+Mirin Brah Honestly I think someone who isn't a fan of TNG would be surprised at the knowledge bombs Picard is always dropping. His dialogue is some of the best written on TV in my opinion.
Picard's dialogue is the most wise of any dialogue in all of filmography. Gene Roddenberry always intended for Star Trek to be about stories, not Science Fiction Entertainment. It was about getting a wise message across, not about awesome graphics or effects. That's why the new Star Trek Movies suck Ferengi Chode.
I like that, but First she says he should learn from his mistakes, then she turns around and says he''s overanalyzing when that doesn't work. Isn't that exactly what his analysis is for? Which is it, Troi - accept your losses or learn from them? The quick turnaround makes it seem like she's manipulating the conversation rather than making some revelation.
I love how Picard actually does what the other two didn't. He acknowledges Data's prowess by implying that Data did in fact play perfectly, absolves him of grief by saying "that's not weakness", and then says "That's life" giving Data the ability to still see himself as being at the same level as anyone he was negatively comparing himself to. All in 2 lines! The best part is Picard knew when to leave while his words had maximum impact instead of over explaining his views. A skill people these days have a hard time with
I liked Pulaski. I like Beverly too, but Pulaski was good. She berated Data at first, for being nothing more than a calculator, which I think fans hated her for. But the arc of her then acceptance of Data should have redeemed her. Sad she has not been asked back or came back as a guest star on Picard.
@@tilasole3252 Yeah, that's the weird thing about the Pulaski hate. It seems to go over a lot of people's heads that she was written that way deliberately for the purpose of having a character arc vis-a-vis Data. She comes around in the end. But Star Trek fans can be dense sometimes.
It's sad though. He did what most of us would do in a defeat or tragedy - go over what happened to see where the fault was, where things went wrong. And he believed the fault was in him, because of some error he might have committed. But the fact, and equally sad, is that life just doesn't order things like that. The randomness of life is its wonder but also its disappointment. What matters is how you can handle that disappointment. If you can rebound, then maybe a second chance can allow you to fix the mistake you did before. At least I see it that way.
It has always stricken me as funny how Data repeatedly demonstrates emotion. His reactions are muted, and he lacks self-awareness of his own emotional responses, but he is absolutely emotional. He just...doesn't know it. And generally can act in spite of it.
@@Geo_Seph I mean, if he speaks that way to you, more power to you, but I doubt that's an intentional parallel. Data isn't socially awkward in that particular way. Compare Data to Sheldon of Big Bang Theory, for instance. If anybody is supposed to represent that kind of social awkwardness - and I still don't think he is - it's Lt. Barclay, who is much more aware that there is something to be uncomfortable about.
As a child I saw this as a flaw in the character's writing or acting. I didn't yet understand emotion myself, let alone realize it is an intrinsic emergent property of intelligence. Now, I can recognize how the emotionally underdeveloped - who think they feel less and believe they only care about logic - are actually _more_ controlled by their emotions. And that actually makes sense. You cannot accurately analyze a situation if you are blind to some of its constituent parts. Armed with that perspective, to me Data's writing and Brent Spiner's portrayal are both utterly brilliant.
@@countluke2334 i completely agree. I mean I love Beverly, she's a very lovely and welcoming presence like you would hope any doctor of your's would be. And she has an intriguing relationship with Jean-Luc, and she is also outspoken and has her own moral/ethical lines that she makes clear and stands firmly on when challenge. Which is all nice but I think Pulaski was a far more outgoing character who would challenge people regardless of whether threatened herself. Beverly often enough stayed in the background while Pulaski was having her rivalry with Picard and maintaining funny friendships with Data and Worf.
I’ve always felt like I didn’t like Pulaski very much. I don’t think it’s because of her character, so much as they never gave her anything to do. They just sort of randomly stuck her in episodes. There were very few episodes where she actually played apart. It was a shame really. I like that she didn’t take anyone’s nonsense, but I wish that she’d been more than a female version of Dr. McCoy. I wish they had given her more to do and more character development. Even after Crusher came back, they could’ve done something with her.
Polaski was a human Beverly is a "perfect" human We can relate more to Polaski, skilled trade workers. Who care, but often hide that care behind their profession. But still human with flaws
Troi: "What's wrong?" Data: "I am broken, because I lost a game." Troi: "It's just bruised ego." Data: "I have no ego. I am broken. Please go." Pulaski: "All right, buster, what's the deal?" Data: "I am broken, because I lost a game." Pulaski: "Yes, I heard, but..." Data: "It is no ego, I do not have one of those." Pulaski: "Yes, I know. So why are you sulking?" Data: "I am not sulking. Please leave." Picard: "Get your arse on that bridge, pronto!" Data: "But I am broken, because I lost a game." Picard: "No, you're not broken. Shit happens. Now get on the bridge." Data: "Yes, sir"
Rewatching this episode again more recently I did feel like Data was indeed sulking in his quarters just because he lost a stupid game to some arrogant prick. Glad to know I wasn't the only one who thought so.
I love the growth in Picard's perception of Data as the show goes on. This episode was still quite early, he only saw Data as a machine, a tool, incapable of feeling, even Data himself says he has no ego. Then by the episode Data is on trial, Picard is righteously furious at even the idea of treating Data like property. "Awareness of one's own ego" is even used specifically as a criteria for sentience in that episode.
His opinion is changed when Data points out Picard's own ignorance on the subject of personal liberty. Data is being asked to allow himself to be disassembled for the greater good of Star Fleet. But Data asks then why aren't all officers required to have superior cybernetic eyes installed.
I never got the impression Picard ever saw Data as only a machine--in fact, Picard seemed the least troubled by him being an android compared to some others. But Data is still a bit of an unknown, and at first, Picard seemed to not fully understand his needs; a good example is the "Measure of a Man" episode, where Picard at first looks at how amazing it would be to have a Data on each ship, until Data points out Picard's prejudice towards him. By ST: First Contact, Picard was willing to be assimilated by the Borg and die on the Enterprise so Data could escape. It's a really good development of both characters.
This is why Pikard is my favorite captain. And this is why Star Trek holds a special place in my heart that no other show has ever come close to having :)
Sorry, but Picard's wisdom puts him over the top for me... Followed by worf. He's just plain badass... Then Tori. Then Jordi and Data tie...Then chief obrien, Then Riker, then the doctors and Wesley is dead last. It was nice watching data grow up on the show, but sometimes it seemed to take too long.
@@missmorbid1439 I've always found that to be a bit of a flaw in the concept; that the cadets know they're in an unwinnable program. Wouldn't it be more telling to see how they react when they don't know for a fact that they'll ultimately lose?
@@willieoelkers5568 No, the point is to see how they handle a situation where they know unequivocally that they can't win. Not telling them that it's impossible would mean that everyone would keep trying to save the ship, thinking that maybe the key was in specific procedures of their operation, maybe putting shields up at different times or trying some other form of diplomacy or using torpedoes at this point instead of phasers would let them narrowly win the situation. Letting them know that it's unwinnable from the start makes them realize that there are no small optimizations that could mean the difference between life and death, that the test is here to measure your overarching thought process, the major decisions, not the minor ones. Besides, there's no way that they could reasonably _not_ tell them it's unwinnable. You don't think anyone is going to find it strange that over a century of the test being used, not a single person has found a working solution? At that point it might as well be unwinnable, because the chances that you could beat a test that the best and brightest minds at Starfleet over a whole century couldn't beat are on par with the chance that the developers of the unwinnable situation missed something.
"its possible to make no misstakes, and still lose". Life has an abundance of hard truths. This is one of them. Sometimes, you can work your job perfectly, but you can still lose it when the company needs to make a budget cut. Sometimes, you can give it your all in a relationship, do everything in your power to keep things going... and yet the other can still magically fall "out of love". You can try and raise your child to the best of your ability, turn them into a straight up exemplary person.. and then they somehow end up in an addiction to something. That.. is life.
It's amazing how JJA was completely unable to catch that the spirit of Star Trek lies in these conversation bits and not in spaceships and explosions. This is quintessential Data. He's so focused on becoming human that he misses the obvious fact that he's already plenty human-like.
@@stclairstclair though the lack of creativity of expression in modern Trek for SJW topics and contexts is particularly painful. They went from clever analogies and metaphors to just blatant presentation
@@tricksterjoy9740 there's a difference between respecting the audience enough to let them come to their own conclusions and beating them over the head with the "correct" position being SJW isn't merely upholding egalitarian ideals, it's the hubris to believe that the only way to uphold those ideals is by conforming to YOUR belief structure
Just noticed that Data stays seated for both the Councilor and Chief Medical Officer, both of whom he outranks, but promptly stands for the Captain. Textbook adherence to protocol and a nice little detail.
Once we understand that modern rehashes of franchises like Star Trek, Star Wars, et al, are deliberate attempts at cultural vandalism it becomes easy to dismiss the new ruined variants of all our most beloved heroes as mere attacks by an enemy, no different from those seeking to undo the advent of America and its freedoms by overtly attacking statues of the Founding Fathers.
So cool how Picard is put out by having to hold datas hand, he’s on a time crunch before the battle simulation. so he just walks into datas room and solves the situation with like 4-5 lines.
You know what made TNG so great? Space is great the stories were great, we all love the sci-fi elements for sure however the actual characters in the series were so awesome. Data is a total boss!
Well that's not actually true, this was in a deterministic strategy game similar to chess, with no element of luck like backgammon or poker, so actually, it ISN'T possible to make no mistakes and still lose, if you played it perfectly, you'd never lose.
@@medexamtoolsdotcom Define a mistake in this contest. The one issue you will always have is you can't know what your opponent will do next. You can make an educated guess, make plans that include possible counters to you, but the future is unknowable.
@@medexamtoolsdotcom Unlike a human player, Data cannot rely on intuition to figure out his opponent's next move. Without this advantage he CAN "commit no errors and still lose". Deterministic or not, it is the opponent that leads to a win or a loss. Data was defeated not by his opponent, but rather by his own innate limitations.
Reminds me of my dad when I was having doubts about my first girlfriend in high school and I was trying to salvage our relationship. He was genuine in his advice and he said... “Do you personally feel that she feels the same way about you? Is she pacing the floor at her house like you are wondering if she’s good enough for you at this moment?” She was distant and I knew that she didn’t care I just couldn’t admit it to myself until I heard that from my father. I said, “No.” He followed up with... “Then you know what you have to do. It will hurt but you’ll realize there’s nothing you can do to make her change her mind. You’ll meet someone else and one day you’ll meet someone who will make you happy. When I met your mom I realized that the heartbreaks I suffered meant absolutely nothing when held you in my arms when you were born.” Damn it I’ll never forget that speech from my dad. At the time I thought nothing of that talk and dismissed it until I grew up and realized what he was really saying...
That in defeat, we are not made weaker. We are instead made stronger. It is in weakness that we grow, in moments of defeat that we gain the most, and in times of greatest sadness that we are closest to those we love.
Do you're self a huge favor and set aside the time to watch all of The Next Generation. Sometimes it can be a bit corny, but the philosophy, morality plays, and moments like these far, far, far outweigh any of the dated corniness.
I think of the Orville as both a parody and an homage. They poke fun at TNG but it comes from a place of respect and love. They know they could never match the philosophical lessons of the old '90s show. For the record I love it.
Wow, this really hits close to home. I went through two abusive relationships in which I gave all that I could in the best ways possible to my abusers, but they took every helpful tool and favor I gave them, just to throw it away and keep asking for progressively greater sacrifices. That was enough to get me to think I’m not as human as I should be.
Shawn Walker oh absolutely, I’m myself and in others. If someone raises red flags for me, I step out of that cycle because I’m not obligated to deal with bs that’s not mine to deal with.
How Data deals with his confusion about his abilities is a great way for people to reflect on their own confusions about their own failures. It beats accepting everyone else's opinions about them, because most of the time other people would rather find fault with something you're doing rather than offer something truly considerate to help you through - they would rather compare your situation with theirs and make you emulate something they assign.
I absolutely love when star trek references classic literature. It's both entertaining and lends some immeasurable level of credibility to it. Part of why Patrick Stewart was such a good choice for captain.
References to classic literature occurred throughout the series, and those references were there for much more than to merely "lend credibility." The values instilled and lessons taught by classic literature prepared the protagonists of this series to triumph against adversity equally as much as their substantial technical education. In the 1990's there was a political movement (which persists to this very day) which called for the educational system to focus more on math, science and technology rather than on humanities, which was painted as a frivolous luxury. I believe that the TNG series was used in part as a way of voicing support for the importance of education in the humanities despite (or even precisely because of) the increasing importance of technology in society. I promise you, it was no accident that the captain of the ship was written to have been an archeology major at university.
I don't remember what it's from, but this reminds me of a quote: "Not ever loss is a lesson. Sometimes all you learn in defeat is that you've been defeated"
Nope, no one is "more smart" than data! The object of the game was misunderstood... he later figures out that in stead of trying to win, you try to maintain balance- this causes the other side to fail. Once he figured it out he went back and "busted him up" bad!
That's true but the fact remained that he still couldn't get over the fact he couldn't figure it out immediately, and that's what he had to do in order to figure it out. It wasn't about questioning Data's intelligence because he's obviously insanely intelligent, it was just positing that it's entirely possible for even the "most powerful" to make a blunder or a miscalculation, and Data's problem is that he overanalyzed the game to the point he missed a simple solution and he jumped to the conclusion something was wrong because he didn't get it the first time.
Exactly, he simply was viewing the problem from the wrong prospective,(experience vs intelligence) I can't remember exactly how he figured it out, but with a clue from the very experienced Guinan, he did- and adapted accordingly- the perfect learning machine.
No, the objective of the game is to win. Data just realized he couldn't win the game, so instead aimed to outlast his opponent instead. Technically he didn't play in the spirit of the game
@@koalabrownie He played the player instead of the game - same thing that the jerk with the game was doing. The game itself was nothing more than an open-ended tic-tac-toe, as evidenced by the fact that the only reasonable advanced strategy was to target a cat.
@@Ni999 "He played the player instead of the game" that tends to be what you do with competitive games. in strategy it works well, but in fighting games it works even better....i used to play tekken 4 at the arcade....i only used lei, ever. and once i got to know the fighting styles of the regulars at the arcade i would play each of them in more or less the same way, regardless of which character they were using.
The first four seasons of GoT were pretty cerebral. Although in a more violent and... luscious context. I really loved how it when they didn't have a big budget, and so we didn't get battles but we got Tyrion finding out about the outcomes. But then the money came, and writing got replaced by cgi, and everything went to shit...
When you can look at a TV show and go "Huh... Yeah that's philosophically sound." In almost every episode, you know it's good. The way they give a non-human character human problems is phenomenal.
There are a lot of human skills we don't even realise we've practised all our lives. Here, Data is introduced to the skill of second-guessing yourself, not feeling at your best, even worrying about your sanity, *and still carrying on* because you need to.
That episode is another great example of why Dr Pulaski is totally awesome. the character brings some much-needed friction to the ensemble. I think if the show was written today you would have someone like her rather than Beverly who offers little personality apart from being a doctor, the mother and that might or might not be lover for the captain which was never really pursued.
"I might make a mistake." Data you naive goober that's the same thing every sentient being worries about. We're just used to them because we make so many more!
I love these little life lessons one gleans from the organic conversations that take place among characters in this show. The idea that one can make no mistakes and yet still lose is absolutely true, and a hugely valuable concept to come to terms with. Sometimes, in certain situations or with certain people, you simply can't win - it is possible that that may very well not be any indication of your own flaws or shortcomings, and that is an encouraging thought.
4 года назад
So well written. I love how Star Trek is not only a great show but it's also full of really good life lessons.
This makes me think of that episode they are caught in some time loop and keep going with Data's suggestion which gets them blown up each time, and it is not until Data realizes his suggestion is wrong, and Riker's may be the correct one, that they escape.
its not that Data realized he was wrong but he sent himself a message that his idea results in destruction, Data is constantly getting the message but it is not until it is almost too late that he realizes what the message means and decides to try Riker's idea
Those words of wisdom from Picard changed my life for the better a few years ago. I stopped having so much trouble with self doubt. I love this series so much.
Ah, back when Star Trek still had amazing writers. Now of course we live in the times of chopped off heads and a Picard who keeps working together with the murderer.
Data will learn about true defeat much later when Troi, who is clearly a counselor of no rank, takes a two hour class and suddenly becomes his commanding officer.
She was a Lt. Commander when she was first assigned to the Enterprise. Just that her duties and abilities had her have an informal role where other Ship Counselor's didn't. So she was referred by her job title, rather her rank.
Deanna Troi has been serving starfleet about as long as Riker. It's just that she didn't take the commander's exam that she was eligible for but never bothered to. Data, on the other hand, already gave that exam and had commander's rights even though his rank was lower than her. And yeah she outranked data
@@corvo2696 is likely with an unknown such as data they would slow his promotions through the ranks to see how he handles the responsibilities. And since he is basically ageless it taking him a few extra years would mean nothing to him.
It's puzzling that you would expect military realism from Star Trek of all places, a show that didn't even demonstrate it consistently when an Army Air Force veteran was running the show. He knew when to apply that stuff, and when not to.
I think when it comes to motivational speaking and wisdom that can move people in a short amount of time, Picard may only be second to Guinan. Troi is trailing far, far behind.
I agree. Picard gave Data exactly what he needed. Data probably puzzles Troi to no end. I'm thinking Troi is mostly trying to treat Data like he's human. Much of the time I think he's OK with that. But then things like this happen and it backfires. She's in her element among humans.
+techracer2003 I think Picard stands alone in that respect. He has lots of very deep lines which are specific, not just truisms everyone knows. Guinan mostly says some rather generic platitudes.
After Picard told Data to "leave his self doubt at the door", do you think Data spent a long time in his room, trying to figure out what the hell that meant?
But there is an analogue that still stands, albeit imperfect: even though Achilles is stronger than them all, how has this happened to him? Because, as Picard says, "that's life." Being the best - whether you're Data or Achilles - doesn't insulate you from failure, because there are circumstances and forces bigger than you at play.