Just Finished Reading: Star Trek and Philosophy – The Wrath of Kant edited by Jason T Eberl and Kevin S Decker (FP: 2008)

Boldly going where no philosopher has been before – OK, maybe not as the sections in the book cover age old questions using pop-culture to tease out some of the issues in a format the modern reader can appreciate – looks at the many issues raised and philosophical ideas broadcast during the long running saga of Star Trek (all of the series and movies up to the time of publication).

Some of the ideas will come as no surprise to Star Trek fans the world over: whether language can ever be separated from the culture that produced it and the need for cultural references to understand the spoken word (referenced by the rather strange TNG episode ‘Darmok’), can logic alone lead to the truth or is it just a way of making mistakes with confidence (referenced by numerous episodes in OS, TNG and Enterprise, plus ST III, V and VI), can data become anything like the human he aspires to without true emotions – one’s that he can’t turn off when they become inconvenient (many TNG references), is Khan right to seek revenge against Kirk and can revenge ever be a productive driving force (referenced, of course, by ST II and the original OS episode it grew from – aw well as the books by Greg Cox), can ultimate power ever lead to happiness or do we need to struggle our way to heaven (referenced by the many appearances of Q in TNG and Voyager), is it ever OK to kill your clone or is your clone actually you (referenced by the TNG episode ‘Masterpiece Society’), can Starfleet, basically a military organisation, really be a force for good in the Galaxy or will military ethics always be in conflict with more liberal democratic points of view (with many OS and TNG references), is Odo a collaborator both with the Cardassians and the Dominion (with many DS9 references), what place does ethics have in business or are they mutually exclusive (DS9 again), why is it so bad to be assimilated by the Borg (TNG, Voyager and Enterprise), why is Star Trek such a cultural phenomenon and would it be a good idea to live in their universe if we could (many references as you might imagine), why it’s not a good idea to live your life on the holodeck (many references again), if the Gods came back would anyone believe it and if so, why (mostly referenced by ‘Rightful Heir’ in TNG) and one of my personal favourites, is it ever really possible for deep seated enemies to ever get beyond their enmity for each other and sit down for meaningful talks at the negotiation table after the war is over (many DS9 references).

Being a long-time fan of all of the incarnations of the Trek-verse (the less said about the new movie manifestation the better I think) this book was a page turning delight as it looked at some of my favourite SF characters, plots and ideas from a variety of philosophical points of view. Star Trek was often, if not always, a deeply philosophical project which is not surprising really seeing where the idea for the whole thing came from. ST often asked awkward questions in a way that many other shows just couldn’t at the time it was first shown. It made the audience question firmly held assumptions in quite subtle and insidious ways which explains how Trek has become a huge part of 20^th and now 21^st Century culture. This book is a worthy addition to that continuing dialogue. Recommended.