Sfdebris.net

Morgaine wrote:

Madner Kami wrote:

Morgaine wrote:Racism isn't logical.

Hm I disagree. Human-on-Human-racism is dumb, obviously. So is Vulkan-on-Vulkan-racism. But Vulkan on Human? They are stronger than we are, live longer and have more capable brains, even limited telepathy. Racism would actually be logical, because they are better than we are. So are we to Pakleds.

So what would they have to fear from Sarek uplifting a human or two to the ways of logic?

Hm, playing Devil's Advocat here, do you consider uplifting a potentially dangerous, because very adaptable, impulsive, expansionistic and militaristic, if not outright warlike species a sound undertaking? I can see why they wouldn't.
Alternatively, they are just angry because he is wasting time and effort into an inferior species, instead of helping his own superior species progress even further? Or maybe they are just afraid, that his mingling could weaken their race in the long run or muddy their philosophy of pure logic.

Vulcans are logical.
Animals are illogical.
Vulcans are superior to animals.
Humans are illogical.
Therefore Vulcans are superior to Humans.
Therefore treating Humans and Vulcans as equals is wrong.

Reducing everything to the simplest logic i. e. logic extremism. Like Spock says its only the beginning of wisdom, on it's own it can still be pretty dumb.

Morgaine wrote:

Madner Kami wrote:

Morgaine wrote:Racism isn't logical.

Hm I disagree. Human-on-Human-racism is dumb, obviously. So is Vulkan-on-Vulkan-racism. But Vulkan on Human? They are stronger than we are, live longer and have more capable brains, even limited telepathy. Racism would actually be logical, because they are better than we are. So are we to Pakleds.

So what would they have to fear from Sarek uplifting a human or two to the ways of logic?

When Earth sends its humans to Vulcan, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing their problems with them. They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists, and some, I assume, are good people.

Hey, here's an amusing little fact. In SF Debris's own words, Star Trek Insurrection was trying to undermine the franchise and Nemesis was the enemy of the show? Well, here's yet another unfortunate naming choice from Paramount since if you shorten Star Trek Discovery to its acronym, what does it spell out? STD. As in, this show is like a sexually transmitted disease. I found that amusing.

Wow, what an original observation!

GandALF wrote:Vulcans are logical.
Animals are illogical.
Vulcans are superior to animals.
Humans are illogical.
Therefore Vulcans are superior to Humans.
Therefore treating Humans and Vulcans as equals is wrong.

Reducing everything to the simplest logic i. e. logic extremism. Like Spock says its only the beginning of wisdom, on it's own it can still be pretty dumb.

False equivalence fallacies are hardly logical.
And parroting what Spock said about logic isn't an answer. Whether relying entirely on logic as a guide for your life is flawed or not, the point is logic is consistent and leads to one conclusion - the logical conclusion.

Comparing a human to an animal is not logical, you can communicate with a human and teach them the ways of logic.
Vulcan superiority to a logical being would only mean that a Vulcan has nothing to fear from a human. Anything else is simply racism.

"We can't teach humans the ways of logic!" "Why?" "Because we're better!" "If we're better isn't it logical to aid and uplift our inferiors to demonstrate our superiority?" "S.. shut up! *explodes*"

Again if they want racist Vulcans, then they could just call them racist Vulcans, but their attempt to mishmash together Trump-supporter xenophobia, radical Islamic Jihadism and Vulcan logic just doesn't work.

Madner Kami wrote:Hm, playing Devil's Advocat here, do you consider uplifting a potentially dangerous, because very adaptable, impulsive, expansionistic and militaristic, if not outright warlike species a sound undertaking? I can see why they wouldn't.

Well, why not? The Vulcans, after all, were just like that. Well actually they were worse. They view the ways of Surak and logic as saving them from the aftermath of a nuclear war.
I can see the Vulcans seeing themselves in humans, and while some may even resent them for that.. that wouldn't be logical.

Alternatively, they are just angry because he is wasting time and effort into an inferior species, instead of helping his own superior species progress even further? Or maybe they are just afraid, that his mingling could weaken their race in the long run or muddy their philosophy of pure logic.

[/quote]

I'd say again that kind of fear isn't logical. Like I've pointed out, you can have Vulcan extremists, isolationists, xenophobes etc but calling them logic extremists completely misses the point.
It'd be a bit like introducing a band of human isolationist terrorists and calling them mathematics extremists.

Morgaine wrote:
False equivalence fallacies are hardly logical.
And parroting what Spock said about logic isn't an answer. Whether relying entirely on logic as a guide for your life is flawed or not, the point is logic is consistent and leads to one conclusion - the logical conclusion.

The exact same logical methods can be used to come different conclusions depending on what is believed to be true, which Vulcans do differ over, otherwise there would be no disagreement between Spock and Sarek over him joining Starfleet and all of Vulcan would be of Valeris' view about the Klingons.

GandALF wrote:

Morgaine wrote:
False equivalence fallacies are hardly logical.
And parroting what Spock said about logic isn't an answer. Whether relying entirely on logic as a guide for your life is flawed or not, the point is logic is consistent and leads to one conclusion - the logical conclusion.

The exact same logical methods can be used to come different conclusions depending on what is believed to be true, which Vulcans do differ over, otherwise there would be no disagreement between Spock and Sarek over him joining Starfleet and all of Vulcan would be of Valeris' view about the Klingons.

And none of those are "logic extremists".
As Chuck says in his reviews, Vulcans are logic tempered by ethics. Pure logic gets you the Borg.

To use Valeris as an example, it's logical that a lasting peace would be achieved by using the Klingon's weakness to conquer them here and now. But that's not ethical, at least not to a Vulcan who values peace and non violence.
In that way, Valeris is an extremist, and has more of a claim to being a logic extremist than the yahoo in DSC, because she is taking a cold and calculated view on preserving the Federation.

Morgaine wrote: And none of those are "logic extremists".
As Chuck says in his reviews, Vulcans are logic tempered by ethics. Pure logic gets you the Borg.

To use Valeris as an example, it's logical that a lasting peace would be achieved by using the Klingon's weakness to conquer them here and now. But that's not ethical, at least not to a Vulcan who values peace and non violence.
In that way, Valeris is an extremist, and has more of a claim to being a logic extremist than the yahoo in DSC, because she is taking a cold and calculated view on preserving the Federation.

Isn't "pure logic" without ethics then logic extremism? Valeris' goal is very similar to the yahoo's, you just have to swap Federation for Vulcan and Klingon for human. She believes it to be necessary to sidestep ethical boundries in order to take the logical course of action and is willing to kill and very probably die for that action.

GandALF wrote:

Morgaine wrote: And none of those are "logic extremists".
As Chuck says in his reviews, Vulcans are logic tempered by ethics. Pure logic gets you the Borg.

To use Valeris as an example, it's logical that a lasting peace would be achieved by using the Klingon's weakness to conquer them here and now. But that's not ethical, at least not to a Vulcan who values peace and non violence.
In that way, Valeris is an extremist, and has more of a claim to being a logic extremist than the yahoo in DSC, because she is taking a cold and calculated view on preserving the Federation.

Isn't "pure logic" without ethics then logic extremism? Valeris' goal is very similar to the yahoo's, you just have to swap Federation for Vulcan and Klingon for human. She believes it to be necessary to sidestep ethical boundries in order to take the logical course of action and is willing to kill and very probably die for that action.

Yes but again, suicide bombing and racism/xenophobia/isolation are not logical. Not even if you are in fact superior to another species.

Reaching the conclusion that you are superior because of superior traits is logical, though that would be tempered by the fact that Vulcans aren't the leaders of the Federation.
Using that to therefore say inferior species must be expelled and the Federation must be abandoned is not logical, it's based on bias and resentment.

I'd expect a logic extremist to a) want to spread the ways of logic to as many as possible, with the understanding that Vulcans remain the superior mentors and b) to desire that Vulcans be the figureheads of the Federation instead of humans.

Now of course there can be Vulcan isolationists, because there have been, but they wouldn't be "logic extremists" because they would be using bad logic, or logic tempered by bias and bad ethics. And I doubt they would blow themselves up either.