Doctor centric episodes have a tendency to be the strongest of Voyager, Living Witness is another great example, and it's always a treat seeing Picardo flex that immense acting talent he has.
@@krzosuthat’s not how the prime directive works. There is no on/off switch. No black and white. No “you either get it all or you get nothing”. Being a warp capable species, doesn’t mean you’re capable of handling any and all tech. The aspect of the prime directive you’re referring to, is just the FIRST parameter. Once you reach that, then you start having access to SOME aspects.
Voyager had plenty of moral compass questions episodes, trick is always the best when he gives you a debate to wrap around your brain, Voyager is truly underrated as a series.
I never understood the "Doctor is stolen" plots because he should be easy enough to steal without the crew noticing due to simply copying him, in fact making copies of him for trade would lead to interested plots since the Doctor had become a sapient being due to how long his program had been left running without a wipe, but at the same time the idea of making copies of himself to help treat more people would be perfectly in line with his way of doing things. We already saw the potential for stories like this with the one where a war museum centuries in the future accidentally made a copy of him, but I feel this episode would have been more interesting had it been one where a copy of him was traded with this planet and he was there for the long haul, no means of getting back to Voyager and having to live with the consequences of whatever actions he takes because this is his home now.
There’s only one mobile emitter. And the future museum episode, it was a backup they found after a piece of voyager was left behind at a battlesite, right?
@@justysilvermanIt was a backup copy of his program that was stolen by the same person that became a martyr for the race running the museum. Turns out their martyr was common thief and terrorist, but those facts got lost over 600 years.
it's easier to steal the emiter with doctor on it (aka trick him to transfer then deactivate him and steal the emiter) than gain access directly to the main computer to steal the program from there - most likely that would trigger some failsafes or security subrutines - most likely the thief tricked doctor so he transfered himself to the emiter to show of that he wasn't bound to sick bay - and thus unkowningly allow the thief to steal the emiter along with his program. So as you can see - it does made sense under certain conditions. The thief knew that on his own he would have hard time to gain access to voyager computer - so tricking doctor and then stealing the emiter was the only way he could pull it out. Keep in mind doctor knew who abducted him - so most likely he witnessed the thief deactivating him.
I don’t understand the Voyager hate. They expanded nicely on the Maquis/Federation stuff from DS9, they went back to TOS monster of the week style episodes, and it asked the question “do Federation principles work in a vacuum away from home and support?” There’s some stinkers, sure, but that happens with every series. Also, I DONT think the Prime Directive applies here as I think their technology is similar to the Federation. I understand that “Values” count too but this society used to be more like the Feds before the Allocator was developed. Plus, the Doctor was stolen… thrust into their society as medical tech, so, that’s what his programming said to do.
If their tech really was similar to the Federation then surely they could synthesize the majority of drugs in practically limitless quantities? For the ones that are too delicate for a replicator to handle you could build additional facilities in orbit, even if the planet is too crowded to support them, this is ONE planet, I don't think their tech is nearly as good as the Federations when you take that into account.
I would agree with u. Remeber they had the tech to force the doctor to different bed sides so keery their tech was at least “close” to the federation at least in terms of ability. My guess is they were like the malon; they had the technology but it wasn’t clean and thus whole advanced their society was in shambles.
yeah I watched all of voyager a couple times I guess now and its not my favorite but number two overall. I started with the animated series then TNG and DS9
@@jhoughjr1 wow, it is rare to find someone who started on animated series. I started on tng but my mom was a tos fan. I ain’t that old but am getting some grey in my hair but just a bit 😆
Another thing that they never seem to bring up is the fact that The Doctor, who is a computer program made decisions that I doubt his creators would have wanted him to be able to make even if they would have made the same ones themselves. He wasn't meant to be a person, yet he became one and even when they argue this fact, what he did here is never mentioned. I have always felt this was short sighted by the writers.
He is the "emergency medical hologram." Hes meant to be used in short periods of time, not long periods he started to degrade when left running, so by design he was never meant to grow, he had the potential, voyager gave him the time to do so.
@@matthewal9545 That was my point. The people in Starfleet who had him created wouldn't have wanted him to be able to do the things he became able to do, but when in later seasons they argued that he had become more than just an EMH non of this is ever shown being brought up. I doubt Starfleet would have liked the idea of him being able to manipulate organics.
This fault seems to be consistent in ALL EMH-1 types. Doctor's play ''Photons be free'' is *secretly* distributed among the now repurposed EMH-1's. Something they shouldnt be doing as it hints at them having free will. EMH-1 types probably do have a free will but lack the experience of life to present it to humanity.
Having not seen the episode recently, I'd say it's largely an examination of the utilitarianism of Trek tipped on its head in the context of scarcity and incomplete awareness of current needs and norms. I.e., it's literally the theme of Voyager. It's exactly what the doctor went through in the first few episodes of Voyager where he performed triage and constantly butted heads with Janeway/refused orders regarding who to treat and what resources went where. And now he's going through it again with a few years of character growth under his belt but with even less ability to argue his case or advocate for his patients to the powers at be. This is the mirror darkly version of the pilot.
I mean, I guess that’s better than someone saying discovery is their favorite , and everyone is entitled to their own opinion and taste. But still lol, I have a hard time accepting this opinion.
It's kind of telling that when the writers tried to conceive of the medicinal morality play, being the 90s and all, they were unable to conceive of a health care system not driven by profit motive. The Doctor's little coy strategy depends on the health care being a good that is bought and sold. But it's specifically described as a "resource", therefore, if the upper wings didn't use their full allocation of drugs, those would then be distributed to the lower classes. Which hypothetically the director should be very proud of, "we were able to send six vials downstairs today to save six more lives!" But the conceit of healthcare as a product runs so deep, even Lore here didn't notice.
I see a lot of comments on here regarding "Voyager Hate". I would fall into that category. Of the 6 "classic" series, Voyager ranks at the bottom. I don't necessarily hate it: many of the episodes provoke thought around moral quandaries. But when I look at the series as a whole, all I see is wasted potential. The Maquis-Starfleet crew came together within a few episodes and was never mentioned again. The lowly Kazon managed to severely damage Voyager on several occasions, but she came out squeaky clean week-after-week. Same thing for encounters with the Borg and Hirogen. Speaking of the Borg.... Deep Space Nine was a dark series. Voyager had the potential to blow that right out of the water. That's where my angst comes from.
To be honest, the "we can't afford to save resources this period even though we could, because then we will get less resources next period" is literally how hospitals work in at least one country in the EU. Which becomes REALLY obvious when the economy takes a downturn. This is not strictly the same thing because we're also expected to improve equipment, do research and educate personnel, and ideally hire more each year, which makes the costs always increase, but it's basically the same thing, we never get enough money so we're constantly over budget and nobody pretends to care until the economy goes poorly.
The Prime Directive is less a directive and more a disclaimer. "Wer'e not responsible for any lost items in the store... but if we find your stuff for you, anyway, that's our choice."
certainly an reflection of the US healthcare system in the 90s. its often forgotten how bad things were before the ACA even with it being a series of half-measures. insurance companies can't ban you from the insurance pool for the rest of your life now, nor can they drop patients when they get sick. everybody who had a documented case of covid would have been banned from the insurance pools by the insurance industry if there were no limits like they have today
The ACA has actually made things much worse. Before, people could not be turned away for life-saving care if they were in need. Now, their insurance is checked first, and if they're not insured for the specific need, they get booted. And insurance is more expensive, meaning fewer people are insured for the actual kinds of care they need. This is especially bad for older patients, who used to be able to get what they needed at affordable prices, but now cannot get them at any price. The assumption that "everyone" has insurance means that now there is no allowance for treating people who lack it, or who don't have whatever they need covered by it. And because the ACA required that certain things that are not needed by everyone be covered for everyone, insurance is much more expensive unless you basically buy a do-nothing plan that still costs through the nose but only exists to let you claim on your legal forms that you have insurance. It doesn't actually cover anything.
LOLOL before the ACA? Are you actually trying to claim the ACA helped? we spend 1.8 TRILLION a year in free healthcare. That’s not enough. But you think the ACA would magically make it enough? Ok. The ACA was awful. It ruined all the good that we had. And made the bad things even worse.
The issue on that planet was that the sickest patients were the people judged to contribute less to society. Those who were judged to contribute more to society were being given a drug that could have saved the lives of the sick people as either a preventative or to simply prolong their lives. The Allocator was giving unlimited access to a life-saving drug to people who were only using it to make their lives more comfortable, while people it judged to contribute less to society were dying for lack of access to the drug. The Doctor was trying to get the needed drugs to the people who needed it most, people who could have contributed more if given the chance but weren't being given that chance. The Doctor definitely violated his programming, but he was fighting a system that ignored the principles his programming was based on. Triage is supposed to ignore patient status outside of basic medical need. The patients in the luxury hotel section of the hospital weren't actually sick. They were taking a life-saving drug used to treat a deadly disease and using it like space-age Botox injections. In the meantime, the people who needed the drug to survive were denied it because their jobs were judged to be less important to society. There are no indicators as to how much of this drug they can produce or acquire.
I am so tired of people poopooing on Voyager. I personally feel that it’s the most criminally underrated Star Trek show in the overall lineup. Like other Star Trek shows, it’s definitely not perfect. And even I have critiques for this episode. My critique of this episode is actually the same critique I have with most Star Trek shows/episodes which is the arrogance the federation has with forcing their square values into other species possibly circular culture’s. In this episode there seems to be a real serious reason why this medical system was put into place. Their society is on the verge of collapse due to a lack of resources. Which forced them to have to make some tough decisions like decide who gets treatment and who doesn’t. I agree with you that this situation is not so black and white. While using the last cure for some deadly virus on a homeless man is definitely altruistic and compassionate, the only brain surgeon on the planet now is going to die, because there is no more cure left for him, which in-turn will lead to possibly hundreds or thousands more deaths in the long run because of that lack of resource. And perhaps that homeless man may one day have become a brain surgeon Or some other important role to society. Right now, the society needs skilled laborers today. So the system makes sense. At least, hopefully, for the short term. In the hopes that eventually one day, the system will relax and open back up to everyone. On the flipside, the fact that they were giving treatments that could’ve saved others lives to people who didn’t need the treatments, that obviously was immoral and needed to change. I do wish the episode excluded that clear immorality. Because instead of the episode being about this moral dilemma this society has to face every day, it became about a society that created a system to protect its resources and wether it was a legitimate problem or not, it became about the allocation of goods to people society felt was worth it. I would’ve preferred it strictly stuck to the moral dilemma and not attempted to make it so black and white. In the end, though, I actually love this episode.
Thanks for making this, I've always thought Voyager was some of the best Trek since TOS. Both genuinely conflicted/growing characters and plenty of legit Sci-Fi stories which examine societies climate systems, and technologies which we are grappling with right now here on earth-1. Happy to see Voyager getting some daylight in 2023!
There was an alien in this episode that looks a lot like Lore Reloaded, at least to me. He's the alien whose wife left him for Gar, the guy who stole the doctor.
In regards to in episode dialoge I would argue Sanitation workers are more important. Them and plumbers have done more to improve public health & save lives than anybody else.
More important than the people that make the food???? You can live without sanitation or plumbing. You can’t live without food. Food always comes first. If you don’t have shit to eat, you don’t need garbage men and plumbers to get rid of the shit….
@@jamesbizs Poor sanitation spreads diseases that kill people. If you have to choose between starving to death or dying of plague, it's not much of a choice. Both jobs are vital.
I’m confused. What if it has helped their society like they say it has? If the agricultural system falls apart everyone suffers maybe dies. As a child I thought this was one of the more morally ambiguous episodes. The doctor doesn’t get to see all the other things the society is dealing with but they’re out there. I Liv in the uk and used to be a police officer. Every department I worked in thought it was underfunded. When I interacted with the NHS everyone thought their department was underfunded. Yeah there aren’t limitless resources. They need careful allocation and that really sucks when you’re on the sharp end seeing the failures due to the lack of resources.
Interesting that you say the part about "order more this month in case you need it next month" is "capitalism saving the day" because it involves "supply and demand". As, in practice, that reminds me far more of trying to game centralised planning (whether within a multinational company, or within a nationalised industry). That said, the rationing of care based on pre-existing "usefulness" rather than a baseline for everyone to enable society to flourish and gain more back in the long run does remind me of privatised healthcare. While the NHS "rations" healthcare in terms of deciding how much they want to pay for every year (and is currently being under-resourced), everyone's in the same waiting list rather than being split into tiers and judged on their lives like in this episode. Whereas quality of private health insurance, ability to pay co-pays or uninsured prices, etc is far more clearly stratified. With some hospitals only taking certain types of insurance, or charging way more/less, or clearly having superior/subpar resources.
I liked this episode. Although the ethics questions weren't quite black and white, i think there was great depth to the guest cast. I'm not fully subscribed to your channel so only catch an episode here and there. Sorry if you've mentioned this or if someone in the chat has, I thought I really good ethics episode was Repentance from Season 7.
When I saw this episode, I actually agreed with the society that was allocating resources efficiently despite how the episode painted them as the bad guys. I think that the society must have had a good reason to be using this system and that it wasn't the doctor's place to place moral judgement on it without all the details of how their society works. Not only that, but if you are in scarcity then you must prioritize things and make sacrifices. The doctor is coming from a society of abundance so his morals are not compatible with the scarcity society.
You missed an important point… when it is explained to the Dr that medicine is supposed to treat arterial aging he remarks the patient has healthy arteries with no damage or signs of aging. It’s explained that the medicine is given as a prophylaxis to all patients on level blue if they need it or not. 😶
Well said! I have been watching your videos for years, and I think this was one of your most well-done videos! And I am impressed with how far you’ve come for what that’s worth! On paper so many things have the best of intention but then when put into practice, unfortunately, reality doesn’t always work with “on paper…”
This is probably really when you see the doctor really become his own person. He violates his programming and several laws in the process of healing people. As for the prime directive argument; I think it’s null since he doesn’t really have a choice. He was forced to be here, and even under prime directive it’s hard to ignore people suffering when you can help. Which, amusingly, also informs the lying, theft, etc as being in character. That’s the kind of things he’s always done, his best to treat everyone. He has dilemmas when he has to triage, but he often can get past that by stabilizing people quickly. But this wasn’t even triage. This was blatant favoritism to him, and that’s where the federation programming comes in. He’s programmed to triage in emergency, like on level red. That’s where he would be; in the thick of it, treating everyone he can, but the federation is supplied enough that even uncommon medicines if they aren’t in stock, can be synthesized on site. So this is a familiar setting, with an alien demand. He clashes here so much because it’s antithetical to what he does. You don’t deny someone lifesaving medication because they “aren’t worth it” in the federation. And those are the ethics the doctor is built on.
This is a great episode about government-run healthcare. Treatment decisions are made based on who the administration thinks is important, not on who is sick or even who can afford treatment. If the society was capitalist, the companies making the drugs would try to get them into the hands of as many people as possible (even if they didn't really need them).
Funny, I see it the opposite way, this reminds me of the US healthcare system, if you have good insurance/ contribute, you get the best healthcare in the world, if you don’t have top tier health insurance, then you’re denied coverage by a suit somewhere that “reviews” your doctors treatment as too expensive. Just my take.
@@seanwhelan6960 not to mention how now the utopian liberal mindset of Healthcare inside both the US and the Federation in Star Trek is becoming more & more aligned to how tyrannical governments operated healthcare in places like the former Soviet Union, North Korea, etc. The COVID pandemic has broken a lot of moral ethics by doctors and the institutions they represent, given that most want the general population to accept their laws to act/behave a certain way for their own benefit. It's reverse idolatry and indoctrination towards a biased deontological ethical standpoint that violates every norm that a typical utilitarian medical physician must try to abide by - greater happiness & health despite the consequences to everyone as possible. Corporations, though, still play a role, and given if they are government-led, that would create a monopoly on the ethical rights of patients. It would be like how Joseph Stalin would decide on which Russian citizen got the best care. In contrast, Serfs, who represent 90% of the population of Russia, would get hardly any help because the administration wants to control them. The same could be said of those who want to stamp out anyone who supports any Constitutional government's laws against the overhanded healthcare system.
I don't think the Prime Directive really applies to this episode. The planet has obviously been visited by aliens, as Gar can walk around with no disguise and nobody bats an eye. The hospital administrator is also an alien to the main protagonist characters, and even the Allocator states species along with the TC number. It's not stated whether or not they have warp technology, but the hospital is floating in the sky, and they would only do that if they were fully secure in that technology. The prime directive isn't absolute on interference either, it says you can't introduce knowledge to a society who can't handle it wisely. Giving a planet a seed of an idea (maybe this Allocator isn't all it's cracked up to be) that they can then choose to implement and iterate on is much different than transporting down power stations and replicators for a society who doesn't understand electricity. It also wouldn't make much sense to program the EMH with the Prime Directive. The Doctor was never intended to leave the ship, and putting in a barrier between the captain's orders and the EMH obeying makes sense for ethics (if the captain tells the Doctor to kill every prisoner of war on the ship, then that program should resist), but the Prime Directive is bent and broken all the time, and it's probably better to risk breaking that than losing a life at a critical moment.
First good sir I must say, I'm glad you mentioned that Trek is more than the sum of its parts and is meant to make people think and not always black and white, even when we may be led to believe it is. I will also say that I don't always agree with you on every point in every video. In fact there are some points in certain videos I strongly disagree with. However even when I disagree I can at least appreciate why you hold the stances you do. So props for that. With that in mind, I would argue that by the standards of Starfleet, Voyager would have been obligated to help this society out and give them replicator technology or something to increase medical production. Especially since the Prime Directive was already violated with the Doctor's intervention and the species stealing the Doctor to facilitate care. I know it wasn't them that actually did the stealing but you get the idea. To give some context I would point to the episode where Voyager first encounters the Malon in the Void. At first they are attacked by the aliens living there until they all learn what's really going on. From there they agree to help the Void aliens and to give the Malon tech to help their race, even if the Malon won't listen. They also destroyed the Caretaker Array to protect the Ocampa, and Tom trying to save that ocean world place. I would go as far as to say they were obligated to give that species messing about with Omega particles access to replicators as well to prevent them from using Omega. Then there's the whole giving the Hirogen holodeck technology. So they're not above interfering when they feel like it or believe it would protect others. In the instance of the Void aliens they interfered to protect millions that lived in the void, so likewise precedent was set for them to interfere in Critical Care to help that society. One could even argue keeping the knowingly stolen doctor was a cry for help. If we're to believe that helping the Void aliens was the right thing to do as the show would have us to believe, then helping this species with replicator tech is also justified. In both instance you're helping millions, perhaps billions of people. The only difference is the form that help takes. If they're willing to help militarily with the void aliens, technologically with the Malon and Hirogen, there's zero reason they couldn't have given replicator tech here with medical shortages. Far as him poisoning dude in the episode, was it drastic, absolutely. However I would argue that it's morally justified here, even if dude had died. I would first argue he was never in any real danger because the Doctor knew that the administrator would relent because he's a coward. Let's assume for sake of argument these aliens lived to be similar ages to humans and lived to be around 100 (which seemed to be far more common by TNG time), a 40% increase in life expectancy would be another 40 years. Even if we said lifespan was 80 years, 40% of that is still 32 years. What the heck is that society doing that they can't train people to replace folks like that agricultural engineer in 32-40 years? That just stinks of incompetence. The show leads us to believe that the people in the top level would've lived without the excess medication and it was a luxury. I would argue that in this instance, what is the one administrator and his potential discomfort or even death compared to millions of lives saved. Just like if a cure for cancer was produced today. Of course people would try to patent it, but if folks ignored the patent and produced it on their own, let's just say I wouldn't shed any tears. Also in this instance I trust no mortal man or government with the kind of power that medical board had in that episode to decide who lived and who died based purely on what their perceived contribution to society is. Something like that is way way too easy to abuse against one's foes. Even if the issues of old weren't completely eliminated, the episode hints that this isn't going to completely obliterate the society. I could go on about this for awhile but point I'm making is sometimes it takes something drastic for people to consider change. Overall I do believe the Doctor did the right thing. However I wish that Voyager would have done more on screen. Such as saying they gave them replicator tech but didn't know if the government would listen. The moral ambiguity is still there, just in a different form.
My problem with the episode is that a system that is designed to be efficient... well, isn't. It works based on how we do things, monthly reviews and all that. Really, the system should be constantly making corrections daily or perhaps even hourly, adjusting to better suit needs. It also seems to assign more importance to individuals than it really should. While yes, it can and sometimes is true that there are certain people who are more important on a person by person basis, it also starts to fall apart when you begin to rate a small number of people over a larger group. While an agricultural planner is very important if you're trying to rebuild a society or to just feed the population, you need people to work the farms. Star Trek has never been a very super mechanized universe, where physical labor is still a need, so I'll say this culture does indeed bodies on the ground to tend to crops... and you need more of them to do so. So, in this system, the masses should be getting sufficient medical care to keep them alive and well, as they are, as a group, more important than that planner. What we see in this episode is less about actual efficiency and struggling to rebuild and maintain a society, and more of just classism and ham fisted moralizing about a current day topic.
I think the main goal was achieved. He made them think about what they were doing and self analyze how they do things and not have all their moral decisions made by a computer, but with their hearts as well. After all, isn't that what Trek is all about?
Trek is a multi-layered onion with many layers added by different voices, left, right, center and occasionally a few voices completely out of the ballpark.
I can agree with you but I'd like to add a point to consider, who's to say their society hasn't been like this before the large scarcity of resources for medicine? And that if they keep doing what they've been doing it might lead *everyone* into ruin. I think this is implied by the directors comment on how Doctor is "going against a *society",* as "societies" take a long time to form and stay in greater consciousness. What if that director literally *can't* imagine a system other than the one he's perpetuating, you feel me? What they are doing is just what climate change disbelievers say the solution to climate change would be, *"have fewer people".* Which in the episode is space eugenics. The more logical way to do things I BELIEVE- (don't take out of context) is to *better allocate resources,* like the Doctor states when talking about getting more medicine. *And if there is a resource scarcity,* then don't funnel the medicine to the most educated, better to give it to the *educators.* I know this video is just you speculating on what the planets situation might be, but I'm playing along. Leftist opinions are incredibly unpopular in the wider world especially nowadays, but I'm continuing to hope for a brighter tomorrow. Albeit- a brighter tomorrow that's *not* caused by the o-zone layer being disintegrated by the sun before we are- anyway thank you for reading my comment to the end whomever you are, hope it's some food for thought. TL;DR: funni hologram man go brrr and destroy capital owners with disease and threat 😈 Remember to eat and drink water!
"... waste processor." Guys, I think I've found the problem. Unless of course they're playing a global city builder simulator where they have to balance priorities. If not then they really need to clean up their s***.
My last comment was tongue in cheek but this does remind me of an old twilight zone episode. While it's a weak parallel, we see a man recieve capital punishment for refusing to renounce his faith in a totalitarian world where religion has been outlawed. Someone working for the government pays a visit to try to convince him to reconsider to save his own life. Not only does he refuse, he makes a convincing argument that the gov guy's life is in immediate danger. In his panic, he uses the phrase "in the name of God!" The condemned man, having made his point, frees the other from his trap. The episode ends with the gov man being accused of making a declaration of faith and has him arrested while he's protesting the accusations. The doctor, being the one who's trapped in this situation regarding the rationing of medicine, does something similar. While this is obviously nothing new in cinema it's usually done to a villain or even a hapless innocent to raise the stakes. As opposed to commentary on society, ethics/morality, and duties to others.
I've rewatched this episode a few times and come to a few conclusions. Not sure you'll agree with them, but so be it. 1) This is a fairly realistic look at socialized medicine. In a world where both the haves and the have nots get sick, and treatments are a commodity, who is going to get access? You can't trust a doctor because a doctor will want to treat everyone and try to find ways to do so with limited resources (in this case treatments or medication). So the decisions must be deferred to a board (or in this case an AI "Allocator") that makes decisions based on what that particular society prioritizes. To put it in our terms, a coder doing research might be considered more valuable to society than an electrician. So the coder gets the treatment because she does the more advanced thing. But now there's no electrician. 2) Commodification of resources (in this case medicine or treatment) leads to commodification of people. Rather than have inherent value because you're alive, your value is determined by someone or something else based on some subjective societal standard. Both the haves and the have nots are valued or devalued only for what they contribute or drain from society. They're not even seen as people. 3) Ethics and morals can sometimes stand in the way of doing what is right, or maybe a better way to put it is what is necessary. You made a veiled reference to Sisko poisoning a planet to make it uninhabitable, knowing that a Maquis cell was operating. Morals and ethics of the Federation, which Sisko was indoctrinated with, prohibit that from even being a consideration. But he was also given the task of removing the threat of the Maquis, as they had (in Sisko's words later on) driven the Cardassians right into the arms of the Dominion. So in the necessity of removing the Maquis, Sisko had to suspend his morals and ethics, though not completely as he gave fair warning as to what he was going to do. In the case of this episode, the doctor had to suspend his ethical programming of "do no harm" in order that no other harm would be done by the lack of care. 4) This is one of the better episodes of Voyager, and even I'd say a top 20 episode of Star Trek in general. For those who say Star Trek is a model of socialism and an indictment on capitalism, I'd say it's much more nuanced than that. At times (and across series) arguments can be made both for and against. If it was solidly one or the other I don't believe it would last 60+ years.
I'm only going to address points 1 and 4. 1) there's one fewer electricians in this scenario. If there is an abundance of electricians and a shortage of coders, it would make sense why the coder has a higher value. 4) one of the reasons why I love DS9 is it shows some of the good aspects of capitalism through the phrangi. Quark convinced a Vulcan to accept peace using capitalist economic theory. Nog improved life for the fleet, the station, and some klingons when he was given the authority to trade.
@@gobblox38 to take it out of the universe of Star Trek for a moment, what is being promoted right now in a world that's becoming more advanced? AI, IT, programmers, coding, etc. They are the careers of the future. You know what's not being as promoted? The trade jobs which are seen as less important. What if there was a push to go to a trade school or get an apprenticeship with an electrician or a plumber like there is with tech jobs? One less electrician might not seem so drastic right now, but if there aren't any electricians to take his place, it does become a problem. You also made my fourth point. Star Trek has always been seen as "progressive", which in many ways it is. But it's also traditional in many ways too. By giving further examples of that you helped make my point.
@christophercole8114 right now the market for computer scientists is flooded with people looking for work. You'd be hard pressed to break into such a career. And sure, it might change in the future. I've heard the argument "there will always be jobs for computer scientists/engineers/coders." The argument doesn't hold up. I'm not sure why you think the trades aren't being promoted. In the past 10 years, I've heard an excessive amount of people say "don't go to college, go to trade school." There's nothing wrong with trade school. In fact, it would be the much better option for a lot of people. The same problem will pop up eventually. A heavy focus on trades will eventually produce an excess of people in those trades. What we're seeing is natural cycles that take decades to play out. I highly doubt we'll reach a point where we run out of skilled electricians or other trades. Shortages of those skilled laborers, yes, that's possible.
@@gobblox38 when is the last time you saw an active ad campaign to recruit more people into trade careers? Or heard one on the radio? How about the last time you saw an ad campaign for STEM careers? Tech jobs? Linking the video games you love to the creating games through learning to code? Schools putting coding into their curriculum? At the cost of woodshop? My guess is if you have heard an ad campaign or seen one for the trades, it's because they're getting desperate. Or you've talked with people who are getting close to retirement but can't because there aren't new electricians, new plumbers, new HVAC techs to take their place.
1) Hippocratic Oath; First, I will do no harm. That Oath is BROKEN 2) Needs of the Many does sorta kinda justify breaking the Oath, MAYBE? 3) Prime Directive justifies Genocide, we hates it forever. 4) Lore Reloaded says maybe it was true that there were limited supplies of medicine. We are so used to Government saying that that we automatically assume it is false, but if it were true, then EMH harmed the Many. 5) EMH hoped that breaking both oaths was a mal-function @Nostripe361 Star Trek is best when it doesn’t give you a simple answer but a dilemma to debate
Lore, I find it truly mind-boggling how a certain sect of Star Trek fans believe that a viewer must share their ideological mindset to enjoy the show. I've seen every episode (less DIS) and movie dozens of times. And one doesn't have to be a Communist/Far Left to understand and enjoy Star Trek. The Trek Universe employs many lessons on morality, non-judgement, and ethics that everyone retains something after most episodes (not so much 'Code of Honor', 'Threshold', 'Sub Rosa'). I believe Gene's vision includes "Making the Viewer Contemplate the Outcome of What Happens in the Story." May EVERY person that watches Star Trek, see a part of themselves, find some Hope for the future, enjoy the show on their own terms, regardless of any predisposed background.
It leads you to believe this will inspire change. I find it far more likely that it will not. The admin seems like a stubborn sob who would probably return things to the way they were after all was said and done.
Right? Lol he brought up discovery, claiming it’s some how not as bad. I can rewatch voyager multiple times. I couldn’t even watch discovery once. Yeah, there are some bad episodes. But at least it was a fun show
Maybe you could see it this way the doctor was playing poker in the end he wouldn’t let him died but he need to make a point and was bluffing if I was in the same situation I hope i would have the strength and courage to do the same thing.
Name a bad episode that focused on The Doctor? I can't. He had some of the best episodes. I think the Beowulf story was his weakest, but even that had a good purpose for the character and his development. This episode seened mostly metaphorical of issues we have or do face. The US insurance and wealth based system is obvious. And doctors almost certainly do insurance fiddles to give the poor needy what they need. The way he talked about allocation of resources is exactly how UK local authorities work. In my work, I sometimes supply local authorities, and they absolutely make spend the last of their budget before the financial year ends so that their budget for next year isn't cut. We've had cast systems, and in some, resources have indeed been given to those considered more useful. It's also an exaggeration of triage, which isn't always perfect because it's rules can only be so perfect in an imperfect world. It's also a good character episode for The Doctor in having to move beyond his simple programming which wasn't designed for these situations and making decisions based not on strictly programmed procedures and more on his own morality and what he believes is right, which pushes him further into the viewer questioning if he's essentially human or a program emulating a human. Which is absolutely Star Trek at it's core.
I agree, if they made it where the “haves” needed the medicine….. like a plague affecting entire population… that would have made it more morally unclear. My guess that would have been toooo intense for the money men with the purse strings. While I don’t always agree I FULLY RESPECT your process and you are atleast consistent. Intj?
Well he is make by federation where you have all resorces you need and doctor can choice if we talking abaut who have biger chance for survival or is importand, just for him and federation make somone life longer when you can save others is so bad that it break his own moral code
Financing and infra-structure funding based on previous years is something that is done in the real world. In Germany, the funding a city gets for maintaining infra-structure is primarily based on how much this city had to spend in the previous year. So, if a city had to spend barely anything, it would get barely anything in the following year, no matter what happens. So it might be that critical repairs and whatever would come up, but due to not having spend enough money in the previous year, the city won't get the money in time. So what is it cities do? Well, they spend it, as much as they can so that they can always say that they need it. This causes ridiculous building projects that are just stupid. Idiotic stuff, and cities get ridiculed for their spending habits. And city officials have to face anger for spending money on unnecessary prestige projects and ridiculous stuff. But truth of the matter is, they don't really have a choice. At the end of the fiscal year, they are in a position in which they had to spend that money, even if there was nothing sensible to spend it on. Just so that they would have that money next year in case that there could be something coming up that would necessarily require that money. And this is a weakness of federal capitalist systems. Too many layers of government required to be as efficient as possible. Truth is, infra-structure spending requires some leniency. Same with anything health related. It cannot be measured by standard capitalist values to work properly.
9:40 i don't think doctor actually broke any of his values - he did try to help everyone involved - in prior times doctors often were introducing one disease to a patient deliberately because they knew that diesase would kill another diesese they did not know how to cure and the first one was treatable and by doing so they saved the patient whom otherwise would die. I'm more than certain doctor was well aware of this parctice on earth during medival times. So if anything he did the same - the disease he was trying to cure was the moral decay that was allowing these people to let others die without even trying to cure them - sure it's a murky ground but it does make sense. The doctor is capable to compromise his ethics to be effective - for eg to operate in essence a doctor must first harm the patient by making an incision (aka direct harm even if it is temporary yes ? - which would be in contrast to the hypocratic oath of "do no harm". So his program is flexible enough to recognise when he must compromise in order to heal because that might be neccesary part of the healing process. Another example is a bacterial infection - bacterias are alive - but he must kill them to save the patient - and from purely logical standpoint he is sacraficing one life form to save another form of life - but his program is flexible enough to be able to move beyond that in order to save the patient. and in this case the need of the few( a patient) outhweights the needs of the many (bacterias) and the pure logic would dictate to be otherwise. In essence - the doctor was stricly following his ethical subroutines that in order to save a life he must first intoduce some harm to do it first and he did it after he exhausted any other viable alternatives first - at first he wanted to do things by the book - but that proved ineffective or to restrictive to be effective so he made a compromise after compromise to get results. For eg at one point another doctor points out that things started to be better when they started to follow the allocator rules - this implies the situiation is no longer critical (which is why they introduced those rules to begin with)- and now they are just doing it out of habbit and not real neccesity. meaning they could have changed the rules but they didn't and it was this inflexibility the voyager doctor rebelled against as this meant people were dying because of it. On top of that he also had his emergency command hologram subrutines - whiche meant he was capable of taking command to solve an emergency - and that situation was exactly that kind of thing - which meant he planned and executed a strategy.
The ends never justify the means, he stole medical supplies and gave it to people. It would be like me stealing food from a grocery store and giving it to starving people, it's still theft, the moral way to feed them is to buy the stuff not steal it.
i disagree that a waste processor is unequal to a agricultural engineer. they both serve important roles. the waste processor makes sure the machines to handling waste are done efficiently, this is important for public health of the society as a whole, if one waste processor gets lazy on their job, it can have effects on the health of society. the same is true for the agricultural engineer, you design and build farms for a living, cool. food is vital to survival and public health due to nutritional benefits. the problem i have with what that chief MD said, is hes obviously and purposely downplaying the need for public santation as if its a secondary option, when in fact its just as important, because the overall health of the population will determine rather or not that civilization lives or dies as civilizations without a clear understanding of how public health equates to production quality will eventually have no workers or start having very immoral practices being made. for example, america almost died off many times during the industrial revolution. from the wave after wave of pandemics to the civil war. we only managed to survive as a nation because we started investing early on in public health infrastructure, such as water treatment plants, garbage collection services, and the occasional regulation or 3 on food quality. we also decided to take more active measures at reducing overcrowding in apartment blocks, and instituted indoor bathrooms as a mandatory and nesscary thing to reducing disease. it started a decline in pandemic frequency rather quickly starting in the 1910s up to the 1940s. and its not just physical health of a general population im talking about either, mental and emotional health of a population is just as important, and we are seeing such struggles in america today and across the world. the mental and emotional health of a population is another key factor, if the mental and emotional health of a nation is in the toilet, no pun intended, the civilization will eventually die as even the most intelligent among us will devolve to insanity and not be able to use the logical functions in the pre-frontal cortex as efficiently as they want, and that leads to internal conflicts and anarchy.
With respect I think you’re missing the point of this episode. The people receiving quality care didn’t necessarily contribute to society but instead they were wealthy and that was enough to give them preferential care as opposed who couldn’t afford it.
I completely agree with your assessment that Voyager is one of the weakest series but does have some amazing episodes. The Doctor in this episode is more like the crew of DS9, doing an action they know is wrong for the right reasons and hoping it all balances out in the end.
Pronouns don't even make a sentence by themselves. The Docs programing SHOULDN'T allow him to do what he did BUT it was GOOD an correct in adherence to following HIGHER values an tenets as a doctor. Obeying his oaths an not condoning or excepting massive wrongs like that. Especially MEDICAL which was LITERALLY his purpose for being. That species wasn't even right not questioning WHERE AN HOW he came into their possession.
You’re critiquing an episode that didn’t air. Write your own- this one was about the American Health Care System which ISN’T what you’re talking about. Voyager isn’t great, but it knew what it was saying.
.... You care to give actual counter examples? I provided such examples, and even footage to correspond and corroborate.. Not to mention it's a piece of media/art and thus up to interpretation..
It’s not actually capitalist lol. It’s literally how government bureaucracy’s work. Budgets are cut when you’re too good. If you aren’t spending a lot of money, you will get less money. If you do work too fast, you clearly need less employees. Etc etc. capitalism would go deeper than that, and would actually be able to see the profit and loss aspects. Rather than just having a budget for the sake of having a budget
It's a processing issue, the way youtube streams the video to you. In general, just reload and it should be fine. However, youtube does have a tendancy to have weird processing issues on content that might be controversial in some way.
Rodenberry believed in Utopian Socialism. No religion, just people sharing all things. The problem with Trek is that it takes place in his fantasy future. Therefore the characters should be without bias, without greed, without racism. Yet that just isn't possible. Kirk was a hotheaded playboy that acted upon emotion. In a future that people should be clear headed, otherwise peace would never last. Even if there was no need for materials. Humans still act upon primitive urges. Kirk as a hotheaded playboy sure does. Picard is an elitist snob. He doesn't really like a lot of people early on in TNG. He's a bit cold, kind of stuffy. Not the open minded human of an enlightened humanity. Q even mocks him for this many times. Sisko is filled with rage, he holds grudges because of things that happened to him. He clearly isn't above using blackmail, or associating with people who do terrible things if it meets his end goal. He even says this when he gets Garak to get the Romulans into the war. Janeway and Archer are obviously flawed. But these two were on screen after Rodenberry's death. I can't include them in my critique. But my point is that Trek fans who believe in the original ideals of the show don't even know what those are. Because it's not possible. A television show can't be centered around characters with no flaws. It would be too boring. Human beings are perfectly imperfect . The question asked is if God was so magnificent and loving, why would he allow such suffering and strife. The answer is obvious. Same for our entertainment. We could make movies without any conflict, a story filled with joy and happiness. But we don't.
“ an agricultural engineer is obviously more important than a waste processor… To society” Man’s clearly never been through a garbage strike. Also if you think of society as a your body you can go 28 days without eating but about 7 days without p**ping, so I would contend the value to society between the two may not be as great at first thought. Also unless we’re talking something like industrial multi level hydroponics/aquaponics the title “ agricultural engineer” is otherwise commonly known as a farmer, so is it value to society, or job title that’s being calculated?
Your detractors tend to be far left and far right as you tend to have opinions that piss off both of those extremes for different reasons. Which I enjoy about your videos.
As an Aussie who first saw this episode I was shocked at what was happening in this episode, then I realised it was happening in North America all this time. 😂 USA USA USA, unless your sick, injured or need to give birth. 😂😂 Aussie Aussie Aussie. 😂😂😂
The assessment of this episode is actually quite wrong precisely because of the existence of blue level. Triage analogy works only when blue level doesn't exist. Blue level isn't Triage, it's luxury. If blue level functions like Red, then there isn't an ethical conflict to it, and no episode. People understand triage, there's not debate. Lets not pretend that if a planet that has a purely capitalistic system isn't particularly resources stave, the 'haves', still would say the resources is limited and the 'haves' needs it more. As the saying goes, they don't want more money, they want all of the money. And your assessment of 'capitalism saves the day' is practically nonsensical, the way he achieve his goals is actually a common practice, even in communist regime. But it is also readily countered, especially in capitalist system. You think the extra expenses isn't coming out of somewhere else? They already do so without even without double dip or piggybacking off the rich going on. Staff cuts, etc etc. they do it even without that. Lay off a bunch of people just for the numbers to look great for next quarter because the Shareholders 'needs' it. You didn't over think the situation, you under think it the other way.
I have many people in my family in the medical field and never have I heard of triaging anyone based on contributions to society. Your conservative roots are showing again.
@@LoreReloaded I think the onus is on you, since you made the claim. What makes Discover better than Voyager, beside Michaels constant crying, and the copy/paste formula that all modern dramas follow?
Ahh gotcha. I have always found voyager to be among the weakest series. It isn't coherent as a whole when it comes to the series and is very, very contradictory. It turns the borg into villains of the week and has a lot more issues. I have several videos on this, but they're pretty old.
Naturally, they did not frame this as a government controlled healthcare system. Canada rations care and makes euthanasia decisions for individuals without family input. So does the Netherlands although the Netherlands may be changing after this last election.In Italy unjabbed people were denied access to healthcare by a government controlled system. It's so facetious to blame it on a third party.
I agree that voyager was a weak series. I had to force myself through the first few seasons. It got better towards the end, but it was always lacking. I remember at the time that people insisted that DS9 was the weakest series. That's the inverse of what people think now.
@LoreReloaded I'm probably misreading your comment about pronouns in our current context. What's wrong with indicating one's pronouns, especially when it's not immediately obvious?
@LoreReloaded agreed! With starfleet being a military organization that has gendered uniforms, the topic doesn't come up much. On the other hand, everyone being Bi and pan was clearly in Gene's vision
