Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Gert wrote:
Part of the human condition one might argue. If you remove the fear of death or the drive to live life to the fullest while you can, what's the point in doing anything? Plus most of the pain associated with getting old isn't a super big concern in the Federation, except with Picard who kept not taking medication because he was miserable for other reasons.

Even in the Federation its obvious you grow older, weaker, you die by inches and yards - they only seem to last a few decades more than we do.

Living for a few hundred even a few thousand years in good health would be so much better than degrading in body and or mind - and then if you have had enough - the you can choose to end it.

Do you know anyone who has the time to achive a fraction of what they wanted, what they could.....old age is the great enemy of our species, maybe we will defeat it in time...and that will be a great day.

Also why is longevity a bad thing for just humans and fine for other races....and why people are scared of it

Again I refer to the Culture novels - death is just an option when you grow tired of it all. That might take a 100 years or thousands or more - but they certainly don't grow old - unless they want to to experience something odd and unusual and then they can fix it.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Also why is longevity a bad thing for just humans and fine for other races....

Partly because races that are born with long-lives evolve society and natural structures that balance them out.

Humanity isn't "designed" to live for excessive lengths of time and thus it would seriously mess with our social structuring not to mention our breeding capacity and populations. I believe one episode of Original Series even touched on this with a world so heavily overpopulated it was standing-room-only on the surface.


It's important to note that some of ST's social elements are not purely set in their own setting and are values, ideals, concepts that are considered suitable in today's world being projected onto a sci-fi setting. So things like rampant overpopulation and excessive resource use exist even though in the ST universe at its point in history it could easily cope with a vast increase of population without much detriment to lifestyle or such. Heck with replicator technology and warp travel; you could expand in a lot of ways and that's before you get to mega-structures like a Dyson sphere.


Plus again these don't have to be ideals of the Federation, just Soong

 Overread wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Also why is longevity a bad thing for just humans and fine for other races....

Partly because races that are born with long-lives evolve society and natural structures that balance them out.

Humanity isn't "designed" to live for excessive lengths of time and thus it would seriously mess with our social structuring not to mention our breeding capacity and populations. I believe one episode of Original Series even touched on this with a world so heavily overpopulated it was standing-room-only on the surface.

It's important to note that some of ST's social elements are not purely set in their own setting and are values, ideals, concepts that are considered suitable in today's world being projected onto a sci-fi setting. So things like rampant overpopulation and excessive resource use exist even though in the ST universe at its point in history it could easily cope with a vast increase of population without much detriment to lifestyle or such. Heck with replicator technology and warp travel; you could expand in a lot of ways and that's before you get to mega-structures like a Dyson sphere.

Plus again these don't have to be ideals of the Federation, just Soong

As you say the Federation has the means and ability to have everyone live as long as they like and operate at their maximum physical and mental capacity.

Humanity is not designed to do anything - its just currently restricted by technology sadly.

The bigger issue is that unlike the TNG cast playing old versions of themselves in "All Good Things" back in 1994, they are that old now and have the real-life issues that come with aging. Killing Picard wasn't an option but replacing him with a prototype machine that simulated being old and had a lifespan similar to what Picard had left in human time was, even if it was rather silly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Morden wrote:
As you say the Federation has the means and ability to have everyone live as long as they like and operate at their maximum physical and mental capacity.

Sort of. People certainly live long and disabilities aren't nearly as much of an obstacle as they are in modern times but genetically enhancing people is actually fully illegal in the Federation. Societal support is massive as well so even if there isn't a solution for something, the state doesn't just lock someone away or do the bare minimum.

Yeah I know the off screen reason

You don't need to genetically enhance people - you just turn off the ageing process.

Yeah but I figure they don't want to say "no to genetic engineering" but then turn around and go "But you can get a robot body that's exactly like a living one; only you won't ag, won't die and heck give it a while and I'm sure we can upgrade your brain with more RAM!"

Because then its basically going down the same pathway as genetics, just from a different angle

 Overread wrote:
Yeah but I figure they don't want to say "no to genetic engineering" but then turn around and go "But you can get a robot body that's exactly like a living one; only you won't ag, won't die and heck give it a while and I'm sure we can upgrade your brain with more RAM!"

Because then its basically going down the same pathway as genetics, just from a different angle

Just shows how foolish they are

The thing is, with all the medical, societal and technological advances and the utter lack of a monetary drive behind them, there's no fight for science. If someone wants to dedicate their life to making a better Warp Drive they can do that and not worry about income, food or bills. You don't need immortality when life expectancy is high and there aren't any restrictions placed on your life.

 Gert wrote:
The thing is, with all the medical, societal and technological advances and the utter lack of a monetary drive behind them, there's no fight for science. If someone wants to dedicate their life to making a better Warp Drive they can do that and not worry about income, food or bills. You don't need immortality when life expectancy is high and there aren't any restrictions placed on your life.

Old age puts its own restrictions on life.

There is also no reason to condem people to old age and disease - to do so without reason is sadistic and cruel.

It has to focus on consent.

I for one don’t fear death or ageing. It’s a natural part of life, and unavoidable.

What I am genuinely terrified of though is Being The Last To Go. In the last few years, my immediate family have been dropping. I’ve seen inside nursing homes, and it’s not something I want for myself.

All joking aside, my friends know that if I’m diagnosed with something terminal? I’m not waiting for the reaper. Oh no. I’m cashing out whatever I can, then hookers, blow, straight over the nearest cliff. I don’t want to hang around. And whilst far from having a deathwish, I’d rather I’m not the last of my friends to be hanging on.

Now sure, Picard’s new body could’ve removed much of that. No disease. No disability, that does sound kind of appealing. But the “oh yeah and we didn’t ask you but you’re now the only one of your friends that’s functionally immortal”? No. Thank. You. And most certainly not without my explicit consent. That’s really no different to a Doctor just bumping me off rather than tell me I’ve got something terminal. It’s a decision for the individual and the individual alone.

Ageing is only currently unavoidable due to our primitive technology and resources.

Its the insidious degredation of everything that I hate about ageing - there is nothing good about it whatever people say.

Add to that 1/2 of us are going to get cancer (my father is currently fighting it) and then there is stuff like dementia......

On the decision - well they already made him a robot body without any consent - so its a very grey area so removing the defects that the biological body had fallen foul of would not have been any issue. Personally if they did that to me I would have been nothing but grateful.....

It’s definitely one thing to be cured. I know from when we lost Mum to cancer, she was offered at least one experimental treatment which would’ve extended life. At that point, she’d made her peace with mortality and opted out.

But to be cured and rendered relatively immortal? I don’t think that’s ethical, unless you can ensure that persons loved ones, and their loved ones, and their loved ones lovers ones follow suit. Because life can be lonely enough, let alone having to sit by and watch as your nearest and dearest drop away one by one.

It’s definitely an interesting moral quandary.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Old age puts its own restrictions on life.

There is also no reason to condem people to old age and disease - to do so without reason is sadistic and cruel.

Death is a part of life, to deny it is to deny living.
And once again, medicine within the Federation is far more advanced than we are and the societal issues faced by many today just don't exist. You don't need health insurance or need to wait years for surgeries because there is no money holding anything back. No underfunded health service or living from paycheck to paycheck avoiding medical bills. Those problems are gone.
The whole point of the Federation is that it is a utopian society. Nobody is "condemned" to old age because the problems we associate with it are largely gone. Yes, some conditions and diseases will still exist but the vast majority have measures or medications that reduce their severity and suffering. In TNG, they literally grow Worf a whole new spine.

 Gert wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Old age puts its own restrictions on life.

There is also no reason to condem people to old age and disease - to do so without reason is sadistic and cruel.

Death is a part of life, to deny it is to deny living.
And once again, medicine within the Federation is far more advanced than we are and the societal issues faced by many today just don't exist. You don't need health insurance or need to wait years for surgeries because there is no money holding anything back. No underfunded health service or living from paycheck to paycheck avoiding medical bills. Those problems are gone.
The whole point of the Federation is that it is a utopian society. Nobody is "condemned" to old age because the problems we associate with it are largely gone. Yes, some conditions and diseases will still exist but the vast majority have measures or medications that reduce their severity and suffering. In TNG, they literally grow Worf a whole new spine.

Death is a part of our life - perhaps in a better future it will be a choice, an option to be taken when one desires to do so...or not. And longevity is not immortality....many races in the ST universe do very well with with living for hundreds of years or more....

And yet those that live in the Federation grow older...weaker........they suffer from diseases and conditions.....not all injuries are fixable as shown in the various shows. The Next gen crew seemed very happy with the revilitaisation effects of the Ba'ku planet as well....

The Federation also doesn't like genetic tampering even though the benefits can be clearly seen. So you're fighting against the social and cultural elements of the Federation and upon what its founded.

These are the ideals that the people of the Federation - at large - live by.


It might be that in a generation or two those values will change. Perhaps positronic bodies will become more and more accepted and potentially used as a form of after-life-extension.

Holograms are also another potential avenue which also gets around a lot of space and other issues. Just have yourself preserved in an eternal Holodeck.

Then you've got genetic tampering which DS9 touched on. Perhaps in another few generations the Federation will change its stance as more like Basheer sneak through the barriers.

 Overread wrote:
The Federation also doesn't like genetic tampering even though the benefits can be clearly seen.

The negatives are fairly clear as well.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Death is a part of our life - perhaps in a better future it will be a choice, an option to be taken when one desires to do so...or not. And longevity is not immortality....many races in the ST universe do very well with with living for hundreds of years or more....

And yet those that live in the Federation grow older...weaker........they suffer from diseases and conditions.....not all injuries are fixable as shown in the various shows. The Next gen crew seemed very happy with the revilitaisation effects of the Ba'ku planet as well....

Death is a natural process, it's not just part of Human life but all life. Now as has been pretty clearly explained about four or five times now, Human life has already been extended beyond current averages (100 by the time of Enterprise and about 130 by TNG) while also being far more fulfilling and enriched than modern life. Other races live longer lives but they still aren't functionally immortal and still grow old because death is still an important part of life. It's not a condemnation to grow old if the society in which one does so supports them which the Federation does. You seem to be under the impression that getting old is only awful and terrible while refusing to take what anyone has said here into account.

As for Insurrection, bad dialog and a rubbish plot do not a good example make.

Young Guinan is cute as a button. Bit of an attitude, but cute as a button.

 Gert wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Death is a part of our life - perhaps in a better future it will be a choice, an option to be taken when one desires to do so...or not. And longevity is not immortality....many races in the ST universe do very well with with living for hundreds of years or more....

And yet those that live in the Federation grow older...weaker........they suffer from diseases and conditions.....not all injuries are fixable as shown in the various shows. The Next gen crew seemed very happy with the revilitaisation effects of the Ba'ku planet as well....

Death is a natural process, it's not just part of Human life but all life. Now as has been pretty clearly explained about four or five times now, Human life has already been extended beyond current averages (100 by the time of Enterprise and about 130 by TNG) while also being far more fulfilling and enriched than modern life. Other races live longer lives but they still aren't functionally immortal and still grow old because death is still an important part of life. It's not a condemnation to grow old if the society in which one does so supports them which the Federation does. You seem to be under the impression that getting old is only awful and terrible while refusing to take what anyone has said here into account.

As for Insurrection, bad dialog and a rubbish plot do not a good example make.

No - the on screen depiction of ST shows us that humans grow old, fat and degrade - I agree there is more mitigation in the Federation than we have much more but they still perish in a mere century - degarding all the time. Thats clearly seen in Picard - yes its the actor who is degrading but its also obivously part of the ST Universe.

Death may be an important part of life for you but for me its a limitation that in time should become nothing more than a choice of if and when - currently there is no choice - you degrade and perish, and everything you could have achieved, enjoyed dies with you. I work with alot of old people - and you see them slowly fade and decline as minds and bodies fail them - its a very sad thing. Thats what I saw in recent ST - the people slowly dying.

Again, comes down to consent.

I think we all understand you’d jump at the chance of immortality.

And….entirely fair enough. Your life, your choice. Your ongoing never ending choice at that point.

But I do not want to become immortal. At all. I don’t want my life extended beyond mental and physical capacity. I don’t want to be kept alive Just Because Modern Medical Science Can Do It. I want quality of life.

Hence, if I’m diagnosed with something terminal? Cash out my pension. All the blow, all the hookers, where’s the nearest cliff, YEET!”.

If it’s someone in a coma? Where like Picard, we can port them into a new body, previously devoid of sentience? Yes. By all means do that. You’re preserving the consciousness.

But simply….do not make that new body immortal without asking it’s soon-to-be-inhabitant if they want to be immortal.

 Mr Morden wrote:
No - the on screen depiction of ST shows us that humans grow old, fat and degrade - I agree there is more mitigation in the Federation than we have much more but they still perish in a mere century - degarding all the time. Thats clearly seen in Picard - yes its the actor who is degrading but its also obivously part of the ST Universe.

Death may be an important part of life for you but for me its a limitation that in time should become nothing more than a choice of if and when - currently there is no choice - you degrade and perish, and everything you could have achieved, enjoyed dies with you. I work with alot of old people - and you see them slowly fade and decline as minds and bodies fail them - its a very sad thing. Thats what I saw in recent ST - the people slowly dying.

I'm going to have to disagree on your philosophy regarding death as I believe your argument to be utterly selfish. The prospect of an eventual death can give people motivation to achieve their dreams and goals, and when combined with a society where there are no worries about money or requirements to work it makes it all the better. People have that century of life to achieve whatever they want, even if that achievement is extending life even further. But their lives work means all the more if others are inspired to carry it on after their death which in turn can lead to new ideas and inventions stemming from new minds. Take Jonathan Archer as an example. What pushed him to become the man he was? His father never got to see the engine he built in action, which in turn led Archer to become the first captain of the Enterprise lineage and one of (if not the most) important figures in the founding of the entire Federation. If Archer's father never dies, Archer never joins Starfleet, and the Federation isn't formed. Eternity leads to stagnation and stagnation leads to the destruction of a society. One way or another, immortality leads straight back to death.

You might work with old people now but you don't live in a utopia. You live in a time where we are stuck with the whims of corporations and health systems that are underfunded and degraded year after year. Your perspective is flawed and you refuse to acknowledge that. You also aren't the only person ever to experience the degradation of people you care about so don't act like you know everything.

 Gert wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
No - the on screen depiction of ST shows us that humans grow old, fat and degrade - I agree there is more mitigation in the Federation than we have much more but they still perish in a mere century - degarding all the time. Thats clearly seen in Picard - yes its the actor who is degrading but its also obivously part of the ST Universe.

Death may be an important part of life for you but for me its a limitation that in time should become nothing more than a choice of if and when - currently there is no choice - you degrade and perish, and everything you could have achieved, enjoyed dies with you. I work with alot of old people - and you see them slowly fade and decline as minds and bodies fail them - its a very sad thing. Thats what I saw in recent ST - the people slowly dying.

I'm going to have to disagree on your philosophy regarding death as I believe your argument to be utterly selfish. The prospect of an eventual death can give people motivation to achieve their dreams and goals, and when combined with a society where there are no worries about money or requirements to work it makes it all the better. People have that century of life to achieve whatever they want, even if that achievement is extending life even further. But their lives work means all the more if others are inspired to carry it on after their death which in turn can lead to new ideas and inventions stemming from new minds. Take Jonathan Archer as an example. What pushed him to become the man he was? His father never got to see the engine he built in action, which in turn led Archer to become the first captain of the Enterprise lineage and one of (if not the most) important figures in the founding of the entire Federation. If Archer's father never dies, Archer never joins Starfleet, and the Federation isn't formed. Eternity leads to stagnation and stagnation leads to the destruction of a society. One way or another, immortality leads straight back to death.

You might work with old people now but you don't live in a utopia. You live in a time where we are stuck with the whims of corporations and health systems that are underfunded and degraded year after year. Your perspective is flawed and you refuse to acknowledge that. You also aren't the only person ever to experience the degradation of people you care about so don't act like you know everything.

Lets agree to disagree - and perhaps you should re-read your own statements to see who is claiming to be the moral authority of the universe?

Althought you seem to completly ignore my repeated statement that elmination of the ageing process gives you a choice - our current biological limitations and shown evidently on screen by the citizens of the Federation those do not give a choice only an inervitable decline leading to death.

Look at Picard season 1 - he is old and dying, a sad shadow of his former self physically. How is that a good thing?

Why do you want people to degrade phycially and mentally - I truely do not understand you. I said get rid of that and let people choose when (or if) they die- many may choose to do so when they fill they done eveything they want.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Again, comes down to consent.

I think we all understand you’d jump at the chance of immortality.

And….entirely fair enough. Your life, your choice. Your ongoing never ending choice at that point.

But I do not want to become immortal. At all. I don’t want my life extended beyond mental and physical capacity. I don’t want to be kept alive Just Because Modern Medical Science Can Do It. I want quality of life.

Hence, if I’m diagnosed with something terminal? Cash out my pension. All the blow, all the hookers, where’s the nearest cliff, YEET!”.

If it’s someone in a coma? Where like Picard, we can port them into a new body, previously devoid of sentience? Yes. By all means do that. You’re preserving the consciousness.

But simply….do not make that new body immortal without asking it’s soon-to-be-inhabitant if they want to be immortal.

But Picard in a young body could still end himself at any point.....its a choice to continue or not - sticking him in a failing physical body just condenms him to death and degredation?

 Mr Morden wrote:
Look at Picard season 1 - he is old and dying, a sad shadow of his former self physically. How is that a good thing?

That's because he's depressed you muppet. He's also never recovered from being assimilated by the bloody Borg, a condition that very few people ever actually have to live with. If you're going to pick an example at least pick a good one.

Question for everyone:

If you wanted to sit down with someone to watch Picard, assuming you skipped Season 2 completely (and who wouldn't), what episodes of Season 1 would you say are vital/important for context in Season 3? I mean the first and last (I genuinely love the final scene with Data in Season 1), but any else?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Question for everyone:

If you wanted to sit down with someone to watch Picard, assuming you skipped Season 2 completely (and who wouldn't), what episodes of Season 1 would you say are vital/important for context in Season 3? I mean the first and last (I genuinely love the final scene with Data in Season 1), but any else?

You can't really split it up.

It's not like the old seasons where you could just cherry pick because everything starts and ends the same. Picard is a tight story driven narrative where each episode is basically unique in structure to the next and relies on the previous to make sense. It's more like a long drawn out film broken into episodes. So for someone new to the season you really cannot cherry pick parts out because the story will just not make any sense what so ever.


Even skipping season 2 will be quite baffling as a lot of characters shift around in relationships, positions and roles. Granted its more possible because a lot of the new cast are missing and replaced with old cast and most are kind of sort of ish where they were at the end of season 1 again. However a few things might be confusing (like why Rafie and 7 are broken up or Picards relationship with a Romulan which might be one of the weaker points of season 3 because that was swept out very fast and kind of didn't return for the end since the end of 3 was more of a TNG thing)

finished season 2 yesterday and to add this, it all feels more like the stretched a single episode or two part episode over a "season"

Season 2 was not bad compared to the first one but could have been done in less episodes, specially as it was clear what they are going for after the 2nd episode

so it is more like which part of an episode to skip rather than leaving out filler episodes and therefore don'st skip it

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Question for everyone:

If you wanted to sit down with someone to watch Picard, assuming you skipped Season 2 completely (and who wouldn't), what episodes of Season 1 would you say are vital/important for context in Season 3? I mean the first and last (I genuinely love the final scene with Data in Season 1), but any else?

As long as you know that A) Picard's original body died and he was put into a synthetic body replicating his old one and that B) Data died a 'final' death I'd say you don't even need to watch them.

 Overread wrote:
So for someone new to the season you really cannot cherry pick parts out because the story will just not make any sense what so ever.

As someone who has suffered through the first two seasons, I know that's not the case. I'm just a very continuity driven guy, and am trying to break away for that for the benefit of my friend's sanity (and time), hence my asking what would others include or exclude from Season 1.

 Overread wrote:
Even skipping season 2 will be quite baffling as a lot of characters shift around in relationships, positions and roles. Granted its more possible because a lot of the new cast are missing and replaced with old cast and most are kind of sort of ish where they were at the end of season 1 again. However a few things might be confusing (like why Rafie and 7 are broken up or Picards relationship with a Romulan which might be one of the weaker points of season 3 because that was swept out very fast and kind of didn't return for the end since the end of 3 was more of a TNG thing)

Season 3 didn't even watch Season 2! That final scene basically went "Nah, forget about all that!".

Hyped.