And we can't start assuming things just because we never saw anything to the contrary.
In Theory said:JENNA: What were you just thinking?
DATA: In that particular moment, I was reconfiguring the warp field parameters, analyzing the collected works of Charles Dickens, calculating the maximum pressure I could safely apply to your lips, considering a new food supplement for Spot.
Don't put human standards and morals on Data. As much as he wants to be human, he isn't. He is what he is. He simply calculated the best option under the circumstances.
When Worf plunged his bat'leth into Duras' chest after killing K'helar (I'm not about to look up proper Star Trek spellings of these, so if they're wrong - that's why), everyone in the audience let out with one loud cheer. When Data "may" have fired with the intent to kill (but didn't kill), he's considered wrong or immoral? Or amoral? Seriously? Worf killed for revenge and personal satisfaction and we're okay with it because it's true to his culture and his character. Data's freedom and the lives of others were potentially at stake. Plus there was the revenge factor.
Data is, for all intents and purposes, alone in the galaxy. He is his OWN culture, so he makes the rules to live by. Every decision he makes is carefully calculated based on assorted variables. If he fired with intent to kill, rest assured, the reasons he had were good for him. It doesn't matter if it's good for you or not - it was the right choice based on Data's way of life.
He also decided, based on what he knew about his human friends, that the best answer to give Riker when asked was a non-answer. He also probably assumed Riker would react as he did and let it drop.
Besides, taking a life to avenge others and save his own ass? That makes him one notch closer to being human.
I didn't, but I can't speak for the rest of you blood-thirsty savages.When Worf plunged his bat'leth into Duras' chest after killing K'helar (I'm not about to look up proper Star Trek spellings of these, so if they're wrong - that's why), everyone in the audience let out with one loud cheer.
I didn't, but I can't speak for the rest of you blood-thirsty savages.When Worf plunged his bat'leth into Duras' chest after killing K'helar (I'm not about to look up proper Star Trek spellings of these, so if they're wrong - that's why), everyone in the audience let out with one loud cheer.![]()
There's just something satisfying about a morally contemptible character getting their comeuppance.
In Theory said:JENNA: What were you just thinking?
DATA: In that particular moment, I was reconfiguring the warp field parameters, analyzing the collected works of Charles Dickens, calculating the maximum pressure I could safely apply to your lips, considering a new food supplement for Spot.
So I think I can safely assume that Data went through every possible scenario and still figured the best course of action was to shoot Fajo...![]()
I so agree with that....it was good that Fajo was busted for what he did. Because he murdered in cold blood with no remorse whatsoever and was prepared to do it again.
From an in universe point of view, perhaps. However, I feel that the option I have presented would work, and since Data didn't choose to do it, there must have been some problem with it. I can't see what that problem is, and no one in this thread has been able to explain it.
Of course, from a real world stand point, the answer is simple - it was just bad writing.
I so agree with that....it was good that Fajo was busted for what he did. Because he murdered in cold blood with no remorse whatsoever and was prepared to do it again.
Kind of scared to read an opinion like that in a Trek forum ... I'd expect Trekkies to be against capital punishment, I guess.
I so agree with that....it was good that Fajo was busted for what he did. Because he murdered in cold blood with no remorse whatsoever and was prepared to do it again.
Kind of scared to read an opinion like that in a Trek forum ... I'd expect Trekkies to be against capital punishment, I guess.
I don't think fighting and killing to ensure your own freedom is the same as being pro-capital punishment. I've taken every view here as what people would do in Data's place. I'm against capital punishment except for the most heinous crimes that include children, but I'd have burned Fajo to the ground to ensure my own life and freedom in a heartbeat.
From an in universe point of view, perhaps. However, I feel that the option I have presented would work, and since Data didn't choose to do it, there must have been some problem with it. I can't see what that problem is, and no one in this thread has been able to explain it.
Of course, from a real world stand point, the answer is simple - it was just bad writing.
It's not bad writing. It's consistent with the character that we'd known up to that point. Just because the writers' went in a direction you personally don't approve of doesn't make it 'bad writing'.
The scenario I see in The Most Toys is far more believable than the scenario you continue to promote here. Data may not be human. But guess what? The person writing all his ethical subroutines was. It was the same person writing Lore's ethical subroutines.
What?
How is it consistent?
We have a character up until this point who has had no emotions, no sign that he's ever had any, and has always been eager to explain things, perhaps in more detail than was absolutely necessary. And now, he decides that an EXECUTION is the only possible course of action, despite the fact that Fajo was unarmed, and then he refuses to say what was really happening?
In what universe is this consistent with the way Data had been written or portrayed up until that point?
Skin of Evil said:DATA: Curious. (the phaser drops) You are capable of great sadism and cruelty. Interesting. No redeeming qualities.
ARMUS: So what do you think?
DATA: I think you should be destroyed.
ARMUS: A moral judgment from a machine.
Data isn't as morally "righteous" as you'd like to think he is.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.