A Star Trek Debate

Cmdr Data

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
6
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Other Church
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
I am a huge fan of Star Trek. Earlier today, I re-watched an episode on the series. This episode was Star Trek: The Next Generation, season 1, episode 8. I'm not asking you to go watch this episode. I'll provide a brief synopsis to help with the point of the topic.

In this episode, the crew are beamed down to a planet with a young, carefree world. Wesley Crusher is playing with kids his age when he accidentally knocks over a flower installment. This happened in a regulation zone at the time which led to the regulators having to punish him as per their laws since it happened in that district while it was an active regulation zone. The punishment for this was death.

Now, the problem of the episode occurs when the crew of the Enterprise want to save him but face a moral and ethical quandary. You see, the Enterprise crew are bound by different laws. This incident happened to affect two of their policies that directly contradict one another in this situation. The first rule is the prime directive which state the Enterprise cannot interfere with the natural working societies of planets they visit. The second rule is that the captain is responsible for the safety of their crew at all costs.

Debate topic: if you were the commanding officer of the Enterprise, would you save the crewman violating the prime directive effectively tainting a society's existing method of peace? Would you leave the crewman to face the punishments of the society they were visiting to maintain the prime directive? Why? How would you go about solving this from the decision maker perspective?
 

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
31,566
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I would save the crew member because life is more valuable and I would try to convince the other government that the consequences don't correlate well enough to the action committed. If I needed to remove Wesley on my own I would and if that meant stepping down in my position later on, I would do that knowing I made the right choice.
 

NewCreation435

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
4,914
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I am a huge fan of Star Trek. Earlier today, I re-watched an episode on the series. This episode was Star Trek: The Next Generation, season 1, episode 8. I'm not asking you to go watch this episode. I'll provide a brief synopsis to help with the point of the topic.

In this episode, the crew are beamed down to a planet with a young, carefree world. Wesley Crusher is playing with kids his age when he accidentally knocks over a flower installment. This happened in a regulation zone at the time which led to the regulators having to punish him as per their laws since it happened in that district while it was an active regulation zone. The punishment for this was death.

Now, the problem of the episode occurs when the crew of the Enterprise want to save him but face a moral and ethical quandary. You see, the Enterprise crew are bound by different laws. This incident happened to affect two of their policies that directly contradict one another in this situation. The first rule is the prime directive which state the Enterprise cannot interfere with the natural working societies of planets they visit. The second rule is that the captain is responsible for the safety of their crew at all costs.

Debate topic: if you were the commanding officer of the Enterprise, would you save the crewman violating the prime directive effectively tainting a society's existing method of peace? Would you leave the crewman to face the punishments of the society they were visiting to maintain the prime directive? Why? How would you go about solving this from the decision maker perspective?

I would save the crew member and get out of there fast. Those people are crazy
 

rstrats

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2018
Messages
234
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Atheist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
No
I'm not sure the prime directive applies here. Saving Wesley doesn't really interfer with the natural development of the society.
 
Top Bottom