So what would Picard have done if it had been his Enterprise to find the giant Space Amoeba? Just leave it alone?
The Agony Booth, Oh My...
- Thread starter Spock's Barber
- Start date
I've always seen it as a false moral jeopardy, as I seriously doubt that it would have worked in the first place. Let's show the Borg something that they can't decipher and fry all of their brains! What are they, Mudd's androids?
Regardless of the silliness of the device, Data and LaForge say it will work. So Picard has to make his decision based on that information.
These are all the positions they expected us to take on the issue. They knew the risk with not using the virus when they wrote the episode. We should at least all get together on the fact that it's not a completely simple, easy, and obvious issue. It can seem like mass killings are the only answer, until you find out later that for some reason you didn't know at the time, it turns out it wasn't necessary of helpful after all. Like blinding Spock in Op Annihilate, on a bigger scale.
The candidate I'd choose for the agony booth is Odo. Totally leaves Rom hanging, then only helps because Kira is hot. That was a jerk move.
P.S. I'm with the, genocide isn't cool crowd. I'm also with the Borg are a species crowd. They are a unique sentient consciousness.
P.S. I'm with the, genocide isn't cool crowd. I'm also with the Borg are a species crowd. They are a unique sentient consciousness.
For me? It is a completely simple, easy and obvious issue. You use the virus.
If someone wants to call me a monster, they'll be around to have the freedom to do so.
And what do you say to all of the beings later annihilated or assimilated by the Borg?
Yeah, if you're not cool with genocide, the Borg should be the first ones you take out.
Well, I probably ought to have rewatched the episode before diving in with that P.S. because, due to the number of times it came on as a rerun both during and after TNG, I grew to hate it and frequently skipped over it. But...
And I suppose this is neither here nor there, but once those beings are annihilated or assimilated, I would think I'd have to explain myself to them at all. Because they would be dead. Or Borg. Either way, I can't imagine them caring at that point.
But, the real reason is two main things. The first is that the entire episode (as I remember) sets up the drone's capacity for individuality. In other words, separated from the collective he is an individual capable of forming his own opinions. If that is the case, then killing the hive mind that is the Borg is not just killing one malignant sentient being but doing so by eliminating a whole host of victims (the drones).
The second thing is that, to me, being against genocide is a categorical imperative. The ethics of not committing the acts are unchanged, regardless of the acts that the would be victim commits or doesn't. Applying exceptions to committing genocide is arbitrary and the moral equivalent of the Borg themselves.
That, I guess, would be my argument.
Following that episode had there been an attack on the Federation that they hadn't been able to repel by other means? Picard should have resorted to genocide to prevent having to use conventional forces in the future?
As others have pointed out, individual borg drones have sentience beyond the collective, this is exactly the reason Picard balked, he realised be would have been committing an atrocity beyond any in humanity's history.
The borg are an aggressor, a formidable one. That does not justify genocide.
As others have pointed out, individual borg drones have sentience beyond the collective, this is exactly the reason Picard balked, he realised be would have been committing an atrocity beyond any in humanity's history.
The borg are an aggressor, a formidable one. That does not justify genocide.
Now back to real life people we would like to see get a session in the agony booth.
I nominate the new anchor lady on the CBS Evening News on Saturdays at 5:30 PM CDT. She sounds like she's doing an audition for Entertainment Tonight or for some bad soap opera. The national and international news is not to be read in hyper dramatic fashion. Please stop.
I nominate the new anchor lady on the CBS Evening News on Saturdays at 5:30 PM CDT. She sounds like she's doing an audition for Entertainment Tonight or for some bad soap opera. The national and international news is not to be read in hyper dramatic fashion. Please stop.
The Borg aren't a species. They are an amalgamation of species. If you wipe out the Borg then you save billions and billions. Remember the episode of Voyager where the Borg destroyed an entire planet in two episodes. These and all the other planet annihilations in the Delta Quadrant can in some way be attributed in part to Picards actions in not using te virus. Although I don't really think it should have been Picards reponsibility alone. He should have sent the decision back to Starfleet HQ.
If I were made Borg I would rather be killed than to live out mu life as a drone forced against my will to enslave other species. Picard would have been doing me a favour.
I know they repatriated some Borg but whiie Janeway was doing that one-by-one in te Delta Quadrant planet fulls of beings were being taken over and what made them unique as a species destroyed.
Interesting. So is Worf responsible for everything the Dominion does because he stops Garek from blowing up the founders?
Is Sisko responsible for the Cardassian-Dominion alliance because he saves Dukat's ship from the Klingons?
Is Kirk responsible for anybody who Kahn killed because he didn't execute him on their first meeting?
Is the difference the magnitude of the crimes committed or that you don't feel that the Borg are a unique species?
I'm really asking. I disagree but I think you have a point too.
Let's try this another way. You are walking through a secluded parking lot at night. For some reason you have a gun. You hear a scream, and you look up to see a woman who has obviously already been beaten lying on the ground unable to move. You see a man approaching her with a knife obviously intent on killing her. Do you shoot the guy and save the woman's life? Or do you tell yourself that murder is wrong and that you will have no part in it and watch the guy kill the woman?
I'm taking away the option of shooting the guy in such a way as to stop him by injuring but not killing him. You're not that good a shot that you can guarantee that you won't kill him if you shoot him. If you pull the trigger at him, you are agreeing to potentially kill him. Do you pull the trigger or no?
Look, everyone saying they should wipe out the Borg, you're all probably right, but I'd be very concerned about the Federation if they didn't pause on this one, and become troubled by it, at least somewhat. Then I'd hope they'd go ahead and do it. If this is a "no brainer ", if we can be for this without hesitation, there are other extreme things we could go for too.
By the way, I don't remember the ep that well. .. and I hope they didn't have the military deciding this. This has to be a civilian decision by elected officials. This is , after all, sort-of genocide...
By the way, I don't remember the ep that well. .. and I hope they didn't have the military deciding this. This has to be a civilian decision by elected officials. This is , after all, sort-of genocide...
Of course I'd shoot the guy but I don't accept the premise of your question because the analogy is incorrect.
First, this is specifically about a preemptive strike. About preventing the Borg from conceivable damage the could do, not imminent damage the were doing. So the analogy would have to be, if I'm in a room with a guy I have determined to be a killer, do I kill him on the basis that if I fail to do so it is possible, even likely, he might kill somebody in the future.
Second, the object used as a weapon is a sentient being. So the question would have to be, if I'm in a room with a guy who might likely kill somebody in the future do I use another being as a human shield so that I can kill him.
Third, we are talking about the elimination of a whole unique life and culture comprised of individuals not guilty of the same crimes as the collective whole, so the analogy would have to be, if I was in a room with a group of the last set of some endangered bears, who were likely to maul somebody at some point in the future, would I infect my friend with a disease and then let the bears eat my plague ridden friend so that I could be sure once those bears were extinct they would no longer have any opportunities to maul people.
My answer to that is, I'm not sure. But even if I was sure that it was the practical choice, that still wouldn't do anything to justify it as the moral choice.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...l-gorilla-enclosure-doing-just-fine/85152146/
Interesting dilemma just in the news recently. Shoot now and ask the questions later?
Interesting dilemma just in the news recently. Shoot now and ask the questions later?
Happened here in Cincinnati. I wish they could've tranquilized the gorilla, but they are the experts and probably know better than I how to handle it.
The parents should definitely get full duration in the Agony Booth.
I'm reminded of this incident from a few years back.
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/08/16/15-years-ago-today-gorilla-rescues-boy-who-fell-in-ape-pit/
A young boy fell into the enclosure, whereupon a female ape protected him until the help arrived.
Check out this response ...
http://www.erbzine.com/mag16/1680.html
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/08/16/15-years-ago-today-gorilla-rescues-boy-who-fell-in-ape-pit/
A young boy fell into the enclosure, whereupon a female ape protected him until the help arrived.
Check out this response ...
http://www.erbzine.com/mag16/1680.html
At the suggestion of Bob Cook, a "Kala Award" was presented to the Brookfield Zoo (in or near Chicago). This was in honor of the chimpanzee that rescued a very young boy who had fallen into the ape enclosure. She picked up the child and took him to the gate used by the keepers to enter the enclosure, thus protecting the child, as did ERB's Kala [Tarzan's adoptive mother]. But the Zoo refused to accept the award. They didn't want any more publicity about the happening, although it had been widely reported in newspapers, radio and TV news reports, with video clips shown on TV.
Similar threads
