Star Trek Thread

[Cthulhu]

Instead, I'm going to move this thread on and ask another question: are humans really capable of a Roddenberry-esque future? Recall Encounter at Farpoint, the very first episode of Next Gen, where we right off the bat meet Q who writes off humanity as an inherently flawed and savage race. Can humans overcome themselves, if only for the sake of the "final frontier"?

Well, everything TNG and past is pretty pretentious, I think - when mankind discovers warp drive and other species (in the series), they suddenly find it in themselves to abolish war, poverty, hunger and money within only a few years, where mankind was decimated after WW3 just before that. And in TNG and beyond, they're being very pretentious and elitist - something even Q, who btw is one of the most win recurring characters throughout all Star Trek series (did he appear in DS9 as well btw? I think he did, but not sure), would have to admit to. If mankind was 'inherently flawed and savage' and Q (and his Q's) wanted to decimate them (or snap their fingers to make them blink out of existence), why didn't they do that with the Klingons, Romulans, and the Borg and whatnot?

I think mankind is getting discriminated as cunts by the creators of Star Trek. Cunts, .

 

[Ⓐaron]

Well, we don't know for sure that they didn't, they just haven't shown it to us if so, .

 

[Munatik]

I agree, the Q episodes were probably some of the best Next Gen episodes evAr. In fact, they put out a mini-box set of the Q episodes several years ago, which I just had to buy. XD

Anyway, it's true that Q, and the show, was particularly Earthling-centric, although you could argue that we have no idea what Q does when he's not in an ST episode--he could have fucked with everybody's reality without them knowing about it just for shits and giggles. But it makes sense to present the show that way, since that was kind of the original idea behind Star Trek--to create a parallel in order to comment on morality, human nature, social justice, etc.

But you're right to wonder why he may not have put other civilzations to the test (he could have, like V said, but I doubt they hold as much interest to Q). Perhaps it just wasn't necessary, plus I think a lot of people would miss the Klingons. I also have heard it postulated that each of the major peoples are actually supposed to represent facets (or inverses) of human nature. That requires more support than I cba to come up with at the moment, though.

Anyway, I think it's possible for humans to achieve a Roddenberry-like utopia, but I highly doubt it would come about in ~200 years from now. I think we need much, much more time to socially and intellectually evolve to that point.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Q is definitely one of the most awesome things about Star Trek. I too am sceptical that we'll be able to manage that kind of utopia in two hundred years, but who knows. Hell on bad days I'm sceptical that we'll manage to survive for two hundred years.

I should add that Star Trek probably had a substantial impact on some of my social views, though, but that's a topic for another day when I'm less lazy.

 

[Belmat]

I watched the new film today, and while I'm still disappointed with the lazy title of "Star Trek", I have no complaints about the actual movie.

Is it the amazing wunderkind that so many people are saying it is?

No.

Is a nevertheless a good film?

Sure, why not. Just don't expect to find me furiously masturbating in the back row.

 

[Munatik]

Q is definitely one of the most awesome things about Star Trek. I too am sceptical that we'll be able to manage that kind of utopia in two hundred years, but who knows. Hell on bad days I'm sceptical that we'll manage to survive for two hundred years.

I should add that Star Trek probably had a substantial impact on some of my social views, though, but that's a topic for another day when I'm less lazy.

Soon, right? Can't wait to hear it!

And thank you muchly, Belmat. I appreciate you being honest but also nice and vague. I'm strangely relieved, too, for I was startled by the movie's 96% on Rotten Tomatoes. I still haven't seen this damn movie for lack of company and opportunity. I'm thus a little concerned about my Trekkie status, but I hope to make up for it by seeing it in IMAX.

 

[Belmat]

I went with a female Trekkie friend

 

[Harley]

Jedi's plz.

 

[Belmat]

Jedis plz.

fixxxed

 

[Munatik]

Jedis can GTFO and get their own thread. Or Jedi mind trick someone into making it. Unless these Jedi are also Star Trek fans who want to talk about Star Trek in this thread.

 

[Cthulhu]

Jedis don't have Vulcan death grips / mind melds or their own language, ergo, fail .

They do get better games though.

 

[Ⓐaron]

In theory they kind of do, it just happens to sound exactly like English. GALACTIC BASIC, MOTHERFUCKER, DO YOU SPEAK IT?

 

[Munatik]

Ew, yeah. I played some Trek games for the SNES and Genesis. There was only one that was DS9 based that might have been just barely passable, but the rest were utter fail. I've avoided touching any ST games since. /shudder

Also, if it wouldn't be sliced through like butter, bat'leth > lightsaber, imo.

 

[Cthulhu]

I've played some point-and-click games for the original series and TNG, and that shooter they made out of fail Voyager a few years back. And I really can't see a bat'leth be a proper weapon besides its sheer awesome, tbh .

 

[Belmat]

GALACTIC BASIC, MOTHERFUCKER, DO YOU SPEAK IT?

Made me chuckle

 

[Ⓐaron]

I wish I could claim credit for that, but alas, it's been around for awhile.

 

[Belmat]

Ah well, I'd never heard it before anyway.

 

[Munatik]

True, a bat'leth for RL might be as cumbersome and worthless as a homemade set of Wolverine claws. Still, I'm onboard with whatever the Klingons use to bring swift death to enemies of the Empire. Qapla!

 

[Isabella]

Saw the movie today and was most pleasantly surprised.

That is all.

 

[Ⓐaron]

I should add that the proper plural of Jedi is Jedi. I don't know why I didn't pedantically correct that earlier.

I effectively derived a large part of my ethics when growing up from the Vulcan dictum, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one." Certainly there are exceptions, as Trek itself makes clear, but even then, the exceptions tend to be few. While I've never been fundamentally rigid in adhering to a utilitarian code of ethics, I've yet to be presented with solid evidence for why any other formulation of ethics is more fundamentally ethical. Effectively, as long as one does not stoop to committing atrocities in satisfying the needs of the many, satisfying as many needs as possible is the most ethically desirable course of action.

Naturally, this eventually led me to embrace some form of market socialism as I came to see the flaws inherent in capitalism, but that took several years of un-brainwashing and certainly didn't happen while I was a young Trek fan.

 

[Harley]

After seeing the movie, I can now say I have a new respect for Star Trek, and John Cho was the shit.

That is all.

 

[Cthulhu]

I'm just going to have to add that that is by far not a Vulcan thing by itself, really, and has probably appeared in a shiteload of other works before.

 

[Munatik]

Like from John Stuart Mill?

I, too, like the kind of ethics that formed the base of Vulcan philosophy. Really, one of the best ways to come to an ethical decision is to weigh the amount of happiness produced against the amount of unhappiness that would occur.

A problem with that, of course, is that most of the time you'll never be able to fully predict the outcome of your actions, whether you intend for them to do the most good for the most people.

Also--and I think it was Kant who pointed this out--that utilitarianism can often treats humans as means, and not ends. Or in this case, it sometimes calls for Vulcans to treat their own kind (or themselves) as means to achieve the most happiness, an awful trade-off that was rather poignantly demonstrated in Wrath of Kahn.

But truthfully, from what I can remember, I generally agreed with JSM's ideas more than Kant's. But I'll stop myself since this is an ST thread.

Thanks for sharing that, V.

 

[Tennyo]

I would obviously join the crew with the greatest number of sexy chicks, but I don't know which crew that is

I'm considering to watch the new Star Trek in theatres, only problem is no one wants to go with me Or more correctly, they are just not interested in seeing the movie.

I WOULD have this same problem if not for the hotness that is Chris Pine. A couple of my friends want to go just for him. lol

Yes he is hot but I would go regardless.

Now Wolverine, I went and saw that mainly for Daniel Henny, but ST deserves better. lol

Also as for which crew I would join it's a toss up between TNG and Voyager. :/

 

[Munatik]

Prophets bless The Onion:

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film