^Interesting point, and one I hadn't considered - that would be a good way to test Kirk's resolve and character.
^ Well, here's the thing - if my morals are so corrupt as to kill a crewman and lie about it, then I'm sure as heck corrupt enough to take the poison deal. So if I was guilty of what they were accusing Kirk of, you bet your bippy I'm taking Stone's deal.
Hey there SISKO -
Good to see you back. Well yes, exactly,... but the DILEMMA, which is set up perfectly, demonstrates two things to me:
1) STAR TREK at its finest; not just in terms of 'episode', but in terms of working into the story premise (acutally the story premise is adroitly weaved around the dilemma) very challenging moral, social, ethical, political, religious, etc, issues - without the UNABASHED SOCIAL INDOCTRINATION SPEECHES, so prevalent in later episodes - and almost subliminally, causes the viewer to become slightly more self-examining, by viewing them.
2) I further feel, as demonstrated by your own struggle, which is common to probably 98% of our worlds population today,... that at his core, man is a self-serving beast (no offense pal) and will, when given the chance, toss away his claim to civility, IF it means preserving, advancing or enhancing his existence, YET demands that same civility to be in place, honored, and enforced when it also suits his need to preserve, advance, or enhance is existence.
So who are the other 2% which are unaccounted for?,...
That figure is a wishful estimate, representing the possibility that when given the PASS or TAKE option,... there MAY just exist such a man IF GUILTY that would exclaim,.. "I PASS on the corrupt deal being offered me, AND I plead GUILITY".
I know,.. it's rarely gonna happen in this life time,.... but when one is an IDEALIST,.. and TREK was originally writing Moral Dilemma puzzle-stories with idealogical solutions,...
That in my opinion is what made TREK superior to anything else written for TV.
OKAY SISKO - You are off the examination table,.... and it your turn now to give me one back from a different episode,....
I hear you snickering and grinding your hands together out there SiSKO LOL!!
"Bet my Bippy" LOL!
In some other instances, he was dealing with crazy computers that had enslaved the human populace, and frozen any kind of development by them ('The Apple', 'Return Of The Archons', 'Spock's Brain'). Maybe the PD had a specific clause for this kind of situation?![]()
Well basically you can't support it, except it cases where the natural evolution and order of a culture was interfered with by the Federation agents, and THAT idea is whole problem on to itself. KIRK breaking the PD, is an unsupportable position position, as it is motivated by story-telling and then 'supported' by justifications which are flimsy at best, but support the sotry, nor the PD.
How about giving me a specific from an episode to exam, as I did for you?
What about the right to non-interference of those other people?
Well basically you can't support it, except it cases where the natural evolution and order of a culture was interfered with by the Federation agents, and THAT idea is whole problem on to itself. KIRK breaking the PD, is an unsupportable position position, as it is motivated by story-telling and then 'supported' by justifications which are flimsy at best, but support the sotry, nor the PD.
How about giving me a specific from an episode to exam, as I did for you?
Alrighty, how about this - "The Enterprise Incident" - is Starfleet and the Federation acting simply in self defense by broaching Romulan Territory and stealing their property, or are they an interfering, colonial minded super power trying to keep potential competitors weak?
7THSEALORD - Can you expand upon that?, I would like hear more on that perspective.
Thanks.
7THSEALORD - Can you expand upon that?, I would like hear more on that perspective.
Thanks.
If following the Prime Directive means being passive-aggressive stupid - to the extent of allowing the rest of the Galaxy to ride roughshod over you - then you have a serious problem.
Principles are good, important to both individuals and cultures. But they are not all that is needed - no person or culture has ever survived genuine danger just by being principled or nice. They survive by being smart, or strong, or adaptable, or sometimes just plain lucky. Especially (but not only) in war.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.