Was Janeway's action here Lawful Evil or Lawful Neutral?
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Was Janeway's action here Lawful Evil or Lawful Neutral?
Was Janeway's action here Lawful Evil or Lawful Neutral?
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
If someone looks at the action and says 'BASED' it was probably Lawful Evil.
>posting this
BASED
"Based" is really more of a Chaotic action, as you'd be going up against some sort of authority or norm.
No it's not, anarchkiddie.
Neutral Good. It wasn't based in principle or order or law, nor was it based in spur-of-the moment inspiration or whim or base personal want.
For all that I can criticize Janeway of both as a character and as how she's written as a character, this decision was reached on the basis of the greater good and a genuine concern for the people that she knew as individuals, and their well-being and right to self-determination, whether a disciplined stick-in-the-mud (Tuvok) or unprincipled inconsiderate and uktimately selfish moron (Neelix).
Therefore, the action taken was just (Neutral) Good.
This. I like Voyager, but holy shit it has inconsistent characterizations. Janeway is clearly suffering from BPD/PMS.
Based action is radical embrace of authority and norm. Radical enough to shock the authority and regular joe followers of the norm.
Tuvix was cringe, so that makes killing him based. But Janeway is cringe too, so does that make Tuvix based after all?
>Tuvix was cringe, so that makes killing him based
You're ignoring a base assumption: Neelix was gigacringe.
This is actually interesting. I'd like for some kind of study on what "based" actually means.
We tend to use it as an indication that we're witnessing some kind of archetypal manly ideal, the same way the Greeks perceived "Arete", or moral virtue.
I guess that's my personal opinion. That based is actually a synonym for arete. Or that we simply declare something based when we detect the symptoms of arete within it.
I've even noticed that liberal/progressive people fricking hate "based" as a concept, perhaps because they too at least instinctually realize that it's tied to some hypothetical manly virtue that they don't possess. And conservatives tend to fricking LOVE "based" perhaps because it's some kind of goal they hope to one day reach.
Funny how a pinnacle concept of greek enlightenment can just evolve once again in such a manner. Maybe like carcinization slowly turns all beings into crabs, maybe all fundamental philosophies slowly drift back to arete once again.
>the same way the Greeks perceived "Arete", or moral virtue.
No, absolutely not, "based" is a word of appreciation that's specifically a lower class, low-brow appreciation.
The people using it aren't necessarily that and don't necessarily consider themselves that, but then when using it they're being ironically low-class. It's not a coincidence it originates among African-Americans, and was popularized by a rapper.
This is probably the closest to a concise and graspable description that I've seen. Describing it as an exclamation of masculine arete is definitely how it is used by virtually anyone that I'd say "gets it".
morons.
I just slept on it, woke up, and feel even more confident. I can't even think of a use case where calling something based and saying that a given person/action exhibits a high degree of arete don't mean the same thing.
I've heard killers, crooks, and charlatans called based, I've heard heroes, paragons, and saints called based. It's kind of a concept that goes beyond good/evil and law/chaos, yet it still serves as an indication that something is fundamentally desirable. So, it must be that based is merely when a specimen exhibits highly confident conviction and perfection within their role as a human being. Whatever the frick that role is.
I think arete used to be a concept in one of the older editions of Mage: The Ascension (Or Awakening, IDK.), maybe I'll go to the WOD general and ask them what they think about it.
Whether or not it's a low-brow word is more or less irrelevant. "To frick" and "To make love" are the same thing despite one being more crass than the other.
You're probably right, I was probably wrong to refer to it as a progressive/conservative thing. I definitely don't want to make this a /misc/ thing. I do think it's true that there's a discernable ideological distinction between people who like based and people who don't, but describing it that way seems like an oversimplification. Maybe the difference is about post-modernists and modernists or something. If someone has an ideology wherein they don't believe in universal truth and think the world is subjectively constructed, I think a concept like arete/based inherently can't even make sense. After all, you can't excel at an archetypal role if those roles are spooks. That tends to be a progressive/liberal mindset, but it doesn't necessarily have to be.
I think you're referring to an old Digibro video. If not him, I definitely remember an anime YouTuber describe that like 7 years ago. That's a whole other topic to unpack that I'm not ready for.
GAR is a meme dating back to the 2006 Fate/stay night anime, when after Archer died in a really cool and defiant way, someone posted the misspelled message "I'M GAR FOR ARCHER"
In that case it's probably just that I watched a video about it like 7 years ago and forgot about the actual context.
Both your interpretation of "based" and "arete" is different from how I've seen them used.
>I've heard killers, crooks, and charlatans called based [for when a specimen exhibits highly confident conviction and perfection within their role as a human being. Whatever the frick that role is.]
I've read some greek stuff but I'm no expert so I really hope I'm not too out of my depth here, but I don't think this matches at all the use of arete by the actual greeks.
Arete is the virtue of nobility and heroes, they would never have used it for an especially crooked crook.
Meanwhile, the usage of "based" is not quite the same, but fairly close to the usage of "cool".
These go for both "based" and "cool":
* it suggests factional alignment with the speaker. When it comes to some politics thing, people describe politics aligned with them as "based" and never politics not aligned with them as "based". This is the most important part - practically anything might pass as "based" as long as it is well-aligned with the speaker.
* it suggests daring. A quiet, dutiful person won't be "based" or "cool", even if he is productive and whatever.
* it suggests violating norms. Close to the daring thing, but worth a seperate mention - a warrior can be daring without violating norms, a corrupt bureucrat can violate norms without being daring.
* it suggests fun. A youtube video can be "based" or "cool", school homework isn't.
* it suggests surprise. "based!" and "cool!" are common exclamations (might this even be the most common use for the words?), something or someone turned out more so than you previously thought.
Arete isn't a good fit. Especially for the first, most important part - "arete is defined, retroactively, as the quality of politicians that I like, whoever they might be at a time" sounds like a ridiculous and corrupt use of the term, arete is something seperate from factional alignments.
I think Anon's got a point, based to me seems intentionally low-brow. Of the same (in this case totally affected) blue collar, work a day type of speech that produces "simple as" which is also, performativly, used by anons to seem simple and confident and therefore wise.
Conservatives don't say based. The typical (boomerish, Christian) conservative voter would never use it. I think you're confusing the Internet for real life.
Reminds me of people equating virtus with the modern slang GAR. I.e. being so awesome that even straight men are aroused by your manliness (though at the same time even extremely feminine women can possess GAR, because it's about stepping up more than it is about displaying your manliness all the time).
You're really overthinking it, anon. The way I see it. it's much simpler:
>If cringe is something that makes you feel second-hand embarrassment
>and based is the opposite of cringe
>then based is a way of expressing admiration or being proud of someone's actions
Based = base but with an implied "and that's a good thing."
Literally no.
Based comes from hip hop when it used to denote a drug addict. Ref. NY State of Mind by Nas from Illmatic
>laughing at baseheads trying to sell some broken amps
Then was purposefully glorified by a newer rapper (Lil B) started using based as a positive, being a drug addict and all, to mean you were acting entirely of your own accord, paying no mind one way or the critics and detractors.
To be based or to do something based means only to do so because you want to and like it or like the idea of it. Is you do it because of encouragement or stop because of critique, it isn't based.
I think you're on to something. "Based" definitely has connotations of excellence, achieving the ideal of something, and usually with a moral dimension.
Based is a useless buzzword meant to indicate you think something is cool and little more. Fricking zoomer election tourists poisoned the entirety of this site with their fricking nuspeak
to be based is to be admirable in some way, or perform some kind of admirable action, specifically in that it conflicts with typical or popular values. for example:
>*someone performs a summay execution of a criminal without trial*
>someone who holds to the legal and moral principles of due process: cringe
>someone who does not hold those values and appreciates the executioner performing the action in spite of the fact that he exists in a culture which praises such principles: based
of course, the action need not be masculine or violent to elicit such a reaction. rather, it must be an expression of individuality against common social mores, and be palatable to the observer calling such actions "based".
I've heard plenty of people called based merely for saying a default Christian opinion. You can say that goes against common social mores, but only in the specific context that the common social more is being some kind of radical left transexual atheist with an anxiety disorder.
I would agree that being based cannot possibly by a normal thing, because arete wouldn't be normal. It would require you to be exceptional. I just don't think that it's explicitly about non-conformity any more than becoming rich or wise is about non-conformity. Perhaps it correlates, I'll even say it correlates very strongly, but just calling it lawlessness seems to be a really jaded and cynical way of looking at it that misses the point. Strongly implies a negative animus and sour grapes.
>I've heard plenty of people called based merely for saying a default Christian opinion
most likely, in their view, they see the expression of such opinions as a kind of rebellion against a dominant culture of atheistic and secular values. likewise, someone in a predominantly Christian and traditional country might see the expression of such atheistic values as being "based". The point is, of course, that basedness is highly perception and context dependent. what might be based in one social circle or culture is cringe in another.
>but just calling it lawlessness seems to be a really jaded and cynical way of looking at it that misses the point. Strongly implies a negative animus and sour grapes.
i didn't mean to imply any such thing. It's not merely lawlessness, but rebellion against dominant values in accordance with the values of the viewer. Not everyone who refuse to conform can be called based on that account alone, they must also hold values that the viewer agrees with before being called "based".
IMO "Based" means following one's own moral compass, disregarding the conventional societal norms and expectations. Like people in this thread mentioned, it's not always a good thing. Smashing a baby's head on the floor because such was your conscious moral decision is based.
Neutral Evil. Tuvix was a net benefit to the crew and ate less; Janeway only wanted her friend back and sacrificed him to do that.
Yeah checks out.
Janeway and Sisko are the most based captains, since they did the most warcrimes while enforcing their status quo.
Lawful Evil or Neutral Evil
He provided half the labor for half the food consumption, but she killed him to get her friends back
All of you are wrong. Based comes from the heart. You either know it when you see it, or you don't know it and can't see it.
It's been a long road
Getting from there to here
It's been a long time
But my time is finally near
And I can feel the change in the wind right now
Nothing's in my way
And they're not gonna hold me down no more
No, they're not gonna hold me down
'Cause I am based in the heart
I'm going where my heart will take me
I am based to believe
I can do anything
I've got strength of the soul
And no one's gonna bend or break me
I can reach any star
I've got based
I've got based, based in the heart
Anything in Voyager is Chaotic Neutral though
The Federation had an obligation to protect the lives of Neelix, the ship's official ambassador, and Tuvok. This obligation superseded any supposed obligations to protect the life of Tuvix.
Janeway DID benefit from regaining two of her favorite crew members; HOWEVER, she didn't specifically gain anything from the destruction of Tuvix himself, so I would say her actions were LN and not LE.
Neelix and Tuvok were dead for all intents and purposes . It's an odd situation but one where Janeway essentially gets a chance to resurrect two people but has to kill one person to do it.
That sort of sacrifice of sentient beings, even if for a "greater good" is absolutely Evil. If you killed a guy to give his organs to two other dying people to save them we'd still call you evil.
Whether its Lawful or Chaotic depends on your interpretation of Janeway's motives
>Neelix and Tuvok were dead for all intents and purposes
If someone can stop being dead if you intervene, they're not really dead. Choosing not to save them in that situation is effectively allowing them to die.
This. Though, it would have been more humane to keep Tuvix in a coma of some kind rather than letting him walk around and come to get attached to living life as his own being.
Yeah, that was a poor choice on their part. If they had to keep him awake for study, at least keep him locked up in medbay or something.
Should have done some sort of brain scan or some shit and put him in a robot body when they got back to earth
>Neelix and Tuvok were dead for all intents and purposes
No more than someone being stuck in a transporter buffer is dead. If the transporter buffer became sentient due to the act of passing a human body through it, would you claim that the human must be sacrificed so the transporter buffer may live?
I haven't watched Janeway Trek. Why did the star trek general call her Chaotic Evil? That doesn't sound very starfleet.
War Crimes.
She had to make tough decisions every week in situations far removed from anything in Starfleet protocol. Yes, she stepped on a few toes, but in the end she got results.
ty tom servo
>sound very starfleet.
>Chaotic Evil?
Voyager's writer's room was a chaotic mess with nobody caring about character consistency. Her actress openly admitted to eventually playing her as bipolar to explain her constant character swings.
>Why did the star trek general call her Chaotic Evil?
Kate Mulgrew was an amazing actress, and played Janeway well... rather, whatever Janeway they wrote that week. She admitted in an interview that the scripts she was given for Janeway were so inconsistant, that she as an actress had to figure that Janeway had a split personality in order to even feel like she was the same person.
LN. I need to give Voyager another go. maybe I'm now mature enough not to stumble on tupac and chipotle
True neutral, honestly. Tuvix was not a real person, he was the result of an equipment malfunction. A personality resulting from an accident.
If a family member falls down the stairs and gets a brain injury and regresses to a childlike state, seeking to fix the damage and restore their original personality is NOT 'killing a child'. The regressed personality is a macabre distortion of your loved one, a tragedy playing out in front of you. No reasonable person would contest restoring your loved one to their full mental ability again, to leave them as a mentally disabled person if you had the option to fix them would be horrific.
Tuvix is the same situation, it just involves two people instead of one.
>Tuvix was not a real person, he was the result of an equipment malfunction. A personality resulting from an accident.
If you were an accidental pregnancy, that doesn't make you less of a person.
>If a family member falls down the stairs and gets a brain injury and regresses to a childlike state, seeking to fix the damage and restore their original personality is NOT 'killing a child'.
But we're not dealing with brain damage here. We're dealing with an intelligent person with a fully functioning brain, who is capable of making informed decisions.
>But we're not dealing with brain damage here.
I mean, you are. You're dealing with 2 brains merged to think it's one brain. That's damage. The fact that the brain doesn't THINK it's damaged is irrelevant.
>But we're not dealing with brain damage here.
Two brains were damaged
This. The whole situation was dumb. Sacrificing the lives of two people to let a metaphysical accident try and poorly take their place is stupid and nonsensical.
Was it ever addressed what Neelix and Tuvok remembered of the previous month afterward? AFAIK they just went straight into the next crisis next episode.
Since they were restoring the previous buffer patterns, presumably they would remember nothing. Its like reloading a previous save, all unsaved progress is lost.
You know, I've never understood why the transporters can't work like cloning machines. If it's purely a matter of ethics, in this case it would be MORE ethical to just bring Neelix and Tuvok back while allowing Tuvix to remain as their "child."
They do, and the only thing stopping them from doing exactly what you said is a cloud of ionized handwavium.
They can, transporter doubles have happened before. There is a second Riker wandering around as a result of one in TNG. The transporters just usually have safety features that prevent them from doing so.
Its a matter of ethics and also legality. One of the big problems with transporter doubles is that, legally, they are not clones. They are two copies of the same guy. A Clone can be easily defined as a separate, if extremely similar, organism to the original because while they share genetic data they have difference memories and experiences that make them a different person than their parent. This is not the case in a transporter double, you have two people with the same memories and equal claim to ownership of their legal status/name/citizenship and all of their property. No matter which one of them you declare 'real', you are stealing that life away from the other who, from their POV, has done absolutely nothing wrong. Its a real can of worms with no good answers.
Transporters are just kind of a busted tech anyway. The duplication error isn't the only thing locked behind safety features, DS9 makes it pretty clear that jailbreaking a transporter pretty easily turns it into both a time machine AND means of interdimensional travel. Its not even reliant on special circumstances, you just need to install a few parts and you can hop back and forth to the mirror dimension like its next door.
The Riker clone is a one in a million sort of deal, IIRC it was something specific in the atmosphere of the planet he was getting beamed from that caused the signal to bounce back. So it's not really a viable method. That said I really do wish Thomas Riker got more screen time, there's the one episode where he joins the Maquis and that's it
wasn't he put in cardassian jail? he may have died during the chaos
But in this case, there's no ethical problem with letting Tuvix live while restoring Tuvok and Neelix. Tuvix isn't claiming the identity of either Tuvok or Neelix. Any legal conundrums are easily addressed by treating him as a child of the two.
>transporter issues are now babies
your entire train of thought is defeated by the fact there's ample difference between a baby and a transporter frick-up, and your baby analogies only go so far.
Why? I mean, all a clone is is an identical twin.
>there's ample difference between a baby
Well then it's a good thing we're not talking about a fricking baby, now are we? We're talking about a being that originated from two other beings, which is close enough to a parent-child relationship to utilize for legal purposes. If this being had to be destroyed to restore it's "parents" to life, I would support that for the same reason I'd support a woman getting a life-saving abortion: it's not a person yet and it's potential for life does not outweigh the parent's actual life.
That being said, if the process of just replicating Tuvok and Neelix is completely independent of what happens to Tuvix, then destroying him is a complete waste, especially for a crew that doesn't exactly have access to a lot of fresh recruits.
there's no ethical problem with recreating him other than the objection of either Neelix or Tuvok, and yet he was never recreated
interesting
>there's no ethical problem with recreating him
Given that there isn't a standing policy of restoring dead crew to life using the transporter, it seems that recreating dead people from anything other than transporter accidents IS an ethical problem for the Federation. A problem that is easily bypassed by not killing Tuvix when reviving his progenitors.
>dead
but he wasn't dead, "he" was a transporter accident that happened to two living people
to deny that is to deny them their rights, particularly as they never chose to become Tuvix ever again, or to have him recreated from their patterns
I thought that was the one of the interesting implications of the episode - more than one of us is the unwilling result of an accident involving the union of our parents. and at best we're no accident, but we still didn't ask to exist
The difference there is that it's unlikely that 1. Neither parent consented to the union and 2. Your birth killed both parents. In the end, your parents had the right to choose whether or not to allow you to exist.
so we're extensions of our parent's rights for a while and have no rights (such as the right to exist, which rather seems to be the PR of all our other rights) of our own just by virtue of our existing
No one has an inherent right to be created, and the right of the result of a transporter accident to exist (which is very dubious as is because the lack of consent that led to its creation) does not trump the right of the original crew to exist.
>Given that there isn't a standing policy of restoring dead crew to life using the transporter, it seems that recreating dead people from anything other than transporter accidents IS an ethical problem for the Federation
On the other hand, that COULD explain why they have so many spare redshirts. Hell, if we twist our logic enough, we could even explain why Jeffrey Combs plays so many different characters.
Honestly, I think the reason they don't do that is because they don't want to remind their crew that they die every time they get transported and are replaced by perfect clones every time.
This is the answer I came to post. Just duplicate him at the same time you split him.
Therefore, the answer to
is Lawful Stupid.
Transporters are cloning machines. Every person who has ever used a transporter was killed and replaced by a clone. No one survives using them.
Untrue. The episode with Barclay in the transporter stream proves you continue to exist within the transporter stream.
>Was Janeway's action
Jainway is a OK-ish character however she is written inconsistently and deducing any ideology from all of her actions is pointless.
> Lawful Evil or Lawful Neutral?
D&D alignment is literally impossible schizo shit that makes no sense whatsoever.
>Nooo every character IN EVERY FICTION AND IN REALITY must fit into a grid of 9 aliments that are basically deduced from a set of fantasy books that no one today did read however that Gary Gygax jerk offd to!
>D&D alignment is literally impossible schizo shit that makes no sense whatsoever.
The only people who say this, are people who try to extrapolate it to real life.
It is something that relates only to the D&D setting; trying to use it for more than that means you are an idiot, like this poster and OP.
The issue is that originally it was just Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic with Law being civilization, Chaos representing absolute barbarism, and Neutral being between the two. The problem came from people wanting Robin Hood to be Chaotic Good when originally he was the epitome of Neutral.
> Foreseeing his imminent destruction, Tuvix secretly tampers with the transporter panel in sickbay.
> His activities go unnoticed due to Tuvok's intimate knowledge of Voyager's security measures.
>Hours later, back in Sickbay, Janeway approaches the panel after The Doctor refuses to perform the forced separation procedure on moral grounds.
>Janeway keys the controls to begin transporter separation of Tuvok and Neelix, but the silver streaks of a transporter beam descend upon both Tuvix and Janeway!
>When the beams dissipate, Janeway is gone, but Tuvix is sporting a new shoulder-length hairdo and a flattering bust and waistline.
>(S)he makes hard eye contact with the security goons guarding the door.
>"Who else wants to join the collective?" (S)he grins.
>"I. AM. TUVIWAY."
>The security officers glace at each other nervously.
>"CAPTAIN TUVIWAY." (S)he declares.
>Visibly sweating, the ranking security officer clears his throat.
>"Y-yes, Captain?"
>And so begins the command of Captain Tuviway.
excellent. this is the sort of stuff that puts asses in the seats
Yes yes, we've seen that episode of Lower Decks.
Someone actually watched Upper Decker?
But that would kill Tuvix in the same way his creation killed Tuvok and Neelix. If he's going to die anyway, surely he'd rather resurrect his parents than kill Janeway.
So Sisko gets to gas an entire planet and start the Dominion War and he's lauded as one of the best captains. While Janeway "kills" one person and people still complain almost 30 years later.
Don't get me wrong I love DS9 and haven't seen voyager but it just feels a little inconsistent y'know?
DS9 is like a "preview of coming attractions" for JJ Kurtzman trek. All the spirituality prophecy family drama bullshit that is the hallmark of Kurtzman and Abrams starts in DS9. I retroactively hate it now.
Don't hate a good thing because someone ineptly tried to copy it and failed wholesale.
Sisko is a war criminal.
He's also black space Jesus so he can do whatever he wants.
I prefer Voyager to DS9, although they both have their moments.
Well, people go on about Sisko gassing a planet 30 years later. And in that case he did it because the Maquis had already done it to another planet. The show itself also acknowledges that it's a sketchy action. Sisko also pulled the Romulans into the war through cloak and dagger bullshit that involved literal murder. One of Sisko's running themes is that he gets results through unorthodox actions because he's got frick-all to work with. Janeway also has a much bigger track record of doing whatever the frick she wants, for whatever reason she comes up with, while Sisko is a little more consistent. One reason people like Sisko is that he greatly values the lives of those serving under him, and isn't willing to put everyone's lives on the line for ideals.
Sisko is consistently vexed by the tough choices that he has to make and clearly carries their weight. He's in a tough position, having never been trained to be an ambassador, much less a messiah, and the ways that he copes with the strain form consistent threads through the narrative. So, while he may commit war crimes, the weight of his actions permeates the narrative and doesn't need to be called out in the same way.
By contrast, Janeway will bounce from fighting the evil capitalist radiation garbagemen one week to dealing with a murderous alien dream-clown the next, pausing just long enough to ignore the Prime Directive in any context in which doing so DOESN'T make it easier to get home. There's no weight to her actions, which heightens the absurdity of them. That said, I find Voyager a much more entertaining show for episodic watching, while DS9 requires more of a commitment.
If Pale Moonlight were written like a Voyager episode then it would be presented as the obviously correct course of action, any questions surrounding it would amount to some throwaway line, probably by Kim because he's permanently the naive ensign, which Janeway responds with a matter-of-fact "sometimes you need to make the tough decisions to be captain," there would be absolutely no dramatic weighty self-reflection on assassinating a foreign member of government in a false flag attack to draw their species into a bloody war that will kill millions, and there would probably be a B-plot about Morn accidentally turning the holosuites into a massive cheese replicator.
Also, Janeway would introduce her plan with a line like "Looks like we have to out-minion the Dominion".
oh yeah sometimes they had episodes that weren't about quark
>and there would probably be a B-plot about Morn accidentally turning the holosuites into a massive cheese replicator.
Classic Morn. He didn't speak often but when he did, they were always real killer scenes
Or they could've gotten a better writer than either of them. JMS was the goat, is the goat, and will remain the goat. Remember always that DS9 was the bad imitation.
>B5 fans
>not forever seething that a science fiction show "stole" the concept of a space station
Dude, Paramount had the B5 bible (JMS was shopping the show around) and "suddenly", DS9 came along, a show that was quite unlike the previous Trek, but oddly similar to B5.
DS9 was in pre-production before B5 was shopped, and their only similarities are "sci-fi show on a space station that mention religion." JMS himself said that he didn't think the writing of DS9 actually ripped him off. What he b***hed about was Paramount threatening to blackball TV stations that aired B5 by not letting them air Trek, which is illegal but JMS was told not to sue because Paramount would just drag out the legal proceedings to the point where B5 would be a liability to any network or production company.
A lie of omission is still a lie, which makes you a liar. JMS was shopping around his first setting bible to get funding in '89 and he met with Paramount execs. He said that he didn't believe that Pillar and Berman copied his bible, not that their money people didn't.
"Their money people" never gave a shit about Trek other than as a money maker and used it as a stashing ground for execs too moronic to be trusted for more important projects, like Berman. If Berman and Piller didn't see anything about B5, not a single person above them either saw or gave a frick either.
Janeway is presented as murdering someone and it is framed as Janeway not only performing the correct action, but having the balls to make the tough, difficult choice. It's just winning all around for her. Janeway was just constantly winning, doing no wrong, never really meaningfully challenged in any capacity by anyone. The Maquis fell in line pretty damned quickly, 7 of 9 fell into line and accepted the wisdom and correctness of Janeway, and Janeway is single handedly responsible for defeating the Borg, forever, until it was retconned and she didn't but it was not her fault she was still stunning and brave and she did it all without needing no man.
This post unintentionally sums it up best: people hate Janeway but love Sisko because Janeway is a woman, and the average Trek viewer can relate better to a black man than they can to a woman of any ethnicity. Truly, woman is the Black person of the world.
>Notsureifpretending.jpg
I can’t fricking stand sjws like you. It’s like everyone is literally just what diversity quota they fill. There is no room for individuals you are just your skin color, gender, and sexuality.
Yes, of course. It has nothing at all to do with the deliberately shitty writing by feminists who were so afraid to let Janeway actually be challenged for decisions a male captain would get called out for, nor made to face any sort of consequence for them as a male captain would.
Sisko's the easiest comparison because he takes actions that are very similar to Janeway, but Sisko actually has to confront that what he's doing is morally reprehensible and villainous.
Consider how In The Pale Moonlight, Bashir demands orders in writing and promises to take his grievance up the chain of command. And later, when Sisko goes to Garak to try and project his guilt on Garak the tailor doesn't let Sisko off the hook one bit.
If Janeway were in the same position, the Doctor would be up Janeway's ass about how great everything she did was, and whoever took the place of Garak would be like "your hands are clean and it's only me, an evil man, who did anything, you're stunning proud and brave Janeway."
The Doc is one of the only crew members who would occasionally give her some lip. But while I can't guess at the reasons for it, one of the largest failings of Janeway as a character is that she got in on everything, while the other shows weren't afraid to have their Captains take the back seat occasionally. Janeway is always in the limelight, and isn't allowed any weakness. Even weakness that isn't weakness, like that DS9 episode where Sisko is injured and spends time connecting with Kira instead of commanding the ship in combat. Kirk, Picard, Sisko, even Archer have episodes where they're put in shitty positions and their character is tested. But even when Janeway is kidnapped by mutant Paris, turned into a lizard, and has his babies she has to end it all with a quip about how she was probably the dominant one. b***h, you experienced body horror to an insane degree. You don't just smile that off. Even Q turned into a simp around her.
Avery Brooks was asked at a con what it meant to be the first black Captain, and he answers that you can't play a color. Of course, DS9 also did Far Beyond the Stars as a reasonable portrayal of period racism, and had the stones to say "Black folk" on TV.
>But even when Janeway is kidnapped by mutant Paris, turned into a lizard, and has his babies she has to end it all with a quip about how she was probably the dominant one.
Basedway is such a kween.
May she slay forever
Also, honestly, I am pretty /misc/ but Sisko's protests about how the casino setting was racist and how it was dealt with honestly pretty reasonable compared to the trash we get today and honestly Sisko taught me a lot about the difference between a black man and a Black person.
Like honestly, I needed it explained to me why it was a problematic thing at the end for Sisko to go into the wormhole and leaving Jake - who by the end is a grown ass man - behind. Although maybe Cassidy was pregnant and that was more the problem.
It's because Sisko is generally more consistent and better at justifying what he does, while Janeway is written to be a lot more arbitrary.
Thing is, Sisko was always going to do those things when faced with those scenarios and situations. There isn't really any version of Sisko that wouldn't have done those things. Janeway? With Janeway there is quite literally no way to know.
>haven't seen voyager
You should. Then you'd understand. But also, Voyager is (mostly) a pretty good show, although not as good as TNG or DS9.
>arbitrary
I disagree. Saying it's arbitrary implies that there was a process of arbitration taking place. Like she reached some kind of decision, even if it was arcane or ill-explained. But often there is none, and her decisions just come across as random, based on where Janeway is in her monthly cycle or something.
NTA, but I did a rewatch of Voyager a while ago, and it made it pretty clear why Voyager isn't as good as TNG and DS9. Its dialogue and characters are kind of empty. In DS9 there's a rather famous discussion between Quark and Garak talking about the Federation, and that was squeezed in because the episode came up short. One of the Picard speeches that gets posted online a lot, the one with "that's not weakness, that's life", is from an otherwise completely atrocious episode. Both shows had strong characters that could carry scenes, and Voyager has much less of that. The regular conversations between characters are kind of boring, while really only the Doctor stands out as someone who can really carry a scene. Tuvok and Seven are OK as well. But all other characters? They just never have moments like that. There's no point where Chakotay's rebel/Indian past results in some banger of a line or dialogue where he gives some unique insight. Tom Paris has this obsession with Earth's past, but he always comes across as a nerdy LARPer. The wittiest Tom gets is off-screen, when he rewrites the Doctor's holonovel. You see it in the Captains, too. Picard has gravitas, and can say lines as if they mean something. Sisko has presence, and can stare down any alien with a look that promises a pimp slap. Janeway acts exasperated, put-upon, and b***hy.
Also, Voyager has the cleanest break between bad early episodes and good later episodes of all Treks. It's not even a meme that the show gets better when Seven joins the crew.
>Its dialogue and characters are kind of empty.
Fun fact, that was executive mandated to have all the human characters like that so that the alien characters "would stand out more".
The writers hated it too, as did Mulgrew who had to constantly redo her scenes because she kept acting in them.
7o9 was a means for the writers to get around the mandate as "she's not human", which is the other reason she kept getting plots and relevance.
So between the captain's inconsistent characterization and the dumbass idea to have no emotion, Voyager was always doomed to mediocrity?
I'm also pretty sure you're not supposed to allow a race to declare you a deific entity
Destroying the abomination for the good of the ship and the people who make up its component parts is both Lawful and Good.
I was digusted by the Tuvix character. Hated the personality. Was that just me? Were you supposed to find him cool and pleasant?
Tuvix looked disgusting - head ridges projecting - in his audience before Janeway. Very very disrespectful.
I didn't like him, either. The fricker was half Neelix, after all.
I'm not sure. It's possible they just wanted him to come across as confident and fulfilled rather than charismatic and likeable
Tuvix is to Curzo as Voyager is to DS9.
Lawful Good, neither Tuvok nor Neelix ever expressed a desire to be recombined or to have Tuvix re-created to live alongside them.
It was Neutral Good. True Good. Tuvix wasn't an individual it was the result of an accident.
>Tuvix wasn't an individual it was the result of an accident.
I am sure there are several posters who were born as an accident, but that doesn't mean they are not individuals, does it.
>Neutral Good
These are the only correct posts in the thread.
>Tuvix wasn't an individual it was the result of an accident.
Not mutually exclusive.
There was some reason why they couldn't let all three live, right?
Not everything has to align with your stupid fricking D&D chart
Obviously Voyager writers were moronic (pic, never let them forget), but why the frick did they keep cramming Tuvok and Neelix together? Like that time Tuvok got space-autism and they left him with fricking Neelix. He served with the Jane for years, there had to be someone else available. The only good Tuvok + Neelix interaction was when Neelix got choked out.
straight man and goofball pair, same reason it's always data and geordi; robot asking the tismo what human interactions mean
Like the other Anon said, it's basically comedy writing 101. But it's such a bog standard move that everyone in the audience saw through it. Usually the straight man and the goofball learn from each other at least a little, and they're closer together at the start. A man who holds logic above all else and a man who's such a manchild he even dates 2 year olds start at opposite sides of the spectrum and pretty much stayed there for all of the show. When either gets paired with other characters they usually have their best episodes. Even Neelix was acceptable when he got episodes like the one where he commits a crime in an attempt to stay in Voyager's good graces.
> (pic, never let them forget)
They didn´t.
frick this smug space Black person
At least he´s getting blueballed HARD.
Like the other anons said, they were probably trying to create a comedy buddy pair like Odo and Quark in DS9.
It wasn't Lawful at all. Janeway follows the ideals of the Federation, and it's made clear multiple times that she considers these her core values. Chiefly among the values of the Federation are the discovery of and respect for new life, noninterference, and attempting to resolve conflict peacefully.
Tuvix was a new, unique lifeform, and the procedure was lethal to him. Performing it was clearly against the values of the Federation, and the episode itself isn't exactly shy about pointing that out. But for once Janeway actually had a decent argument for her insanity, namely that two crew members returning to life outweighs the loss of life of one, something Tuvix probably realized given that he was half Tuvok. And arguably the ship needed Tuvok more than it did Tuvix.
I'd say it's Chaotic Neutral. It breaks the rules for reasons of pragmatism. Janeway was also good friends with Tuvok, and if that was her chief reason it edges more towards Chaotic Evil. Picard wouldn't have done it. Sisko did something similar, and it's clear he had a lot of trouble coming to that decision (and also had his hand forced somewhat by someone to whom it is second nature).
>Tuvix was a new, unique lifeform
Wrong. Tuvix was the result of an accident that had a remedy. Frick off.
Don't you have a desk to captain, Insaneway?
Should be noted that lawful usually but does not exclusively mean following the in-universe laws to the letter because some of those laws could, seemingly but not actually paradoxically, be themselves non-lawful by alignment. Janeway's actions reflect putting the collective whole above the individual, which would be a lawful action.
I know, but Janeway hammers a lot on Federation ideals and the entire reason they're in the Delta Quadrant in the first place is because she put Federation ideals before her crew.
Yes, but that doesn't matter. She follows laws that benefit the collective, and when they don't, she doesn't. It's that dedication to the crew above the needs of an individual that makes it Lawful.
>Janeway hammers a lot on Federation ideals
depends on how psychotic the writers choose to make her each episode
i like to think her entire temperament is decided by whether or not she's had enough coffee that day
Reminder they could have gotten the originals back without killing the chimera by just splitting the transporter signal and only applying the recovery process to one half.
This is the thing that annoys me the most. The entire thing is a pointless dilemma because Tuvix didn't need to die for Neelix and Tuvok to be "reborn."
neelix and tuvok both sucked, so beaming tuvix into space would've been ideal
I disagree. Tuvok was an excelent, I would even say the best, depiction of a Vulcan that Star Trek has produced.
>Not so jovial as Spock
>Not a crackhead like T'Pol
>None of the arrogance of Solok
>Not completely and wildly out of control like T'Lynn
A paragon of Vulcan excellence and logic, even if occasionally a needless risk taker.
Tuvok was genuinely one of the few actually good characters in Voyager. It was basically just him, Tom, and the Doctor. And maybe Kes, but she was unfortunately short-lived. No put intended (but appreciated).
>Not like borg lady
She had the bazoongas though anon. They wouldn’t allow such an attractive woman on a star trek show anymore.
I liked her just fine. That doesn't mean I think that she was a good character. Her finest moments were as a foil for others, but at the end of the day she was mostly a poor man's Data.
Lmao.
I don't know the opinion on lower decks here but they actually talked about this. Janeway spent most of the series with no guidance, no supplies, and no reinforcements. she couldn't call up command for orders, there was no getting new crew after losses, every repair took from a finite stockpile.
now Starfleet comes with a known inherent risk upon signing up, but the crew hasn't signed up for being flung across the known galaxy where originally there was a real chance they would die if old age before getting home. it would be like signing up for the coast guard and somehow ending up on Mars in a warzone. so she had an even greater obligation to that crew to get them home then usual as this was clearly outside their agreed upon deal.
so basically she was operating well outside normal parameters in an unheard of scenario. so she can try to stick to Starfleet protocol but a lot of that stuff had no protocols or were clearly not written with these scenarios in mind
If she was consistent in her actions, your arguments would matter. But she's not. One day she'll prioritize getting everyone home or save something inconsequential and say damn Starfleet Protocols. Next day she'll say that the same protocols are tying her hands and refuse to deal with alien civilizations on the basis of those protocols, even when the exchange would likely be largely irrelevant yet serve to bring them hundreds of years closer to home.
I like the series, it's truly part of what I consider to be the "core" of "real" Star Trek, but the way Janeway acts from episode to episode cannot be excused, and I feel like the actress must just not have had the authority to really claim the role or the presence of mind and character to point out when it wasn't making sense, in stark contrast to the other captains/commanders.
>I like the series, it's truly part of what I consider to be the "core" of "real" Star Trek, but the way Janeway acts from episode to episode cannot be excused, and I feel like the actress must just not have had the authority to really claim the role or the presence of mind and character to point out when it wasn't making sense, in stark contrast to the other captains/commanders.
She IIRC mentioned once she sorta realized the writers were being inconsistent and decided to channel that into making her seem like the inconsistency was a consequence of her starting to crack
The problem is that this only matters some of the time. She destroyed the Caretaker array because "muh prime directive". Frick, she turned down a deal that could get them closer to home because muh principles when even Tuvok agreed that it was logical to make the deal. The crew of the Equinox was in a much worse situation, and had a way to get home faster. That way eventually meant their doom, but Janeway treated them like trash for doing it, again citing muh Federation ideals. And then she goes and violates the fricking timeline to get everyone early. Not just home, but home early so some of her friends don't die. She doesn't just fluctuate, she fluctuates from one extreme to the next.
>every repair took from a finite stockpile
In theory, yes. In practice, no. They had endless torpedoes and shuttles. Which is honestly fine, because they can trade with people, and they have enough resources and knowledge to produce Starfleet grade replacements from the stuff they buy, but it's never mentioned. Not even once. They consider buying a new gun once, and then back out of it. That's the kind of stuff that would have been cool, honestly. Enterprise unironically did this much better. I still think a Tuvix show of Voyager and Enterprise would be top Trek.
>The crew of the Equinox was in a much worse situation, and had a way to get home faster. That way eventually meant their doom, but Janeway treated them like trash for doing it, again citing muh Federation ideals.
Oh, man, the way she treated the crew of the Equinox is probably what cemented my hatred of the woman. I realize she's inconsistently written, but holy shit, this went through multiple writers and production staff and the reading and performance by the actress, and they were like "ok, yes, this works".
I'm not arguing that they did right, but they didn't even realize that these things were sentient until it was too late, and they were genuinely desperate, partly because they had initially stuck closer to protocols than Janeway and the Voyager had, and were running desperately low on supplies, with critical systems damaged, harried by hostiles at every turn. And she showed them *zero* understanding, which ultimately resulted in *more* people being harmed because they felt like they couldn't possibly come clean and had *no* avenue of escape.
To be fair, it does have its roots in earlier Star Trek writing, and it's a thing that has always bugged me. A lot of Starfleet Captains have always given a lot of leeway to non-Federation aliens, while Federation citizens and/or humans have this expectation to be impeccable placed on them. And it's especially jarring when the person doing that is Janeway, who's far from impeccable herself. It's pretty clear that the crew of the Equinox tumbled down the stairs of morality one step at a time, and they're not so much "Dark Voyager" as they are Voyager with worse luck and less resources.
The thing that weirds me out is how they hint at it occasionally, and then never carry through. They almost buy that gun. They buy the mindrape ship from the scrapyard. They use Neelix's garbage scow to bust Tom and Harry out of jail. But it never carries through. They never have to use Neelix's ship because all the shuttles are under repair or something. They build the Delta Flyer as a dick measuring context with the Malon rather than as something they actually need, despite the fact that it's a very useful ship to have in their situation. Shit, they build it like it's nothing, too. No resource requirements, no energy saving concerns. They have a fry cook because of muh energy, but they pull an entire hot rod out of the replicators. Voyager just never portrays hard choices or cunning solutions. Enterprise, despite being mostly trash, does. The episode where Archer interrogates a guy by repeatedly drugging him and shaking a shuttle, pretending to be his buddy, is great.
>they didn't even realize that these things were sentient until it was too late
Yeah, that's what you'd tell yourself in that kind of situation, isn't it?
If it was true, then yes, of course. What a meaningless question.
>Sisko taught me a lot about the difference between a black man and a Black person.
Of course. Sisko is fictional.
>That's the kind of stuff that would have been cool, honestly.
Also, this, yeah, I agree. Every time I watch Voyager, I think that it's a wasted opportunity. Not just because of Janeway or any of the major things, but also with small things like this. It's funny, because IIRC there's some time-frickery-episode where an altered Voyager is shown, having been changed throughout the years, but when it comes to the "actual" timeline and the progression in the "actual" show, this never happens. To see the Voyager change, step-by-step, taking on and leaving people along the way, season by season, subtle changes to the architecture as well as the profile of the shit, etc., it would've really helped drive home the whole concept of them spacing their way home over a long time, having to make do along the way.
Of course, I would've just had Will Riker as the Starfleet Captain and Tom Riker as the Maquis First Officer, avoiding the whole Janeway thing entirely.
Needs of many > Needs of few
neither
the mashup of Neelix, Tuvok and some alien flower created a new life form
starfleet has a mandate to seek out new life
crew shortages were not an issue, Tuvix was better than both Neelix and Tuvix at their respective jobs and was enhanced enough to perform both of their roles
The real issue with Tuvix was that he was black and not in a castrated house-Black person way like Tuvok
Also, care for individual life forms was a bullshit justification for separation. Tuvok and Neelix came back, but there was no mention of the alien plant.
Why did they force him to go back? Both halves were in full agreement that it was better this way.
Because Jadzia is a timid little girl without him.
Man, his forehead is some tripophobic nightmare stuff but those clothes look frickin' cool. Look at those patterns. The fact that it's Yellow and Purple just makes it better.
they weren't in full agreement, iirc Kurzan decided that he was being selfish and it would be unfair to both Jadzia and the Dax symbiote to abandon them, very different from the Tuvix moronation
He came to that decision after being browbeaten into it for half the episode
>transporter clones are so common pretty much any engineer could intentionally create one
This episode is so fricking dumb. They just don’t want dig into the idea transporters disintegrate you
Neutral good. It's just the obvious thing to do. The funny thing is it's only supposed to even be a question to the fart huffing, pompous, bleeding heart pseudo-intellectuals of starfleet.
Leaving it as is would be chaotic neutral at best but I'd imagine tuvoks wife and kids would have something to say about that and I don't think even neelix in his right mind would consider it less than evil.
Lawful Evil, without a doubt.
I’d say lawful neutral because I tend to think of lawful evil as being more based on self serving desires or sadism towards others. She wasn’t trying to create suffering or anything, just trying to do what she thought was best in a way that comes off as callous.
Genuinly didn't mind Janeway. Me and my old man always called her Captain Magpie. Fricking "My People Chakotay My People My People" needed to suck hard vacuum. Most irritating self righteous, moral grandstanding, c**t.
I couldn't help but laugh when I found out that Chakotay's "native american cultural consultant" turned out to be a israeli man that fabricated all of it.
An already known conman.
That's Hollywood, baby!
It was
>We had to bring the episode back to the norm for a procedural show
I guess that’s lawful neutral
LG. It checks out under Catholic Natural Law since Tuvix's death was a byproduct of saving Tuvok and Neelix and not the goal of the procedure. In the same way that you could give a medical treatment to a pregnant woman that caused the death of her unborn baby but couldn't directly abort the child.
>Tuvix's death was a byproduct of saving Tuvok and Neelix and not the goal of the procedure.
It was explicitly the goal. The point of the procedure was to use Tuvix as raw material to bring back two people. It was no different than killing a hitchhiker and using his organs to save the lives of people who need organs. You’re claiming the two scenarios are equivalent. The death of the hitchhiker isn’t the goal, just an unavoidable consequence of removing his heart, lungs, kidneys, and whatever other useful parts are in there.
>The point of the procedure was to use Tuvix as raw material to bring back two people. It was no different than killing a hitchhiker and using his organs to save the lives of people who had been involuntarily blended together to form the hitchhiker.
Interesting line of thought.
The deep lore of America
Every Star Trek Captain after Kirk has been Lawful Stupid except based war criminal Benjamin "converted to space Judaism" Sisko
>all these posts talking about what based means
>not one mention of Lil B
disgusting
On a side note you've got to wonder what Janeway would have done had she found Tuvix being chased by a different crew. Because you know damn well she would have saved him, and used that situation to declare the other crew as poopybumfaces, making it ok to steal literally everything not bolted to their ship, violently ripped out anything that was bolted down, and probably left them marooned. While Chockonwieners sat in the background rambling about how "His people had to deal with these sorts of situations in the past, and something something animal spirits something something"
Chaotic Evil. She knowingly took the life of an unwilling innocent individual in order to resurrect two others for soley selfish reasons. This was the exact moment I stopped caring about the lives of 95% of the crew.
I use alignments as a shorthand for how something -generally- behaves:
Good - Selfless
Evil - Selfish
Lawful - Controlled
Chaotic - Impulsive
Neutral - Somewhere in between
So Superman is Lawful Good and Plastic Man is Chaotic Good while Darkseid is Lawful Evil and Joker is Chaotic Evil.
In this instance, I'm guessing Janeway was doing something to help someone else because something something Star Trek captain.
>In this instance, I'm guessing Janeway was doing something to help someone else because something something Star Trek captain.
No, just committing murder.
Because she's a psycho.
Short version: transporter accident merged two people, Tuvok and Neelix, into one person, who called himself Tuvix.
Tuvok and Neelix are both essentially dead, there is no suggestion that they exist as personalities within Tuvix. Tuvix has his own personality that is something of a blend between the two but also exhibits some distinct traits uniquely his own. Also just as important, the blending appears to be completely stable. Tuvix isn’t dying or suffering in any way. He also notably still retains all the raw skills and memories of both Tuvok and Neelix.
He specifically wants to continue existing and does not want to be split back up into Tuvok and Neelix, as this would kill him.
Most notably, the Doctor, a hologram programmed to be absolutely compliant to medical ethics, refused to take part in splitting up Tuvix and outright called doing so murder.
Janeway’s decision to kil Tuvix and bring back Tuvok and Neelix was driven purely by emotion, and selfish emotion at that: she valued getting her friends back (who incidentally might not even have agreed to come back at the expense of Tuvix; it’s impossible to know since they were dead) more than she valued Tuvix’s conscious desire to live.
What Janeway did was as pure an example of Evil as I can think of.
>the Doctor, a hologram programmed to be absolutely compliant to medical ethics
Was he? I remember at least one episode where he went evil because parts of his program acted up, possibly even because of programming he introduced himself.
Dude was as absolutely compliant to medical ethics as Janeway was to the prime directive and Chakotay was to acoochemoyah.
The Doctor has the excuse of being a program that was left running for far, far longer than he was ever intended to, and his medical ethics breaking down on occasion is a result of that.
I mean he's absolutely right that Tuvix is a conscious living who hasn't done anything wrong and is as far as we know perfectly healthy and viable, and who has personally expressed a desire to continue living. Show me a doctor who agrees that it's ethical to kill him, and I'll show you a doctor who's about to lose his medical license.
>Show me a doctor who agrees that it's ethical to kill him, and I'll show you a doctor who's about to lose his medical license
I think insurance companies hire those guys to tell them that you don't really need the stuff YOUR doctor (you know, the quack who's actually seen your face and prodded your carcass) says you need
There were two episodes off the top of my head, neither of which had him go evil. The first being one episode where Kim and a random redshirt were both dying and he could only save one so he ended up picking Kim, and his programming went insane with grief doubting himself until they had to literally delete those memories. Twice. The second time was when he got hijacked for a hospital on an industrial planet where medical care was rationed to people the system deemed worthy enough, so in order to get proper care for the lowly proles he threatened to murder the administrator using the system against him.
I was thinking of Darkling, and I thought there were more where he was fooling around with his own programming and it resulted in him doing some super shady shit.
It was against Starfleet regulations is what it was.
Killed a sentient being that didn't want to die to bring back two dead men.
All of Janeway's actions are LE.
She's a textbook example of the LE hero.
Except I'm certain by the laws of the Federation, what she did to Tuvix was illegal.
I think on the face of it it might be, but there's probably a lot of legal defenses that allow a starship captain to do illegal things for any number of reasons that could be applied here.
Even if a court martial found Janeway guilty I can't imagine that they'd seriously punish her in light of the extraordinary circumstances.
The federation is a strange place. They'll court marshal you for stopping an asteroid from wiping out billions of people just because they haven't invented warp drive yet.
It's kind of weird how the Prime Directive went from TOS to TNG. It starts as a reasonable non-interference policy where they still interacted with aliens, and where in its first mention Kirk reasons that a stunted culture does not fall under the Prime Directive as it can not develop. But Picard is regularly arguing that literal annihilation falls under the Prime Directive, despite doing something like deflecting an asteroid that a primitive culture doesn't even knows exists would have absolutely zero influence on their cultural development.
Honestly, we know Picard isn't evil, but his rigid interpretation of the Prime Directive is textbook Lawful Evil. "No no, we can't be bothered saving these dudes, and technically interacting with them in any way could influence their cultural development so I'm ruling it a PD case. Now set course for Risa!" And it's even worse in that Enterprise episode where the PD doesn't even exist, but they figure they're not going to help aliens that already know other life exists and specifically sought it out, because all of them dying might give the literal moron species that also lives on their world more room to grow. I kinda like SFDebris' head canon that the sick aliens eventually became the Breen, and the moron aliens became the Pakled.
But Picard violates the Prime Directive to save lives all the times. Like with the Mintakans.
>But Picard is regularly arguing that literal annihilation falls under the Prime Directive
No moron, this happened exactly once and it was under a specific context both in the show and in real life (being a shitty season 7 episode), which means it should be weighed on the dozen other times where Picard violates the Prime Directive for ethical reasons.
One episode in the middle of the show literally has a retired Admiral point out how many times Picard violates the Prime Directive as an attempt to brand him as a disloyal lunatic. One incident in a shitty episode after they ran out of ideas does not outweigh that.
Kirk violates the PD all the time anyway.
Janeway is a true neutral.
Did they ever explain where Tuvix's extra mass went (or why both Rikers were both apparently a normal mass each)? Presumably Tuvok's and Neelix's mass would combine into a Tuvix with the combined mass of both; he should be a big guy
>big guy
It is now essential that someone with more talent than me edit a pic of Tuvix to have a bane mask.
Extra atomic mass went into replicator buffers and was promptly converted into coffee.
Get back to /lgbt/ homosexual. He's right and it's not political.
They also tried to give me opioids for mild knee pain. Modern medicine is a miracle but the institution is miles away from flawless or full of ethical people.
Oh frick off leave too.
Here is the magical thing though, you are both moronic and baiting for no reason. The question in this thread is very critically not are doctors perfect, or that medicine is perfect, or anything of that nature. You're stale takes on trans people can be expressed somewhere where people care and it makes sense. The thread question is - is killing this person evil why? The fact that doctors also deal with transkids is such an ass pull to just get that in the thread an derail it because it is easy fricking (Yous) look at me, I am falling for it right now. That he's moronic and thinks that is unethical and therefore we can question all medical ethics is, and this is key, not at all critical to THIS particular question. More relevant stupid examples would be if he tried to bring up euthanasia, or if he wanted to be big brain bait talking about doctors who did kill people for political or experimental reasons. His example just does not fit.
>talking about doctors who did kill people for political or experimental reasons
Literally the entire transsexual medical movement.
I think it was an effective example to demonstrate a point by that poster. But let's just say they do X as a replacement then instead, and be done with it. You're extending the life of this issue by taking particular issue with it. You are the issue you're complaining about and this is a golden opportunity not to be.
Well, then don't appeal to the moral and ethical authority of real world doctors to make a point, anon. That authority is suspect at best.
And you also frick off leave.
It’s not about right or wrong. You’re none of you any fun. This was a fun thread arguing about medical ethics in the context of an impossible science fiction scenario. Now you’re here shitting up the place with real-world shit that is not remotely relevant to the discussion and is no fun at all.
Frick off leave, all of you.
>nooo you can't draw parallels to real world ethical issues in my off topic STAR TREK thread
NTA but come on, guy. You have no leg to stand on here complaining about that sort of thing.
Based means "does what he wants regardless of other's opinions". and some people just post it to say "i agree with this". That is all. You dumb pseuds.
This thread is full of morons who don't know that the modern form of based originates with the california bay area african american scene. When Lil B adopted it, it took its new, modern form of being chaotically "you".
Get some culture.
You mad?
Don't know about lawful, since Tuvix has rights as an individual, but I have a hard time calling it evil. It's a horrible position for Janeway to be placed in: to have to kill one innocent to save two. Even if it is evil, it's quite understandable, and even admirable. If two of my friends fused into a single person by accident, and I have to kill that new person to bring them back, I'm doing it. Maybe it is wrong, but I don't care. I want my friends back.
>to save two
But those two were *dead*. This is like if a friend of your dead parents decided to "save" them by killing you and using your genetic material to bring them back to life. It's absurd to think of this as "saving" them.
If my parents had to die in order to create me, then it might be a comparable scenario. But I won't waste any more of your time, because it's purely an emotional issue for me. I would kill this newly created person to bring back the two people I loved. That is selfish and irrational, and I don't care.
>I would kill this newly created person to bring back the two people I loved. That is selfish and irrational, and I don't care.
I can respect that. I despise when people try and twist the bad things they do around to justify them.
>Lawful
Try Chaotic Evil. At no point in the manual is ramming something with your ship recommended and Janeway does it so often Voyager should have had horns.
Why not copy Tuvix with one of the hundred ways you can do it with the transporter, and then separate the original, leaving the ship with three crewmen?
Purposefully copying a living being through the transporter is explicitly banned by Starfleet, and the only consistent fact about Janeway's is that she is a religous zealot about Starfleet regulations.
I'll never get over the fact that Quark was right. He claimed that his mother was using sex to manipulate a senile old man into dismantling civilization to the end of creating an egalitarian liberal democracy and that's EXACTLY what she was doing; as the cherry on top, his half-moronic henpecked brother ended up being the head of state. Frick Quark was such a fun character.
DS9 had excellent writing, the cardassians and ferengi in particular get incredible treatment where a bunch of traits that on paper should have made them cartoon badguys were instead explored and made if not agreeable then at least sympathetic and fun to watch.
I wouldn't want to live in Ferengi society, its a capitalist hellhole. But I understand why Quark *does*. He is a true believer in the rules of acquisition, he legitimately believes that they make his life better and impart important moral and life lessons that give real guidance and solve practical problems.
Even in the clip you posted, Quark is right. I generally agree with a lot of the programs being proposed, but they were happening in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons. The ferengi needs to find their own way to improve the quality of life for their people, not to have alien ideology forced down upon them from on high all at once. Thats not sustainable, because its an artificial cultural shift rather than an organic one, and always leads to an extremist backlash of some kind, sometimes even a civil war. We've seen that happen IRL often enough to know its a bad idea even if you think you are doing it out of good intentions.
It was an evil act because I liked Tuvix more as a character than Tuvok or Neelix combined.
"Based" means "in line with Fascism" and that's a good thing.