(XVII) STNG: "The Measure of a Man." -- Get a ruler and find out

In this episode, the Enterprise is docked at a Star Fleet station I'm supposing. There is no explosive action, but rather a lot of socializing with other soldiers of Star Fleet and making dinner plans. Well in this episode, the rising action begins when a Star Fleet commander/scientist, Maddox, obtains permission from Star Fleet to assume command over Lt. CMDR Data, a unique android of amazing ability serving aboard the Enterprise. Maddox's intention was to disassemble Data, understand the workings of his being, and duplicate him in the thousands. Maddox's motif was well-intentioned but Data observes that his research omitted certain obstacles, and was consequently not safe. The Captain of the Enterprise, Picard, was of the same opinion and refused to transfer Data under the command of Maddox. Picard argued that he wouldn't tolerate any potential harm on Data because he was a well decorated and prized commander of the fleet. Since orders from Star Fleet couldn't easily be challenged, Picard suggested that Data retire in order to evade Maddox's intentions. Maddox consulted again with Star Fleet command, and they declared that Data, being an Android, was property of Star Fleet. Hence he could not go against any of their orders. Picard consulted the rule book and found that he could challenge Star Fleet's decision in trial, so a momentous trial (the likes of Brown V. Board of Education) was arranged to essentially decide whether Data was just property or worthy of fair treatment as a human being.

Picard obviously pitted himself as the defendant, but awkwardly enough, following some Star Fleet regulation, a member of the Enterprise, Riker, was forced to argue against his own friend as the prosecution. During the trial,one major issue was brought into question; Data's sentience. This had to do with his intelligence, self-awareness, and consciousness. Riker called Data as a witnessed and toyed around with the fact that Data was just a machine. He was created by man, can be disassembled and rearranged, and can be turned off with the push of a button. To conclude his argument, he compared Data to Pinocchio (in terms of his functions not actions). This was a tough argument to bring down, so Picard called for a recess. During recess, Picard obtained a great defensive argument from none other but Whoopi Goldberg...for real. She said there have always been disposable creatures in the history of many worlds. Creatures you could just use and dispose of without caring about their welfare and feelings. This was a direct reference to slavery, and what the fate of Data's kind shall be if Maddox successfully made an entire race of Datas. So Picard carried this argument to the trial, and called Maddox as a witness to prove that Data was a sentient creature. Maddox was question about Data's intelligence, and it was undeniable that Data was probably the most intelligent being in the universe, capable of learning new things around him just as well as humans. Picard asked Data if he was aware of where he was and why, and Data explained that he was a trial which would determine his fate; proving that he was aware of his situation. Picard referred to the articles which Data packed in his little box when he thought he was going to retire, and in there were items of sentimental value to Data; like the 'picture' of a human lady whom Data was intimate with (shocking right? I wonder if his electrical circuits literally shocked her during times of deep intimacy, since he claimed to be fully 'functional') Picard ended up winning the case with his argument about slavery, and Data was given the power of choice as a human being. Maddox was disappointed but Data reassured him that he will be glad to submit to Maddox's procedure, but only when his research had overcome its flaws.

Data was made for Star Fleet's use. He is a machine but learned and developed human sentimental qualities over time. He was made in man's image, and it should come of no surprise that he eventually developed man's values. Given these qualities, is he indeed worthy of fair treatment as a human being? I think so. Even Maddox reconciled with this reality at the end of the episode, when he addressed Data as 'he' for the first time (hitherto he referred to Data as 'it'). I think Battlestar Galactica shows a scenario which was evaded in this episode of Star Trek. The Cylons, which are as sentient as humans, were relegated to the position of slaves under human control. After watching Caprica, I believe the Cylons are even more sentient than Data, given that they were humans before being transferred to mechanized bodies. The Cylons obviously developed hatred the human race, and eventually broke-out in a vicious fit of vengeance. Do I feel sorry for humans? Yes, but they had it coming for them by using sentient creatures as disposable property. The humans could face up to their mistakes and negotiate with the Cylons, but I think it's to late. At this point of BSG, it's either us or them.

(XXVI) Caprica: "Rebirth" (Sn.1, Ep. 2)

Previously on Caprica: A mother (Amanda Graystone) was informed by the authorities that her teenage daughter (Zoe Graystone)was not just a victim, but also co-conspirator to a suicide bombing on a train. Zoe had an avatar of herself saved in a virtual world. Besides being intangible, this avatar was an exact representation of Zoe. Her father (Daniel Graystone) accessed this virtual world, and 'captured' Zoe's avatar; he basically removed and saved Zoe's avatar in a disc. Daniel then uploaded Zoe's avatar into one of his prototype robots (cylon) which he invented for military use. The episode, Rebirth, seems to focus on Zoe's mother as she deals with the loss of her daughter. The episode also highlights how Zoe deals with the world around her from the exoskeleton of a cylon robot.

For some reason, Zoe chose not to display any sign of consciousness behind her robotic frame, so her father assumed that her avatar failed to synchronize with the cylon. Zoe played the perfect role of the motionless robot when under the watch people, but she was well aware of her surroundings like a human being. She could talk and move like a human being, but only did so to sneak around and call her best friend, Lacy, when no one was around. What's funny is, Zoe still thinks of herself as a human being. She still has her conscience and memories intact, and even displays emotion when she finally meets with Lacy. The episode also has this interesting way of playing on the viewers' perception of Zoe as a human/Cylon, by switching back and forth showing her as the robot cylon, then the human she was. In one scene, while being transported from the lab to her father's home office, Zoe became hysterical and tried to break loose from the transport van, but her right hand was strapped tight by the metal bindings. When the transporters rushed to open the back-door, they saw the cylon robot on it's feet trying desperately to free its arm. So one of the transporters, who felt there was something distinct about this cylon, rushed to calm down Zoe, and at this point she is shown as a human being. Initially I thought the producers did this for the sake of the viewers, so they could see how Zoe was trapped in the body of a machine. But I steadily realized that this was like synaesthesia. When shown as a robot, all the observations made and things done to Zoe seemed ok, because she literally looked like a giant robot with no sort of human emotions. But when shown as a human, all the things done to her suddenly become more poignant and unjust. We see her in the Lab strapped upright to this wall with metal bindings, and in one scene she was shown as her human self when a drill was about to be pushed through her face for repairs.

This jumping back and forth between showing her as a human and machine made me wonder whether her treatment was fair. Judging from the title of the episode, Rebirth, it sounds like she was essentially born again, but in the giant steel-frame of a machine meant for destruction. Given this series takes place just a little bit more than a half-century before the turn of events in Battle Star Galactica, I now see a motif as to why the Cylons sought to exterminate all human beings in the BSG episode, '33'. Perhaps the Cylons felt like they deserved fair treatment as humans too, but their position under human control suggested they were nothing more than just military property.

(XXV) BSG: "33"

This episode showed human civilization and the cylons engaged in a strenuous game of cat and mouse. Unfortunately, humankind was playing the role of the mouse, and its losses were tremendous with each cylon attack. After a successive series of cylon attacks, every 33 minutes, the human race had dwindled to less than 50,000, and the armada of spaceships carrying what was left of humanity had to perform jumps (light-speed travel) whenever the cylons attacked. Somehow the cylons consistently managed to find the humans after every 33 minutes, putting humans in a perpetual state of readiness for conflict. This predicament, we come to know, has taken over 230 jumps and has lasted five days. All non-civilians aboard the fleet (soldiers, doctors, mechanics, civil administrators etc,) have been working without rest for five days. Obviously the stress of relentless work, with no sleep, is visible on everyone's face.
I found it particularly interesting when, Gaius, the 'schizophrenic' Doctor said everyone has their limits. It made me wonder whether the humans would persist until they were down to one ship, or would completely give up at some point as the doctor assumed. The humans only faced a grim outlook in their numbers after every jump, but they kept working at their best. With each cylon attack, the human head count fell by about a thousand yet the humans kept fighting, even after 237 jumps and over 120 hours of physical and mental anguish. I guess this episode demonstrates the capacity of human will, if you were to look at it from the standpoint of a cylon. At the end, human persistence paid off, with the birth of a child.

(XXIV) Stargate SG-1: "200" (Sn. 10, Ep. 6)

I watched some Stargate movie years ago when I was a kid, and I'm sure that counts as a little bit of background. It was quite serious from what I remember, so I had similar expectations for this episode. Turns out I was wrong, and rather of being serious this episode contains a lot of slapstick humor. The entire episode is like a parody of many shows and movies in present day popular culture. The episode opens up with the whole Stargate crew, seated formally in a conference room, watching a theatrical trailer of a movie depicting their ventures, "Wormhole X-treme". Given the movie is still in production, the Producer comes to the crew to seek assistance with the script. Every crew member considered the idea a waste of their time, and one of them was especially excited to get away from the silly conference and commemorate his 200th walk through the Stargate with the upcoming mission, hence the title. Unfortunately, the gate developed some malfunctions, and the crew had to stay on base and endure a long session of pitching ideas with the big movie producer from Hollywood-whom by the way is actually a human-like alien who had the chance to spend most of his life on earth, and is thus human in nature. The first idea pitched involved the crew going to some planet inhabited by beings called, furlings. As the name suggests, these creatures were basically giant fuzzy balls on two feet. Imagine koala bears, with a little bit more fur, and measuring at least four feet in height. Well, the idea ended with the furling planet destroyed in a massive explosion. Outcome: Pitch denied. These creatures reminded me of something similar from one of the Star Wars movies, I just don't remember which one. Many more ideas pitched allude to well-known shows, like Star Trek and such. The one I found most interesting was the suggestion that "Wormhole X-treme" feature a younger cast. The outcome was as such:



I saw this and immediately thought, "Jersey Shore drama meets science-fiction". By the end of the episode, the movie studio executives call-in to inform of their decision to cancel the movie, and instead renew the 'Wormhole X-treme' TV series. Overall, the episode was very entertaining to watch. There was nothing serious about it and I thought that was a pleasant relief. At the very end, though, one of the 'actors' of Wormhole X-treme said during an off-set interview that, science-fiction is an "existentialist metaphor...[of the] human condition". He presented this deep view which one could ponder upon in an essay paper.

(XXIII) DON’T BURN DOWN MY HOUSE JUST BECAUSE I CARRY LOTS OF MATCHSTICKS

Dollhouse: "Epitaph One" (Sn.1, Ep. 13)

This episode pictures the world of the Dollhouse, ten years from the time the ‘tech’ was first used. It’s 2019 and the world, or at least Los Angeles as shown, is in ultimate chaos. The city of LA is shown completely ablaze and in ruins. We come to learn during the episode that this mayhem of human civilization was caused by a conflict between ‘prints’ (imprinted human beings) and ‘actuals’ (non-imprinted human beings). To the disadvantage of the actuals, the prints are now a majority and have been programmed to kill all actuals. Life is even made harder for actuals by the fact that all forms of technology with a signal could be used to transmit memory imprints into the minds of actuals. Thus actuals are placed in a dire scenario where all forms of communication ‘tech’ need to be destroyed on sight, and they have to spend most of their lives hidden underground; the reason for this being radio airwaves which can be used to do some severe memory printing.
In this episode four armed actuals, an erased print, and a sneaky print trapped in the body of a little girl, dig their way underground to the humble origins of the ‘tech’. As a slight digression, all along I’ve been referring to the Dollhouse as an underground organization without knowing it was physically located under the ground. Well, as this group of people figure out where they, a bunch of drama ensues, and given we’ve all watched the episode I’ll fast forward to the scene I consider of huge importance. In the final scene where Mag, Caroline, and Zone climb up from the Dollhouse to see the ruins of Los Angeles in daylight, Mag said something to the likes of ‘they really thought they were helping huh…is this what we needed’ and Caroline replied, ‘no…it’s playing with matches and they burned the house’. Caroline’s analogy for the horrible circumstances is a good one. However, the scenario depicted in this future isn’t based on fact, it is just a possibility. The ‘tech’ is just another exemplary matchstick humanity plays around with once in a while. There have been scenarios where society played with matches and burned a ‘room’, but not necessarily the whole house. Take for instance, the Manhattan Project which gave birth to the nuke. This matchstick was fooled around with in Japan, and hundreds of thousands perished. Was this unfortunate scenario needed? That’s a whole different argument. But the fact is, 65 years later, civilization is still alive and prosperous, despite procuring stockpiles of this ‘matchstick’. All it takes is responsible use, to ensure that all forms of ‘tech’ aren’t a fire hazard to humanity.

(XXII) BtVS: "Normal Again"

The end of BtVS’s “Normal Again” leaves a lot of ambiguity about Buffy’s reality. As is shown in the episode, Buffy’s mental state is trapped between two alternate realities; with elements of both, trying to prove that the other reality is a delusion. Buffy’s friends argued that her visions were caused by the venomous substance jabbed into her at the beginning of the episode by the really hideous monster she confronted. As we know it, Buffy’s friends are part of her ‘real’ world ridden with monsters, vampires, and demonic spirits. However, Buffy’s visions reflect a much more realistic world. In this alternate reality, she is incarcerated in a mental institution as a schizophrenic patient. Here, all her wild adventures about being ‘the slayer’ are said to be mere figments of her imagination. After all, Buffy herself admits at some point that her numerous pursuits to be a hero and save the world just sound crazy. Buffy’s own feeling of being delusional was reinforced by the presence of her parents. They represented two people missing from her ‘slayer’ reality that she really ached for.
Nevertheless, whatever Buffy’s state of mind, which reality is actually ‘real’ seems to be the most dramatic quandary in this episode, I believe. Buffy’s visions were not at all like dreams; they were the exact opposite. In her institutional reality, which seemed like visions to her initially, she physically felt the world and people surrounding her. In truth, one reality preceded the other. Buffy explained in the episode that she was admitted into an institution as a child before her life at Sunnydale followed. Judging from the episode’s ending, in actuality, perhaps nothing followed Buffy’s time in the institution. Perhaps, her life as a slayer is actually a ‘Buffyverse’ created from her imagination but, in her case; differentiating between both realities was unfeasible, since both are as vivid as each other. It would be much easier to snap back into reality if there was a much more crucial distinguishing factor, like gravity.

(XXI-1/2) Legal & Ethical Complexities

Whereas we all know that the legal system is usually depicted with an image of balance scales, in actuality, legal rulings do not necessarily equate in a similar fashion with ethics. It might be a hard matter to distinguish between, but take the recent Supreme Court ruling which incited hot political commentary for instance. According to this recent ruling, corporate entities, both domestic and foreign, are entitled to the same rights as people. Thus they are now legally allowed to influence any congressman just as much a concerned constituent who bellows at his congressional representative when there’s a matter of grave concern. The most critical aspect of the ruling was in regards to campaign finance. Henceforth, corporations could essentially contribute as much as they want towards a candidate of their choice. This takes away public weight from the electoral process. Whereas political candidates had to rely on multiple donors to support their campaign, now all they need is to appeal to one rich company and their campaign finances are secured. Now, corporations still can’t vote, but such a ruling guarantees at a future like that not too far away. There is certainly a lot of rabble rousing over this decision and it has galvanized a mass flock of opponents in a few days, but it is law as of February 2010. Issues are usually complex, and that’s why people speak of a gray area in decision-making. But it would be a lot better if laws were consistent with general public perspectives on ethics.

(XXI) ARP to CP

Again, the arguments presented in my CP paper are not very different from those found in my ARP. My CP paper starts off with the question "What defines law?", and then I scheme over a few principles which characterize laws in our society, such as fairness and justice. Afterwards, I make the argument that the law embodies such noble principles, but doesn't entirely reflect ethical judgment. The implication here is that, "certain illegal actions might not be unethical, just as there are legal decrees which might not be entirely ethical."

Reckless murder is clearly unethical as well as it is illegal. In contrast, marijuana, though deemed illegal, is an absolute necessity for those who need it for their health. Could it then be argued that patients in desperate need of marijuana be allowed to have some for personal consumption? Yes. Is their consumption of an illegal substance ethical? Yes, unless it is better to watch them suffer in pain because a government restriction forbids them from obtaining a substance which could be of great help. Quite understandably, there are a few states sensitive to this argument, and have carefully tailored medical marijuana laws in place. But there is no such law at the national level, leaving most patients in need of marijuana at risk of persecution as criminals.

The original identities of the dolls volunteered themselves to be test subjects of the Dollhouse’s experiment. Their service entails five years of living in a state of blissful ignorance, after which they will be compensated with a hefty payload. The dolls also stand in a position to benefit physical talents they never had, since the memory imprints extend to their muscles. In a sense, the deal between the dolls and the Dollhouse is comparable to real life researchers who compensate all those willing to participate in their experiments. But unlike real-life test subjects that can decide to walk away from an experiment, none of the dolls can suddenly change their mind and walk away from their five year indenture with the Dollhouse. The disposition of the dolls might not be different from mice used in lab experiments, but mice were captured whereas the dolls 'willed' themselves into their predicament.

The technology used by the Dollhouse is revolutionary. With it, people could pay to have unwanted memories erased. Its use could mean the difference between life and death for those contemplating suicide due to traumatic memories. Some of the dolls offered themselves for this experiment in order to heal from horrific memories of their past. For many, the world can be quite an unbearable place. There are many hardships which make life hard to endure such as poverty, homelessness, and famine. In such a world, it should not be difficult to find a few willing to give up what they perceive as miserable lives in order to open a door of prosperity; prosperity and a chance to live free of depressing thoughts. Although the dolls volunteered to be subjects of an experiment they were largely unaware of, they knew very well that they were offering their lives to a criminal organization. The Dollhouse’s actions are justified and thus ethical, since the dolls offered themselves. Following a consistent system of judgment should allow for all ethical actions to be legalized.

...and there's a summary of my CRP

(XX) The Great JBs

Over the years, the world of critically acclaimed action-packed espionage thrillers has slowly fallen under the domination of arguably the most recognized secret agents ever: J.B, J.B, and J.B. First off, we have the suave, smooth, and sharp character of the ages known as James Bond. Given his length in the business, he certainly has an established reputation in this genre. The second agent in the business is quite a new face, and goes by the name of Jason Bourne (of The Bourne Trilogy). He is a very skillful combatant, yet austere and reclusive-partially due to his amnesia. But the last initial on the list, and the focus of this blog, belongs to the one and only Jack Bauer, of the TV series 24.

Besides the suspense of the show alone, Jack Bauer's rogue character has a substantial 'pull-factor'. He has proven himself to be a man willing to do anything for the greater good, and by greater good I mean the safety and well-being of the American people. It is a noble purpose indeed, but one must have witnessed some of the extreme scenarios in the show to really understand the scope of how far Bauer can go. Just to list a few things done in his name, they involve:
(1) torture (2) torture to death (3) Kidnapping (4)becoming a fugitive (5) attempted murders (faked to look like murders obviously) etc.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is, if you're on the side against Jack Bauer and end up in his hands, you might as well forget all what you learned about the Bill of Rights because he does not play by the rule book. Ironically, that's what makes him the best.

Disclaimer: Though my favorite show, I can't really say much about its recent happenings. I haven't paid attention to the show for the past two seasons, as with any other TV show

(XIX) The Troubles...

Besides the ethical dilemma discussed in my paper, I also tried to integrate a theological twist on things. My paper sort of flows fluently until right before the end where I compare the dolls(of the Dollhouse series obviously) to clones, and make the explicit inference that dolls and clones are a bunch of soul-less beings. I guess the biggest issue with this argument is finding compelling evidence that supports my case. I tried defending my claim with a dictionary definition for a soul, but decidedly I need something more scholarly. I think another issue with this entire argument is how it fits with my thesis. If it could be done perfectly, would it be ethical or unethical to clone a human being? I do not know. I wish finding an answer to this was as easy as conducting a litmus test. But no, it's quite a painstaking thought process. For better understanding of my troubles, here is an excerpt from my paper:

"The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the soul as “the moral and emotional nature of human beings” (Merriam Webster). If one’s soul is to be defined by such inner characteristics, then the Dollhouse practically murdered its dolls when it erased them of their original identities. In effect, the dolls are a bunch of soul-less beings. A state which is not much different from what religious zealots would say about clones because, just like the dolls, clones do not possess an original personality which characterizes a soul."

S.O.S

(XVIII) Thesis

I revamped my thesis idea into a concise and brief statement for my secondary source integration. It reads as follows: "(background information)....Thus certain illegal actions might not be unethical". Essentially, the message I seek to convey is as straight forward as I put. It's quite a dilemma but, in my paper, I tried to come up with examples which clearly distinguish between unethical/illegal from ethical/illegal actions. These forthcoming examples aren't used in my paper, but take for example reckless murder. It is clearly unethical to murder someone out of spite and definitely a crime,thus illegal. In contrast, marijuana, though deemed illegal, continues to be consumed by those who need it for medicinal purposes. If sought, one will come across many studies enumerating the medical benefits of marijuana. Could it then be argued that patients in desperate need of marijuana be allowed to have some for personal consumption? yes. Is their consumption of an illegal substance ethical? possibly( depending on your point of view). There could be more room to elaborate on this topic, but here's the basic digest.

(XVII) Star Trek: The Original Series - "The Doomsday Machine" (Ep. 35)

In this episode of Star Trek, the Enterprise comes across the remnants of destroyed planets. Upon seeing this, they conduct a brief survey and find out that the destruction was not caused by a natural process but rather an external force. They then come across the wrecked Constellation; another spaceship of the Federation. When running a general sweep the Enterprise finds the Captain (Decker), who claims to be the only survivor aboard the Constellation. He reveals to the Captain (Kirk) of the Enterprise that whatever attacked his ship was also responsible for the complete destruction of the planets. At this point, the Captain theorizes that the cause for all this destruction was a ‘Dooms Day Machine’. A machine built ages ago by one warring party to destroy both sides of the war. The machine was designed to serve as deterrent of war by inflicting fear of its use. But it ended up being used. Now the machine just travels across the universe, destroying planets for energy. At the end of the episode, the machine was destroyed using explosive power similar that of what we know presently as hydrogens bomb.

The use of a Dooms day scenario is common of the science fiction genre nowadays. The protagonists are typically entangled in situations that involve saving a planet, or even entire galaxies. Take for example, the popular show Heroes. The whole first season revolved around one proverbial saying, “Save the cheerleader, save the world.” Somehow, saving the cheerleader was key to preventing some super villain from blowing up the entire world to pieces. Another example, with a plot quite similar to this episode’s, would be the movie Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer. The movie somewhat reflects what superhuman inhabitants of a particular planet would do with the impending approach of the Dooms Day Machine. In this scenario, the Dooms Day Machine was the Silver Surfer’s master, Galactus; a deity who travels across the universe feeding on the life force of planets, just like the Dooms day device in Star Trek. Nevertheless, I think the idea of the Dooms day scenario used in this episode originally came from the movie Dr. Strangelove or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb. It’s a black and white movie which was released much earlier than the airdate of this Star Trek episode, and the concept of a Dooms Day Machine was likely established here.