test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Cultural Contamination

djf021djf021 Member Posts: 1,378 Arc User
edited November 2015 in Ten Forward
Today I watched the Enterprise season one episode "Dear Doctor". For reference, see this. I had forgotten exactly how the episode ended, and now it's bugging me. I don't think I agree with Dr Phlox withholding the cure from the Valakians. I understand his point that the Menk might end up being the dominant species on the planet, but as far as we can see that would only be because of the genetic disorder killing the Valakians. The Valakians were a pre-warp society, but they were already well aware the galaxy had other species, and that those species had better technology, so the cultural contamination and shock that we've seen in other episodes from other series such as TNG was a non-issue. They were asking for help, so to refuse would be to abandon those in need. Phlox said, "I'm saying we let nature make the choice", meaning they don't interfere in something that MIGHT affect the future of their people. But that's like looking at a cancer patient and saying, "I have a cure for your cancer, but since nature chose you to develop it, I'll withhold the cure and let nature take it's course, because curing you would interfere in your natural development." At the end Captain Archer said he realized they were not out there to "play God". But I'm a paramedic, so I guess the idea of refusing to help someone on that basis doesn't sit well with me. Isn't it "playing God" to choose who gets a cure and who doesn't?
The episode was of course playing on the idea of the Prime Directive, but should that really apply when a people are asking for help and contamination is a non-issue? Is there a precedent in canon (I can't remember every episode) for this?
Discuss...
C4117709-1498929112732780large.jpg

Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference.
-Captain James T. Kirk
«13456789

Comments

  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    There was no excuse for that. That's not even how evolution works, anyway. As far as I am concerned, once a species gains intelligence and technology, evolution itself takes a back seat to that species' own self-determination.

    Now, the Valakians deserved punishment for mistreating the Menk (abuse of their self-determination)--but not simply being condemned to dying of a preventable medical condition. That in NO way has the standing of properly administered justice.

    On top of that, since that was a United Earth and not Federation starship, I think Archer would have been WELL within his rights (and his moral obligation) to order Phlox to follow human medical ethics, which would've required intervening. There was no "multiculturalism" excuse to go by...Archer was in complete control there. Since Phlox agreed to serve on a United Earth starship, then he should have been required IMO to either abide entirely by human ethics or not accept the post if by some screwed-up definition he would find it "unconscionable."

    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.
  • djf021djf021 Member Posts: 1,378 Arc User
    gulberat wrote: »
    Now, the Valakians deserved punishment for mistreating the Menk (abuse of their self-determination)--but not simply being condemned to dying of a preventable medical condition. That in NO way has the standing of properly administered justice.
    I didn't really have a problem with the living conditions of the Menk, because as Phlox said, they didn't seem to need or want a defender, and they had a symbiotic relationship going.
    As for the disease, I do agree Archer should have ordered Phlox to give them the cure. To me curing the disorder was a separate issue from dealing with the social dynamic between the two species.
    C4117709-1498929112732780large.jpg

    Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference.
    -Captain James T. Kirk
  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    Personally, I think the fact that Phlox thought it was OK to let a species die shows that his value system is not acceptable for service on a United Earth ship, and therefore he also cannot be trusted to give an accurate reading of the situation between the Valakians and the Menk. His point of view is already screwed up on one, so I don't see why I should trust it on the other.

    You know, if Archer had stood his ground there, I wonder what a different course Federation history and policy would've taken. A definite shame there, as what Archer did in not forcing Phlox to either give up the cure or step down from his position then laid the groundwork for all of Picard's later moral cowardice. :/

    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.
  • djf021djf021 Member Posts: 1,378 Arc User
    gulberat wrote: »
    Personally, I think the fact that Phlox thought it was OK to let a species die shows that his value system is not acceptable for service on a United Earth ship, and therefore he also cannot be trusted to give an accurate reading of the situation between the Valakians and the Menk. His point of view is already screwed up on one, so I don't see why I should trust it on the other.

    You make a good point there.
    C4117709-1498929112732780large.jpg

    Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference.
    -Captain James T. Kirk
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    Didn't Phlox point out that his treatment was not a permanent cure?

    I seem to remember something about how Valakians would still be slowly dying even if they took it and that their race was doomed anyways. But that his research had created a way to slow their demise.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • alexmakepeacealexmakepeace Member Posts: 10,633 Arc User
    To me, the choice that the crew made was clearly wrong. It is, of course, supposed to be the origin of the Prime Directive, which I hold to be fundamentally flawed. It assumes that there is one "right" way for a culture to develop, and that one way is the way that it would develop without outside interference. The Temporal Prime Directive works the same way--it assumes one "right" way for the past to unfold. Anything else, to quote that one timeship captain in Temporal Ambassador, "is an aberration." Why is the timeline we're familiar with the "right" one? Anything is possible, why is only one set of options allowed to be "good"?

    You are right to point out the problems with "letting nature take its course." Nature is not a moral system, it is a physical one. You can't say that nature will drive a species extinct any more than you can say that it's morally right that a stone falls to the ground when you drop it. It's just the way the system works.

    There's no reason to assume that the Valakians are "supposed" to die off. If you want to get the Menk out from under their thumb, there are better ways.
  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    djf021 wrote: »
    gulberat wrote: »
    Personally, I think the fact that Phlox thought it was OK to let a species die shows that his value system is not acceptable for service on a United Earth ship, and therefore he also cannot be trusted to give an accurate reading of the situation between the Valakians and the Menk. His point of view is already screwed up on one, so I don't see why I should trust it on the other.

    You make a good point there.

    To me, Phlox' rationalization reads way too close for comfort to justifications of atrocities on Earth--some of which were perpetrated by people who purported to be following the scientific method. I do not want to debate those examples, solely say that when those same "theories" come into contact with rigorous science they are proven absolutely false. That's why it rubs me the wrong way to see Phlox treated as the good guy in the episode. How the writers missed that they were making Phlox look about as solid as a phrenologist is beyond me.

    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.
  • djf021djf021 Member Posts: 1,378 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    Didn't Phlox point out that his treatment was not a permanent cure?

    I seem to remember something about how Valakians would still be slowly dying even if they took it and that their race was doomed anyways. But that his research had created a way to slow their demise.

    When Phlox and Archer were arguing the issue in the mess hall, Archer said "Can you find a cure or not?" and I'm pretty sure Phlox said "I already have it."

    Edit: Confirmed on the Memory Alpha episode page.
    C4117709-1498929112732780large.jpg

    Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference.
    -Captain James T. Kirk
  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    Regarding getting the Menk out from under the Valakians' thumbs, I would've actually been less annoyed if Archer had pulled an act of political interference and essentially extorted the Valakians by forcing reform in return for the cure. It would've been a dirty move but far less dirty than condemning them to die. Which shows just HOW bad Archer and Phlox's act in the actual episode really was, that I would consider extortion the lesser of two evils. O_O

    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.
  • djf021djf021 Member Posts: 1,378 Arc User
    You are right to point out the problems with "letting nature take its course." Nature is not a moral system, it is a physical one. You can't say that nature will drive a species extinct any more than you can say that it's morally right that a stone falls to the ground when you drop it. It's just the way the system works.

    I agree wholeheartedly with you on this. And if a person happened to be unwittingly standing under that stone as it fell, it's not morally wrong to find a way to protect him/her if we could.
    C4117709-1498929112732780large.jpg

    Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference.
    -Captain James T. Kirk
  • djf021djf021 Member Posts: 1,378 Arc User
    gulberat wrote: »
    Regarding getting the Menk out from under the Valakians' thumbs, I would've actually been less annoyed if Archer had pulled an act of political interference and essentially extorted the Valakians by forcing reform in return for the cure. It would've been a dirty move but far less dirty than condemning them to die. Which shows just HOW bad Archer and Phlox's act in the actual episode really was, that I would consider extortion the lesser of two evils. O_O

    What's funny about this is it somehow actually sounds like something Janeway would do. :D
    C4117709-1498929112732780large.jpg

    Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference.
    -Captain James T. Kirk
  • alexmakepeacealexmakepeace Member Posts: 10,633 Arc User
    You can't say that nature will drive a species extinct any more than you can say that it's morally right that a stone falls to the ground when you drop it.
    Left out some words. Should be: You can't say that it is morally right that nature will drive a species extinct any more than you can say that it's morally right that a stone falls to the ground when you drop it.
  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    djf021 wrote: »
    gulberat wrote: »
    Regarding getting the Menk out from under the Valakians' thumbs, I would've actually been less annoyed if Archer had pulled an act of political interference and essentially extorted the Valakians by forcing reform in return for the cure. It would've been a dirty move but far less dirty than condemning them to die. Which shows just HOW bad Archer and Phlox's act in the actual episode really was, that I would consider extortion the lesser of two evils. O_O

    What's funny about this is it somehow actually sounds like something Janeway would do. :D

    Or Sisko. He had a few pretty egregious acts under his belt too. I would actually rank such an act by Archer under Sisko's WMD incident and the assassination of Vreenak since no lives would be taken.

    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.
  • djf021djf021 Member Posts: 1,378 Arc User
    gulberat wrote: »
    djf021 wrote: »
    gulberat wrote: »
    Regarding getting the Menk out from under the Valakians' thumbs, I would've actually been less annoyed if Archer had pulled an act of political interference and essentially extorted the Valakians by forcing reform in return for the cure. It would've been a dirty move but far less dirty than condemning them to die. Which shows just HOW bad Archer and Phlox's act in the actual episode really was, that I would consider extortion the lesser of two evils. O_O

    What's funny about this is it somehow actually sounds like something Janeway would do. :D

    Or Sisko. He had a few pretty egregious acts under his belt too. I would actually rank such an act by Archer under Sisko's WMD incident and the assassination of Vreenak since no lives would be taken.

    I thought of that too. Although I kinda sympathized with Sisko on that one. True it was dirty, but it was about doing whatever it took to survive. Although that too I guess he couldn't prove...
    C4117709-1498929112732780large.jpg

    Don't let them promote you. Don't let them transfer you. Don't let them do anything that takes you off the bridge of that ship, because while you're there... you can make a difference.
    -Captain James T. Kirk
  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    I can follow Sisko's thinking on the Vreenak thing though it wasn't right...I can't on poisoning a planet to get Eddington though.

    More like the first, had Archer extorted reforms out of the Valakians I would've at least been able to understand why he did it, as compared to the incomprehensible (and reprehensible!) decision he made.

    As it was, I wonder if he didn't give in because of his own insecurities (surely the "more mature species" must know better?). Of course he eventually overcame said insecurities, such as when he flipped out on Shran and Gral and demanded they shape up and try "acting like humans for once." A very politically incorrect way of putting it, but he had a legitimate point and was confident enough to recognize it and stand by it. Watching some of the late episodes I never saw when the show was on, it seems Archer may have shown some character growth...and part of it actually seems to have been to ditch PC and call BS when he saw it instead of always letting everyone convince him they knew better to whatever disastrous consequence.

    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.
  • rambowdoubledashrambowdoubledash Member Posts: 298 Arc User
    It's a bad episode. I love Enterprise; it is my favorite Trek series, but I won't go to great lengths to defend "Dear Doctor". I can, and I have, but I've come to realize that I'm only doing so as a reaction to defend my favorite Trek series, which catches an unnecessary amount of flak that bothers me. Objectively, it's just a bad episode.

    Some episodes are bad; news at 11.

  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    djf021 wrote: »
    gulberat wrote: »
    djf021 wrote: »
    gulberat wrote: »
    Regarding getting the Menk out from under the Valakians' thumbs, I would've actually been less annoyed if Archer had pulled an act of political interference and essentially extorted the Valakians by forcing reform in return for the cure. It would've been a dirty move but far less dirty than condemning them to die. Which shows just HOW bad Archer and Phlox's act in the actual episode really was, that I would consider extortion the lesser of two evils. O_O
    What's funny about this is it somehow actually sounds like something Janeway would do. :D
    Or Sisko. He had a few pretty egregious acts under his belt too. I would actually rank such an act by Archer under Sisko's WMD incident and the assassination of Vreenak since no lives would be taken.
    I thought of that too. Although I kinda sympathized with Sisko on that one. True it was dirty, but it was about doing whatever it took to survive. Although that too I guess he couldn't prove...
    Well, the Sisko's use of biogenic weapons was done carefully, and did not result in fatalities.
    gulberat wrote: »
    djf021 wrote: »
    gulberat wrote: »
    Personally, I think the fact that Phlox thought it was OK to let a species die shows that his value system is not acceptable for service on a United Earth ship, and therefore he also cannot be trusted to give an accurate reading of the situation between the Valakians and the Menk. His point of view is already screwed up on one, so I don't see why I should trust it on the other.
    You make a good point there.
    To me, Phlox' rationalization reads way too close for comfort to justifications of atrocities on Earth--some of which were perpetrated by people who purported to be following the scientific method. I do not want to debate those examples, solely say that when those same "theories" come into contact with rigorous science they are proven absolutely false. That's why it rubs me the wrong way to see Phlox treated as the good guy in the episode. How the writers missed that they were making Phlox look about as solid as a phrenologist is beyond me.
    I think the issue is in the way the writers screwed up the technobabble.

    Rewriting the technobabble to sound more like real science and not fake science would probably help. The basic concepts were relatively simple. The Valakians had a systemic genetic fault that was causing their DNA to mutate uncontrollably, thus giving each generation more genetic defects that the previous one. The Menk did not have this. Some members of the Menk population had genetic mutation that made them much more intelligent than what was average for a Menk.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • rambowdoubledashrambowdoubledash Member Posts: 298 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    Rewriting the technobabble to sound more like real science and not fake science would probably help. The basic concepts were relatively simple. The Valakians had a systemic genetic fault that was causing their DNA to mutate uncontrollably, thus giving each generation more genetic defects that the previous one. The Menk did not have this. Some members of the Menk population had genetic mutation that made them much more intelligent than what was average for a Menk.

    It would have been particularly clever for the Enterprise writers to have tied in the potential solution to the Eugenics Wars. The Valakians could maybe be cured, in the better version of the episode, by large-scale gene sequencing and a thorough eugenics program - i.e., an utterly barbaric and horrific option to a 22nd-century Terran.
  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    It's a bad episode. I love Enterprise; it is my favorite Trek series, but I won't go to great lengths to defend "Dear Doctor". I can, and I have, but I've come to realize that I'm only doing so as a reaction to defend my favorite Trek series, which catches an unnecessary amount of flak that bothers me. Objectively, it's just a bad episode.

    Some episodes are bad; news at 11.

    I'm not down on the whole series; otherwise I wouldn't have noted that Archer appears to have shown character growth and later ditched the "PC-type" stuff and stood his ground in later episodes.

    (Oh, and "Move Along Home" gets more flack than necessary, despite Siddig's awful acting in that episode. I could point to worse in DS9's catalogue. "Move Along Home" is a fluff piece, but not a stinker.)

    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.
  • rambowdoubledashrambowdoubledash Member Posts: 298 Arc User
    gulberat wrote: »
    (Oh, and "Move Along Home" gets more flack than necessary, despite Siddig's awful acting in that episode. I could point to worse in DS9's catalogue. "Move Along Home" is a fluff piece, but not a stinker.)

    Actually I personally love it; Star Trek is a silly franchise to me, or at least it should be. It's just my understanding that DS9 fans tend to dislike it.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    Rewriting the technobabble to sound more like real science and not fake science would probably help. The basic concepts were relatively simple. The Valakians had a systemic genetic fault that was causing their DNA to mutate uncontrollably, thus giving each generation more genetic defects that the previous one. The Menk did not have this. Some members of the Menk population had genetic mutation that made them much more intelligent than what was average for a Menk.
    It would have been particularly clever for the Enterprise writers to have tied in the potential solution to the Eugenics Wars. The Valakians could maybe be cured, in the better version of the episode, by large-scale gene sequencing and a thorough eugenics program - i.e., an utterly barbaric and horrific option to a 22nd-century Terran.
    Yeah, that sort of background does make sense for the episode. They did kinda come close-ish, but not that close. It'd have been more interesting if they discussed possible side effects of whatever treatment option Phlox had come up with. Might it have been worse than the disease?
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • lilchibiclarililchibiclari Member Posts: 1,193 Arc User
    To me, the choice that the crew made was clearly wrong. It is, of course, supposed to be the origin of the Prime Directive, which I hold to be fundamentally flawed. It assumes that there is one "right" way for a culture to develop, and that one way is the way that it would develop without outside interference. The Temporal Prime Directive works the same way--it assumes one "right" way for the past to unfold. Anything else, to quote that one timeship captain in Temporal Ambassador, "is an aberration." Why is the timeline we're familiar with the "right" one? Anything is possible, why is only one set of options allowed to be "good"?

    Really, the "right" timeline is whichever one leads to your own existence. Nobody really wants to allow a timeline where they themselves are erased. It's not about morality, it's about survival. If Kal Dano had not saved the Lukari, for example, then he could not have been born.
    There's no reason to assume that the Valakians are "supposed" to die off. If you want to get the Menk out from under their thumb, there are better ways.

    The Valakians are in the interesting border zone between "warp-capable" and "pre-warp" civilization. They attempted interstellar flight, but at sublight speed. Really, the criterion is of whether a civilization has achieved interstellar travel, not how fast their spacecraft move. Nobody is really going to say "well, your starship reached us under its own power, but your engines aren't fast enough to qualify for contact".
  • rambowdoubledashrambowdoubledash Member Posts: 298 Arc User
    edited November 2015
    The Valakians are in the interesting border zone between "warp-capable" and "pre-warp" civilization. They attempted interstellar flight, but at sublight speed. Really, the criterion is of whether a civilization has achieved interstellar travel, not how fast their spacecraft move. Nobody is really going to say "well, your starship reached us under its own power, but your engines aren't fast enough to qualify for contact".

    Well, you say that, but the Federation has memory-erasing technology which it happily uses to preserve the Prime Directive. A sublight ship somehow encounters a Federation outpost or ship would probably have its crew's memory wiped and the ship placed on a new course.

    The line in the sand is the warp drive because, well, the line has to be somewhere. Mind, I guarantee that debates over the the line being there happen all the time in the Federation; it came up at least once in the Star Trek: Titan books, anyway, as well as the ongoing Enterprise; Rise of the Federation novels.

    (In Trek, humans have had sublight interstellar flight since the 1990s at least - when the Botany Bay was launched, and the 1990s thru the 2050s or so saw the launch of sleeper ships from Earth to various locations, notably Alpha Centauri. Still the Vulcans didn't contact Earth until it had invented a warp drive)
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    Well, there is a clause in the Prime Directive regarding civilizations that intentionally make contact with the Federation. Which the Valakians did. Also, if the low-tech civ comes to you, there's a good chance that they'll come back if you ignore them the first time.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    Well, there is a clause in the Prime Directive regarding civilizations that intentionally make contact with the Federation. Which the Valakians did. Also, if the low-tech civ comes to you, there's a good chance that they'll come back if you ignore them the first time.

    Which makes sense in that theoretically if you have invented subspace radio, even if you haven't been able to get a working warp drive, you did so with the express intention of intercepting signals from aliens and eventually initiating first contact. Such a society has probably had some time to adjust to the reality of the intercepted signals before contact actually happens.

    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.
  • marcusdkanemarcusdkane Member Posts: 7,439 Arc User
    gulberat wrote: »
    Personally, I think the fact that Phlox thought it was OK to let a species die shows that his value system is not acceptable for service on a United Earth ship, and therefore he also cannot be trusted to give an accurate reading of the situation between the Valakians and the Menk. His point of view is already screwed up on one, so I don't see why I should trust it on the other.

    You know, if Archer had stood his ground there, I wonder what a different course Federation history and policy would've taken. A definite shame there, as what Archer did in not forcing Phlox to either give up the cure or step down from his position then laid the groundwork for all of Picard's later moral cowardice. :/
    By your moral standards...

    Phlox is an alien, with alien values, standards and morals. That they do not sit well with you does not make them wrong...

    The same approach would just as likely be taken by a Cardassian or a Romulan...

    Worf initially refused to provide a transfusion to a Romulan, even though it would mean the Romulan's death (and which the Romulan himself rejected) It was clear that they could not order Worf to comply, and his values and opinions were respected for what they were, even though they did not align with that of his Human comrades...

    To the topic itself: Assistance was requested, and Archer had an obligation to see it provided. A distress call from a ship would have been answered, so should this have been...

  • alexmakepeacealexmakepeace Member Posts: 10,633 Arc User
    Phlox is an alien, with alien values, standards and morals. That they do not sit well with you does not make them wrong...
    Well, this brings up the question of moral relativism. If a culture believes something is right, does that make it right?

    Personally, I don't think it does. While I don't claim to necessarily know with certainty what is right and wrong, I do believe that an act can be right or wrong regardless of how a given culture perceives it.

    Gulberat's point stands that if you're going to serve on a United Earth ship, you will be held to United Earth moral standards. If Phlox violated those standards, he is unfit to serve on that crew regardless of whether he believes his actions are justified.
    Worf initially refused to provide a transfusion to a Romulan, even though it would mean the Romulan's death (and which the Romulan himself rejected) It was clear that they could not order Worf to comply, and his values and opinions were respected for what they were, even though they did not align with that of his Human comrades...
    I'm pretty sure that's still a case of human standards. Having not seen the episode, I can't say for certain, but I'm inclined to speculate that they can't order him to undergo a transfusion because they can't order him to undergo a transfusion, rather than because of anything to do with his moral standpoint. Human moral standards require consent for medical procedures. If I can perform a lifesaving treatment on a dying man, but he refuses it and is clearly competent to make that decision, I'm forbidden from saving his life, even if the man's death means his dependent children go without care. The law doesn't care if the man's decision is right, only that he made it.
  • lilchibiclarililchibiclari Member Posts: 1,193 Arc User
    I always found the part about Worf giving blood to a Romulan odd given that Romulans have the Vulcan copper-based blood while Klingons do not--why should he be chemically more compatible than all of the other species on board the Enterprise?
  • artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,450 Bug Hunter
    edited November 2015
    The Temporal Prime Directive works the same way--it assumes one "right" way for the past to unfold. Anything else, to quote that one timeship captain in Temporal Ambassador, "is an aberration." Why is the timeline we're familiar with the "right" one? Anything is possible, why is only one set of options allowed to be "good"?

    Not exactly. Cause then effect. If the future has already been witnessed then the past will have to happen a certain way for the future to come into being. This is essential if a traveller comes back from said future. Their future has to exist or else they would be able to come back into the past, so the 'right' way here is the way that allows everything to unfold as it did before.

    gulberat wrote: »
    djf021 wrote: »
    gulberat wrote: »
    Regarding getting the Menk out from under the Valakians' thumbs, I would've actually been less annoyed if Archer had pulled an act of political interference and essentially extorted the Valakians by forcing reform in return for the cure. It would've been a dirty move but far less dirty than condemning them to die. Which shows just HOW bad Archer and Phlox's act in the actual episode really was, that I would consider extortion the lesser of two evils. O_O

    What's funny about this is it somehow actually sounds like something Janeway would do. :D

    Or Sisko. He had a few pretty egregious acts under his belt too. I would actually rank such an act by Archer under Sisko's WMD incident and the assassination of Vreenak since no lives would be taken.

    Yes he did, a fact that made him a much more moral person than Picard. The WMD thing ended a war with zero casualties (remember the evacuation ships mentioned) and the deaths of four people (Vreenak, his two aids, and the fish guy) saved billions, Picard would have let nature take its course and the war play out as it should. Hell, he'd probably have taken the Jack Pack's suggestion of surrender, one that apparently didn't factor Sisko and fighting dirty into the equation.

    I despise the usage of Picards line in Insurrection (How many people before it's wrong Admiral) applied to the Vreenak situation. The answer is obvious, you're killing four to save billions, that's thousands of millions (or millions of millions, I don't know if the Federation uses the long or short billion). I'd have even gone along with S31 and seen the Founders wiped out as they only count as one person.
    If it turned out that the destruction of an entire planet of, say Vorta, was needed then it would get a bit murkeyer, Five thousand million lives to save everyone else? That's harder, but when it's a choice of 4 or 1 vs. even just 1000,000,000 it's morally wrong by any reckoning not to kill the 4 or 1.

    To suggest Sisko's acts were egregious (I assume here in the modern sense) is completely wrong by any standard that doesn't involve just rolling over in front of the Dominion. Not all lives are equal and even if Vreenak, and the other three, were the purest of the pure, it still would be utterly repulsive to chose them over the billions who would die in their stead (likely including at least three of the four in the first place).

    Edit: I realise this has nothing to do with the Valakians. When it comes to the lives of the two species any opinion by Phlox that leads to deaths is automatically wrong. He broke the fundamental of Human doctors (as he was serving on a Earth ship) 'Do no harm'. I'd rather Earth had asked the Vulcans or Andorians to fly over and try to sort the situation out for them.​​
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Sign In or Register to comment.