Never attribute to culture that which can be adequately explained by bad, and often contradictory, writing in weekly genre shows.
Oh, I totally agree. My entire point is made within the context of the established continuity. In reality, it's just that different writers have different visions on what a Vulcan should be.
I'd really have to nitpick the posts here but on a first glance you're talking about rationality, not logic. While both part of philosophy their different branches.
Everything a Vulcan does and says derives from their logical thinking. That doesn't necesarily mean it's rational to say or do.
Then i see the word respect a few times. Vulcan society is a different culture so they also have a different view upon respect. Projecting "our" sense of what we perceive to be getting respect onto Vulcans is exactly what you are accusing the Vulcans of. Kind of perpetual no?
I'd really have to nitpick the posts here but on a first glance you're talking about rationality, not logic. While both part of philosophy their different branches.
Everything a Vulcan does and says derives from their logical thinking. That doesn't necesarily mean it's rational to say or do.
Then i see the word respect a few times. Vulcan society is a different culture so they also have a different view upon respect. Projecting "our" sense of what we perceive to be getting respect onto Vulcans is exactly what you are accusing the Vulcans of. Kind of perpetual no?
Differentiating between rational and logical is a good point. I have been using them almost interchangeably.
That said, I still think it's illogical to intentionally behave in a way that is counterproductive to a goal.
As far as respect, I have to disagree. My use of respect is within the terms that the Vulcans themselves define respect and talk about quite regularly on the shows. So my use of respect is by their definition, not mine.
I can give examples if you ask for them, but I'd rather not because I'm incredibly lazy.
Also for clarification, I admit I'm basing my argument on the actions of a few specific examples. Primarily, all the Vulcans on Enterprise, Sarek, Tuvok, and a few more.
I don't count Spock among them because Spock isn't a Vulcan. The whole point to Spock is that he tries and often fails at being a true Vulcan. I think Spock is an incredible character because - ultimately - he shows that the vulcans and the humans are strongest when embracing each other's differences.
Also for clarification, I admit I'm basing my argument on the actions of a few specific examples. Primarily, all the Vulcans on Enterprise, Sarek, Tuvok, and a few more.
I don't count Spock among them because Spock isn't a Vulcan. The whole point to Spock is that he tries and often fails at being a true Vulcan. I think Spock is an incredible character because - ultimately - he shows that the vulcans and the humans are strongest when embracing each other's differences.
spock maybe half vulcan but he chose the vulcan way of life even though he has struggled with his emotions from time to time, remember when spock thought he "killed" kirk because his manipulative wife gets what she wants after kirk is "killed" by spock, then finds him alive, in something of an outburst of emotion even for a vulcan, he grins from one side to the other happy to see kirk alive at the complete disbelief of mccoy who caught that!
spocks behavior is atypical for a vulcan, but like any vulcan not immune to the effects of emotion.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Throughout TOS, Spock strove to be more Vulcan than any Vulcan, because he - ah - felt that he had something to prove.
The V'ger incident, however, left him with a clear concept of the emptiness of a life of pure logic - that was what he experienced when he tried to mind-meld with it. In TWoK, he has clearly come to embrace his entire heritage, both Human and Vulcan. That is temporarily lost after the re-implantation of his katra, but he spends much of TVH relearning it.
Now, as for "alien mindsets" - I have a neurological difference (some might say deficiency) that renders my so-called "mirror neurons" largely useless. I often have difficulty understanding why someone's feelings are hurt in a given exchange (as an example, in a recent ad for a Toyota sale event in which a woman spouts off what she "remembers from her research", then proudly says that she never forgets anything. Her husband replies, "You can say that again!", which was apparently the wrong thing, as she turns away looking insulted and he droops and quietly says, "Oh boy." Was that not a compliment on her memory? I'm told by others her reason for being hurt should be obvious).
That being said, by the time I was 30 I'd learned, largely by rote, when certain expressions were appropriate and when they might spark resistance. Certainly Vulcans who are regularly in contact with Humans can be expected to learn as much over the course of five or six decades, particularly given the alleged superior intellect...
That said, I still think it's illogical to intentionally behave in a way that is counterproductive to a goal.
As far as respect, I have to disagree. My use of respect is within the terms that the Vulcans themselves define respect and talk about quite regularly on the shows. So my use of respect is by their definition, not mine.
I can give examples if you ask for them, but I'd rather not because I'm incredibly lazy.
While i still think, that is not intentional and most Vulcans have a problem understanding other beings (like most humans would have a problem distinguishing between a teasing tellarite and a really angry one), i also disagree about what would be respectful behavior.
It it really respectful to lie to your allies so that they don't need to confront unpleasant truths ? Or is it more respectful to trust them with the facts so that they can make informed decisions ?
Kirk is not a little child that must be protected from the bad universe that only Vulcans can handle. Neither is Janeway or Archer any other one.
Sugarcoating is not a sign of respect, it is a sign of contempt.
While i still think, that is not intentional and most Vulcans have a problem understanding other beings (like most humans would have a problem distinguishing between a teasing tellarite and a really angry one), i also disagree about what would be respectful behavior.
It it really respectful to lie to your allies so that they don't need to confront unpleasant truths ? Or is it more respectful to trust them with the facts so that they can make informed decisions ?
Kirk is not a little child that must be protected from the bad universe that only Vulcans can handle. Neither is Janeway or Archer any other one.
Sugarcoating is not a sign of respect, it is a sign of contempt.
You're making some pretty sweeping assumptions here. Nobody is suggesting they sugarcoat anything and nobody is suggesting they lie.
Again, here's an example:
"Captain, your plan is not only illogical. It is short-sighted, unnecessarily dangerous, and driven by your human need for revenge. It would be far more logical to approach this situation..."
or
"Captain, I certainly respect your decision and understand why you've made it. That said, I have a suggestion for a plan you might find more effective..."
How is the second statement sugar coating anything? How is it lying?
It is presenting the exact same suggestion in a manner that would get better results (which is the most logical choice). It is being respectful without lying or sugarcoating anything. It is the fastest and most effective way to get suggested solution considered.
And yet - despite all that - vulcans feel compelled to present things like the first example which is completely counterproductive to the ultimate goal and will almost certainly make the other person react defensively. Whether vulcans understand that or not, if they don't know it simply from decades of history, they're certainly not the intellectual giants the claim to be.
And to say vulcans have a problem understanding other beings belies everything they claim to be. By their definition, a culture's natural evolution should be respected, yet they actively tried to dissuade humanity from exploring the galaxy.
They claimed it was because we weren't culturally evolved enough to appropriately interact with other cultures in the galaxy.
Well, if it's like you say, and they have a problem understanding other cultures, how are they superior? What evidence is there that vulcans are remotely better at interacting with other species than humans? When we met them, they were about to go to war with Andorians. They are hated by Romulans and Klingons. I can't think of a single galactic power (except humanity) who has any desire to befriend the vulcans. How exactly does that make them better at dealing with other cultures?
It would not be pandering and it would not be abandoning their beliefs.
Expecting someone to behave in a manner contrary to their cultural background, for the 'emotional comfort' of others, is to disrespect that person's heritage, and is indeed, expecting them to pander to other sensitivities... For example, an Arabic Muslim woman in America should be well within her rights to wear typical Arabic clothing. However, many would find her clothing 'offensive', and feel that she should assimilate by wearing Western clothing. Equally, the Muslim woman would find the Western clothing revealing and immodest... Apples and oranges maybe, but the same core issue of conflicting cultural values... Humans who expect Vulcans to consider their [Human] emotional needs will likely find themselves with hurt feelings. Humans who understand that Vulcans will not behave like them and may say things which they (the Human) do not immediately understand or find condescending, will not... Then of course, there are characters like Ambassador Soval and Captain Solok, who were deliberately written in the protagonist role, so had to appear as more 'insensitive' to the feelings of others to fulfill their role
An immigrant is a bad analogy, but if said immigrant refuses to learn the language of the natives, refuses to embrace any part of their culture and in fact expects those natives to abandon their culture in favor of his own is going to find himself very unwelcome.
What's called for is not pandering, what is called for is compromise.
Vulcans know that they are dealing with emotional beings yet refuse to compromise, choosing methods and language they know will elicit negative emotions even when more diplomatic choices are available, that's not logical, that's condescending arrogance.
If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
Expecting someone to behave in a manner contrary to their cultural background, for the 'emotional comfort' of others, is to disrespect that person's heritage, and is indeed, expecting them to pander to other sensitivities... For example, an Arabic Muslim woman in America should be well within her rights to wear typical Arabic clothing. However, many would find her clothing 'offensive', and feel that she should assimilate by wearing Western clothing. Equally, the Muslim woman would find the Western clothing revealing and immodest... Apples and oranges maybe, but the same core issue of conflicting cultural values... Humans who expect Vulcans to consider their [Human] emotional needs will likely find themselves with hurt feelings. Humans who understand that Vulcans will not behave like them and may say things which they (the Human) do not immediately understand or find condescending, will not... Then of course, there are characters like Ambassador Soval and Captain Solok, who were deliberately written in the protagonist role, so had to appear as more 'insensitive' to the feelings of others to fulfill their role
First, I would never think your example should assimilate her clothing to our culture. I think that's a very unfair comparison and is not at all what I'm suggesting. Expecting assimilation is far different from respecting another culture.
So if you're dealing with a person who - because of his culture - bows to you as a greeting, you don't think it's respectful to bow back? You consider that pandering and not an act of respect? Would you eat a hamburger while talking to someone who believes cows are sacred? And if that person asked you to refrain from eating hamburgers in his presence, you would still eat the hamburgers because you think you shouldn't be asked to pander to his beliefs?
And since when did volunteering unnecessary information that will almost certainly offend the other party and will almost certainly work contrary to the greater good become part of the vulcan culture? I think you're incorrectly assuming that every word that comes out of a vulcan's mouth is a fundamental part of their culture.
For example, the way Sarek interacted with the Federation president was dramatically different from how he interacted with Kirk. That's because he was showing respect to the president but not to Kirk.
An immigrant is a bad analogy, but if said immigrant refuses to learn the language of the natives, refuses to embrace any part of their culture and in fact expects those natives to abandon their culture in favor of his own is going to find himself very unwelcome.
What's called for is not pandering, what is called for is compromise.
Vulcans know that they are dealing with emotional beings yet refuse to compromise, choosing methods and language they know will elicit negative emotions even when more diplomatic choices are available, that's not logical, that's condescending arrogance.
On the contrary, I think it's an excellent analogy in the given terms. It's not about the language of the immigrant, but their clothing, which could cause discomfort to Americans. Yet to wear American clothes could cause discomfort to the immigrant...
As you say, compromise is the ideal way, but that makes for pretty bland plots
On the contrary, I think it's an excellent analogy in the given terms. It's not about the language of the immigrant, but their clothing, which could cause discomfort to Americans. Yet to wear American clothes could cause discomfort to the immigrant...
As you say, compromise is the ideal way, but that makes for pretty bland plots
Before Star Trek 4, Sarek treated Spock in a very specific way. At the end of Star Trek 4, he changed the way he interacted with Spock.
Vulcans treat humans the way Sarek treated Spock before the end of that movie.
That's not cultural treatment. It's outright disdain.
In more depth: To someone without objectivity, an objective stance can appear rude and tactless. You want proof? Take the furor about the cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad: To the 'objective' westerner, they're just harmless cartoons, an idle joke, worthy only of an eyeroll if you find them annoying. But to the 'subjective' muslim, they're a breach of the tenets of their faith, and they don't trouble to worry about YOUR opinion about their faith.
One of the problems with the Vulcan ideology is that logic only functions if you have an agreed upon set of givens, which the Vulcans routinely try to foist of on other people as assumed truth: Emotions are bad, detachment is good, and all problems can be best solved through considered application of logic. Which sounds great until logic dictates that you should die for the good of the many, and that your suffering is not important because anguish is just another emotion. So yeah, the Vulcan ideology is pretty horrible, when you deconstruct it. It may produce a stable society, but not one I'd want to live in.
First, I would never think your example should assimilate her clothing to our culture. I think that's a very unfair comparison and is not at all what I'm suggesting. Expecting assimilation is far different from respecting another culture.
I disagree, it is exactly the same core principle: Expecting a Vulcan to assimilate to Human culture enough to not ruffle someone's feathers by pointing out logical facts if they can be delivered 'more palatably' to the Human... Equally, while you may have no issue with the immigrant's clothes, there are indeed those who would feel affronted, possibly even threatened by that 'non conformity'...
Before Star Trek 4, Sarek treated Spock in a very specific way. At the end of Star Trek 4, he changed the way he interacted with Spock.
Vulcans treat humans the way Sarek treated Spock before the end of that movie.
That's not cultural treatment. It's outright disdain.
If Sarek treated Spock disdainfully prior to the end of Voyage Home, that would suggest that he had an issue with Humans. Yet he married two Human women... I think the more logical conclusion was that Sarek (still by that point) disapproved of/was disappointed by Spock's choice to enter Starfleet, rather than the Vulcan Science Academy (which JJ expanded upon) Equally, as before, one cannot discount the fact that some characters had to take antagonistic roles to create dramatic tension... As mentioned above, Vulcans find Human behavior as unusual as a Human would find a Tellarite or a Klingon...
I'm going to have to step out of the conversation, as I'm on the verge of repeating myself
They aren't just logical... they're jerks about it. They're condescending and downright insulting about it sometimes.
You'd think logic would dictate that the best way to recommend a course of action would be to recommend that action in a way that is most readily accepted by an emotional species, as opposed to a way that almost always makes that species confrontational.
You'd think after centuries of seeing humans react badly to them, they'd logically pursue a method of communicating with humans that promotes results.
The Vulcans are always chastising humanity for not appropriately respecting other cultures, but I can't really think of a single example where Vulcans respected human culture.
What do you think? Do you think Vulcans are truly logical or are they mostly logical with a touch of condescending jerk?
When you have an IQ like theirs and brute strength to fend off any one who takes offense, you can afford to be
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] ***Disenchanted***
Real Join Date: Monday, 17 May 2010
If Sarek treated Spock disdainfully prior to the end of Voyage Home, that would suggest that he had an issue with Humans. Yet he married two Human women... I think the more logical conclusion was that Sarek (still by that point) disapproved of/was disappointed by Spock's choice to enter Starfleet, rather than the Vulcan Science Academy (which JJ expanded upon)
You're making a counterpoint to a point I did not make.
I didn't say Sarek had disdain for humanity. Sarek, of all vulcans, clearly didn't.
I said Sarek showed disdain towards Spock. You evidently agree with that assertion by saying the logical conclusion is that it was due to Spock's entrance into Starfleet. I agree with that.
My point was that it was disdain. It wasn't why he showed disdain.
My point is that the way other vulcans treat humanity is exactly the same way Sarek treated Spock before the end of Star Trek 4. We both apparently agree that was disdain, which means the other vulcans are treating humans with disdain.
So it's not cultural. It's that they don't like us.
Sarek's treatment of Spock - in both tone and mannerism - at the end of Star Trek 4 shows that it's not a cultural issue here. It's that they simply don't like us.
You're making a counterpoint to a point I did not make.
I didn't say Sarek had disdain for humanity. Sarek, of all vulcans, clearly didn't.
I said Sarek showed disdain towards Spock. You evidently agree with that assertion by saying the logical conclusion is that it was due to Spock's entrance into Starfleet. I agree with that.
My point was that it was disdain. It wasn't why he showed disdain.
My point is that the way other vulcans treat humanity is exactly the same way Sarek treated Spock before the end of Star Trek 4. We both apparently agree that was disdain, which means the other vulcans are treating humans with disdain.
So it's not cultural. It's that they don't like us.
Sarek's treatment of Spock - in both tone and mannerism - at the end of Star Trek 4 shows that it's not a cultural issue here. It's that they simply don't like us.
I agree that Sarek treated Spock poorly, but I do not agree that all Vulcans treated Humans with intentional distain. Did the Humans take umbrage to being 'dressed down'? Yes. Did the Vulcans intend to cause offense? As before, to intentionally do so would be illogical...
And in your last sentence lies the crux of what we are trying to explain. I could see it as a matter of ignorance if we were talking about the first few interactions with humanity. But after hundreds of years of contact with humanity, Vulcans have no excuse for not knowing the results of their behavior. As logical as they are, they should have a playbook of sorts to explain, "if you do this, then this will be the result." They don't have to agree with it or think it is right, but to knowingly do harm to another because they believe differently from you is what the worst zealots do, not logical people.
P.S.--Jonsills, having not seen that commercial for myself, I can't be sure, but I would say that when the man said "You can say that again" after the woman said she never forgets, that he believes she never forgets anything that HE does, that she doesn't like, and that she brings those things up all the time in a manner he finds hurtful or embarrassing. He expressed his resentment, based on his perception (whether justified or not) and being accused of such behavior--whether or not it's true--made her mad.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I agree that Sarek treated Spock poorly, but I do not agree that all Vulcans treated Humans with intentional distain. Did the Humans take umbrage to being 'dressed down'? Yes. Did the Vulcans intend to cause offense? As before, to intentionally do so would be illogical...
I think that's the crux of our disagreement. You don't think it's intentional. I do. Since it's just interpretation of actions, I'd say we've officially reached an impasse.
And in your last sentence lies the crux of what we are trying to explain. I could see it as a matter of ignorance if we were talking about the first few interactions with humanity. But after hundreds of years of contact with humanity, Vulcans have no excuse for not knowing the results of their behavior. As logical as they are, they should have a playbook of sorts to explain, "if you do this, then this will be the result." They don't have to agree with it or think it is right, but to knowingly do harm to another because they believe differently from you is what the worst zealots do, not logical people.
I agree totally. The vulcans are too intelligent to fall back on the "we don't know better" defense.
Vulcans are repressed, they cover their repressed feelings with "logic".
How many repressed people do you know who isn't a complete TRIBBLE$wipe?
As for the odor thing, vulcans are mostly vegetarian, as a funny note, alot of westerners think that people from India smell funny, because of the high amount of curry they use in their cusine. Alot of people from India think westerners smell funny...like spoiled milk, because they have no dairy in their diet.I think the odor thing is based on what the two species consume.
Honestly, I think Vulcans act like that because it's the closest any of them can get away with being emotional without actually expressing it to anyone. Think about it - putting down others is the MO of people who feeeeeeel the neeeeeed to bring themselves up. It's emotional reassurance expressed by verbally attacking someone you view negatively. Not only that, but arrogance seems to be a racial trait - see Romulans for more details on unbridled Vulcanoid emotional states.
You're making some pretty sweeping assumptions here. Nobody is suggesting they sugarcoat anything and nobody is suggesting they lie.
Again, here's an example:
"Captain, your plan is not only illogical. It is short-sighted, unnecessarily dangerous, and driven by your human need for revenge. It would be far more logical to approach this situation..."
or
"Captain, I certainly respect your decision and understand why you've made it. That said, I have a suggestion for a plan you might find more effective..."
How is the second statement sugar coating anything? How is it lying?
It is presenting the exact same suggestion in a manner that would get better results (which is the most logical choice). It is being respectful without lying or sugarcoating anything. It is the fastest and most effective way to get suggested solution considered.
Actually between those two options, i, as a human would sooner use the first one, if i can't have anything in between. The second one lacks all the arguments against the decision (long time consequences, danger, questionable goal of "revenge") and it also doens't express, how extremely stupid i think, it is.
How should the adressee change his opinion, if i don't explain to him, why he is wrong ?
The only thing where the first one goes wrong is the word "human" as it has nothing to do with the situation at all and even suggests it would be human nature to make those decisions instead of it being a matter of values and priorities. That really is counterproductive.
The second one reads as if being written for some idiot who can't confront his own weaknesses and has to be guided to make the right decisions. In fact, it reminds me of Literature and theatre examples of both powerful and incredibly stupid kings or other nobles and their loyal and competent advisers. Not exactly anything i associate with respect. But that might be a cultural thing, as it happens that i am German.
And to say vulcans have a problem understanding other beings belies everything they claim to be. By their definition, a culture's natural evolution should be respected, yet they actively tried to dissuade humanity from exploring the galaxy.
Not wanting to change something doesn't mean you understand it.
Well, if it's like you say, and they have a problem understanding other cultures, how are they superior? What evidence is there that vulcans are remotely better at interacting with other species than humans?
Oh, i don't claim that their culture is superior. And the last thing i would say, is that they are born diplomats or something, quite the opposite. The less similar cultures are, the more misunderstandings it produces and compared to Vulcans most of the other humanoid civilizations are pretty much the same.
At least they are not trying to change everything they don't understand which gets them a kind of isiolationist attitude compared to TOS humans, but that still doesn't hint at better understanding.
See, that's the key you might be missing - you don't claim their culture is superior. They claim it's superior. That's why they felt they had the "duty" to restrain Humanity during the development of the Warp Five Project, because they were so obviously superior to us, and knew better than we did what we needed.
See, that's the key you might be missing - you don't claim their culture is superior. They claim it's superior. That's why they felt they had the "duty" to restrain Humanity during the development of the Warp Five Project, because they were so obviously superior to us, and knew better than we did what we needed.
You can't really blame that on the Vulcans though. They had been "peaceful" for centuries when humanity was still trying to erradicate itsself. And the timespan between that and the warp 5 project is not even the average lifespan of a Vulcan iirc.
So whichever way you put it, you can't blame the Vulcans for their behaviour towards humans.
Oh, i don't say that a lot of them are not both arrogant and prejudiced and made very wrong decisions.
The bad thing about logic and prejudices is, that while logic dictates, you should get rid of them, it is no help at all in doing so. Prejudices form from anecdotal experiences, missunderstandings and not enough knowledge.
When Vulcans see humans making decisions, they are reminded of their own violent past. As long as they firmly believe that their culture evolved and is better now, they would see the human culture as primitive and barbaric. It doesn't help, that human civilization is a lot younger which suggests end explaines less refinement.
The problems Vulcans and humans have are two fold.
1. Humans have evolved to read facial clues and intent on faces in a subconscious ways for communication. Being as Vulcan do not express this way Human misread tone and inflection from them.
2. though Other beings have said Vulcans have mastered their emotions they know they have not. They run away from them. The true masters are Humans and they do not even know it. The Vulcans for all thier bluff and posture of being superior have not advanced in anyway for 100s of years. where humans have at a pace that is almost unknown in other beings. Vulcans fear what Humans my achieve or do in the future.
Vulcans fail to master their Emotions Human did not and that does not sit well with them.
This is expressed best by Vulcan Ambassador Soval
Vulcan Ambassador Soval: We don't know what to do about Humans. Of all the species we've made contact with, yours is the only one we can't define. You have the arrogance of Andorians, the stubborn pride of Tellarites. One moment, you're as driven by your emotions as Klingons, and the next, you confound us by suddenly embracing logic.
Admiral Maxwell Forrest: I'm sure those qualities are found in every species.
Vulcan Ambassador Soval: Not in such confusing abundance.
Admiral Maxwell Forrest: Ambassador... are Vulcans afraid of Humans? Why?
Vulcan Ambassador Soval: Because there is one species you remind us of.
Admiral Maxwell Forrest: Vulcans.
Vulcan Ambassador Soval: [nods] We had our wars, Admiral, just as Humans did. Our planet was devastated, our civilization nearly destroyed. Logic saved us. But it took almost 1500 years for us to rebuild our world and travel to the stars. You Humans did the same in less than a century. There are those on the High Command who wonder what Humans would achieve in the century to come. And they don't like the answer.
Comments
Oh, I totally agree. My entire point is made within the context of the established continuity. In reality, it's just that different writers have different visions on what a Vulcan should be.
Everything a Vulcan does and says derives from their logical thinking. That doesn't necesarily mean it's rational to say or do.
Then i see the word respect a few times. Vulcan society is a different culture so they also have a different view upon respect. Projecting "our" sense of what we perceive to be getting respect onto Vulcans is exactly what you are accusing the Vulcans of. Kind of perpetual no?
moradum: I got banned for saying "I started my day with cutting off 3 MM off of the bottom of my cabinet"
http://www.elitedefensestarfleet.com
Differentiating between rational and logical is a good point. I have been using them almost interchangeably.
That said, I still think it's illogical to intentionally behave in a way that is counterproductive to a goal.
As far as respect, I have to disagree. My use of respect is within the terms that the Vulcans themselves define respect and talk about quite regularly on the shows. So my use of respect is by their definition, not mine.
I can give examples if you ask for them, but I'd rather not because I'm incredibly lazy.
I don't count Spock among them because Spock isn't a Vulcan. The whole point to Spock is that he tries and often fails at being a true Vulcan. I think Spock is an incredible character because - ultimately - he shows that the vulcans and the humans are strongest when embracing each other's differences.
spock maybe half vulcan but he chose the vulcan way of life even though he has struggled with his emotions from time to time, remember when spock thought he "killed" kirk because his manipulative wife gets what she wants after kirk is "killed" by spock, then finds him alive, in something of an outburst of emotion even for a vulcan, he grins from one side to the other happy to see kirk alive at the complete disbelief of mccoy who caught that!
spocks behavior is atypical for a vulcan, but like any vulcan not immune to the effects of emotion.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
The V'ger incident, however, left him with a clear concept of the emptiness of a life of pure logic - that was what he experienced when he tried to mind-meld with it. In TWoK, he has clearly come to embrace his entire heritage, both Human and Vulcan. That is temporarily lost after the re-implantation of his katra, but he spends much of TVH relearning it.
Now, as for "alien mindsets" - I have a neurological difference (some might say deficiency) that renders my so-called "mirror neurons" largely useless. I often have difficulty understanding why someone's feelings are hurt in a given exchange (as an example, in a recent ad for a Toyota sale event in which a woman spouts off what she "remembers from her research", then proudly says that she never forgets anything. Her husband replies, "You can say that again!", which was apparently the wrong thing, as she turns away looking insulted and he droops and quietly says, "Oh boy." Was that not a compliment on her memory? I'm told by others her reason for being hurt should be obvious).
That being said, by the time I was 30 I'd learned, largely by rote, when certain expressions were appropriate and when they might spark resistance. Certainly Vulcans who are regularly in contact with Humans can be expected to learn as much over the course of five or six decades, particularly given the alleged superior intellect...
It it really respectful to lie to your allies so that they don't need to confront unpleasant truths ? Or is it more respectful to trust them with the facts so that they can make informed decisions ?
Kirk is not a little child that must be protected from the bad universe that only Vulcans can handle. Neither is Janeway or Archer any other one.
Sugarcoating is not a sign of respect, it is a sign of contempt.
You're making some pretty sweeping assumptions here. Nobody is suggesting they sugarcoat anything and nobody is suggesting they lie.
Again, here's an example:
"Captain, your plan is not only illogical. It is short-sighted, unnecessarily dangerous, and driven by your human need for revenge. It would be far more logical to approach this situation..."
or
"Captain, I certainly respect your decision and understand why you've made it. That said, I have a suggestion for a plan you might find more effective..."
How is the second statement sugar coating anything? How is it lying?
It is presenting the exact same suggestion in a manner that would get better results (which is the most logical choice). It is being respectful without lying or sugarcoating anything. It is the fastest and most effective way to get suggested solution considered.
And yet - despite all that - vulcans feel compelled to present things like the first example which is completely counterproductive to the ultimate goal and will almost certainly make the other person react defensively. Whether vulcans understand that or not, if they don't know it simply from decades of history, they're certainly not the intellectual giants the claim to be.
And to say vulcans have a problem understanding other beings belies everything they claim to be. By their definition, a culture's natural evolution should be respected, yet they actively tried to dissuade humanity from exploring the galaxy.
They claimed it was because we weren't culturally evolved enough to appropriately interact with other cultures in the galaxy.
Well, if it's like you say, and they have a problem understanding other cultures, how are they superior? What evidence is there that vulcans are remotely better at interacting with other species than humans? When we met them, they were about to go to war with Andorians. They are hated by Romulans and Klingons. I can't think of a single galactic power (except humanity) who has any desire to befriend the vulcans. How exactly does that make them better at dealing with other cultures?
What's called for is not pandering, what is called for is compromise.
Vulcans know that they are dealing with emotional beings yet refuse to compromise, choosing methods and language they know will elicit negative emotions even when more diplomatic choices are available, that's not logical, that's condescending arrogance.
First, I would never think your example should assimilate her clothing to our culture. I think that's a very unfair comparison and is not at all what I'm suggesting. Expecting assimilation is far different from respecting another culture.
So if you're dealing with a person who - because of his culture - bows to you as a greeting, you don't think it's respectful to bow back? You consider that pandering and not an act of respect? Would you eat a hamburger while talking to someone who believes cows are sacred? And if that person asked you to refrain from eating hamburgers in his presence, you would still eat the hamburgers because you think you shouldn't be asked to pander to his beliefs?
And since when did volunteering unnecessary information that will almost certainly offend the other party and will almost certainly work contrary to the greater good become part of the vulcan culture? I think you're incorrectly assuming that every word that comes out of a vulcan's mouth is a fundamental part of their culture.
For example, the way Sarek interacted with the Federation president was dramatically different from how he interacted with Kirk. That's because he was showing respect to the president but not to Kirk.
As you say, compromise is the ideal way, but that makes for pretty bland plots
Before Star Trek 4, Sarek treated Spock in a very specific way. At the end of Star Trek 4, he changed the way he interacted with Spock.
Vulcans treat humans the way Sarek treated Spock before the end of that movie.
That's not cultural treatment. It's outright disdain.
I hope nobody is taking my zealous manner of debating as actual frustration or intended disrespect.
In more depth: To someone without objectivity, an objective stance can appear rude and tactless. You want proof? Take the furor about the cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad: To the 'objective' westerner, they're just harmless cartoons, an idle joke, worthy only of an eyeroll if you find them annoying. But to the 'subjective' muslim, they're a breach of the tenets of their faith, and they don't trouble to worry about YOUR opinion about their faith.
One of the problems with the Vulcan ideology is that logic only functions if you have an agreed upon set of givens, which the Vulcans routinely try to foist of on other people as assumed truth: Emotions are bad, detachment is good, and all problems can be best solved through considered application of logic. Which sounds great until logic dictates that you should die for the good of the many, and that your suffering is not important because anguish is just another emotion. So yeah, the Vulcan ideology is pretty horrible, when you deconstruct it. It may produce a stable society, but not one I'd want to live in.
If Sarek treated Spock disdainfully prior to the end of Voyage Home, that would suggest that he had an issue with Humans. Yet he married two Human women... I think the more logical conclusion was that Sarek (still by that point) disapproved of/was disappointed by Spock's choice to enter Starfleet, rather than the Vulcan Science Academy (which JJ expanded upon) Equally, as before, one cannot discount the fact that some characters had to take antagonistic roles to create dramatic tension... As mentioned above, Vulcans find Human behavior as unusual as a Human would find a Tellarite or a Klingon...
I'm going to have to step out of the conversation, as I'm on the verge of repeating myself
When you have an IQ like theirs and brute strength to fend off any one who takes offense, you can afford to be
***Disenchanted***
Real Join Date: Monday, 17 May 2010
You're making a counterpoint to a point I did not make.
I didn't say Sarek had disdain for humanity. Sarek, of all vulcans, clearly didn't.
I said Sarek showed disdain towards Spock. You evidently agree with that assertion by saying the logical conclusion is that it was due to Spock's entrance into Starfleet. I agree with that.
My point was that it was disdain. It wasn't why he showed disdain.
My point is that the way other vulcans treat humanity is exactly the same way Sarek treated Spock before the end of Star Trek 4. We both apparently agree that was disdain, which means the other vulcans are treating humans with disdain.
So it's not cultural. It's that they don't like us.
Sarek's treatment of Spock - in both tone and mannerism - at the end of Star Trek 4 shows that it's not a cultural issue here. It's that they simply don't like us.
I agree that Sarek treated Spock poorly, but I do not agree that all Vulcans treated Humans with intentional distain. Did the Humans take umbrage to being 'dressed down'? Yes. Did the Vulcans intend to cause offense? As before, to intentionally do so would be illogical...
P.S.--Jonsills, having not seen that commercial for myself, I can't be sure, but I would say that when the man said "You can say that again" after the woman said she never forgets, that he believes she never forgets anything that HE does, that she doesn't like, and that she brings those things up all the time in a manner he finds hurtful or embarrassing. He expressed his resentment, based on his perception (whether justified or not) and being accused of such behavior--whether or not it's true--made her mad.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I think that's the crux of our disagreement. You don't think it's intentional. I do. Since it's just interpretation of actions, I'd say we've officially reached an impasse.
I agree totally. The vulcans are too intelligent to fall back on the "we don't know better" defense.
How many repressed people do you know who isn't a complete TRIBBLE$wipe?
As for the odor thing, vulcans are mostly vegetarian, as a funny note, alot of westerners think that people from India smell funny, because of the high amount of curry they use in their cusine. Alot of people from India think westerners smell funny...like spoiled milk, because they have no dairy in their diet.I think the odor thing is based on what the two species consume.
How should the adressee change his opinion, if i don't explain to him, why he is wrong ?
The only thing where the first one goes wrong is the word "human" as it has nothing to do with the situation at all and even suggests it would be human nature to make those decisions instead of it being a matter of values and priorities. That really is counterproductive.
The second one reads as if being written for some idiot who can't confront his own weaknesses and has to be guided to make the right decisions. In fact, it reminds me of Literature and theatre examples of both powerful and incredibly stupid kings or other nobles and their loyal and competent advisers. Not exactly anything i associate with respect. But that might be a cultural thing, as it happens that i am German.
Not wanting to change something doesn't mean you understand it. Oh, i don't claim that their culture is superior. And the last thing i would say, is that they are born diplomats or something, quite the opposite. The less similar cultures are, the more misunderstandings it produces and compared to Vulcans most of the other humanoid civilizations are pretty much the same.
At least they are not trying to change everything they don't understand which gets them a kind of isiolationist attitude compared to TOS humans, but that still doesn't hint at better understanding.
You can't really blame that on the Vulcans though. They had been "peaceful" for centuries when humanity was still trying to erradicate itsself. And the timespan between that and the warp 5 project is not even the average lifespan of a Vulcan iirc.
So whichever way you put it, you can't blame the Vulcans for their behaviour towards humans.
moradum: I got banned for saying "I started my day with cutting off 3 MM off of the bottom of my cabinet"
http://www.elitedefensestarfleet.com
The bad thing about logic and prejudices is, that while logic dictates, you should get rid of them, it is no help at all in doing so. Prejudices form from anecdotal experiences, missunderstandings and not enough knowledge.
When Vulcans see humans making decisions, they are reminded of their own violent past. As long as they firmly believe that their culture evolved and is better now, they would see the human culture as primitive and barbaric. It doesn't help, that human civilization is a lot younger which suggests end explaines less refinement.
How would logic help seeing humans differently ?
1. Humans have evolved to read facial clues and intent on faces in a subconscious ways for communication. Being as Vulcan do not express this way Human misread tone and inflection from them.
2. though Other beings have said Vulcans have mastered their emotions they know they have not. They run away from them. The true masters are Humans and they do not even know it. The Vulcans for all thier bluff and posture of being superior have not advanced in anyway for 100s of years. where humans have at a pace that is almost unknown in other beings. Vulcans fear what Humans my achieve or do in the future.
Vulcans fail to master their Emotions Human did not and that does not sit well with them.
This is expressed best by Vulcan Ambassador Soval
ROMULANS