Vulcan attitudes to the disabled
- Thread starter JoeZhang
- Start date
Come to think about it has anyone ever heard of a disabled Vulcan?
Strange question. But I'm sure the Vulcans value life as much as we do. Life in any form. IDIC, you remember? Of course they wouldn't kill it! And why couldn't a disabled child contribute to society? Why does is it have to anyway? Sorry, but that's really a weird way to look at things.
I doubt they would kill them either, then again Ive never seen a disabled Vulcan so maybe they have some kind of offspring purity.
The question depends greatly on what you consider as contributing. Geordi was disabled, yet contributed. If you want to look at the real world, Stephen Hawking is disabled. I don't think he's a waste of material. Nor are all of the millions of people with disabilities who contribute every day, including teachers, doctors, scientists, accountants, lawyers, clergy, etc.
Maybe the original poster means disabled as those that are helpless and mentally challenged. As to an answer I doubt if disabilities like that exist anymore. Course Capt. Pike would be an exception. I'd imagine that they would be cared for and there are scientist that are feverishly looking for cures as today.
Just to give a little context, I ask because I was reading something that mentioned that Vulcans practice euthanasia and I was wondering what other things that a society that is based on logic might do that *we* would find unplatable (or at least some of us).
Yes that's what I was thinking of. We know that many genetic illnesses still exist in the Star Trek universe so it's not impossible that mentally disabled children are born - would they be shunned or hidden away on a planet that is based on it's intellectual prowess?
Horsehockey. Some author was trying to make a political statement. Kirk/Spock slash fiction is more accurate.
Or a fat one?
Come on guys. It's TV. You only see the perfect and mostly good-looking.
Although TV often makes except for heavy older guys. It's more acceptable on TV to be male and overweight than female and overweight.
We've only seen perhaps a few dozen Vulcans anyhow, spread across the five series (and several movies.) None of them were just "regular people" on the planet, they were all notable in some way.
As for a "Trek" answer, there is no logic in disposing of someone who, however physically limited (and how many of those would there be given the future level of medicine?), could contribute towards society. As for mentally limited, as we know even here in this day and age, useful and productive work can be found for those who are mentally limited provided the people are guided and helped in the areas where they require assistance. (Sadly enough, the danger to them is not so much from THEMSELVES but more from US, the normal/above normal intelligence people, specifically the predators, bullies and jerks among us.)
Seems to me a few things should be pointed out:
- Mental disability would probably be "less" common (not nonexistent, but certainly many advances in treating it will have been made).
- Any type of physical disability alone wouldn't justify euthanasia as long as the mind is active, because they could contribute (e.g. Hawking)
- Mental disability which had the potential for a cure would mean no killing because I don't think Vulcans would find it logical to kill someone who could potentially be cured
- Simple mental disability does not preclude contributions
- Vulcans do place a high value on life and non-violence
- Relative to today, the "resource draw" of a profoundly mentally disabled person would probably be much more easy to handle on any Vulcan planet or vessel of relative technological accomplishment.
- Profound mental disability only - e.g. vegetable state - might justify it; I think a Vulcan would look at it logically and decide whether this creature has a chance for recovery, happiness, or any sort of contribution. If not, euthanasia would probably be an option. But my guess is these circumstances would be very rare indeed.
- Mental disability would probably be "less" common (not nonexistent, but certainly many advances in treating it will have been made).
- Any type of physical disability alone wouldn't justify euthanasia as long as the mind is active, because they could contribute (e.g. Hawking)
- Mental disability which had the potential for a cure would mean no killing because I don't think Vulcans would find it logical to kill someone who could potentially be cured
- Simple mental disability does not preclude contributions
- Vulcans do place a high value on life and non-violence
- Relative to today, the "resource draw" of a profoundly mentally disabled person would probably be much more easy to handle on any Vulcan planet or vessel of relative technological accomplishment.
- Profound mental disability only - e.g. vegetable state - might justify it; I think a Vulcan would look at it logically and decide whether this creature has a chance for recovery, happiness, or any sort of contribution. If not, euthanasia would probably be an option. But my guess is these circumstances would be very rare indeed.
I doubt the Vulcans are that Conservative.
Also, non-canon, but *very* early Trek-verse: John Ford's Star Trek: The Final Reflection, has a scene in it where Spock's father is giving intimate details about how Vulcan genetic engineering made it possible for Amanda to conceive a "fusion" child. Theoretically, the Vulcans shared much of their medical technology with Terrans, and one would presume in the spirit of IDIC, how to "cure" those diseases which can be cured through genetic re-sequencing prior to birth.
---------------
Looking for chocolate asteroids in all the wrong places.
---------------
Looking for chocolate asteroids in all the wrong places.
well said.
Similar threads
