So what was wrong about using Q power?
- Thread starter YARN
- Start date
He's histories greatest monster!
Even at that point Starfleet was no longer useful to him. What Picard did in Hide and Q was no different than what Q tried to do to humanity in Encounter at Farpoint. Would Picard have been so quick to denounce Riker's powers if he hadn't bet Q his starship command against Riker rejecting them?
It would've been like Kirk yanking Decker off of V'ger. Sorry pal... I'm making the decision that you're just not ready for this.
At the end of the day, Picard was simply wrong here and the fact that he bet with Q made his opinions in the matter biased.
Um no...It was Riker who realized he wasn't ready and Picard was right. He was betting that Riker was smart enough to eventually realize this by allowing the "gifts" to happen.
Decker and V'Ger were a logical "next step" in the man-machine interface, powerful, but not reaching Q standards.
RAMA
Once Picard had a stake in the outcome, he was no longer an unbiased observer who only had what was best for Riker in his heart.
The Q just didn't give the powers to Joe Smith, they gave those powers to one of Starfleet's best and brightest. Picard simply had no right to stand in his way.
If Picard had Riker's best interest at heart he would have sat him down, told him that he was requesting a new XO and that Riker needed to go off and contemplate what this step meant and whether or not it was in his own best interest.
A man has to search his own soul, without outside interference, to know what's in his own best interest.
It would've been a much more powerful episode if Riker comes to terms with the fact that he's not ready. That he sees the inherent faults with wielding that much power.
But, like a lot of Next Gen, there was a powerful premise at the heart of Hide and Q but they wimped out on the execution. Probably why Maurice Hurley took his name off of it.
Once Picard had a stake in the outcome, he was no longer an unbiased observer who only had what was best for Riker in his heart.
The Q just didn't give the powers to Joe Smith, they gave those powers to one of Starfleet's best and brightest. Picard simply had no right to stand in his way.
If Picard had Riker's best interest at heart he would have sat him down, told him that he was requesting a new XO and that Riker needed to go off and contemplate what this step meant and whether or not it was in his own best interest.
A man has to search his own soul, without outside interference, to know what's in his own best interest.
It would've been a much more powerful episode if Riker comes to terms with the fact that he's not ready. That he sees the inherent faults with wielding that much power.
But, like a lot of Next Gen, there was a powerful premise at the heart of Hide and Q but they wimped out on the execution. Probably why Maurice Hurley took his name off of it.
Yup Picard's views were clear, nevertheless he allowed it to continue, and Riker, while wielding the power learned on his own without Picard's interference...
So now you're saying that it was Picard's fault for not telling Riker what to do? To leave the ship?
I think the fact that he stayed on the ship is what ultimately saved him. Without the tether to those he loved and the memory of what he wanted out of life, he would have gone mad alone...the proverbial junky in a dingy apartment with no one or nothing but the heroine.
I think the fact that he stayed on the ship is what ultimately saved him. Without the tether to those he loved and the memory of what he wanted out of life, he would have gone mad alone...the proverbial junky in a dingy apartment with no one or nothing but the heroine.
Basically, Picard did not trust Riker. When Picard asked Riker not to use these powers, he made clear that he thought Riker's character was not up to it.
So your friend comes to you with this plan to assassinate a third world dictator and you're going to say, "Right on buddy - I believe in you!"
If Riker was more than just a human with overwhelming powers, he wouldn't need Picard to believe in him or not. Captain Picard accurately assessed the situation on his ship and let his untethered subordinate see for himself the life he's in for with Q. And he did so with Riker with what might be the last vestiges of his former life - his friends and the ship he'd wanted to command one day.
What's the alternative really? Let this already douchebag deteriorate into a mad superbeing rampaging through the cosmos? Or it's a Faustian story of the doctor who learns so much but who loses himself in the pursuit, no longer being capable of happiness. Would he shatter his Rosebud, or lead his Marguerite to her death? Leaving himself open at last to be damned by Mephistoph-er-that-is-Q?
If Riker was more than just a human with overwhelming powers, he wouldn't need Picard to believe in him or not. Captain Picard accurately assessed the situation on his ship and let his untethered subordinate see for himself the life he's in for with Q. And he did so with Riker with what might be the last vestiges of his former life - his friends and the ship he'd wanted to command one day.
What's the alternative really? Let this already douchebag deteriorate into a mad superbeing rampaging through the cosmos? Or it's a Faustian story of the doctor who learns so much but who loses himself in the pursuit, no longer being capable of happiness. Would he shatter his Rosebud, or lead his Marguerite to her death? Leaving himself open at last to be damned by Mephistoph-er-that-is-Q?
YARN
Fleet Captain
Well, this is a bit of Catch-22 isn't it?
If Riker doesn't take advice, this is proof he is blinded by power, because he is closed off to the advice of others.
If he does take his advice, however, this is proof that he is not ready for his powers.
What a convenient method of proof!
On the contrary, I submit that because Riker does not force his gifts upon his friends and because he does take counsel from his peers, this is evidence that he was not simply insane or beyond reason. Indeed, without the impossible condition imposed by Picard, Riker could have learned to grow into his powers.
Yes, he shrewdly and quickly leans on Riker to commit to a promise knows he cannot keep, for if it were in one's power to do good in an exigent circumstance, it would strain one in the extreme not to do so for a scruple about an arbitrary promise not to use that power.
OK, so he's a little familiar with a superior officer. But what are his crimes? Seriously?
The alternative is to counsel Riker to careful grow into his powers, to use them judiciously, and to use that power for good.
You're expecting Riker to rise to the occasion of godhood but then blame Picard for Riker not having the emotional fortitude to stand alone.
No mortal can handle that kind of power and responsibility. But if they could, they would have to be strong enough to say, "No, I'm going to do what I think is right. I have to. I'm a god."
We have fundamentally different ideas about what a human being is. You think of a human being is infinite in ability. As Picard quotes in the episode, "What a piece of work is a man! How noble in Reason! how infinite in faculties! in form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an Angel! in apprehension how like a god!" To you, it's a matter of "character."
I think that you neglect what's in the rest of the scene that that quote is from. Q then asks, "Surely you don't see your species like that, do you? Picard: I see us one day becoming that. Is it that which concerns you?"
Picard states that we are not infinitely capable today. Human beings are subject to the finite mental capabilities of the neurons in their heads. Push them beyond those biochemical limits, and they break – just as any machine pushed beyond its structural limits. We're having this discussion now on the merits of torture and what happens to people when they're pushed beyond their limits. Tempt a finite human being with the infinite stresses of a god and they will break.
YARN
Fleet Captain
Again, with the Catch-22?
So, unless Riker proceeds headlong without reflection or counsel, he cannot be a God? And if he does, of course, he's reckless, mad, and rampaging.
"Strong" -- hmm, this sounds suspiciously like a character trait...
As I argued upthread, humanity has already mastered God-like abilities in TNG:
*they can replicate matter,
*they can travel at the speed of light,
*they can destroy worlds,
*they can turn matter into energy and then back again, etc.
And... ...they can apparently handle it.
Also, Riker is not really made God (he is not all knowing or all present and we don't really know if he is omnipotent.
Riker is not infinite in ability. He cannot rob the Q of their powers. He is not omniscient. Heck he apparently cannot even read the minds of those around them (the Betazed have an advantage here), nor is he all knowing (omniscient) since he fails to guess how his gifts will be regarded. We don't know Riker's limits, but they do not reach to the infinite--certainly not in all things.
This all sounds very grim and serious, but where is the proof?
How do we know that Riker is being stressed past his biochemical limits?
What is the nature of these infinite stresses? We've already established that Riker is not infinite, so I am not sure what these stresses might be.
The writers of this episode agree with you in terms of conclusion, but not in terms of the cause of that conclusion; they paint no biological picture of limitation. Riker is in no danger of hitting a neurological limit, but rather a moral limit. The lesson is simply the old saw about "power corrupts." That is, no human has the character to live without moral limits.
I've just reread through this thread and see that not only are we going around in circles, but I've said what I was going to say better before. We just disagree on the limits of character.
They didn't put it in neurological terms but they didn't have to - just as every morality tale from TNG to TOS to the Bible to Aesop, since and earlier, didn't.
And no it isn't a catch-22 nor do I give a shit that the writers agreed with me, or that is that I agree with the writers.
They didn't put it in neurological terms but they didn't have to - just as every morality tale from TNG to TOS to the Bible to Aesop, since and earlier, didn't.
And no it isn't a catch-22 nor do I give a shit that the writers agreed with me, or that is that I agree with the writers.
Similar threads
