For those of you here who think the prime directive is flawed, or could be adjusted.

What do you agree with, how would you change what you disagree with, and why?

  • Mathieu@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    One of the concerns I have with the Prime Directive is that it is intended to avoid a “slippery slope” problem, and so it is a very black-and-white rule. Starfleet can’t protect a developing civilization from a catastrophic planet-ending disaster… and the core reason is that “interference” can be a bad thing, so we won’t ever do it.

    There are clearly situations where interference in another civilization would be immoral. There are also clearly situations where it would be moral. We can’t possibly figure out those situations and enshrine them into law? We do better today! Homicide is illegal, but there are exceptions like self-defense, and there are mitigating circumstances like causing an accidental death.

    The Prime Directive should be much more complex.

    Might not make for great TV, though.

    • roofuskit@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even funnier to think about, is that Starfleet has set the development of warp technology as the cutoff. But there are clearly species out there (Q anyone) who would find that stage of a species development way too early to introduce themselves.