Was Sloan a sociopath?

[Rush Limborg]

I have enjoyed the answers everyone have given. Really a case can be made either way. Sloan was not impulsive however, he showed great patience.

To me Sloan on screen completely lacks emotion or guilt. This can't be said for any of the other characters on DS9, all who have committed acts of homicide(except Jake?).

All the great captains of the Star Trek series have been shown to be weighed down by the the pros and cons of following or breaking orders/laws in the resolution of a plot problem. What evidence of ethical paralysis did Sloan ever show?

Well, you remember the moment at the very end of "Inter Arna..."?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V3EF-nzC2Q

Look carefully when he says to Bashir, "You did the right thing." From that point on, until Bashir replies, Sloan actually looks sad. Thus, when he says the line about sleeping at night...I wonder if he is implying the feeling of guilt on his part.

Who is Sloan accountable to? If he is a big part of the organizational strength of Section 31 then he is accountable to himself not others.

I've theorized that Sloan is one of many directors of certain "divisions" of Section 31. They each have absolute control of their divisions, and they have deals in place that no director may interfere with another's division, for fear of reprisal.

Still, they all hold each other basically accountable. If it is proven that a director is not working in the best interests of the Federation...

Did Sloan ever think that his rationalizations were more valid than others? I mean if I decided to start murdering people and altering the makeup of the Romulan government I might feel a little bad if those choices enabled Shinzon to rise to power in his quest to destroy Earth.

Frankly, Shinzon would have carried out the coup regardless. I doubt Sloan's actions had anything to do with it.

 

[Admiral Shran]

Um no it's not Section 31 says that there authorization to exist comes from Article 14 Section 31 of the Starfleet charter, except that particular part of the charter only says that a Starfleet officer can bend some of the rules in a time of crisis not that they can set up a secret organization that answers to no one.

Where does that come from? Is it from some of the novels?

As far as I know, Section 31's justification of Article 14, Section 31 of the Starfleet Charter giving them authorization is from the twenty-second incarnation of the agency, from Enterprise. And in those episodes, I don't think we ever heard what the lines of the Charter actually say.

 

[DS9Continuing]

Fascinating thread, all. Given me lots of material for a planned fanfic.

 

[BenRoethig]

No, if anything he's the other side of the coin. A sociopath is incapable of caring about anything but him/herself. Sloan is a true believer. He believes in the Federation so much, that he completely loses perspective. Saving the Federation supersedes all morality.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^But what does it mean, "perspective"?

 

[Rush Limborg]

Um no it's not Section 31 says that there authorization to exist comes from Article 14 Section 31 of the Starfleet charter, except that particular part of the charter only says that a Starfleet officer can bend some of the rules in a time of crisis not that they can set up a secret organization that answers to no one.

Where does that come from? Is it from some of the novels?

As far as I know, Section 31's justification of Article 14, Section 31 of the Starfleet Charter giving them authorization is from the twenty-second incarnation of the agency, from Enterprise. And in those episodes, I don't think we ever heard what the lines of the Charter actually say.

It's from the Enterprise novels.

BTW, the TOS Section 31 novel, Cloak, established that the Federation Starfleet Charter does have a "Section 31" that allows for "an autonomous investigative agency".

 

[imajakov]

think about this : Archer and Sisko are just as moral/immoral as Sloan was.

During the Enterprise episode "Damage", Archer orders the theft of a warp coil to make it to the Xindi Council in order to save the galaxy.

During DS9's In a Pale Moonlight, Sisko is involved in a secret operation that includes him being an accesory to the murder of 2 people, and the manipulation of the entire Romulan Empire in order to beat the Dominion.

Both guys regret what happened, but wouldnt do things differently if they had a second chance to do it all over again

The only difference is, Sloan had to do it on a daily basis, and Archer and Sisko only did it when they had no choice.

Sloan is the perfect anti hero- just like Garak was. there are times in life when the ends justify the means.

 

[Withers]

The only difference is, Sloan had to do it on a daily basis, and Archer and Sisko only did it when they had no choice.

Under extreme duress Archer and Sisko resorted to actions they ordinarily wouldn't have. It's like ignoring the speed limit when you have someone giving birth in the backseat or a gunshot victim sitting next to you. Luther Sloan disregarded the speed limit on a regular basis based on nothing but his word that where he was going was important. There's a big difference there.

Sloan is the perfect anti hero- just like Garak was.

I think a Sloan vs Garak thread would be pretty interesting actually. I'd have to think on that a little more to have anything concrete but it's certainly a discussable notion.

there are times in life when the ends justify the means.

This is also a subject worthy of its own thread (and it already has a few.) The "ends" in regard to the Federation remaining a sovereign power were the same for everyone. The "means," however, were not the same and some were far worse than others. 31 attempted genocide against the Founders and Luther Sloan actively tried to keep Bashir from curing Odo. I don't think those "means" are justified by the outcome of the Federation winning when other means were not only available but ultimately what solved the problem.

-Withers-​

 

[Luther Sloan]

Yeah, the choices made by 31 are not always pretty. Heck, I personally wouldn't condone or agree with them myself. But they do ensure the safety of the Federation (even if they do take it too far sometimes).

So on one side of the coin, I understand where Section 31 is coming from. They get the job done when it comes to protecting the Federation. But on the opposite side of the coin, there is a price to be paid, though. And I believe that price is the guilt that Section 31 has to live with by the very actions they take.

 

[imajakov]

it doesnt matter if you do it once or 1000 times, archer and sisko STILL did it. archer willingly did what he did
and sisko did what he did- and the worst part is he covered the murders up.
Archer tortured a pirate.willingly and without any conscience about it

they only made sloan the bad guy to make julian look good.
in my opinion sloan, however morally ambiguous was a hero- or at least an anti-hero

oh and when starfleet found out about the founders disease, both starfleet AND sisko both refused to give the cure to the founders while the war was still going on, so sisko was NO saint either!

what if the federation needs and always will need section 31? if sloan was telling the truth, and secton 31 has probably saved the federation 10 times over had it not for thier intervention, they might have been destroyed or conquered by just about any of the major galactic powers, then what? if section 31 did that just by bending a few rules, i would thank them for it if i were a federation citizen.

i think section 31 got a bad rap. some people want to equate it to the Tal Shair or Obsidian Order. but what people fail to realize is that section 31 doesnt impose its will and instill loyalty thru fear like the Tal Shair or Obsidian Order does(did).Almost nobody knows who Section 31 even is.Section 31 doesnt operate thru torture, fear, and murder of its citizens like some Gestapo like organization would. In fact they probably care about the Federation more than anyone. they just are willing to cross( or dance on) the line at times IF neccesary to protect it and its allies.

that can involve murder, theft, manipulation, allowing innocent people to die, but in the end they are doing it to save,protect many other lives in return. even the vulcans say the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Infecting the founders with a fatal disease was immoral. but neccesary the ALpha Quadrant alliance camee VERY close to losing the war. they almost did, many times IF it wasnt for the Bajoran Prophets, THEY WOULD HAVE. even With the prophets help, they almost lost the final battle of Cardassia!
Section 31 knew the federations chances of survival were slim. So they did what they had to do protect it. Besides the Founders are guilty of far worse crimes, including genocide, and conquering and imposing its will on countless others in the Gamma Quadrant. and the founders were NOT doing it to save lives. they were doing it becuase they were afraid of solids.they didnt care and they thought they were better than solids.they were the self made ARYANS of star trek.

what sloan a sociopath? probably not. he Was just a patriot.one countrys patriot is another countrys terrorist.
and even if you get to label him a sociopath, id rather take him than the psychopaths all over the quadrant.
Think about this