Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
I'll at least give TNG credit for establishing the Cardassians as multifaceted. In Macet, Daro, and Telle, you had three "archetypal" personalities that we see in Cardassians...
Macet: Ambiguous figure, calculating, can be taken as good or bad depending on what you think is going on behind the scenes. I tend to imagine a positive backstory for him, unlike Dukat. Personally, I think he got backed into a corner by Central Command--knew they were lying--but did not want war and had to play the hand he was dealt. All the while, Central Command knew how he would react and was, I think, using him once they saw what Maxwell was doing, to get political capital that they then turned around and used to convince the Federation to screw themselves over in the treaty that ended up turning over all those colonies.
Daro: Quiet, reflective, clearly feels the guilt of his people. If I had to pin someone as a dissident, whom we never saw confirmed as one, it would be this man. STILL to this day pissed at the bartender who cut him off when he was about to say something enormously important that I think O'Brien very much needed to hear. (As to what it was...well, that'll show up someday in my fanfic, but I won't spoil it here.)
Telle: The stereotypical, arrogant Cardassian thug...a rather one-dimensional character. But played off of the other two, this isn't a bad thing.
When you've done all you can, sometimes all you can do is leave things...
"In the Hands of the Prophets"
We start off with Keiko nagging O'Brien about his attractive female assistant. This is probably why the Doctor never got married. Well, not yet. Or maybe he did. You know, timey whimey, wibbly wobbly and all that.
I've got to say that Keiko is not my favorite character on the show.
Then she's teaching in the one-room schoolhouse and someone named Vedek Winn, who's wearing the Sydney Opera House on her head, walks in. Keiko is spouting some treknobabble about the wormhole that's going way over my head, so I have no idea what the first-graders are getting out of this, unless you have to learn treknobabble to graduate from kindergarten. But Winn doesn't like that Keiko isn't teaching the orthodox Bajoran version, that the prophets are divine, and she lets everyone know that it's not an artificially-constructed wormhole, it's really the Celestial Temple, and anyone who says otherwise is blaspheming.
I've got a question. In the Abrahamic religions here on earth, prophets are mortals who speak to and are inspired by God. But on Bajor, the Prophets themselves are the gods. Am I understanding this right? It's just a little confusing for me.
Vedek Winn is insistent that teaching anything from a secular perspective is blasphemy and is convinced that unless Keiko teaches "traditional Bajoran beliefs," she's misleading the youth.
Interestingly, Kira, who seems pretty sensible, says she supports Winn and suggests two schools, one for Bajorans and one for Federation kids. Sisko says no, but that's an idea that actually makes sense. I'm guessing that the writers aren't big fans of parochial schools.
Meanwhile, there's a murder mystery unfolding, as poor Ensign Aquino was reduced to a little puddle of crud.
If I haven't said it before, I'll say it now: I love Odo's stiff-necked nod thing. He's been doing it all season, and it really makes the character look just that much less human. It's like he knows nodding is the appropriate thing to do, but doesn't quite know how to do it right.
We get another look at a Bajoran religious figure in Vedek Bariel, who seems at first quite the idealist who isn't power-hungry, but then turns out to be (I think--I realize others may disagree) just as much a pious fraud as Winn. I loved the exchange with Sisko: "The prophets teach us patience." "They also teach you politics."
In the end, it turns out that Winn's quite the schemer: the whole protest and a terrorist bombing of the school were just a ruse to get Bariel onto DS9, where Neela was supposed to assassinate him. She's a pretty reprehensible person, but a great character.
But there's another thing I don't understand. Sisko and Winn talk about Kai Opaka. Why hasn't anyone been out to see her? She's just on the other side of the wormhole, after all. She's the religious figure who led Bajor during the occupation. Doesn't anyone care about her anymore? She's just stuck on that moon, not dead. I'm an Opaka fan, so I might be biased.
Overall it way a good episode. I think they could have handled the assassination attempt a little better--Sisko's slow-motion "NOOOOOOOOOO" was kind of cheesy. But it raises many implications for the future, since it now seems clear that DS9 is going to be involved in Bajoran politics in a way that wasn't clear at the start of the season.
I vaguely recalled seeing the episode mentioned as one of the better ones, so I had high hopes. I wasn't sure if it was going to be a light-hearted musical show (I was a big fan of them on Voyager) or what, but suffice it to say that I was totally blown away...
Q: If we forced you to sit down and watch three episodes of DS9, which three would you pick and why?
Behr: I only have 170-something to choose from, right? One of them would probably be "Duet", I think. But I can’t pick three. It just doesn’t pay. On another day I might pick different episodes. Would it be ones I wrote or ones I didn’t write? There are so many episodes I’m proud of.
We get another look at a Bajoran religious figure in Vedek Bariel, who seems at first quite the idealist who isn't power-hungry, but then turns out to be (I think--I realize others may disagree) just as much a pious fraud as Winn. I loved the exchange with Sisko: "The prophets teach us patience." "They also teach you politics."
Bariel definitely plays the political game, but I think he also cares about his faith versus his personal power a lot more than Winn does. This becomes a little more clear in the early parts of season 2.
Your thoughts on "In the Hands of the Prophets" are pretty similar to mine, otherwise, though. It's a very good episode, but it does have a few flaws. Coming right after "Duet," its relative lack of subtlety is a bit glaring, but it does do an impressive job of widening the show's scope a bit by showing the kinds of issues Bajor is dealing with. Really, by upping the stakes a bit and by starting to show more complexity in the storytelling, the end of the first season really is a portent of what would become DS9's strengths.
She can be grating at times, but I've grown to like her. I'm sure that it has something to do with the fact that she's very attractive - hey, I'm a shallow, superficial, male pig; sue me.
I've got a question. In the Abrahamic religions here on earth, prophets are mortals who speak to and are inspired by God. But on Bajor, the Prophets themselves are the gods. Am I understanding this right? It's just a little confusing for me.
Indeed. The Bajorans use the word "Prophets" for the their gods, whereas in real-life Abrahamic religions, the prophets were humans.
Interestingly, Kira, who seems pretty sensible, says she supports Winn and suggests two schools, one for Bajorans and one for Federation kids. Sisko says no, but that's an idea that actually makes sense. I'm guessing that the writers aren't big fans of parochial schools.
It seems very sensible to me. Another solution would be to teach both versions. This is one of the few problems I have with the episode (the other being Vader's, I mean Sisko's, slow motion NOOOOOOOO).
Keiko isn't really presented as much better than Winn in some respects. Winn is presented as someone who has her mind made up - the religious version is the only one that should be taught (of course, we later learn that it was all a ploy to kill Bariel, but that is how she is presented at first). Keiko is the other extreme. She's presented as someone who has her mind made up - the scientific version is the only one that should be taught. Sisko even says at one point that if you look at it that way, you're no better than Winn. It's a little confusing as to what the writers were trying to say. Then, at one point, Keiko says that it's her job to open her students minds up to all possibilities. That begs the question - why not open their minds to the spiritual possibility?
We get another look at a Bajoran religious figure in Vedek Bariel, who seems at first quite the idealist who isn't power-hungry, but then turns out to be (I think--I realize others may disagree) just as much a pious fraud as Winn. I loved the exchange with Sisko: "The prophets teach us patience." "They also teach you politics."
Bariel is definitely a political player, but I doubt anybody who gets to that level of power, be it temporal or spiritual, could not be one. The question is, what does he do with his power? Bariel comes off as someone who actually has a deep faith and a willingness to the do the right thing to help his people (which becomes clearer as the show progresses), as opposed to Winn, who only cares about the power itself. I like to compare him to one of the few politicians I admire in real life, Ron Paul - he's clearly a political player but has actual principles and is willing to do the right thing.
All in all, another good episode to finish off the season. And like has been said, it's getting the show on track and focused which was sorely lacking for most of the season.
Keiko is a science teacher. Bajoran religious beliefs have no place in her class. They're no more relevant to her subject than "intelligent design" is to a biology class. Save that for Sunday school (or the Bajoran equivalent).
That said, since Keiko's school seems to be a multi-subject one, there's no reason that Bajoran culture shouldn't be brought up at other times, especially since their in Bajoran space and serving so many Bajoran students.
Interestingly, Kira, who seems pretty sensible, says she supports Winn and suggests two schools, one for Bajorans and one for Federation kids. Sisko says no, but that's an idea that actually makes sense. I'm guessing that the writers aren't big fans of parochial schools.
I became an atheist when I was 13 but I continued to go to a Catholic school because there weren't any non-Catholic schools in the area. One day during a science lesson, one of my classmates asked the science teacher where the universe came from, and he responded by saying it was caused by the Big Bang and whatnot. But my classmate kept at him and asked where the Big Bang came from and my science teacher responded "God". I was taken aback by that, because we were in a science class. If my religion teacher had said it an hour later in a religion class, I wouldn't have had a problem with it because it was a Catholic school and it was her job to teach Catholicism. But the science teacher's job was to teach science and science does not comment on the existence of gods. It's not in its remit.
If the Bajoran kids had their own school, they were still going to need to be taught science, and that means teaching how the wormhole works on a scientific level like Keiko was doing. An hour later when the religion class starts, then they could teach the kids all about the Prophets and the Celestial Temple, but not during the science class. That's not what Vedek Winn wanted, she wanted to insert her religious beliefs into a science class and that is why I think she was wrong.
All that being said, one of my favourite scenes from this episode was the one between Sisko and Jake where Sisko teaches Jake to be open-minded on the subject of the wormhole aliens and not call those that believe in the Prophets stupid. It's not only a good philosophical standpoint, it's also a nice father/son moment.
But there's another thing I don't understand. Sisko and Winn talk about Kai Opaka. Why hasn't anyone been out to see her? She's just on the other side of the wormhole, after all. She's the religious figure who led Bajor during the occupation. Doesn't anyone care about her anymore? She's just stuck on that moon, not dead. I'm an Opaka fan, so I might be biased.
That's one thing that I don't get either. I just pretend that Sisko and the others told the Bajorans that Opaka died so that millions of Bajorans didn't go to that moon looking for her.
Keiko is a science teacher. Bajoran religious beliefs have no place in her class. They're no more relevant to her subject than "intelligent design" is to a biology class. Save that for Sunday school (or the Bajoran equivalent).
That said, since Keiko's school seems to be a multi-subject one, there's no reason that Bajoran culture shouldn't be brought up at other times, especially since their in Bajoran space and serving so many Bajoran students.
No argument from me there. Religion shouldn't be taught in a science class and science shouldn't be taught in a religion class. But they refused to taught anything about the spiritual aspect of the Prophets/Wormhole Aliens.
Even when Kira suggests something like a "Sunday school," Sisko immediately shuts the idea down.
In that case (and you're the expert--my memory of the episode is a bit hazy) then it sounds like Sisko and Keiko were being rather unreasonable. Of course, so was Winn, making hay over something was a non-issue until her arrival for her own nefarious means.
Indeed, it was a non-issue until Winn made it one for, shall we say, less than pleasant motives.
My problem is that the writers seem to saying two different things. We're clearly meant to side with Keiko, yet she's being just as unreasonable. We have that very touching scene with Sisko imploring Jake to be open-minded, yet he refuses to allow a "religious school."
It all could have probably worked better with a little script polishing. Have Keiko offer to teach a religion class that's separate from the science class, but have Winn say it isn't good enough.
I've got a question. In the Abrahamic religions here on earth, prophets are mortals who speak to and are inspired by God. But on Bajor, the Prophets themselves are the gods. Am I understanding this right? It's just a little confusing for me.
That is correct as far as the Bajorans are concerned. Now, I have a private theory as to why that is their name--but it isn't substantiated in canon.
Interestingly, Kira, who seems pretty sensible, says she supports Winn and suggests two schools, one for Bajorans and one for Federation kids. Sisko says no, but that's an idea that actually makes sense. I'm guessing that the writers aren't big fans of parochial schools.
And I think that forcing everyone into the public schools is a very, very bad idea. Very draconian, and provides evidence that the Federation does directly promote secularism.
We get another look at a Bajoran religious figure in Vedek Bariel, who seems at first quite the idealist who isn't power-hungry, but then turns out to be (I think--I realize others may disagree) just as much a pious fraud as Winn. I loved the exchange with Sisko: "The prophets teach us patience." "They also teach you politics."
I didn't get the idea that Bareil was a fraud. What I think you are uncomfortable with, though, is the merger of church and state on Bajor, which personally I consider to be more of a substantiated complaint, because there is never anything I saw that suggested Bareil was scum. That church-state merger requires a person like Bareil, if he wants to oppose a person like Winn, to play politics just to have any influence even in a good way. (And that, I think, is the problematic aspect.)
It seems very sensible to me. Another solution would be to teach both versions. This is one of the few problems I have with the episode (the other being Vader's, I mean Sisko's, slow motion NOOOOOOOO).
Yeah, really. This would've been the right solution: present both views. Or even arrange a way for kids whose parents sign a permission slip to go on a field trip to the temple and hear a Bajoran speak about the Celestial Temple. Perfectly voluntary--and up to the parents.
But what I didn't like was that if this was supposed to be an evolution parallel, that the third view was never presented except in a very brief, indirect aside from Bareil: that the wormhole could be both at once. That the two explanations are not at all contradictory. That both what is observed by the senses and what is received as theology are true, just in different ways.
Keiko is the other extreme. She's presented as someone who has her mind made up - the scientific version is the only one that should be taught. Sisko even says at one point that if you look at it that way, you're no better than Winn. It's a little confusing as to what the writers were trying to say. Then, at one point, Keiko says that it's her job to open her students minds up to all possibilities. That begs the question - why not open their minds to the spiritual possibility?
Because Keiko--just like Winn--believes it is her job to indoctrinate children. They really are mirrors of each other, except that Keiko didn't try to kill anyone.
Keiko is a science teacher. Bajoran religious beliefs have no place in her class. They're no more relevant to her subject than "intelligent design" is to a biology class. Save that for Sunday school (or the Bajoran equivalent).
That said, since Keiko's school seems to be a multi-subject one, there's no reason that Bajoran culture shouldn't be brought up at other times, especially since their in Bajoran space and serving so many Bajoran students.
Keiko is not exclusively a science teacher, for starters. But I think she did fail to approach the subject with sufficient respect. I especially think it's rude not to call the Prophets by their real names, because they are sentient, intelligent beings with which the Bajorans have a relationship. Not calling them by their name (they have no other name until later on, when there are a few individual Prophets you can call by specific names...won't spoil those though) is a deliberate swipe at them. At intelligent beings.
But I don't think that Keiko has a right to decide which parts of Bajoran culture are and are not acceptable to her, and to practice censorship. Especially not on a Bajoran-owned space station. Remember--this is not Starfleet's station, and not Starfleet's school. But apparently respect for other cultures stops as soon as they do a "primitive" thing like believe in a deity.
If my religion teacher had said it an hour later in a religion class, I wouldn't have had a problem with it because it was a Catholic school and it was her job to teach Catholicism. But the science teacher's job was to teach science and science does not comment on the existence of gods. It's not in its remit.
You were in a Catholic school devoted to a Catholic worldview (not a secular school), which all of the faculty had signed onto, so if you didn't like it (or at that age, if your parents objected), you/they should have insisted on being transferred out to a secular school.
Especially if they hold the "no contradiction" viewpoint, where science and faith are not seen to undermine each other and faith is not seen to require any "editing" of science. To my own view, personally, I would have no hesitation about that answer because they are simply one and the same.
All that being said, one of my favourite scenes from this episode was the one between Sisko and Jake where Sisko teaches Jake to be open-minded on the subject of the wormhole aliens and not call those that believe in the Prophets stupid. It's not only a good philosophical standpoint, it's also a nice father/son moment.
That was one of the few redeeming qualities of a poorly-portrayed debate.
That's one thing that I don't get either. I just pretend that Sisko and the others told the Bajorans that Opaka died so that millions of Bajorans didn't go to that moon looking for her.
I won't say why lest I spoil it for Shatnertage, but not having millions of Bajorans on a pilgrimage through the wormhole probably turns out to be a very good thing, later...
And again, what gives him the right, on Bajoran property to decide that the on-station temple has no right to express its religion in a certain way? Especially if it's an opt-in thing, that parents have to decide to allow their kids to go to, and isn't at all forced.
The only way I can remedy that in my head is imagine that the Bajorans served him with some kind of order later, to demand their right to assemble freely.
KIRA: A lot of Bajoran and Federation interests are separate, Commander. I've been telling you that all along. SISKO: Nobody's saying that there can't be spiritual teaching on this station, Major, but can't it be in addition to what's taught in Mrs O'Brien's classroom? KIRA: But if she's teaching a fundamentally different philosophy...
You were in a Catholic school devoted to a Catholic worldview (not a secular school), which all of the faculty had signed onto, so if you didn't like it (or at that age, if your parents objected), you/they should have insisted on being transferred out to a secular school.
There were no secular schools in the area back then, the result of the Catholic church being given too much influence over the running of this country for too long. It is only now that the state has begun the process of taking some schools out of the hands of the church.
Especially if they hold the "no contradiction" viewpoint, where science and faith are not seen to undermine each other and faith is not seen to require any "editing" of science. To my own view, personally, I would have no hesitation about that answer because they are simply one and the same.
In a philosophy class, maybe, but not in a science class. Science has rules and a very famous methodology, and questions about gods don't fit within it. The correct answer to that question, scientifically speaking, would have been "We don't know what caused the Big Bang, at least not yet. Obviously, many believe that there is a God behind it all, but science can't really say."
Yes, it was a Catholic school, and if they wanted to teach us about Catholicism then they could do so during the three religion classes we had a week. But that stuff has no place in a science class.
I think as soon as the phrase "I believe" comes into play, it is MORE than sufficiently clear that this is not derived from the scientific method. People are not idiots.
In the US, you have your choice of public (secular) schools, secular private schools, religious schools of many different types, and homeschooling according to many different curricula. A parent who objects to one type of upbringing can sometimes just take their kids out of the school they don't like and put them in a new one. If you ask me, this is the best solution because it puts the control firmly in the hands of the parents, though it would be better if there were more mechanisms in place to allow people of all income levels to have a choice--if the public schools were forced to compete, in other words.
That was what I didn't like about the DS9 episode--the idea that giving PARENTS the choice was somehow a bad, bad, bad thing.
Still, it doesn't excuse the fact that Keiko was unwilling to teach the spiritual viewpoint while simultaneously claiming that her job was to open the students to all knowledge.
In the US, you have your choice of public (secular) schools, secular private schools, religious schools of many different types, and homeschooling according to many different curricula. A parent who objects to one type of upbringing can sometimes just take their kids out of the school they don't like and put them in a new one. If you ask me, this is the best solution because it puts the control firmly in the hands of the parents, though it would be better if there were more mechanisms in place to allow people of all income levels to have a choice--if the public schools were forced to compete, in other words.
And I think that forcing everyone into the public schools is a very, very bad idea. Very draconian, and provides evidence that the Federation does directly promote secularism.
Secularism is the separation of government/institution from religions and religious belief.
Of course the Federation should directly promote that just like every reasonable country on Earth should. Government has to be separated from religion because Governments and the state in general represents every citizen which includes a bunch of different religions plus atheists.
A state therefor cannot be founded on any religious principles. It has to be founded on basic laws and human rights that can be defined without religion. That's the only way that everybody within the state (no matter which religion he/she believes in if any at all) can agree on the basic principles.
I just thought this is worth mentioning because it doesn't make much sense to accuse the Federation of "promoting secularism". Unless of course your point was that DS9 is a Bajoran-owned space station.
But then again the Federation is in charge of actually running the station and forcing the very heterogenous, culturally and religiously diverse population of DS9 into a non-secular environment would be bad.
You also said "forcing everybody into public schools is a bad idea". Now I'll give you that. I don't see a need for every school to be state-run but the private schools should be held to very strict universal standards regarding their curriculums and contents.
I attended a Catholic private school myself but there was no indoctrination happening there. Apart from the religious education class the school was completely secular which is how it should be.
Yeah, really. This would've been the right solution: present both views.
Well, just don't think this was the writer's intent. The show was an allegory. It reminded me a lot of the weird American discussion of evolution vs. intelligent design. And I'm convinced that only one view should be taught in science class. Thankfully the discussion is non-existent in Europe because no church in their right mind here would reject evolution. In any case even in a fundamentalist private school that other view should only be presented in religious education class because it has nothing to do with science and only to do with belief.
I don't think the writers wanted to show compromise. They did a great job at showing how scary religious fundamentalists and fanatics can be, though.
Because Keiko--just like Winn--believes it is her job to indoctrinate children. They really are mirrors of each other, except that Keiko didn't try to kill anyone.
Teaching science based on scientific facts and theories (before you complain: gravity is called a "theory", too. It's how science works) is not indoctrination.
They could've just also hired a teacher for religious indoctr... education, though. That way atheist Keiko wouldn't have had to comment on the Bajoran people's religion.
Keiko is not exclusively a science teacher, for starters. But I think she did fail to approach the subject with sufficient respect. I especially think it's rude not to call the Prophets by their real names, because they are sentient, intelligent beings with which the Bajorans have a relationship.
Well, yeah. That's where the writers screwed up, really. The analogy isn't perfect because unlike the Earth religion's gods the prophets on Bajor actually exist on an objective scientifically proven basis. You can just go out and talk to the guys. (Unless... Sisko never actually met them and just had a Moses-like hallucination but don't follow me on these quirky thoughts. )
Within the context of the show it's obvious that those prophets are real so Keiko was basically being a bit silly. But that's obviously the writer's fault for not noticing (or overlooking) the flaws in the allegory.
science and faith [...] are simply one and the same.
A shiver runs down my spine when I read things like this. It's genuinely scary.
And again, what gives him the right, on Bajoran property to decide that the on-station temple has no right to express its religion in a certain way? Especially if it's an opt-in thing, that parents have to decide to allow their kids to go to, and isn't at all forced.
Agreed, that was stupid. Again it was the writers pushing for confrontation when it wasn't all that necessary.
It felt like the writers were trying desperately to get their point across in the most obvious and unsubtle way possible.
Nothing wrong with "sunday school".
In essence I think the writers did a pretty poor job by taking the 2 extremes and confronting them even when it didn't make much sense.
I think as soon as the phrase "I believe" comes into play, it is MORE than sufficiently clear that this is not derived from the scientific method. People are not idiots.
I wish that were true, but it's not. Most people don't know how science works and think that the whole thing is based on guess-work, which is why you get so many people in America that that think evolution is just a guess with no evidence to back it up. Look at the MMR vaccine scare and how anecdotal evidence with no research to back it up led to millions of people refusing to get their children vaccinated (including my own parents, by the way) even though study after study found no link between the vaccine and autism.
Many people view science as a belief system based on guess-work, which is why extra care needs to be taken in schools to make sure that children aren't given false impressions of what science is.
Still, it doesn't excuse the fact that Keiko was unwilling to teach the spiritual viewpoint while simultaneously claiming that her job was to open the students to all knowledge.
In fairness to Keiko, she's not qualified to teach Bajoran spirituality to Bajoran kids. I mean, if you sent me to eastern Asia and asked me to teach children about Taoism, I'm not going to do it because a) I don't believe it and I wouldn't be comfortable teaching children something that I don't believe and b) I barely have any clue what Taoism is all about. I could no more teach Taoism than I could Spanish.
If the Bajoran temple wished to organise a class for the Bajoran kids to go to to complement Keiko's class then I don't think Keiko would have objected to it. It was Kira that objected to such an idea on the grounds that science and religion are fundamentally opposed philosophies.
Well, yeah. That's where the writers screwed up, really. The analogy isn't perfect because unlike the Earth religion's gods the prophets on Bajor actually exist on an objective scientifically proven basis. You can just go out and talk to the guys. (Unless... Sisko never actually met them and just had a Moses-like hallucination but don't follow me on these quirky thoughts. )
Within the context of the show it's obvious that those prophets are real so Keiko was basically being a bit silly. But that's obviously the writer's fault for not noticing (or overlooking) the flaws in the allegory.
But at this point in the show, there was no indication that the wormhole aliens were anything other than that; aliens. It's not until the later seasons that they start acting like gods, at this point in the show they are just represented as aliens that the Bajorans have come to believe in as gods. For Keiko in this episode, teaching children that these aliens are gods makes as much sense as teaching the Mintakans that The Picard is a god just because he is more technologically advanced than they are.
In fairness to Keiko, she's not qualified to teach Bajoran spirituality to Bajoran kids. I mean, if you sent me to eastern Asia and asked me to teach children about Taoism, I'm not going to do it because a) I don't believe it and I wouldn't be comfortable teaching children something that I don't believe and b) I barely have any clue what Taoism is all about. I could no more teach Taoism than I could Spanish.
Good point. As a practicing Catholic, I doubt I would be much good at teaching Taoism either. But, if we're going to go down that route, I have to wonder how Keiko is qualified to teach anything other than botany.
In fairness to Keiko, she's not qualified to teach Bajoran spirituality to Bajoran kids. I mean, if you sent me to eastern Asia and asked me to teach children about Taoism, I'm not going to do it because a) I don't believe it and I wouldn't be comfortable teaching children something that I don't believe and b) I barely have any clue what Taoism is all about. I could no more teach Taoism than I could Spanish.
Good point. As a practicing Catholic, I doubt I would be much good at teaching Taoism either. But, if we're going to go down that route, I have to wonder how Keiko is qualified to teach anything other than botany.
For the most part, it seems that the kids on the station aren't particularly advanced, and I'm sure Keiko has knowledge of basic Federation and human subjects.
It seems like she's just a general primary (elementary) school teacher. However, she couldn't teach Bajoran religion, because she doesn't have the first clue about it.
If she wanted the school to have some religious lessons, why doesn't she get one of the local monks to do some in their free time. There aren't many (at least not in the 1st season) Federation citizens who have spare time to teach, while the monks should be free at least some of the time.
I just thought this is worth mentioning because it doesn't make much sense to accuse the Federation of "promoting secularism". Unless of course your point was that DS9 is a Bajoran-owned space station.
But then again the Federation is in charge of actually running the station and forcing the very heterogenous, culturally and religiously diverse population of DS9 into a non-secular environment would be bad.
Just the same, forcing everyone into a secular environment through government coercion is bad. Telling them they cannot choose a religious education if they do want it is government-imposed atheism.
But my biggest beef in this case is that the station is Bajoran property, which means Starfleet is way outside its rights to countermand Bajoran law and impose restrictions that Bajoran law does not.
As to the question of whether Bajoran law does indeed hold force on the station, we have seen proof on two occasions that it does, that I can recall: in "Dax," when a Bajoran magistrate was required to try Dax's case and not a Federation one, and in the Circle Trilogy
when the Federation was required to obey the Bajoran demand to remove their personnel from the station (our crew disobeyed, but it was made very clear that they were breaking the law to do so).
(Interestingly, this precedent suggests Sisko violated Bajoran sovereignty in the episode "Cardassians." The Treklit novel The Neverending Sacrifice directly makes the assertion that Sisko did indeed break Bajoran law by not having a Bajoran magistrate make the decision.)
So, suppressing religious expression of a type very likely protected by Bajoran law would be illegal to do on a Bajoran space station, whether you like it or not. The only solution, therefore, is to offer some form of choice to parents, so that they can decide what kind of education they feel is appropriate for their kids.
You also said "forcing everybody into public schools is a bad idea". Now I'll give you that. I don't see a need for every school to be state-run but the private schools should be held to very strict universal standards regarding their curriculums and contents.
I attended a Catholic private school myself but there was no indoctrination happening there. Apart from the religious education class the school was completely secular which is how it should be.
I have attended both public and private schools, myself. I think that any school, or homeschooling association, must be able to meet standards in terms of their kids being able to perform academically, but once that requirement is met, I don't think the state has the right to be in the business of saying, "religion can be mentioned during this hour but not during this one." In my science class they acknowledged that different people have different views of evolution and that no one should feel forced to change their minds, but we were clearly told that we had to learn the material as presented in our textbooks. We used a normal science textbook and I did not see anything in the material tested to that was unscientific or that compared poorly to what I learned in public school.
If you can keep up or exceed the performance of the public schools (and frankly, it's not hard to do better than most public schools given the state they're in), then the only case where a curriculum should be objectionable is if there is any violence being encouraged, or any abuse taking place. Anything that violates the safety of the student, or teaches the student that it is OK to violate the safety of others, is patently unacceptable.
Well, just don't think this was the writer's intent. The show was an allegory. It reminded me a lot of the weird American discussion of evolution vs. intelligent design. And I'm convinced that only one view should be taught in science class. Thankfully the discussion is non-existent in Europe because no church in their right mind here would reject evolution. In any case even in a fundamentalist private school that other view should only be presented in religious education class because it has nothing to do with science and only to do with belief.
See above as to how it was handled at the private school I attended.
As to my own belief, I have zero objection to evolution and I think the whole argument is silly. I am not one, however, for winning the argument by coercing people. I think that to simply lay out the evidence and invite people to look at it and make their own decision is sufficient.
I don't think the writer's wanted to show compromise. They did a great job at showing how scary religious fundamentalists and fanatics can be, though.
However, they ignored how scary ANY kind of fanatic can be, and frankly, Keiko was getting into that territory (though obviously, she did not commit any physically violent acts). Human nature being what it is, in history we have had people of many ideological bents decide that it's OK to force their ways on others. An atheist fanatic is no better; once you've crossed the line into thinking you can impose your views by coercion, in my mind you're right in the same bucket with a religious fanatic.
Teaching science based on scientific facts and theories (before you complain: gravity is called a "theory", too. It's how science works) is not indoctrination.
They could've just also hired a teacher for religious indoctr... education, though. That way atheist Keiko wouldn't have had to comment on the Bajoran people's religion.
She could simply comment that "Bajorans call the wormhole the Celestial Temple, and the beings inside go by the name 'Prophets,' and that the Bajorans have a relationship with these beings. Many Bajorans believe in these beings as deities. Now, here's what our studies and measurements show about how the creation of a stable wormhole was accomplished..."
That's a very simple, polite statement, and I think an atheist child could listen to that without feeling pressured in any way. It acknowledges that there's another viewpoint, provides an example of "how to be respectful to those with whom you disagree," and there is a very clear transition between "some people believe this," and "here is what our sensors physically detected." She doesn't even have to go into depth for which she isn't qualified. That kind of simple statement, that would likely be found in their equivalent of a "Wikipedia" entry on the Bajorans, would make the point nicely.
To go beyond that, send the kids home with a permission slip for a field trip to the on-station Temple (offering, of course, an alternative to attending the field trip that allows all kids to get credit for that day).
That way, parents can choose from there what they'd like their kids to be exposed to. I'd be willing to bet that not all Federation parents would keep their kids home that day. I know, for instance, my own parents (as Christians) would have had no problem with letting me tour another religion's temple, shrine, etc. (That opportunity never came up, but I was most certainly encouraged when I wanted to read books about other peoples and what they believed.) I think it would've been presented to me as, "We believe differently from this, but we think you should see it and learn so that you understand how different people think."
The important thing here is that the opportunity would be provided for parents to know what's coming, make a decision, and have the conversation with their children that they deem appropriate.
Within the context of the show it's obvious that those prophets are real so Keiko was basically being a bit silly. But that's obviously the writer's fault for not noticing (or overlooking) the flaws in the allegory.
It's a pretty glaring flaw, and it really does make Keiko look like a fanatic, or at least very rude to a group of sentient beings who have a name and, like anyone else, would surely like to be called by it.
science and faith [...] are simply one and the same.
If you learn more about the views of moderates, then it should not be. Put simply, I see no need to edit my science to conform to a literal description of what is in the Bible. Nor, however, do I see a reason to decide that because scientific instruments cannot detect things such as purpose, truth, right, wrong, and God Himself, to reject their existence. Truth is truth, to my mind. I see evolution as truth, and I see it as truth that we were created with purpose. Science shows me how it was accomplished; faith shows me why, and what we ought to do with the existence we have been given.
I wish that were true, but it's not. Most people don't know how science works and think that the whole thing is based on guess-work, which is why you get so many people in America that that think evolution is just a guess with no evidence to back it up. Look at the MMR vaccine scare and how anecdotal evidence with no research to back it up led to millions of people refusing to get their children vaccinated (including my own parents, by the way) even though study after study found no link between the vaccine and autism.
To be fair, in that case it was "anecdotal evidence and a scientific paper with forged results that should never have been allowed to be published in the Lancet," so I'm not quite sure you have a direct comparison there.
What you in fact have is a combined failure of the scientific method and the peer review process that got represented as if it were science.
Which unfortunately plays right into the hands of those who think science is mere guesswork. "Look how this was screwed up--look how untrustworthy these scientists are if they lied about this! What else could they be lying about?"
Many people view science as a belief system based on guess-work, which is why extra care needs to be taken in schools to make sure that children aren't given false impressions of what science is.
At the same time, though, I have seen people say that science rules out faith. "We can't build a God-detector, so there must not be a God." Um...right. Try reading the definition of "non-falsifiable" a little more carefully. That's also a false view of science. The scientific method has a finite scope of things it can deal with. Philosophy is not one of those things.
One way I think that it could be explained is that it is an extension of our senses, not an extension of our ideas and feelings. For the rest, individuals must seek other things for use in making their decisions for or against.
I could no more teach Taoism than I could Spanish.
