Burning Issues

By Walt Edinger

The best conversations take place around a fire. Staring into a hot bed of coals lends itself to deep thoughts and a roaring fire is the source of great discussions. Surrounded by the right friends, these conversations may allow us to examine the problems of the day, explore our innermost thoughts or even to answer the questions asked by philosophers.

This book is an attempt to take the reader on a philosophical quest with John, as he tries to answer questions about life, ethics and Star Trek. In the format of a conversation among friends, the main character asks his companions what makes our decisions ethical or unethical and whether we need a first principle of ethics to help decide among competing choices. What begins as a simple question soon becomes the focus of this gathering of friends.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Walt Edinger
• Release date: Jun 23, 2020
• ISBN: 9780463631959

Walt Edinger

I taught medical ethics at the University of Toledo. I have taught and consulted on issues of research ethics and clinical ethics since 1987. I have found writing to be a way to express my doubts and frustrations about the cases I have been asked to address over the years. Most of my writing has been short stories or poetry. The Trial of Frankenstein is my first attempt at a longer work. Burning Issues was written as a way to answer my own questions about what it means to be ethical.

Book preview

Burning Issues

By

Walt Edinger

Contents

Preface

Part 1

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Chapter 11

Chapter 12

Chapter 13

Chapter 14

Part 2

Chapter 15

Chapter 16

Chapter 17

Chapter 18

Chapter 19

Chapter 20

Chapter 21

Chapter 22

Acknowledgments

About the Author

Other Books by Walt Edinger

Preface

The best conversations take place around a fire. Staring into a hot bed of coals lends itself to deep thoughts and a roaring fire is the source of great discussions. Surrounded by the right friends, these conversations may allow us to examine the problems of the day, explore our innermost thoughts or even to answer the questions asked by philosophers.

This book is an attempt to take the reader on a philosophical quest with John, as he tries to answer questions about life, ethics and Star Trek.

The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.

-Socrates

The most important question in ethics is ‘who counts?’

-Walt Edinger

Relativity applies to physics, not ethics.

- Albert Einstein

Laws and principles are not for the times when there is no temptation: they are for such moments as this, when body and soul rise in mutiny against their rigour ... If at my convenience I might break them, what would be their worth?

-Charlotte Brontë, Jane Eyre

The unexamined life is not worth living.

-Plato

We must strive to be more than we are. It does not matter that we will not reach our ultimate goal. The effort itself yields its own reward.

-Gene Roddenberry

Part One

i

John sat staring at the glowing embers of the fire. The others were back at the house and he sat alone. Contemplating. The orange glow was only interrupted by occasional flickers of blue flame. A smoldering fire breeds contemplation, sparks the imagination. A roaring fire is better for conversation.

Just then, Ben walked up and threw a couple of logs on the fire. He sat down and watched as the new logs began to burn. What are you thinking about?

Life. Ethics. Star Trek.

Wow. I’m intrigued. Star Trek?

Yeah. Sort of. There was a long pause. "You know how Star Trek has the Prime Directive? It got me thinking. The Prime Directive is supposed to be an unbreakable rule that guides the Federation in the show. Even though they usually push up against it and sometimes violate it, the Prime Directive is an ethical starting point. It’s what they measure their actions against. It provides a basis for deciding what they ought to do and what they shouldn’t do. We don’t seem to have a shared ethical starting point.

So I was just sitting here wondering whether the Prime Directive would work for us. Would it be appropriate for ethical interactions among individuals, or does it only make sense for interactions in dealing with other planets or other civilizations? Is it even a good directive? What would make sense for us?

And you thought of all that by staring at the fire?

Actually, John said, I’ve been thinking about this off and on for a while. The fire brings me back to it.

Okay. So the Star Trek Prime Directive says you shouldn’t interfere with alien civilizations, right?

Actually, it’s stronger than that. It states that there can be absolutely no interference with the social development of alien civilizations. Not just that you ‘should not’. You ‘must not’. Prime directives leave no room for interpretation.

If it were that simple, there would be no mention of it in the Star Trek series. Said Ben. Everything is subject to interpretation.

That’s true. So should not interfering with the development of alien civilizations be Star Trek’s Prime Directive? Is there a better ‘first principle’? When they violate it, are they following a higher principle than ‘non-interference’? And if so, should that principle be the Prime Directive?"

Too much theory. Give me some context so we can talk about it, says Ben. So, this prime directive is basically non-interference. But anytime you meet someone, you interfere. Right?

The fire was roaring now but John threw on a couple more logs for inspiration. Of course. The Prime Directive is about allowing cultures or civilizations to develop without interference. But it seemed to be mostly concerned about the consequences of space flight.

What do you mean?

If a planet had not developed space flight, if their technology was ‘pre-warp’, you couldn’t let those on the planet know about the existence of life on other planets or that space travel was possible. They couldn’t identify themselves or their mission, because it would change the way that civilization naturally developed.

Wait. What is ‘pre-warp’? asked Ben.

It’s not a real thing. Warp technology on the show is what allows them to travel at such great distances in a short amount of time. So instead of traveling out to Jupiter in a couple of years, you could travel to other star systems in much less time. So the difference between a ‘pre-warp’ and a ‘warp-capable’ society is about how far they can travel, so there is an assumption about how worldly they are or how advanced their civilization is.

So, we are pre-warp, I assume. If a Vulcan or a Martian were to land here, they couldn’t tell us they were from outer space?

Well it would be hard not to know that, right? So, they would either not land or would have to disguise themselves so that we wouldn’t know. Otherwise, the thought goes, it would affect how we would otherwise have developed.

You are suggesting, if we are living our daily grind here on Earth, and some Vulcan or Martian lands suddenly, our daily grind shifts to building space ships?

Possibly. Think about what that would mean. We are already talking about whether our religious beliefs would be altered by the presence of life on other planets. Imagine how technological changes would advance. Knowing something can be done makes us work harder toward the goal. Working for a cure for cancer, or a vaccine for AIDS, is a lot of effort because we don’t know if a cure can be found. Imagine if you knew that something existed and we just had to find it. If we were certain it would be found, and that it was just a matter of time and hard work, the task would be different. If you had some idea of what it would look like, it would make the hard work more meaningful and promising.

John continued. "Knowing that aliens are real and able to come here from outside our solar system would mean that we could, and perhaps should, devote more energy and resources to space travel. Not just going to the moon but leaving the solar system. If they can come here, we must find a way to go there. We would do this either because we are explorers, conquerors and exploiters, or even for defensive reasons.

A glance at the night sky would look different. Instead of being shiny lights in the sky, they might be homes to billions of inhabitants. Don’t we look at the stars differently than our ancestors did? We have a hard time looking at the sky and imagining not knowing what those lights are.

Ben remained quiet for a moment and then sat up straight. But it’s more than knowing that space travel is possible, isn’t it? We like our gods. Would space travelers appear as gods to us?

Exactly! John replied. In fact, that is a key point in some Star Trek stories. It is not just that you focus differently on the world. What if a society isn’t just ‘pre-space flight’, but pre-industrial? What would those people think if a space ship landed in their yard? They might think these beings are Gods!

Or Devils, Ben said.

Maybe even witches or demons, who knows? Especially if they looked different than we do, which is likely. That would often be the case in a Star Trek episode. How would a society’s culture change or be shaped by this sudden occurrence? Your previous belief system may change or disappear to be replaced by a belief in the Enterprise or the Federation. Or The Kirk.

Or The Picard!

Exactly. And previous beliefs may not be able to incorporate these new ideas. Those who saw The Picard would struggle to convince the non-believers who didn’t. There would be social upheaval.

So what? There is always social upheaval. One community may have a different set of core beliefs than another community. When they meet, there is conflict. How is it any different in this case? Except that in the case of seeing the Picard, it’s a fact. The truth may hurt, but it’s still the truth. Why would that be something to avoid?

They sat there for a minute without saying anything. After a while, John replied, Because it hurts. And the harm is being imposed by outsiders.

But what we are calling ‘interference’ wouldn’t always be harmful, right?

I don’t know, John said. But sometimes. Maybe even often. A Prime Directive is meant to serve as a guidepost. It’s one overarching principle that keeps you from having to weigh different principles on a case by case basis. It prevents one person from being in a position to bring their own personal bias into a situation, as that bias could cause harm.

You’ve lost me again – you’ve obviously watched more Star Trek than I have. Give me examples of the crew applying the Prime Directive and when they violated it.

Ooh. Star Trek discussions around the fire. Jeff walks up and warms himself by the flames.

Have a seat. We were discussing the Prime Directive.

Jeff responds, General Order Number One. Star Fleet Officers take an oath to uphold this Order even if it means sacrificing their own lives or the lives of their crews.

And yet, John responds, they do violate it.

But it is a good rule. Jeff settles into his chair but leans forward toward the flames.

We were just discussing that, says John. We were talking about how a culture might develop differently if they were visited by aliens from outer space, and that cultures should develop on their own without outside interference. But isn’t any exploration interference? ‘Seeking out new life and new civilizations,’ and all that?

Jeff gets excited. Oh, it includes the idea of limiting first contact to civilizations only after they achieve warp capability. But that doesn’t mean you can’t seek out new life and learn about new life forms. Maybe they are carbon-based life forms like us, maybe not. That is exploration. Learning about new civilizations. You can learn about them but they may not be able to learn about you if they are pre-warp. You see Star Trek episodes where they are studying a civilization but they are in hiding or they are disguised as the natives. But the Prime Directive is about more than just limiting direct contact to post-warp drive civilizations. It is about cultural non-interference, even for the planets who have warp capability.

What do you mean? Ben asked. What kinds of cultural non-interference are we talking about?

Respect for another civilization’s laws and customs. Their way of doing things. There were several episodes where a member of the crew went down to visit a planet and broke a law or custom. Obviously, the Enterprise was powerful enough to impose their will and free the crew members who were imprisoned. They could just beam them back to the ship. Or they could fire a few photon torpedoes at the planet to force the release of the crew. But these actions would violate the Prime Directive. You can’t interfere.

So that is the end of that crew member? asked Ben.

Jeff responded, It could be. That would be one way to deal with the Prime Directive. But the series was often about either pushing the limits of the Directive or even violating it, or finding a way to work within those limits. Many episodes were meant to show us that you can work within the laws to accomplish your goals. Rather than using force, you work within their legal system, their laws. This would be one way to respect the Directive and, at the same time, try to save your crew members, because it would be non-interference in their culture and would allow for cultural self-determination.

Respect, says Ben.

Exactly, said Jeff. Our laws and culture may be different than theirs. We may not have laws like they do. We may not, at least in the Star Trek future, allow capital punishment. But we cannot force our views on them. It took a long time for the Star Trek world to abandon the need for capital punishment, or money, or whatever. And these new worlds we find will need and will deserve the time to achieve their own long-range goals. We can’t impose these changes on them. They must come to them on their own. This is the more important part of the Prime Directive. Non-interference of cultural self-determination.

John replies, Even if they don’t always follow it. There are as many or more episodes where they do violate it. Little violations to big violations.

True, replied Jeff. Yet, most times violations are called out. Spock would say, ‘that would violate the Prime Directive.’ Or the possibility of violation would begin a heated discussion. There was a Next Generation episode where they discussed a little girl who was on a planet that was undergoing huge geologic shifts that were likely to lead to the destruction of the planet and all life on it. The Prime Directive said to not interfere. But it brought up issues of fate versus choice. If avoiding the prime directive is permissible in cases of natural disasters, is interference allowed in the case of an epidemic? Or a war? Star Trek was really good about raising the issue of the ethical slippery slope. But that is the purpose of a Prime Directive. It’s meant to stop you from sliding down that slope.

What do you mean by a slippery slope? Asked Ben.

John replied, It simply means that if you allow one exception, what is to stop you from allowing the next exception and then the next?

But they often did slide down the slope, didn’t they?

Yup, said Jeff. But that’s what made it such a good show. It forced us to ask questions of great consequence.

So do you think the Prime Directive is a good rule? John asked Jeff. "This is kind of where we started. Do we need a first principle? A prime directive? And is this the example we should look to? Would it work for us?

Jeff looked at the flames, thinking. Disease and hunger had been ended in the world of Star Trek. There was no need for money. People could use replicators to get anything needed. In the future envisioned by Star Trek, this principle might work. But as we discussed, it worked imperfectly even then because the real world is messy. Without the Prime Directive, the star ships that were sent out may have been more like the explorers of our own history. Conquering, exploiting, converting, and killing. Given the choice, I would prefer we explore with the Prime Directive than without any guiding principle, wouldn’t you? I need to get a drink, he said. Need anything? They declined and with that Jeff walked away leaving John and Ben to stare quietly into orange embers; yellow flames lapping around the edges of the smoldering logs. A spark flew onto a nearby maple leaf. They watched as the leaf began to smolder and change.

ii

John got up and added a few smaller logs to the fire and watched the flames build.

You know, John said after a long silence, we face the same questions here, on Earth. In fact, it was looking at how we address our obligations to other people on our own planet that made me think about the Prime Directive.

He stared for a minute into the fire before continuing. "Have you heard about these so-called ‘lost tribes’? In places like the Amazon rainforest, there are tribes that have never had contact with the outside world. They say there are between 40 and 90 tribes that they are aware of in that area. Many along the borders of Columbia, Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia. I have even heard of lost tribes in New Guinea and the Andaman Islands in the Indian Ocean. There may be even more that we are unaware of.

Can you imagine? These people, living in isolation as they have always lived. Completely unaware of the outside world. Some of these tribes are secretly studied by academics and scientists, or some that think they are acting secretly. It would be hard for these tribes not to observe their observers. Imagine what we might learn about our own more primitive history by studying these people still living as they did a thousand years ago. It’s mind boggling to me.

Ben replied, It wouldn’t just be scientists, would it? Can you imagine the temptation for missionaries to come in and change them? Completely upend their culture by bringing their holy book to these ‘lost souls’?

Something that missionaries have always done. It’s interesting. I don’t remember Star Trek ever dealing with missionaries violating the Prime Directive, said John.

Really?

Not that I remember. Anyway, Peru and Brazil actually have a ‘no first contact’ policy. Although it’s not perfect, the policy attempts to prevent contact until a tribe makes contact first. With logging operations in some of these areas, contact is inevitable.

Too much money is on the table to avoid contact forever, I guess.

"There have been cases where tribal members will sneak into settlements and take supplies. There are even cases of tourists taking pictures with them. When there is contact, the government goes in for the purpose of inoculating the tribe