Is everything relative? The "Prime Directive" is evil

[look3467]

I am a staunch opponent of the Prime Directive, and I have seen every episode of Star Trek: the Next Generation. If we can intervene in a foreign culture to produce good results, we should, but we must also not succumb to hubris and automatically assume that we are more civilized than those with less technological advancement.

I will agree with you to this extend: to change the word "intervene" to introduce, and to guard against out own corruptive potentials in the introduction.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Alceste]

I'll honor your opinion!

My personal responsibilities, behavior as far as ethics and morality are concerned are based on two things:
1. That I love the Creator God with all my heart, mind and soul, and
2. That I love my neighbor as I love myself.

In those two, I am free to exercise them to no limit, for in them, are no laws restricting me.

How do they influence my behavior, my attitude and my passion for life?

I will say this - it is refreshing to gear from a Christian who managed to pick up on the guiding philosophy of Christ. I think we have different ideas of what it means to love your neighbour. Calling him "primitive" because his community is self-sufficient and lives simply does not strike me as loving, especially when paired with a desire and intention to mold him into something more like ourselves.

 

[McBell]

There was an episode of Star Trek where Worf's brother saved a small village from certain destruction.

The brother couldn't care less about the Prime Directive, but Roddenberry's crew of the Enterprise were going crazy at how terrible it was to risk 'contaminating' their culture. They didn't even want to debate the matter, it was PC to believe in the Prime Directive, the only question was, why was Worf's brother so crazy as to violate it? Was he sick? Sociopathic? Why was he betraying Worf's honor by saving these few hundred people from certain death? Why didn't he feel ashamed at what he was doing?

My biggest problem with the Star Trek Prime Directive is how inconsistently it is applied.
Look under "Criticism" at this site:

Prime Directive - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
​

 

[McBell]

I am a staunch opponent of the Prime Directive, and I have seen every episode of Star Trek: the Next Generation. If we can intervene in a foreign culture to produce good results, we should, but we must also not succumb to hubris and automatically assume that we are more civilised than those with less technological advancement.

I will agree with you to this extend: to change the word "intervene" to introduce, and to guard against out own corruptive potentials in the introduction.

Blessings, AJ

Define "good results".
Who gets to decide what is and what is not to be "introduced" upon them?
Who gets to define which is "better" for them?

Seems to me that this is merely a weak justification in order to interfere.

 

[look3467]

I will say this - it is refreshing to gear from a Christian who managed to pick up on the guiding philosophy of Christ. I think we have different ideas of what it means to love your neighbour. Calling him "primitive" because his community is self-sufficient and lives simply does not strike me as loving, especially when paired with a desire and intention to mold him into something more like ourselves.

The word "primitive" was used only to describe a different culture and not to demean it in any way.

If such a culture could use modernization, I'm sure they would consider it.

Blessings, AJ

 

[look3467]

Define "good results".
Who gets to decide what is and what is not to be "introduced" upon them?
Who gets to define which is "better" for them?

Seems to me that this is merely a weak justification in order to interfere.

Your really making me jump through hoops to justify my views.

OK, "good results" are anything better than what they all ready have or do.

Take for example: A chain saw verse and ax?

If I were the missionary, not only would I introduce Jesus to them on the spiritual side, and on the natural side, anything they could use to improve on what they have been doing for years that would make their lives easier.

If I introduced a tractor to plow the fields, wouldn't you say it might be a well worth item?

If yes, then you just decided with me what would be better for them.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Darkness]

Define "good results".
Who gets to decide what is and what is not to be "introduced" upon them?
Who gets to define which is "better" for them?

Seems to me that this is merely a weak justification in order to interfere.

Obviously the outside culture gets to decide what is "good results" and what is "better" for them. I do not pretend to be a moral absolutist, but I do believe in universal human rights. What is truly absurd is the belief that human rights stop at a nation's boarders. I believe that racial discrimination, sexism, homophobia are areas where all people in all places and times should protected from, and I don't give a damn whether it is a part of their culture.

 

[silence]

We leave them alone. What if all of your 'what if's' are wrong ?

They would feel threatened by us, there immune systems would be one of the weakest of the planets, a common cold may kill them.

They have survived without us for this long and should be left this way, even if the children are slaves this is there culture and growing up, maybe when they become men they then are no longer slaves and the slavery is what made them into men in there tribe ?

All possibility's, but they need to be left alone !

 

[look3467]

Obviously the outside culture gets to decide what is "good results" and what is "better" for them. I do not pretend to be a moral absolutist, but I do believe in universal human rights. What is truly absurd is the belief that human rights stop at a nation's boarders. I believe that racial discrimination, sexism, homophobia are areas where all people in all places and times should protected from, and I don't give a damn whether it is a part of their culture.

Well, your certainly entitled to your opinion.

I believe liberation is a good thing especially if invited.

The oppressed are heard in time by God who sends relief in to aliveate the pain and sufferring.

Case in point: Deu 28:49 The LORD shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flieth; a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand;

If God is aware of every minute detail of our lives, and we, as responsible people don't take action to make corrections, then He will step in and perform through a nation, a leader, or by any human being as He sees fit to use.

I believe we are on the verge of a big turn over, sort of like a tilling of the soil, where everything is turned around, both the good seed and the bad seed alike.

Blessings, AJ

 

[look3467]

We leave them alone. What if all of your 'what if's' are wrong ?

They would feel threatened by us, there immune systems would be one of the weakest of the planets, a common cold may kill them.

They have survived without us for this long and should be left this way, even if the children are slaves this is there culture and growing up, maybe when they become men they then are no longer slaves and the slavery is what made them into men in there tribe ?

All possibility's, but they need to be left alone !

Any improvement in the quality of life, regardless of who it is, is inevitable. It is just a matter of time.

The world is getting smaller, knowledge wise, technology wise, and sooner or later, all must come to the table to feed upon such things.

Blessings, AJ

 

[McBell]

OK, "good results" are anything better than what they all ready have or do.

WHO gets to decide what is and what is not "better"?

This seems to be the part you have problems addressing.

 

[McBell]

Obviously the outside culture gets to decide what is "good results" and what is "better" for them. I do not pretend to be a moral absolutist, but I do believe in universal human rights. What is truly absurd is the belief that human rights stop at a nation's boarders. I believe that racial discrimination, sexism, homophobia are areas where all people in all places and times should protected from, and I don't give a damn whether it is a part of their culture.

Yet you disregard the rights of the culture to decide what is and what is not "better" for them?

 

[McBell]

Well, your certainly entitled to your opinion.

I believe liberation is a good thing especially if invited.

The oppressed are heard in time by God who sends relief in to aliveate the pain and sufferring.

Case in point: Deu 28:49 The LORD shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flieth; a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand;

If God is aware of every minute detail of our lives, and we, as responsible people don't take action to make corrections, then He will step in and perform through a nation, a leader, or by any human being as He sees fit to use.

I believe we are on the verge of a big turn over, sort of like a tilling of the soil, where everything is turned around, both the good seed and the bad seed alike.

Blessings, AJ

Here you are merely attempting to use your chosen god as your justification for interfering.

 

[McBell]

Any improvement in the quality of life, regardless of who it is, is inevitable. It is just a matter of time.

So why the need to hurry it along unless you are attempting to lead this alleged "better quality of life" in a specific self serving direction?

The world is getting smaller, knowledge wise, technology wise, and sooner or later, all must come to the table to feed upon such things.

Blessings, AJ

Surely you have a better justification for your blatant interference than this?

 

[Darkness]

We leave them alone. What if all of your 'what if's' are wrong?

Here's the thing. Morals are not starfish. They are human constructs, not concrete objects. There is no such thing as absolute right or wrong. I believe human rights (as, let's say, defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) to be good, in the sense that I want them, but others may find human rights to be abhorrent and bad, in the sense that they don't want them. All I can do is appeal to the altruistic, emotional sense in people, to condemn acts such as rape and homophobia.

They would feel threatened by us, there immune systems would be one of the weakest of the planets, a common cold may kill them.

I thought we would be in starship.

They have survived without us for this long and should be left this way, even if the children are slaves this is there culture and growing up, maybe when they become men they then are no longer slaves and the slavery is what made them into men in there tribe?

I don't give a damn. I am against the concept of rigid gender roles.

All possibility's, but they need to be left alone !

When the ********, barbaric idiots in Ethiopia leave little girls alone and don't force them to have their clitoris cut off to be accepted in the culture, then we can talk.

Yet you disregard the rights of the culture to decide what is and what is not "better" for them?

That's right! I disregard the right of German society to decide that Jews are undesirable and should be eradicated and I will hold this narrow-minded belief until the day I die. :banghead3:

 

[McBell]

That's right! I disregard the right of German society to decide that Jews are undesirable and should be eradicated and I will hold this narrow-minded belief until the day I die. :banghead3:

Epic fail.
Seeing as the German society was forcing their definition of "better quality of life" onto the Jews, which you have already flat out said is just fine here:

Obviously the outside culture gets to decide what is "good results" and what is "better" for them. I do not pretend to be a moral absolutist, but I do believe in universal human rights. What is truly absurd is the belief that human rights stop at a nation's boarders.

Care to start back peddling now that you have been shown to be talking out both ends?

 

[croak]

Your really making me jump through hoops to justify my views.

OK, "good results" are anything better than what they all ready have or do.

Take for example: A chain saw verse and ax?

If I were the missionary, not only would I introduce Jesus to them on the spiritual side, and on the natural side, anything they could use to improve on what they have been doing for years that would make their lives easier.

If I introduced a tractor to plow the fields, wouldn't you say it might be a well worth item?

If yes, then you just decided with me what would be better for them.

Blessings, AJ

I vaguely remember from a class the effect the introduction of a chainsaw had (or hypothetically would have, I'm not sure). So no. And a tractor? Then you need to buy gas. Then you need money. Then... seriously, what's the point? And what if the people don't practise agriculture? You'd be surprised at the world's diversity beyond the boundaries of civilization.

Survival International - The movement for tribal peoples

I haven't looked through it yet, but I thought I'd throw it out there before I head to bed.

 

[look3467]

WHO gets to decide what is and what is not "better"?

This seems to be the part you have problems addressing.

If you chose, you, and if I chose, myself.

By the way, I hesitate not to introduce my view to anybody for their evaluation.

A radio has a knob for tuning out any station not desirable to the ear.

Blessings, AJ

 

[look3467]

I vaguely remember from a class the effect the introduction of a chainsaw had (or hypothetically would have, I'm not sure). So no. And a tractor? Then you need to buy gas. Then you need money. Then... seriously, what's the point? And what if the people don't practise agriculture? You'd be surprised at the world's diversity beyond the boundaries of civilization.

Survival International - The movement for tribal peoples

I haven't looked through it yet, but I thought I'd throw it out there before I head to bed.

Well, common sense would be the vehicle for determination, wouldn't you think?

Blessings, AJ

 

[look3467]

The killings by Hitler, the body mutilations by some, the dismembering of arms by others and the execution by stoning and many other human atrocities, are by many of us unacceptable.

And we should strive to eradicate those practices as is the only human rights thing to do, save that which is spiritual.

As this world gets smaller, we are part of the whole, and have a responsibility to the whole in the human rights arena, commencing in our own houses first.

Blessings, AJ