Star Trek's Prime Directive revisited

Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 6 months ago to Philosophy
23 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Star Trek: The Next Generation - The Prime Directive Revisited

One of our more interesting debates happened a couple of months ago.
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/10...

I saw the episode tonight that validates my argument. The episode "Symbiosis" is an interesting exploration of Ayn Rand values.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbiosis_(...)
From Wikipedia, the summary is as follows:

The Enterprise attempts to rescue the freighter Sanction, which is trapped in a star's magnetic field. An agreement is reached to transport over the crew of the freighter, but they surprisingly send over a cargo barrel first. The Enterprise crew attempts to transport the freighter's crew, but is only successful in recovering four of them before their ship is destroyed. Two, T'Jon (Merritt Butrick) and Romas (Richard Lineback), are scruffy and unshaven, while the other two, Sobi (Judson Scott) and Langor (Kimberly Farr), are groomed and well dressed. They all show relief that the barrel made it over, and little remorse for the lost ship and crewmen. Each pair start to fight over the ownership of the barrel, and they are escorted to the observation lounge under guard.

The two pairs come from different planets within the same system. It is explained that the barrel contains a medicine for a plague on the planet Ornara. The medicine is produced on the planet Brekka, whose entire economy has become centered on producing and refining the drug. The Ornarans are the only ones with the means of space travel but their ships were all built long ago and are beginning to fail due to use and lack of maintenance and they no longer know how to repair them. Captain Jean-Luc Picard (Patrick Stewart) offers to return them each to their homeworlds and provide replacement parts for their freighters. The Brekkan pair of Sobi and Langor argue that they retain ownership as the items the Ornarans offered in payment were lost on board the freighter. T'Jon and Roma are suffering from the effects of the plague, and are sent to sickbay where Dr. Beverly Crusher (Gates McFadden) can find no reason for the effects. The Brekkans offer two doses of the medicine for their immediate needs. Langor explains that the entire technology of Brekka is devoted to producing the medicine for Ornara. After T'Jon and Romas take their doses, Dr. Crusher realises that the medicine is actually a narcotic, and the plague was cured long ago. Because of the addictive nature of the medicine, Brekka continued to supply it to Ornara. Picard warns that they cannot intervene due to the Prime Directive. He and Dr. Crusher later question the Brekkans alone, and suspect that they know well of the nature of the medicine.

The Enterprise arrives at Ornara, and Sobi and Langor have agreed to provide the medicine to the Ornarans for later payment. However, Picard announces that as the Prime Directive prevent him from interfering in the deal, it also prevents him from providing replacement parts for the freighters. T'Jon and Romas are furious at the decision as it means that the trade between Ornara and Brekka will stop because the ships can no longer make the journeys without the parts. After the four are transported off the Enterprise, Picard confides to Dr. Crusher that while the Ornarans may suffer from withdrawal symptoms, this will be an opportunity for both races to advance in their own ways.

See the following episode:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duxkZUc6Q...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc2yB9T_3...

Then tell me what you think.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 6 months ago
    Picard is an empirical bureaucrat. If Riker had any guts he would mutiny, but he is just a looter who advanced in star fleet because he is a yes-man who looks like he should be an officer (and the network execs think he brings in more female viewers on the off chance he might do something manly.) Fortunately there is a touchy-feelly counselor to make everyone feel guilty if they have any individual thoughts.
    Where is over-acting Shatner when he is really needed? He is in another politically correct pro-cop pro-empire propaganda show, of course.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 6 months ago
    To me the Prime Directive depends on their being a cosmic plan in which some people are fated to be exploited or even die. It seems like Picard could have told them he thought the drug was addictive, giving them the coils, and moved on. In my experience, *telling an addict the truth has little impact*, so I reject his claim the "the results are invariably disastrous".

    To me the prime directive is based on appeal to ignorance. "We don't *know* the results of our actions, so let's not act." I love Star Trek, but I reject the Prime Directive.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago
      If you don't think that the results are invariably disastrous, perhaps you should look at the outcomes of America's last several military interventions going back all the way at least to Vietnam. The US has had very little to gain from such interventions, because those countries have had relatively little of value (except oil, which we haven't taken as compensation for our efforts).

      Regarding the drug situation in the Symbiosis episode, following the Prime Directive permitted a reasonable basis for NOT getting in the way of a dispute. As with most of real life, the person or country that intervenes in a conflict is resented by both parties within the conflict. Not following the Prime Directive in that sort of situation is like volunteering to be an umpire or referee.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 6 months ago
        "Regarding the drug situation in the Symbiosis episode, following the Prime Directive permitted a reasonable basis for NOT getting in the way of a dispute. As with most of real life, the person or country that intervenes in a conflict is resented by both parties within the conflict. Not following the Prime Directive in that sort of situation is like volunteering to be an umpire or referee. "
        I like the idea of not getting involved. They could make their data on the felicium available to anyone who wants it. They could leave a supply of withdrawal medicine and procedure for making it for anyone who wants it. My thought is these minor steps wouldn't lead to a quagmire, but I could be wrong.

        My problem with the prime directive is it ties their hands against doing *anything*.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago
          If they made their data on the felicium available, then the Brekkans would be giving away the fruits of their labor - very un-Galt-like.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 6 months ago
            "If they made their data on the felicium available, then the Brekkans would be giving away the fruits of their labor "
            NOT data on on how to make a knockoff of their potency-enhanced felicium or steal Brekkan IP in any way. I'm saying they could share their research and opinion that the drug is addictive, not needed, and has been engineered to be more potent and perhaps more addictive. If the Ornarans want that drug, then they keep buying from the Brekkans. If that information makes them want an alternative product, the anti-withdrawal treatment, they can go that route. Maybe that knowledge will lead them in some way completely unpredictable. Maybe they'll ask the Brekkans to come up with a way to get high and still have enough brainpower to repair their ships. It's their choice.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 9 years, 6 months ago
    Back to the original topic - Start Trek Prime Directive


    How do you think not having a prime directive, and all its offshoots, would alter how Star Fleet would operate?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 9 years, 6 months ago
    In many ways the Prime Directive boils down to ....

    You don't know everything....don't meddle


    Good advice, but advice that humans are nearly incapable of following.

    It is not the first directive like this to come down the path...

    Like they tell doctors - "First off, do no harm"

    The problems come when people's self opinion exceeds their actual knowledge and abilities. Then they invariably jump right in to do something even when they have no real idea of whether their action will produce an outcome that is good, bad, or indifferent to the problem. Without even considering whether or not their perception of the problem is accurate.

    Good Samaritan laws have a good side and a bad side.

    Good Side - protects people helping someone from being sued if they don't produce a good result.

    Bad Side - protects people helping someone from being sued so they will try to do something even if they have no idea at all what should be done.

    Talk about a crap shoot for the person in trouble.

    Overall they seem to be a good thing to have given the American propensity over the last few decades of playing lawyer lotto at the drop of a hat. Not because a big jury payout is right or just, but because they and the lawyers are greedy.


    Back to the Prime Directive - its purpose is to attempt to keep Starfleet officers from stepping too far outside what they are trained to do.

    Said training should be based on things that have worked in the past, since real results are the best examples to apply in the future.

    Of course, to produce drama for the show they violate the Prime Directive in new and creative ways as a plot device for an episode or story arc.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago
    This episode also points out the folly in the War on Drugs. I am not in favor of narcotic drugs in any way, but the War on Drugs has gone on for 25-30 years with no end in sight. Let those who pursue their own end in narcotics feel the pain of their own choices.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Technocracy 9 years, 6 months ago
      Demand side is the only effective way to do anything about drugs. There is too much money involved to stop the supply side
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 6 months ago
        "There is too much money involved to stop the supply side"
        I like the fact that if the gov't makes an all-out effort to stop some form of economic activity, it hardly puts a dent in it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago
          Regarding "I like the fact that if the gov't makes an all-out effort to stop some form of economic activity, it hardly puts a dent in it.", that is true in some cases. In other cases the government activity is crippling to the point where the businesses go Galt, like mine did. Obama's favoring of solar energy over other renewable energy like my former biofuels company (which had pretty thin margins to begin with) was the straw necessary to break this camel's back.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 5 months ago
            "In other cases the government activity is crippling to the point where the businesses go Galt, like mine did."
            I don't understand what happened. Was the biofuel company viable without gov't support but then gov't stepped in an supported a competing technology, causing people to stop buying biofuels?
            If so I'm sorry to hear that. I hope the subsidies end so customers can buy the bio product instead of subsidizing another product.
            Do bio and solar compete directly? Is there room for a bio product separate from the one the gov't is subsidizing?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 9 years, 5 months ago
              That is exactly what happened. Both biofuels and solar compete for the same environmentally friendly fuel dollars. It was hard enough competing with other biofuels companies that were getting government grants under Bush. The amount of money Obama gave to the solar energy companies was overwhelming.

              I had done ROI calculations on solar power for my own home's pool and estimated a breakeven point at 90 years back in 2005 when we got solar panels because my wife and kids wanted to use their pool more. The subsidies that Solyndra et al. got turned them from breakeven companies into > 10% profit centers if they didn't siphon the money off - which of course they did.

              However, by then, the natural gas discoveries lowered that price to the point where biofuels would not have a chance. A key biofuel intermediate is syngas (a mix of CO + H2), which is always tied to natural gas in price - roughly 50% of the price of natural gas.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Technocracy 9 years, 6 months ago
            +1 For you

            Crony capitalism indeed, and more prevalent in the "green" sector than most others.

            Sorry they did that to you Jim, you aren't the only one. Tis why I deal strictly in information now.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 9 years, 6 months ago
              Well, we all have our stories here in the Gulch. I so liked absolving liberals of their guilt back in the day when they paid me for their energy. Actually, it was about a -1000000 for our company.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo