True or False: Dear Dr. is most morally bankrupt trek episode evar

[horatio83]

You cannot determine maturity by technological prowess.

The Edo were technologically inferior yet were mature enough to accept visitors from the sky. As were the Capellans. The existence of alien life did not appreciably impact those societies. While the presence of Picard and Troi on a world ready to make their first flight was shook to its core.

By your standards, a mature world would be excluded from the galactic mix because they have no interest in FTL technology.

Of course there are always exceptions but the general pattern of cultural development is that you are ready to face the possibility of alien life when the chance to get out there becomes a material reality. We are talking about a guideline for Starfleet captains when they first become aware of the existence of a new species and have no data on them at all. Suppose Starfleet does not detect antimatter, decides to conduct duck-blind missions and then realize that these guys are ready to welcome alien visitors. Then you obviously initiate first contact.

In the case of first contact you have to err on the side of caution.

 

[DonIago]

^^No. The Cytherians had the capacity for FTL travel, they just "reversed" the concept.

 

[horatio83]

One example would be asking for help in a war that had nothing to do with the Feds.

The Cold War could have easily ended in the extinction of humankind. So make up your mind, is preventing extinction only OK in the case of natural catastrophes and not in the case of cultural ones or what and why the distinction between cultural and natural and what about the cases where you cannot make a distinction between them?
I am just looking for some consistency. On the one hand people are saying that human ethics should be universally applied in the galaxy but then they do not like the word dogma and want the Prime Directive to be a very lax rule. Seems like Swiss Cheese not me and not like a thought-out position.

 

[Ian Keldon]

^But Junk Psuedoscience such as Warp Drive is OK?

Warp drive doesn't carry with it inherent moral implications from it's use.

 

[BillJ]

The Cold War could have easily ended in the extinction of humankind. So make up your mind, is preventing extinction only OK in the case of natural catastrophes and not in the case of cultural ones or what and why the distinction between cultural and natural and what about the cases where you cannot make a distinction between them?

I made up my mind about five pages ago...

You should get involved for only two reasons: an external extinction event (not self-inflicted) or to clean up a mess by a prior expedition.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Archer, (one of) the founding father(s) of the Federation, is a great man precisely because he is able to grasp that "he is not in Kansas anymore", that this new age requires interspecies ethics and not human ethics.
If they followed the latter they could e.g. eat the Tellarite pigs.

Let's stop dancing around the issue: the PD is nothing but the ultimate expression of the concept that there is no such thing as good/evil, right/wrong, etc, and that all is perspective, and that no one should exercise any sort of moral discernment.

Which is a notion that is total and complete BS. At best it's an excuse for moral cowardice, and at worst it's collaborating with evil.

If I were Central American and were so-inclined as to attempt to revive the Aztec human sacrifice religion of Mezo-America, would you just shrug and say "your culture, your rules...I have no right to judge you or interfere..."?

I seriously doubt it. No person with a functioning conscience would defend permitting that to happen.

In Trek terms, witness the case of Dr Timicin (TNG) and the Eminians/Vendikans (TOS). In both cases their societies had developed socially dysfunctional, if not outright diseased cultures that were committing great acts of evil on the populace. Kirk (rightly) said basically "Oh no you don't!" and did something. Picard, Troi, et al just shrugged and said "it's your culture"and let him go kill himself not because he was facing a horrid, lingering death in great pain, or even because he was some sort of burden, but only because his sick culture decreed that everyone must die at 60.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Since so many of the civilizations in Star Trek are presented as allegories for real world civilizations, this idea of new interspecies ethics doesn't work.

Thank you! That is absolutely correct. Within the Trek universe, with a few exceptions, what is considered "right" by one culture is considered "right" by another. There are cultural exceptions like Klingons viewing suicide as a means of regaining honor, but in general Trek does not support the idea that different ethics apply to different cultures. The Federation would agree with Optimus Prime: "Freedom is the right of all sentient beings."

That doesn't mean Trek supports the idea that humans should run around forcing their views on everyone, but most species and civilizations follow the same basic ethics and morals as everyone else anyways. What is needed is not "interspecies ethics" but interspecies politics. The politics and logistics change when dealing with things on such a large scale or when dealing with "aliens", but that's it. What is right is right, and the Trek universe supports that.

Now I'm sure someone's gonna try to argue with me and say there are times when Trek presents two different viewpoints as equally "right." That's not what I'm talking about - I'm talking about generalities, not specifics.

If they followed the latter they could e.g. eat the Tellarite pigs.

Seriously? Do you honestly believe that? Right, 'cause the fact that Tellarites are sentient beings would mean nothing to the humans in Trek if they kept their human viewpoint. "They look like pigs, so it must be okay to eat them if you view life with human ethics." That's completely ridiculous.

The Menk are enslaved, and deprived of Education and therefore Development, by the Valakians. Is that not applying and tolerating different Ethics for different Cultures if you gave the Valakians the cure? The Menk were shown to be quite sentient in the episode. Matter of fact, the Menk helping Phlox, who arranged and categorized and sub-categorized the Blood samples showed more intelligence than we saw exhibited to us by any Valakian

So the answer is to sign the death warrant on a species?

BS!

The answer is to cure the plague, THEN sit down and fix the social issues between the two races.

 

[BillJ]

In Trek terms, witness the case of Dr Timicin (TNG) and the Eminians/Vendikans (TOS). In both cases their societies had developed socially dysfunctional, if not outright diseased cultures that were committing great acts of evil on the populace. Kirk (rightly) said basically "Oh no you don't!" and did something. Picard, Troi, et al just shrugged and said "it's your culture"and let him go kill himself not because he was facing a horrid, lingering death in great pain, or even because he was some sort of burden, but only because his sick culture decreed that everyone must die at 60.

Actually, I support both of these cultures to execute their respective moral codes internally.

The problem becomes if it spills outside their populace and ensnares innocent people, like we see in A Taste of Armageddon. You can't enforce your moral code on other cultures.

 

[BillJ]

The answer is to cure the plague, THEN sit down and fix the social issues between the two races.

The answer is to cure the plague. Internal dynamics of a culture is not for Starfleet to judge.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Medical assistance which sustains a system of oppression is already a crime among humans (if Hitler is sick your ethical injunction is not to cure him but to ensure that he dies) and definitely among aliens.

Doctors are not soldiers. Their duty is to "do no harm" and to practice their profession dispassionately and without favoritism or prejudice. Doctors cure sick people (if such be within their power) regardless of race, politics, moral standing, etc, at least the ethical ones do.

 

[Ian Keldon]

The Hippocratic Oath forbids abortion and euthanization and hardly a decent contemporary guidelines for medical ethics.

What can be more decent in ANY era than the principle of "do no harm"?

 

[Ian Keldon]

Babylon 5 dealt with a similar matter. An Alien family had a son with a breathing problem that was killing him. The Doctor could fix it with a simple operation, however, the family's Religion didn't allow cutting/surgery, and so they refused to allow the Surgery. The Doctor went to the Commanding Officer to ask for permission to do the surgery, the Commander ordered him not to do the surgery unless the family agreed. The Doctor did the surgery anyways and the boy was fine. But, the family believed he was no longer pure and they killed him

And should have been sentenced to whatever the maximum penalty for murder in that universe is.'

The doctor did the right thing, saving a life. It was the twisted, sick beliefs of the parents that killed the child.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Actually, I support both of these cultures to execute their respective moral codes internally.

The problem becomes if it spills outside their populace and ensnares innocent people, like we see in A Taste of Armageddon. You can't enforce your moral code on other cultures.

So it's perfectly all right to allow other cultures to practice human sacrifice because "that's their culture", just so long as it's their own people that they are killing?

Doesn't fly. Not for one minute.

 

[DonIago]

Right, much better that humanity should go through space forcing others to adhere to our belief systems.

And if an alien race comes to Earth and wants to impose their beliefs upon us?

 

[BillJ]

Actually, I support both of these cultures to execute their respective moral codes internally.

The problem becomes if it spills outside their populace and ensnares innocent people, like we see in A Taste of Armageddon. You can't enforce your moral code on other cultures.

So it's perfectly all right to allow other cultures to practice human sacrifice because "that's their culture", just so long as it's their own people that they are killing?

Doesn't fly. Not for one minute.

So you're saying that starship captains should go through the universe enforcing truth, justice and the American way? Or is that the Chinese way? Or the Islamic way? Or the Vulcan way? Or the Andorian way? Or the Tellarite way? Or the Betazoid way? Or the Trill way?

Are you going to stay years or decades to ensure that they meet your moral code? Are you going to set up a military government and send in troops to enforce your morality on an alien race? Would you be supportive of a superior race technologically coming in and enforcing their morals on humanity? Do you equate technological progress to moral superiority?

I don't think for a minute that I'm wise enough to enforce my own moral code on an alien race. It discounts thousands of years of development on their part, because of how I feel today. I'm a much different person than I was twenty years ago and will be a much different person twenty years from now.

Your mileage may vary...

 

[horatio83]

About external extinction events, I think it is for Starfleet to destroy objects that are on a collision course with a Minshara class planet with sentient life on it.
Setting up something like the verteron array on Mars to constantly protect an alien culture would probably go too far because the folks would think that it is totally natural than no asteroids hit their planet and not come up with a method to deflect them on their own as it is already done for them.

 

[sonak]

The line is not arbitrary. When a species develops warp drive it has to face aliens and learn to deal with them.
If you drew the line earlier, e.g. when a species industrializes, aliens would have been ethically obliged to prevent the dozens of genocides, the development of sweat shops, slavery, nuclear weapons and nowdays climate change and financial speculation on food.
About "standing by as civilizations die", note that at least climate change and nukes endanger not just millions but our entire civilization.

Do you want some benevolent alien nannies to help us with these problems or do you want us to become an adult species on our own respectively if we fail destroy ourselves?

a species doesn't need warp drive to have aliens come to contact them.

Still not getting the rationale, are we? When a culture develops warp drive and wants to actually get out there it has to change and open itself to alien lifeforms. Its culture will massively change (humankind!) and in this time it is OK for the Feds to contact them. If you do it earlier the civilization is not ready yet (the episode First Contact).
Still waiting for an answer, do you want the alien nannies or not?

The line is not arbitrary. When a species develops warp drive it has to face aliens and learn to deal with them.
If you drew the line earlier, e.g. when a species industrializes, aliens would have been ethically obliged to prevent the dozens of genocides, the development of sweat shops, slavery, nuclear weapons and nowdays climate change and financial speculation on food.

Seems like the Valakians were out facing aliens without warp drive.

There is some debate as to whether or not those who left Vulcan had warp drive when they founded the Romulan Empire. One series of books speculates that they used generational ships. The asteroid ship Yonada didn't have warp drive. The ancient Bajorans were able to make FTL trips by using solar sails.

And we saw races that were considered advanced that participated in all the things you list above.

Warp drive is an incredibly arbitrary line in the sand.

The smart way to go would be to evaluate in a culture by culture basis.

While "pre-warp" probably covers the vast majority of cases I agree that "out in space and culturally ready to meet new folks" should be the more general pattern.
Then again you need simple guidelines. Detect no antimatter, stay away. If you discover afterwards that they use a different form of FTL propulsion you can still make first contact. It's an asymmetrical issue, no harm done if you wait for days or even years but if you make first contact too early you can fuck them up seriously.

Since the top part was directed at me...


1. You seem to be assuming that FTL travel is automatically connected to a desire for contact with other races. That's a big assumption. Suppose it was developed by a race that had overcrowded their planet, as a way of settling on other uninhabited worlds far away? They might not be looking for contact at all, merely settlement. Others may do it to escape repression or because of a political split.(Like the Romulans fleeing Vulcan) On the other hand, a species WITHOUT FTL may be very interested in alien contact(like many on Earth are right now)

That's why it's arbitrary.


2. As for the nanny thing, it's a strawman. I'm not proposing that the UFP go out and search for problems to take care of. In "Dear Doctor," this was a situation they stumbled upon. And I don't consider it "nannyism" to help those in need, I consider it the right thing to do.(resources and capabilities permitting)

 

[Sindatur]

I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.

Lovely nonsense, if you want an abortion or get euthanized you are screwed. No doctor today cares about this ancient oath anymore and a fictional alien doctor in an interspecies exchange program certainly doesn't either. Archer chose a Denobulan doctor precisely because he wanted somebody with a different perspective. Gee, that's why humankind is going out there in the first place, to learn from and about other people.

You do realize the modern Hippocratic Oath is different from ancient one, right? Most doctors still respect the modern oath.

Also just because Phlox's perspective is different doesn't make it good. Phlox seems to using eugenics to justify his perspective, that a weaker race is holding a stronger race back and if the weaker race dies the stronger race will thrive. That sounds familiar.

Frankly if Phlox can just ignore the Hippocratic oath at his whim, he is not fit to be a doctor in Star Fleet. Do you think Picard shouldn't have punished Worf for killing Duras, even according to Klingon culture what Worf did was okay?

I don't believe in complete cultural relativity, that is dangerous for a society. If someone believes they have the right to beat their wife, I don't think they should be legally allowed to do that.

Why do you keep bringing up Starfleet, and what Picard would do, and the Prime Directive, none of these things exist, and Phlox is not a member of Archer's Organization that gives him his orders. He is a Cultural Exchange participant, who Archer invited along for the ride requesting he serve as the ship's Doctor, no different than T'Pol's situation as an Observer

 

[horatio83]

As for the nanny thing, it's a strawman.

You are still evading the question I asked so strawman yourself.

You have problems with the Feds standing by as civilizations die. If they are aware of the problem of a civilization like ours should they prevent someone like us from annihilating ourselves via nuclear weapons, climate change or whatever or not?

 

[BillJ]

As for the nanny thing, it's a strawman.

You are still evading the question I asked so strawman yourself.

You have problems with the Feds standing by as civilizations die. If they are aware of the problem of a civilization like ours should they prevent someone like us from annihilating ourselves via nuclear weapons, climate change or whatever or not?

No they shouldn't interfere. The scenarios above are self-inflicted.