[mastab]

This probably sounds like a weird way to start a debate, but a friend and I were watching Star Trek Voyager when a debate over morality came up over the episodes' plot.

I don't remember the specifics, but I still remember the main idea, and I figured it'd be worth seeing what you guys think. Two guys named A and B are together on a planet. A is eccentric, B is logical. Some mistake happens on the way back from the planet, and A and B merge into one person called C. C has the characteristics, memories, and personalities of both A and B. It takes over a month for them to figure out how to undo it, and in that time C becomes romantically involved with A's former wife, C gets a job, C makes friends, and C becomes a real person. Once they figure out how to undo it, they ask C what he thinks and he says he doesn't want to be split into A and B again because that would mean his death. The Captain forces C to have the procedure, and C is replaced with A and B.

So, was the right thing done? Is it okay to kill C if it means A and B will get to live?

I think that he was a person and shouldn't be punished for the mistake made earlier. He became a person, and so he has a person's right to life.

[Vaal Satori]

I remember that episode. It's a very difficult question, and comes down to whether the merged person is manifesting the individual wills of the two original people. If you interpret his will to life as being the wills of the two individuals to be merged into one, then right there you have the opinions of the three people who this directly affects and you must respect their wishes. If however the new person's will supplants the two original wills, and you think they would both want to be two separate people, then the merged person is outvoted and their rights trump his.

The captain would also need to decide if losing two valuable crew members would jeopardize the functionality of the ship, and if it was a matter of ship security to restore them to their natural states regardless of their wishes.

[Winterhammer]

Interesting...

A/B "I came first" stance could be used and probably was in the ep although its my interpretation that the merger created another life that was non A or B and as a result they were dead...probably not the best example but think of it as reproduction where the mates die...

[Otto Verteidiger]

Did C know he was a merge of A and B? Did he know he was two people?

[BartSimpson]

Where "C" is a composite of A & B he would have no rights to trump those of A & B. A & B cannot be deprived of their right to exist in order to allow C to exist.

[Otto Verteidiger]

BartSimpson, on Jun 12 2008, 12:42 PM, said:

Where "C" is a composite of A & B he would have no rights to trump those of A & B. A & B cannot be deprived of their right to exist in order to allow C to exist.

I would agree with this if "C" knew he was a composite. If not, they all die, that is fair.

(Honestly if "C" didn't know I would have no idea on how to call it)

This post has been edited by Highbuzz: 12 June 2008 - 11:21 AM

[Kenadian_2006]

mastab, on Jun 12 2008, 01:05 PM, said:

This probably sounds like a weird way to start a debate, but a friend and I were watching Star Trek Voyager when a debate over morality came up over the episodes' plot.

I don't remember the specifics, but I still remember the main idea, and I figured it'd be worth seeing what you guys think. Two guys named A and B are together on a planet. A is eccentric, B is logical. Some mistake happens on the way back from the planet, and A and B merge into one person called C. C has the characteristics, memories, and personalities of both A and B. It takes over a month for them to figure out how to undo it, and in that time C becomes romantically involved with A's former wife, C gets a job, C makes friends, and C becomes a real person. Once they figure out how to undo it, they ask C what he thinks and he says he doesn't want to be split into A and B again because that would mean his death. The Captain forces C to have the procedure, and C is replaced with A and B.

So, was the right thing done? Is it okay to kill C if it means A and B will get to live?

I think that he was a person and shouldn't be punished for the mistake made earlier. He became a person, and so he has a person's right to life.

Tuvix is not amused by you.

This was on yesterday on Spike, Mastab. (

This post has been edited by Kenadian_2006: 12 June 2008 - 11:41 AM

[Renolds]

Highbuzz, on Jun 12 2008, 06:46 PM, said:

I would agree with this if "C" knew he was a composite. If not, they all die, that is fair.

(Honestly if "C" didn't know I would have no idea on how to call it)

In the Voyage episode C knew.

Eh the captain needed tuvok the most (who the hell needs neelix?) so i think she was justified.

[Vaal Satori]

Renolds, on Jun 12 2008, 02:07 PM, said:

In the Voyage episode C knew.

Eh the captain needed tuvok the most (who the hell needs neelix?) so i think she was justified.

But he possessed all of Tuvok's skills and personality traits. If she didn't need Neelix then what difference would it have made to keep Tuvix?

[mastab]

Highbuzz, on Jun 12 2008, 10:36 AM, said:

Did C know he was a merge of A and B? Did he know he was two people?

Yes, he knew what had happened.

BartSimpson, on Jun 12 2008, 10:42 AM, said:

Where "C" is a composite of A & B he would have no rights to trump those of A & B. A & B cannot be deprived of their right to exist in order to allow C to exist.

They already don't exist. The damage has been done, and killing someone else to bring them back only adds more to the list of tradgedies.

This post has been edited by mastab: 12 June 2008 - 02:31 PM

[Kenadian_2006]

mastab, on Jun 12 2008, 01:05 PM, said:

This probably sounds like a weird way to start a debate, but a friend and I were watching Star Trek Voyager when a debate over morality came up over the episodes' plot.

I don't remember the specifics, but I still remember the main idea, and I figured it'd be worth seeing what you guys think. Two guys named A and B are together on a planet. A is eccentric, B is logical. Some mistake happens on the way back from the planet, and A and B merge into one person called C. C has the characteristics, memories, and personalities of both A and B. It takes over a month for them to figure out how to undo it, and in that time C becomes romantically involved with A's former wife, C gets a job, C makes friends, and C becomes a real person. Once they figure out how to undo it, they ask C what he thinks and he says he doesn't want to be split into A and B again because that would mean his death. The Captain forces C to have the procedure, and C is replaced with A and B.

So, was the right thing done? Is it okay to kill C if it means A and B will get to live?

I think that he was a person and shouldn't be punished for the mistake made earlier. He became a person, and so he has a person's right to life.

Tuvix was, frankly, one person. Two people outweigh one person. Two people's right to life is more important than that of one.

[battousai567]

This reminds me a lot of the Trolley Problem -> http://en.wikipedia....Trolley_problem

or maybe more related to the transplant modification in the above link

Quote

A brilliant transplant surgeon has five patients, each in need of a different organ, each of whom will die without that organ. Unfortunately, there are no organs available to perform any of these five transplant operations. A healthy young traveler, just passing through the city the doctor works in, comes in for a routine checkup. In the course of doing the checkup, the doctor discovers that his organs are compatible with all five of his dying patients. Suppose further that if the young man were to disappear, no one would suspect the doctor.

[SpoiL]

Well..IF I ever turn into a zombie..and there is a potion to make me myself again..Please give me that potion. Dont cry Zombie rights! That is all.

[Esau of Isaac]

Kenadian_2006, on Jun 12 2008, 02:29 PM, said:

Tuvix was, frankly, one person. Two people outweigh one person. Two people's right to life is more important than that of one.

Except this one person is those two people. It possesses the faculties that both of the others used to.

It knows what they want, because it's them.

[Kenadian_2006]

Esau of Isaac, on Jun 12 2008, 06:11 PM, said:

Except this one person is those two people. It possesses the faculties that both of the others used to.

It knows what they want, because it's them.

No, it's not them. He is a product of the two of them combining. He was neither Tuvok nor Neelix, he was an entirely new entity, Tuvix. (which sounds like a cereal but whatever) I hate to use it as an example but...think of the fusions from DBZ.

[SpoiL]

Esau of Isaac, on Jun 12 2008, 06:11 PM, said:

Except this one person is those two people. It possesses the faculties that both of the others used to.

It knows what they want, because it's them.

If it is still them..then separating the one into the 2 isnt killing the one.

Above post makes that irrelevant.

This post has been edited by SpoiL: 12 June 2008 - 03:49 PM

[Biohazard]

I'd judge on whose the better person(s), whether or not C should live.

EDIT:

My tiny brain can't comprehend this.

This post has been edited by Biohazard: 12 June 2008 - 03:50 PM

[SpoiL]

Biohazard, on Jun 12 2008, 06:15 PM, said:

I'd judge on whose the better person(s), whether or not C should live.

EDIT:

My tiny brain can't comprehend this.

Its TV..just go with it >.<

[Kenadian_2006]

SpoiL, on Jun 12 2008, 06:13 PM, said:

If it is still them..then separating the one into the 2 isnt killing the one.

Above post makes that irrelevant.

Don't worry, if he wasn't a new entity, your point would probably be the best argument for going through with it.

[mastab]

Biohazard, on Jun 12 2008, 03:15 PM, said:

I'd judge on whose the better person(s), whether or not C should live.

EDIT:

My tiny brain can't comprehend this.

Who decides who is the better person? As for contributing to the ship, C did as well if not better than A and B.