DIS - New Eden

[RahhelTheThird]

I'm surprised that the episode discussion has turned into a discussion about religion. Then again maybe I shouldn't be surprised considering how much of a hot button topic it is. Anyway, has anyone thought about the knowledge each of the displaced humans had on their respective religion? Most people sport a rather surface level knowledge about their religion and just remember the parts they like the most or agree on. Not sure if there was a priest, maulvi or theologian in that church. Could a bunch of regular people re-create the Bible, Quran or Torah? It wouldn't surprise me if an exchange like that happened:

Joe: "Hey remember how in the Bible there was this one metal scene in which the Whore of Babylon as riding a ten headed monster dragon with seven horns?"
Bill: "Lol, stop lying Joe. This is religion and not some kind of Tolkien fantasy novel!"

Also I'd like to re-address how little the Discovery crew discussed whether or not they should follow the Prime Directive. I mean this is the sort of moral dilemma that Star Trek is known for by its fans. I'm not even that much of a Star Trek fan and just casually watched some episode re-runs here and there. Hell, I'm just starting with DS9 and probably going to give all the other series' a thorough watch. My starting off point is Voyager for God's sake and even I can't recognize this show as Star Trek.

To go back to the point about the Prime Directive. My first thought was an example like this:
If people were shipwrecked, and the outside world didn't know they survived, the survivors would do anything to catch the outsiders help and will assume they'll receive help. Now we assume the island is so remote the outside doesn't notice them until generations later. Airplanes have been invented and the survivor's descendants have been discovered. Would anyone on the outside proclaim "No, we can't make contact with them until they've independently discovered airplanes."?

Discovery didn't even attempt a discussion. Why? I mean even assuming if someone used the exact same argument . Another person could reply: "An apt metaphor, but a flawed argument in this instance. The descendants don't expect rescue. They assume the outside to be dead. It wouldn't be a reintegration, but a full on integration of a different culture."

The more I think about it the more the episode writes itself in my head. Is that just me or am I crazy? This episode will be my personal stopping point of sorts with Discovery. I gave it a fair chance. I endured through the first season and got quite far in the second I'd say. I watched a few episodes after Eden. Stopped around the part where the Angel's identity was revealed. The second season is better than the first, as is normal for a series, but it doesn't make it good or even mediocre Trek. If the series was called anything but Star Trek I'd rate it a bit higher, but even then it'd be mediocre at best.

[CharlesPhipps]

I thought not telling them about Earth was bullshit. The Prime Directive shouldn't apply to a bunch of people kidnapped by aliens.

[Thebestoftherest]

Yeah the prime directive always seems to be against thinking.

[CharlesPhipps]

Yeah the prime directive always seems to be against thinking.

Natural development is also a loaded phrase because it implies that interacting with other people is unnatural.

Mind you, I can actually forgive it in New Eden because Pike is clearly romanticizing the Space Amish here.

Burnham, by contrast, thinks this planet is Hell on Earth.

[Beastro]

''Religion IS different from a government''.

Meh. Separation of church and state is an incredibly modern concept and isn't even that true across the world. Any Muslim country under Sharia Law does not make a distinction.
And if we turn to history, any society that has a god-king has no contrast between the two. The Aztecs and the Egyptians based their entire system of governance around the fact that their leader was appointed by the gods. The Medieval European kings and queens used to claim the Divine right to rule which basically meant that their word was that of God.

It's worth noting the marked shift in its use between the Middle Ages and Early Modern Era with the latter being more the target in mind for its more infamous, arbitrary viewpoint which followed in tandem with the rise of the State as an idea.

There's also the fact that Divine Right was restricting on monarchs which came before. The Church and Christian kings in Anglo-Saxon England constantly struggled with lasting pagan cultural impetus to make the Anglo-Saxon monarchs into priest-kings. One bishop caused an infuriating stir once when he declared, upon looking at the present monarch on his throne crowned, that he saw God Himself seated. This aspect was crucial to the cult of Edward the Confessor and ardently opposed by the Norman monarchs after the Conquest.

A legacy of it that remained and refused to die for centuries after the Middle Ages was the Royal Touch. It lasted so long it in fact hopped over and became a French custom.

[CharlesPhipps]

Honestly, Divine Right was an old idea that went out of fashion for a long time and then got reinstated by a bunch of assholes in the Renaissance.

Because history doesn't always go forward.

[RahhelTheThird]

Yeah the prime directive always seems to be against thinking.

Natural development is also a loaded phrase because it implies that interacting with other people is unnatural.

Mind you, I can actually forgive it in New Eden because Pike is clearly romanticizing the Space Amish here.

Burnham, by contrast, thinks this planet is Hell on Earth.

I'm not totally against the Prime Directive. They did have the case in which they gave a pre-Warp culture replicators and they used them in the end to blow themselves up. I think that's an example a Vulcan cited in ENT. The Directive is, however, not an absolute. In cases in which a natural disaster wipes out a species it seems to be unconscionable not to interfere. Discovery did save the people even if they were not going to tell them.

Again this leads to more of a discussion. The argument would go like this: "So we can save the people, but we cannot tell them they've been saved? Telling them about us would be enough to at least kickstart that stagnant world into rejoining the rest of humanity and work on the warp drive. They would hardly destroy themselves, since all we give them is hope, not technology with which to kill." This solution would be a reasonable middle-ground on following the Prime Directive, yet no one managed to come up with it?

It's also quite odd how Discovery refuses to help these people in a way that matters, but Kelpies are fair game. Kelpies are only vaguely aware of warp technology. The only real difference is that due to systematic slavery the crew's moral fiber is questioned to such a degree they just have to help Saru on his personal mission.

[Link8909]

I'm not totally against the Prime Directive. They did have the case in which they gave a pre-Warp culture replicators and they used them in the end to blow themselves up. I think that's an example a Vulcan cited in ENT. The Directive is, however, not an absolute. In cases in which a natural disaster wipes out a species it seems to be unconscionable not to interfere. Discovery did save the people even if they were not going to tell them.

I agree that General Order 1 in itself isn't bad, and there're times when adhering to it is the best corse of action, and it is a case by case basis, I'm just against General Order 1 when it was used to justify allowing an entire civilisation to go extinct, so I'm really happy that Star Trek Discovery has the crew saving the people of New Eden and the Kelpiens.

[RahhelTheThird]

I agree that General Order 1 in itself isn't bad, and there're times when adhering to it is the best corse of action, and it is a case by case basis, I'm just against General Order 1 when it was used to justify allowing an entire civilisation to go extinct, so I'm really happy that Star Trek Discovery has the crew saving the people of New Eden and the Kelpiens.

Wait, has there been a case where the Prime Directive was used to let a people die or face horrible consequences from circumstances beyond their control?

[Link8909]

Wait, has there been a case where the Prime Directive was used to let a people die or face horrible consequences from circumstances beyond their control?

Yep.