Is Troi ethical?

[Shawnster]

It's the same thing that an intuitive person could do by looking at body language, reading between the lines of what someone said or didn't say, or listening to their hunches, only more so.

We don't know when we're being studied or observed, but there is only so much a person can tell about us by watching us normally without technical aids or a higher level of access. I suppose it could be considered an invasion of privacy, but maybe that's regarded in extreme circumstances like entering a house without a search warrant because you hear screaming. If something is going on, a captain needs to know for the needs of the many on his ship and in the Federation/Starfleet.

I going to disagree with this.

An intuitive person is observing without intruding. They are observing what is being broadcast or put out there for everyone to see. Sometimes an intuitive person gets it wrong.

In contrast, a Betazoid's ability is intrusive. It intrudes on the hidden thoughts and emotions of others. The difference would be seeing a present or a box and actually peeking inside the box.

Because the above are conscious actions taken to trap someone. Betazoids are using what is a normal sense for their people. To ask them to turn it off would be like asking a human to turn off their hearing.

This is a good point. Similar to someone accidentally picking up the phone and hearing private conversations vs. intentionally eavesdropping. If Betazoid's senses are passive and cannot be regulated or turned off, then there is no intent behind Troi picking up on emotions.

However, even if the ability is passive and cannot be turned off, ethics might dictate the Betazoid keep their big mouth shut. Choosing to speak or keep silent is an active decision, not a passive ability. Revealing the thoughts or emotions of another individual is a choice.

That's where the ethics ultimately comes into play. Is revealing private information ethical? If private thoughts are private, and a Betazoid (or some other telepath) learns this private information by accident or without intent, then what gives them the right to share that information? If a telepath needs to actively choose to read these thoughts or emotions, what gives them the right to peer into another person's private thoughts and feelings without consent?

Ethics comes down to consent, control, and choice. If a person can control their ability to learn information that would otherwise be private, and if said person did not receive consent (or legal authorization such as a warrant), then is it ethical for that person to choose to learn and/or reveal that information?

 

[BillJ]

However, even if the ability is passive and cannot be turned off, ethics might dictate the Betazoid keep their big mouth shut. Choosing to speak or keep silent is an active decision, not a passive ability. Revealing the thoughts or emotions of another individual is a choice.

Another point is whether Betazoids are blabbing everything that they come across, or are they filtering out anything that isn't relevant to a situation.

Tomalok is going to come across the Neutral Zone is pertinent information, Tomalok has massive credit card debt isn't.

 

[BillJ]

An interesting side question...

Can the Federation compel Betazoids testify based on what they sensed?

 

[Farscape One]

An interesting side question...

Can the Federation compel Betazoids testify based on what they sensed?

Good question.

I actually am not sure that what they scan telepathically could even be admissable, considering it's completely dependant on the Betazoid's ability to accurately process what they sensed. It might be considered more heresay than an eyewitness account.

 

[BillJ]

Good question.

I actually am not sure that what they scan telepathically could even be admissable, considering it's completely dependant on the Betazoid's ability to accurately process what they sensed. It might be considered more heresay than an eyewitness account.

Telepathic impressions would have to be admissible in Betazoid courts, as they likely have worked that way for centuries. Otherwise, you'd have no testimony.

I'm not sure Federation courts could keep telepathic impressions testimony completely out of courts, as the Betazoids can't be the only telepaths in the Federation. Besides, even eye-witness testimony among humans is the least reliable type of evidence.

 

[Farscape One]

Telepathic impressions would have to be admissible in Betazoid courts, as they likely have worked that way for centuries. Otherwise, you'd have no testimony.

I'm not sure Federation courts could keep telepathic impressions testimony completely out of courts, as the Betazoids can't be the only telepaths in the Federation. Besides, even eye-witness testimony among humans is the least reliable type of evidence.

But if eyewitness testimony is considered unreliable, why wouldn't telepathic impressions be considered just unreliable (if not more so, considering how often minds have been screwed with in the franchise), since it's an 'eyewitness' by way of the mind's eye?

 

[BillJ]

But if eyewitness testimony is considered unreliable, why wouldn't telepathic impressions be considered just unreliable (if not more so, considering how often minds have been screwed with in the franchise), since it's an 'eyewitness' by way of the mind's eye?

That is what I was getting at. It would probably be seen in the same light as eyewitness testimony.

 

[Farscape One]

Ah, okay.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Hearing someone's thoughts is maybe more reliable a gauge of their mindset. People lie and equivocate all the time, intentionally or unintentionally. You might have a sudden thought that you regret and try to push aside, but you did think it. I suppose you might lie to yourself, but you wouldn't go out of your way to deliberately think specific lies if you didn't know someone was listening in.

 

[BillJ]

Hearing someone's thoughts is maybe more reliable a gauge of their mindset.

It would still be up to the interpretation of the particular Betazoid reading of a person's thought.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Yeah, I guess they could:

a) Attribute one person's thoughts to another
b) Hear only part of a thought and jump to conclusions
c) Hear the what and not the why (out of context)
d) Hear the thought and not the tone it was said in

 

[Guy Gardener]

Good question.

I actually am not sure that what they scan telepathically could even be admissable, considering it's completely dependant on the Betazoid's ability to accurately process what they sensed. It might be considered more heresay than an eyewitness account.

So what if Two Betazoid scan the same mind and read the same bullshit?

On Betazed telepathy is admissible because everyone always knows when any one is lying, and you can probably find a hundred people that were scanning the same person, for any given situation.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Further, among non-telepaths they could lie about what they heard, and anyone who trusted them would believe them.

 

[Tuskin38]

They need skin to skin contact.

not always

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

She scanned their brains, their innermost thoughts..

No, only their emotions.

Deanna is not a full telepath. Emotions are as far as she can go.

(Except when talking to her mother or Will Riker.)

 

[Guy Gardener]

not always

Almost always.

 

[fireproof78]

Thats what the stone of Gol was for.

 

[Mojochi]

Why don't the Federation have a full blooded Betazoid on every capital ship as a matter of policy?

Cuz it kind reeks of exploitation?

All of this goes back to no one using privacy controls on the holodeck. There just seems to a be a lot of transparency in 24th century Starfleet that's accepted by everyone.

This really is the base point imho. That said, I'd say it depends on application. Dude in The Drumhead? literally demonstrated in full for what a bad idea it is, & he's a full telepath. Guy in The Price? has its questionable aspects but leans more toward self-interest. Whereas it seems to me like Deanna is supplying more of an intention barometer, for the would-be greater good, than a hard line mental MRI, that's going to be acted on as infallible, or specifically taking advantage of anyone, so I'm not fully opposed. Space is a dangerous place after all, & good faith is a tightrope to walk.

That's my take on whether telepathy application as a professional attaché practice is ethical. Now, I'll address whether I think Troi herself is ethical, cuz I certainly have had some issues. Mostly she has been so, but...

#1, socially. Now granted, in The Wounded, Picard had directed her to be aware of people & their feelings about the Cardassians, probably mainly to avoid an incident occurring. However, I feel like she crossed a line with O'Brien in the transporter room when they beamed over. Surely, she was caught off guard by it, & probably reacted because of that, but this is a lady who's had this ability for a long time. She made the deliberate choice to stare him down about it, until he looked away. That is uncool. You don't know what this man's been through. You have no right to shame him, & should know better. Pausing in the doorway long enough to maybe have him notice would've been enough. A physical "I heard that" instead of a "What did you just think over there?"

#2, professionally. Jellico is unsure of himself? You're going to go out onto the bridge of the ship, during potential wartime negotiations & tell THAT to the XO, completely devoid of context? Are you insane? You have literally fueled further deterioration of that command structure, that was already in bad shape. I partly blame HER for Riker getting relieved, because he is certainly carrying on, more cemented in his opposition to the captain, with that professional advisement from the ship's counselor driving his assertions. It's the most reckless thing I've ever seen her do... & pretty ignorant.

The man has already been perfectly clear that he expects nothing they do will prevent them from going to war. However, he is using this last strategy to avert it. So, of course he is not certain it will succeed. However, I really don't believe she has the nuance of skill to differentiate between that uncertainty, & him being uncertain of his own ability to command, which is what she implied to Riker. Had I been him, I'd have immediately said "WTF did you just say to me??? I command you to qualify that remark in detail?"

 

[BillJ]

No, only their emotions.

Deanna is not a full telepath. Emotions are as far as she can go.

(Except when talking to her mother or Will Riker.)

Or other Betazoids. See: "Night Terrors"

 

[Nyotarules]

Ethics comes down to consent, control, and choice. If a person can control their ability to learn information that would otherwise be private, and if said person did not receive consent (or legal authorization such as a warrant), then is it ethical for that person to choose to learn and/or reveal that information?

If I overhead someone talking to another about plans to commit a crime, is it ethical to keep my mouth shut or do I inform law enforcement? Or am I abusing my auditory abilities?