Transporters and Replicators; the keys to Utopia?

[T'Baio]

Do you think the key to the utopia on Earth in Star Trek is the inventions of the transporter and the replicators?

What would happen if we actually had these, and they were free to all? Would people learn to get along if personal wealth was no longer an issue or goal? Or would we still be killing each other?

 

[tharpdevenport]

No, it would not be the key. Abolishing evil and it's practices and finding other planets to house life (since we can't all continue to multiply and live here forever) would also be necessary.

But it occured to me: even replicators need energy to contruct food and cloths, but eventually our population will be so great that we will have used up all ready-supply sources of energy and it will come to a point where we simply can't replenish the amount needed to sustain life.

 

[shivkala]

This is definitely a stretch one has to "swallow" to suspend their disbelief with the "perfect" future Star Trek shows.

I honestly think that if this technology existed, it would not end up in the hands of the people, but rather by the government and maybe free enterprise (like what I did there?). People would still have to purchase products as they always have. We are too rooted in capitilism to break free of this and allow everyone the ability to create whatever they wanted. At best, everyone would have access to one, but like on Voyager, people would have to earn replicator credits.

I just don't see enough people, with access to a machine that can create anything they want and another machine that can send them anyplace they'd wish to be, showing up for work as they used to. Sure there would be people who'd do so, but would there be enough firefighters, doctors, police officers, etc. working double shifts to cover the need for them? Would there be enough teachers? Would artists, authors, actors, etc. still expect to get paid for their efforts or would they freely give of their talents so people could have music, movies/television, paintings, books, etc.?

 

[Daneel]

It would have been great if Picard could have expanded on his "the acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives" speech, and maybe explained how in the hell that came to be. Knowing the human race as I do, I just don't see it happening.

However, when suspending disbelief, perhaps it was a combination of things that made the Federation such a utopia. The ability to travel to faraway, non-developed worlds provides the potential for virtually unlimited resources, assuming there are enough planets with useful resources.

There's also the fact that humans of the Star Trek universe have learned that there are other intelligent species out there, most of which seem to be unified. Perhaps it gave them something to strive for, and was enough to help human beings to, eventually, put aside their greed and petty differences.

Of course, we can't forget that this utopia arose only after 600 million people were killed in WW III. That might also cause the bulk of humanity to re-evaluate their priorities. The cynic in me thinks that it might actually take something this bad (or worse) to change humanity in so radical a way.

Ultimately, I don't think we'll ever see a humanity like the one in Star Trek. We might get closer to it, but it'll take more than transporters and replicators to do so.

 

[Spot's Meow]

I would say it would turn out more like it is on Fringe than it is on Star Trek. But I'm a pessimist.

 

[Mr. B]

Free, unlimited energy would have to be a prerequisite for matter replication and transporter tech to make a fundamental impact. Earth wouldn't see world peace overnight, but if replicators could eliminate scarcity, that would solve a great many of the World's problems.

 

[judge alba]

Do you think the key to the utopia on Earth in Star Trek is the inventions of the transporter and the replicators?

What would happen if we actually had these, and they were free to all? Would people learn to get along if personal wealth was no longer an issue or goal? Or would we still be killing each other?

more likely we'd be killing each other off with more wierd means of doing so or worse killing in the name of religion