VOY - Natural Law

[Madner Kami]

So it can be honestly argued to be better materially. Yes we can ask the people. But seeing all the magical people show up. Will it be an educated or reasoned answer? I am not saying the people are stupid. But a primitive people may have an innocent ignorance.

There's also the issue of peer pressure, where people would accept changes or outside influences on an individual basis, but refuse them as a community. Think of the community of deaf people and cochlear implants.

[Riedquat]

Just a thing but Arrogant: having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.

The better medicine, food, water are all not arrogant. They are blunt truth. The clothing and housing may be as not all of each would be good in a given environment.

So it can be honestly argued to be better materially. Yes we can ask the people. But seeing all the magical people show up. Will it be an educated or reasoned answer? I am not saying the people are stupid. But a primitive people may have an innocent ignorance.

Yes, I would say arrogant; how much you value something is subjective after all, so for one person to say to another "no, you're wrong, this is better, material concerns are what you want" I'll stick with arrogant. Personally speaking I'm satisfied enough with medicine, to the degree that I would prefer to live in the world now than a very high tech in every aspect of our lives one (we've gone too far down that path already) if that was the price for more. I'll happily take improved medicine of course, on its own, but not at the cost of complete societal change. If I was living in a hut in a jungle, frequently seeing friends and family die of illness and injury, my boundaries may well be different. But it's not for you to tell me what I should prefer, that your world is somehow objectively better. Very materialistic people are terrible at empathy I've noticed, they just can't grasp that their great world isn't everyone else's, and frequently start getting abusive when people don't go along.

***

The question of education, reasoned answers, realistically informed choice though, that's an interesting one. I suppose you'd need a few people to go and take a look at this other world and then to go back and explain it, although then it's down to possibly their individual biases.

[9ansean]

There clearly was a lot more to consider in this episode than I recognized. My only major thought upon watching was there probably wasn't going to be a Stupid Neelix Moment. Because I could barely remember him having any dialogue and Tom's flight instructor was WAY more annoying in this.

Well that and it did seem bizarre the time Seven and Chakotay spent on the planet together wasn't used to set up there relationship in Endgames. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere there actors said that was supposed to happen but I guess ever dialogue was meant to be included got lost.

It does seem strange that they don't even consider having Chakotay ask the natives want they think about their situation after he'd already bothered to learn the language. One would think given his personal history and familiar with the role technology can play in culture shock (as seen in Distant Origins), that he'd be really apt at handling this sort of thing. The he would know how to express a familiarity with their concerns of the less developed culture (about how much they actually willing to change about there lives) wouldn't disclosing too much about the potential long term influences that might come from the other culture.

[Nealithi]

Just a thing but Arrogant: having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.

The better medicine, food, water are all not arrogant. They are blunt truth. The clothing and housing may be as not all of each would be good in a given environment.

So it can be honestly argued to be better materially. Yes we can ask the people. But seeing all the magical people show up. Will it be an educated or reasoned answer? I am not saying the people are stupid. But a primitive people may have an innocent ignorance.

Yes, I would say arrogant; how much you value something is subjective after all, so for one person to say to another "no, you're wrong, this is better, material concerns are what you want" I'll stick with arrogant. Personally speaking I'm satisfied enough with medicine, to the degree that I would prefer to live in the world now than a very high tech in every aspect of our lives one (we've gone too far down that path already) if that was the price for more. I'll happily take improved medicine of course, on its own, but not at the cost of complete societal change. If I was living in a hut in a jungle, frequently seeing friends and family die of illness and injury, my boundaries may well be different. But it's not for you to tell me what I should prefer, that your world is somehow objectively better. Very materialistic people are terrible at empathy I've noticed, they just can't grasp that their great world isn't everyone else's, and frequently start getting abusive when people don't go along.

***

The question of education, reasoned answers, realistically informed choice though, that's an interesting one. I suppose you'd need a few people to go and take a look at this other world and then to go back and explain it, although then it's down to possibly their individual biases.

I am not sure the term for your argument stance is. You get sick, you are starving. I have medicine, I have food and ways for you to grow it better, and ways to keep your water clean. But you call it materialistic and arrogance. I think it honesty. Yes we have better on that.

***

I keep being reminded of the MiB quote. "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

***

Just looking at our discussions here and for Homeward. I would say the Prime Directive and not having one are both slippery slopes. And I wish we still had TNG on air. Because this sounds like a great thing to have happened on the show. The PD has been broken nine times as of Drumhead. Why is the Enterprise crew still where they are? Because every instance has been justified. Nine violations where Star Fleet Command reviewed what happened and gave it an acceptable stamp. Filled the spirit of the law.
Maybe an episode of someone going over the logs and seeing what was done. To show that the Federation is not dogmatic. But does have rules.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I'm with Madner Kami. This barrier has hampered the development of the Ventu. By allowing the barrier to go back up has condemned to living in a terrarium. But, like many Star Trek episodes, Voyager will just head out and not have to worry about the consequences of their actions.

Chuck is right that the Ventu should've been asked what they wanted. They probably would like their territory respected, but I suspect being kept under a dome would be a non-starter.

That is my opinion regarding all of those ''beautiful'' Amazon tribes that fire arrows at helicopters. ''Ooh! What about their culture!'' someone always bleats.

So? What about their culture? They live in filth, they die of preventable diseases, they think a helicopter is a dragon. Whatever stories they have, or unique language they developed or god they worship will still be there if they are wearing jeans and have a Big Mac in their hand.

''Ooh! But what is so good about us?'' someone always bleats.

You mean, apart from our advanced medicine, plentiful food and water, instant communication, knowledge of the universe, warm clothes, housing that isn't made out of mud and twigs? The poorest Westerner lives a life infinitely better than anyone who is living at a cro magnon level of development no matter how much those of us spoiled by it like to moan. Fact is, the rest of us developed AWAY from how they live for a reason.

Rather arrogant that.

I'm with Chuck on the "ask them" part of it. If some remote tribe just acts hostile at any meeting then leave them alone, if they actively make contact then fine. But don't barge in saying "hey you filthy stinking disease-ridden savages, you must live like us! We know what's best for you!" In the mean time yay, access to new areas to mine, cover in concrete, burn down etc...

Handled well contact should be able to work well, but it rarely will be.

You can look around a lot of the world today and see people dressed the same way, living in cities with the same concrete blocks, with the same shops... Rather sad when things end up like that, rather good when it comes with things like medical improvements. You'd think an advanced society like the Federation would have some idea how to offer some of the latter without completely altering a society. Take medicine - for a stone age type society you don't need to give them a load of tech to make a big difference, the technology to make soap and some basic guidance on hygeine would make a massive difference.

Just a thing but Arrogant: having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.

It's arrogant because the argument up to the post's point amounts to a juxtaposition of superior development. There's nothing said of the complexity in establishing contact or the right to domineer another society, just based on the rules that we cede to between each other.

[CharlesPhipps]

WEIRD FACTOID:

There was an uncontacted Amazon rain forest tribe living in the kind of conditions shown here and, of all fucking people, Eli Roth shows up one day with his camera crew to film cannibal Amazon movie THE GREEN INFERNO. It took him about a day to teach them about what a movie camera was, what he was doing, and his whole plotline about cannibal amazons that they thought was hilarious.

Notably when he came back, people freaked the fuck out and his reaction was akin to, "You act like this will drive them insane versus treating them like adults." For me a bigger issue would be disease concerns for them than "cultural contamination."

I did like Roth's statement that he also believed greed was the primary mover and shaker in colonialism: " "The idea that a fictional movie about a fictional tribe could somehow hurt indigenous people when gas companies are tearing these villages apart on a daily basis is simply absurd. These companies don't need an excuse—they have one—the natural resources in the ground. They can window-dress things however they like, but nobody will destroy a village because they didn't like a character in a movie, they'll do it because they want to get rich by draining what's under the village. The fear that somehow a movie would give them ammunition to destroy a tribe all sounds like misdirected anger and frustration that the corporations are the ones controlling the fates of these uncontacted tribes."

[clearspira]

Just a thing but Arrogant: having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.

The better medicine, food, water are all not arrogant. They are blunt truth. The clothing and housing may be as not all of each would be good in a given environment.

So it can be honestly argued to be better materially. Yes we can ask the people. But seeing all the magical people show up. Will it be an educated or reasoned answer? I am not saying the people are stupid. But a primitive people may have an innocent ignorance.

Yes, I would say arrogant; how much you value something is subjective after all, so for one person to say to another "no, you're wrong, this is better, material concerns are what you want" I'll stick with arrogant. Personally speaking I'm satisfied enough with medicine, to the degree that I would prefer to live in the world now than a very high tech in every aspect of our lives one (we've gone too far down that path already) if that was the price for more. I'll happily take improved medicine of course, on its own, but not at the cost of complete societal change. If I was living in a hut in a jungle, frequently seeing friends and family die of illness and injury, my boundaries may well be different. But it's not for you to tell me what I should prefer, that your world is somehow objectively better. Very materialistic people are terrible at empathy I've noticed, they just can't grasp that their great world isn't everyone else's, and frequently start getting abusive when people don't go along.

***

The question of education, reasoned answers, realistically informed choice though, that's an interesting one. I suppose you'd need a few people to go and take a look at this other world and then to go back and explain it, although then it's down to possibly their individual biases.

I am not sure the term for your argument stance is. You get sick, you are starving. I have medicine, I have food and ways for you to grow it better, and ways to keep your water clean. But you call it materialistic and arrogance. I think it honesty. Yes we have better on that.

***

I keep being reminded of the MiB quote. "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

***

Just looking at our discussions here and for Homeward. I would say the Prime Directive and not having one are both slippery slopes. And I wish we still had TNG on air. Because this sounds like a great thing to have happened on the show. The PD has been broken nine times as of Drumhead. Why is the Enterprise crew still where they are? Because every instance has been justified. Nine violations where Star Fleet Command reviewed what happened and gave it an acceptable stamp. Filled the spirit of the law.
Maybe an episode of someone going over the logs and seeing what was done. To show that the Federation is not dogmatic. But does have rules.

The one thing I will say about the PD is that no other sci-fi franchise ever raises these questions. You have shows like Stargate which will occasionally have Daniel pipe up about contamination, but normally they just turn up with automatic weapons to see what shit you have. ''Emancipation'' for example. Bad episode, but as Chuck pointed out, SG-1 had severe white man's burden in that episode and probably left things just as bad for the women as when they started. But hey, SG-1 got a new salve out of the deal. Then there is the episode where they broke Thor's Hammer which led to an invasion.

Star Trek has severe problems but they at least dared to ask the question ''hey, maybe we are the bad guys in this situation?''

[Frustration]

Stargate *has* done that. I'm particularly thinking of the episode where they find a planet colonized by Native Americans that is also rich in naquadah. After the people living there refuse permission to mine the substance, factions in the US government decide to seize the planet by force. The SG team warns the natives and instructs them to bury the stargate.

I'm also reminded of the first episode with the Tollans, whom the governments decides to imprison in order to persuade them to explain advanced technology.

And of course the time that reporter who figured out the existence of the Stargate program and who was killed in a convenient hit-and-run.

[Riedquat]

I am not sure the term for your argument stance is. You get sick, you are starving. I have medicine, I have food and ways for you to grow it better, and ways to keep your water clean. But you call it materialistic and arrogance. I think it honesty. Yes we have better on that.

I can still get sick now. At some point in the future we may well have a world where I wouldn't get sick. And that world will also come with a lot of other changes. Based on the way things seem to be changing anyway I'd rather take my chance with not accelerating that, I prefer the risks to the changes. Going back in time at some point medicine was bad enough (and not all that far back) that I'd probably not hold the same view, but at the end of the day that needs to be my decision. It's arrogant for you to come and and tell me "no, you're wrong, you should have my world." It's arrogant to tell people what they should and shouldn't be prepared to live with, and to completely change their society. And when you dig down it invariably looks materialistic - "you can have more stuff."

Just looking at our discussions here and for Homeward. I would say the Prime Directive and not having one are both slippery slopes. And I wish we still had TNG on air. Because this sounds like a great thing to have happened on the show. The PD has been broken nine times as of Drumhead. Why is the Enterprise crew still where they are? Because every instance has been justified. Nine violations where Star Fleet Command reviewed what happened and gave it an acceptable stamp. Filled the spirit of the law.
Maybe an episode of someone going over the logs and seeing what was done. To show that the Federation is not dogmatic. But does have rules.

The problem with the writing is that some of the characters certainly treat it as dogmatic, which lessens them, and the Federation having that set up as their Prime Directive and then frequently being shown to justify breaking it, but with no change, it still being spouted as all-important and inviable despite that is fairly weak worldbuilding.

[clearspira]

I am not sure the term for your argument stance is. You get sick, you are starving. I have medicine, I have food and ways for you to grow it better, and ways to keep your water clean. But you call it materialistic and arrogance. I think it honesty. Yes we have better on that.

I can still get sick now. At some point in the future we may well have a world where I wouldn't get sick. And that world will also come with a lot of other changes. Based on the way things seem to be changing anyway I'd rather take my chance with not accelerating that, I prefer the risks to the changes. Going back in time at some point medicine was bad enough (and not all that far back) that I'd probably not hold the same view, but at the end of the day that needs to be my decision. It's arrogant for you to come and and tell me "no, you're wrong, you should have my world." It's arrogant to tell people what they should and shouldn't be prepared to live with, and to completely change their society. And when you dig down it invariably looks materialistic - "you can have more stuff."

Just looking at our discussions here and for Homeward. I would say the Prime Directive and not having one are both slippery slopes. And I wish we still had TNG on air. Because this sounds like a great thing to have happened on the show. The PD has been broken nine times as of Drumhead. Why is the Enterprise crew still where they are? Because every instance has been justified. Nine violations where Star Fleet Command reviewed what happened and gave it an acceptable stamp. Filled the spirit of the law.
Maybe an episode of someone going over the logs and seeing what was done. To show that the Federation is not dogmatic. But does have rules.

The problem with the writing is that some of the characters certainly treat it as dogmatic, which lessens them, and the Federation having that set up as their Prime Directive and then frequently being shown to justify breaking it, but with no change, it still being spouted as all-important and inviable despite that is fairly weak worldbuilding.

Necessity is the mother of invention. That is what created the modern world.

The cold kills so we developed clothes and fire. Raw meat kills so we learned to cook. Pain kills so we developed painkillers. Other humans and animals kill so we invented weapons. Boredom kills so we invented entertainment. Lack of communication kills so we invented the phone. Water kills so we learned to swim. Lack of food kills so we invented the silo. Parasites kill so we invented antibiotics and sanitation. Lack of education kills so we invented schools.

Everything can be traced back to necessity. And those necessities are as true for us as they are for them. Difference is, for whatever reason, we are better at it then they are.

I think you kind of hit the nail on the head several times in this comment: the reason why you can be so dismissive of things like this is because it ain't your problem. You can pass judgement whilst simultaneously enjoying the benefits of our kin's efforts. Meanwhile they are still suffering as we once did. These people, both in the episode and in the Amazon, live worse lives than the Ancient Greeks did some 3,000 years ago ffs.

We don't even have to give them 2022 AD tech to make their lives better. The year 1 AD would do.