Eddington's vitriolic assessment of The Federation
- Thread starter Ragitsu
- Start date
From LD's "Reflections":
Brad Boimler said:
The Doctor didn't spend seven years in the Delta Quadrant for yous to question his agency! HE HAS RIGHTS!
Of course he does! But we have yet to see Federation law actually acknowledge and respect the natural rights of sapient synthetic lifeforms like the various Emergency Medical Holograms, Soong-type androids, etc on anything other than an individual, case-by-case basis (or at least that was the case until the reforms passed at the end of PIC S1).
Saying that the Voyager crew was acting outside Federation law by conferring upon the Doctor the authority to make command decisions is a moral indictment of Federation law, not an indictment of the Voyager crew.
It's interesting though. They've had the case of Data - ruled to have his rights, they've seen the example of holographic Moriarty becoming sentient, and they don't have any provisions for the eventuality of this happening again in law or code?
But the rights that Data has been established to possess are extremely limited. the JAG in "The Measure of a Man" did not actually rule that Data is a sapient being with full personhood and equal rights. Rather, she ruled that Data is not the property of Starfleet and has the right to resign his commission. That's it. Similarly, the arbitrator in "Author, Author" did not rule that the Doctor is a legal person, but rather ruled that he was a legal artist under the Federation Constitution's Guarantees, and therefore could enjoy the right to control the publication of his holonovel. We know that the exocomp named Peanut Hamper was given a Starfleet commission in the early 2380s, but there's no reason to assume her commission came with any more legal recognition of personhood or rights than Data's.
So until 2399, the Federation's legal precedents on sapient A.I. rights have been extremely limited and have never, that we know of, included finding that these artificial intelligences are sapient persons entitled to full equal rights with sapient biological lifeforms.
I suspect part of the reason the Federation legal system was reticent to do that, was because the federation uses a lot of technology that either already is AI, or could become it with little to no intervention.
So it’s a massively destabilizing action.
So it’s a massively destabilizing action.
In the Star Trek universe, computer programming inevitably leans towards life the same way amino acids lean towards life?
So... the Federation refuses to recognize the natural rights of Data and the Doctor because then it wouldn't be able to use compulsory uncompensated labor from other sapient AIs?
Gosh, can't imagine why the Maquis might want to declare independence.
So... the Federation refuses to recognize the natural rights of Data and the Doctor because then it wouldn't be able to use compulsory uncompensated labor from other sapient AIs?
Gosh, can't imagine why the Maquis might want to declare independence.
AFAIK, the Maquis didn't champion AI rights.
You don't have to champion A.I. rights to recognize a pretty fundamental moral hypocrisy.
Hm..."Paradise Lost" predates "For The Cause"; either Starfleet took that lesson to heart or they considered the Maquis small potatoes compared to the Changeling threat.
As well they should be. The Dominion were an existential threat, while the Maquis were a political thorn.
Of course. The fact that they didn't adopt the strict procedures we witnessed during "Paradise Lost" elsewhere - in an attempt to extirpate Changeling infiltrators - leads me to believe that they wouldn't have gone above and beyond to ferret out Maquis and Maquis sympathizers (who were problematic but nowhere close to an existential threat).
And don't forget hijacking the industrial replicators that were intended for Cardassia.
Shooting a senior officer is probably a felony all by itself, even if it was on stun.