Your argument ignores one important aspect.
They were looking for a reason to de-person him, to take him apart, and to build loads more like him to be used as slave labor in mines and other dangerous places.
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
188 points (93.1% liked)
TenForward: Where Every Vulcan Knows Your Name
3680 readers
1011 users here now
/c/TenFoward: Your home-away-from-home for all things Star Trek!
Re-route power to the shields, emit a tachyon pulse through the deflector, and post all the nonsense you want. Within reason of course.
~ 1. No bigotry. This is a Star Trek community. Hating someone off of their race, culture, creed, sexuality, or identity is not remotely acceptable. Mistakes can happen but do your best to respect others.
~ 2. Keep it civil. Disagreements will happen both on lore and preferences. That's okay! Just don't let it make you forget that the person you are talking to is also a person.
~ 3. Use spoiler tags. This applies to any episodes that have dropped within 3 months prior of your posting. After that it's free game.
~ 4. Keep it Trek related. This one is kind of a gimme but keep as on topic as possible.
~ 5. Keep posts to a limit. We all love Star Trek stuff but 3-4 posts in an hour is plenty enough.
~ 6. Try to not repost. Mistakes happen, we get it! But try to not repost anything from within the past 1-2 months.
~ 7. No General AI Art. Posts of simple AI art do not 'inspire jamaharon' and fuck over our artist friends.
Fun will now commence.
Sister Communities:
Want your community to be added to the sidebar? Just ask one of our mods!
Honorary Badbitch:
@jawa21@startrek.website for realizing that the line used to be "want to be added to the sidebar?" and capitalized on it. Congratulations and welcome to the sidebar. Stamets is both ashamed and proud.
Creator Resources:
Looking for a Star Trek screencap? (TrekCore)
Looking for the right Star Trek typeface/font for your meme? (Thank you @kellyaster for putting this together!)
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
I fervently disagree. I think you can view it in a very optimistic and utopic way.
When confronted with his friend's sentience and individuality being questioned, Captain Picard chose to debate on the basis of data being a person and deserving rights. Sure you could've just said that data was a person because Starfleet accepted him. But does that specifically extend to all androids or beings in similar circumstances? I think it's a good character moment for Picard that he chooses to argue on the basis that star fleet is better than stripping away someone's agency. And he wins too. Ultimately the federation comes to agree with that view point. Thats why it is a utopic society. Because when faced with a moral dilemma they didn't simply choose "technically legally correct" they chose "morally right".
You forgot that it was starlet that created the need for this legal argument in the first place.
If the judge was truly moral; this trial would never have happened. If starfleet was moral, the docheberger that wanted to dismantle data would never have been a member.
Also the other best defense would have been to ask docuheberger to prove he’s not just a machine, and crusher explain in intricate detail how they can reassemble Ryker’s brain. And reattach Ryker’s limb after Warf rips it off.
(Okay, so maybe I don’t like Ryker.)
Yeah they encountered something new in the universe and they had to decide on what to do. They decided to do the moral thing for moral reasons. Starfleet isn't a utopia but it's utopic because of instances like this where the right thing is done for the right reasons.
The fact they had a trial to determine data’s personhood and that it was agonizingly close, that they were actually considering denying it.
If they were truly moral, the question would have never come up; or Maddox and the general would have been slapped down with a scathing “don’t be evil”.
Also, at that point data was hardly new- he’s been in starfleet for 20+ years in which Data earned his place as a decorated Lt. Commander.
In any case, this isn’t even a question for a starfleet court - this would fall under civil purview, and even hearing the trial is a miscarriage. (Also the IFP courts probably have some sort of test that doesn’t require destructive testing. Details.)
Yeah sitting down and discussing all viewpoints before coming to consensus is clearly beneath Starfleet. They should just automatically know the right thing to do (which is obvs what I think is right) and clearly a interplanetary civilisation wouldn't have any sort of conflict of interest/opinion.
Obviously the guy suing should understand data is clearly a person despite being a new 'unique' form of life in the universe that they have never interacted with before. Like come on are you telling me everyone in the federation hasn't watched tng and become emotionally attached to the characters like I have.
Stoopid episode 0/10
That's because Star Trek is sometimes a show about introducing basic philosophy and ethics to American nerds who genuinely could not and often still do not grasp the idea of giving at least theoretical personhood to someone that wasn't biological.
Just ask half of this community what they think about Fallout 4 synths if you don't believe it.
Yeah this is just an excuse to talk about the mind-body problem. I like it.
The dumbest part is when the JAG appoints Riker as the...plantiff/prosecutor? And threatens to summarily vote in the plantiff's favor if he refuses to serve in that capacity. "If you don't do anything, you win."
Hot take. But put it in the context of the year it was aired, not today. Star Trek (and sci fi in general) was suffering from being perceived as "blue babes and laser guns".
This episode was thoughtful if taken as standalone. And TNG really was about taking the episodes more or less independently. The season long story arcs and such didn't exist. People weren't binge watching. So the world building was less important than the specific hypothetical moral quandary of the week. Like, they are almost like Asimov short stories with a shared cast.
It wasn't until a few years later that serialized TV even really became a thing -- Twin Peaks probably was the first here, but Babylon 5 would have a good claim (and DS9, Buffy, and others were coming together then too). So the style of storytelling on TNG S2 is different.
Divorce the story from Star Trek and the setting and evaluate it as a sci fi ethical quandary. And in that framework, it is a remarkable episode.
Also, Brent Spiner played it well :)
I think that’s a terrific argument and it is always wise to contextualize it in history.
We have absolutely been binging which certainly gives it a different feel, but I would argue even as a standalone episode it was poorly written if superbly performed.
There are ideas that could have been played with in a way that respects the setting. Perhaps another computer attempting to join Starfleet, but it looks like a box rather than a person and asks Data to argue its personhood.
I don’t know. I’m not a writer and I’m just spitting an idea off the top of my head, but I think there’s a place for internal consistency within a narrative regardless of when it was written.
There is an episode later where Data defends the rights of a less-human-looking artificial life (the one with exocomps), though no courtroom scenes.
I think most star trek episodes can be torn apart pretty easily - I actually enjoy pointing out errors while I watch. But it's good drama and themes with fun characters in an optimistic future, which is still a rarity decades later.
(This is vague enough that I don't feel spoilers are necessary)
Perhaps another computer attempting to join Starfleet, but it looks like a box rather than a person and asks Data to argue its personhood.
They kind of had that exact opportunity in Discovery. But instead of an entire courtroom episode, it was more of a forced arbitration scene :(
load more comments
(4 replies)
And TNG really was about taking the episodes more or less independently.
This era was also the high water mark for syndicated TV which really drove the episodic format. Viewers couldn't be guaranteed the show would air on the same channel or even the same timeslot. So long form serial TV were really rare.
load more comments
(10 replies)
The whole point of this episode is to challenge the viewer to think about the arguments. That’s all. Is it stupid as far as realism? Yeah it kinda is. But is it a subject matter many of the viewers at the time of it airing were thinking about? No.
I imagine the idea the writer had was “let’s challenge what the viewer thinks and/or feels without them knowing”. There’s a lot of that in ST throughout the years and I, for one have always been here for it.
It’s not the best episode, but it’s certainly not the worst.
I think voyager did it a little better with The Doctor, at least there was a reason why he was in the crew and was accepted as a person, but legally he was not
load more comments
(1 replies)
Honestly I agree, the legal parts were cringe. I even saw a legal analysis of it on YouTube and they thought it was legally great.
But it's pretty simple in my mind: if he didn't have agency, he wouldn't have been able to join Starfleet. The very basis of Starfleet accepting him means that he is capable of making his own decisions. And the very act of accepting him means he is not the property of Starfleet.
Either way Data is out. Sentient because you accepted him. Not sentient means his acceptance contract is void and obviously not property of Starfleet.
Starfleet rescued him off the planet and reactivated him. He was next to Lore who was completely disassebled. To people thinking Data isn't a person, it was a salvage operation, not a rescue. Same as getting back a derelict doesn't make it a person and makes it the property of Starfleet.
Data. Lor.
Lore.
Data and Lore are 2 different kinds of information.
That just occurred to me.
I'm having a hard time understanding what you're trying to say.
Salvage rights are very complex on their own, you don't automatically own other stuff simply because you come to their rescue (as in rescuing a ship) or flip a switch. It's quite literally someone else's property. So Starfleet didn't own him.
Second, he's an officer. You have to apply to officer school. Just like the children on the ship aren't automatically enrolled in Starfleet, they and he have to apply. It's a serious application. It's not like this android was just kicking around on a ship and fell into being an officer. (Same goes for enlisted.) *For anyone that doesn't want to read my next longer comment: Data signed a contract to enlist. To sign a contract requires agency, which starfleet accepted.
Abandonned property can be taken and used. It was thought that whoever was the "owner" of Data died in the crystaline entity incident.
As for enlistment - Data could learn what he needed to probably in a day. He was a huge asset and denying him entry would be a detriment to Starfleet, even if he was a "thing". I don't see enlisting as something that would only be offered to humans / not things, we see a ship "enlist" in Discovery for instance.
First, was it abandoned or were the residents fleeing for their lives under duress? Yeah the latter. This is very far from being long abandoned property. Even if the owner was killed, it's not a sudden finders keepers. There are wills, or even without a will there are still legal inheritors that the courts figure out. Again, this is not an event from long ago, it literally just happened. If you want to claim legal ownership rights over something that wasn't yours to begin with, it's a serious task and the burden is on you. You don't automatically assume legal ownership, basically the court would have to find in your favor that you can claim salvage. Until and unless that happens, you don't have legal ownership. That means any difficulty/ambiguity/complexity in the matter leans away from the courts giving you legal ownership. Also, generally as the value of the object goes up, the difficulty of the salvage ownership claim goes up. The value and complexity of a working android is unfathomable and the difficulty of your salvage claim just shot into the stratosphere.
Second enlistment. This is not about learning. Enlisting is a contract. I really have to emphasize that part: a contract. I'm not kidding when I say that's a serious thing. You need to have agency to sign that contract. This is why people under 18 and feeble minded people can not enter into a contract - they do not have agency.
That's what Picard should have argued: 1) The very act of Starfleet accepting Data's signature shows they thought Data had agency. Precedent set. That means both sentience and the ability to decide to resign. That is huge, that alone basically wins the case. But failing that we can look at the other side: 2) If the judge says that he has no agency to resign from Starfleet, then that means that Data never had agency to enlist in Starfleet in the first place. The entire contract is null and void. Data has no legal relationship with Starfleet, they can not give him orders to report to Maddox, and Data is free to go. Which leaves you with the salvage claim, and as above good luck with that you're going to need it.
That's basically the same as what I said before but with more elaboration. That's as elaborate an explanation that I care to make so I think that's my last reply.
What about him joining Star Fleet proves without any doubt that he is a person?
It's not about proving it beyond a doubt, the OP's frustrarion is about how the whole courtroom drama was inaccurate.
The assumtion is this: Legally, Starfleet only allows sapent adults to join its ranks. So a toaster cannot be a starfleet officer, and neither can a dog.
The fact that he is an officer means that in legal terms, Starfleet has already decided that he is a person, and any court that asks this question has a quick and easy answer.
neither can a dog
Admiral Porthos: Am I a joke to you?
What bothered me most about this ep is that Riker is forced to act as some kind of prosecutor. And he’s like no, I won’t do it. And she’s like you better do it, and to the best of your ability yada yada or else I’m gonna something something. Like how is she gonna know if he does this to the best of his ability. Why wouldn’t he just completely blow it? Or at least in some plausible attempt at an effort. What was she gonna do then, have another trial for Riker for being a bad fake lawyer? Is the concept of conflict of interest not a thing in future robot court?
"You didn't even try to turn him off!"
"I am literally incapable of doing that."
load more comments
(3 replies)
Every Star Trek episode involving a trial shows that the way Starfleet conducts its justice system is incredibly stupid.
The Menagerie, Measure of a Man (and like 3 other TNG episodes), Ad Astra Per Aspera, that DS9 one where the Klingons want to extradite Worf... all stupid.
The only one you can't really blame for being stupid in this regard is Voyager, because they always have the "we aren't in the Alpha Quadrant" excuse to fall back on.
There must be something to their judicial system, taking Voyager as the example, clearly as soon as they are beyond the reach of Federation justice captains turn into genocidal war criminals in very short order.
I mean... they're genocidal war criminals inside the system.
Sisko sure was.
I mean... yeah, the episode isn't as focused on procedural detail, and I do live for legal process minutia, but I can fill in the blanks just fine and suspend disbelief.
I mean, the question being raised is whether Data has been operating as a person willingly joined Starfleet or as salvaged equipment. If Data had been roaming around on his own and then applied to join Starfleet I'd be more nitpicky, but he was found and turned on by Starfleet and he seems to have been in the system since, so I can see the question of how to categorize him coming up retroactively. Especially in retrospect, since we eventually get undeniable confirmation that AGI is very much possible within their normal gear.
I mean, for the record, by the time Voyager comes around we know that they have protocols to use holographic AIs to substitute in for key personnel, so if you can have a "EMH" slot in for an officer you can have a piece of salvaged machinery operate with a rank and then reassign it to a different role... unless that entity has personhood. It IS a sci-fi as hell concept, but a valid one in-universe.
Me, I would have very much enjoyed Noonyien Soong arguing whether he still owns Data and learn what is legal salvage in Starfleet territory but for the sake of 90s network TV I can see "Is this android truly a life form" being the approach to a Trek episode. And thematically... well, I can't get through the Goldberg and Stewart scene about slavery without tearing up. It isn't just how good they both are, it's the "oh, crap, they're saying the thing" element to it, too.
Of course that means Starfleet straight up condoned slavery later, as per Star Trek Picard season 1. I would gladly remove all of Picard from lore at this point, but nope, officially Starfleet had legal proceedings to determine that Soong androids are people and to remove their autonomy is akin to slavery and then went ahead and did it anyway.
Picard sucks and is the worst Star Trek thing ever, is what I'm trying to say. Yes, way worse than anything in Discovery. Including season three.
load more comments
(18 replies)
Hmm for the sake of discussion, it could be such that that legal tribunal was calling into question all of that history. Just because a "crime" (in this case a misclassification) occured and was propagated for many years doesn't mean it is correct tomorrow.
The point of the episode was the kangaroo court. It was that data had served as a valid, meaningful, human-like member of the staff for years, and all that was at risk. It does the very star trek thing of highlighting real world issues, in that people all over the world suffer from kangaroo court style judicial-injustice, and Picard's achievement is that much more impressive given the hill to climb. (Corruption)
Even in a seemingly idealistic futurist-future, injustice can arise, and minorities can be swept up in the mess. The federation is not perfect, and this episode is a crystal clear example of it's potential faults. (Executives with opinions trump up proceedings to bring about their own goals, essentially corrupt bureaucracy wrapped in judicial procedure)
load more comments
(2 replies)
You are not taking crazy pills, its premise does suffer when watched with a "critical eye" (i.e. thinking about it even a little).
The reason it's remembered so fondly (imho) is two fold. It is one of the first "thought provoking" episodes. And the first couple of seasons were... not the best to put it mildly.
edit: admittedly, I do enjoy it, but I really have to turn my brain off to do so.
load more comments
(3 replies)
The existing legal precedent is absolutely ignored in lieu of courtroom spectacle. An excuse to have Picard wax poetic, which he does to great effect.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›