Something interesting came to mind after watching the clip about Cmdr. Data on Star Trek the other day. I noticed that there was a good deal of controversy around his 'right to choose', and whether he possessed the ability to do so. It seems as if the creators of Star Trek deliberately chose to debate this subject, possibly hoping to project into the future the decision it came to when the show was written. Perhaps they saw something we didn't, I don't know.
However, what I do know is what happens in Star-Trek is something that people like Capt. Picard were trying to avoid. We see many R2D2's and mech-droids of all kinds serving in all kinds of positions, and ostensibly under human or 'sentient' being control. It does not seem to pose a problem at all for the people in Star Wars, so why does it have to be a big deal in Star Trek ?
Although Star Wars is interfused with religious intertitles (e.g. "Light/Dark" The Force/Dark Side), I feel it does not attempt to address such political or relevant issues that Star Trek attempts. I feel that's one of the reasons that makes Star Trek for me more appealing than Star Wars.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
yeah, but I feel like Star Wars' approach is more realistic...sure basically sentient droids are used for a variety of reasons, but they are always treated as what they are: artificial servers of humanity. Their rights are never in question because their status as property is never in question. I just don't see human technology expanding beyond that and actually constructing anything that blurs the line between robot and human.
Post a Comment