(no subject)
Jul. 25th, 2007 09:17 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lizzybennetI finished my paper on the aspects of human nature as portrayed by Star Trek. My my professor has posted all our papers on our class discussion board so we can read and comment on each others research.
Here's what he wrote about my paper:
Attached you will find Tina Dalton's paper on Star Trek.
Tina gave special attention to the executive creator of Star Trek (Gene Roddenberry) and his vision of the future, shaped by secular humanism. The paper touches on the origin of moral principles, the idea of rights, and the future of religion in a scientifically-trained future society.
Tina's reflections on Roddenberry's sub-creation has me returning to that question I often ask myself, "what is the future of religion?" As quality education spreads over the world and more people understand science and philosophy, how will religion evolve to meet our needs without offending our sense of logic? Will the future look something like the vision Roddenberry (and many other science fiction writers) had, in which religion is a footnote rather than a meaningful part of most characters' lives?
I've often imagined a science fiction scenario in which an alien race makes contact with humans, and the aliens have absolutely no interest in our science, our politics, or meeting any of our powerful people. No, they are only really interested in our religious beliefs and practices. Let's say there is a "religion gene" and people with it tend to reproduce more and get along with others a bit better. Over the long term, such a gene could eventually dominate a gene pool, perhaps even in a very scientifically advanced species. Anyway, Tina's paper got me thinking about that.
Star Trek and The Future of Humanity
Episode: The Tholian Web, Star Trek the Original Series
Kirk: (to Spock) I suspect you’re becoming more and more human all the time.
Spock: Captain, I see no reason to stand here and be insulted.
Upon pondering the complexities of human nature, perhaps Star Trek would not be the first philosophical influence to come to mind. However, with closer examination, we can easily discover that Star Trek has been greatly concerned with the human condition from its earliest conception. Indeed, in a universe “of advanced technology, adventure on a galactic scale, and unbridled optimism for humanity’s ethical progress” how could we not expect to learn a great deal about human character? Time and again, from The Original Series to The Next Generation to Voyager to Deep Space Nine to Enterprise, we are introduced to characters that are struggling to understand and accept humanity. It is through these characters’ journeys that we can gain greater insight about how human nature is viewed by the creators of Star Trek.
Star Trek was developed by Gene Rodenberry during the heyday of the 1960’s. Racial segregation was a hot topic in the US, as was the threat of Soviet nuclear power. The Vietnam War raged on alongside the Race to Space. It was amidst all these influences that Star Trek first appeared. Roddenberry’s vision was of a futuristic humanity where no prejudice, poverty or war existed. The crew of the Enterprise, the flagship on Star Trek, was multi-racial to show that in the future, race didn’t matter. Russians work alongside Japanese and African-American officers on the bridge of the ship. Humans have evolved into a more enlightened, more tolerant species. However, another critical aspect to the Star Trekian future is the importance of science.
Roddenberry’s own philosophical principles have played a crucial role in the development of Star Trek’s values. Rodenberry was a follower of secular humanism, a “man-centered philosophy which views religion as regressive superstition and man’s increasing mastery over nature (by means of science and technology) as the surest way to progress.” In the future as portrayed in the Star Trek series, technology works for the betterment of mankind. Rarely are viewers faced with the question of whether technology has the potential to become hostile towards humans. Instead, technology and science have enabled mankind to evolve into a just and unified society. Religion, war, poverty and the need for money have all been eliminated from the earth. Humankind has become unified and peaceful, all thanks to the glorious discoveries of science.
Star Trek, The Original Series (also known as TOS) was cancelled after only three seasons due to low ratings. The fan base had already been built and Rodenberry had his first avid followers. As the Star Trek phenomenon has continued to grow with movies and spin-off series, the fan base has also continued to grow. Star Trek fans are often stereotyped to be fanatical, costume-wearing nerds but this is far from the truth. In fact, I myself am an avid Star Trek fan and I’m more as what can be described as a “soccer mom”. One wouldn’t look at me and think “Star Trek”, yet I love the show, the movies and the books. This is just an example to show that people from all walks of life find a certain appeal in Star Trek.
However, for some, Star Trek has become a type of religion. As Mike Hertenstein argues in his book The Double Vision of Star Trek, “religion has been replaced by pop culture.” Consider the Star Trek convention: fans travel long distances to attend (pilgrimage), spend large amounts of money on collectables (icons, relics) and wait in very long lines for a chance to speak with their favorite actors (saints). For those who follow Roddenberry’s tenets of secular humanism, Star Trek and the ideals it teaches can indeed become a way of life. Gene Roddenberry also took his role in this new “religion” seriously. He began touring college campuses and delivering lectures on his ideas of secular humanism.
When considering the question of human nature as portrayed by Star Trek, it is important to keep a few things in mind. First, not even Gene Roddenberry was very clear. Hertenstein states,
Whenever the Great Bird (Roddenberry) was quoted in interviews on subjects like religion, morals, politics, or metaphysics, one strained to hear much more than self-important gobbedlygook.
He wanted his show to portray humans that had moved past the point of having conflict amongst themselves. But just how interesting is it to watch a television show with no conflict? Thus we have the introduction of aliens, mind manipulation and various other writing tricks to spur the show forward. Secondly, whatever else it is (religion, cultural movement, philosophy) Star Trek was a television show written to entertain. A myriad of writers were employed over the years, all with their own individual views on humanity. While the show did hold to certain specific values, other values fluctuated from episode to episode. For example, the Prime Directive, which dictates that Starfleet officers cannot interfere with the natural development and evolution of a culture. However, viewers frequently watched as Captain Kirk barged into a civilization and blundered around, fixing things to his liking.
Also, after Gene Rodenberry’s death the Star Trek franchise began to explore aspects that had before been off limits. For example, Roddenberry was adamant that religion was no longer part of humanity and not to be part of the show. With the creation of Deep Space Nine (DS9) in 1993, viewers were introduced to the world of Bajor, where religion plays an integral role. Even the commander of the space station, Sisko, becomes involved in the Bajoran religion when it is revealed that he is an emissary to the Prophets (Bajoran gods). The fact that the Prophets turn out to be another form of alien life doesn’t change the Bajoran view of their deity. Why not have alien life that protects and preserves a less developed form of life?
Taking into consideration all these variables, what then is Star Trek’s view on human nature? Perhaps most importantly is the premise that humans have integrity. We are innately good. This point is driven home most aptly when humans have contact with other alien species. The Ferengi, for example, are capitalistic, selfish aliens always looking to make a profit without a thought to whom they may hurt along the way. The absurdity of the Ferengi race makes the fact that humans no longer use or need money look even more “good”. Likewise, if a Klingon is merciful to an enemy and spares his life, he is accused of “being around humans too long.” Mercy (another “good” quality) is considered a human trait. Through the integrity of Picard and other Star Fleet officers, we see the tenets of secular humanism mirrored. As stated in The Affirmations of Humanism:
We believe in the common moral decencies: altruism, integrity, honesty, truthfulness, responsibility. Humanist ethics is amenable to critical, rational guidance. There are normative standards that we discover together. Moral principles are tested by their consequences.
Moral principles come from within humans, and not as a result of outside (religious) influences. Humanity has evolved to the ability to make “right” decisions on its own.
Secondly, humans are emotional creatures but we still practice self-restraint and common sense. We are not fully ruled by our emotions, yet they are a fundamental aspect of our existence. Take for example the episode of TOS, “The Enemy Within” . Through a transporter malfunction, Kirk is split into two separate men: a rational Kirk and an emotional Kirk. The rational Kirk is rendered helpless without his emotional self, unable to make any command decisions. His emotions are key to his ability to function. Common sense, or intuition, is also lauded as a valuable human asset. Countless are the times when Janeway and Tuvok (or Archer and T’Pol) bicker over logic versus intuition. Tuvok, as a Vulcan, cannot understand why humans go against the premise of pure logic and instead choose to rely on their common sense or “hunches”. Inevitably, the human hunches always prove more correct that the Vulcan logic.
A third aspect of human nature is best illustrated by Captain Jean-Luc Picard’s dealings with the Borg. He tells them that human culture “is based on freedom and self-determination.” The need for these aspects of humanity is reasserted throughout different series of the show. Captain Kirk refuses to live as a captive, even if it is in perfect world created for him through illusion. Captain Janeway continually fights the Borg, unwilling to allow her crew to live without the basic human rights of freedom and self-determination. However, humans don’t simply fight for their own right to freedom in Star Trek. They also extend this freedom to suppressed alien races everywhere.
Think of all the Trek episodes which climax in the overthrow of some tyrannical alien “god”, and the inevitable speeches at the end of such stories to the newly freed inhabitants who must now take individual responsibility for themselves and their freedom.
Despite the Prime Directive, which instructs Star Fleet officers from interfering with the development and evolution of other races, the extension of freedom to others is an ongoing theme throughout all the Star Trek series.
Humanity’s use of self-determination also serves to replace the need for religion. Humans no longer need a code of ethics as dictated by a church or a god because they can make the “right” choice on their own. This emphasis on self-determination and the ability to live moral lives without religion is not only another aspect of secular humanism but also expresses views of existentialism. However, self-determination doesn’t only include the ability to make moral choices, but also the freedom to choose. Humanity is now free to choose what type of sexuality they prefer and when they wish to have children. Abortion and homosexuality are no longer stigmatized.
Existentialism, particularly Sartre’s view, teaches that above all humans’ have the ability to choose. Our life may be headed in a certain direction, but that doesn’t mean we are condemned to follow that path. We always, always can choose. In this regard, Existentialism is also in integral part of the future of humanity. The freedom to choose and to choose well makes Starfleet officers ideal examples of existentialism lived to the best degree. In The Ethics of Star Trek, Judith Barad writes
Sartre also believed that as we choose to make ourselves into a certain sort of person, at the same time we also choose for all people – that is, as we create our own values, we also create an image of human nature as we believe it should be. “In fact, in creating the man that we want to be,” Sartre writes, “there is not a single one of our acts which does not at the same time create an image of man as we think he ought to be. To choose to be this or that is to affirm at the same time the value of what we choose.”
Through the choices made by the Enterprise crew and other members of Starfleet, the writers hoped to show how that mankind’s future had developed a more decent human nature.
Rodenberry’s optimistic view of humanity as rising above the ills that now plagues us is a fascinating one. Who doesn’t hope for a future where poverty, war, greed, illness and prejudice have been erased? The tenets of Star Trek have captivated both fans and scholars alike. Many books have been written exploring the ideals embodied by the show. For example, The Ethics of Star Trek by Dr. Judith Barad studies how the ideas of Plato, Kant and many other scholars have been implemented into the series. The books The Metaphysics of Star Trek and The Meaning of “Star Trek” also seek to explore the ideals behind the show. Trek has also been utilized by scholars in order to teach students about different principles. A simple web search reveals university courses entitled “Philosophy and Star Trek” offered by Georgetown University and “The Religions of Star Trek” taught at a handful of different colleges. The ideals of Star Trek are no longer explored only by the stereotypical “geeky” convention-attending fans.
Just as Star Trek has evolved since Roddenberry’ death to involve religion and human conflict, so it will continue to evolve. A Star Trek movie has been announced to be in the preproduction stages. It will be fascinating to see what new ideals are added to human nature in the new film. Will the new screenplay stick to Kirk’s original idealistic playboy character, or will a more politically correct Kirk step on to the stage?
Do the tenets of secular humanism and existentialism as taught by Star Trek hold the key to the future of mankind? Did Roddenberry succeed in his vision for our future? In some respects, we have come a long way towards the ideals of Starfleet since it’s original inception in the 1960’s. By no means have all traces of sexism and racism been erased from our nation, but America is much more tolerant than the days of civil unrest that accompanied Star Trek’s birth. The world is becoming a more global community. Technology has greatly advanced since the 1960’s, however not nearly as far as Roddenberry had envisioned in the Star Trek timeline.
The largest problem I see with the future as portrayed by Star Trek is absence of all forms of religion. Where did religion go? Considering the amount of conflict, war and death that religious beliefs have caused throughout Earth’s time, how did religion suddenly become a non-issue in the future? According to Star Trek history, there is a final war, but it centers on eugenics, not religion. What about those religions whose racial identity is tied up with their faith, such as Judaism? I wonder how Roddenberry’s future deals with these issues? As idealistic as secular humanism is, I don’t believe it will ever completely replace the need for religion among human society. Yes, our reliance as a species on science will increase as time passes. This seems inevitable. Yet there will continue to be people, such as myself, who find a way to reconcile our faith in God and our faith in science.
Works Cited
Barad, Judith and Ed Robertson. The Ethics of Star Trek. New York: Perrenial, 2000.
Council for Secular Humanism. “The Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles” Accessed 6 July 2007 http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=affirmations
Georgetown University Website. “PHIL-180 Philosophy and Star Trek.” 2007-2008 Course Catalog. Accessed 6 July 2007 http://www2.georgetown.edu/explore/courses/index.cfm?Action=View&CourseID=PHIL-180
Gostomski, Christina. “Teaching religion: the final frontier?” The Morning Call 21 July 2003: The Foundation for Religious Freedom. Accessed 6 July 2007 http://www.forf.org/news/2003/godtrek.html
Hertenstein, Mike. The Double Vision of Star Trek: Half-Humans, Evil Twins, and Science Fiction. Chicago: Cornerstone Press Chicago, 1998.
Internet Movie Database. “Star Trek (2008)” Accessed 6 July 2007 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/.
Here's what he wrote about my paper:
Attached you will find Tina Dalton's paper on Star Trek.
Tina gave special attention to the executive creator of Star Trek (Gene Roddenberry) and his vision of the future, shaped by secular humanism. The paper touches on the origin of moral principles, the idea of rights, and the future of religion in a scientifically-trained future society.
Tina's reflections on Roddenberry's sub-creation has me returning to that question I often ask myself, "what is the future of religion?" As quality education spreads over the world and more people understand science and philosophy, how will religion evolve to meet our needs without offending our sense of logic? Will the future look something like the vision Roddenberry (and many other science fiction writers) had, in which religion is a footnote rather than a meaningful part of most characters' lives?
I've often imagined a science fiction scenario in which an alien race makes contact with humans, and the aliens have absolutely no interest in our science, our politics, or meeting any of our powerful people. No, they are only really interested in our religious beliefs and practices. Let's say there is a "religion gene" and people with it tend to reproduce more and get along with others a bit better. Over the long term, such a gene could eventually dominate a gene pool, perhaps even in a very scientifically advanced species. Anyway, Tina's paper got me thinking about that.
Star Trek and The Future of Humanity
Episode: The Tholian Web, Star Trek the Original Series
Kirk: (to Spock) I suspect you’re becoming more and more human all the time.
Spock: Captain, I see no reason to stand here and be insulted.
Upon pondering the complexities of human nature, perhaps Star Trek would not be the first philosophical influence to come to mind. However, with closer examination, we can easily discover that Star Trek has been greatly concerned with the human condition from its earliest conception. Indeed, in a universe “of advanced technology, adventure on a galactic scale, and unbridled optimism for humanity’s ethical progress” how could we not expect to learn a great deal about human character? Time and again, from The Original Series to The Next Generation to Voyager to Deep Space Nine to Enterprise, we are introduced to characters that are struggling to understand and accept humanity. It is through these characters’ journeys that we can gain greater insight about how human nature is viewed by the creators of Star Trek.
Star Trek was developed by Gene Rodenberry during the heyday of the 1960’s. Racial segregation was a hot topic in the US, as was the threat of Soviet nuclear power. The Vietnam War raged on alongside the Race to Space. It was amidst all these influences that Star Trek first appeared. Roddenberry’s vision was of a futuristic humanity where no prejudice, poverty or war existed. The crew of the Enterprise, the flagship on Star Trek, was multi-racial to show that in the future, race didn’t matter. Russians work alongside Japanese and African-American officers on the bridge of the ship. Humans have evolved into a more enlightened, more tolerant species. However, another critical aspect to the Star Trekian future is the importance of science.
Roddenberry’s own philosophical principles have played a crucial role in the development of Star Trek’s values. Rodenberry was a follower of secular humanism, a “man-centered philosophy which views religion as regressive superstition and man’s increasing mastery over nature (by means of science and technology) as the surest way to progress.” In the future as portrayed in the Star Trek series, technology works for the betterment of mankind. Rarely are viewers faced with the question of whether technology has the potential to become hostile towards humans. Instead, technology and science have enabled mankind to evolve into a just and unified society. Religion, war, poverty and the need for money have all been eliminated from the earth. Humankind has become unified and peaceful, all thanks to the glorious discoveries of science.
Star Trek, The Original Series (also known as TOS) was cancelled after only three seasons due to low ratings. The fan base had already been built and Rodenberry had his first avid followers. As the Star Trek phenomenon has continued to grow with movies and spin-off series, the fan base has also continued to grow. Star Trek fans are often stereotyped to be fanatical, costume-wearing nerds but this is far from the truth. In fact, I myself am an avid Star Trek fan and I’m more as what can be described as a “soccer mom”. One wouldn’t look at me and think “Star Trek”, yet I love the show, the movies and the books. This is just an example to show that people from all walks of life find a certain appeal in Star Trek.
However, for some, Star Trek has become a type of religion. As Mike Hertenstein argues in his book The Double Vision of Star Trek, “religion has been replaced by pop culture.” Consider the Star Trek convention: fans travel long distances to attend (pilgrimage), spend large amounts of money on collectables (icons, relics) and wait in very long lines for a chance to speak with their favorite actors (saints). For those who follow Roddenberry’s tenets of secular humanism, Star Trek and the ideals it teaches can indeed become a way of life. Gene Roddenberry also took his role in this new “religion” seriously. He began touring college campuses and delivering lectures on his ideas of secular humanism.
When considering the question of human nature as portrayed by Star Trek, it is important to keep a few things in mind. First, not even Gene Roddenberry was very clear. Hertenstein states,
Whenever the Great Bird (Roddenberry) was quoted in interviews on subjects like religion, morals, politics, or metaphysics, one strained to hear much more than self-important gobbedlygook.
He wanted his show to portray humans that had moved past the point of having conflict amongst themselves. But just how interesting is it to watch a television show with no conflict? Thus we have the introduction of aliens, mind manipulation and various other writing tricks to spur the show forward. Secondly, whatever else it is (religion, cultural movement, philosophy) Star Trek was a television show written to entertain. A myriad of writers were employed over the years, all with their own individual views on humanity. While the show did hold to certain specific values, other values fluctuated from episode to episode. For example, the Prime Directive, which dictates that Starfleet officers cannot interfere with the natural development and evolution of a culture. However, viewers frequently watched as Captain Kirk barged into a civilization and blundered around, fixing things to his liking.
Also, after Gene Rodenberry’s death the Star Trek franchise began to explore aspects that had before been off limits. For example, Roddenberry was adamant that religion was no longer part of humanity and not to be part of the show. With the creation of Deep Space Nine (DS9) in 1993, viewers were introduced to the world of Bajor, where religion plays an integral role. Even the commander of the space station, Sisko, becomes involved in the Bajoran religion when it is revealed that he is an emissary to the Prophets (Bajoran gods). The fact that the Prophets turn out to be another form of alien life doesn’t change the Bajoran view of their deity. Why not have alien life that protects and preserves a less developed form of life?
Taking into consideration all these variables, what then is Star Trek’s view on human nature? Perhaps most importantly is the premise that humans have integrity. We are innately good. This point is driven home most aptly when humans have contact with other alien species. The Ferengi, for example, are capitalistic, selfish aliens always looking to make a profit without a thought to whom they may hurt along the way. The absurdity of the Ferengi race makes the fact that humans no longer use or need money look even more “good”. Likewise, if a Klingon is merciful to an enemy and spares his life, he is accused of “being around humans too long.” Mercy (another “good” quality) is considered a human trait. Through the integrity of Picard and other Star Fleet officers, we see the tenets of secular humanism mirrored. As stated in The Affirmations of Humanism:
We believe in the common moral decencies: altruism, integrity, honesty, truthfulness, responsibility. Humanist ethics is amenable to critical, rational guidance. There are normative standards that we discover together. Moral principles are tested by their consequences.
Moral principles come from within humans, and not as a result of outside (religious) influences. Humanity has evolved to the ability to make “right” decisions on its own.
Secondly, humans are emotional creatures but we still practice self-restraint and common sense. We are not fully ruled by our emotions, yet they are a fundamental aspect of our existence. Take for example the episode of TOS, “The Enemy Within” . Through a transporter malfunction, Kirk is split into two separate men: a rational Kirk and an emotional Kirk. The rational Kirk is rendered helpless without his emotional self, unable to make any command decisions. His emotions are key to his ability to function. Common sense, or intuition, is also lauded as a valuable human asset. Countless are the times when Janeway and Tuvok (or Archer and T’Pol) bicker over logic versus intuition. Tuvok, as a Vulcan, cannot understand why humans go against the premise of pure logic and instead choose to rely on their common sense or “hunches”. Inevitably, the human hunches always prove more correct that the Vulcan logic.
A third aspect of human nature is best illustrated by Captain Jean-Luc Picard’s dealings with the Borg. He tells them that human culture “is based on freedom and self-determination.” The need for these aspects of humanity is reasserted throughout different series of the show. Captain Kirk refuses to live as a captive, even if it is in perfect world created for him through illusion. Captain Janeway continually fights the Borg, unwilling to allow her crew to live without the basic human rights of freedom and self-determination. However, humans don’t simply fight for their own right to freedom in Star Trek. They also extend this freedom to suppressed alien races everywhere.
Think of all the Trek episodes which climax in the overthrow of some tyrannical alien “god”, and the inevitable speeches at the end of such stories to the newly freed inhabitants who must now take individual responsibility for themselves and their freedom.
Despite the Prime Directive, which instructs Star Fleet officers from interfering with the development and evolution of other races, the extension of freedom to others is an ongoing theme throughout all the Star Trek series.
Humanity’s use of self-determination also serves to replace the need for religion. Humans no longer need a code of ethics as dictated by a church or a god because they can make the “right” choice on their own. This emphasis on self-determination and the ability to live moral lives without religion is not only another aspect of secular humanism but also expresses views of existentialism. However, self-determination doesn’t only include the ability to make moral choices, but also the freedom to choose. Humanity is now free to choose what type of sexuality they prefer and when they wish to have children. Abortion and homosexuality are no longer stigmatized.
Existentialism, particularly Sartre’s view, teaches that above all humans’ have the ability to choose. Our life may be headed in a certain direction, but that doesn’t mean we are condemned to follow that path. We always, always can choose. In this regard, Existentialism is also in integral part of the future of humanity. The freedom to choose and to choose well makes Starfleet officers ideal examples of existentialism lived to the best degree. In The Ethics of Star Trek, Judith Barad writes
Sartre also believed that as we choose to make ourselves into a certain sort of person, at the same time we also choose for all people – that is, as we create our own values, we also create an image of human nature as we believe it should be. “In fact, in creating the man that we want to be,” Sartre writes, “there is not a single one of our acts which does not at the same time create an image of man as we think he ought to be. To choose to be this or that is to affirm at the same time the value of what we choose.”
Through the choices made by the Enterprise crew and other members of Starfleet, the writers hoped to show how that mankind’s future had developed a more decent human nature.
Rodenberry’s optimistic view of humanity as rising above the ills that now plagues us is a fascinating one. Who doesn’t hope for a future where poverty, war, greed, illness and prejudice have been erased? The tenets of Star Trek have captivated both fans and scholars alike. Many books have been written exploring the ideals embodied by the show. For example, The Ethics of Star Trek by Dr. Judith Barad studies how the ideas of Plato, Kant and many other scholars have been implemented into the series. The books The Metaphysics of Star Trek and The Meaning of “Star Trek” also seek to explore the ideals behind the show. Trek has also been utilized by scholars in order to teach students about different principles. A simple web search reveals university courses entitled “Philosophy and Star Trek” offered by Georgetown University and “The Religions of Star Trek” taught at a handful of different colleges. The ideals of Star Trek are no longer explored only by the stereotypical “geeky” convention-attending fans.
Just as Star Trek has evolved since Roddenberry’ death to involve religion and human conflict, so it will continue to evolve. A Star Trek movie has been announced to be in the preproduction stages. It will be fascinating to see what new ideals are added to human nature in the new film. Will the new screenplay stick to Kirk’s original idealistic playboy character, or will a more politically correct Kirk step on to the stage?
Do the tenets of secular humanism and existentialism as taught by Star Trek hold the key to the future of mankind? Did Roddenberry succeed in his vision for our future? In some respects, we have come a long way towards the ideals of Starfleet since it’s original inception in the 1960’s. By no means have all traces of sexism and racism been erased from our nation, but America is much more tolerant than the days of civil unrest that accompanied Star Trek’s birth. The world is becoming a more global community. Technology has greatly advanced since the 1960’s, however not nearly as far as Roddenberry had envisioned in the Star Trek timeline.
The largest problem I see with the future as portrayed by Star Trek is absence of all forms of religion. Where did religion go? Considering the amount of conflict, war and death that religious beliefs have caused throughout Earth’s time, how did religion suddenly become a non-issue in the future? According to Star Trek history, there is a final war, but it centers on eugenics, not religion. What about those religions whose racial identity is tied up with their faith, such as Judaism? I wonder how Roddenberry’s future deals with these issues? As idealistic as secular humanism is, I don’t believe it will ever completely replace the need for religion among human society. Yes, our reliance as a species on science will increase as time passes. This seems inevitable. Yet there will continue to be people, such as myself, who find a way to reconcile our faith in God and our faith in science.
Works Cited
Barad, Judith and Ed Robertson. The Ethics of Star Trek. New York: Perrenial, 2000.
Council for Secular Humanism. “The Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles” Accessed 6 July 2007 http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=affirmations
Georgetown University Website. “PHIL-180 Philosophy and Star Trek.” 2007-2008 Course Catalog. Accessed 6 July 2007 http://www2.georgetown.edu/explore/courses/index.cfm?Action=View&CourseID=PHIL-180
Gostomski, Christina. “Teaching religion: the final frontier?” The Morning Call 21 July 2003: The Foundation for Religious Freedom. Accessed 6 July 2007 http://www.forf.org/news/2003/godtrek.html
Hertenstein, Mike. The Double Vision of Star Trek: Half-Humans, Evil Twins, and Science Fiction. Chicago: Cornerstone Press Chicago, 1998.
Internet Movie Database. “Star Trek (2008)” Accessed 6 July 2007 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-07-25 04:42 pm (UTC)You should compare Star Trek's secular humanism to Battlestar Gallactica's complex set of plural and single dietie - the Cylons alone are intriguing - can robots, machines have faith? Does God take care of them as He takes care of us?
You could do an entire Theses project on religion in Pop Culture/sci-fi tv shows alone!
It does make me wonder - what did happen to religion. I am so glad you brought that up. Its great to think that everyone is free, people are happy, we're no longer tied down to money and societal classes it creates...but how do you wipe out and entire civilization's religious beliefs?
Then again...was it Stalin or Lenin that pretty much wiped out religion in Russia and tried to do that to the entire then USSR? China has done it. North Korea? It's been done, but there are underground Christian movements in China.
This is something that I'll bring up in our book discussion on Friday night. In 1984 there is no religion. Well, the religion is Big Brother. No temples but there is in fact Two Minutes of Hate - kind of like a time of worship and response. There are the gatherings, the celebrations - the people gathering to support and praise the government.
I honestly don't think you can have the type of Eutopia that Roddenberry wanted to exist without religion...but then again...we'd all have to have the same religion. Otherwise we all continue to fight about who is right and who is wrong. Because I doubt that humans will ever get to a point where we say, "You have your beliefs and I'll have mine and everything will be okay." Take the radical Muslims. Supposedly their "religious" leaders are telling them to be terrorists. Of course they think it's a relgious war, so to them it's not terrorism.
Wow...this whole thing is mind blowing. How you kept your paper so short and precise and not going off on tangents like I seem to be doing is beyond me. Just shows what an extraordinary talent you have.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-25 05:16 pm (UTC)I like your examples of the USSR and China as having wiped out religion. However, it was an extremely bloody process (and religion still remains somewhat). If the Star Trek future, there is no mention of a bloody religious war. Instead, we just all quite believing the archaic need for religion, and all accept the theories of science and evolution.
It will be interesting to see where bsg goes with it's show. Does God care for the cylons as well? Do cylons have souls (I suppose their continuous resurrection would say that they do, but what about those models that are shelved?) I can't wait for the series to start again!
no subject
Date: 2007-07-25 05:25 pm (UTC)I don't know if the cylons have souls - they say that the resurrections (which is new to this version of BSG - the original version of BSG did not have humanoid cylons) are a resurrection of conciousness, different from the Christian version of resurrection. But yet they believe in one God. Are they Jewish? While they never mention Christ they do talk speak about Christ's teachings in the New Testament.
And what about the Cylon's belief that God is love, but the Cylon drive to destroy the humans?
Mind boggling!
I don't know too much about the original BSG series but I don't think that religion played into it as much as it does in this series. I'll have to check on that though. I know that they had their gods and goddesses but I don't think that the cylons had their single diety.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-26 01:54 am (UTC)