ST Enterprise: Rate "Similitude"

[Space_Cadet]

this episode is definitly up for a Hugo along with Twilight and Cogenitor

[Captain Novaes]

Gave it a 7. Aside from minor techinchal quibbles - the thrust thing and all - it presents the thoughest ethical question ever seen on Star Trek. Sacrifice one not just for another, not just for the ship & crew, but for a whole planet.

Still, were it a RPG plot and I instead of Archer, I would´ve tried something different

[Evan van Eyk]

Just when I thought season 3 might end up not to be that bad, they throw this at me. At the beginning of season 3 Archer turned somehow very angry and almost "evil" but he seemed to have found his way back to the "good" guys. But well in this episode he all blew it up - so now he is not only willing to torture people, but essentially became fascist all the way: "Hey your live is not as much worth as Trip's so kill yourself or I will kill you". And Doctor Phlox whom I remember to be an ethical person, always speaking about ethics ( e.g. in the episode where he has to treat somebody of an "arch-enemy species" ) and now he not only holdsback vital information but is willing to kill a person just to get spareparts.
There were two very bad sentences in that episode:
Archer answering Sim referring to be a murderer: "Don't make me one!" How ridiculous. Nobody makes you a murderer. But of course it is easier to blame somebody else for your own guilt. Definitely nice, Captain! "Hey its your fault if I disregard basic human rights!"
The next one was Sims words: "That is what I was meant to be!"
Great not only does Archer state rascist views, the victim even accepts it.

The episodes lesson is that there are different values of live - definitely Star Trek! I remember how rascist TOS used to be...mmhhh wait...

I would have liked it much more, if Sim would have agreed to sacrifiy himself right from the beginning, although that would have left out very interesting aspects of the plotidea - at least that very poor characters back-development of Archer, as well as the strange outcome of the episode would have been spared too.

Definitely a bad episode, so far the "untrekist" episode I have seen in any ST series.

[Phantom]

I gave it a 6, so it is about average for the season.

As to Archer forcing Sim into the operation, what would you have liked him to do? Wait until Sim died and lose both of them? At least the solution saved one of them. I think that is a big check in the positive column. Remember Phlox said their was no evidence the drug would have extended Sim's life.

[Sea Tyger]

Originally posted by Captain Novaes
Gave it a 7. Aside from minor techinchal quibbles - the thrust thing and all - it presents the thoughest ethical question ever seen on Star Trek. Sacrifice one not just for another, not just for the ship & crew, but for a whole planet.

-----------------
"The needs of the many outweigh..."

"...the needs of the few?"

"Or the one."
-----------------

I gave the show an 8. T'Pol's reaction surprised me. The nit on the thrust thing didn't really bother me at all (never let the truth get in the way of a good story ). Archer's gumption was refreshing.

Excellent character and ethical story.

[BouncyCaitian]

Racist is probably an incorrect term in this case. Cold Blooded and Callous, on the other hand, describes Archer perfectly. However, I can sorta see his point. Sim is was enginnered for a 15 day life span and is walking spare parts.

The fact that the brain started to develop and the replicant (anyone got a better name?) was able to learn, speak, and had Trip's memories (still trying to figure that one out), does however raise all sorts of ethical questions.
I do not envy Archers position, but if forced to make the choice, I'd have to throw empathy out the window and make sure my chief enginner was back up and running, and damn the replicant's feelings on the matter. It's an ugly command decision, but I'd learn to live with it.

[Phantom]

Is it just me, or does it seem that Archer is standing a little too far from his razor in the morning?

He seems to have 4 o'clock shadow 24 hours a day now. A little un-military I think.

[Balok]

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
But well in this episode he all blew it up - so now he is not only willing to torture people, but essentially became fascist all the way: "Hey your live is not as much worth as Trip's so kill yourself or I will kill you".

Given the circumstances, Trip's life *is* worth more than that of a creature with a limited lifespan. Archer is convinced that if he can't stop the Xindi, in the next few months at the outside, then Earth is doomed. If the choice comes down to killing one "man" or allowing the entire human race to die, it seems clear to me. Hell, if the choice came down to me giving *my* life or allowing a huge number of people to die, I'd like to think I could make that sacrifice.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
And Doctor Phlox whom I remember to be an ethical person, always speaking about ethics ( e.g. in the episode where he has to treat somebody of an "arch-enemy species" ) and now he not only holdsback vital information but is willing to kill a person just to get spareparts.

What vital information did he hold back? About the enzyme? Perhaps he considered that the enzyme treatment to have an extraordinarily low probability of success. Part of what a professional does is use his best judgement about a situation. Nevertheless, the enzyme sequence was poor and didn't need to be there.

We don't know whether Phlox would have done the operation without Sim's consent or not -- it never reached the point where that question was asked. We do know that Phlox' medical ethics allow him to perform any treatment a patient requests, even one that kills them -- his ethics are such that if a patient requests it, it's okay. So there's no conflict with him operating on Sim, fatally, if Sim asked him to do so.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
There were two very bad sentences in that episode:
Archer answering Sim referring to be a murderer: "Don't make me one!" How ridiculous. Nobody makes you a murderer. But of course it is easier to blame somebody else for your own guilt. Definitely nice, Captain!

I agree. Anyone who would make such a statement has a poor character, clearly believing they're not responsible for they're actions.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
The next one was Sims words: "That is what I was meant to be!"
Great not only does Archer state rascist views, the victim even accepts it.

I disagree. It's possible that Sim decided to sacrifice its own life. The segment where it decided that could have been written better.

[Sea Tyger]

Originally posted by Phantom
Is it just me, or does it seem that Archer is standing a little too far from his razor in the morning?

He seems to have 4 o'clock shadow 24 hours a day now. A little un-military I think.

I was thinking that myself. I chalked it up to the fact that Archer probably hadn't slept much in the intervening days...but the captain is certainly looking more haggard as the mission progresses.

[Evan van Eyk]

Originally posted by Phantom
Remember Phlox said their was no evidence the drug would have extended Sim's life.

Neither was there evidence that the operations could actually save Trip. After all, Phlox was wrong when evaluating the outcome of the operations on Sim, so I would regard it highly insecure on Trip as well.

Sea Tyger
"The needs of the many outweigh..."

"...the needs of the few?"

"Or the one."

Well, but I remember Kirk stating that this is Vulcan idiotism. BTW mathematicall incorrect. Life is generally regarded as invaluable. MAthematically speaking, "infinty" does not change when multiplicated with any factor, thousand times infinty, remains infinity.

BouncyCaitian
Racist is probably an incorrect term in this case. Cold Blooded and Callous, on the other hand, describes Archer perfectly. However, I can sorta see his point. Sim is was enginnered for a 15 day life span and is walking spare parts.
I do not envy Archers position, but if forced to make the choice, I'd have to throw empathy out the window

Well Archer clearly stated because of Sim's shorter lifespan he regarded him less-valuable, which is definitely rascist. And besides that Sim had the same skills as Trip, so he could have taken his post easily. And do not tell me, Earth first Warp 5 ship gets underway without an elite-crew or another one who can become chief-engineer.
And by making this decision you would ignore the basic human rights, which are part of most constitutions of Earth, and presumbly of United Earth Republic as well. And worth has a species which throws overboard those human rights, when it becomes uncomfortable to push them through. What is left of civilization when you drop that?

Fesarius
Given the circumstances, Trip's life *is* worth more than that of a creature with a limited lifespan.
...
We don't know whether Phlox would have done the operation without Sim's consent or not -- it never reached the point where that question was asked.
...
I disagree. It's possible that Sim decided to sacrifice its own life. The segment where it decided that could have been written better.

Erm, no. Human life has its value independent of the persons skills, abilities or whatever. That's why its called basic human rights, the right to life being part of it.
and it seemed so, that Phlox would have done the operation, or how else would Archer have done the procedure?
But ti does not feel like Sim decided to do it. He actually just saw that he would not like to end in a shuttlepod, alone and thus chose the "better" option. But I had not the impression he actually wanted to save Trip. It was more - "ok I have to die, because they won't help me, so I can die right now anyway."



The thing is just that Archers behaviour seems to be so inconsistent. In "Mine Field" he personally jumped out the airlock to save Reed, although the whole ship was endangered - and he would have had access to a security chief far more easy than in the expense. And in Rajiin he is willing to risk the away team retrieving vital information in the conflict with the Xindi jsut to save a sexy slave girl.
But when it comes to somebody, who happens to look and behave like his best friend, he has no problem about murdering him.



BTW the shuttles towing the ship are depicted correctly. You have to overcome the inertness to get the ship going, afterwards its gets much easier. Try it out with your car. Once you have it actually moving its far easier to pull/ push.

[BouncyCaitian]

Evan van Eyk

Nice selective editing of my arguement to reinforce your point. Let's not do that again.

In any event, Archer was less than pleased that Phlox hadn't mentioned the treatment which 'might' have saved Sim, and he was outraged that Sim would die when the parts of the brain that were needed were removed.
But, and this is the cold hard reality of the situation, Sim was enginnered for spare parts to begin with. He was built with a 15 day lifespan. This is not racism. This is what he was built with.
Archer is faced with a desperate situation. He has less than a year to find a weapons enginnering center of a highly hostile species that wants to obliterate Earth and all it's colonies. His ship is badly damaged, and his chief enginner is in a coma, leaning towards a terminal situation. Phlox shows up with a potential cure, so he grasps it.
A unforseen side effect is that the clone/replicant seems to have access to trips memorys and it can speak, thus creating a potential moral (and morale) problem. Archer was correct in NOT trying to bond with it, as this would interfere with the potentially ugly duty he would be forced to do later.
To his credit, he asked Phlox if Sim would survive the transplanation procedure and when told yes, it made a potentially unpleasant duty easier. A nasty surprise came later when it turned out that Phlox's estimates were incorrect and the Sim would terminate in a few days, with Phlox mentioning that the needed termination date was coming soon if Trip was to survive.
When Sim brought up the potential treatment to extend his life span, Archer was outraged that it hadn't been mentioned, but Phlox told him he hadn't brought it up because the treatment was a slipshod prospect on the original DNA template he would normally work with. With Sims mixed DNA, the chances became near to non-existant. Archer (correctly) wasn't pleased that he hadn't been informed, but could understand the reasoning behind it.
Considering the desperation of the situation, and Sim's known terminal situation, he made the correct decision in valuing Trip's existance over Sim's. Simple practicality.
Racism is prejudice or discrimination based on the belief that race is the primary factor determining human traits and abilities. Racism includes the belief that genetic or inherited differences produce the inherent superiority or inferiority of one race over another. In the name of protecting their race from "contamination," some racists justify the domination and destruction of races they consider to be either superior or inferior. Institutional racism is racial prejudice supported by institutional power and authority used to the advantage of one race over others.
No racism here. The cards were stacked against Sim the moment he was created. Archer was at least decent enough to explain what was going on to Sim and gave him a choice at the end.

A lot of the conflict on the episode, in hindsight, was based on sloppy writing IMHO. When asked by Sim if Trips life was more valuable, Archers response should have been "No. But some eight billion Human beings lives are. We are faced with a situation of the total destruction of the Human species. We are badly crippled right now without my chief enginner to repair the ship.
"You were originally created to help trip by providing the tissues he deperately needs to live, so that we can continue on and save the Human Species. Your normal life span is fifteen days. We couldn't have reasonably anticipated you developing Trip's memories since this was a one-off event.
"I'm faced with a decision that no commander throughout history has ever wanted: Condemning someone innocent to death. Balancing your limited lifespan verses the entire population of Earth and the entire Human race, however......do the math.
"Now, we'll do what we can so see if there is anyway out of this. But I'm not going to hold out a false hope for you. If it comes down to the wire, it's Trip who will live and not you.
"Besides, look at it this way, you'll have helped save earth and the entire human species. Not a bad epitath to have."

taking this approach early on, would have kinda cut short the drama, but it makes more sense

[Evan van Eyk]

Originally posted by BouncyCaitian
Evan van Eyk

Nice selective editing of my arguement to reinforce your point. Let's not do that again.

Erm, you don't expect me to quote your whole post, do you? Therefore I just repeated the points were do not agree on, to make clear, why I do not agree on that.

He was built with a 15 day lifespan. This is not racism. This is what he was built with.

I never said that this was the racist issue ( see below ). And I can perfectly udnerstand Archers decision here. Why its still ethically highly questionable to create a human being ( although presumed not be really sentinent ) just to get its organs, I can see the need for it, if not Earth should be destroyed. Additionally it would have been alloweed to live out its normal lifespan at that point.

Archer was correct in NOT trying to bond with it, as this would interfere with the potentially ugly duty he would be forced to do later.

I did not say he should have bonded with it ( which he actually did, referring to the flying model scene in the shuttle hangar ). But I simply felt it poorly acted/ written that he has no problem with murdering his best friend. I would assume that you get emotional problems, when you are to kill somebody, who has the memories, the personality and the look of your best friend. That's all.
Additionally I think it was bad written that Archer tries to push his responsibility away. I think that does not match a Starfleet Captain, blaming others for his decisions ( "don't make me one!").

Archer (correctly) wasn't pleased that he hadn't been informed, but could understand the reasoning behind it.

Oh great, since when do civilians decide on military matters?Imagine Archer would have learned of it, after the procedure. That would have been even more severe to him - having killed somebody, who might have lifed a normal life, just because some Doc decided not to tell the whole story to the Captain.
Additionally I did not find that very consistent with Phlox other behaviour. It simply does not match his ethical path in earlier episodes.

Considering the desperation of the situation, and Sim's known terminal situation, he made the correct decision in valuing Trip's existance over Sim's. Simple practicality.

Well, I do not know about US military, but in German military, the highest order is to protect Human Rights. Any order violating those is not to be carried out - and the person givving such an order has to face "court martial" ( we actually have no court martials, all military law issues are carried out by civilian courts ). And taking a look at the UFP charta and Starfleets General Orders, I see the same. As United Earth Republic is the only human planet in the UFP, I would assume that this ideas came from here and therefore are already present in the Republic.
Although that may be practical its still violating Sim's human rights, thus its highly immoral. As I asked before ( and you did not answer that ). What worth has a nation which drops its principles when it becomes uncomofrtable.

Additionally, why do the Vulcan actually bother with humans, they have a lifespan which is mere a fourth of theirs.

Institutional racism is racial prejudice supported by institutional power and authority used to the advantage of one race over others.
No racism here.

Well Archer is the authority here. And he gives Trip the advantage because Sim has other biological statistics, thus its racism.

A lot of the conflict on the episode, in hindsight, was based on sloppy writing IMHO. When asked by Sim if Trips life was more valuable, Archers response should have been ...
taking this approach early on, would have kinda cut short the drama, but it makes more sense

You are right. I would have preferred a more "pathetic" end if it would have meant not to accept this strange and unsatisfying outcome of the episode. When Archer confronts Sim about it, he should have asked him, what he thinks Trip would do, if he could save Earth, if that would not be worth his life. After all there is still his family on Earth, all these people, Sim misses in his earlier days.
I think that conflict at the end did not match the episode, maybe it was simply too much. There would have been raised enough questions with Sim dying because of the operation and being only created as spare parts.

[Balok]

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
Neither was there evidence that the operations could actually save Trip. After all, Phlox was wrong when evaluating the outcome of the operations on Sim, so I would regard it highly insecure on Trip as well.

I agree that the operation wasn't certain to work. However, I think the difference is that the enzyme treatment for life prolongation was virtually certain not to work (extremely low probability) and the tissue replacement was likely to work (high probability). This is Phlox' professional judgement, which Archer has to trust -- Phlox is a trained physician. I think you need to keep the relative probabilities in mind.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
Life is generally regarded as invaluable. MAthematically speaking, "infinty" does not change when multiplicated with any factor, thousand times infinty, remains infinity.

So, it is your opinion that taking a single life is wrong, even if the other choice is the destruction of all human life? Those are Archer's options, based on the data presently available to him. I can't agree. I understand your concern with the slippery slope, and how immoral acts (but please see below) can destroy what you're fighting to save, sometimes before you even realize it. But to state, absolutely, that one must never sacrifice a life, even if the result is racial death, is a little too absolute for me.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
Well Archer clearly stated because of Sim's shorter lifespan he regarded him less-valuable, which is definitely rascist.

Are you, perhaps, sidestepping the fact that Sim isn't really a man? He's a highly specialized animal that looks and acts like a man. That doesn't mean he is a man.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
And besides that Sim had the same skills as Trip, so he could have taken his post easily.

For five days, until he died. The enzyme treatment probably wouldn't have worked, remember.

It might have been an interesting story if the enzyme treatment had worked, and they'd decided to replace Trip with Sim -- but I don't think it was the story they wanted to tell.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
And do not tell me, Earth first Warp 5 ship gets underway without an elite-crew or another one who can become chief-engineer.

It's reasonable to assume that there are other talented engineers, but it's also reasonable for Archer to assume that his crew is indispensible. It's also reasonable to assume Trip got the top spot because he's the most knowledgeable. He can't get reinforced from Earth. So each death matters more -- and matters in proportion to the set of skills lost.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
Erm, no. Human life has its value independent of the persons skills, abilities or whatever.

That view is somewhat ivory tower, I feel. First, it ignores the fact that Sim is not a human. Second, Earth's survival depends on Enterprise, and Enterprise's survival depends on the skills and abilities of her crew. It's quite arguable that the members of that crew are more valuable, in this situation, than others humans -- and that the members of that crew are valuable in proportion to their contributions.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
But ti does not feel like Sim decided to do it...

The ending was a bit hurried. I was left with the impression that he'd decided to sacrifice himself, but youi could be right.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
The thing is just that Archers behaviour seems to be so inconsistent.

This is certainly true. It's possible that his friendship for Trip influenced his decision making, here.

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
And in Rajiin he is willing to risk the away team retrieving vital information in the conflict with the Xindi jsut to save a sexy slave girl.

Yes, he mishandled that situation. I would have left a special forces soldier in the brig with instructions to kill her before allowing the Xindi to retrieve her and the information she'd stolen.

[Ergi]

Originally posted by Chris Lowrey
Woohoo! There it is - the obligatory "2" vote. I've been waiting all day....

Chris

One of those, now two, 2s came from me, but that was an accident, I confused the episode titles after watching North Star which was extremely lame, at least IMHO.

Simlitude, on the other hand, was much better. I'd give it a 7, unfortunately you can't take back your votes. Anyway, good acting, great story, very trekish (seems like the two lords of evil B&B have listened to some fans after all), but once again a total violation of modern science.

First, they ignored the conservation of momentum which could have been easily explained with some warp bubble technobabble, but I understand why they left it out.

Second, they claim that human memories can be stored in the form of proteins = RNA =>DNA=genes, like they did before in the TNG season 5 episode "Violations". Although they somehow had to explain Sim's fast maturation there could have been other ways to do that. Selecting an explanation that was wrong 10 years ago makes neither correct, but they at least are consistent.

[Sea Tyger]

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
Well, but I remember Kirk stating that this is Vulcan idiotism. BTW mathematicall incorrect. Life is generally regarded as invaluable. MAthematically speaking, "infinty" does not change when multiplicated with any factor, thousand times infinty, remains infinity.

What???

First, Vulcan idiotism? I certainly never heard Kirk call Spock an idiot; in fact, Kirk admitted he couldn't argue with his friend's wisdom. Second, I was simply using an old Trek quote that was appropriate to the situation.

And why are you debating the mathematics of an axiom that has nothing to do with mathematics??? It's a statement about the willingness to sacrifice your needs for the needs of the greater good, which is part of the core of Gene's vision. Who cares if you can disprove it mathematically? Life isn't just mathematics (and this is coming from a guy who loves math)...you can't just apply a formula to everything and hope your theorum is correct.