Which Star Trek entries would you point to as very good or very bad instances of the franchise taking an ethical dilemma and giving it the weight it deserves? This doesn't necessarily mean you agree with the final result, just that you feel the dilemma received the weight it deserved.
A few good ones:
"Cogenitor" - It's easy to see how Trip loses sight of things. I can sympathize with his position even as I disagree with it.
"I, Borg" - I still doubt the weird little graphic would have done substantial damage to the Collective, but the question of whether Hugh should be sacrificed without his consent in an effort to destroy a relentlessly hostile foe is well-handled here. I very much appreciate that the episode comes down to asking Hugh what he wants, and that there's follow-up where Picard's decision comes back to bite him in the ass in the form of Admiral Nechayev.
"In the Pale Moonlight" - Sisko not only faces an ethical dilemma that he arguably fails, but he can't even share what he's going through with any of his usual sounding boards. In the end, the dilemma is effectively taken out of his hands in a way that only digs the knife in deeper.
"Tuvix" - There's entire threads discussing this one. I doubt I can add anything. I'd argue the only weak point, which isn't the fault of the episode itself, is that the entire event is never referenced again throughout the series.
And some bad ones:
"Dear Doctor" - I want to like the handling of this one, but the poor science makes it problematic.
"Homeward" - Perhaps one of the worst handlings of the Prime Directive; I don't recall Our Heroes even particularly discussing whether they shoulld be trying to save what they can of the Boraalans? Nikolai fails to engender my sympathy, while at the same time showing more humanity than Our Heroes and ultimately forcing their hand.
Insurrection - The epitome of raising some complex moral arguments and then burying them under an action-adventure film. The discussions I've seen on this board have given far more gravity to the problem than the film itself can be bothered to do.
"Blood Oath" and "Hippocratic Oath" - Both suffer from the same problem, where we're led to believe that decisions made by characters should have some lasting repercussions, but apparently those repercussions are entirely resolved off-screen.
A few good ones:
"Cogenitor" - It's easy to see how Trip loses sight of things. I can sympathize with his position even as I disagree with it.
"I, Borg" - I still doubt the weird little graphic would have done substantial damage to the Collective, but the question of whether Hugh should be sacrificed without his consent in an effort to destroy a relentlessly hostile foe is well-handled here. I very much appreciate that the episode comes down to asking Hugh what he wants, and that there's follow-up where Picard's decision comes back to bite him in the ass in the form of Admiral Nechayev.
"In the Pale Moonlight" - Sisko not only faces an ethical dilemma that he arguably fails, but he can't even share what he's going through with any of his usual sounding boards. In the end, the dilemma is effectively taken out of his hands in a way that only digs the knife in deeper.
"Tuvix" - There's entire threads discussing this one. I doubt I can add anything. I'd argue the only weak point, which isn't the fault of the episode itself, is that the entire event is never referenced again throughout the series.
And some bad ones:
"Dear Doctor" - I want to like the handling of this one, but the poor science makes it problematic.
"Homeward" - Perhaps one of the worst handlings of the Prime Directive; I don't recall Our Heroes even particularly discussing whether they shoulld be trying to save what they can of the Boraalans? Nikolai fails to engender my sympathy, while at the same time showing more humanity than Our Heroes and ultimately forcing their hand.
Insurrection - The epitome of raising some complex moral arguments and then burying them under an action-adventure film. The discussions I've seen on this board have given far more gravity to the problem than the film itself can be bothered to do.
"Blood Oath" and "Hippocratic Oath" - Both suffer from the same problem, where we're led to believe that decisions made by characters should have some lasting repercussions, but apparently those repercussions are entirely resolved off-screen.
