Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence?

[Cepstrum]

We're told many times how humanity has moved past its violent past, and that crime etc. is virtually non-existent.

So why are Bashir and Miles constantly playing out such tragically violent episodes in Earth's history in the holosuites (eg, Battle of Britain, The Alamo)? They seem to be entertained by violence. If humanity truly had moved beyond its dark past, why are they enthused — rather than repulsed — to relive events in which people were killing each other?

 

[DevilEyes]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

We're told many times how humanity has moved past its violent past, and that crime etc. is virtually non-existent.

So why are Bashir and Miles constantly playing out such tragically violent episodes in Earth's history in the holosuites (eg, Battle of Britain, The Alamo)? They seem to be entertained by violence. If humanity truly had moved beyond its dark past, why are they enthused — rather than repulsed — to relive events in which people were killing each other?

Exactly for that reason.

Why are people today fascinated rather than repulsed by medieval knights and battles? Why do they find them romantic? Why do people like WW2 movies?

You seem to be confusing "the society has eradicated/moved past wars and crime" with "humans have completely psychologically changed in the period of a few hundred years".

 

[Can]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

I think it is kind of nostalgia , or a wish to understand those times , conditions and behavior of ancient human history as a whole. Kind of fascination with past and its ( supposed ) romantics. Even we do not above these things in modern times do we ? We watch movies or plays ( mostly fictional or fantasy version ) of Rome , Ancient Greece , Middle Ages....Wear Caveman costumes for Halloween ( at least I did during my first Halloween in USA : ) ) Visit old battlefields....Remember Star Trek TNG's "Brothers" episode ? Dr Soong once asked Data that why humans were fascinated with old ancient things like clocks , antics etc ? I think it is our desire to live and experience those times and conditions because it is impossible to do so in a modern age.....Part of a wish to live that experience ( that was part of the reason of Holosuite/Holodeck's existence in Star Trek universe )

At the other hand if Star Trek people actually lived those times and condition they would be surprised and shocked usually. Remember "Past Tense" two parter of DS9 ? Basher was quite astonished the deprevity he saw around when he entered to sanctuary zone. ( Though he acknowledged thay he did not like 21st Century history ) So fantasy they created in holodeck and reality they encountered would rarely be equal....( just like when we watch a movie about history in PG-13 rating or play a PC game like Empire Total War )

 

[Navaros]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

It's to show that their claims to be "enlightened/evolved" are a crock and in reality they are no different humans living now.

DS9 also proved that in the real lives of the characters, such as: when they use violence to massacre Jem'Hadar, mining the wormhole, and the genocide disease against the Founders etc.

Clearly, the alleged "enlightened/evolved" humans use violence to solve problems just like their alleged "inferior" counterparts.

 

[Cepstrum]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

We're told many times how humanity has moved past its violent past, and that crime etc. is virtually non-existent.

So why are Bashir and Miles constantly playing out such tragically violent episodes in Earth's history in the holosuites (eg, Battle of Britain, The Alamo)? They seem to be entertained by violence. If humanity truly had moved beyond its dark past, why are they enthused — rather than repulsed — to relive events in which people were killing each other?

Exactly for that reason.

Why are people today fascinated rather than repulsed by medieval knights and battles? Why do they find them romantic? Why do people like WW2 movies?

You seem to be confusing "the society has eradicated/moved past wars and crime" with "humans have completely psychologically changed in the period of a few hundred years".

EDIT/NOTE: [I composed the following before I was able to read the next two replies. Sorry! I'll go read them now.]

You're right — I'm getting things confused. Thanks for your help. A follow up question:

So the new social order (no violence/crime/poverty/greed etc) is driven not by a (biologic) change in humanity but rather a change in the environment?

Is this order imposed from above, a result of the gift economy, the spread of knowledge, or an artificial biological enhancement — almost like a vaccine or genetic manipulation — that takes away the dark impulses?

Is it like how many highly educated members of the First World today are less inclined to "barbaric" behavior, than say, an uneducated, isolated tribe member in the wild who might be less disinclined towards savagery, for that might be all he knows? (I'm not trying to malign "backward" peoples, just trying to think of an albeit flawed analogy.)

Another example might be how many societies that formerly practiced chattel slavery eventually became repulsed by it once they understood that the slaves were no different from themselves, as well as learning about their horrible treatment.

But if that analogy is somewhat accurate, I still wonder why the humans of the future are entertained by violence. Few — if any — educated/civilized people of today enjoy being entertained by watching slavery in action (though there are plenty who can't seem to get enough gratuitous violence on TV/the movies). I'd have thought the same would be true of vicarious violence in the 24th century.

Thanks for your help. You're right: I am confused and often end up confusing things. Still, I'd appreciate any further attempts to remove my misunderstandings.

 

[Cepstrum]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

It's to show that their claims to be "enlightened/evolved" are a crock and in reality they are no different humans living now.

DS9 also proved that in the real lives of the characters, such as: when they use violence to massacre Jem'Hadar, mining the wormhole, and the genocide disease against the Founders etc.

Clearly, the alleged "enlightened/evolved" humans use violence to solve problems just like their alleged "inferior" counterparts.

I see your point. Perhaps in, eg, Picard's mind humanity has evolved — but his exprirnces are limited to a rather elitist bunch. Actually, even he demonstrated excessive violent tendencies (gunning down the Borg in FC).

But that makes it hard to reconcile with the notion that crime (at least the violent sort) is no more on Earth. The penal system is quite lenient, so apparently it's not due to fear of punishment. Maybe it's because of the gift economy — people don't need to rob to get what they want — and a combination of medical/genetic treatments that stops otherwise sociopathic people from acting on their natural tendencies (those who kill with little or no reason). Of course, the "gift economy" is difficult to explain, for it's contradicted several times.

And I still don't see why any SF officer/crewman would necessarily obey his/her CO or show up on time for his/her shift: they're (apparently) not getting paid, and there's no severe punishment (except for being reprimanded enough timed until being kicked out). But that's a question for another thread.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

The humans of Star Trek aren't really evolved. They've changed the definition of "my tribe" from being this or that nation, race or religion, to being the Federation. They behave towards non-Fed societies like old-time human bigots used to behave towards other nations, races or religions. It's still just as tribal as ever.

The humans of Star Trek do have a variation on tribalism that isn't common to most current societies (but is a characteristic of American tribalism - no big surprise, since that's where Star Trek came from in the first place) - namely that they're liberal minded enough to be willing to absorb other tribes into their own tribe, as long as the other tribes stop their evil ways and start to act like the good tribe (ie, the UFP). This quality is not always appreciated by the other tribes of the galaxy, hence the comparisons between the UFP and the Borg and the interesting fact that the peace-loving UFP always seems to be fighting at least one war.

 

[DevilEyes]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

So the new social order (no violence/crime/poverty/greed etc) is driven not by a (biologic) change in humanity but rather a change in the environment?

Of course, just like Europe is a very different place now than 200 years ago, or 500 years ago, even though people haven't biologically evolved for hundreds of thousands of years.

Is this order imposed from above, a result of the gift economy, the spread of knowledge, or an artificial biological enhancement — almost like a vaccine or genetic manipulation — that takes away the dark impulses?

Definitely the former, since a) we've been told over and over that genetic engineering is forbidden in the Federation, and b) none of the Human characters seem to be particularly different from real life modern day humans, they certainly do have violent impulses, they fight, they hate...

I don't believe that Humans of the 24th century do not have a propensity for violence. We are just supposed to believe that the society has an efficient while also humane way of containing the potential violence, so the crime rates are very low. (I don't think for a moment that it literally doesn't exist, that would be a fairytale rather than SF.) How exactly it does that... That's an extremely interesting question, and one that would be very interesting to see Trek really tackle. We usually just hear the characters talk about Earth as a "paradise", we rarely get to see it.

But that makes it hard to reconcile with the notion that crime (at least the violent sort) is no more on Earth. The penal system is quite lenient, so apparently it's not due to fear of punishment.

Is it really? We were told that offenders are put in "reorientation centers". That implies some sort of psychological therapy. What are those therapies like? They might be very humane, or they might be more like One Flew Over the Cookoo's Nest, and the treatments might be something similar to the infamous behaviorist therapy techniques (or, to use another famous fictional version of this, Clockwork Orange). For all we know, the reorientation centers might be in some ways creepier than the maximum security prisons of today - you might not get beaten, raped or in danger of getting killed, but the intrusion may be far greater if you're having people poking through your mind and trying to "reprogram" you and change your entire personality.

Maybe it's because of the gift economy — people don't need to rob to get what they want — and a combination of medical/genetic treatments that stops otherwise sociopathic people from acting on their natural tendencies (those who kill with little or no reason).

And here we run into the problem of the alleged ban on genetic modifications. People kill and commit violence for a variety of reasons, many of which have nothing to do with money and material possessions. No gift economy (if that's what it is) would help eradicate sexual crimes, crimes of passion, hate crimes (in every sense of the word - the American legal one or the literal one) etc.

 

[JarodRussell]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

I'm wondering if there is a level of realism setting on the holodeck. Battle of Britain seems to be less of a problem, but The Alamo?! That was a bloody mess!

 

[indolover]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

Humans in the Trek universe are a mixed bag.

Human nature has not fundamentally changed then! Whether human nature can ever change is a highly moot point.

It's just that that society's social values are different, and that a more evolved state is encouraged. And to be fair, Earth appears to be a paradise, and other Federation worlds appear to be peaceful. it's like in the real world, we hate things like racism or sexism today, but Western society hundreds of years ago did not.

But if humans have fundamentally changed, then Picard shouldn't have wanted revenge against the Borg. Even in the real world, we reckon that revenge is wrong, but life is not black and white. Many acts of violence for example in world are done because of revenge, in a way getting back at people who hurt us is normal.

And the Federation is always involved in wars, even if they don't start them. The existence of Section 31, and even Sisko tricking the Romulans into the Dominion War doesn't show evolution lol. Again, IMO it's just the social mantra of 24th century Trek society. It's possible that human nature may not ever change.

 

[Admiral Shran]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

It's to show that their claims to be "enlightened/evolved" are a crock and in reality they are no different humans living now.

This.

I think Quark said it best in The Siege of AR-558...

"Let me tell you something about Hew-mons, nephew. They're a wonderful, friendly people – as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts... deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers... put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time... and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon. You don't believe me? Look at those faces, look at their eyes..."

So yes, I do think it is more environmentally based than biologically based. The gift economy of the Federation has made it possible for Humans to move past the need for violence. However, the desire for violence is still there, ready and waiting for the first opportunity to show itself.

 

[Anwar]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

It's the same reason we still enjoy playing harmless war games and stuff right now, when we have no real violent urge to do so. It's just fun for the sake of fun.

Yes, it is possible to be a more humane, less violent culture and still want to have fun in some harmless but still bizarre way that can appear violent when it really isn't. That doesn't make the UFP humans hypocrites for reliving the Alamo, because they're all aware it's not real.

Seriously, does playing stuff like Starcraft make us no different from Viking Raiders from centuries ago? No, it just means we're having fun in a way that may appear violent to someone else but it is in NO WAY violent.

So yeah, it's the more enlightened people having fun, being misinterpreted as false hypocrisy by the haters who think that it's dumb for people from the future to be different from us in any possible way. IE, misrepresentation.

 

[Crewman47]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

I'm wondering if there is a level of realism setting on the holodeck. Battle of Britain seems to be less of a problem, but The Alamo?! That was a bloody mess!

I'm sure that like video games of today holo simulations would likely have a graphic filter that the user could adjust to there preference.

The one difference though between todays video games and holo programs is the fact that holo characters are more life like than computer characters, so wouldn't that change anything or do you still treat it the same by saying to yourself that the person you just killed is just a projection of light and photons and made up of 0's and 1's.

 

[TheGodBen]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

It's the same reason we still enjoy playing harmless war games and stuff right now, when we have no real violent urge to do so. It's just fun for the sake of fun.

Yes, it is possible to be a more humane, less violent culture and still want to have fun in some harmless but still bizarre way that can appear violent when it really isn't. That doesn't make the UFP humans hypocrites for reliving the Alamo, because they're all aware it's not real.

Seriously, does playing stuff like Starcraft make us no different from Viking Raiders from centuries ago? No, it just means we're having fun in a way that may appear violent to someone else but it is in NO WAY violent.

I'm going to agree with Anwar. *sounds of heads exploding can be heard across the internet*

I like to think of myself as a reasonably "evolved" human being that refrains from violence, I'd rather watch a political debate than a boxing match. But for some reason the most entertainment I have experienced over the last year was playing Red Dead Redemption, a cowboy game where you ride around the wild west shooting people. I'm not even a fan of westerns, but the game was so much fun and the world so immersive that I couldn't help but enjoy myself. I played it so much that my Xbox broke down.

Holodecks are merely the ultimate version of video games, they're about living through fantasies that we didn't even know we had. There's something within all of us that gets a thrill from violent and suspenseful actions even though we have intellectually moved away from such actions in our daily lives, and these games allow us to experience that thrill in a safe place where there are no consequences.

The one difference though between todays video games and holo programs is the fact that holo characters are more life like than computer characters, so wouldn't that change anything or do you still treat it the same by saying to yourself that the person you just killed is just a projection of light and photons and made up of 0's and 1's.

I'd say that it would change our attitudes towards the games, even the move to HD graphics has had an effect on how I play games like GTA. Back in the 2D days I used to find it funny if innocent pedestrians got killed, partly because I could only see the tops of their heads and shoulders and partly because the AI was useless. When GTA3 made the jump to 3D it was still funny because the characters were blocky, the animations were awkward and the AI just walked around. When I first played GTA4 I shot I man to see what would happen, and as I saw him trying to crawl away in a realistic human way I found myself feeling guilty. Then he collapsed and started wheezing on the ground. I shot him in the head just to put him out of his misery. Ever since then I've refrained from killing innocent pedestrians at close range, it's just not fun like it used to be.

I couldn't even contemplate the possibility of doing something like that to a hologram.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

I like to think humans of the future would honour their ancestors, and that means acknowledging the role of violence. Violence is not a "dark impulse" or some evil desire lurking in the mind, it's a natural trait that in the past was quite necessary in humans and any other animal that wanted to survive. It's not something to be ashamed of or fear. We are simply lucky that we have progressed technologically, socially, etc, to the point where we can survive perfectly well without it. Our descendants hopefully can develop still further, and violence will, I hope, become less and less common. But that doesn't mean we should turn our backs on history. I mean, I'm a pacifist and can't stand violence (that includes any realistic violence on TV, etc- I can't watch it). But non-realistic "mock" violence, or martial arts, or "war games" etc I find great fun and/or useful. I think we should definitely keep the warrior ethic of humanity alive- and that view doesn't conflict with my pacifism. Maybe the Federation humans share my view of things. I mean, if they can arm their ships heavily as a wise precaution while remaining peaceful explorers...

PS: Look at my usual avatar! I'm a pacifist, yet I pretend to be a crazy frothing axe-murderer!

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

PS: Look at my usual avatar! I'm a pacifist, yet I pretend to be a crazy frothing axe-murderer!

Good point! I'm pretending to be a Borg.

 

[Anwar]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

For the rule of three: I'm a super-Human/Dalek!

 

[Admiral Shran]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

When I first played GTA4 I shot I man to see what would happen, and as I saw him trying to crawl away in a realistic human way I found myself feeling guilty. Then he collapsed and started wheezing on the ground. I shot him in the head just to put him out of his misery. Ever since then I've refrained from killing innocent pedestrians at close range, it's just not fun like it used to be.

I couldn't even contemplate the possibility of doing something like that to a hologram.

I probably couldn't either.

But Worf sure could. Hell, he gleely decapitated holograms for kicks.

 

[JarodRussell]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

When I first played GTA4 I shot I man to see what would happen, and as I saw him trying to crawl away in a realistic human way I found myself feeling guilty. Then he collapsed and started wheezing on the ground. I shot him in the head just to put him out of his misery. Ever since then I've refrained from killing innocent pedestrians at close range, it's just not fun like it used to be.

Haha, oh my God. I hope in real life you call the ambulance.

 

[TheGodBen]

Re: Why are the "enlightened/evolved" humans so interested in violence

In real life I do all my killing with a knife! Guns are for sissies.