The Prime Directive

[steve_bank]

Star Trek had the Prime Directive. It prohibited tinkering in developing cultures. No exposure to technology. It was the highest law for starships exploring the galaxy/

The prohibition was based on the fact that meddling could just as well be catastrophic in the ling run as being helpful. Cultures were to be left to evolve.

Consider a small culture in relative isolation. They have a high infant mortality rate and teen death rate.

They have a local economy a little above subsistence level, Fishing, small scale farming, and livestock. The adult population size is in balance with resources. The population goes up and down about an averafe,

Along come outside influences. Vaccinations are provided. Prenatal care is provided. Birth rate climbs above the local resources. Starvation occurs. The people become entirely dependent on assistance as population continues to grow.

Was interfering in the local situain's balance even with best of intentions moral?

A real case. A small Caribbean island had a balanced local economy. Fishing, farming, small local industry.

A regional trade agreement brought in cheap frozen chicken and other foods by ship. It ended up destroying the local economy.

 

[bigfield]

A real case. A small Caribbean island had a balanced local economy. Fishing, farming, small local industry.

A regional trade agreement brought in cheap frozen chicken and other foods by ship. It ended up destroying the local economy.

I doubt the regional trade agreement in question was established so that outsiders could help the island. Rather, trade agreements are established to enrich oneself.

 

[fromderinside]

Yeah, now it's a garbage dump litter with empty cans of Spam. Gotta give it to the Samoans though. They do produce wonderful linemen.

Thinking back,The ST show was actually weekly examples of how migrants from across whatever found ways to disrupt societies, mess with green women and weaponize the Mind Meld and make Kiruk look good. What kinds of fallacies can we throw at something like that? America the superior before Tet.

 

[steve_bank]

The question is if the hypothetical in the OP is moral. Anyone capable of discussion?

 

[bigfield]

Was interfering in the local situain's balance even with best of intentions moral?

This is a more specific form of a broader question: Can one's intentions provide a moral justification for one's actions?

Or put another way: Is hubris good?

 

[fast]

Star Trek had the Prime Directive. It prohibited tinkering in developing cultures. No exposure to technology. It was the highest law for starships exploring the galaxy/

The prohibition was based on the fact that meddling could just as well be catastrophic in the ling run as being helpful. Cultures were to be left to evolve.

Consider a small culture in relative isolation. They have a high infant mortality rate and teen death rate.

They have a local economy a little above subsistence level, Fishing, small scale farming, and livestock. The adult population size is in balance with resources. The population goes up and down about an averafe,

Along come outside influences. Vaccinations are provided. Prenatal care is provided. Birth rate climbs above the local resources. Starvation occurs. The people become entirely dependent on assistance as population continues to grow.

Was interfering in the local situain's balance even with best of intentions moral?

A real case. A small Caribbean island had a balanced local economy. Fishing, farming, small local industry.

A regional trade agreement brought in cheap frozen chicken and other foods by ship. It ended up destroying the local economy.

Intentions are important, but consequences are important too.

Good intentions and good short term consequences where bad long term consequences are reasonably expected does seem like caution is highly important when it comes to how far we go with our short term good intentioned actions.

Throwing a wild animal food in passing (to me) is not a bad thing because of the short term benefit. A little good has come its way, and no long term ripple of devastation will result from such innocent one off good intentioned encounters. Feed the hungry critter --and never mind the opinions of others.

Repeated (or habitual forming) acts of intentional good steeped in ignorance of long term effects is not all bad, as the heart was in the right place, but doing short term good over and over knowing that it's enabling and ultimately crippling becomes more and more unacceptable as the consequences manifest--and down right inexcusable knowing a horrible outcome is inevitable.

So, look at intentions. Also, look at the short term consequences. Look at long term consequences. But, don't let long term consequences unjustly inform our short term behavior.

The little girl who has diabetes probably ought not eat ice cream every time her friends do, and when she is old enough to recognize the manipulation of circumstances by adults by refocusing attention, the dad can tell her to hell with everyone and say that his baby girls getting two scoops today. Irresponsible? No, the intentions are good and the short term effect is negligible. What is atrocious is to repeatedly use that logic to make such actions routine. The psychological impact in the moment far outweighs a momentary spike in blood sugar. The retort to setting lessons can be handled intelligently.

The prime directive. First, I feel for those that sense the impending doom from suffering from the benefits of the civilized ones. It's sickening how the smart crowd reasons. Let the colonials suffer their plight their way overall, but shame not to those that help out a little to ease whatever pain or heartache that's happening in the moment.

Give someone food once, twice, hell make it thrice, seems quite, well, nice, but teach them not by then to fend for themselves and create dependency; nay, not quite so good.

 

[steve_bank]

We killed the Iranian democracy movement in n by installing the Shah a despot if there ever was one. The intent was balance Russia and keep the Iranian oil from being nationalized.

The Shah's rule led to the Iranian Revolution and the current regime. We are seeing the Prime directive play out day by day in Korea, Afghanistan, and the Mid East. We see it in the rise of American PC and suppression of speech because it is uncomfortable.

Thanks for the response fast.

 

[braces_for_impact]

The question is if the hypothetical in the OP is moral. Anyone capable of discussion?

Well is your Star Trek example up for discussion or is it just an example and you'd like to discuss a real world example? It seems to me there's a difference. We've plenty of real world examples that seem to show intervention can be a pretty bad idea in many cases. On the other hand, in the Star Trek Universe, in the Federation, poverty has been eliminated, and replicators can make most anything anyone would need to survive. So, you land on the planet, and their economy is unstable. You provide replicators, health care, education. Money isn't required. I suppose one could make a point that you're destroying the local culture, but I fail to see how people are going to suffer because of the economy.

 

[Kharakov]

Thanks for the response fast.

Most of us phrase can proper order for a quick response, right fast?

 

[steve_bank]

The question is if the hypothetical in the OP is moral. Anyone capable of discussion?

Well is your Star Trek example up for discussion or is it just an example and you'd like to discuss a real world example? It seems to me there's a difference. We've plenty of real world examples that seem to show intervention can be a pretty bad idea in many cases. On the other hand, in the Star Trek Universe, in the Federation, poverty has been eliminated, and replicators can make most anything anyone would need to survive. So, you land on the planet, and their economy is unstable. You provide replicators, health care, education. Money isn't required. I suppose one could make a point that you're destroying the local culture, but I fail to see how people are going to suffer because of the economy.

Up for discussion in the con-ext of what is going on around the world today. Are we doing more harm than good in presuming to initiate democracy where there is no cultural foundation for it as one example.

 

[BH]

I think the prime directive was in error on one point. There was an epsidoe of Star Trek THG where for some reason a planet was going to destroy its own surface and kill the civilization on it in doing so. The Enterprise was sent to watch what was going to happen but was not going to try to save anyone. Warf's brother took it upon himself to save some of the people on the planet Picard found out about it. They ended up putting them on another world.

 

[Kharakov]

On another world with an ecosystem they eventually destroyed.

It's a bit like the guy who saved young Trump from falling off a building his dad invested in. At the time it didn't seem like a horrible act, the kid's spoiled, but he's not going to be able to fuck things up too much, is he?

The road to a Trump presidency is paved with the good intentions of kind, lower class workers who save rich kids they think are clueless. Trump knew he was an evil douchebag, and that guy saving him assured him that he and his corrupt ilk would continually get away with their lazy man's efforts to permanently enslave the kind poor so they could live the life of luxury. At least Trump hasn't taken the God pill (yet) like a lot of the soldiers of corruption- but when he does... that's all she wrote.

Any hope of creating a non-corrupt Godlike AI that serves humanity with an Apple in its mouth is gone.

 

[fromderinside]

Any hope of creating a non-corrupt Godlike AI that serves humanity with an Apple in its mouth is gone.

I guess you missed it. Non-corrupt AI is retained with Alphabet now that Guber has been dispatched and by Moto -love those blonde lips - which simply replaced corruption with add ons.

Galaxy and LG? They were diverted by the winter olympics.

Actually, the prime directive was stolen. Remember Ernest and Julio Gallo?

 

[humbleman]

We killed the Iranian democracy movement in n by installing the Shah a despot if there ever was one. The intent was balance Russia and keep the Iranian oil from being nationalized.

The Shah's rule led to the Iranian Revolution and the current regime. We are seeing the Prime directive play out day by day in Korea, Afghanistan, and the Mid East. We see it in the rise of American PC and suppression of speech because it is uncomfortable.

Thanks for the response fast.

When you say "we", is it about "we Americans killed the Iranian democracy movement in... by installing the Shah?

If that is the intention of your sentence, then you are saying that Russians interfering US elections is also "OK" and might be to prevent something else.

If we consider than lots of scientists in the US are of foreign nationality, does the Prime Directive applies as well? Is better for those scientists not to "intervene" in a foreign land and let the inhabitants to evolve their technology by themselves?

Prime Directive sounds like to what biologists do with wild animals, just observing them. Animals can fall from a hill, or catch a disease, or suffer of illness, the biologist will just "observe" nature and won't get involved.

However, Prime Directive is not about animals.

The series Star Trek is about visiting other cultures with inhabitants who have reasoning like us. The Prime Directive is erroneous when taking the position of no help or influence in moments when those cultures need it.

Legends from civilizations of the past relate of the founders of those cultures, lets use the Incas as an example. The legend narrates a man and women who came from heaven and taught them how to hunt, how to make clothes, how to do this and that. The narration doesn't say the condition of the inhabitants before the arrival of the "son of the Sun" who became the first ruler of the Inca empire, but it appears they didn't know how to do those things.

We see from the above the influence of a higher culture over a culture with a lesser level of technology. Same with Spaniards and Englishmen in America, from whom the aborigines eventually learned a new culture.

The use of metals in ancient history was passed from one culture to another. It didn't happen at the same time, however one culture learned from the another.

Your example with the people of an island going to economic chaos because the import of goods destroying their base farming industry, such is a different scenario as are the invasions of Spaniards and Englishmen in America, because business are indeed part of "culture", but is not technology itself.

Star Trek is not about business or invasions to conquer lands, then, sharing technology is not a negative influence.

However, the methods to share new technology to cultures with lesser level of technological advances is what should be monitored, not banned.

 

[Kharakov]

Just don't share or give tech to cultures based on stealing, like conservative culture in the USA. They don't give a fuck about the work put into developing the tech that gives them power, because they didn't do shit to help in its development- they devote their lives to stealing from others (they call it harvesting, or capital gains, and justify it through various bullshit excuses).

That's why we have to kill all of them. They don't give a shit about the majority of the work put in, because they don't do it, and surround themselves with fools who think they do...

 

[Malintent]

The question is if the hypothetical in the OP is moral. Anyone capable of discussion?

Well is your Star Trek example up for discussion or is it just an example and you'd like to discuss a real world example? It seems to me there's a difference. We've plenty of real world examples that seem to show intervention can be a pretty bad idea in many cases. On the other hand, in the Star Trek Universe, in the Federation, poverty has been eliminated, and replicators can make most anything anyone would need to survive. So, you land on the planet, and their economy is unstable. You provide replicators, health care, education. Money isn't required. I suppose one could make a point that you're destroying the local culture, but I fail to see how people are going to suffer because of the economy.

"THE PICARD".... comes to mind.... In a Next Generation episode (by a name I do not recall), a starship guy is seen by a primitive guy as he "beams up". The primitive guy hears him say something about "Captain Picard's orders"... Later, we find that the society has gone full-theocracy, with witch burnings and all... as they began to worship, "The Picard".

in a Voyager episode, the ship gets caught in orbit around a primitive planet, except this planet science-fictionally has accelerated time... a day on the ship was a century on the planet. Voyager's presence (that is the name of the ship) caused frequent quakes on the planet. The ship was visible to the people on the planet (once they reached the point of having telescopes), and a connection between their quakes and the ship was made.... by the end of the episode those people were centuries ahead of the starship crew in terms of technology, and was able to come visit them and help them break orbit... For the people of the planet, it was an honor to meet those that represented so much of their culture... however, when they were still in their "nuclear age", they hurled missiles at Voyager for a while.

There was quite a bit more "cowboy diplomacy" (as the Vulcans call it) in the original Star Trek series. Kirk was more 'ends justify the means" kind of guy. There are a ton of examples of episodes where he violates the prime directive.
In Voyager, with respect to the prime directive, what made things a bit interesting was a bit of a "We're lost in space in a dangerous quadrant with no means to get home... fuck the prime directive, no one around here ever heard of it, I need to eat" type of attitude here and there.

 

[Eldarion Lathria]

There was quite a bit more "cowboy diplomacy" (as the Vulcans call it) in the original Star Trek series. Kirk was more 'ends justify the means" kind of guy. There are a ton of examples of episodes where he violates the prime directive.

This became known as 'kirking' the Prime Directive.

Eldarion Lathria