Altruism???!!!

[Cheapjack]

Star Trek is filled with messages.

Bob Justman said it was a morality show.

It depicts a better world, brought about by altruism.

Look at the first opening shot of the bridge - it depicts a multi-ethnic crew.

In how many Star Trek episodes do they visit worlds in a bad state and say, 'We nearly ended up like you, but we avoided it.' ?

It's obvious.

Read the Whitfield book. I'm not going to paraphrase it.

The danger as I see it, is it COULD degenerate into a Star Was type show, just designed to make money with big special effects.

If certain people want to watch it for the space battles, good luck to them, but they're missing the point.

 

[Amaris]

Star Trek is filled with messages.

Bob Justman said it was a morality show.

It depicts a better world, brought about by altruism.

Look at the first opening shot of the bridge - it depicts a multi-ethnic crew.

In how many Star Trek episodes do they visit worlds in a bad state and say, 'We nearly ended up like you, but we avoided it.' ?

It's obvious.

Read the Whitfield book. I'm not going to paraphrase it.

The danger as I see it, is it COULD degenerate into a Star Was type show, just designed to make money with big special effects.

If certain people want to watch it for the space battles, good luck to them, but they're missing the point.

You've really.

Got to stop.

With the single statement sentences.

And spaces between each line.

Because it makes you look inflexible.

And it makes you look like a bit of a jerk.

Because you're being very obstinate.

Every time you say "it's obvious!"

You lose another person who may have been willing to listen.

Just some advice.

J.

 

[Cheapjack]

I'm sorry if I come across as a bit stubborn, but it staggers me to see that some people have not realised this.

Just of the top of my head:

The Prime Directive is altruistic. If they acted as 20th Century humans, they would be selling less advanced cultures weapons or cigarettes. OK, Kirk broke it a few times, but the principle is there.

In 'The Devil in the Dark', they could have killed the Horta. It was killing them. They didn't. They were altruistic.

Kirk displays altruism in 'Charlie X'. Charlie is harmful to humans, but Kirk argues that they have a duty to him, to look after him.

Kirk displays altruism or loyalty, in 'Galilieo Seven'. He risks his command to save Spock and Spock likewise in Court Martial in ST6.

We're debating the obvious here. If you don't realise Star Trek is a morality tale, you've missed the point.

Anyway, ST11 must be some good. Nimoy wouldn't do it if it was just an effects film, like Star Wars, designed to make as much money as possible.He doesn't need the money.

 

[Cheapjack]

...also:

The most popular episode of all time: 'City on the Edge of Forever'.

Kirk loses the love of his life to save the world.

Also: Arena, Court Martial, Space Seed,This side of Paradise and a Taste of Armageddon are all cases where the Enterprise and her crew are put at risk but save the situation or the world despite chance of harm to themselves.

The TNG does this in spades too. 'All Good things' springs to mind. Sisko and Janeway are guilty as hell of this trait. They're heroes! Heroes are selfless.

 

[Cheapjack]

...need I add the crew's risk of being burned alive in a slingshot around the Sun in ST4, or their risk of being imprisoned on Rura Penthe in ST6?

Picard is put on trial for the whole of humanity in Encounter at Farpoint!

 

[SonicRanger]

...also:

The most popular episode of all time: 'City on the Edge of Forever'.

Kirk loses the love of his life to save the world.

Also: Arena, Court Martial, Space Seed,This side of Paradise and a Taste of Armageddon are all cases where the Enterprise and her crew are put at risk but save the situation or the world despite chance of harm to themselves.

The TNG does this in spades too. 'All Good things' springs to mind. Sisko and Janeway are guilty as hell of this trait. They're heroes! Heroes are selfless.

Yes, they save Earth/the Federation/the universe, but in many of those cases, it is also in their own best self-interests. Also it is their duty, which is not the same as altruism.

 

[SonicRanger]

Picard is put on trial for the whole of humanity in Encounter at Farpoint!

Again it is unclear how this case, and some of these others, is altruism. A godlike being snatches you from your reality, puts your life in danger, even points a gun at you and threatens to shoot unless you plead "guilty" -- you're going to plead "guilty" on behalf of humanity to save your own life.

 

[Cheapjack]

What about Kirk in Generations? At first, he said he had no duty, he was out of uniform. Then, he gave his life.

In ST4, they demonstrated altruism by returning to Earth to face trial. They could have run. They did it again by risking getting fried to save the Earth

You have to be altruistic to serve in any force, even today. Altruism exists even today.

Sorry folks, but Star Trek is about altruism. The space battles are the vehicle for the message.

Gene Roddenberry: 'Here was a chance to go to far off planets, with little polka-dotted people if necessary and talk about love,god, war,sex, all the excitement of the human condition, and maybe the censors would let it pass because it all seemed so make-believe.'

It would have been in their best self interest in ST4 not to return. And they were not in the service any more, so it wasn't their duty.

Kirk was out of uniform, literally, when he saved spock in ST3.

It has always been pointed out in Star Trek that you can resign or defy an order. Why do they follow them? Because they're altruistic. It's not a dirty word.

Picard is put on trial for the whole of humanity in Encounter at Farpoint!

Again it is unclear how this case, and some of these others, is altruism. A godlike being snatches you from your reality, puts your life in danger, even points a gun at you and threatens to shoot unless you plead "guilty" -- you're going to plead "guilty" on behalf of humanity to save your own life.

But Picard risks getting shot by putting in a provision! And he feels he must do this to save humanity's record, again altruism.

Reagan and Thatcher have so much to answer for! Altruism is denied today, even when we have suicide bombers and soldiers risking their lives to fight them.

ST4- 'You and your crew have saved this planet from it's own short-sightedness and we are forever in your debt'

It's really evident in ST4. It is demonstrated several times.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Judging from what Gene Roddenberry has said about Star Trek and mainly from watching it for 35 years, I would have to disagree.

Star Trek is about altruism. It's obvious. I saw that when I was seven and I see it now.

Read 'The Making of Star Trek', by Steven Whitfield and read the Roddenberry quotes. At The very least it's about a better world, brought about by altruism.

I don't care what people have written and said about Trek, only about what's actually on the screen. And frankly I care a great deal more about what was in TOS than the movies or modern series.

Altruism is usually a pernicious "principle" in any event - it's most often cover to call for other people to sacrifice for a "common good" that's being defined by the advocate. People should focus more on generosity in our own lives and less on what we think "the people" or "the public" or "joe sixpack" ought to be giving up in order to save the world.

 

[Eric Cheung]

Star Trek is filled with messages.

Exactly, it has many messages. No one really said that Star Trek lacked altruism, just that it's not the only thing it's about. That would be impossible after over 700 hours of Trek. Even by accident several other themes would crop up, as JJ said (I'm paraphrasing) it's about the conflict of emotion versus logic, it's about family. Orci has talked about showing how this is not only a positive view of the future but that it's a positive view of our own future. Does that include altruism? Yes, but not in total.

The danger as I see it, is it COULD degenerate into a Star Was type show, just designed to make money with big special effects.

If certain people want to watch it for the space battles, good luck to them, but they're missing the point.

No one in any interview has suggested it would be just about space battles. Hell, Star Wars isn't just about space battles. It's simpler, but because it's about the dichotimization of good and evil. It's about ordinary people coming together to be a part of something greater.

I don't think you have to worry about Star Trek meaning more than just space battles and McDonald's toys.

 

[Sector 7]

I am, it's obvious.

One of those people, obviously.

That you, obviously, have lost.

I, it's obvious, was reading what you wrote.

But, it's obvious, you will not be open to other views.

So, obviously, I'm outta here.

 

[Cheapjack]

Stephen Whitfield, 'The Making of Star Trek':

'On the surface, it would appear to be nothing more than simple space adventure stuff. But, like a Trojan horse, it would contain a surprise. Gene was certain the TV audience was not the collection of nitwits(?) the studio thought them to be. Here was a chance to talk about God, war sex, politics,all of the human condition'.

'Gene is a man very much concerned FOR mankind.'

I'm sorry.

Mr Spook.

I think.

I'm right.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

^
^^Well, you're basically right about the Altruism of Star Trek being obvious. However, the degree of altruism exhibited by the Star Trek protagonists is so common among film heroes that it doesn't really warrant being singled out.

One could say that almost EVERY modern movie hero has some basic altruistic tendency -- that's one of the definitions of movie hero: doing things to help others without regard for himself. It isn't really much of a stretch to say that the Star Trek heroes also exhibit some altruistic tendendies. However, they aren't exceptionally so. Their actions are not predicated on thinking about what effect they will have on the long-term human condition (even if GR said so, he didn't do a very good job translating that to the screen.)

I don't see Kirk and Spock doing things strictly to further the cause of humanity (or 'Vulcanity' ) for the long-run. They usually do things to save the day "in the here and now". Admittedly, they do things to help others without concern for their own safety -- and that IS certainly heroic and could be considered altruistic. However, the same could be said for Han Solo, James Bond, Harry Potter, Sam Witwicky, Lara Croft, Peter Parker, Indiana Jones, Bruce Wayne and even Jason Bourne to some degree.

Is Star Trek about humans in a future full of hope and positive ideals? Sure. Does that mean altruism is a driving force behind Star Trek's storylines and its 'tone'? Not really...not to a greater degree than other films.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Stephen Whitfield, 'The Making of Star Trek':

'On the surface, it would appear to be nothing more than simple space adventure stuff. But, like a Trojan horse, it would contain a surprise. Gene was certain the TV audience was not the collection of nitwits(?) the studio thought them to be. Here was a chance to talk about God, war sex, politics,all of the human condition'.

Which doesn't make it true, nor are these assertions relevant to what's actually in TOS.

Appeals to authority on such a subject are meaningless.

Next.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Sorry folks, but Star Trek is about altruism. The space battles are the vehicle for the message.

Uhhh.... nobody said anything about the space battles being the basis of Star Trek. Never underestimate other posters. They're usually sensitive, intelligent people.

 

[Nardpuncher]

It sounds like the OP is trying to put together a college paper with our help.

I've seen the "You missed the point of Trek" schtick too often these last few weeks here. I can't remember which threads, but people really like to use that as an insult. Then they guess you're Republican.

 

[Cheapjack]

Starship:

I didn't give just quotes from Roddenberry, I gave examples too.

As to Kirk and Spock just responding to crises - what about 'A Private Little War'??

They quite specifically mentioned that humanity had matured and avoided extinction by becoming long sighted. They said that in 'Whom Gods Destroy',too. The Prime Directive is altruistic, they could exploit races like the Ferengi and the Klingons do, but they don't. They tolerate differences. They don't argue ove differences in politics or social differences or economic systems - see TNG's 'The Last Outpost'. They do this because they believe that people as a whole will be better off in the long run - altruism in other words.

Star Trek is so chock full of altruism it's difficult to say that that's not what it's mainly about. ST4 is almost totally about it.

I've had this argument about altruism in general with people who are practically sociopaths. You just can't tell some people that not everyone is as selfish as them.

I'm sure this element will not be missing in ST11. They aren't that dumb.

Altruism exists now. The 9/11 bombers were altruists. The people who are fighting them are. Kennedy was an altruist - 'Ask not...'.

 

[Cheapjack]

'I don't see Kirk and Spock doing things strictly to further the cause of humanity (or 'Vulcanity' ) for the long-run. They usually do things to save the day "in the here and now". Admittedly, they do things to help others without concern for their own safety'.

'You and your crew have saved this planet from it's own short-sightedness' - Star Trek 4

'We will not be the instigators of war on the Eve of Universal peace' - ST6

'Don't lecture me about duty. I was out saving the Universe when your grandfather was in Diapers' - ST7

'Alright! I agree, humans HAVE been savage, But test US, test, whether this is presently true of humans!' -Encounter at Farpoint.

I think someposters here have intermittent hearing or sight problems.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

'I don't see Kirk and Spock doing things strictly to further the cause of humanity (or 'Vulcanity' ) for the long-run. They usually do things to save the day "in the here and now". Admittedly, they do things to help others without concern for their own safety'.

'You and your crew have saved this planet from it's own short-sightedness' - Star Trek 4

'We will not be the instigators of war on the Eve of Universal peace' - ST6

'Don't lecture me about duty. I was out saving the Universe when your grandfather was in Diapers' - ST7

'Alright! I agree, humans HAVE been savage, But test US, test, whether this is presently true of humans!' -Encounter at Farpoint.

I think someposters here have intermittent hearing or sight problems.

Wow. Congratulations, you've WON the DEBATE!

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Starship:
As to Kirk and Spock just responding to crises - what about 'A Private Little War'??

The Federation was engaged in a Cold War type of competition with the Klingons - the comparison was specifically drawn. In "A Private Little War" Kirk sacrifices the local culture's values for the self-interest of the Federation.

They quite specifically mentioned that humanity had matured and avoided extinction by becoming long sighted. They said that in 'Whom Gods Destroy',too.

Kirk liked to make speechs - his behavior in episode after episode contradicted what he said.

The Prime Directive is altruistic, they could exploit races like the Ferengi and the Klingons do, but they don't.

Funny, since almost every time the PD was brought up in TOS it was because Kirk was about to violate it on the basis of either some rationalization or his attempts to protect his ship. God, if our nuclear submarine commanders showed the same "respect" for our cultural ideals and foreign policy that Kirk did we'd have had a nuclear war decades ago.

You just can't tell some people that not everyone is as selfish as them.

There's nothing altruistic or unselfish in being so ego-involved with one's point of view that having it challenged makes one angry.

Altruism exists now. The 9/11 bombers were altruists.

Thanks for making my point about how evil altruism often is.

Kennedy was an altruist - 'Ask not...'.

Kennedy gave a speech urging sacrifice by other people. That does not make Kennedy an altruistic man. No altruist has ever been elected President, and none ever will.

There is much sacrifice and, arguably, there are sometimes altruistic actions portrayed as positive in "Star Trek" - as in most fiction outside of the underinformed and bombastic ramblings of Ayn Rand. That is quite different from asserting that "Star Trek" is "all about altruism."