The reality of the Prime Directive.

*fascinating. There is a real-life Star Trek Prime Directive thing happening here.

Obviously, we don't want to introduce disease to these people, but I'm pretty sure we have some stuff (medicine, plumbing, refrigeration, Stephen Colbert, etc) that would make their lives better. Interesting ethical conundrumm.

only because they illuminated the octopus like a christmas tree...for sealions. The prime directive violated!

My long time issue with the "they would be too intelligent/evolved to have any interest in us" type scenario, such as he puts as number two here, is that we go through great lengths to try and research and understand very primitive life. There are efforts being made to talk to dolphins and apes. We're looking to build ships to crash or land ships onto Titan to see if there is microbial life on a moon orbiting a gas giant, not to mention work to see if Mars once upon had life. So the very fact we're able to get off our little rock (though not much off it), I think would warrant a stop and look, perhaps to help answer what was life like at such an early stage of evolution.

Not said stop and look doesn't imply any sort of communications. Indeed there may be a Prime Directive like thing with them where by they see and observe, but leave no evidence of such a visit (alien abductions being just mental illness coupled with abuse or other issues).

Now distance is a super valid point, but by far the most likely point is the survivability window, which he talks about in point three. We're still a level zero civilization (Kardashev scale) and decades until we reach a level one civilization (unfortunately it seems delayed even further due to some very anti-science moves being made by certain groups). Moving up that scale is only one thing, avoiding killing ourselves via war is another huge one. With CRISPR technology advancing, there is a very real danger of a Division/Stand/Utopia type disease coming to the foreground, especially if driven by a zealot (ala Division and Utopia). I highly doubt a man made black hole or something, but war or a CRISPR engineered disease... Not to mention the natural disasters he mentioned, and others, such as huge gamma ray bursts and others that we've managed to avoid. And we'd have to think that most civilizations go through somewhat similar phases, with a universe that is fairly hostile to life, even if many planets are capable of at least starting life. Generally I figure that most civilizations never make it past the stage we are at now, and those that do probably don't get to stage two and beyond (to be fair, I doubt any civilization can achieve stage two on Kardashev's scale as it goes beyond knowledge needed, but materials and more).

Back to the technology of communications point. I've generally figured if you are space faring, you gave up on radio communications and are using strange properties or something along those lines.

Guys, guys, guys... You're all misunderstanding.

He wasn't trying to save her. He was doing his job, just trying to capture the audio of her drowning.

You have to understand these news folks know not to interfere with a developing story. It's their prime directive.

One person is NEVER responsible for another person's emotional state or reaction to stimuli. It is not YOUR fault that an entire nation of emotionally damaged, abused, affected, incapable, ineffectual, developmentally-disabled human beings are now covering the landscape like a fungus...HOWEVER:
Self-preservation, species advancement, psycho-spiritual evolution, and the innate sensibilities that afford humanity a chance to get the goddamn molecule off-planet being the prime directive, one should when given the opportunity assist said molecule so much as is does not cause undue stress or fatigue to one's body, mind, or soul.

YouTube comments mean jack and or shit, as does most of the prattle filling servers faster than they can be manufactured. Get over it Missy, yer sexy to some, ugly to some, stay on task, make yer magnet videos, eat, shit, fuck, sleep, and die like the rest of us so the planet can produce more coal, fishes, coffee and mosquitoes, life goes on.

Sexism, racism, ism ism motherfucking isms, get the fuck over yourselves you bunch of self-satisfied, privileged, whining cake-hole stuffing fucks, and BIG HUGS for everyone with sandy vaginas, hashtag, smiley-face, fuck-off.

Oh yeah, and TROLLS??? That's YOUR emotion state telling the molecule to be un-molecular. Everyone commenting on the internet is a goddamn troll, in case you haven't figured that shit out yet, get a clue.

Well, it IS just a preview, but I kinda see your point. But movies are fantasy. Big budget movies require big audiences, and one way to bring them (and me) in is to make movies like this. I, for one, enjoyed the hell out of the previous movie (think I'll watch it on BluRay right now), and I have no doubt I'll love this one.

Is character development really needed for characters we've known for over 45 years? Granted, new actors will portray them a little differently, and the reboot takes place earlier than TOS. Maybe it's just me, but I didn't find myself wanting for more character exposition after the last movie. Hell, I thought they did an awesome job of introducing each character and laying out their individual personalities and quirks.

My least favorite of all the Star Trek series was TNG. I dug it, but it would be at the bottom if I had to rank them. I dunno, too idealist and preachy, maybe. JFC, I think Picard referred to the Prime Directive at least once an episode. Some episodes just bored me to death. I wanted every episode to be Enterprise vs. the Borg. I much prefer Kirk kicking a Gorn's ass, or fighting alongside Abe Lincoln, or in pursuit of the Praetor's finest flagship, or battling Apollo or "General Trelane, Retired". TOS was often campy, but always fun, and that's how I prefer my Star Trek.


Edit: Noted that you were speaking more generally about movies nowadays, and I'm speaking specifically about Star Trek.

I can't see the value in the prime directive. It only serves to keep inferior races down.

Are these actions in violation of the Prime Directive? You decide!

>> ^Peroxide:
>> ^ToastyBuffoon:
Unnecessary dramatic music aside, THIS is and should be the #1 focus with OWS. This country is being purposely torn apart through much of the media, leading the true victims into bickering and fighting with each other over your supposed "political beliefs" as the wealthy just sit back and laugh all the way to these corrupt banks. It sickens me to see what our government has become.

I disagree, perhaps your thinking is along the lines of "If we can accomplish one thing, this should be it." I think its a completely noble and ethical goal, and will make things better, but this measure alone is not enough.
I think many of the people on the streets are there for a lot more than this, money out of politics is a given, but what about electoral reform, national financial reform, and a general sense of discussion and debate about direction and goals of the nation, aka the common good.
A lot of people laugh when you use Star Trek as an example, but at this point in civilization's history, considering population and ecological stresses, I like to imagine that the enterprise would intervene, break the prime directive and give us a good talking to.
At this point in time, its way past due that we move the discussion about common good, and expand the range of our empathic sensibilities to a global level. Now, if I can claim that I've made a point with this rant, it would be that when the people take to the streets in a beautiful unfolding of common, peaceful democratic expression, the last thing we should do is narrow that movement to a sliver of its potential, put blinders on, and ask for less than we are capable of. Less than we now realize what we deserve.
When people realize that political organization is fun, empowering, and deeply meaningful, they will realize just how politically dormant our democratic discussions have been. There is plenty more to say, lets not arrest the discussion prematurely. (no pun intended)


very well put! my sentiments exactly

>> ^ToastyBuffoon:

Unnecessary dramatic music aside, THIS is and should be the #1 focus with OWS. This country is being purposely torn apart through much of the media, leading the true victims into bickering and fighting with each other over your supposed "political beliefs" as the wealthy just sit back and laugh all the way to these corrupt banks. It sickens me to see what our government has become.


I disagree, perhaps your thinking is along the lines of "If we can accomplish one thing, this should be it." I think its a completely noble and ethical goal, and will make things better, but this measure alone is not enough.

I think many of the people on the streets are there for a lot more than this, money out of politics is a given, but what about electoral reform, national financial reform, and a general sense of discussion and debate about direction and goals of the nation, aka the common good.

A lot of people laugh when you use Star Trek as an example, but at this point in civilization's history, considering population and ecological stresses, I like to imagine that the enterprise would intervene, break the prime directive and give us a good talking to.

At this point in time, its way past due that we move the discussion about common good, and expand the range of our empathic sensibilities to a global level. Now, if I can claim that I've made a point with this rant, it would be that when the people take to the streets in a beautiful unfolding of common, peaceful democratic expression, the last thing we should do is narrow that movement to a sliver of its potential, put blinders on, and ask for less than we are capable of. Less than we now realize what we deserve.

When people realize that political organization is fun, empowering, and deeply meaningful, they will realize just how politically dormant our democratic discussions have been. There is plenty more to say, lets not arrest the discussion prematurely. (no pun intended)

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Given life on any planet I would not say that intelligence is inevitable. For us, intelligence and self-awareness was just a particular adaptation - that didn't have to happen, we could have gotten an extra row of teeth instead.

Still though, given the vast amount of potential life-bearing planets out there, it must happen sometimes - and that's enough. That's why i think something like the Prime Directive is keeping us isolated. I also doubt that radio waves are used for interstellar chatting. Subspace communication FTW!

>> ^Xaielao:

>> ^deathcow:
of course life is everywhere

I'm inclined to agree. Considering the shear wealth of life on this planet alone with it's ability to survive what we thought just fifty years ago was impossible conditions. It sure seems to me that life isn't just a possibility, but the norm. It's certainly been shown in the lab that life strives to exist, that it just isn't a random event. And we as well now know that life began on this planet very early in it's own life. Indeed I think that even intelligent life (though I think that is a bad term in and of itself) is inevitable given time.

@kasinator, I agree with your point, but I also think you're restating the conclusion of the original video -- not that the Prime Directive is bad, but that the way it became an unquestioned dogma in the series was bad. Like the original video showed, there are plenty of examples where the only defense of Prime Directive absolutism were fallacious arguments (argument from ignorance, and argument from authority were highlighted).

I argue that that's because it's a TV show, and the writers obviously weren't trained moral philosophers. Also, they'd long since painted themselves into a corner by making such a big deal about how it's a core principle of their civilization -- like, say, the 1st Amendment.

To state the obvious, the Federation isn't a real civilization, so its laws, ethics, and doctrines aren't going to have the same rigor as ones that have been subjected to centuries of debate by real people who have to live by them.

In any case, discuss is more meant for questions of rules infractions about a video, not just for comment threads that get interesting.

*return

@csnel3
@kulpims
@GeeSussFreeK
@NetRunner
@draak13
@gwiz665
@budzos
@Bidouleroux
@everyone else here
And while it is true the vulcans have emotions which if left unchecked can perpetuate acts of chaos, even logic could condone the acts of intervention under certain circumstances. Like what was mentioned earlier with transporting the inhabitants of an entire colony to another planet. Logic would dictate that saving a lives rather than having them face extinction, especially when taking such action takes minimal effort on the part of those who intervene is a far better outcome than ignoring them and moving on. some of those ants Q steps on could have made great stides, some Q are even cautious enough to look out for ant hills so they would not step on them. Remember that Q himself does not represent the continuum and the entire Q as a whole.

Now just so I am entirely clear here, I am not against the principles of the prime directive, it does have its importance. But it seems whenever this debate is drawn both parties in which are for or against the directive are under the impression the directive has to be the one sided stance. That is what I am against. It should indeed be a directive, a consideration to keep in regard, but upholding to a non debatable stature leaves no room for leniency, any more than abandoning it and following a reckless moral compass as those pro directive would imagine it to be. What the directive needs is a middle ground. A set of further principles which leaves room for making a rational and logical decision to intervene under appropriate circumstances.

I was going to save this for a future sift, but this seems like the best time to place this:



I fear that point the most. Is it really free thinking if everyone shares the same idea? Unity may bring about a positive force, but it will always need quarrelsome debate to establish its principles, When people need to resort to an order, to establish the prime directive as a one way street, is it unified logic, or a dictated mindset? And if it is either one, what happens when everything else becomes a one way street? even in the optimistic future Roddenberry Imagined, his future did not have a perfect race. Every race had its own strengths and weaknesses. And some of their strengths to others seemed like their weaknesses, but when they worked with and learned with one another, it provided a harmony of thought, principle and the idea that even Their "enlightened" principles needed adjustment from others.

So my point to all this is the prime directive should be seen as a recommended precaution which leaves room for debate, not a dogma, and certainly not something that should be taken lightly. With that said, I think I am past the point of sharing the video, and this should really be moved to sift talks so we can further *discuss this in greater detail.

@kasinator

Replicating weapons is not a theory. In fact, all weapons and ship are replicated except for those parts that use materials that can't be replicated (like latinum). Of course, normally there are safety lockouts that prevent you from replicating weapons, plus you would need a replication pattern.

But anyway, my point concerning the Prime Directive was that, as a Vulcan precept it is not primarily concerned with morality per se. When Spock tells Kirk that his holodeck solution is logical, he is not saying in any way that it is a "good" or "bad" solution. Spock doesn't take morality into consideration, only logic. Thus, while Kirk's solution is "logical" in light of the moral dilemma he faces (that he created for himself) it is not a situation that Spock would get himself into because Spock would not have deliberated on whether or not he must try to save the natives in the first place. And it's not like Spock doesn't have emotions. Even pure-blood Vulcans have emotions, they just shove them aside most of the time. To a Vulcan, acting on emotions invites chaos sooner or later and chaos is inherently unpredictable. Instead of trying to predict the unpredictable and play god, you decide not to interfere.

But then we kind of see the reverse with the Q for a while. They are so high-up in the food chain that they do not consider their interventions as disruptive any more than we consider our destroying of an ant colony disruptive. After all, ants as a whole will adapt and survive in one way or another. But still, even they must admit that they cannot predict what will happen to their own continuum and so they realize they can't stop themselves from evolving without losing what made them Q in the first place. Their "Prime Directive" of not artificially ascending lower lifeforms (except Riker for a while) into Q stems mostly from apathy towards non-Q things but also from self-preservation, as they cannot predict what would happen if non-evolved Q arrived en masse. Thus the same could be said of the Federation's Prime Directive, even if the self-preservation aspect is unavowed.