Sfdebris.net

The Prime Directive.


In ToS, it was treated as a guideline. The newer the series, the more they treated it as the word of god. The prime directive, because of that, has become a subject of great, heated debate.

I'm not saying the Prime Directive needs to be ignored all the time. The Prime Directive should be asked in any situation when regarding interfering with a group/species. But it should be viewed as a guideline to help give pause so we make the right choice. It should never be treated as some unbreakable rule that can only be broken when it really benefits the main characters.

As Chuck says, it should be used as a test of our heroes' character.

clearspira wrote: ↑Fri Mar 29, 2019 12:46 pm

FaxModem1 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:57 am As per DS9's "Paradise", Luddhism is a mistake in philosophy, as the problems with such a society is that a lot of suffering and death will happen that is easily preventable.

Luddhism and communism work well as fantasy scenarios. But real human life is too fragile for the former, our real personalities are not altruistic enough for the latter. This is why the Ba'Ku needed immortality for the former, and the Federation needed post-scarcity for the latter.

Well, any level of technology improves our lot in life. The daily newspaper doesn't show it, but we have made leaps and bounds above where we were as a society a few decades ago. To the point that comparing our lives to someone from 1900 or 1920(even barring that they're reeling from World War 1 and the Spanish Flu), we're living lives that seem downright like paradise compared to theirs in terms of disease, health, work conditions, tolerance, violence, quality of life, free time, etc.

Beastro wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:07 am

clearspira wrote: ↑Fri Mar 29, 2019 12:46 pm This is why the Ba'Ku needed immortality for the former, and the Federation needed post-scarcity for the latter.

Cept Roddenberry's reason for the way the Fed works is that Mankind has evolved enough to make it work being that altruistic, same for his BS about Mankind evolving beyond grief, etc.

To give Roddenberry credit, we're a lot better as a society than we were even a few decades ago, with our stances on interracial relationships being a lot more tolerated than even they were in the 1990s. Gay rights as well have made tremendous steps, with legal protections as well as growing demographic acceptance of those who are different. We're not quite to Federation-level IDIC, but we're rather more accepting of the differences between others than we used to be. We still have problems, but we're working on it.

And yet, we're more toxic as a society too. You see this on the internet all the time. It's why Chuck has repeatedly said the internet will always make you lose your faith in humanity. Yes, crime rate is going down, but the social unrest and social division is just as insurmountable as ever. And I don't think we're quite as accepting of differences as you think we are, if someone does something, and someone will go, "Aw, come on, bro, really?" rather than just accept it outright.

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Sat Apr 13, 2019 3:10 pm And yet, we're more toxic as a society too. You see this on the internet all the time. It's why Chuck has repeatedly said the internet will always make you lose your faith in humanity. Yes, crime rate is going down, but the social unrest and social division is just as insurmountable as ever. And I don't think we're quite as accepting of differences as you think we are, if someone does something, and someone will go, "Aw, come on, bro, really?" rather than just accept it outright.

Depends on what you are asking me to accept. Remember Otherkin? I'm not accepting that you are a dog no matter how hard you beg.
There is a difference between acceptance and turning my brain off.

E = Mc²

Lowering the age of consent to 7.

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Sat Apr 13, 2019 3:10 pm And yet, we're more toxic as a society too. You see this on the internet all the time. It's why Chuck has repeatedly said the internet will always make you lose your faith in humanity. Yes, crime rate is going down, but the social unrest and social division is just as insurmountable as ever. And I don't think we're quite as accepting of differences as you think we are, if someone does something, and someone will go, "Aw, come on, bro, really?" rather than just accept it outright.

Or are we just more aware of our differences than we were before, and willing to acknowledge them? People arguing on the internet is a small price to pay for less genocide or prejudice in the world.

Addendum, hate crimes, lynchings, etc, are much less of a thing than they were pre-internet. I'd consider that a less toxic world, even if there is 4chan.

jstrahan wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:11 am Lowering the age of consent to 7.

Wait, what? When did he say that?

Did I say that? Or am I misunderstanding? No, I do NOT think that's okay if you're talking about me.