I have decided that no Star Trek anywhere produced by anyone is worthy of the title "Star Trek". Star Trek, instead, in its platonic essence and idealist form is something to be aspired to-- and its earthly creations only share in this essence of "StarTrek-ness" but cannot embody it. Therefore, we should remain largely uncritical of these representations of what is it to be Star Trek and instead applaud their valiant attempts to obtain this level of greatness. Which leads me to my next point. Star Trek is actually God. Yes, I have come to the conclusion that all creation began with Star Trek. As such I consider TrekBBS a religion and each categorical separation denominations. The moderators of these forums are ministry leaders, and the average poster merely a lowly follower. WHO'S WITH ME
^^^^^^^ Okay, you've just got to stay indoors for awhile. Try some nice calming music on the CD player - Allman Brothers, perhaps - and maybe have a beer, then sleep it off. Things will be better for you tomorrow.
Indeed, Star Trek is God, for: I say Star Trek is the greatest TV series ever, and the greatest movie series, and the greatest novel series, and the greatest pop culture phenomenon - for simplicity's sake, let us define Star Trek as the greatest thing ever. Or, put differently, Star Trek is that than which nothing greater can be imagined. And yet, I have never actually perceived this great Star Trek. Indeed, on closer inspection, every series, movie, etc. has deep flaws. So then where did this conception of Trek (as the greatest thing that can be imagined) come from? For indeed, I do not have a concept of anything unless I have perceived it. Nor can it be a merely intellectual concept, for then it would not be so very great. Obviously, then, Star Trek itself implanted this concept within me, Trek itself being so very great after all. This, then, proves that there is a Star Trek, and that it is indeed so great. But St. Anselm makes this same proof of the existence of God. Since, then, God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived, and Star Trek is that than which nothing greater can be conceived, then Star Trek is God (If A=C, and B=C. then A=B.) QED Additionally: If indeed Star Trek exists only as an eidos, then in order to perceive it in the elysian fields one must reign in the black horse of desire for good Star Trek. Hence, only those who do not want good Trek (who incidentally cannot be those who complain about bad Star Trek, i.e. ENT, NEM, etc., since to reject a thing of inferior quality is to desire a thing of good quality) will ever perceive good Trek. All sophistry aside, this last part's probably true.
I thought you were going to complain that Star TREK implies a journey to a specific destination - space colonization - rather than what they actually do, flying around in circles. Amazing how little complaining there is about this kernel of pure illogic at the core of Star Trek. People certainly complain about every other conceivable thing. That gives me an idea for a great thread... "Complain about something ORIGINAL for a change."
No, Star Trek isn't Star Trek. Star Trek is Lost in Space. ...at least, it is if the Star Trek you're talking about is Voyager.
Well, I doubt this. Surely there are other better scifis out there. I think for me personally, I'd rather reread The Dune Series than read the Titan series. And saying that Nemesis is better than Star Wars: A New Hope is just plain silly. At least Darth Vader was a good villian. So, not only can we imagine greater, in some cases, we've done better. [/QUOTE]And yet, I have never actually perceived this great Star Trek. Indeed, on closer inspection, every series, movie, etc. has deep flaws. So then where did this conception of Trek (as the greatest thing that can be imagined) come from? For indeed, I do not have a concept of anything unless I have perceived it. Nor can it be a merely intellectual concept, for then it would not be so very great. Obviously, then, Star Trek itself implanted this concept within me, Trek itself being so very great after all. This, then, proves that there is a Star Trek, and that it is indeed so great. [/QUOTE] It's called desire. It's like falling in love, you overlook the flaws because you desire it. All in the world know the beauty of the beautiful, and in doing this they have (the idea of) what ugliness is; they all know the skill of the skilful, and in doing this they have (the idea of) what the want of skill is. So it is that existence and non-existence give birth the one to (the idea of) the other; that difficulty and ease produce the one (the idea of) the other; that length and shortness fashion out the one the figure of the other; that (the ideas of) height and lowness arise from the contrast of the one with the other; that the musical notes and tones become harmonious through the relation of one with another; and that being before and behind give the idea of one following another. (Tao, Tao Te Ching (J. Legge tr))
Wait, wait, wait. Is it the Demiurge, or is it merely one of the gods? Because if it's the latter, then the flaws make sense... but the Demiurge is completely flawless. Doesn't gel. I am so utterly sick of the chiaroscuro in the Berman-era Star Trek. It's so soft and bland. It was more evocative in the original series, but even there it was beset but absurdly pastel colours.
Which is of course why its really about the humans involved and the dare I say "drama" then "exploration" (any exploration is about inside human to human stuff not which star system they're in) or mmmm ah "moving forward..." Sharr
Fine aspire to it, but I think that aspiring to create something like Trek must produce something unlike Trek, for Trek was unlike what came before it. Thus a blind copy of trek is the most untreklike thing imaginable. (/zen) The Demiurge is the ignorant got who created matter and thus mucked everything up. The true god is SOPHIA, who created YALDABOATH the demiurge. Most of the time, YALDABOATH is identified as the god of the old testement. Temis the Vorta said: That gives me an idea for a great thread... "Complain about something ORIGINAL for a change." [/QUOTE] I am so utterly sick of the chiaroscuro in the Berman-era Star Trek. It's so soft and bland. It was more evocative in the original series, but even there it was beset but absurdly pastel colours. [/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] I find the single bathroom on the entire Enterprise D to be rediculous. I mean there are 1000 crew members and their families. Do you have any idea how long that line would be?
Wrong Demiurge. Danoz mentioned Platonic idealism, so I was referring to the Demiurge of the Timaeus, who is quite the perfect being, thank you very much. I believe that account is closer to the Gnostic Demiurge.