Star Trek's attitude toward genetic engineering is a lasting legacy of the post-Eugenics era. And that's a period that isn't just about tyrannical German regimes in the 1930s and 40s. The US has a long history with Eugenics, and for those too young to remember it was an issue that cropped up again in the 1960s when the government was shutting down sanitariums across the country (sanitariums had been heavily shaped by theories about eugenics during the 1920s and 30s). It's still a relevant issue in many ways. How will society function when some people are "better" and others simply aren't? Who decides what is better, and using what criteria? It's a moral and ethical quagmire.
Khan's ineffectiveness as social commentary had little to do with a lack of "real-world common sense," and more to do with simply being a moral arguing point for a hot topic issue at the time the episode aired with little exploration of the issue beyond "it's bad." DS9 offered much better commentary on the issue, what little there was, but Star Trek has always assumed that eugenics is bad. Society in general still assumes that. There are other SF series that have done better with the topic like Gene Rodenberry's oft forgotten other series; Andromeda, which tackled the issue much more closely.
Why do all these Threads switch from the Subject at hand into morality discussions?
'Morals are for men, not Gods.'
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Probably because it's Star Trek, and Star Trek has spent more time on moral and ethical issues than technological ones (you know, when it's not about green space women and punching lizard men )
I see a lot of people conflating real-world common sense with in-universe sense.
[...]
Trek is supposed to be Science Fiction, not Fantasy. Technology isn't bad in Trek just because one application of it didn't work as planned. It is not magic, not a force Man Was Not Meant To Know, but applied science. If you don't figure it out at the first attempt, you try again.
The cultural context of the 20th century made this particular technology a scare thing, for historic reasons explained above. So they handwaved it into something special, something uncontrollable. But from a more recent perspective, that just doesn't make sense any more.
I would love to see a mission or ten involving the Eugenics Wars, but I seriously doubt Cryptic would go for that. At best we'll probably get a follow-up blog telling us what became of Vrell.
"Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them." -Thomas Marrone
Star Trek's attitude toward genetic engineering is a lasting legacy of the post-Eugenics era. And that's a period that isn't just about tyrannical German regimes in the 1930s and 40s. The US has a long history with Eugenics, and for those too young to remember it was an issue that cropped up again in the 1960s when the government was shutting down sanitariums across the country (sanitariums had been heavily shaped by theories about eugenics during the 1920s and 30s). It's still a relevant issue in many ways. How will society function when some people are "better" and others simply aren't? Who decides what is better, and using what criteria? It's a moral and ethical quagmire.
It's not hard to figure out. There's already a divide between those who are genetically haves or have-nots. Sickle-Cell, Hemophilia, various other hereditary defects... There's a lot of jobs that won't even think about hiring you if you have one or both of those. What really scares people is getting redefined from "have" to "have-not".
One pretty good example was from the Xmen cartoon. Before joining the Xmen, Colossus tried to get a job as a construction worker. The other workers felt very inadequate when confronted with the idea of working with someone who could lift more than their forklift could. They seemed to be thinking something like "What does the boss need us for if he has guys like that?"
The same sort of thought process goes in real life. The idea of waking up one day and finding yourself obsolete is scary.
Khan's ineffectiveness as social commentary had little to do with a lack of "real-world common sense," and more to do with simply being a moral arguing point for a hot topic issue at the time the episode aired with little exploration of the issue beyond "it's bad." DS9 offered much better commentary on the issue, what little there was, but Star Trek has always assumed that eugenics is bad. Society in general still assumes that. There are other SF series that have done better with the topic like Gene Rodenberry's oft forgotten other series; Andromeda, which tackled the issue much more closely.
I dunno.... It seemed to primarily stick with the "augments are bad" angle.
Not once you get past basics, and into more difficult questions like availability and equity.
There's already a divide between those who are genetically haves or have-nots. Sickle-Cell, Hemophilia, various other hereditary defects...
There is a distinct difference between gene therapy to fix genetic defects, and eugenics. The Federation notably had no ban on gene therapy (it's mentioned in one or two episodes including Dr. Bashir I Presume). It's a very different concept from the idea you can make better people (smarter, faster, stronger, more moral etc) by altering their genes, which is what Eugenics is.
And Sickle-Cell anemia is actually an example of how complicated genes can be. It wasn't always a hereditary defect. It was at one point in time an evolutionary advantage. Sickle-Cell conveniently makes you quite resistant to Malaria. When you're living in West Africa and without modern medicine, Malaria is is a much greater risk factor than Sickle Cell Anemia. Pale white skin is likewise disadvantageous in sunnier environments. Sun burn is pretty uncomfortable you know. Of course, now we have sun screen, so not much of an issue anymore.
Point being, you never know what might suddenly become genetically deficient or advantageous. Not with certainty.
I dunno.... It seemed to primarily stick with the "augments are bad" angle.
Yep. Rodenberry was pretty consistent in his position on the matter. Except in Andromeda the issue wasn't presented chiefly through a cartoon villain everyone could point fingers at as evil. Andromeda actually presented an image of what a society made of a bunch of genetic perfectionists obsessed with unyielding social Darwinism might look like. Even threw in some coy jabs at a few other things by naming the home world of said society after a book by Ayn Rand.
Considering it seems Khan's opponent in the war was Colonel Phillip Green, it seems we're meant to be on the Augments' side. Until they're driven to revenge the two main Augments we've seen seem to be reasonable guys (Khan and Harrison). The Augments of DS9 were odd, certainly, but hardly inherently bad. Even Malik and his mob were about as 'evil' as Klingons.
I think it's more fair to compare the likes of Green or Paxton to the 'them' we're prevented from mentioning, than Khan.
But an episode where we have to go back to the Third World War would be great, especially if we have to determine the Augments as the lesser of two evils over.
I'm not too keen on a 2410 encounter with the Augments though, we're already dealing with too many dangling plot threads.
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
Yep. Rodenberry was pretty consistent in his position on the matter.
And if we remember another plot of his "Earth: Final Conflict" ("Battleground: Earth" in its infancy) not only genetic augmentations are bad. Transforming yourself in partially energy-being can also go seriously wrong.
[...]
And Sickle-Cell anemia is actually an example of how complicated genes can be. It wasn't always a hereditary defect. It was at one point in time an evolutionary advantage. Sickle-Cell conveniently makes you quite resistant to Malaria.
It still is. But for that, it is sufficient to have one copy of the gene, not two. Having one copy has no negative side effects. Only if you have two copies does it become a disease.
Not quite. Carriers(those with only one gene) can still have issues if they are exposed to low air pressures(equivalent to several thousand ft altitude). Those with full sickle cell may never suffer from it if they live at or near sea level. But they can't leave. If they do, it might kill them. Being a carrier of sickle cell can kill you if you're a pilot. You go up to 10 thousand feet and you're fine... as long as the cabin stays pressurized.... But as soon as air pressure drops.... You might have only a few minutes to live.
[...]
Point being, you never know what might suddenly become genetically deficient or advantageous. Not with certainty.
Though that point is not really relevant when you can edit genes in adults on the fly.
This! A society that can simply edit someone's DNA like it was a book... why would they not use it on everyone? Then the question of being "superior" or "inferior" goes away.
Considering it seems Khan's opponent in the war was Colonel Phillip Green, it seems we're meant to be on the Augments' side. Until they're driven to revenge the two main Augments we've seen seem to be reasonable guys (Khan and Harrison). The Augments of DS9 were odd, certainly, but hardly inherently bad. Even Malik and his mob were about as 'evil' as Klingons.
I think it's more fair to compare the likes of Green or Paxton to the 'them' we're prevented from mentioning, than Khan.
But an episode where we have to go back to the Third World War would be great, especially if we have to determine the Augments as the lesser of two evils over.
I'm not too keen on a 2410 encounter with the Augments though, we're already dealing with too many dangling plot threads.
Both were bad. The Augment side basically treated "normal" humans as slaves and didn't care how many of them died.
Considering it seems Khan's opponent in the war was Colonel Phillip Green, it seems we're meant to be on the Augments' side. Until they're driven to revenge the two main Augments we've seen seem to be reasonable guys (Khan and Harrison). The Augments of DS9 were odd, certainly, but hardly inherently bad. Even Malik and his mob were about as 'evil' as Klingons.
I think it's more fair to compare the likes of Green or Paxton to the 'them' we're prevented from mentioning, than Khan.
But an episode where we have to go back to the Third World War would be great, especially if we have to determine the Augments as the lesser of two evils over.
I'm not too keen on a 2410 encounter with the Augments though, we're already dealing with too many dangling plot threads.
Both were bad. The Augment side basically treated "normal" humans as slaves and didn't care how many of them died.
You can hardly blame them. Look at how badly the harmless Jack Pack were treated Picard's hippy utopia. Now imagine how Green or Paxton would treat an entire class of Augments, and now imagine some could fight back.
By and large Augments tend towards insanity, with both Khan and Harrison starting off with reasonable motives for revenge before descending into madness, so they're certainly not the heros of the story, especially not with their disdain for unaltered Humans, but you can see their side and points of view easily in a way you cannot emphasise with the likes of Green.
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
Too late we already hit the third rail on this one.
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
I see a lot of people conflating real-world common sense with in-universe sense.
[...]
Trek is supposed to be Science Fiction, not Fantasy. Technology isn't bad in Trek just because one application of it didn't work as planned. It is not magic, not a force Man Was Not Meant To Know, but applied science. If you don't figure it out at the first attempt, you try again.
The cultural context of the 20th century made this particular technology a scare thing, for historic reasons explained above. So they handwaved it into something special, something uncontrollable. But from a more recent perspective, that just doesn't make sense any more.
Science Fiction often is based on one more or less "fantastic" assumptions, like faster than light travel or artificial super intelligence or sapient alien life. Stuff that we can't do or haven't found yet, and we don't know if we can do or will find them ever. But it says "Let's pretend we would have done/found it, what could happen?"
Star Trek - as a fully fledged science fiction universe, not just a single novel - has a lot of such assumptions. And one of them is now that genetic engineering almost inevitably leads to dangerous results.
In the real world... That might be wrong. Just as FTL might never be possible. But we go with it anyway for Star Trek.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
[...]
Point being, you never know what might suddenly become genetically deficient or advantageous. Not with certainty.
Though that point is not really relevant when you can edit genes in adults on the fly.
This! A society that can simply edit someone's DNA like it was a book... why would they not use it on everyone? Then the question of being "superior" or "inferior" goes away.
[...]
As long as everybody has equal access to the methods at hand, that is. This implies some redistribution of wealth to give everyone the opportunity.
Nah, the Federation already has public health care, just make it part of that.
But even within the show, it is seen multiple times that that assumption obviously is incorrect. It is a social convention, an conviction of characters within the universe, that seems to have little support in the "science" within the series.
It's given as the reason why the Feds think augments are bad, but.... It's not been demonstrated. The opposite was demonstrated instead.
"enchanted human" concept is old, check comicbook's Jack Kirby version of Captain America, and there is few other supposely enchanted experiments that went fail or tradegically altered, for Swamp Thing from DC, and Wonder Man (Gene Simons) of Avengers, dont know why he wasnt included in those movies, Gene Simons had much more advanced formula than Steve Rogers.
Gene were dying and need serum to be kept alive, and later died as hero, and revived by evil voodoo master, but after that part he somehow back alive. now this current wonder man version, he became energy entity. i lost track of it since i quit reading after Marvel comic's 1st and 2nd reboots.
i think Gene Roddenberry used that WW2 concept ala-mode Captian America, but end up with more darker side of human genetic that may gone wrong.
i still think STO would use a new fresh story arc dealing with "generations of eugenic expeirment" and some do need 2nd chances and newer story of good and evil.
it is possible there is some newer seeds that was born centuries later may pop up as some lateint dna woke some up, and we need Dr. Bashir for new story for lost bloodline of eugenic.
Anyways, old school comics had several creators who worked for more than one company. Kirby was probably the most influential though. He's the guy who gave us both Darkseid and Thanos. Strikingly similar characters. Not the same of course, but similar in many ways. He also designed a third character named Gemini for the cartoon Thundarr the Barbarian. Gemini is again... not exactly the same, but has many similarities. Like Darkseid he loves to float in mid air and zap people with eye-beams. And he has an evil lair and armies of henchmen.... But while he dislikes physical combat, he has a massive intimidating presence.
Actually... Kirby designed most of the enemies in Thundarr, and Gemini wasn't the only one who was a walking brick who shot eye beams. There was also Vashtarr... who was so powerful he could TIME TRAVEL.... until the heros cause him to lose his powers.
This is not to say Kirby was uncreative, just that if you look at enough of his creations you start to notice patterns.... such as the good guys using hand blasts, and the bad guys preferring eyebeams... It's not consistent, but recurring.
i just checked to find out who and what is Fightng American, i see big differences and similarities, but captain america was created for WW2, and Fighting American created in 1954 during "red scare". they were decade apart.
i see same people made lot of comic history.
anyway, sorry for hijacked topic about "enchanted humans", still old concept, i think original series were just thrown hastily put together for star trek episodes for only 1 show, and DP9 and few Enterprise episodes were just to fill in some blanks about Eugenic War.
Comments
Khan's ineffectiveness as social commentary had little to do with a lack of "real-world common sense," and more to do with simply being a moral arguing point for a hot topic issue at the time the episode aired with little exploration of the issue beyond "it's bad." DS9 offered much better commentary on the issue, what little there was, but Star Trek has always assumed that eugenics is bad. Society in general still assumes that. There are other SF series that have done better with the topic like Gene Rodenberry's oft forgotten other series; Andromeda, which tackled the issue much more closely.
'Morals are for men, not Gods.'
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
You're doing it again.
I Support Disco | Disco is Love | Disco is Life
"Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them."
-Thomas Marrone
One pretty good example was from the Xmen cartoon. Before joining the Xmen, Colossus tried to get a job as a construction worker. The other workers felt very inadequate when confronted with the idea of working with someone who could lift more than their forklift could. They seemed to be thinking something like "What does the boss need us for if he has guys like that?"
The same sort of thought process goes in real life. The idea of waking up one day and finding yourself obsolete is scary. I dunno.... It seemed to primarily stick with the "augments are bad" angle.
My character Tsin'xing
Not once you get past basics, and into more difficult questions like availability and equity.
There is a distinct difference between gene therapy to fix genetic defects, and eugenics. The Federation notably had no ban on gene therapy (it's mentioned in one or two episodes including Dr. Bashir I Presume). It's a very different concept from the idea you can make better people (smarter, faster, stronger, more moral etc) by altering their genes, which is what Eugenics is.
And Sickle-Cell anemia is actually an example of how complicated genes can be. It wasn't always a hereditary defect. It was at one point in time an evolutionary advantage. Sickle-Cell conveniently makes you quite resistant to Malaria. When you're living in West Africa and without modern medicine, Malaria is is a much greater risk factor than Sickle Cell Anemia. Pale white skin is likewise disadvantageous in sunnier environments. Sun burn is pretty uncomfortable you know. Of course, now we have sun screen, so not much of an issue anymore.
Point being, you never know what might suddenly become genetically deficient or advantageous. Not with certainty.
Yep. Rodenberry was pretty consistent in his position on the matter. Except in Andromeda the issue wasn't presented chiefly through a cartoon villain everyone could point fingers at as evil. Andromeda actually presented an image of what a society made of a bunch of genetic perfectionists obsessed with unyielding social Darwinism might look like. Even threw in some coy jabs at a few other things by naming the home world of said society after a book by Ayn Rand.
Having two actually makes you more susceptible to Malaria if I remember correctly
I think it's more fair to compare the likes of Green or Paxton to the 'them' we're prevented from mentioning, than Khan.
But an episode where we have to go back to the Third World War would be great, especially if we have to determine the Augments as the lesser of two evils over.
I'm not too keen on a 2410 encounter with the Augments though, we're already dealing with too many dangling plot threads.
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!
My character Tsin'xing
You can hardly blame them. Look at how badly the harmless Jack Pack were treated Picard's hippy utopia. Now imagine how Green or Paxton would treat an entire class of Augments, and now imagine some could fight back.
By and large Augments tend towards insanity, with both Khan and Harrison starting off with reasonable motives for revenge before descending into madness, so they're certainly not the heros of the story, especially not with their disdain for unaltered Humans, but you can see their side and points of view easily in a way you cannot emphasise with the likes of Green.
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!
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Star Trek - as a fully fledged science fiction universe, not just a single novel - has a lot of such assumptions. And one of them is now that genetic engineering almost inevitably leads to dangerous results.
In the real world... That might be wrong. Just as FTL might never be possible. But we go with it anyway for Star Trek.
My character Tsin'xing
Gene were dying and need serum to be kept alive, and later died as hero, and revived by evil voodoo master, but after that part he somehow back alive. now this current wonder man version, he became energy entity. i lost track of it since i quit reading after Marvel comic's 1st and 2nd reboots.
i think Gene Roddenberry used that WW2 concept ala-mode Captian America, but end up with more darker side of human genetic that may gone wrong.
i still think STO would use a new fresh story arc dealing with "generations of eugenic expeirment" and some do need 2nd chances and newer story of good and evil.
it is possible there is some newer seeds that was born centuries later may pop up as some lateint dna woke some up, and we need Dr. Bashir for new story for lost bloodline of eugenic.
Anyways, old school comics had several creators who worked for more than one company. Kirby was probably the most influential though. He's the guy who gave us both Darkseid and Thanos. Strikingly similar characters. Not the same of course, but similar in many ways. He also designed a third character named Gemini for the cartoon Thundarr the Barbarian. Gemini is again... not exactly the same, but has many similarities. Like Darkseid he loves to float in mid air and zap people with eye-beams. And he has an evil lair and armies of henchmen.... But while he dislikes physical combat, he has a massive intimidating presence.
Actually... Kirby designed most of the enemies in Thundarr, and Gemini wasn't the only one who was a walking brick who shot eye beams. There was also Vashtarr... who was so powerful he could TIME TRAVEL.... until the heros cause him to lose his powers.
This is not to say Kirby was uncreative, just that if you look at enough of his creations you start to notice patterns.... such as the good guys using hand blasts, and the bad guys preferring eyebeams... It's not consistent, but recurring.
My character Tsin'xing
i see same people made lot of comic history.
anyway, sorry for hijacked topic about "enchanted humans", still old concept, i think original series were just thrown hastily put together for star trek episodes for only 1 show, and DP9 and few Enterprise episodes were just to fill in some blanks about Eugenic War.
My character Tsin'xing