191
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by Ashyr@sh.itjust.works to c/tenforward@lemmy.world

My wife and I are rewatching The Next Generation and just finished Measure of a Man, the episode in season 2 in which Data’s personhood is legally debated and his life hangs in the balance.

I genuinely found this episode infuriating in its stupidity. It’s the first episode we skipped even a little bit. It was like nails on a chalkboard.

There is oodles of legal precedent that Data is a person. He was allowed to apply to Starfleet, graduated, became an officer and rose to the rank of Lt. Commander with all the responsibilities and privileges thereof.

Comparing him to a computer and the judge advocate general just shrugging and going to trial over it is completely idiotic. There are literal years and years of precedent that he’s an officer.

The problem is compounded because Picard can’t make the obvious legal argument and is therefore stuck philosophizing in a court room, which is all well and good, but it kind of comes down to whether or not Data has a soul? That’s not a legal argument.

The whole thing is so unbelievably ludicrous it just made me angrier and angrier. It wasn’t the high minded, humanistic future I’ve come to know and love, it was a kangaroo court where reason and precedent took a backseat to feeling and belief.

I genuinely hated it.

To my surprise, in looking it up, I discovered it’s considered one of the high water marks for the entire show. It feels like I’m taking crazy pills.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 112 points 3 weeks ago

Hot take. But put it in the context of the year it was aired, not today. Star Trek (and sci fi in general) was suffering from being perceived as "blue babes and laser guns".

This episode was thoughtful if taken as standalone. And TNG really was about taking the episodes more or less independently. The season long story arcs and such didn't exist. People weren't binge watching. So the world building was less important than the specific hypothetical moral quandary of the week. Like, they are almost like Asimov short stories with a shared cast.

It wasn't until a few years later that serialized TV even really became a thing -- Twin Peaks probably was the first here, but Babylon 5 would have a good claim (and DS9, Buffy, and others were coming together then too). So the style of storytelling on TNG S2 is different.

Divorce the story from Star Trek and the setting and evaluate it as a sci fi ethical quandary. And in that framework, it is a remarkable episode.

Also, Brent Spiner played it well :)

[-] Ashyr@sh.itjust.works 41 points 3 weeks ago

I think that’s a terrific argument and it is always wise to contextualize it in history.

We have absolutely been binging which certainly gives it a different feel, but I would argue even as a standalone episode it was poorly written if superbly performed.

There are ideas that could have been played with in a way that respects the setting. Perhaps another computer attempting to join Starfleet, but it looks like a box rather than a person and asks Data to argue its personhood.

I don’t know. I’m not a writer and I’m just spitting an idea off the top of my head, but I think there’s a place for internal consistency within a narrative regardless of when it was written.

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 23 points 3 weeks ago

(This is vague enough that I don't feel spoilers are necessary)

Perhaps another computer attempting to join Starfleet, but it looks like a box rather than a person and asks Data to argue its personhood.

They kind of had that exact opportunity in Discovery. But instead of an entire courtroom episode, it was more of a forced arbitration scene :(

[-] Ashyr@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago

I don’t mind spoilers—but use spoiler tags if necessary—what do you mean?

[-] ptz@dubvee.org 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Discovery S2-5 Spoiler (Zora)Discovery encounters an ancient, sentient sphere which uploads its 10,000 years or so of knowledge to the ship's computer. The data eventually merges with the ship's AI and becomes sentient. She names herself Zora and wants to join Starfleet.

Which would easily have led into an updated version of "Measure of a Man", but the whole subplot was basically resolved in a scene and a half that basically amounted to an interview.

The only handwave is that they're almost 1,000 years in the future at that point, so sapient AI rights may have advanced considerably in the interim and an interview may have been all that was necessary?

[-] Ashyr@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago

That’s too bad. Anything involving sentience and how we evaluate it is so fascinating and it absolutely could have been more interesting than that.

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago

That was one of Discovery’s main problems. It was always on the cusp of doing/becoming something awesome, but could never, ever manage to stick the landing. Often cools ideas, terribly executed and/or realized. Very frustrating.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 26 points 3 weeks ago

And TNG really was about taking the episodes more or less independently.

This era was also the high water mark for syndicated TV which really drove the episodic format. Viewers couldn't be guaranteed the show would air on the same channel or even the same timeslot. So long form serial TV were really rare.

[-] Davel23@fedia.io 14 points 3 weeks ago

It wasn't until a few years later that serialized TV even really became a thing -- Twin Peaks probably was the first here, but Babylon 5 would have a good claim (and DS9, Buffy, and others were coming together then too).

Soap operas were doing serialized storytelling for decades before your examples. Maybe not good serialized storytelling, but still.

[-] AceBonobo@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

Batman ended every episode with a cliff hanger. Sometimes literally hanging batman off a cliff. Then they'd resolve it within the first 10 seconds of the next episode.

Soap operas were incredibly addictive. Some of them have thousands of episodes.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

Eh, soap operas had been doing serialised TV for decades before the 80s and 90s. And if you look to outside of the US, in the UK serialised TV was extremely normal, and had been for decades - ever since TV started, really. And even before that it was common in radio plays.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 35 points 3 weeks ago

What bothered me most about this ep is that Riker is forced to act as some kind of prosecutor. And he’s like no, I won’t do it. And she’s like you better do it, and to the best of your ability yada yada or else I’m gonna something something. Like how is she gonna know if he does this to the best of his ability. Why wouldn’t he just completely blow it? Or at least in some plausible attempt at an effort. What was she gonna do then, have another trial for Riker for being a bad fake lawyer? Is the concept of conflict of interest not a thing in future robot court?

[-] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

"You didn't even try to turn him off!"

"I am literally incapable of doing that."

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] MudMan@fedia.io 30 points 3 weeks ago

I mean... yeah, the episode isn't as focused on procedural detail, and I do live for legal process minutia, but I can fill in the blanks just fine and suspend disbelief.

I mean, the question being raised is whether Data has been operating as a person willingly joined Starfleet or as salvaged equipment. If Data had been roaming around on his own and then applied to join Starfleet I'd be more nitpicky, but he was found and turned on by Starfleet and he seems to have been in the system since, so I can see the question of how to categorize him coming up retroactively. Especially in retrospect, since we eventually get undeniable confirmation that AGI is very much possible within their normal gear.

I mean, for the record, by the time Voyager comes around we know that they have protocols to use holographic AIs to substitute in for key personnel, so if you can have a "EMH" slot in for an officer you can have a piece of salvaged machinery operate with a rank and then reassign it to a different role... unless that entity has personhood. It IS a sci-fi as hell concept, but a valid one in-universe.

Me, I would have very much enjoyed Noonyien Soong arguing whether he still owns Data and learn what is legal salvage in Starfleet territory but for the sake of 90s network TV I can see "Is this android truly a life form" being the approach to a Trek episode. And thematically... well, I can't get through the Goldberg and Stewart scene about slavery without tearing up. It isn't just how good they both are, it's the "oh, crap, they're saying the thing" element to it, too.

Of course that means Starfleet straight up condoned slavery later, as per Star Trek Picard season 1. I would gladly remove all of Picard from lore at this point, but nope, officially Starfleet had legal proceedings to determine that Soong androids are people and to remove their autonomy is akin to slavery and then went ahead and did it anyway.

Picard sucks and is the worst Star Trek thing ever, is what I'm trying to say. Yes, way worse than anything in Discovery. Including season three.

[-] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago

Voyager had it's own "Measure of a Man" episode a la the EMH in Season 7, episode 20 "Author, Author". A lot of the same themes were there. But what has bothered me for years is at the end of the episode, it's implied that there is a number of EMH units that have been "reading" the Doctor's holonovel, and building a resistance.

This was never explored in any future Star Trek, was it? It wasn't talked about in Picard or Lower Decks. And Picard had the whole AI plot line.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[-] GBU_28@lemm.ee 28 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Hmm for the sake of discussion, it could be such that that legal tribunal was calling into question all of that history. Just because a "crime" (in this case a misclassification) occured and was propagated for many years doesn't mean it is correct tomorrow.

The point of the episode was the kangaroo court. It was that data had served as a valid, meaningful, human-like member of the staff for years, and all that was at risk. It does the very star trek thing of highlighting real world issues, in that people all over the world suffer from kangaroo court style judicial-injustice, and Picard's achievement is that much more impressive given the hill to climb. (Corruption)

Even in a seemingly idealistic futurist-future, injustice can arise, and minorities can be swept up in the mess. The federation is not perfect, and this episode is a crystal clear example of it's potential faults. (Executives with opinions trump up proceedings to bring about their own goals, essentially corrupt bureaucracy wrapped in judicial procedure)

[-] KnitWit@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

With many of the recent supreme court rulings that have ignored or outright destroyed precedent, I could easily see a situation like you described. Somewhere offscreen a ruling had been made and this is the fallout.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SquirtleHermit@lemmy.world 28 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

You are not taking crazy pills, its premise does suffer when watched with a "critical eye" (i.e. thinking about it even a little).

The reason it's remembered so fondly (imho) is two fold. It is one of the first "thought provoking" episodes. And the first couple of seasons were... not the best to put it mildly.

edit: admittedly, I do enjoy it, but I really have to turn my brain off to do so.

[-] Ashyr@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 weeks ago

Honestly, the validation means the world to me. The performances were all top notch and I get the idea they’re going for, but how they went there was so painful and contrived.

[-] SquirtleHermit@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

lol, no kidding. Even watching it as a kid my first thought was, "the fate of Data's rights can be determined in an impromptu court session with bridge crew acting as lawyers!? Shouldn't they have... real courts for this?". At the time I didn't consider the limitations of the show of course, and I do think the willingness to tackle high concepts was what made the show so special. But damn did the limitations show in this one.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SacredHeartAttack@lemmy.world 27 points 3 weeks ago

The whole point of this episode is to challenge the viewer to think about the arguments. That’s all. Is it stupid as far as realism? Yeah it kinda is. But is it a subject matter many of the viewers at the time of it airing were thinking about? No.

I imagine the idea the writer had was “let’s challenge what the viewer thinks and/or feels without them knowing”. There’s a lot of that in ST throughout the years and I, for one have always been here for it.

It’s not the best episode, but it’s certainly not the worst.

[-] thepreciousboar@lemm.ee 12 points 3 weeks ago

I think voyager did it a little better with The Doctor, at least there was a reason why he was in the crew and was accepted as a person, but legally he was not

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 24 points 3 weeks ago

Every Star Trek episode involving a trial shows that the way Starfleet conducts its justice system is incredibly stupid.

The Menagerie, Measure of a Man (and like 3 other TNG episodes), Ad Astra Per Aspera, that DS9 one where the Klingons want to extradite Worf... all stupid.

The only one you can't really blame for being stupid in this regard is Voyager, because they always have the "we aren't in the Alpha Quadrant" excuse to fall back on.

[-] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 14 points 3 weeks ago

There must be something to their judicial system, taking Voyager as the example, clearly as soon as they are beyond the reach of Federation justice captains turn into genocidal war criminals in very short order.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

I mean... they're genocidal war criminals inside the system.

Sisko sure was.

[-] PlasticExistence@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The important thing is that he could live with it

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 23 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

That's because Star Trek is sometimes a show about introducing basic philosophy and ethics to American nerds who genuinely could not and often still do not grasp the idea of giving at least theoretical personhood to someone that wasn't biological.

Just ask half of this community what they think about Fallout 4 synths if you don't believe it.

[-] ccdfa@lemm.ee 7 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah this is just an excuse to talk about the mind-body problem. I like it.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Honestly I agree, the legal parts were cringe. I even saw a legal analysis of it on YouTube and they thought it was legally great.

But it's pretty simple in my mind: if he didn't have agency, he wouldn't have been able to join Starfleet. The very basis of Starfleet accepting him means that he is capable of making his own decisions. And the very act of accepting him means he is not the property of Starfleet.

Either way Data is out. Sentient because you accepted him. Not sentient means his acceptance contract is void and obviously not property of Starfleet.

[-] Maalus@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

Starfleet rescued him off the planet and reactivated him. He was next to Lore who was completely disassebled. To people thinking Data isn't a person, it was a salvage operation, not a rescue. Same as getting back a derelict doesn't make it a person and makes it the property of Starfleet.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I'm having a hard time understanding what you're trying to say.

Salvage rights are very complex on their own, you don't automatically own other stuff simply because you come to their rescue (as in rescuing a ship) or flip a switch. It's quite literally someone else's property. So Starfleet didn't own him.

Second, he's an officer. You have to apply to officer school. Just like the children on the ship aren't automatically enrolled in Starfleet, they and he have to apply. It's a serious application. It's not like this android was just kicking around on a ship and fell into being an officer. (Same goes for enlisted.) *For anyone that doesn't want to read my next longer comment: Data signed a contract to enlist. To sign a contract requires agency, which starfleet accepted.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Fleur_@lemm.ee 22 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I fervently disagree. I think you can view it in a very optimistic and utopic way.

When confronted with his friend's sentience and individuality being questioned, Captain Picard chose to debate on the basis of data being a person and deserving rights. Sure you could've just said that data was a person because Starfleet accepted him. But does that specifically extend to all androids or beings in similar circumstances? I think it's a good character moment for Picard that he chooses to argue on the basis that star fleet is better than stripping away someone's agency. And he wins too. Ultimately the federation comes to agree with that view point. Thats why it is a utopic society. Because when faced with a moral dilemma they didn't simply choose "technically legally correct" they chose "morally right".

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] ummthatguy@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The existing legal precedent is absolutely ignored in lieu of courtroom spectacle. An excuse to have Picard wax poetic, which he does to great effect.

[-] AceBonobo@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago
[-] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 18 points 3 weeks ago

The dumbest part is when the JAG appoints Riker as the...plantiff/prosecutor? And threatens to summarily vote in the plantiff's favor if he refuses to serve in that capacity. "If you don't do anything, you win."

[-] WarlockLawyer@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

All Johnny 5 had to do was laugh at a religious joke told by Steve Gottenburg. Guess the 80s were more advanced socially in that regard

[-] GrabtharsHammer@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

They sure balanced out that social advancement with Fisher Stevens face painted to be an Indian engineer.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I think the concept is still high minded even if they ignored previous continuity for the sake of having the argument in the first place.

The antagonist is also a character that has little experience actually working with Data; so his ignorance is to be expected. I'm also not really sure how allowing him to be in Starfleet, hold ranks and what not means anything about his humanity.

I mean, even if they considered him to be nothing more than a machine, having him go through the academy and actually gain experience doing his job is a good test of the machine's ability to pretend to be human. It doesn't necessarily mean Starfleet wouldn't do the same for something like a non-android, AI powered robot that nobody would consider to be human.

I don't think the point even is "are androids human?" The point was "what makes a human human?" Our definition of it in reality is based more on emotion than rationality; there is a certain je ne sais quoi about what makes us different from other animals and opinions differ wildly about it.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Your argument ignores one important aspect.

They were looking for a reason to de-person him, to take him apart, and to build loads more like him to be used as slave labor in mines and other dangerous places.

[-] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 3 weeks ago

Having not seen it or any of TNG; is it perhaps supposed to be hated, an allusion to other (obvious) demands for human rights? To be deliberately infuriating that it's even a question?

[-] Cris_Color@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

Its an allegory for the civil rights movement regarding race if I recall correctly, which I think people appreciate, and are just frustrated with certain details of how the story was contrived to express its ideas.

I remember liking it okay, but I frankly don't remember it well, I mostly just remember sobbing a lot at the episode where data has a child because I love Data a whole bunch

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] thessnake03@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

In hindsight, there's a book that sort of covers Data early career, or at least what he was doing when Picard met him. The main focus of the book is Picard's time before the Enterprise. https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/The_Buried_Age

Noone is sure what to make of Data at that point. He is doing some computer database management stuff at some remote location and is content to just do that. Picard shows him how to have aspirations for more.

Starfleet never really thought or cared about Data's needs or wants, let alone sentience, until Maddox wanted to vivisect him

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
191 points (93.2% liked)

TenForward: Where Every Vulcan Knows Your Name

3792 readers
404 users here now

/c/TenFoward: Your home-away-from-home for all things Star Trek!

Re-route power to the shields, emit a tachyon pulse through the deflector, and post all the nonsense you want. Within reason of course.

~ 1. No bigotry. This is a Star Trek community. Remember that diversity and coexistence are Star Trek values. Any post/comments that are racist, anti-LGBT, or generally "othering" of a group will result in removal/ban.

~ 2. Keep it civil. Disagreements will happen both on lore and preferences. That's okay! Just don't let it make you forget that the person you are talking to is also a person.

~ 3. Use spoiler tags. This applies to any episodes that have dropped within 3 months prior of your posting. After that it's free game.

~ 4. Keep it Trek related. This one is kind of a gimme but keep as on topic as possible.

~ 5. Keep posts to a limit. We all love Star Trek stuff but 3-4 posts in an hour is plenty enough.

~ 6. Try to not repost. Mistakes happen, we get it! But try to not repost anything from within the past 1-2 months.

~ 7. No General AI Art. Posts of simple AI art do not 'inspire jamaharon'

~ 8. No Political Upheaval. Political commentary is allowed, but please keep discussions civil. Read here for our community's expectations.

Fun will now commence.


Sister Communities:

!startrek@lemmy.world

!memes@lemmy.world

!tumblr@lemmy.world

!lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world

Want your community to be added to the sidebar? Just ask one of our mods!


Honorary Badbitch:

@jawa21@startrek.website for realizing that the line used to be "want to be added to the sidebar?" and capitalized on it. Congratulations and welcome to the sidebar. Stamets is both ashamed and proud.


Creator Resources:

Looking for a Star Trek screencap? (TrekCore)

Looking for the right Star Trek typeface/font for your meme? (Thank you @kellyaster for putting this together!)


founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS