Star Trek The Next Generation Ruminations S2E15: Pen Pals

Website: www.lorerunner.com
Help Support Lorerunner: / lorerunner
Twitch: / thelorerunner
Stream Uploads: / @lorerunnerstreamarchives
All original works are the property of respective owners.

[@peterkottke2570]

Geordi: It was lucky for her that she was transmitting a message the very moment you were terminating the communication link. Data: Yes very fortunate. One could say even say fate. Geordi: Not like you've been keeping recordings of all her transmissions and decided to play the one most likely to change the captain's mind before you stopped the link. Data: Are you going to tell them? Geordi: Your secret is safe with me. You sentimental trickster. Data: I am not a sentimental trickster. Or am I? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This episode goes may overboard with the preaching much to its detriment. But what I found most interesting is that Data on multiple occassions makes decisions based on emotion. Furthermore he deliberately emotionally manipulates the crew. If any other crew member pulled the stunts Data did, they would have been disciplined but because it's Data everyone is convinced that he isn't letting his emotions get the better of him because they're convinced he doesn't have them. ( even Data himself is convinced of that )

[@rwoliver2]

I laughed out loud when you said, "Hey, we're from space, and we're here to fix your stuff!"

[@mapleicecream4819]

*Wesley Crusher's First Command:* _Saves hundreds of millions of people._ Not bad for a first command, eh?

[@paulscott2037]

You know I think throughout the franchise the Prime Directive is never really shown to be an absolute. After all in The Drumhead Admiral Satie throws the number of times Picard broke the Prime Directive in his face but Starfleet must therefore understand that it is warranted. I think it is likely trained into its officers that it is an absolute for the sake of making sure that there is a weight to breaking it that must be carefully considered. Whenever a Captain does break it they must absolutely submit a report on why, and how they reached that decision. And I dare say that one of the reasons why Picard puts so much faith into it is that not all ships are as well equipped as the Enterprise to have the ability to solve planetary problems the way they do. He could have never assisted this planet while aboard the Stargazer for example. It simply wouldn't have had the means. We also know that the Prime Directive can be broken in situations where it might save a ship and crew. Which makes sense. After all nothing would be worse for PR in the Federation if a ship and crew were lost all because they were so stringently expected to hold to the Prime Directive.

[@knavenformed9436]

This episode has two problems that made it unenjoyable due to logic in my end 1. Data breaks the PD due to emotional influences, even though he is more of a calculating machine on the side of the Federation 2. We had the whole episode "Matter of Honor" due to an Ensign making the mistake of not notifying senior personell and that being a big mistake, here Data does the same for 6 weeks knowingly It would've been interesting if Data got demoted because of his actions and how he would've reacted to a statistical failure, contrasting Wesley's huge success.

[@DrownedInExile]

I think you've pretty much nailed it. Wars and totalitarian governments, the Federation should stay out of, as per the Prime Directive. But the PD should include a humanitarian exception, where the Federation has an obligation to help in cases of natural disasters. The law should encourage aid to be done secretly, in cases where the natives aren't aware of extra-terrestrial life. But Feds shouldn't be able to hide behind the excuse that they couldn't give aid because revealing their presence could contaminate a primitive culture. If that culture ends up dead, contamination is rather moot!

[@fredrikcarlstedt393]

Picard horsing around on the Prime Directive .

[@MariahSyn]

Wasn't there a back and forth on Babylon 5 between Doctor Franklin and an alien ambassador who stated that "I would neither help or harm, let evolution take its natural course" reminds me of the Prime Directive issue.

[@drakejohnson5386]

I think a great parallel to how Lore suggests characters should act when facing a prime directive question, would be the same speech Dax gives Sisko when wondering what to do in the episode destiny. Sisko, the emissary of the profets, was referenced in a profecy and was wanting to seek guidence from it. This lead him to double and triple guessing if he was doing things the way the profets want him to do it or the way starfleet would do it. Ultimately Dax said that the profecy just says the emissary will act and that whatever Sisko would do is what the profecy for tells. Dax in her speech says to act as if he never knew the profecy. If you take the cosmic plan approach to the prime directive, then you should know that the plan is for you to act or don't act based on your judgement, not weather or not this follows the cosmic plan.

[@benlee5139]

LOL, you were talking about wiping the alien's memory just as you were wiping the spill (21.22ff) :D The Prime Directive returns. I like the PD as a thematic device because it causes a lot of discussion about predestination, freewill and interference/non-interference and when. I like that it doesn't have pat answers. That being said, I feel it does have fuzzy edges as applied from episode to episode, inconsistencies. At this point I have to say, regardless of one's opinion of it, for me my prime directive is this question - What is the loving and just thing to do here? Rather than absolute non-interference or interference, one can only do what is the loving and just thing to do with what we know. That could mean making bad mistakes - I believe there were those in the British empire who operated sincerely believing they were doing the right thing but sincerely wrong, which led to lots of problems - and if those who believe there is an ultimate God, power or cosmic plan , then they need a way to determine what that plan is to move ahead. I like Wesley here because he is now faced with the prospect of leadership for the first real time, when all he has done so far is obey and follow. He is nervous and unsure and this is entirely resonant with any new leadership role. I love the way he is not overpowered here but willing to ask questions and learn from the main crew. They integrate his plot with the PD one believably here. Good episode, and glad that compassion won out here.

[@resurrectedstarships]

There is already a Real Life Prime Directive, it is called the Planetary Protection Agency, and it is applicable today to Mars; the debate in eminent! Some people think this is a moral position; but it much more pragmatic than you think. You cannot do an unbiased scientific study if the environment of the planet is contaminated by an outside influence; namely organisms from earth. By the same token, the study of an alien society would be problematic with outside influences. The debate gets heated when the species you study is facing extinction. If we really want to be cold, most life that has ever lived has gone extinct already! Eventually I am sure more complex institutions regarding Planetary Protection will be in place and perhaps more sophisticated and less rigid than the Prime Directive.

[@VM-ln6dj]

As a writer I would say the prime directive is one of the best 'threat of the weeks' because it motivates the viewer that people should help! Any altruistic person hates its over application. But there are some good points for it. I like this episode but it was a bad example about when to debate when to help... but maybe that's why it was easier to write. And show it as a wake up to such rigidity (worfs brother episode contradicts what they learned from this episode- and should be considered a crime of omission) It is hard to know when to get involved and interfere with other people's lives, one person/force may want help, but not another, then what? We choose the one that aligns with our ethical views? (even our friends and how far we should go, when they are not asking/accepting for help) Maybe that culture would find the answer better on their own? Someone should write about all the times we broke it (Kirk) and all the positive and negative repercussions.

[@dylanlewis5113]

There was an Admiral that was Head of Security. He even wore a Operations colored Admiral uniform. I think he was on DS9. In the TOS Movies (or at least 6) and his TNG appearance, Scotty was a Captain of Engineering.

[@tylisirn]

I'm cool with trying to limit cultural contamination and letting civilizations develop in their pace. But my problem with it is exactly this episode. That they're even debating it in a situation like this is almost ass-backwards. The prime directive was conceived to *preserve* the indigenous cultures. You can not preserve a dead culture. Yes, we may be irrevocably contaminating the culture, but at least It. Has. A. Chance. In the worst case the culture is going to be destroyed, well it was going to be destroyed *anyway.* We lose *nothing* in making the attempt, in making the right humanitarian effort. And even if we can't preserve the culture, at least the people have a chance of synthesizing something new. Creating a new culture. This episode just makes me want to go around the table and slap each and every one of the senior staff (except Data, Geordi and Pulaski) and tell them to stop being silly.

[@resurrectedstarships]

In 'this reality' there is already the Planetary Protection Agency, which is a kind of accord to keep as much 'earth contamination' away from other planets we study in the solar system, so that when we do discover life we will not have inadvertently contaminated our studies - I can see at least from the research POV this eventually being expanded into something like the prime directive. I would also think that there is a similar agency in the federation, perhaps with a council, so that when these ethical dilemma arise they can debate it and make a decision. I do NOT think that in a case like this, that the captain and his command staff are really qualified...in the case of a time sensitive emergency, when the captain violates it no doubt he would face a board of inquiry at least. *food for thought for fan fiction*

[@mr51406]

I also liked it better this time. It shows that Data is capable of independent thought, even “breaking his programming” (as Lister would say) since he bends Starfleet rules for essentially humanitarian if not sentimental reasons. I don’t think it’s out of character. It definitely, conclusively proves that Maddox was wrong about Data. Maddox’s army of androids (drones really) definitely would not have helped. So add this episode as a continuity of “Measure of a man.” I liked it better because there could have been lots of melodrama and there wasn’t any. Credit to Ms Snodgrass and the director? As someone who studied geology the science is actually good. There are places where uranium deposits can act as a kind of reactor.

[@frazerrhughess]

#lorerunnerforgrandnagus

[@redshirt5126]

#maketheferengigreatagain

[@Eric_Hutton.1980]

@Lorerunner While Wesley might have been on a science/technology track in Star Fleet, it would make a little since for him to have some command experience, even if he isn't on the command track. Just my opinion.

[@SorakuFett]

I agree with you on the Prime Directive stuff. Personally I think it's simply a large-scale example of those rules that only exist in writing because of some idiot making a mistake, like touching the third rail or some such. That being said, any time I watch this episode and Pulaski starts whining about it, my *gut reaction* is to say to my TV "bruh, you *signed up for this,* how are you only *now* stating this opinion?" Makes me wonder at what point in Starfleet Academy's curriculum do they teach you about the Prime Directive.

[@Sagefox]

I see the prime directive as a character flaw of the federation. Granted I know that was not intended but I see it as a convenient way for the federation to not have any responsibility when things go wrong. Like if they save a random species 100 years ago and now they are big trouble people would see it as the federation's fault for saving them in the first place. In contrast if something bad happens because they didn't do anything it's less likely to be look at as their fault because they did nothing. I know that's not lot logical but it is how I see a lot of people think in real life.

[@mapleicecream4819]

Moving the blame to the wrong person absolutely is a character flaw, and I like the idea that this is a character flaw that the Federation as a whole has. It's kinda like, if all of space was already explored, it would be sad because Starfleet would have nothing new to see, and nothing new to achieve. Similarly, if the Federation had no flaws, it would have no way to grow, and nothing left to improve on. So I like this idea, because I feel like it adds to the whole 'slow and steady forward progress' and 'improving ourselves' vibes I get from TnG.

[@supportpatriarchyordietrying]

I think it was hilarious how they trolled us with that child making her look as disgusting as they possibly could. LOL. (and even more hilarious that they foreshadowed how Nikki Cox would look like after her plastic surgery)

[@Melchiorblade7]

A bit late, but I wanted to add some thoughts anyway. In order for the concept of fate to work, it must take into account and accept the actions of people. The only debate is if these actions are free or determined. If free will exists at all, it is logical to conclude the entity guiding fate allowed or condones free will in the first place. Which means the cosmic plan takes into account free will and accepts it as a concept and integrates it into the cosmic plan. The only thing left is how to use free will, for good or for ill? Basically, the debate about the prime directive boils down to using their free will or not to interfere with other planets. If this entity behind 'fate' is morally good then helping a planet in severe need should be prioritized and should be a good usage of free will. If they seriously think standing by and letting millions die or suffer is ethically good and represents the plan of the 'mind' behind fate, then they are following a malevolent force (perhaps an imagined one)

[@EnvisionerWill]

The Catch-22 that you refer to has a rather sinister implication - the Federation will not intervene to rescue a doomed culture unless they have the ability to consider that there might be aliens out there who can save them. Thusly, the Feds are pushing slightly toward the idea of making isolationist, xenophobic cultures go extinct, since it would rather see space populated by races that are not isolationist or xenophobic. A bit of a conflict of interest there.

[@Enchantmentofeternity]

you're probably going to want to talk about the prime directive again when you get to the third season episode "Who Watches the Watchers". I also thought Next Gen covered the prime directive the most out of any Star Trek show, but that's just me

[@gnomesaiyan1680]

I was just going to bring this one up.

[@ZemplinTemplar]

Yeah, that one is a good later example from the earlier years of TNG. Especially given that Picard shows a generally good sentiment in that episode, but is also a bit too brusque about it. Some moral ambiguity. As LoreRunner points out, Picard's pontificating can come across as a bit convoluted and flawed at times, though usually still right in essence. Crotchety older captain, I suppose. :-P

[@meamishere1166]

"First Contact" Episode, not the movie.

[@randomusernameCallin]

There another time that the prime directive comes into play. The story where it was going bad afterthey saved the life of a native and he talks of the gods and their leader picard.

[@ALoonwolf]

We give them no evidence whatsoever we are out here. If they send a message asking, "Is there anybody out there?" our answer is a clear and definitive, "NO!" Now if they were facing a disaster and we could help them, then we would answer... Oh wait, hmmmm...

[@dreamwhisperer2340]

The prime directive is like these ruminations: to be examined in a case by base casis. ; ) 32:12

[@paulscott2037]

There is another major prime directive episode. Remember the episode with the mintaakens. The more primitive romulan/Vulcan offshoot who had lost their belief in superstition until the enterprise shows up.

[@corssecurity]

Call it the Q continuum? Q all ready said he's God in Tapestry. Seriously though the crew can spend the next twenty years debating, and philosophizing and every one on the planet is dead.

[@devonanderson2902]

Yeah, this is difference and I think the biggest problem with the Enterprise Prime Directive Episode: Despite all the arguments for and against, Picard and his crew still made the choice to save the people. Archer and Flox (without consulting the rest of the crew) debated this and then chose to let the people die. Also, Lore, I completely agree with your interpretation of the Prime Directive. I love the Prime Directive but I am constantly aggravated with how the shows apply it.

[@maxh_music]

This episode actually reaches lamentation status for how Smug Picard reaches peak levels. Not to mention, the only character who strongly counter argues Picard on it, Pulaski, ultimately gives in for the sake of the episode’s resolution. GOD. Tell me what is the worst that could possibly happen by not wiping a child of their memory? Aren’t you adding more risk by doing that procedure, ironically violating the prime directive yet again?

[@philmarsh1000]

I think it could be possible to interfere in a case-by-case basis with a pre-warp civilization in the event of catastrophe or epidemic, which that civilization may not be responsible for visiting upon itself; but certainly not in the case of a war which is entirely self-inflicted.

[@EnvisionerWill]

It dawns on me suddenly that while people call him "Wesley" or "Wesley Crusher" or "Wes", nobody ever calls him "Wes Crusher". I wonder if just that would have improved his presentation a lot. Every time he's called "Wesley" or "Wesley Crusher", it feels like he's a complete child, and a whiny nebbishy child at that. But if he was called "Wes" for reasons other than simple brevity, it might have begun to humanize him a little more.

[@resurrectedstarships]

I don't have anything against wesley either, but damn he is so privileged! Because he is effectively 'family' among the command staff of the Enterprise he gets the golden calf treatment when there may have been any number of promising young crewmen that are being looked over in the lower decks LOL Oh also I disagree that being in command never gets easier, it gets easier but...there is often an anxiety nagging at the back of the head knowing how much attention is on you, and the decision you make can impact negatively all who follow you if you fuck it up! :D Its enough to freeze anyone with indecision if you are not used to this. That never goes away but you learn tricks to deal with it.

[@jeffreymiller9438]

Golden Calf. That's funny. My thought is that don't think for one minute that the lower decks don't know who Wesley is. They know that if they cross him, they'll have Riker all over them. That's why when Wesley finally gave the order, the response was an immediate 'At Once'...

[@LandBark]

I once heard the oppinion that Prime Directive is just a plot device, something for our heroes to break in order to save the day. It is good for our heroes to bend or break the rules to do something good. That's why PD has some evil applications and plot says, PD says to let those people die. Prime Directive is just anti colonial, intervention and exploitation. Something that Federation don't do on a daily basis nor they had the history of doing it, because PD must create conflict for heroes to deal with. Plus Federation is fairly advanced, them rushing into some backward world could be a blessing for people living there, they would gain better life and access to the entire galaxy. I kinda wish I was there during the "debate" of the prime directive, it is a quite stupid talk in my oppinion. When you had rumination of DS9 episode Playing god, this episode and Riker words came to mind "We are not gods". Yes you are, you have no hunger, no misfortune, you live high above the clouds and have the power to save or destroy entire worlds (not to mention create). In the eyes of more backward civilizations, you are gods. Cosmic plan, yeah, cosmic plan says that humans must die (plague, named after doctor Phlox) and I wonder If Riker would accept it or bend over backwards to say "Well, cosmic plan says we save human race". It is nice to speak of those plans when it is not your ass on a line. Not to mention they live in a world of time travel and Q, both of them can duck up cosmic plan. Overall, I wish there was an episode when they say, let them die and they do nothing about. The people die, that would be something new.

[@rmsgrey]

There are problems with The Federation turning up on some planet to uplift them into a galactic presence: 1) Anyone want to give Genghis Khan or Adolf Hitler or Alexander of Macedon or uncountably many warlords and expansionist leaders throughout history starships, beam weapons, and modern medicine? There are plenty of people on Earth today who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near nuclear weaponry. At the very least, there should be some fairly stringent checks on cultural maturity before arming a toddler... 2) What happens when all technical knowledge comes from an outside source? You're looking at magical devices that your people don't have the tools to build the tools to build the tools to produce and people with answers to questions that your people haven't even thought to speculate might be asked one day. Going from that to actually contributing original research and new ideas is not an easy transition. 3) How do you prevent cultural assimilation? You end up with people trying to be humans with funny faces rather than whatever their race/species is. 4) How do you avoid paternalism becoming colonialism? If you give people magic warp technology, do you let them go out and piss off the Klingons to the point that their planet gets sterilised, or do you give them advisors/observers to keep telling them they're doing it wrong (when they're just doing it differently)? Historically, on Earth, a technologically advanced culture coming into open contact with a less technologically advanced culture has rarely gone well for the latter culture. That's not to say that the "cosmic plan" argument is valid - rather it's the height of arrogance - it's built on the assumption that we are outside the plan, and our choices aren't part of it. Remove that tacit assumption and the argument falls apart. A better principle is to consider the foreseeable consequences of a given intervention, bearing in mind that, historically, interventions have tended to have serious, lasting, negative consequences - and weigh them against the foreseeable consequences of not intervening. If a planet is about to be destroyed, then just about any consequence of intervening to prevent that is going to be better than the alternative...

[@ZemplinTemplar]

Very thoughtful, as usual. Keep it up. :-)

[@neuroairman]

Only problem I had with this episode was Data's mullet

[@harpercole5321]

I kept missing this episode on repeats, and didn't see it until I finally got the DVDs in 2003. Not entirely worth the wait, alas. The discussion in Picard's quarters is the only standout scene, and they ultimately get the answer wrong. There's a grey area when it comes to the application of the PD, but this doesn't fall inside that area. Still, less aggravating than the similar S7 episode. The PD does come up a few other times, I think? Who Watches the Watchers, certainly.

[@1300l]

I love this episode. I also like the Prime Directive for the fact that it take in account the cosmic plan. They may not believe in "god".. but no one can prove or not it exist. By that, play safe is to assume it is possible so it is better to don't get involved. Also i my self never see it as "we can't get involved due to faith.. But by "we don't know this culture in depth so we should never change it natural development". I like a military organization that avoid to get involved on "lesser" cultures. It's so different than USA current military. I like it. I also like how in one episode it show how the duties in a starship can be dull. It isn't real time, 6 weeks go by. That also bring a excuse for another video of yours that say that too little time has pass for Georgy to say they were worf family. Who knows how long it took from season 1 till the last episode. The best thing about the debate is that i think Picard already came with his mind set.. that he would help, even before they start debating. I feel that he made this senior staff debate to show the weight of be a "superior" society and the balance of power that we should have. Never rush over feelings. When Data say "We are going to allow them to die" Picard just stop the debate and for me, he show that... No, we wont, i never intended to. But i want you to know the weigh it will have for future cases.

[@athrunzala6919]

With fallacies and sophistry it's amusing that the writers don't know enough about logic to write logically coming from the franchise that produced the Vulcans.

[@RoyalFusilier]

I can respect the intent and motivations behind the Prime Directive. And I'll go further, and say that I think the Federation is a more interesting, more distinct fictional culture for it being there, and it gives them more flavor. I also don't agree with it, like, nearly at all. Aside from the obvious ones of 'don't go down to the cavemen and make yourself their god', but usually in later Star Trek it becomes 'if a comet is going to wipe you out, and you don't have an arbitrary level on the tech tree like we're playing Civilization, then your fucking swine bitch savage ass deserves it, and we not only won't stop it, but we'll sit and watch with popcorn, lol'. How is that anything but the most absurd of cruelty and cowardice, and always presented with the most Noble Face? A lot of the issue does just stem back to the fact that Star Trek often just says Morality Is X. So if you happen to not agree with that, because people are complicated and have a lot of different approaches to morality and philosophy, then like, literally too bad. I'd dig Prime Directive stuff a lot more if they had what felt like a more honest back and forth, where it was up to the audience to decide if x was really justified or not. Oh boy, the 'maybe there's a plan' shit. I'll have done with that real quick, by way of paraphrasing from World War Z. "I'm sorry, but do you really think if God had a plan and he wanted that plan, that a bunch of Arizona national guardsmen could overthrow it?" This sort of circles back to the 'what if we're all a computer simulation' discussion, because it's the same thing. Which also tends to end up being basically religious in nature in that you can't prove or disprove this all-powerful force. If there's fate and it can't be defied, then just do what you were gonna do anyhow. It won't change the outcome, so you won't be able to ruin fate or overturn God's plans or any of that. If there's fate and it can be defied, then obviously the entity who set it up wanted you to be able to defy it sometimes. Presumably based on you making a decision on your free will. So just do what you were gonna do anyhow. If there's fate, it can be defied, but God or whatever didn't want you to be able to, yet still made it so that fucking little human beings in a tin can floating in space can alter destiny, then it's not all-knowing and all powerful, so why should you take it as gospel? Just do what you were gonna do anyhow. And of course, if there's no actual such thing as fate, just do what you were gonna do anyhow. And then Arche goes and says basically all of this, but better-

[@SchneeflockeMonsoon]

Honestly, I have strong feelings for the Prime directive, but I feel it should be less all-encompassing. Non-interference with cultures unaware of the wider galactic community? I think we have to let that be in almost every case. Species which have their fixable problems handled by higher powers won’t become a functional society when they join the wider galactic community. They won’t be pushed to develop without hardship. Natural phenomena or events which will result in the culture’s destruction? Absolutely should be handled by the Federation, albeit quietly. Let me use an analogy. Say the federation is a young adult (that way we can say the Q are a crazy old man), and pre-warp civilizations are children. Strangers, but children nonetheless. Say they trip and fall. They look like they’re getting up on their own. You could pick them up, and make them reliant on you, or you could let them stand up on their own; stronger for it. You absolutely would grab one running out into traffic, because as Riker put it in The Last Outpost: “If they are dead: they would learn nothing.” Do you stop two kids who are arguing, turning their conflict into resentment which could grow into something worse, or do you let them try and resolve it themselves and learn how to compromise? There is a grey area, but I think there is a zone of “let them grow on their own, you can’t hold their hand forever.” Imagine if the Enterprise crew just came down and told them what was wrong and how they fixed it. That species very well could become entirely dependent on the Federation. Every single problem: they would call for help. Assume they became a spacefaring culture. Would they even be a culture anymore, like the Vulcans or Humans, within the Federation, or would they be just a subset of their benefactors, adding nothing to the galaxy?

[@Tumoxa89]

I dissagree with you on PD, I think it's fantastic. I believe you're arguing against the non existant position and taking the phrase "playing god" too literally. This has nothing to do with preserving one civilisation's "God given destiny" or some bullshit like that. In my mind PD is about letting a civilisation discover their own path, learn from their own mistakes and develop their own identity. To mature as a species or to die trying. For example: as horrible as WWII was for us, it also was a hell of a lesson and we're lucky that we've learned that lesson before the wide spread of nuclear weaponry. Now replace "nuclear" with "metagenic" or "matter-antimatter" and you'll get the drift. In my mind: civilisation either wises up and learns to get along enough to develop the means for interstellar travel, or it destorys itself. That's kinda grim, but the alternative is alot more horrific. Ofcourse in this episode they make an exception to PD which i agree with. The planet was dying because of a natural disaster, rather than any societal turmoil. This civilisation was about to experience a sudden death due to no fault of their own, there were no lessons to learn and they needed a 1UP. p.s. Also, you've made a lot of comments against "smug space people" attitude which i think were misapplied then and would be more relevant for the federation without PD,.... Because being a "we know what's right" interventionalist is the smuggest position one could take. Edit: ok, i've made this comment on a 21 minute mark, probably should've watched the whole thing, because you've echoed a lot of my points.

[@wangbot47]

Nono Lore. You CRITICIZE Wesley. I hate Wesley.

[@SexycuteStudios]

Wesley is insufferable in the first two seasons.

[@rpra6435]

TNG "Pen Pals". i think this episode and Sarjenka behaviour on ship proved the best way why Prime Directive is very good one and should not be disagreed with. I felt more and more angry seeing how childlish Data acts in the episode. Data is major rank officer not old brother from high school. How Picard act in last epiode is beyond idiotic. All crew except Worf act like teenagers from usa high school talking about how child sees the world.

[@ifandbut]

An introvert and social non-entity. Wow...that sounds alot like me.

[@Netherfly]

Pen Pals is one of those episodes I remember very fondly but always have difficulty watching. The basic premise? Phenomenal. But that Prime Directive scene is just awful.It really drags down the episode, and worse, its nonsense has bled into almost every fan discussion of the PD I've seen. The problem is that fans love Picard, and therefore assume that because Picard says a thing, it Must Be So, but his arguments here are just complete rubbish (nothing but logical fallacies). Troi and Riker aren't much better, spouting nonsense about destiny that has no place in Star Trek. The only one making an actual argument is Pulaski, but because she was mean to Data that one time fans don't tend to listen. This one scene accounts for about 10% of the most tedious discussions in /r/DaystromInstitute, and is seriously annoying. The Prime Directive was a great idea, but Trek writers have *never* been really able to execute the concept well, due in large part, I think, to the legacy of *this* episode and Picard's little speech.

[@StefanTravis]

You speak like there's something wrong with being introvert or "non-social".