Star Trek explains the human race better than Social Science

Post Reply New Topic

Yep I have come to the profound conclusion Star Trek is a better soiological and cultural approach to understanding the human species than most social sciences. Why? The following reasons explain my position.

1. Social science theories, methods and approaches tend to be faddy . Most hang around for about a decade and are replaced when a new theory comes along. Star Trek has been around for about four decades and is still going strong.

2. Star Trek has never required funding for its existence. Million of pounds , billions are spent on the scoial sciences > Star Trek returns a profit and is self funding.

2.a Star Trek is accessible observation of human beliefs and behaviours to most groups of humans ( and some dogs) It allows them to stand back at a sociological distance. There are condensed philosphical arguments which thye can follow. Interesting NT's and AS alike are willing to pay for this
experience.

3. Star Trek has produced cencepts which have gone on to be be sucessfully developed in our world.
Mobile phones, sliding doors , ionic propulsion systems. Warp Drive has been imagined in the minds of a mass population and is also awaiting realization . Social Science has not porduced such useful things .

4. Vulcan philosphy seems to me to interesect with some AS concepts and ideologies and patterns of speech . ( If we can be held to have any determinable shared ideology.)

For example

"May your journey be free of incident."

Is a Vulcan proverb. This does sound rather a rather off-the-cuff aspie thing to say for example when a loved one is about to head out into morning traffic and you don't want to unduly express any concern.



5. I therefore conclude Star Trek is a vaild cultural and sociologal resource , in fact is more so than most social sciences and related disciplines.

As Spock would perhaps say - In our stage of evolution if Richard Dawkins did not exist it would be necessary to invent him.

Meme

I've found art and literature in general are more helpful and accurate in explaining humanity than social sciences.

I accept your conclusion and agree with it.

I think so too.

Er guys will someone please at least try to disagree , this is part of a series of friendly hailing calls to the NT ARC fleet in UK.

Reptillian there has at least 10 percent sarcasm in that guy's expression, right?

I did disagree myself. I was being sarcastic on the cool story bro.

Thank you !

I like Star Trek, up to a certain point...the one thing I cannot get past though is Captain Janeways extensive banging on about how humans have evolved...every single episode.

[insert captain picard facepalm picture here] (Stupid 5 days rule lol)

If you look back on the four decades you can see differing approaches to anyone who is different:

Captain Kirk punches them, then sleeps with the females.

Picard has to ask his therapist what he is supposed to do every five minutes...

Sisko tries to get along with everyone and instead plunges the galaxy into war

And Janeway bangs on about humanity while being stuck 70,000 light years away because not even the writers wanted her around.

I won't mention Enterprise...I never quite understood the point of that show.

I hadn't considered this. Perhaps being of the first generation I saw this as THE Star Trek and the rest as follow's on.

That's only because as a child seeing things for the first time they are more intense and leave a more lasting impression.

One thing that is difficult to explain is the first series ran when the moonshots were happening and we all totally wanted to be astronauts for about a year. We were sure we were all going to get jobs on something like the Enterprise when we left school, a fact out teachers did not fail to expoit-" you will never get into space if can't do your seven times table." was enough to cuase serious weeping of both sexes in the classroom.



By the time The Next Generation hit our screens I had kids crawling over me and to be honest I was more interested in what the kids were doing than what was on the TV. (Parts of small toys stuck up nose happens in moments of distraction) Now I think about it the series has changed to reflect cultural developments over the years.


Regarding punching

Kirk's double hand blow always seemed a bit inefficient to me and I prefered the Vulcan nerve touch. Fortunately ( or not in some cases) this did not work in the playground.

Having said that Neither BF Skinner nor any Social scientist I can think of ever had a space shuttle named after them.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNsrK6P9QvI[/youtube]

Upon reading your posting, I do have to agree that Star Trek seems to have a lot of social science in it and is easier to understand than a lot of findings in the psych world that are junk that people call research. For example, the series " Dagger of the Mind" has a good message about how a bright light can be associated with certain words which can trigger certain types of behaviors. (I am a psychology major and I still have a lot to learn).

Then there was another episode where everyone developed a virus where their inner desires and feelings start bubbling up.

Sulu (sp?) starts trying to fence and attempts to slay anyone who gets in his was
Mr. Spock breaks down and starts crying by realizing that the vulcan way is harsh and that he needs to cry more often.

I don't know about you guys, but I so much prefer to rely on psych studies.

BS

Star Trek is little more than a leftist utopian fantasy with little regard to any reality.

It struck me the same way as Memesplice, but we saw the originals. With no google, and no understanding at all of psychology growing up without any idea one had autism, it was an amazing source of social information, although stereotyped and wrapped in appropriate packaging during a time when everything goes was not allowable on TV.

It didn't play the same role for me as I grew older after actual exposure to a great number of people and educational resources. But I don't know if I would have ever understood my own emotions as well as I did, because of the many episodes that explored the topic, with logical insight.

The original Twilight Zone and the Alfred Hitchcock hour had the same benefits of understanding the darker elements of society. There wasn't much to be learned from I Dream of Jeanie, the Beverly Hillbillies, Gilligan's Island, or Bewitched, other than life always has a happy ending and Barbara Eden was the Super Vixen of prime time TV. I couldn't have imagined a more perfect wife at the age of 7 or 8.

Rod Serling was a tortured soul, and a cynic of society; it showed in the twilight zone series that he helped create.

I never cared much for Star Trek after the original show. It no longer seemed original, more like a soap opera to me that didn't change much. There are so many things in life full of stimulation rather than thoughtful content.

Now that I think about it I was lucky to experience so many completely, new things in life, when there was nothing like it before. Every new thing like a VCR or a microwave, was much anticipated and appreciated once it arrived, because it made such a difference in life. So easy to get adjusted when everything came in small pieces.

Now it is all there at one time to choose from, with no possibility to experience the same newness or to share the same limited possibilities that most everyone can identify with. People, in general were experiencing the same new things together. Everyone wanted a VCR and everyone wanted a microwave.

We live in a very complex culture, of individuals that share little of the same interests as compared to the past. The only constant that I can think of is church, although I don't attend.

My favourite Star Trek series is DS9. I would agree with Molecular_Biologist in that ST is somewhat a "leftish" utopia, although I think it's a nice one. Some of the reasons I like best DS9 are that it's less utopian and more human than its siblings despite featuring the highest number of aliens and it has compelling story arcs and nice character moments. It explores more of "gray scale" thinking, and brings up philosophical aspects of different alien cultures more in the context of everyday life.

TOS and especially the feature movies with the TOS crew are second on my list to DS9.

Perhaps the ideas of living in peace with other cultures and species as long as possible, accepting/tolerating differences, abandoning money, caring for individuals, respecting biodiversity, specializing in professions are Aspie-ish.

With every respect to the merits of Star Trek, I don't think it's a better sociological and cultural approach to understanding human species than most social sciences. It can help someone to better understand humanity by having some insight into and getting a grasp of some interesting ideas, but altogether it's not enough for a thorough understanding. Even considering many remarkable pieces of other science fiction, say, novels by Asimov and Stanislaw Lem, it would be insufficient, imho.