Theseus Paradox and the new Star Trek....

[Grant Lamontagne]

I'm surprised that we don't have a thread about Star Trek Discovery yet so I guess it is up to me to start one, and I'll start with the elephant in the room- the Theseus Paradox.

For those not familiar with the term, the Theseus Paradox has to do with the ship of Theseus, and how much of it could be repaired and/or replaced before it was no longer really the ship Theseus started with.  A simpler version is Grandpa's old axe, which has had the head and shaft replaced- is it the same axe?

What does this have to do with Star Trek Discovery?  Simple- if the characters are different, the ship is different, the aliens are different, the technology is different, the story is different, how can it still be Star Trek?

I am enjoying it thus far, but I am not sure if it is Star Trek-y enough to be a Star Trek.  Couldn't they have been just as successful being called Voyages of Discovery or something and leave Star Trek alone?  It seems like there is so little in common with the established Star Trek that I'm not sure it really can be Star Trek.

And the Klingons seem remarkably useless and dumb.

Anyone else watching it?

Def

[magentus]

Seen the first three eps and love it! I'm not a Trekkie though so can't comment on how Star Trek it is.

They seem to have taken a leaf from the BSG reboot (big fan) for dark gritiness and it's great to see women in lead roles.

I'll keep going with it as an enjoyable sci fi romp. 

[Don Pablo]

Only seen the first eppy and part of the second, but it seems interesting.
A different kind of X doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad, to me. 

[ThePeacent]

I've seen them all, but this (beware spoiler below)

Show content

last episode about different timelines and repeating the same over and over

is just too overused in all sci fi shows.

From what I can remember, Stargate Atlantis, Eureka, Warehouse 13, Dr.Who, Firefly, Galactica, and a number of other scifi shows have had the same plot and episode development at least in one of their seasons.
It's just annoying already!

Show content

From Groundhog day to the original Star Trek Series, we're seeing it again. It seems to be used when they run out of ideas or have nothing interesting going on in that season, but to use that trick on the 5th episode is a bad signal IMO and IME.

Just my $0.02

[kkokkolis]

Start Trek is a mental construction, a collective myth. It is what we say it is.
Myself, I have only seen the original series and first movie with Satner, Nimoy and the rest. Same goes for Star Wars and Space 1999.

[Ron Who]

The answer to the Theseus paradox is simple.
For an outsider looking at pictures of the spaceship/axe before and after, the answer is no, they are not the same.
But for an insider, a member of the spaceship crew, or the user of the axe, the answer is yes, they are the same.

[pomsbz]

I assume that people assume me fanatical but I thought that the Next Generation shouldn't have been called Star Trek either...

  

[styx]

I'm enjoying it. Not too crazy about some choices they've made with the show but still a solid si-fi series. The Klingons do take some adjusting to

[ironraven]

Not a fan.

I could deal with some of it. But it just doesn't fit, and too much has changed. It isn't the Prime timeline, or Kelvin, or Mirror'verse. It's just... sad. Writing isn't bad. But it doesn't feel like Trek to me, and there are too many inconsistancies. The ship doesn't feel like it falls between the Cage and Where No Man, the uniforms aren't either, the tech isn't,

Show content

and why did they have to smurf with the klingons? Turned them into reptiles!

CBS had some ok scripts for a science fiction series. Then they remembered they have rights to TOS. So they are pilfering the name. Bad, bad CBS. BAD! Go stand on the naught step. Not the nice one. The one top of the mountain. Naked.

[4everYoung]

The answer to the Theseus paradox is simple.
For an outsider looking at pictures of the spaceship/axe before and after, the answer is no, they are not the same.
But for an insider, a member of the spaceship crew, or the user of the axe, the answer is yes, they are the same.

I'm surprised that we don't have a thread about Star Trek Discovery yet so I guess it is up to me to start one, and I'll start with the elephant in the room- the Theseus Paradox.

For those not familiar with the term, the Theseus Paradox has to do with the ship of Theseus, and how much of it could be repaired and/or replaced before it was no longer really the ship Theseus started with.  A simpler version is Grandpa's old axe, which has had the head and shaft replaced- is it the same axe?

What does this have to do with Star Trek Discovery?  Simple- if the characters are different, the ship is different, the aliens are different, the technology is different, the story is different, how can it still be Star Trek?

I am enjoying it thus far, but I am not sure if it is Star Trek-y enough to be a Star Trek.  Couldn't they have been just as successful being called Voyages of Discovery or something and leave Star Trek alone?  It seems like there is so little in common with the established Star Trek that I'm not sure it really can be Star Trek.

And the Klingons seem remarkably useless and dumb.

Anyone else watching it?

Def

The paradox is simply a false paradox anyway. The fundamental particles making up the ship or the axe are in a constant state of change. Electrons continuously move in and out of relationships with other atoms in the world. So fundamentally not is ever made of the same stuff as it once was. You as a person go through the same process. You don't possess the same particles that you once did. The very DNA making your cells replicate is constantly changing particles. However that does not make you a different person. Personhood is not defined as positioning of the particles making up a  being no more than a ship is defined in that way. Properties ascribed to an object give it its objective being.
In the case of the axe, supposing it only had 2 properties.(which is nearly impossible), they would have to be fundamentally and exhaustively descriptive properties In order to make this a true paradox.
So if you say: "This is my axe" as your description of the object.
The object would have to be a possession of your, and have the fundamental qualities of an axe. Let's say head and handle. (For ease of argument.)
So as long as those fundamental properties do not change the objects description is true.
Any axe that is yours is categorically the same. "This is my axe". No matter if you change the head to another type,change the handle to a different shape, it is still fundamentally the same axe. The type of the parts doesn't qualify it as "this is my axe" only those 3 set parameters do that. It also cannot refer to more than one object. For in order to do so, you have to further deepen your description of the object.
The further you specify the object, the less you can change about it to make the statement true. So in the case of the axe, if you said "this is my wooden handled axe" you could not change the handle to composite. It would no longer fit the objects fundamental description.

So in the case of Star Trek, it is only Star Trek in the most broad sense. It shares the essential properties of Star Trek. But it is not the same Star Trek once you begin to ascribe more specific and detailed definitions to what  the original Star Trek is.  Essential what makes Star Trek.... Star Trek?  Is it the cast, the plot, the basic ideals? That's a question without a concrete definition to give it an answer. Not because it's a paradox but because it's relational question. How 2 things relate is not always the same. It all depends on the context of the relationship at hand. That's why there is no paradox.

[raistlin65]

I've seen them all, but this (beware spoiler below)

Show content

last episode about different timelines and repeating the same over and over

is just too overused in all sci fi shows.

From what I can remember, Stargate Atlantis, Eureka, Warehouse 13, Dr.Who, Firefly, Galactica, and a number of other scifi shows have had the same plot and episode development at least in one of their seasons.
It's just annoying already!

Show content

From Groundhog day to the original Star Trek Series, we're seeing it again. It seems to be used when they run out of ideas or have nothing interesting going on in that season, but to use that trick on the 5th episode is a bad signal IMO and IME.

Just my $0.02

Yeah. I watched the new one Sunday and thought the same think: overused. But at least it was a bit different than what I had seen previously.

Show content

I liked that it was about a criminal using it to practice until he perfectly was able to commit the crime. I don't remember seeing that before. 

[raistlin65]

As far as the Theseus Paradox, Star Trek has grabbed from the Marvel comics universe playbook, which has seen many reboots over the years. There's still some essence that is the same (with Marvel and ST), but definitely revisioning the history.

I also think that TOS was edgy in its time. When it was first released in the late sixties and during it's first years of syndication, it was a grittier show than TNG was years later. TOS just now feels more over the top melodramatic because of how television has progressed and because of the TOS movies that celebrated the series. Discovery may end up feeling over the top for it's dark and gritty feel thirty years from now, too.

So I'm OK with the new series so far, although I still haven't settled in with the characters and wonder if the short season will work against that, as we are used to longer seasons with ST. Meanwhile, if I want something that is more traditionally Trekkie, I have The Orville for that. Clearly a TNG clone with Seth MacFarlane humor thrown in.

[David Bowen]

Just watched episode 7 yesterday,  it's different than other star treks but I really like it. So much controversy surrounding it and the pay to view nature doesn't help either.

[Gerhard Gerber]

Jeez Grant, I was enjoying it until you pointed that out..... 

[Steinar]

Show content

I felt the time travel episode was alarmingly early in the show's run. The writer's usually aren't desperate enough that fast... Here they used it 90% consequence free character exposition. I hate writers spending time on stuff without consequences... Also, if someone breached all security on the Federations most important ship and gained access to critical technology and planned murder and slavery... in wartime... I think I would have a small "accident" with an airlock. Did I mention I hate characters having obvious and impervous plot armor too?

That said, I think I enjoy the show. I think it's Trek because the classic Trek stuff is a baseline which works pretty well communicating with the viewer. The Klingon armor and voice training in the early episodes, yeah, I didn't like those either. What is important, I'm warming to the characters and enjoying a Trek with a protagonist with an arc involving emotional development, a morally ambivalent captain, no cute kids as of now, realistic age on the characters and so on.

I don't like everything, but the show keeps my interest for now. I even think I've overcome my disappointment Michelle Yeoh wasn't the captain of the permanent ensemble.

[Don Pablo]

Just watched episode 7 yesterday,  it's different than other star treks but I really like it. So much controversy surrounding it and the pay to view nature doesn't help either.

It's on Netflix, at least here, and for me, yes, I know that Netflix is €10 a month, but we watch other stuff on it also, so for me, Discovery is a bonus. 

[ironraven]

Red Alert!

Technobabble detected!

The paradox is simply a false paradox anyway. The fundamental particles making up the ship or the axe are in a constant state of change. Electrons continuously move in and out of relationships with other atoms in the world.

Not saying you're wrong. But I'm going to guess your favorite series was Voyager. 

[4everYoung]

Red Alert!

Technobabble detected!

The paradox is simply a false paradox anyway. The fundamental particles making up the ship or the axe are in a constant state of change. Electrons continuously move in and out of relationships with other atoms in the world.

Not saying you're wrong. But I'm going to guess your favorite series was Voyager. 

Actually I don't even watch Star Trek. I've watched the newer movies but thats about it. I couldn't tell you much past that in regards to the show.
My answer was based on science and philosophy. Since this is a philosophical question, the answer must be given in terms as such.

[raistlin65]

Red Alert!

Technobabble detected!

You need flashing lights to do a proper red alert!



Where are the mulitools with built in red alert signals?

[Grant Lamontagne]

There was a point touched on before, about this being the most advanced/important ship in teh fleet currently, and that picks out a HUGE plot hole that I was mentioning while Megan and I were watching it the other day.

Show content

With regards to beaming the space whale on board because it was an endangered species and they need to take it to a zoological station....

With the Discovery being the fast crisis response ship it is, it is very likely that either they are putting the animal in more harm by taking it aboard, knowing they could be called to action anywhere in the galaxy at a moment's notice, or that they would need to use the spore drive to deliver the creature to said facility.  No plans for transport were made, so the former seems more likely.  If the creature is really that "valuable" for lack of a better term, putting it in the hold was probably one of the dumbest things they could do.  More realistically, in a similar situation they should have marked the location and transmitted that data to a more capable vessel.

Of course, little of that applies to the fact that they took a creature that has evolved to live in the vacuum of space and put it in a cargo hold with atmosphere and gravity.
 WTF?   

And, the entire time all I could think of was the episode of Futurama where Leela had to keep reminding everyone that the 4th Dimension Space Whale was actually a 4th Dimension Space Mammal, not a 4th Dimension Space Fish.  I had made that comment during the episode a few times, even before whatserface from the Walking Dead referred to it as a space whale.

Oh yeah, and about the new Klingons...

WTF is up with them?  Their armor makes them super stiff, which would be bad for a warrior race, who could probably appreciate the ability to move freely for combat.  And their language is far from efficient, which is also something that a warrior race would probably prize.  You don't want to take 5 minutes to say "look out!" because by the time you do, it'll probably be too late.

Not to mention that they look like the descendants of the Uruk Hai, so I guess it's possible we will eventually see an episode where it turns out the Klingons are originally from Earth, specifically the South Pacific area?

I am enjoying the show overall, but I am finding all kinds of oddities in the way they are writing it... not that other iterations of Star Trek didn't have plot holes large enough to fly the Enterprise through too....

Def

[Steinar]

Show content

With regards to beaming the space whale on board because it was an endangered species and they need to take it to a zoological station....

With the Discovery being the fast crisis response ship it is, it is very likely that either they are putting the animal in more harm by taking it aboard, knowing they could be called to action anywhere in the galaxy at a moment's notice, or that they would need to use the spore drive to deliver the creature to said facility.  No plans for transport were made, so the former seems more likely.  If the creature is really that "valuable" for lack of a better term, putting it in the hold was probably one of the dumbest things they could do.  More realistically, in a similar situation they should have marked the location and transmitted that data to a more capable vessel.

I reacted to quite a lot of plot points around that creature as well. I even found the rescue slightly curious in and by itself. The Federation lives by The Prime Directive, a non-interference ideology. Now, when wild animals are sick or wounded from natural reasons, I'm used to scientists preaching non-interference on Earth today. So I found it strange the Federation obviously finds it logical to gather endangered species like postage stamps, but at the same time won't interfere with pre-warp civilizations. Now, sentient beings and arbitrary life forms are certainly not the same thing, but the combination is curious.

And hiding a ship with a very unusual crystal within an animal? And they haven't got a single sensor which screamed out? Why don't people cover warships and torpedoes with meat in Star Trek? No need for a cloaking device! :p

I get it, they just wanted the guy with plot armor aboard the ship, but I don't need to like how they did it.

[Smashie]

I'm with Dave Cullen as far as Discovery is concerned

[ThePeacent]

Oh yeah, and about the new Klingons...

WTF is up with them? Their armor makes them super stiff, which would be bad for a warrior race, who could probably appreciate the ability to move freely for combat.  And their language is far from efficient, which is also something that a warrior race would probably prize.  You don't want to take 5 minutes to say "look out!" because by the time you do, it'll probably be too late.

Not to mention that they look like the descendants of the Uruk Hai, so I guess it's possible we will eventually see an episode where it turns out the Klingons are originally from Earth, specifically the South Pacific area?

I am enjoying the show overall, but I am finding all kinds of oddities in the way they are writing it... not that other iterations of Star Trek didn't have plot holes large enough to fly the Enterprise through too....

Def

Those two things are what bugs me the most of the new Klingons. If their armors were so pointy and heavy and bulky they'd be all day punching holes on their monitors, scratching the ship's walls and breaking delicate, high tech devices as they move around. They would most likely hurt and stab their mates if they ever go to rescue them or save the wounded warriors in battle
 

Look at the Federation's combat and spaceship suits, they're slim, tight, lightweight and without any no-nonsense add-ons or parts, they are ergonomic and anatomically fit. WTH?

And for such an intelligent race, that language is just not believable. If they are so slow to speak, they'd never be able to communicate effectively in combat, their parliament and senate talks would last days, and they just wouldn't have the speed of reaction and ability to express their ideas in time, which makes it quite unlikely that they have evolved to develop Faster Than Light travel, energy weapons and massive spaceships.   
Everything in their culture and civilisation would be MUCH slower. Slow creatures die and are erased from existence by superior, faster acting and quicker thinking beings. Natural selection 

[Steinar]

I think we can scratch up the language to start-up problems for the show. They are talking standard Klingon from earlier versions of Trek, but are overdoing it. The Klingon language is pretty straightforward stuff, neither especially efficient nor inefficient. In later episodes the pronunciation is much faster and more natural.

[Grant Lamontagne]

I'm with Dave Cullen as far as Discovery is concerned

I have many of the same feelings, although I don't think I am quite as off put by the show as he seems to be.  I am actually enjoying the show, I just think that if they were going to try and pull off an absolutely different Star Trek, they needed to watch their backs, because the hardcore fans are going to pick at it mercilessly.

Def

[ironraven]

So maybe the Discovery is that CBS is a bunch of mindless smurfs who are pissing off 50 years of fandom because they are desperate and think that the fans will love anything with the Star Trek brand on it?

The logical solution is to bury a bat'leth in some p'toq's forehead deep enough that their grandparents retroactively die at birth.

[Grant Lamontagne]

Is anyone else still watching Discovery?  I have to say, I am really digging the plot twists in the second half of the season.

Def

[Smashie]

Is anyone else still watching Discovery?  I have to say, I am really digging the plot twists in the second half of the season.

Def

No, but I am enjoying Altered Carbon

[Grant Lamontagne]

I haven't watched that one yet, but I have been eyeing it closely....

Def

[Steinar]

Still watching Discovery. Cheered like the fanboy I am when

Show content

Michelle Yeoh returned to the captain's chair. (M.Y. fanboy, just a relaxed fan when it comes to Star Trek in general.)