Live Long and Prosper
A show that boldly goes where no show has gone before, Star Trek not only brought to light interstellar travel and genius androids, but also the crew’s exploration into philosophical dimensions. It may be a popular sci-fi TV show, but since Star Trek launched in the 1960s, the series has blasted off with debates into metaphysical conundrums and ethical enigmas- such as questioning the nature of the soul to the foundations of society.
The “Prime Directive”, also known as the “Non-Interference Directive”, orders Starfleet crews to follow one rule: do not interfere with other cultures or civilizations. The actual order given in the 1968 episode called Bread and Circuses is:
“no identification of self or mission; no interference with the social development of said planet; no references to space, other worlds, or advanced civilizations”
Photo of Captian Jean Luc Picard retrieved from: https://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/star-trek/
Captains take this seriously, like Jean Luc Picard from the original series who states:
“A starship captain’s most solemn oath is that he will give his life, even his entire crew, rather than violate the Prime Directive.”
The Prime Directive reflects both the Kantian commitment to respecting others autonomy and the consequentialist commitment to harm reduction. The assumption of the Prime Directive is that cultures are better left alone to their own devices, these devices can be social or technological. Any interference is judged to create chaos in unexpected ways, even if well-intended. If there are unintended harms to the culture it is better if they are a result from the culture’s own free choices. This commitment to respecting a civilization’s beliefs, practices and values rather than imposing “better” ones upon them is kind of an anti-colonialist ethos.
Are such policies in the universe’s best interests? If the Starfleet can save lives and civilizations from extinction shouldn’t they try to? By being bystanders does this make the Starfleet evil? Well, not according to the Westphalian sovereignty concept, a political paradigm embodied by the Starfleet. This concept comes from the 1648 Peace of Westphalia treaties which established modern thinking on nation boundaries and provinces and indicated that conflict would be caused through cross-border intervention. This thinking is discussed by Captain Jean Luc Picard who states:
“The Prime Directive is not just a set of rules; it is a philosophy… and a very correct one. History has proven again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous.”
You can see Captain Jean Luc Picard further talking about The Prime Directive in a debate here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mH-L6UCCAE
The philosophy of the Westphalia treaty appeared to lead to peace, halting over 80 years of war in Europe when initiated. But, as you may have noticed, there have been a couple of near-apocalyptic world wars since then. In our intricate universe such simple concepts rarely lead to peace.
Photo taken of my brother, his friend, and I on Halloween. My brother is dressed up as Data from Star Trek the Next Generation.
An example that may resonate more with folks in the ENVS*3000 Nature Interpretation course is imagine if you’re a wildlife filmmaker and you come across a dying antelope, do you have a moral obligation to help it? Are you responsible for the death because you walked away? What if by helping the animal you are inadvertently starving a pride of lions that would have fed on the carcass? What would you do?
Photo I took of a happy Garter snake on the Bruce Peninsula.
I have a respect for the Prime Directive and within my nature interpretation I will apply concepts like this. Nature is beautifully natural, and when leading guided hikes watching, not interfering and leaving no trace will be the morals I follow and lead. I have made a list of guidelines that I will follow, and you can too, based off of my personal ethics surrounding the Prime Directive and the textbook “The Gift of Interpretation” by Beck and Cable. This list includes:
1. Always place the welfare of your group above all else.
2. When looking at wildlife, ensure that your subjects are not caused any anxiety, physical harm, consequential predation, or lessened reproductive success by your activities.
3. When observing, do not do anything that with alter the natural behavior of your subject permanently. (For example: habituation, baiting, or feeding.)
4. Do not restrict or restrain wildlife to attract predators. Do not drug or restrain wildlife to film them.
5. Be aware and follow all local/national laws regarding nature. (For example: staying on trails, picking plants)
6. Give credit where it is due.
7. Always do research before you present, some information is updated or is subject to change.
8. Allow all sites to easily restore to their original state after you have been there.
9. Be prepared for unexpected conditions, both environmental or the subject.
10. When observing animals be aware and take precautions. Certain species will never return to a site because they can smell you there. Nighttime observations should be made with natural light. Being near dens or nests can attract more predators.
11. Nature is naturally beautiful, and everyone deserves to enjoy it.
This concludes my blog posts for the course ENVS*3000 at the University of Guelph. I hope you have enjoyed reading my thoughts, a few of the prompts incorporated concepts I hadn’t considered before- so if you didn’t learn a lot, I sure did! I am very accustomed to scientific writing through University and having the opportunity to share my ideas in a creative way was difficult at first, but very beneficial and lots of fun. Thank you for reading, and to everyone in the ENVS*3000 course I wish you the best of luck! I have no doubts that everyone will guide rocking hikes, and use the skills learned on a daily basis.
References:
Beck, L., & Cable, T. T. (2011). The Gifts of Interpretation: Fifteen Guiding Principles for Interpreting Nature and Culture. Urbana, IL: Sagamore Publishing
Lau, A. (2007). Engaging first-year students in ethical issues via Star Trek. Pennsylvania University, 566. Retrieved from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/702a/b04eb5975f7a29a31701981bc5c1c25429d2.pdf
First of all let me just start by saying I LOVE STAR TREK! It’s funny because all semester in class we’ve talked about relate the subject material to your audience, and help them find their spark. Well Star Trek is definitely my spark to your post!
I think your post evokes a moral dilemma that I didn’t even know I was facing. Your antelope problem I think I can take a crack at. I do not think I would help the antelope that was dying IF the antelope was dying due to natural causes or nature. Even though it would be devastating to watch. Where the problem gets tricky for me is that humans have not followed Star Treks code and have had many interactions with nature. Humans have had their impact on nature which ranges from destroying habitats, limiting food sources, hunting for sport and more.
I really enjoyed your list of 11 things you will try to do when you find yourself leading walks, tours, or hikes. One that stood out to me is “When looking at wildlife, ensure that your subjects are not caused any anxiety, physical harm, consequential predation, or lessened reproductive success by your activities” (Moira Parker), I think a lot of people do not understand this concept. Trying to take close up photos of animals, causing the animal emotional harm. As well as trying to get close to the animal could result in you ruining their habitat or like you said physical harm.
Thanks again Moira for your posts this semester and having the courage to combine my favourite TV show with a university level project!



















