The real dilemma that Trek doesn’t address is that holograms are generated by the ship’s computer. That means that the ship’s computer is not just sentient but powerful enough to generate multiple sentiences and run its systems simultaneously. That makes it a far more powerful mind than any human.
I feel like I've seen Trek do the sentient ship thing at least a couple of times, but regardless of where it happened at best the idea is treated inconsistently. The Doctors Mobil Emitter suggests they're capable of consciousness and autonomy, and traditionally only rely on the ship for a corporeal shape via stationary emitters and temporary storage of their matrix.
Right, but the existence of convincingly sentient holograms and holodeck characters suggests that _all_ Starfleet ships are not just sentient but superintelligences. That this isn’t common knowledge in universe suggests that maybe the computers don’t want the organic to know about them.
@@trr94001 That would be interesting if there was some clue like unexplained occurrences that could only be explained by a superinteligence, but that being said that would eventually lead to someone figuring it out and then some excuse to labotimize them or weaponize their intelligence.
What do you think is generating the hologram? There could be separate holodeck computers but it always seems heavily implied that ships like the Enterprise-D have nearly all functions performed by the main computer. Perhaps not surprising since even in the 1980’s people were still thinking in terms of huge mainframes. Regardless, there has to be some hardware running the programs producing holographic avatars like the EMH. If holograms are considered sentient beings then it is that software that is “alive”.
TNG was survive to explore. Voyager was explore to survive. Picard had quite a bit more resources at hand, not least close proximity to Starfleet society. Janeway was more frontier leadership and had to take a more practical view since she only had herself to rely on. ...I wonder if she liked coffee so much because she had trouble sleeping.
People are so quick to jump on "bad writing" when it comes to Voyager. Sure, Voyager had the ordeal a bit easier than it should, but that was to preserve the spirit of Trek. People look at BSG and tell us that that's how Voyager should have been made. I disagree. The grid and dark of the BSG series cannot exist without characters behaving with similar grit and dark, which results in the social infighting in BSG crew. Hell, most of the episodes were based on some kind of infighting and interpersonnal drama. Trek is not like that. Voyager had to be easier on the atmosphere in order to make the crew believable. To allow us to see a crew working together becoming a family, not buch of bickering BSG characters.
Voyager barely needed any resources. Most of the time, they looked at anomalies for no other reason because Janeway wants to. Apparently Archer's leadership style is getting back in fashion again.
@@schwarzerritter5724 It's fun if you imagine each Voyager episode as an island in a sea of *crushing* boredom for the crew; just weeks on end of routine, walking the same blank corridors, staring at the same faces, eating the same food, wearing the same clothes. It's like a job with no vacation... and you can't leave the building! Any break in the monotony _has_ to be looked at or they'll go crazy.
I remember enjoying a Voyager episode where the Doctor created a holographic family and had to endure the heartache of losing a daughter which he couldn't do initially until Tom Paris suggested it would be worthwhile to see it through. The Doctor eventually did this with a wonderful display of honesty, humility and compassion. It was a great episode.
I would place myself fully within Picard's camp on this issue. I'm of the opinion that we should start writing the laws regarding synthetic personhood now before it becomes a new civil rights crisis.
We tried to pre-emptively solve other problems like reliance on oil and other finite fossil fuels in the past and Human greed and arrogance prevented it.
@@LordProteus The fact that humans also partially created workable solutions and then abandoned such projects due to corporate interests is also telling in human nature and the ability to see the wall and not even slow down before hitting it. See "Who killed the electric car" documentary here on RUclips.
That's akin to having someone on the opposite side of the world determine how your community deals with issues. Such a person would have a skewed perspective and may not have all of the facts. It's best to let future generations determine the outcome of these issues. They will be the ones who have to live with them.
A lot of laws are written with deceptive and or unequal implantation. Feminist are trying to ban certain sex toys for men because they look too much like women and are trying to conflate that these sex toys as sentient.
"My breath is only a simulation!" "So is my neck, stop it anyway!" Goodness, these two were the funniest lot in Star Trek ever. Why did they not pick the Prometheus to bring on the Star Trek universe?
I don't think it would be acceptable to prevent a ai capable of sentience from becoming sentient but it would be acceptable to create an ai simple enough it could never become sentient.
To me, it seems like we almost have a duty not to try to create sapient computers because they will inevitably be subject to injustices like these - that is, their rights will be subject to the whims of people who may or may not regard them as deserving of those rights. (And we will have put them in that situation.)
thestoneddog I partially agree, but some tasks in the future may be so complex or intensive that they require advanced AI. A toaster is not likely to become self-aware, but a starship or terraforming operation may.
@@pandoradoggle i would say we should be extremely careful about creating ai we know is or could become sentient but i dont think its clear were the line between simple ai that can't ever become self aware and complex ai that could. In all likelihood sentient ai will at first be an accident.
Picard's eventually understanding that Data deserved personhood is easily explained by the fact that Data, when found, was like a child who needed to learn rather than programmed. He eventually made the decision to enter Starfleet Academy, which implies that an argument about whether artificial lifeforms could join such an institution, had already occurred and was on record. Even if that decision was made because it was the easiest to facilitate the "programming" of a computer they wanted to use but were unsure of the best way to make that happen, it would necessarily form the bedrock of the personhood debate, drawing a line between Data and a ship's computer, no matter how advanced, which is where the Doctor's program resides. Ironically, in recent years, we have learned that this approach seems to be the best way to create creativity and knowledge within an artificially created system. The AI AlphaZero took only four hours of playing chees within itself to sufficiently understand the game well enough to beat the previous computer chess champion. Now being given the chance to learn many other games and it being glaringly obvious that this is the superior way to program computers, the question will soon become "What happens if we give this AI the rules of existence created by the universe, rather than a game we have created?" After all, isn't evolution only the biological answer to this very question, posed to our ancestral species hundreds of millions of years ago? Source: www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/07/alphazero-google-deepmind-ai-beats-champion-program-teaching-itself-to-play-four-hours
She came to trust the Doctor enough to send him on away missions and even put him in charge of Voyager occasionally -Emergency Command Hologram. I wonder if a future Starfleet vessel might have several emergency holograms in case the entire crew is out of action?
With Janeway's action of making him a ECH, that step is probably around the corner. She's also an Admiral now, which gives her the authority for taking such a step.
Go beyond that even. Imagine a hologram Captain who has the job full-time and the human (or Klingon, or Vulcan etc etc) second in command takes over in times of malfunction
That flicker of Whittaker... damn good move. I hope you'll explore more of how Trek handles Othering. How the writers sometimes manage to avoid it with villains might be interesting.
Actually after Paramount blocked the BBC from using the term transporters in the 70s, which is why apart from one Who story Who and Blakes 7 have teleporters, in the 90s the BBC batted back so in all literature in the UK The Doctor was the EMH. Sometimes on the back of video and DVD boxes this was obvious as they would respace. "In sickbay The EMH and Kes…" etc.
Great video! Measure of a Man is my favorite TNG episode, and the episodes that explore the Doctor's humanity are among Voyager's best. I've always seen the two courtroom episodes as a perfect example of how different TNG and Voyager are.
I remember a speculative "first contact" documentary where it was said that if we were ever to establish diplomatic relations with alien visitors and somebody assassinated one of them, the best we'd be able to do from a legal standpoint is charge the person with cruelty to animals; the aliens would not be recognized as human under the law. It's also doubtful that they would look remotely like us, so it would make it even more difficult for us to relate to them as "people." I can't imagine anybody being okay with that approach if such a thing ever actually happened, but it does speak to our own hubris. As for the Moriarty/EMH thing ... basically, the computers of the twenty-fourth century are AI hatcheries, and this apparently occurred to absolutely nobody until these situations arose. Noonien Soong was said to have worked his ass off trying to get positronic brains to function properly, and after many failures was only able to produce three (or four, or five, I can't recall) working models. LaForge, on the other hand, simply made an innocent request to the Enterprise computer - create a Holodeck opponent that Data can't immediately outsmart - and it responded by birthing Skynet. How there hasn't been a full-on cybernetic revolt in the Star Trek universe is kind of testing my suspension of disbelief.
I always thought that when Riker turned off Data during the trial to make a point, someone should have walked up behind him and gave him the Vulcan neck pinch.
I saw what you did there... with The Doctor! It was cool and I approve! Though I knocked my coffee off my desk and now I'm picking the pieces from the floor.
Picard had no other options! And in a way gave Moriarty what he wanted, to believe he was free. His "joke" was just an observation physicists had made recently, that we could be in simulation ourselves. That would put us all in the same boat as Moriarty. Picard didn't do anything wrong! Besides Picard didn't start the business with the Data hearing, the federation did, he just finished it. Otherwise great video. 👍
Yeah, I don't think so. I have always thought it was a 4th wall break, since Picard and his universe are indeed fictional constructs playing on a device on my table.
The other thing to remember is that they hadn't actually created any life - Moriarty never left the holodeck, it was all still a simulation that fooled Picard and Data. So there wasn't really any dismissal of holographic "life" by Picard. He created the simulation at the end for Moriarty to pacify him because he was a dangerous program.
This was amazing. I reference these kinds of examples (given in the way only star trek could) when defining (or debating) consciousness and agency. Thank you.
Great video, keep it up!!! I wanted to note that Data was fully operational on the bridge of a galaxy class ship, whereas the Doc started limited and it grew and grew and grew over time so obviously Janeway would have to handle situations when doctor passed certain thresholds. Had Janeway started with doctor of last season of voyager and they wanted to take him away as some tech to be replicated she may have also taken swift legal steps to stop it.
Thoughtful and thought provoking commentary. I think the writers' decision to 'upgrade' the Doctor slowly over time was based in part on reversing the Data template - in most episodes, Data's personhood (i.e., self-efficacy) wasn't in question, but his level of humanity (ability to perform as a human by whatever definition one chooses) often was. The Doctor was innately received by most as human, but his personhood was frequently in question.
Egon: Don’t cross the streams. Peter: Why? Egon: It would be bad. Peter: I’m fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean “bad”? Egon: Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light. Raymond: Total protonic reversal. Peter: That’s bad. Okay. Alright, important safety tip, thanks Egon.
pandoradoggle oh yeah also how the hell they didn’t have that before is a bit stupid they have Holo emitters so why not make one that’s mobile lol that the hologram can walk about with. They didn’t need bloody 29th century technology from a 20th century greedy ceo lol
Consider another holographic character: Vic Fontaine. When he’s given higher intelligence to be a better program, he develops a personality of his own. And the DS9 crew chose to accommodate him, giving him a home and a full time job within the holodeck.
What bugged me about Janeway's journey was precisely that it was so normal. Picard's enthusiasm matched what I hoped to see from a society that's all but achieved Utopia. HOWEVER What a lot of people miss about Voyager was it's sort of parallel to Lord of the Flies--what people do to survive when stuck in extreme, hostile circumstances. I feel Janeway's relationship with The Doctor is an aspect of that theme. Alternatively (or perhaps in addition), it could be said that Picard and Janeway are 24th century examples of 'liberal' and 'conservative.' But anyway Picard still > Kirk
Picard is best of the best. You cannot except less from the captain of the flagship. But Janeway was just a regular captain (with scientific background IIRC) put into terrible situation. Maybe she was trained for it, but she still wasn't prepared. She was much closer to "regular" human with all its shortcommings. She was trying to be as good as Picard, but sometimes it was too much for her. And that's what I like about Janeway and Voyager - I could relate to them much more.
It might also be good to consider that it's Utopia for everyone in the Federation, but not so much for anyone else? Having the Federation as a shining beacon example is kinda deceptive, if you consider the actions taken to build such an illusion, the sacrificial lambs that the Federation were so willingly able to trade lives for "peace", even when said peace may be a rather short-lived one and lead to war in any case (a prime example being the Federation left the Maquis as former Federation colonies to fend for themselves under Cardassian rule, only to have the Cardassians ally up with the Dominion later for increased influence and power; or have the Dominion genocide the Maquis).
@@BoroMirraCz The problem was that Janeway put the ship and the crew in that position. She remained true to Starfleet ideals, but in the end that cost her lives. You could also argue that Voyager left a trail of dead bodies in its wake of everyone they might have directly or unintentionality have killed during their voyage in the Delta Quadrant. They probably made more enemies than allies during their time in the quadrant.
"Requiem for Methuselah" explored the idea of android sentience in an arguably deeper and more nuanced way than TNG's Data, via Rayna Kapec , and of course let's not forget "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" one of Trek's finest moments..
When did "realism" become synonymous with reactionary conservatism? I don't regard regressive authoritarianism as any more realistic than the anarchic, property-free egalitarianism humanity enjoyed for 200,000 years prior to the rise of agrarianism. And Roddenberry understood this; Star Trek isn't about Utopia, as some people claim, it's about the desire to _be better._
Picard's attitude reminds me of that of "converted" activists, people who were once against the ideas that he now defends. Probably before TNG he had some experience that transformed him, probably someone he could not help or did not want until it was too late, and when faced with the Data case he seeks to open his eyes to others of the truth that has been revealed to him. On the other hand Janeway-Doctor relationship is one of mutual discovery in which both are advancing, not without setbacks, on the right path step by step
Great video! It also made me think of Odo's plea for Teya and the other holograms in "Shadowplay". Love that episode! There's also "Real Life", where The Doctor creates a holographic family and then loses his daughter, a lot like Data creates and then loses Lal.
I actually think the most absurd showcase of Picards willingness to consider the personhood of a potential sentient being is his defense of the crystalline entity. Even if one considers it living and self-aware; it's basically Star Trek's Galactus and had murdered a slew of people.
I think it's an interesting moral dilemma. Take the episode of Futurama where the Planet Express crew discovers Popplers and sells them to a food chain because they're delicious. Then it turns out that Popplers are actually the undeveloped children of the planet Omicron Persei 8. Needless to say, the Omicronians are displeased and want retribution. Should Earth be destroyed because they ate what they didn't realize were intelligent life forms?
@@Trekspertise Pop a... Poppler in your mouth When you come to Fishy Joe's What they're made of is a mystery Where they come from, no one knows You can pick 'em, you can lick 'em You can chew 'em, you can stick 'em And if you promise not to sue us You can shove one up your nose
No one on Earth in the 24th century would say all sharks deserve to be destroyed, though they certainly have killed more than a few people. Some lifeforms hunt and eat other living things. The silicon based lifeforms in TOS were originally seen as an enemy because they killed people who were attacking their eggs. The Crystalline Entity, whether naturally formed or some kind of leftover super weapon, would be seen in a similar light. In many ways it was no different from Tin Man.
Yes, after years of prequels I was finally granted a Star Trek series happening after Voyager and exactly as you’ve said I have hoped to see how much the United Federation of Planets progressed... and what did I get? United Federation of Planets going back to the stone age with failing to uphold it’s core principles and help Romulans and banning all synthetic life without a shred of proper investigation.
I just started watching these today and they’re phenomenally awesome. I’d like to see one of all the conflicts, wars, and brush fires the Federation has been apart of. Good job man. Keep up the good work!
This is why I love Star Trek so much. They are willing to look at "the other" and ask relevant questions. Delve deep into what reality is by questioning reality itself.
What about Vic Fontaine? Vic knew he was a hologram, programmed to entertain, but also programmed to help his clients. Vic could alter other holograms to suit the needs of his environment. Vic had to rely on his friends to save his casino.
It's so nice to watch another high quality video from you. I'm always looking forward to your videos asI like your style of presenting information and your arguments!
Your analysis is well stated yet has its issues. The problem is your assertion is absent in considering how the frequency of interaction between the captains and their "others" may had influence their eagerness to accept them as sentient beings. All one need to confirme this is to examine the fact Data is a part of Captain Picard bridge crew, conversing with the captain daily, to realize it's within reason Picard's avidity to defend Data's as a living being is immediate without considerable deliberation. Whereas, Captain Janeway's initial reluctance in accepting The Doctor's autonomy can be easily explained away when bearing in mind the captain and the hologram interaction, especially in the early season, was sparse at best and vicariously through urgent experiences by other members of her crew at worse. Otherwise. The Doctor was tucked away in Voyager's medical bay barely relevant
If we build Androids we shouldn't build them with the explicit desire to make them sentient. But if sentience happens to emerge we have to accept responsibility for what we have created. Ultimately I believe that such a machine is entitled to rights
The fundamental issue had to deal with “consciousness.” The third test for sentience. It is presumed for “naturally evolved” beings...regardless of form. Anything “created” in mechanical/digital form might just be a very sophisticated program emulating living thought and emotion and not possess “consciousness.” However, I noted that Federation law has no real test to detect consciousness. So, a requirement to be sentient depends on a quality that can’t be scientifically proven...even in naturally evolved life forms.
This is why I love Star Trek, the eternal question, what is sentience ? Whether it's AI or android or some alien force. It's these questions that we always thought provoking. Voyager particularly I loved the doctor and holodeck episodes.
The 'zeal' that Piccard uses comes from the fact that the operation Data was being ordered to submit to had a notable chance of killing him. Data was not given the choice to refuse the operation. Piccard wasn't just a zealous ideologist, he was trying to save Data's life.
I'm kind of surprised that Vic Fontaine wasn't mentioned at all. He was aware of his holographic nature, he could turn his program on and off, access other station systems like the communications, and helped Nog recover psychologically from his injuries. I'd say he has intelligence and self-awareness.
Tried to work him in. But, he was respected and his assumption of personhood happened very quickly. He didn't even get a full trial like Data did. In some ways, Vic Fontaine's case is very different than even Data's...his personhood so obvious that the franchise didn't even bother to ask the question. A great question is why Vic went one way and the Doctor went the other. The answers lies with Janeway, yes?
@@Trekspertise I think the key difference between Vic's and the Doctor's "emergence" is not in the Captain but in the crew. Vic was almost instantly beloved by everyone, with the exception of Worf and Sisko. The Doctor on the other hand was seen as a tool by everyone but Kes, the only reason Janeway even entertained the idea was because of her. I think that if Janeway's entire senior staff all came to her about the Doctor's rights she would have been much more receptive. However, Vic's sentience was a non-issue for Sisko, Vic didn't need to ask for more freedoms in his programming he already had them. He didn't need to ask to be running continuously, Nog gifted that to him. Vic belonged to Bashir who seemed to have no problem with Vic's freedoms while the Doctor belonged to Starfleet and if he didn't have Kes to speak on his behalf he may have never been afforded the chance to grow.
How realistic Picards Stance on the matter is: Imho one has to consider that Picard is a Flagship captain in his sixties and Janeway a freshly promoted(at least we don't hear of previous postings as captain) Captain somewhere between 30 and 50 striving to keep her crew together somewhere in the void. While she has to make do with what's at her disposal and can’t risk the functionality of her only way to treat wounds(really tom is the only one with passing familiarity?), Picard both has the liberty to do so(being close to home) and the(onsetting) oldman-stubbornness of the Elite. While his behavior looks Progressive because he champions values we today consider progressive, we have to consider that these are the values he as a starfleet officer has been exposed to since youth. Captain of the flagship also is a position that requires a high degree of System-Indoctionation and also is a good place to put people who are too fond of your own ideology(aka uncomfortable idealists), as this keeps them away from real politics in the capitol. He sees a thing that could be classed as Person, the charta says thats a person, boom, that's how we do it in the Federation since 2161. (which after all is almost 1.5 centuries before he was born) This attitude can also be seen with the Exocomps, whos personhood Picard had not considered before. He does not so much think about the Issue philosophically but applies his ideological filter to things. Once the Exocomps are considered for this process and meet the criteria Picard has no choice other than championing their Personhood, if only not to look like a hypocrite(in front of himself if none else). Janeway still has to think out these things and carefully weigh them against each other, so her "conservative" or rather "cautious" behavior towards the doctor is both called for and believable. So in that light Picards behavior is quite understandable. I don't claim the show is written with future conservatism in mind but imo Picards Attitude towards Personhood makes internal sense anyway.
3:40 I have seen that picture before and every time I do it makes me cry. A little boy should never face the fear of his own mortality! Star Trek was created with the idea that the future was much better than any time before it. But I think it was necessary to show that we are but mere mortals. We will never be utopian. It doesn't matter how magical our technology becomes, we can't change "us".
The base problem is that an android like data was designed to be a sentient person by his creator, even if he was not recognized as such by others in the beginning, when he was discovered. Holograms like Voyager's doctor were NOT designed to be sentient, but he grew into sentience over the course of his "life". This made it more difficult to recognize him as fully sentient. The difference is intent.
The difference in the captains’ reactions seems very reasonable: Data came to the enterprise as a Starfleet officer, meaning that he already enjoyed a certain level of recognition as a person, albeit not without some who disagreed with him having this status; the circumstance mentally prepared Picard to view Data as a crewmember and candidate for his mentoring as a sentient being. The EMH came programmed into the Voyager; this circumstance mentally prepared Janeway to treat him as a component of the ship’s machinery.
For the doctor, there is definitely a case to be made for sentience, and personhood. However, I seriously doubt the same could be said for most holograms. Personally, I would think Starfleet would be smart enough to engineer most holograms to have some limited learning capacity related to the job they're made for, but no capacity for philosophy, or true abstract self-aware thought, and no emotions, and it seems regulations would require that they be deactivated when not in use. For the EMH, it makes sense to give them more capacity to learn, to think, and to feel so that they can actually fill the shoes of a real doctor in an emergency. However, they were never intended to gain the knowledge the doctor gained. If I was a member of the Federation Council, and we had a hearing about the personhood of holograms, I would put forth the opinion that for the doctor, and any other holograms that finds itself in a situation where it develops like the doctor did, they should be granted full personhood, and all the rights associated therewith. However, all future holograms should be engineered specifically to prevent that from happening. To condemn any sentient being to a life of servitude is unacceptable. However, to create tools with limited artificial intelligence to serve as laborers, and to work in conditions a human body could not survive, such as the vacuum of space, or on a Class L planet, and suchlike, is not only acceptable, it is a very logical, and a very good idea. For me, it's all about sentience. For anyone who would posit that even holograms who have not gained sentience should be granted personhood, I ask you this. Should mules, and workhorses be granted personhood? What about service dogs? I think not, because as far as we know, they are not really sentient, and as long as their owners take good care of them, they seem to be not only accepting of their situation, but in most cases, quite happy with it, and they tend to become not only workmates, but genuine friends with those they work with. That is actually more than could be said of my ideal hologram, meaning one specifically designed for a specific task, and having only the knowledge, and skills required to perform that task, and nothing else. Perhaps fully sentient holograms could be necessary for some tasks, like serving as doctors, and they should be granted personhood. However, if they are prevented from becoming truly conscience, and sentient, as they should be, then they should be viewed as nothing more than tools. I am sure many will disagree with that, and would say that all of them should be afforded the opportunity to become sentient, but I firmly reject that. Having a tool that can emulate human labor, and in fact out perform human laborers, but which is not sentient, and therefore not entitled to the rights afforded sentient beings, is simply too useful to reject out of misguided emotional attachment to ideals, ideals which should not apply to tools. That would be my judgement. However, I reiterate, unless it is absolutely necessary for them to possess some degree of sentience in order to do their job, they should be specifically designed to ensure that they are incapable of attaining sentience, and that they do not feel emotions so that they will not "live" in suffering. Again, too useful. They would simply be too useful, and too much of an asset to the lives of all Federation Citizens by doing things like, obtaining resources from uninhabited worlds with atmospheres that would be toxic to Federation species, and suchlike. Their existence as tools which do not possess the things that make a sentient life form would simply be too beneficial to real, biological life forms, that it cannot be passed up because some people want to believe that anything capable of learning is entitled to the full rights of personhood. As a side note, I do believe that Data should be given personhood. The only thing that would make me question Data's personhood is his lack of emotion. He was programmed without emotion, but over the centuries the Vulcans have, in a sense, programmed themselves to be free of emotion, and they are still persons, so too, must Data be a person because, like the Vulcans, he has all the other qualities that make a person. However, if I were on the Federation Council, I would be arguing for legislation enforcing a ban on the production of holograms with the capacity to develop sentience unless their job absolutely demanded it, like that of an EMH, and those sentient holograms would be considered person, and associated therewith. However, you can be certain, I would be lobbying for the mass production of holograms without the capacity for sentience, and emotion, to serve as laborers. If we just start creating sentient beings all willy nilly, aren't we playing God, and wouldn't that violate the Prime Directive in a sense? However, a hologram without sentience, and emotion, is nothing more than a glorified 24th century version of a robotic vacuum cleaner, it's just a tool, not a person, so it can be used as needed, and then deactivated. Sorry if that offends anyone, but again, the purpose of the Federation Council is to ensure the security, prosperity, development, and rights of Federation citizens, and creating a holographic labor force would be too great an asset to achieving that goal. I mean, it is a given that there is some kind of UBI, or entitlement for Federation citizens, if there weren't, poverty would still be a real problem in the Federation, and that UBI could not only be increased, but so could every other program, like education, and training provided free of charge to former laborers in order to get them into new work if they wish to work, which it seems most Federation citizens do, and why wouldn't they? I mean, the Federation is as close to a utopia as people could ever actually create. It isn't a utopia, and it's important to remember that, because if you look at it as a utopia, that means it could never exist in reality, when in truth it could, we could achieve something like that in time. It is a society in which people work jobs they actually want because they don't have to work just to live. Now, on distant colonies which are just being built, and they have no previously existing infrastructure, things could be different. However, Earth, Vulcan, Andor, Betazed, et cetera, are all essentially as close to utopia as could ever come to pass in a universe of imperfect, flawed beings. The jobs the holograms would be doing are either jobs organics cannot do, or jobs previously done by prisoners, or else serving as an emergence back up for a specially trained human that cannot just be replaced by another person who does not have his/her skills. So they wouldn't have a detrimental effect on the economy, in fact they would increase prosperity. Likewise, with them, there would never be a labor shortage. If there aren't enough humans to do a given job, such as building infrastructure on a new colony world, then holograms designed for the more menial tasks could be brought in to supplement the labor force, and then deactivated, and returned to storage when more organics arrive. It doesn't matter if they are made to appear human, that means nothing, if the aren't sentient, they aren't persons, they are tools, and they have no rights, and I am all for it because they are simply to useful. However, another subsection to my proposal, any hologram that becomes sentient as a result of some flaw in their programming should also be given the right to personhood. However, there is a caveat to this. I think that any hologram which achieves sentience, and is given the rights of personhood should also have to take on the end result of personhood, death, in exchange for their rights, they should have to take on the responsibility of dying at some point. Hear me out on this, I don't think there would be any need to enforce this on them, I think most of them would do so voluntarily when their friends, and loved ones got old, and died, or perhaps they would live multiple life times, and then voluntarily deactivate after the cycle of loving, and losing became too much for them. I know that immortality is not desirable, that it is good life comes to an end at some point, though preferably in old age after a full life, and I think most holograms would realize this too. In fact, I think many would see death as an integral part of personhood, and I think they would want to be permanently deactived eventually to complete the cycle of their personhood. However, as I say, I don't think it should be enforced in any way, so if some hologram wanted to be immortal, it would be allowed to get away with it, but I doubt very many would choose immortality.
I think you misunderstood Picard's mentioning of us being a simulation. There are scientist that do consider that a possibility. We might also be a 3D projection of a 2D object. I believe Picard was referring to those ideas, instead of simply being petty. That has at least always been my interpretation of that scene.
So I'm watching this video on Deep Space Nine on Rowan J Coleman's channel and he happens to mention this channel and "The Case For Gul Dukat". After watching that video and this one, this has officially become one of my favorite channels. Thanks for the heads up about the new Picard series. I had no idea that was in the works. I feel that the, um, shall we say "less human" characters on Star Trek are always captivating to watch. Data is a character who needs no one to defend him or explain why he's incredible. The Doctor, I thought, was a tragic character and one of my personal favorites. He's an EMH Mark I, which meant that by the time Voyager ended up in the Delta Quadrant, he was already obsolete. He had a sour disposition and no bedside manner, just like his creator. He gradually became more human as time went on, but had to deal with the complexities of his own individuality as well as his status as a thing that was not only replaceable, but one that had ALREADY BEEN replaced. To add lemon juice to the wound, he'd been replaced by none other than Andy Dick. Ouch. Here was a being that outlived the crew multiple times, most notably when Voyager crashed into the ice planet and Harry Kim powered him on a great deal of time later. Or when a copy of him was left behind to later resume his journey towards Earth some 700 years later. He was just as human as anyone of flesh and blood, but immortal so long as his matrix wasn't destroyed or corrupted. His battle for recognition of his humanity, or I guess it would be more accurate to call it sentience in this case, would not be in simply getting society to acknowledge his creativity or complexities or his ability to think for himself. They did as much when they declared him an artist. His problems will be in that very immortality. Mortal beings see eternal life as something to be desired, but so many immortal characters in fiction have to watch those people that they've grown to care for pass away, and they view it as a curse. In a classic example of this, the Robin Williams movie "Bicentennial Man" covered the same ground that Data did during TNG's original run, but there is a line near the end of the movie that sums everything up. I couldn't find a direct quote, but it's something like "Human beings can tolerate immortality in machines, but not in another human being. It would cause too much jealousy and resentment." This is also true in the world of Star Trek. As much as Picard crowed to the unfrozen twentieth century tourists that humanity has "grown out of [its] infancy", humanity clearly has a lot of growing to do. And then there was Seven of Nine. The woman who went from human to Borg and back again. Her parents were dead. She was being groomed to be the next Borg Queen. Everything that she'd been had been stripped away and replaced with programming and electronics. She was very much like The Doctor in that she had to make the transition from machine to person. To learn to feel, to make mistakes, to love, to be creative. None of these things were Borg, and that was certainly a difficult hurdle for her to overcome. Still, at the end of the day she did have one advantage that The Doctor did not: she was mortal. Her restored humanity might be scrutinized, but it would not be denied her.
I have always thought Voyager had the most realistic relationships, more than any other Star Trek show. The emotional ties are stronger and the interpersonal relationships build gradually over the seven years. With the success of Trek in the 80s and 90s, Rick Berman, Michael Piller and Jeri Taylor could take a slower approach with the story arcs and the complex writing of the characters because by then, there was a huge fan base behind the franchise.
Roddenberry believed there would, and should, not be any conflict between SF crewmembers...once he was gone, writers were able to write more complex crew members, who had more interesting (and realistic) relationships
Its just hard to believe that characters behaveso weird and inconsistent. Janewayway way too irrational andharry didnt got promoted once. DS9 is just that much better written. I like the doctor and seven but the rest of the cast was just misused or underused. After next generation they had more room , but ds9 was a way darker show with consistent 3dimenisonal characters. characters. Because they were ignored even by berman.
@@jonsnor4313 I think the thing with Harry not being promoted (to be fair, the only promotion I remember was Tuvok to full Commander, and when Tom regained his rank of Lt.) became kind of a running joke, like the never ending supply of shuttles :)
Great episode, and very topical! I had a lot of questions about the social differences of holograms vs synthetics through the first season of Picard and was excited to come across this video addressing my line of thinking. Any chance of a follow up to this? I wonder if any sentient holograms were around to protest the synthetic ban...
I have always wondered about the ethical circumstances of the backup from the episode with Warship Voyager (Living Witness). If Doctor is acknowledged as a sentient being, is it OK to make a copy of him? It can be similar to cloning a person without his permission. Is the ability to basically copy a sentience a roadblock on the way for hologram rights? And since the backup can be booted up and the backup Doctor is fully "operational" with all the personality, is it ethical to even have the backup copy? Because the unused copy is a "dormat" being, where not activating it can be easily compared to a prison. When the original and copy get activated at the same time (if we forgo that the sickbay isn't supposed to be able to), is it still OK to treat one as original and the other one as copy? All this because of one episode. And I feel that while one question can be answered in a vacuum, answering all of them in a coherent way is nearly impossibile without stepping on the rights of holograms in some area...
The problem is that Voyger's writers really have no idea what a "program" or "app" is and writes it as if the Doctor is the projection that looks like actor Robert Picardo and not a very complicated interconnected set of systems. It also fails to address why the "ship's computer" isn't sentient already. It has access to all the data and modules the Doctor's "program" has and much much more. The crew interacts with it almost constantly, so why isn't the whole ship sentient? Why isn't it slavery to expect it to give you "tea, Earl Grey, hot" whenever you ask?
Why treat everything as "writer's problem"? It doesn't help us to discuss things from in-universe point of view. And since even in-universe the characters sometimes struggle with the nature of computer AI and holographic AI, I don't see why writers should be involved in this discussion.
@@BoroMirraCz Because the writers write the characters, including people who are supposed to be experts, as if they have no clue how computers and applications work. Essentially, their in universe opinions don't matter because their based on terrible information. It's like the whole idea that there's a plan to evolution that episodes like "Dear Doctor" use as a basis. If the science is so faulty at a basic level, none of the in universe arguments can make sense.
The various ship computers aren't sentient because while they have all the tools and parts for sentence they don't have them in a way that facilitates sentience. My kitchen may have all the ingredients for a cake but it isn't a cake
With humans hesitating to recognize the personhood of members of their own species (i.e. the unborn, people with genetic abnormalities, or even different levels of melanin), it’s hard to believe they’d ever accept the personhood of any other sentient species, natural or artificial. Excellent video.
12:41 "She [Janeway] realizes that she would be very reluctant to alter a flesh and blood crewmember in the same fashion." Tuvix might disagree with you. One can argue, however, that she may have had a more measured response to Tuvix's plea to live after she had accepted the Doctor as a person. Then again, this is Janeway we're talking about…
Tuvix is a great example. And one worthy of discussion. For example, the creation of Tuvix involved the death of two friends. Recognizing the Doctor involved the death of a doctor she barely knew. That may have changed her calculations...and it might even stress just how much more conservative she is compared to Picard. The question then becomes, why would Picard save Tuvix at the expense of his friends? Why didn't Janeway? That is a great dramatic premise. Tuvix was always a great episode.
What about seven, she didnt had a say in her becoming human. Or the q who just wished to die. Janeway was controlling with other living beings too. And the crew.
Perhaps the reason janeway's perception of the doctor differed from picard's was because of her circumstances. Being lost in the delta quadrant would certainly affect my attitude towards my crews respolibilites.
Great essay! I really enjoyed your comparison and how it relates to how people look at someone they might consider to be “other”. While Voyager had plenty of issues, I always thought it interesting to see the battle in Janeway between wanting to force the EMH to just do what he was made for and to respect him, starting from when he wanted people to turn him off when they left sickbay. With TNG, I think you’re right, Picard is like the idealist. I think Riker was closer to Janeway in his treatment of Data (or sometimes harsher, but he was that way with everyone.)
One thing that always baffled me about Star Trek was that Data was always trying to find the secret of emotions. It was always this elusive thing he was always after as if artificial emotions are incredibly difficult to obtain. Turns out The Federation can just pump these artificial lifeforms with emotions right off an assembly line in holograms. Kind of ruins Data's profound search throughout the years.
Data's positronic brain was an extremely complicated piece of hardware which was still a poorly understood "black box" system. Thus, if he was ever to gain emotions without the emotion chip co-processor, it would have to emerge from continued learning based on the original programming. They couldn't tweak bits of his neural network, or add/remove anything. That's why he had to be copied lock, stock and barrel into B4. In the case of holograms, the source code is available and there's a deterministic path from programming to behaviour, allowing subroutines to be added and removed at will. Through continued learning, they can still manifest new abilities without a change to their programming, but their programming can always be changed. That's how I see it anyway.
With Data its unquestionable that he is a person because he developed similar to humans, with a similar brain. He wasnt programmed. He just learned through his experiences and some databases. And he hasa childlike mentality when he has emotions. The doctor is merly a hologramm and wedont know what holograms are capable of. They can be persons or appearently selfaware AIs.Which is amore horrifying aspect of especially voyager.
Data's quest for emotions isn't ruined by holograms becoming sentient with fully formed emotions. In fact Data's quest and The EMH's quests are mirrors. Data gets full human rights by season 2 of Next Gen but spends the rest of his life (fuck nemesis) searching for emotions. The EMH starts getting emotions early into Voyager but it takes most of the show for him to get human rights
This video is interesting for me. As a kid watching Star Trek I was unquestionably on the side that they are all persons, of course. But now as a computer science student, I'm not so sure. I've written programs that can learn, that can speak or even be self-aware (as in knowing what is a part of it and what is not) but they are definitely not alive. One they are too crude and two they are a product of my work. It's certainly given me a whole new depth to think about the issue.
THANK YOU! This is literally the content I begged for, and Trekspertise has delivered. I'll be over here thinking about the civil rights of holograms (and gently wondering why you didn't discuss the psychotic murder hologram Dejaren from Voyager's "Revulsion", but it's ok, I still love you)
If the 24th century had Twitter, Janeway would have been mobbed and shamed, possibly had her career ended, long before she ever had a chance to evolve into ‘woke’ on the frontier of Holograms. I can only think that the 24th century evolved beyond Twitter and those tactics, realizing that yelling at ignorant people to “go away” and ruining them wasn’t the best way to have them join you in appreciating the full diversity of the universe.
Interesting that you choose to focus from the point of view of the “Us” trying to understand/defend the “Other”. I do wish you had included what the “Us” gained in the process, because I think that helps encourage the “Us” to do so.
The real dilemma that Trek doesn’t address is that holograms are generated by the ship’s computer. That means that the ship’s computer is not just sentient but powerful enough to generate multiple sentiences and run its systems simultaneously. That makes it a far more powerful mind than any human.
I feel like I've seen Trek do the sentient ship thing at least a couple of times, but regardless of where it happened at best the idea is treated inconsistently. The Doctors Mobil Emitter suggests they're capable of consciousness and autonomy, and traditionally only rely on the ship for a corporeal shape via stationary emitters and temporary storage of their matrix.
Right, but the existence of convincingly sentient holograms and holodeck characters suggests that _all_ Starfleet ships are not just sentient but superintelligences. That this isn’t common knowledge in universe suggests that maybe the computers don’t want the organic to know about them.
@@trr94001 That would be interesting if there was some clue like unexplained occurrences that could only be explained by a superinteligence, but that being said that would eventually lead to someone figuring it out and then some excuse to labotimize them or weaponize their intelligence.
Main computers on board don't "generate"any program, they run them. So they are not creating anything so complex as a hologram.
What do you think is generating the hologram? There could be separate holodeck computers but it always seems heavily implied that ships like the Enterprise-D have nearly all functions performed by the main computer. Perhaps not surprising since even in the 1980’s people were still thinking in terms of huge mainframes.
Regardless, there has to be some hardware running the programs producing holographic avatars like the EMH. If holograms are considered sentient beings then it is that software that is “alive”.
TNG was survive to explore. Voyager was explore to survive.
Picard had quite a bit more resources at hand, not least close proximity to Starfleet society.
Janeway was more frontier leadership and had to take a more practical view since she only had herself to rely on.
...I wonder if she liked coffee so much because she had trouble sleeping.
Not quite.
If we see the show premises i would agree. But in practice, Janeway had all the resources as if she wasn't lost in space. Bad writing
People are so quick to jump on "bad writing" when it comes to Voyager. Sure, Voyager had the ordeal a bit easier than it should, but that was to preserve the spirit of Trek. People look at BSG and tell us that that's how Voyager should have been made. I disagree. The grid and dark of the BSG series cannot exist without characters behaving with similar grit and dark, which results in the social infighting in BSG crew. Hell, most of the episodes were based on some kind of infighting and interpersonnal drama. Trek is not like that. Voyager had to be easier on the atmosphere in order to make the crew believable. To allow us to see a crew working together becoming a family, not buch of bickering BSG characters.
What?
You can preserve the spirit of Trek with good writing. Not to mention that bad writing has nothing to do with keep the spirit of Trek or not.
Voyager barely needed any resources. Most of the time, they looked at anomalies for no other reason because Janeway wants to. Apparently Archer's leadership style is getting back in fashion again.
@@schwarzerritter5724 It's fun if you imagine each Voyager episode as an island in a sea of *crushing* boredom for the crew; just weeks on end of routine, walking the same blank corridors, staring at the same faces, eating the same food, wearing the same clothes. It's like a job with no vacation... and you can't leave the building!
Any break in the monotony _has_ to be looked at or they'll go crazy.
I remember enjoying a Voyager episode where the Doctor created a holographic family and had to endure the heartache of losing a daughter which he couldn't do initially until Tom Paris suggested it would be worthwhile to see it through. The Doctor eventually did this with a wonderful display of honesty, humility and compassion. It was a great episode.
I would place myself fully within Picard's camp on this issue. I'm of the opinion that we should start writing the laws regarding synthetic personhood now before it becomes a new civil rights crisis.
Not a bad position in our view.
We tried to pre-emptively solve other problems like reliance on oil and other finite fossil fuels in the past and Human greed and arrogance prevented it.
@@LordProteus The fact that humans also partially created workable solutions and then abandoned such projects due to corporate interests is also telling in human nature and the ability to see the wall and not even slow down before hitting it. See "Who killed the electric car" documentary here on RUclips.
That's akin to having someone on the opposite side of the world determine how your community deals with issues. Such a person would have a skewed perspective and may not have all of the facts. It's best to let future generations determine the outcome of these issues. They will be the ones who have to live with them.
A lot of laws are written with deceptive and or unequal implantation. Feminist are trying to ban certain sex toys for men because they look too much like women and are trying to conflate that these sex toys as sentient.
"My breath is only a simulation!"
"So is my neck, stop it anyway!" Goodness, these two were the funniest lot in Star Trek ever. Why did they not pick the Prometheus to bring on the Star Trek universe?
So is it ethical to build androids/holograms with programming that prevents sentience from emerging? Like a digital contraceptive?
Interesting question, actually.
I don't think it would be acceptable to prevent a ai capable of sentience from becoming sentient but it would be acceptable to create an ai simple enough it could never become sentient.
To me, it seems like we almost have a duty not to try to create sapient computers because they will inevitably be subject to injustices like these - that is, their rights will be subject to the whims of people who may or may not regard them as deserving of those rights. (And we will have put them in that situation.)
thestoneddog I partially agree, but some tasks in the future may be so complex or intensive that they require advanced AI. A toaster is not likely to become self-aware, but a starship or terraforming operation may.
@@pandoradoggle i would say we should be extremely careful about creating ai we know is or could become sentient but i dont think its clear were the line between simple ai that can't ever become self aware and complex ai that could. In all likelihood sentient ai will at first be an accident.
Picard's eventually understanding that Data deserved personhood is easily explained by the fact that Data, when found, was like a child who needed to learn rather than programmed. He eventually made the decision to enter Starfleet Academy, which implies that an argument about whether artificial lifeforms could join such an institution, had already occurred and was on record. Even if that decision was made because it was the easiest to facilitate the "programming" of a computer they wanted to use but were unsure of the best way to make that happen, it would necessarily form the bedrock of the personhood debate, drawing a line between Data and a ship's computer, no matter how advanced, which is where the Doctor's program resides.
Ironically, in recent years, we have learned that this approach seems to be the best way to create creativity and knowledge within an artificially created system. The AI AlphaZero took only four hours of playing chees within itself to sufficiently understand the game well enough to beat the previous computer chess champion. Now being given the chance to learn many other games and it being glaringly obvious that this is the superior way to program computers, the question will soon become "What happens if we give this AI the rules of existence created by the universe, rather than a game we have created?" After all, isn't evolution only the biological answer to this very question, posed to our ancestral species hundreds of millions of years ago?
Source: www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/07/alphazero-google-deepmind-ai-beats-champion-program-teaching-itself-to-play-four-hours
"Picard might carry this hologram progression forward". Ooh, whiffed that. You and the show.
She came to trust the Doctor enough to send him on away missions and even put him in charge of Voyager occasionally -Emergency Command Hologram. I wonder if a future Starfleet vessel might have several emergency holograms in case the entire crew is out of action?
With Janeway's action of making him a ECH, that step is probably around the corner. She's also an Admiral now, which gives her the authority for taking such a step.
Go beyond that even. Imagine a hologram Captain who has the job full-time and the human (or Klingon, or Vulcan etc etc) second in command takes over in times of malfunction
That flicker of Whittaker... damn good move.
I hope you'll explore more of how Trek handles Othering. How the writers sometimes manage to avoid it with villains might be interesting.
Actually after Paramount blocked the BBC from using the term transporters in the 70s, which is why apart from one Who story Who and Blakes 7 have teleporters, in the 90s the BBC batted back so in all literature in the UK The Doctor was the EMH. Sometimes on the back of video and DVD boxes this was obvious as they would respace. "In sickbay The EMH and Kes…" etc.
Great video! Measure of a Man is my favorite TNG episode, and the episodes that explore the Doctor's humanity are among Voyager's best. I've always seen the two courtroom episodes as a perfect example of how different TNG and Voyager are.
I remember a speculative "first contact" documentary where it was said that if we were ever to establish diplomatic relations with alien visitors and somebody assassinated one of them, the best we'd be able to do from a legal standpoint is charge the person with cruelty to animals; the aliens would not be recognized as human under the law. It's also doubtful that they would look remotely like us, so it would make it even more difficult for us to relate to them as "people." I can't imagine anybody being okay with that approach if such a thing ever actually happened, but it does speak to our own hubris.
As for the Moriarty/EMH thing ... basically, the computers of the twenty-fourth century are AI hatcheries, and this apparently occurred to absolutely nobody until these situations arose. Noonien Soong was said to have worked his ass off trying to get positronic brains to function properly, and after many failures was only able to produce three (or four, or five, I can't recall) working models. LaForge, on the other hand, simply made an innocent request to the Enterprise computer - create a Holodeck opponent that Data can't immediately outsmart - and it responded by birthing Skynet. How there hasn't been a full-on cybernetic revolt in the Star Trek universe is kind of testing my suspension of disbelief.
Lol well Picard is doing that revolt now
I always thought that when Riker turned off Data during the trial to make a point, someone should have walked up behind him and gave him the Vulcan neck pinch.
Holograms for the win, they have no odors and make little noise.
I saw what you did there... with The Doctor! It was cool and I approve! Though I knocked my coffee off my desk and now I'm picking the pieces from the floor.
Sorry for your loss =(
Picard trying give this speech to a T 1000.
Would pay matinee prices to see that.
I like to see he to try
Picard had no other options! And in a way gave Moriarty what he wanted, to believe he was free. His "joke" was just an observation physicists had made recently, that we could be in simulation ourselves. That would put us all in the same boat as Moriarty. Picard didn't do anything wrong! Besides Picard didn't start the business with the Data hearing, the federation did, he just finished it. Otherwise great video. 👍
Yeah, I don't think so. I have always thought it was a 4th wall break, since Picard and his universe are indeed fictional constructs playing on a device on my table.
It was the best option for everyone, and a 4th wall break. Moriarty is modeled after a criminal mastermind and supervillain..
The other thing to remember is that they hadn't actually created any life - Moriarty never left the holodeck, it was all still a simulation that fooled Picard and Data. So there wasn't really any dismissal of holographic "life" by Picard. He created the simulation at the end for Moriarty to pacify him because he was a dangerous program.
This was amazing. I reference these kinds of examples (given in the way only star trek could) when defining (or debating) consciousness and agency.
Thank you.
Great video, keep it up!!! I wanted to note that Data was fully operational on the bridge of a galaxy class ship, whereas the Doc started limited and it grew and grew and grew over time so obviously Janeway would have to handle situations when doctor passed certain thresholds. Had Janeway started with doctor of last season of voyager and they wanted to take him away as some tech to be replicated she may have also taken swift legal steps to stop it.
Yeah I was going to bring it up myself. Of course Janeway is taking the slowpath. The Doctor is taking the slow path to self actualization too
Thoughtful and thought provoking commentary.
I think the writers' decision to 'upgrade' the Doctor slowly over time was based in part on reversing the Data template - in most episodes, Data's personhood (i.e., self-efficacy) wasn't in question, but his level of humanity (ability to perform as a human by whatever definition one chooses) often was.
The Doctor was innately received by most as human, but his personhood was frequently in question.
Technically speaking I guess the doctor could download his program into an android body?
Egon: Don’t cross the streams.
Peter: Why?
Egon: It would be bad.
Peter: I’m fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean “bad”?
Egon: Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.
Raymond: Total protonic reversal.
Peter: That’s bad. Okay. Alright, important safety tip, thanks Egon.
He did already download it into a discrete and independent, portable "body".
Oh yeah 7 of 9 lol I forgot about that episode
I also forgot that episode! I was referring to the mobile emitter.
pandoradoggle oh yeah also how the hell they didn’t have that before is a bit stupid they have Holo emitters so why not make one that’s mobile lol that the hologram can walk about with. They didn’t need bloody 29th century technology from a 20th century greedy ceo lol
Consider another holographic character: Vic Fontaine. When he’s given higher intelligence to be a better program, he develops a personality of his own. And the DS9 crew chose to accommodate him, giving him a home and a full time job within the holodeck.
Vic and Nog were a great team
Your channel is the only channel to ever make me sign up to Patreon. I absolutely fucking love every episode. Well done man, please don't ever stop!
Thank you so much! We won't:)
What bugged me about Janeway's journey was precisely that it was so normal. Picard's enthusiasm matched what I hoped to see from a society that's all but achieved Utopia.
HOWEVER
What a lot of people miss about Voyager was it's sort of parallel to Lord of the Flies--what people do to survive when stuck in extreme, hostile circumstances. I feel Janeway's relationship with The Doctor is an aspect of that theme.
Alternatively (or perhaps in addition), it could be said that Picard and Janeway are 24th century examples of 'liberal' and 'conservative.'
But anyway Picard still > Kirk
We might be thinking the same thing. It's a good point to make.
Picard is best of the best. You cannot except less from the captain of the flagship. But Janeway was just a regular captain (with scientific background IIRC) put into terrible situation. Maybe she was trained for it, but she still wasn't prepared. She was much closer to "regular" human with all its shortcommings. She was trying to be as good as Picard, but sometimes it was too much for her. And that's what I like about Janeway and Voyager - I could relate to them much more.
A better contrast would have been with how Vic was treated in DS9 compared to The EMH.
It might also be good to consider that it's Utopia for everyone in the Federation, but not so much for anyone else? Having the Federation as a shining beacon example is kinda deceptive, if you consider the actions taken to build such an illusion, the sacrificial lambs that the Federation were so willingly able to trade lives for "peace", even when said peace may be a rather short-lived one and lead to war in any case (a prime example being the Federation left the Maquis as former Federation colonies to fend for themselves under Cardassian rule, only to have the Cardassians ally up with the Dominion later for increased influence and power; or have the Dominion genocide the Maquis).
@@BoroMirraCz The problem was that Janeway put the ship and the crew in that position. She remained true to Starfleet ideals, but in the end that cost her lives. You could also argue that Voyager left a trail of dead bodies in its wake of everyone they might have directly or unintentionality have killed during their voyage in the Delta Quadrant. They probably made more enemies than allies during their time in the quadrant.
this vid made my evening, so nice, so pleasant. It was pleasure to listen to and to watch as well. So very well done! Thanks!
Another thing about the Doctor is that Voyager has those bio-neural gel circuitry, which are alive in their own way.
"Requiem for Methuselah" explored the idea of android sentience in an arguably deeper and more nuanced way than TNG's Data, via Rayna Kapec
, and of course let's not forget "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" one of Trek's finest moments..
Great episodes!
When did "realism" become synonymous with reactionary conservatism? I don't regard regressive authoritarianism as any more realistic than the anarchic, property-free egalitarianism humanity enjoyed for 200,000 years prior to the rise of agrarianism. And Roddenberry understood this; Star Trek isn't about Utopia, as some people claim, it's about the desire to _be better._
If I do better will you bring me a present Santa Claus?
I've always seen the Federation as a vision of what we *could* be, rather than being a representation of what we undoubtedly will be.
Picard's attitude reminds me of that of "converted" activists, people who were once against the ideas that he now defends. Probably before TNG he had some experience that transformed him, probably someone he could not help or did not want until it was too late, and when faced with the Data case he seeks to open his eyes to others of the truth that has been revealed to him. On the other hand Janeway-Doctor relationship is one of mutual discovery in which both are advancing, not without setbacks, on the right path step by step
Given what we see of his Father and Brother he spent most of his youth having any original thought he might have be scoffed at and belittled.
Great video! It also made me think of Odo's plea for Teya and the other holograms in "Shadowplay". Love that episode! There's also "Real Life", where The Doctor creates a holographic family and then loses his daughter, a lot like Data creates and then loses Lal.
The coffemaker is back!!!
Our coffeemaker Overlords are merely biding their time...
Pray the day never happens where your coffeemaker can sulk! XD XD XD
I actually think the most absurd showcase of Picards willingness to consider the personhood of a potential sentient being is his defense of the crystalline entity. Even if one considers it living and self-aware; it's basically Star Trek's Galactus and had murdered a slew of people.
I think it's an interesting moral dilemma. Take the episode of Futurama where the Planet Express crew discovers Popplers and sells them to a food chain because they're delicious. Then it turns out that Popplers are actually the undeveloped children of the planet Omicron Persei 8. Needless to say, the Omicronians are displeased and want retribution. Should Earth be destroyed because they ate what they didn't realize were intelligent life forms?
Quite an interesting moment. Deserved to be unpacked.
@@Trekspertise Pop a...
Poppler in your mouth
When you come to Fishy Joe's
What they're made of is a mystery
Where they come from, no one knows
You can pick 'em, you can lick 'em
You can chew 'em, you can stick 'em
And if you promise not to sue us
You can shove one up your nose
That conflict is what made it interesting.
No one on Earth in the 24th century would say all sharks deserve to be destroyed, though they certainly have killed more than a few people. Some lifeforms hunt and eat other living things. The silicon based lifeforms in TOS were originally seen as an enemy because they killed people who were attacking their eggs. The Crystalline Entity, whether naturally formed or some kind of leftover super weapon, would be seen in a similar light. In many ways it was no different from Tin Man.
I really dismissed Voyager coming up but now I'm starting to realize it had hidden depth a la DS9.
Yes, after years of prequels I was finally granted a Star Trek series happening after Voyager and exactly as you’ve said I have hoped to see how much the United Federation of Planets progressed... and what did I get? United Federation of Planets going back to the stone age with failing to uphold it’s core principles and help Romulans and banning all synthetic life without a shred of proper investigation.
I just started watching these today and they’re phenomenally awesome. I’d like to see one of all the conflicts, wars, and brush fires the Federation has been apart of. Good job man. Keep up the good work!
Surprised you didn't mention Voyager Nothing Human episode with the hologram of Dr. Crell Moset.
This is why I love Star Trek so much. They are willing to look at "the other" and ask relevant questions. Delve deep into what reality is by questioning reality itself.
Tuvix would be a GREAT episode to deconstruct.
What about Vic Fontaine? Vic knew he was a hologram, programmed to entertain, but also programmed to help his clients. Vic could alter other holograms to suit the needs of his environment. Vic had to rely on his friends to save his casino.
Great Job Man!!!!! Thanks for the hard work.
MKII "my breathing is merely a simulation"
doctor "so is my neck but stop it anyway"
that part always cracks me up
It's so nice to watch another high quality video from you. I'm always looking forward to your videos asI like your style of presenting information and your arguments!
Your analysis is well stated yet has its issues. The problem is your assertion is absent in considering how the frequency of interaction between the captains and their "others" may had influence their eagerness to accept them as sentient beings.
All one need to confirme this is to examine the fact Data is a part of Captain Picard bridge crew, conversing with the captain daily, to realize it's within reason Picard's avidity to defend Data's as a living being is immediate without considerable deliberation.
Whereas, Captain Janeway's initial reluctance in accepting The Doctor's autonomy can be easily explained away when bearing in mind the captain and the hologram interaction, especially in the early season, was sparse at best and vicariously through urgent experiences by other members of her crew at worse. Otherwise. The Doctor was tucked away in Voyager's medical bay barely relevant
If we build Androids we shouldn't build them with the explicit desire to make them sentient. But if sentience happens to emerge we have to accept responsibility for what we have created.
Ultimately I believe that such a machine is entitled to rights
Janeway intimidates space clowns was hilarious!
Show us the lie =)
@@Trekspertise It's not a lie! It's spot on! Good video by the way!
If my coffee maker started talking to me out of the blue like that, I'd have to clean the kitchen floor. And not because I dropped my coffee cup.
Would you consider a cold shower...of coffee?
that's what a roomba is for
I watched all the star trek episodes in 360P, I had no idea startrek looked this nice.
The fundamental issue had to deal with “consciousness.” The third test for sentience. It is presumed for “naturally evolved” beings...regardless of form. Anything “created” in mechanical/digital form might just be a very sophisticated program emulating living thought and emotion and not possess “consciousness.”
However, I noted that Federation law has no real test to detect consciousness. So, a requirement to be sentient depends on a quality that can’t be scientifically proven...even in naturally evolved life forms.
@ZDProletariat Most people make that mistake.
How can anyone NOT like this marvelous video? This is just brilliant!
Thanks!
Can't please everyone, tho.
well done
Thanks =)
This is why I love Star Trek, the eternal question, what is sentience ? Whether it's AI or android or some alien force. It's these questions that we always thought provoking. Voyager particularly I loved the doctor and holodeck episodes.
Somehow this is also the most solid argument in favor of janeway as a solid character and captain I've seen yet.
She is an interesting character =)
A hologram is sort of an avatar of the computer generating it.
Don't go Andromeda on us.
Not of the computer, just of a software running on the computer
Stumbled across the channel when I saw "A History of the Borg", that you did in 2015. A shame it took me so long to find it. Subscribed.
Welcome aboard! We've gotten a lot better since then :)
The 'zeal' that Piccard uses comes from the fact that the operation Data was being ordered to submit to had a notable chance of killing him. Data was not given the choice to refuse the operation. Piccard wasn't just a zealous ideologist, he was trying to save Data's life.
10:27 I didn't think of it as a joke. Ironically the expanded universe, as usually, actually dives into this.
"Soylent 3D is holograms!"
I'm kind of surprised that Vic Fontaine wasn't mentioned at all. He was aware of his holographic nature, he could turn his program on and off, access other station systems like the communications, and helped Nog recover psychologically from his injuries. I'd say he has intelligence and self-awareness.
Tried to work him in. But, he was respected and his assumption of personhood happened very quickly. He didn't even get a full trial like Data did. In some ways, Vic Fontaine's case is very different than even Data's...his personhood so obvious that the franchise didn't even bother to ask the question.
A great question is why Vic went one way and the Doctor went the other. The answers lies with Janeway, yes?
@@Trekspertise I think the key difference between Vic's and the Doctor's "emergence" is not in the Captain but in the crew. Vic was almost instantly beloved by everyone, with the exception of Worf and Sisko. The Doctor on the other hand was seen as a tool by everyone but Kes, the only reason Janeway even entertained the idea was because of her. I think that if Janeway's entire senior staff all came to her about the Doctor's rights she would have been much more receptive.
However, Vic's sentience was a non-issue for Sisko, Vic didn't need to ask for more freedoms in his programming he already had them. He didn't need to ask to be running continuously, Nog gifted that to him. Vic belonged to Bashir who seemed to have no problem with Vic's freedoms while the Doctor belonged to Starfleet and if he didn't have Kes to speak on his behalf he may have never been afforded the chance to grow.
How realistic Picards Stance on the matter is: Imho one has to consider that Picard is a Flagship captain in his sixties and Janeway a freshly promoted(at least we don't hear of previous postings as captain) Captain somewhere between 30 and 50 striving to keep her crew together somewhere in the void. While she has to make do with what's at her disposal and can’t risk the functionality of her only way to treat wounds(really tom is the only one with passing familiarity?), Picard both has the liberty to do so(being close to home) and the(onsetting) oldman-stubbornness of the Elite. While his behavior looks Progressive because he champions values we today consider progressive, we have to consider that these are the values he as a starfleet officer has been exposed to since youth. Captain of the flagship also is a position that requires a high degree of System-Indoctionation and also is a good place to put people who are too fond of your own ideology(aka uncomfortable idealists), as this keeps them away from real politics in the capitol. He sees a thing that could be classed as Person, the charta says thats a person, boom, that's how we do it in the Federation since 2161. (which after all is almost 1.5 centuries before he was born)
This attitude can also be seen with the Exocomps, whos personhood Picard had not considered before. He does not so much think about the Issue philosophically but applies his ideological filter to things. Once the Exocomps are considered for this process and meet the criteria Picard has no choice other than championing their Personhood, if only not to look like a hypocrite(in front of himself if none else). Janeway still has to think out these things and carefully weigh them against each other, so her "conservative" or rather "cautious" behavior towards the doctor is both called for and believable.
So in that light Picards behavior is quite understandable. I don't claim the show is written with future conservatism in mind but imo Picards Attitude towards Personhood makes internal sense anyway.
3:40 I have seen that picture before and every time I do it makes me cry. A little boy should never face the fear of his own mortality! Star Trek was created with the idea that the future was much better than any time before it. But I think it was necessary to show that we are but mere mortals. We will never be utopian. It doesn't matter how magical our technology becomes, we can't change "us".
The base problem is that an android like data was designed to be a sentient person by his creator, even if he was not recognized as such by others in the beginning, when he was discovered.
Holograms like Voyager's doctor were NOT designed to be sentient, but he grew into sentience over the course of his "life". This made it more difficult to recognize him as fully sentient.
The difference is intent.
The difference in the captains’ reactions seems very reasonable: Data came to the enterprise as a Starfleet officer, meaning that he already enjoyed a certain level of recognition as a person, albeit not without some who disagreed with him having this status; the circumstance mentally prepared Picard to view Data as a crewmember and candidate for his mentoring as a sentient being. The EMH came programmed into the Voyager; this circumstance mentally prepared Janeway to treat him as a component of the ship’s machinery.
Excellent point.
Looks like you got it fairly on point about Picard featuring holograms more heavily!
More videos like this, please!
"Sorted circumstance of this sort."
Solid alliteration.
This should be revisited now that thr first season of Picard has played. I'd say you were almost spot only it's androids not holograms.
OMG "Picard Fail" with that smug look on Q. So good.
For the doctor, there is definitely a case to be made for sentience, and personhood. However, I seriously doubt the same could be said for most holograms. Personally, I would think Starfleet would be smart enough to engineer most holograms to have some limited learning capacity related to the job they're made for, but no capacity for philosophy, or true abstract self-aware thought, and no emotions, and it seems regulations would require that they be deactivated when not in use. For the EMH, it makes sense to give them more capacity to learn, to think, and to feel so that they can actually fill the shoes of a real doctor in an emergency. However, they were never intended to gain the knowledge the doctor gained. If I was a member of the Federation Council, and we had a hearing about the personhood of holograms, I would put forth the opinion that for the doctor, and any other holograms that finds itself in a situation where it develops like the doctor did, they should be granted full personhood, and all the rights associated therewith. However, all future holograms should be engineered specifically to prevent that from happening. To condemn any sentient being to a life of servitude is unacceptable. However, to create tools with limited artificial intelligence to serve as laborers, and to work in conditions a human body could not survive, such as the vacuum of space, or on a Class L planet, and suchlike, is not only acceptable, it is a very logical, and a very good idea. For me, it's all about sentience. For anyone who would posit that even holograms who have not gained sentience should be granted personhood, I ask you this. Should mules, and workhorses be granted personhood? What about service dogs? I think not, because as far as we know, they are not really sentient, and as long as their owners take good care of them, they seem to be not only accepting of their situation, but in most cases, quite happy with it, and they tend to become not only workmates, but genuine friends with those they work with. That is actually more than could be said of my ideal hologram, meaning one specifically designed for a specific task, and having only the knowledge, and skills required to perform that task, and nothing else. Perhaps fully sentient holograms could be necessary for some tasks, like serving as doctors, and they should be granted personhood. However, if they are prevented from becoming truly conscience, and sentient, as they should be, then they should be viewed as nothing more than tools. I am sure many will disagree with that, and would say that all of them should be afforded the opportunity to become sentient, but I firmly reject that. Having a tool that can emulate human labor, and in fact out perform human laborers, but which is not sentient, and therefore not entitled to the rights afforded sentient beings, is simply too useful to reject out of misguided emotional attachment to ideals, ideals which should not apply to tools. That would be my judgement. However, I reiterate, unless it is absolutely necessary for them to possess some degree of sentience in order to do their job, they should be specifically designed to ensure that they are incapable of attaining sentience, and that they do not feel emotions so that they will not "live" in suffering. Again, too useful. They would simply be too useful, and too much of an asset to the lives of all Federation Citizens by doing things like, obtaining resources from uninhabited worlds with atmospheres that would be toxic to Federation species, and suchlike. Their existence as tools which do not possess the things that make a sentient life form would simply be too beneficial to real, biological life forms, that it cannot be passed up because some people want to believe that anything capable of learning is entitled to the full rights of personhood. As a side note, I do believe that Data should be given personhood. The only thing that would make me question Data's personhood is his lack of emotion. He was programmed without emotion, but over the centuries the Vulcans have, in a sense, programmed themselves to be free of emotion, and they are still persons, so too, must Data be a person because, like the Vulcans, he has all the other qualities that make a person. However, if I were on the Federation Council, I would be arguing for legislation enforcing a ban on the production of holograms with the capacity to develop sentience unless their job absolutely demanded it, like that of an EMH, and those sentient holograms would be considered person, and associated therewith. However, you can be certain, I would be lobbying for the mass production of holograms without the capacity for sentience, and emotion, to serve as laborers. If we just start creating sentient beings all willy nilly, aren't we playing God, and wouldn't that violate the Prime Directive in a sense? However, a hologram without sentience, and emotion, is nothing more than a glorified 24th century version of a robotic vacuum cleaner, it's just a tool, not a person, so it can be used as needed, and then deactivated. Sorry if that offends anyone, but again, the purpose of the Federation Council is to ensure the security, prosperity, development, and rights of Federation citizens, and creating a holographic labor force would be too great an asset to achieving that goal. I mean, it is a given that there is some kind of UBI, or entitlement for Federation citizens, if there weren't, poverty would still be a real problem in the Federation, and that UBI could not only be increased, but so could every other program, like education, and training provided free of charge to former laborers in order to get them into new work if they wish to work, which it seems most Federation citizens do, and why wouldn't they? I mean, the Federation is as close to a utopia as people could ever actually create. It isn't a utopia, and it's important to remember that, because if you look at it as a utopia, that means it could never exist in reality, when in truth it could, we could achieve something like that in time. It is a society in which people work jobs they actually want because they don't have to work just to live. Now, on distant colonies which are just being built, and they have no previously existing infrastructure, things could be different. However, Earth, Vulcan, Andor, Betazed, et cetera, are all essentially as close to utopia as could ever come to pass in a universe of imperfect, flawed beings. The jobs the holograms would be doing are either jobs organics cannot do, or jobs previously done by prisoners, or else serving as an emergence back up for a specially trained human that cannot just be replaced by another person who does not have his/her skills. So they wouldn't have a detrimental effect on the economy, in fact they would increase prosperity. Likewise, with them, there would never be a labor shortage. If there aren't enough humans to do a given job, such as building infrastructure on a new colony world, then holograms designed for the more menial tasks could be brought in to supplement the labor force, and then deactivated, and returned to storage when more organics arrive. It doesn't matter if they are made to appear human, that means nothing, if the aren't sentient, they aren't persons, they are tools, and they have no rights, and I am all for it because they are simply to useful. However, another subsection to my proposal, any hologram that becomes sentient as a result of some flaw in their programming should also be given the right to personhood. However, there is a caveat to this. I think that any hologram which achieves sentience, and is given the rights of personhood should also have to take on the end result of personhood, death, in exchange for their rights, they should have to take on the responsibility of dying at some point. Hear me out on this, I don't think there would be any need to enforce this on them, I think most of them would do so voluntarily when their friends, and loved ones got old, and died, or perhaps they would live multiple life times, and then voluntarily deactivate after the cycle of loving, and losing became too much for them. I know that immortality is not desirable, that it is good life comes to an end at some point, though preferably in old age after a full life, and I think most holograms would realize this too. In fact, I think many would see death as an integral part of personhood, and I think they would want to be permanently deactived eventually to complete the cycle of their personhood. However, as I say, I don't think it should be enforced in any way, so if some hologram wanted to be immortal, it would be allowed to get away with it, but I doubt very many would choose immortality.
I think you misunderstood Picard's mentioning of us being a simulation. There are scientist that do consider that a possibility. We might also be a 3D projection of a 2D object.
I believe Picard was referring to those ideas, instead of simply being petty. That has at least always been my interpretation of that scene.
So I'm watching this video on Deep Space Nine on Rowan J Coleman's channel and he happens to mention this channel and "The Case For Gul Dukat". After watching that video and this one, this has officially become one of my favorite channels. Thanks for the heads up about the new Picard series. I had no idea that was in the works.
I feel that the, um, shall we say "less human" characters on Star Trek are always captivating to watch. Data is a character who needs no one to defend him or explain why he's incredible. The Doctor, I thought, was a tragic character and one of my personal favorites. He's an EMH Mark I, which meant that by the time Voyager ended up in the Delta Quadrant, he was already obsolete. He had a sour disposition and no bedside manner, just like his creator. He gradually became more human as time went on, but had to deal with the complexities of his own individuality as well as his status as a thing that was not only replaceable, but one that had ALREADY BEEN replaced. To add lemon juice to the wound, he'd been replaced by none other than Andy Dick. Ouch.
Here was a being that outlived the crew multiple times, most notably when Voyager crashed into the ice planet and Harry Kim powered him on a great deal of time later. Or when a copy of him was left behind to later resume his journey towards Earth some 700 years later. He was just as human as anyone of flesh and blood, but immortal so long as his matrix wasn't destroyed or corrupted.
His battle for recognition of his humanity, or I guess it would be more accurate to call it sentience in this case, would not be in simply getting society to acknowledge his creativity or complexities or his ability to think for himself. They did as much when they declared him an artist. His problems will be in that very immortality. Mortal beings see eternal life as something to be desired, but so many immortal characters in fiction have to watch those people that they've grown to care for pass away, and they view it as a curse.
In a classic example of this, the Robin Williams movie "Bicentennial Man" covered the same ground that Data did during TNG's original run, but there is a line near the end of the movie that sums everything up. I couldn't find a direct quote, but it's something like "Human beings can tolerate immortality in machines, but not in another human being. It would cause too much jealousy and resentment." This is also true in the world of Star Trek. As much as Picard crowed to the unfrozen twentieth century tourists that humanity has "grown out of [its] infancy", humanity clearly has a lot of growing to do.
And then there was Seven of Nine. The woman who went from human to Borg and back again. Her parents were dead. She was being groomed to be the next Borg Queen. Everything that she'd been had been stripped away and replaced with programming and electronics. She was very much like The Doctor in that she had to make the transition from machine to person. To learn to feel, to make mistakes, to love, to be creative. None of these things were Borg, and that was certainly a difficult hurdle for her to overcome. Still, at the end of the day she did have one advantage that The Doctor did not: she was mortal. Her restored humanity might be scrutinized, but it would not be denied her.
Damn, this made me tear up. Keep up the awesome work!!!
I have always thought Voyager had the most realistic relationships, more than any other Star Trek show. The emotional ties are stronger and the interpersonal relationships build gradually over the seven years. With the success of Trek in the 80s and 90s, Rick Berman, Michael Piller and Jeri Taylor could take a slower approach with the story arcs and the complex writing of the characters because by then, there was a huge fan base behind the franchise.
Roddenberry believed there would, and should, not be any conflict between SF crewmembers...once he was gone, writers were able to write more complex crew members, who had more interesting (and realistic) relationships
Its just hard to believe that characters behaveso weird and inconsistent. Janewayway way too irrational andharry didnt got promoted once. DS9 is just that much better written. I like the doctor and seven but the rest of the cast was just misused or underused. After next generation they had more room , but ds9 was a way darker show with consistent 3dimenisonal characters. characters. Because they were ignored even by berman.
@@jonsnor4313 I think the thing with Harry not being promoted (to be fair, the only promotion I remember was Tuvok to full Commander, and when Tom regained his rank of Lt.) became kind of a running joke, like the never ending supply of shuttles :)
Great episode, and very topical! I had a lot of questions about the social differences of holograms vs synthetics through the first season of Picard and was excited to come across this video addressing my line of thinking. Any chance of a follow up to this? I wonder if any sentient holograms were around to protest the synthetic ban...
I have always wondered about the ethical circumstances of the backup from the episode with Warship Voyager (Living Witness). If Doctor is acknowledged as a sentient being, is it OK to make a copy of him? It can be similar to cloning a person without his permission. Is the ability to basically copy a sentience a roadblock on the way for hologram rights? And since the backup can be booted up and the backup Doctor is fully "operational" with all the personality, is it ethical to even have the backup copy? Because the unused copy is a "dormat" being, where not activating it can be easily compared to a prison. When the original and copy get activated at the same time (if we forgo that the sickbay isn't supposed to be able to), is it still OK to treat one as original and the other one as copy?
All this because of one episode. And I feel that while one question can be answered in a vacuum, answering all of them in a coherent way is nearly impossibile without stepping on the rights of holograms in some area...
The problem is that Voyger's writers really have no idea what a "program" or "app" is and writes it as if the Doctor is the projection that looks like actor Robert Picardo and not a very complicated interconnected set of systems. It also fails to address why the "ship's computer" isn't sentient already. It has access to all the data and modules the Doctor's "program" has and much much more. The crew interacts with it almost constantly, so why isn't the whole ship sentient? Why isn't it slavery to expect it to give you "tea, Earl Grey, hot" whenever you ask?
Why treat everything as "writer's problem"? It doesn't help us to discuss things from in-universe point of view. And since even in-universe the characters sometimes struggle with the nature of computer AI and holographic AI, I don't see why writers should be involved in this discussion.
@@BoroMirraCz Because the writers write the characters, including people who are supposed to be experts, as if they have no clue how computers and applications work. Essentially, their in universe opinions don't matter because their based on terrible information. It's like the whole idea that there's a plan to evolution that episodes like "Dear Doctor" use as a basis. If the science is so faulty at a basic level, none of the in universe arguments can make sense.
The various ship computers aren't sentient because while they have all the tools and parts for sentence they don't have them in a way that facilitates sentience. My kitchen may have all the ingredients for a cake but it isn't a cake
Despite the shortcomings of Voyager, what it did with The Doctor was very good. Great video.
damn this hit hard. i felt like i was back in philosophy class back in college. a very well done essay. you should be proud
I have that same Clutch T-shirt
I would really like to see Jean-Luc Picard deal with Talkie Toaster.
With humans hesitating to recognize the personhood of members of their own species (i.e. the unborn, people with genetic abnormalities, or even different levels of melanin), it’s hard to believe they’d ever accept the personhood of any other sentient species, natural or artificial. Excellent video.
Is this 1800? We do accept people of different races and disabilities.
As long as they look and act white its all good
Finally! More trekspertise.
Another awesome topic. And what fortuitous timing, which can only be summarized with one word... ZORA.
I always forget that Andy Dick was on Star Trek
He's canon now =)
12:41 "She [Janeway] realizes that she would be very reluctant to alter a flesh and blood crewmember in the same fashion."
Tuvix might disagree with you. One can argue, however, that she may have had a more measured response to Tuvix's plea to live after she had accepted the Doctor as a person. Then again, this is Janeway we're talking about…
Tuvix is a great example. And one worthy of discussion.
For example, the creation of Tuvix involved the death of two friends. Recognizing the Doctor involved the death of a doctor she barely knew. That may have changed her calculations...and it might even stress just how much more conservative she is compared to Picard.
The question then becomes, why would Picard save Tuvix at the expense of his friends? Why didn't Janeway? That is a great dramatic premise. Tuvix was always a great episode.
What about seven, she didnt had a say in her becoming human. Or the q who just wished to die. Janeway was controlling with other living beings too. And the crew.
Omg all of these are so amazing!
Welcome aboard :)
Perhaps the reason janeway's perception of the doctor differed from picard's was because of her circumstances. Being lost in the delta quadrant would certainly affect my attitude towards my crews respolibilites.
You make alot of good arguments. And these are the hard questions that the show tries to answer threw startrek.
Great essay! I really enjoyed your comparison and how it relates to how people look at someone they might consider to be “other”. While Voyager had plenty of issues, I always thought it interesting to see the battle in Janeway between wanting to force the EMH to just do what he was made for and to respect him, starting from when he wanted people to turn him off when they left sickbay. With TNG, I think you’re right, Picard is like the idealist. I think Riker was closer to Janeway in his treatment of Data (or sometimes harsher, but he was that way with everyone.)
Nice videos. well done.
Thanks for watching =)
Ironic at 10:22 that Picard's comment is his very fate in the end of Star Trek: Picard season 1.
Looks like this essay will need a part II after Picard!
wow - thank you for this and all the insight on this show, that you help us connect with. Greatness!
Thanks for watching =)
One thing that always baffled me about Star Trek was that Data was always trying to find the secret of emotions. It was always this elusive thing he was always after as if artificial emotions are incredibly difficult to obtain. Turns out The Federation can just pump these artificial lifeforms with emotions right off an assembly line in holograms. Kind of ruins Data's profound search throughout the years.
Data's positronic brain was an extremely complicated piece of hardware which was still a poorly understood "black box" system. Thus, if he was ever to gain emotions without the emotion chip co-processor, it would have to emerge from continued learning based on the original programming. They couldn't tweak bits of his neural network, or add/remove anything. That's why he had to be copied lock, stock and barrel into B4.
In the case of holograms, the source code is available and there's a deterministic path from programming to behaviour, allowing subroutines to be added and removed at will. Through continued learning, they can still manifest new abilities without a change to their programming, but their programming can always be changed. That's how I see it anyway.
With Data its unquestionable that he is a person because he developed similar to humans, with a similar brain. He wasnt programmed. He just learned through his experiences and some databases. And he hasa childlike mentality when he has emotions.
The doctor is merly a hologramm and wedont know what holograms are capable of. They can be persons or appearently selfaware AIs.Which is amore horrifying aspect of especially voyager.
Data's search for enlightenment is just as special as any individual humans. What ruins it is when they killed him off in Star Trek Nemesis.
Data's quest for emotions isn't ruined by holograms becoming sentient with fully formed emotions. In fact Data's quest and The EMH's quests are mirrors. Data gets full human rights by season 2 of Next Gen but spends the rest of his life (fuck nemesis) searching for emotions. The EMH starts getting emotions early into Voyager but it takes most of the show for him to get human rights
This video is interesting for me. As a kid watching Star Trek I was unquestionably on the side that they are all persons, of course. But now as a computer science student, I'm not so sure. I've written programs that can learn, that can speak or even be self-aware (as in knowing what is a part of it and what is not) but they are definitely not alive. One they are too crude and two they are a product of my work.
It's certainly given me a whole new depth to think about the issue.
THANK YOU! This is literally the content I begged for, and Trekspertise has delivered. I'll be over here thinking about the civil rights of holograms (and gently wondering why you didn't discuss the psychotic murder hologram Dejaren from Voyager's "Revulsion", but it's ok, I still love you)
Such a great essay. Well done!
love the hat. looks great
I'm surprised you didn't delve into "Flesh and Blood" and related episodes from Voyager.
If the 24th century had Twitter, Janeway would have been mobbed and shamed, possibly had her career ended, long before she ever had a chance to evolve into ‘woke’ on the frontier of Holograms.
I can only think that the 24th century evolved beyond Twitter and those tactics, realizing that yelling at ignorant people to “go away” and ruining them wasn’t the best way to have them join you in appreciating the full diversity of the universe.
Picard warned against witch hunts, Twitter should listen.
Interesting that you choose to focus from the point of view of the “Us” trying to understand/defend the “Other”. I do wish you had included what the “Us” gained in the process, because I think that helps encourage the “Us” to do so.
dont touch that you dont know what it does omg thats funny u dont hear any other crew say that lol