Product Description

For Trekkies everywhere, a fascinating look at the philosophy of Star Trek, from Kirk and Spock to Janeway and Seven of Nine

For four decades, Star Trek has been the obsession of millions of fans. But real Trekkies know that the show is more than just riveting entertainment. Its complex moral dilemmas present a view of the future that holds important truths for us in the present. Drawing on episodes from all four Star Trek generations, this unique book explores the ethics of the series in relation to the theories of the world's great philosophers. Questions about good and evil, right and wrong, power and corruption are discussed in language that,is both readable and compelling as the authors show, how the program has evolved over the years to address society's changing values. For this century and beyond, The Ethics of "Star Trek" is an intriguing look at a brilliantly imagined-world and what it can teach us about how to live.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #136402 in Books
• Published on: 2001-12-01
• Released on: 2001-11-27
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 384 pages

Amazon.com Review
At first glance, this blend of philosophical ethics and Star Trek may look like an outlandish Trekkie fantasy. In fact, it is a fascinating use of popular culture to engender sophisticated discussions of ethical theory. Obviously, The Ethics of Star Trek will be most interesting and accessible to fans of the show. But one need not be a guru in the cabala of Star Trek to appreciate and understand the witty instruction in ethics found in this volume. Authors Judith Barad--who is a professor of philosophy at Indiana State University--and Ed Robertson have crafted a charming introduction to ethical theory. As the authors point out, "One reason why Star Trek has endured from one generation to the next is that most of the stories themselves are indeed moral fables." And moral fables, particularly popular ones, are an excellent springboard into the deeper waters of philosophical ethics.

The book covers much more ground than is typically traveled in Ethics 101 courses. In the first of five sections, Barad and Robertson deal with the importance of religion and culture, as well as logic, in ethical reasoning. They go on to successively tackle virtue ethics, hedonism, Stoicism, Christian ethics, social contract theory, duty ethics, utilitarianism, and existential ethics--all in reference to the moral dilemmas enlivened by Star Trek. And while the topics' treatments are somewhat cursory, they are written with a conversational prose that beckons the reader to further study. Perhaps Jean-Luc Picard puts it best in the book's epigraph, "There is no greater challenge than the study of philosophy."

From Publishers Weekly
"One reason why Star Trek has endured... is that most of the stories... are indeed moral fables," say Barad, professor of philosophy at Indiana University, and Robertson, author of The Fugitive Recaptured. Using episodes from the four Star Trek TV series, they travel through various universes of ethical theory: in chapters with titles like "Kirk Finds the Golden Mean" and "Kirk and Kira Battle Evil: Christian Ethics," the authors offer useful and evenhanded introductions to the ethical theories of Aristotle, Epicurus and the Stoics, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche and contemporary ethicist Tom Regan (known mostly for his writings on animal rights). For instance, Plato argued that the four virtues of temperance, courage, wisdom and justice would be the hallmarks of the ideal republic. Barad and Robertson contend that Spock and Kirk exhibit courage in an episode called "The Savage Curtain" when they fight off shadows of four of history's most evil creatures to prove that good is mightier than evil. "The Original Series most clearly reflects Aristotelian virtue;" the authors contend, The Next Generation exemplifies "the ethics of duty... Deep Space Nine, existentialism; and Voyager, Platonic virtue." Their effort to popularize a difficult subject occasionally results in egregious misreadings. Nietzsche, for instance, did not base his philosophy on the concept that "might makes right," as he abhorred every system of subjugation and suggested that we are all continually engaged in overcoming such systems. Overall, philosophically inclined Trekkies will want to beam this book up to their shelves, but it is hard to imagine that this book will boldly go where no other introduction to ethics has goneDamong the broadest range of students and general readers. (Dec. 1)
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From School Library Journal

Adult/High School-For 35 years, Star Trek has been a popular vehicle for exploring social issues. Its humanistic values and optimistic view of the future have inspired many young people in their career choices, and the ethical dilemmas that drive much of its drama have provoked debate among generations of fans. Other authors have explored the physics, metaphysics, and "meaning" of the series; here, a philosophy professor uses the ethical content of its story lines to present a survey of Western philosophy. This method of conveying information might be rather convoluted, but anyone reasonably familiar with the series should be able to follow the authors' arguments. It is a little harder to accept the authors' assertion of a "unified theory" of Star Trek philosophy-a format in which each of the four Star Trek series embodies the ethical values of a particular philosophical system (Aristotelian virtue, Kant's duty theory, existentialism, and Platonic virtue). Spock fans might be disappointed by the authors' sketchy treatment (and sometimes faulty use) of logic, while others could be irritated by the occasional intrusion of the authors' personal beliefs, their sometimes condescending tone, uneven literary style, rambling digressions, or failure to cite sources. Still, autonomous young people voyaging boldly into an ever-changing future, and seeking an ethical system to steer by, could do far worse than to follow the Star Trek model as Barad and Robertson interpret it. And even if they aren't looking for a course in philosophy, serious aficionados of the series will find plenty of intriguing material here to sink their humanoid teeth into.

Christine C. Menefee, Fairfax County Public Library, VA

Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

Customer Reviews

Star Trek Stories as Moral Fables Exemplifying a Philosphy
As someone who has watched a lot of Star Trek, I find myself constantly noticing that the "normal" rules often don't quite apply in the various shows. Captain Kirk was always violating the Prime Directive. Starfleet Academy gave Kirk a commendation for breaking into the computer to change the programming of an "impossible" assignment (looks like cheating to me). Spock was always sacrificing himself for the good of the many (or the one, in the case of Captain Pike). Captain Janeway often risked the whole ship to try to help one crew member. On Deep Space Nine, the Federation is involved in maintaining an alien religion. Other cultures get a lot of respect, but the ones that are like the Nazis are opposed. If you are like me, you often feel upside-down, inside-out, and topsy-turvey all at the same time in these stories. What is the right thing to do in the 24th century?

Professor Barad teaches Ethics at Indiana State and has a course on the philosophy of Star Trek. That attracted me to the book right there. I never took a philosophy course when I was in college that sounded nearly that interesting. We studied Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Kierkegaard, and symbolic logic. Well, you'll be pleased to know that this volume has plenty of Star Trek, Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and Kierkegaard. But you'll also be relieved to know that at least the symbolic logic is missing!

The purpose of this book (its Prime Directive) is to "stimulate greater awareness of the many ethical issues and concerns in daily life." Using famous Star Trek episodes from all four series (The original series, Next Generation, Deep Space 9, and Voyager) as the foundation, classic ethical issues are first examined in terms of the leading sources of ethical thought: such as cultural relativism, religion, Greek and Roman philosophies, the social contract, Kant's notion of duty, utilitarianism, and existentialism. If you are not familiar with all of these, Professor Barad provides just what you need to know. So its meaty, but not heavy.

Then Professor Barad considers whether or not all four series are consistent with any of these ideas. Her conclusion seems right when she says that Star Trek has created a new synthesis of Aristotle's idea of the golden mean (too much or too little of any character quality is a vice while the balance in between is a virtue), Kant's idea of operating "from duty," and Kierkegaard's concept of individual freedom and responsibility. The classic Aristotelean virtues are all present: courage; temperance; friendliness; gentleness; cooperation; justice; open-mindedness; compassion; mindfulness; respect for others; honesty; and loyalty. She leaves us with the idea that perhaps we as a society can evolve in this direction and leaves us with a thought from Captain Pickard: "Make it so."

What makes these thoughts interesting is that Professor Barad points out that "noble as they are, none of the Star Trek characters are saints." Gene Roddenberry himself seems to have set out to establish a new world that "strives to be free of racist, sexist, and xenophobic attitudes." In developing the challenging philosophy described here, obviously he succeeded mightily.

It's also fun to revisit all of these old epsiodes and to squarely focus on their ethical content. That element was always there, but it was a bit submerged.

After you finish reading and thinking about the book, I suggest that you take some issues of contemporary society such as the right way to deal with world hunger, establish peace, and protect the environment appropriately and consider what actions would be most consistent with the Star Trek philosophy as you now understand it.

Live long and prosper!

Lively, fun introduction to heavy-duty ethical concepts
I used to watch Star Trek, which I believe is an asset when reading this book. But you don't have to be a true aficionado of Star Trek in all its permutations to benefit from -- and enjoy -- this unusual approach to the fascinating subject of ethics. That's because, at the start of each chapter, authors Barad and Robertson describe various individual shows in enough (but never too much) detail so that you can picture the scenes and participate fully in the lively conversation. What's right and what's not? Whose view of ethics was applied by the makers of the show, and which SHOULD be applied in each convoluted instance, Aristotle's or Kant's, Sartre's or the Christians?

The tone of the writing is always fresh and conversational, without oversimplifying the topic. Is Spock sometimes "too logical," or is Kirk sometimes too swayed by emotion? How can we tell? By the final results -- the universe is saved yet again -- or by what they hoped would happen? I found myself drawn in again and again, able to follow the thread of what is, after all, a high level discussion. Highly recommended for the casual reader interested in how we determine what to do in living a "good" life. I'd love to see this used in high schools and colleges to introduce people to these age-old but always fresh ideas in a compelling way.

Allegory vs. Example
The purpose of this book is not to examine the treatment of ethical dilemmas in the Star Trek oeuvre, nor indeed to use various Trek episodes to exemplify ethical theories. Instead, it's to determine the ethical framework upon which Trek is based, and even to apply that framework as the basis for an ideal human society. This is troubling, because to emulate Star Trek is not to emulate the United Federation of Planets, an admittedly noble institution, but a group of Hollywood writers and producers. The Federation was created as an ideal society - by definition - by Gene Roddenberry, therefore to conclude that its ethical foundations are optimal is kind of like discovering that circles are round. The episodes of Trek cannot provide adequate real-world examples of ethical theories precisely because they're fictitious: The writers decide whether they want the characters to behave ethically or not. Since the writers (and the times) keep changing, the ethical basis of the various series and episodes is not consistent. For example, in one TNG episode the Klingon society is portrayed as valuing actions and results over motives, but in a later DS9 episode exactly the opposite is stated.

That said, the book nevertheless provides an interesting discussion of all the major ethics philosophies, throughout human history, and uses specific situations from the first four Trek series and the first nine movies to illustrate the critical issues involved. Unfortunately, the discussions are somewhat simplistic, as if Barad felt she had to "talk down" to her audience. The Trek audience, however, is possibly the pop-cultural segment least in need of patronage, and I wish Paramount would realize that. In a few areas, Barad presents the basic principles of an ethical theory or the issues involved in a particular episode, but neglects to take the extra step or to examine more complex theoretical nuances raised by some of the situations. A few examples:

Cultural Relativism: The conclusion here is that cultural relativism is logically inconsistent because of its basic principle that there are no universal cultural precepts, which is itself a universal cultural precept, and that it therefore cancels itself out. It is also pragmatically unworkable because a strict adherence to its tenets would prevent Starfleet from interceding in cultures that practice clearly reprehensible programs like genocide, slavery and repression. But what's not addressed is the possibility that cultural relativism is itself relative, meaning that one culture cannot even impose its interpretation of cultural relativism upon another. By this premise, Starfleet can intercede in the case of genocide because one culture is preventing another from adhering to its own cultural imperative; i.e. the concept of cultural relativism in general (as opposed to a strictly Federation perspective) is not being respected. Starfleet does in fact believe in cultural relativism, in fact the Prime Directive is based upon it, and will act to prevent gross violations of that credo in other cultures. A culture must be allowed to pursue its own tenets within its own boundaries, but it must be prevented from forcibly imposing those tenets upon other cultures.

Duty vs. Motive: During the discussion of whether morals proceed solely from religion or exist independently, Barad concludes that Starfleet captains act not for their own benefit but for that of their crews. In this way she likens them to political leaders throughout history (and the fictional Star Trek future). Someone needs to explain to her the difference between civic leadership and military leadership. As every Trekkie knows, a starship captain acts not for the benefit of his crew but for that of the mission - which, in most cases, is exploration, discovery, and/or diplomacy. The crew of a starship is a team with a unified goal, the successful completion of the mission. The captain's job as mission leader is to decide how best to accomplish that goal, while simultaneously protecting the rights and safety of the ship's crew, equipment, and civilians. Picard and other captains often stated that their primary responsibility was to the safety of their crew, but it is not their only responsibility, nor is it the reason they act. If it were, they would leave the crew at home and go out on the mission alone, thus protecting the crew from any possible harm. A starship is not a society: It exists not for the benefit and welfare of its members but to fulfill a specific mission. Starfleet officers accept the potential hazards of that mission when they enlist.

Still, this book is a good addition to the literature and a fun read for any Trekkie. Since Star Trek exists in large part to examine and/or challege ethical principles through sci-fi allegories and technology-enabled "gray area" situations, a thorough investigation of its relationship to established ethical theories was clearly in order.