The Instigator
bsh1
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points
The Contender
LogikalOwnage
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

The Ethics of Star Trek: The Temporal Prime Directive

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
bsh1
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 1/16/2015 Category: TV
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,442 times Debate No: 68141
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (32)
Votes (3)

 

bsh1

Con

Preface

I will be doing a 12-debate series on the "Ethics of Star Trek." I will consider the AI debate I did with Wylted as the first installment of this series. While I know that Star Trek topics may seems like "fluff" or frivolous topics, I think that they actually have a lot of deep, philosophical issues at their heart that deserve exploration. I certainly think that the AI debate revolved around an issue that had gravitas.

My hope for this debate and for this series is that I will be able to have some fun delving into my inner nerd and my inner trekkie, while still having some lively and informative discussions.

In this debate, particularly, I hope to explore the ethical validity of the temporal prime directive through a specific example. On a side note, you must have completed at least one debate before you can accept this challenge.

Full Topic

The actions Ensign Kim and Cmdr. Chakotay took to save the Voyager Crew were ethical, despite violating the Temporal Prime Directive.

Terms

Ethical - conforming to accepted standards of moral conduct
Temporal Prime Directive - the directive set out by Star Fleet that the timeline must be maintained, and efforts at altering the timeline are prohibited [1]

Context

The resolution refers to events chronicled in the Star Trek: Voyager episode "Timeless." After a failed attempt to return to Earth from a distant part of the Galaxy, the whole crew of Voyager dies, except from Ensign Kim and Cmdr. Chakotay, who successfully return to Earth. Years later, they attempt to alter the timeline by sending signals back in time, warning the Voyager crew of the impending danger. [2]

Rules

1. No forfeits
2. Any citations or foot/endnotes must be provided in the text of the debate
3. No new arguments in the final round
4. Maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. No trolling or semantics
6. Pro accepts all definitions and waives his/her right to add definitions
7. Pro must post their case in Round One
8. Violation of any of these rules or of any of the R1 set-up merits a loss

Structure

R1. Pro's Constructive Case
R2. Con's Constructive Case, Pro rebuts Con's Case
R3. Con rebuts Pro's Case, Pro defends Pro's Case and Crystallizes
R4. Con defends Con's Case and Crystallizes, Pro waives

Thanks...

...to whomever accepts. I look forward to a great (and nerdy) debate!

[1] http://en.memory-alpha.org...
[2] http://en.memory-alpha.org...(episode)
LogikalOwnage

Pro

I accept. Debating will start next round.
Debate Round No. 1
bsh1

Con

Pro did not post first, contrary to the rules. Vice any penalty, I would ask that he be allowed to post his arguments next round. We will be following this altered structure for the debate:

Structure

R2. Pro's Constructive Case
R3. Con's Constructive Case, Pro rebuts Con's Case and Crystallizes
R3. Con rebuts Pro's Case and Crystallizes, Pro waives

I welcome my opponent to the site, and I wish him/her luck!
LogikalOwnage

Pro

LogikalOwnage forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
bsh1

Con

Unfortunately, my opponent forfeited.
LogikalOwnage

Pro

I believe that the actions of Chakotay (C) and Kim (K) were ethical. There is 1 reason for this:

Contention 1: K and C fulfilled their responsibility to their crew

Chakotay and Kim's original assignment was to get the crew home they fulfilled that responsibility. That was ethical.

As long as this point stands and none of my opponent's do pro wins.
Debate Round No. 3
bsh1

Con

Okay, so, let's raise two points in response to Pro:

1. Chakotay and Kim violated their responsibility to Starfleet. When they joined Starfleet, they were aware their actions may lead to the deaths of crewmates, but by joining Starfleet and/or by agreeing to operate under its rules, they agreed to obey Starfleet rules and precepts even if those standards led to undesirable consequences.

2. By altering the timeline, they may have led to more net harms. We don't know which iteration of the timeline would be better, which is why we don't mess with the timeline. But, by saving the crew, they may have altered the timeline such that others died. Given that there is a significant risk, they should not have risked tampering with it.
LogikalOwnage

Pro

LogikalOwnage forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
32 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
You only have three hours to post.
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
Waive means that you don't post arguments. You might just write the word "waive" or "pass" in the last round.

That's okay :) We all start somewhere.
Posted by LogikalOwnage 1 year ago
LogikalOwnage
btw, what odes waives mean. Srry, this my first debate.
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
I am going to pass on round 2, and you can post your argument in round 2 instead.
Posted by LogikalOwnage 1 year ago
LogikalOwnage
Srry i dint read rule # 7 (plz dont forfeit me)
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
Sweet :) Someone took the debate! Yay!
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
I do, lol. I got the idea one day and I sat down and typed out my intended topics plus some back-ups in case no one accepted the debates I wanted to have.
Posted by Maikuru 1 year ago
Maikuru
Do you already know the resolutions of your upcoming debates?
Posted by bsh1 1 year ago
bsh1
Cool :) Star Trek debates can be really fun.
Posted by Maikuru 1 year ago
Maikuru
As an aside, I look forward to this series of debates. My Star Trek debate was one of my favorites, and I am usually down for a good Trek topic.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 1 year ago
Maikuru
bsh1LogikalOwnage
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Ugh. Multiple forfeits and a barebones case, and on a Star Trek debate, no less!
Vote Placed by Skepticalone 1 year ago
Skepticalone
bsh1LogikalOwnage
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: Multiple forfeits by Pro. Boo. Even without the forfeits, Pro never made his case.
Vote Placed by 1harderthanyouthink 1 year ago
1harderthanyouthink
bsh1LogikalOwnage
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: See: Rule 1.