I never really assumed the "bought a boat" line was necessarily meant to be taken literally.
Your honest opinion on the Berman era
- Thread starter Starflight
- Start date
I just never understood what else could Scotty could be referring to.
I figured he was in possession of a boat, but not that he necessarily literally paid money for it.
If someone gives you something, would you ever say you bought it?
I have always figured that there has to be some sort of financial mechanism in place when it comes to luxuries (like a boat) or dealings with non-aligned worlds.
Maybe if there is some kind of bureaucratic process involved to get in possession of a technically "free" good, maybe it's colloquilly referred to as "buying"?
If I was being flippant, possibly.
I mean, yeah, that's pretty much exactly what I meant. Sounds pretty utopian to me.
(Utopia does NOT mean a "communist society where every person is completely emotionless" - by the way but even in TNG)
Yes, as a show TOS wasn't perfect. But compare to a lot of other 50s sci-fi which is exclusively white man.
So, while TOS was also pretty "safe" with mostly white male main characters - they kind of made a point that "btw woman and non -white people are now completely equal as well - even if we only acknowledge that in the background"
I mean - Kodos' food shortage was due to an unnatural catastrophe destroying the food sources. Something that also easily could have happened on TNG.
There is nothing indicating that hungry or poor people exist anywhere outside of unforeseeable catastrophies.
And somewhere else he said human doctors can replace any organ other than the brain.
Again - it's not literal paradise - but it's pretty Utopian.
TOS clearly used a currency ("credits"). Of that technically is money or not doesn't really matter. But "not using money" is IMO not a sign for a Utopia - in fact, often the opposite (Borg collective & computer gods say "hi").
You and I define "utopia" way differently.
I'm taking about a realistically achievable, utopian human society.
Not a magic fairyland where everybody suddenly is perfect.
The first one applies Star Trek, sometimes more, sometimes less, but always more than, say, Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Alien, Babylon 5, Firefly and so on.
Not a magic fairyland where everybody suddenly is perfect.
The first one applies Star Trek, sometimes more, sometimes less, but always more than, say, Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Alien, Babylon 5, Firefly and so on.
I don't call that utopian and the comparison game is useless. TOS doesn't feel like a utopia to me.
Mileage will vary.
I mean, feel free NOT to use the commonly agreed definition of words:
Utopia - Wikipedia
But the standard definition of a Utopia is "highly desirable" to "near perfect" characteristics.
Absolute perfection (for which I would use the word "paradise", not "utopia") is not really achievable.
Near perfect is not TOS to me, especially with the treatment of mental illness and crime.I mean, feel free NOT to use the commonly agreed definition of words:
Utopia - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
But the standard definition of a Utopia is "highly desirable" to "near perfect" characteristics.
Absolute perfection (for which I would use the word "paradise", not "utopia") is not really achievable.
We're talking about the guy who helped steal the Enterprise, he probably just stole the boat.
Arguably, this is a contradiction in terms.
If you're going to argue that it's already been done, for example, that the Nordic countries qualify as an achievable utopian society (I wouldn't make that particular argument, but some do so argue), then the word achievable is misapplied, since in fact it's already been achieved; I would presume from the context that achievable here would be referring to what hasn't yet been achieved.
So, that takes us back to my first point. Under the definition of a society with characteristics ranging from "highly desirable" to "near perfect" conditions: arguably, "a realistically achievable, utopian human society" is a contradiction in terms.
This is because of our track record. It's not like people try to make societies that fall short of what is highly desirable. If someone really understood why the societies that there are have failed to qualify as ranging from "highly desirable" to "near perfect," they'd be a step closer to actually making utopia happen. Given that people still argue even about that, well, that's why the contradiction in terms is so arguably the case.
I agree in the optimism. I'm optimistic about the future of humanity as well, no matter the news. We have a great capacity for growth.
But, I would not say that Trek is utopian in its presentation in TOS just because it's optimistic. I think we need optimism in our view while striving towards becoming better, to create opportunity for others and ourselves to achieve more in their lives, be it small or big.
Early TNG is the initially I'm referring to, should have clarified.
Exactly. I would say that's one of the distinguishing features of Trek from other popular sci-fi franchises.
Utopia, no. But a heck of a lot better than what we've got now or what we had in the mid-1960s.
Similar threads
