have to "hate" Christianity in order to assert your right to disagree with it, or object to having it forced down your throat. The problem is when self-important ethnocentrists insist they're somehow being persecuted just because they're not being allowed to pretend the whole universe revolves around them. Honestly, how can anyone be a Star Trek fan and still think that way? The whole point of the series is that differences in identity and belief are not a basis for hatred, but a basis for curiosity and sharing.
"Hatred" seems a bit strong. More like a sincere attempt to be inclusive and not privilege one particular religion over another . . . .
The way I see it, CE is not anti-Christian, just neutral. Which seems perfectily reasonable to me.
Last edited:
This will all be moot when we switch to stardates.
Except for those darn Bajorans who keep insisting on dating everything according to the Prophets . . . .
Exactly. How can it be wrong to be neutral?
Besides, the period of history that we call the Common Era features widespread global travel, commerce, and cultural exchange, and the rise of global cultures and religions, whereas the period Before the Common Era was characterized by more local, isolated cultures and less widespread travel and trade. So "Common Era" works as a reasonable, meaningful description of the era we live in -- a time when there is more common interaction among human cultures than there was in previous eras.
BCE/CE is actually the international standard, though the use of these abbreviations remains uncommon in the United States.
For an in-universe reason, I'd suggest that the post-religion human society Roddenberry envisioned would retain the Gregorian dating system for cultural reasons but use the BCE/CE notation rather than the BC/AD notation because the religious reasons no longer held cultural force.
I really don't care what term is used. You are only angry at things that are a threat, and this is not a threat to me. So therefore I have no reason to scoff at it.
WIN.
I'm a full on atheist who doesn't care either way. The use of either "AD" or "CE" does establish a subtle political claim in the critical discourse analysis sense, but I suppose keeping the Christ-centered Gregorian calender but using CE could be a compromise in the middle. If someone can go through all of the filmed canon Star Trek and demonstrate clear evidence that AD was used consistently and a majority of the time over CE, then I suppose the tie in work should reflect it.
Star Trek is actually on the right track though by suggesting a base 10 decimalized way of keeping time. I for one would be upset if the books suddenly adopted the Star Trek XI stardate system, which was apparently used on the Jellyfish from 2387. What's up with that one?
Star Trek is actually on the right track though by suggesting a base 10 decimalized way of keeping time. I for one would be upset if the books suddenly adopted the Star Trek XI stardate system, which was apparently used on the Jellyfish from 2387. What's up with that one?
Last edited:
Unless it's nuTrek stardates, in which case we're back to square one
.
I certainly didn't mean to insinuate that Trek authors who have used CE are only doing so because they hate Christianity. I was only referrring to the origins of the concept of CE over AD in our culture in general.
I don't have to agree with every theme of Star Trek or belief of Gene Roddenberry to like the shows. I mostly like it because I got into it as a kid and like to continue to follow the characters and worlds I've followed for 2 decades.
I certainly don't think all differences of identity and belief should be a basis for hatred, but that doesn't mean that all beliefs are equal and good. I'm not inclined to have a sense of curiosity and sharing when confronted with the identity and beliefs of a Satan worshipper, jihaddist, member of the Man-Boy Love Association, or parishioner of the Westboro Baptist Church. Everyone believes that some points of view are inherintly wrong. I'm not saying this has anything to do with the AD/CE debate though. Just felt like that needed to be pointed out.
The weird thing is though, that it doesn't make any sense to start the Common Era 2011 years ago. Nothing important politically, socially, technologically, commercially, or culturally happened that year that we can all agree marked the end of the last era and that start of our own. It only makes sense from a religious point of view. So if you were going to start a Common Era system, they should begin a completely new calendar, not co-opt someone elses.
The reason I don't really care about the CE thing is that it doesn't change any dates, and it's pretty funny because it doesn't make any logical sense.
"A.D." means "Anno Domini," which is Latin for, "in the year of our Lord," i.e., Jesus of Nazareth.
Well, he ain't my Lord, so I like it when I see the term "Common Era" instead.
Star Trek is not a Christian work of art, and has no obligation to pay respect to Christian concepts of natural hierarchy such as the idea that Jesus of Nazareth was or is anyone's Lord.
As for myself, I always use C.E./B.C.E. because it's unrealistic to try to develop an entirely different calender system for the entire Western world, but it's also unrealistic and disrespectful to assume that everyone in Western culture is a Christian.
And, by the way, DTI: Watching the Clock has made it clear that there are plenty of other calenders used alongside the Gregorian calender within the Federation. That's why the Stardate system is used Federation-wide.
- Status