Scientists saw fictional technologies on the show, asked themselves "would that actually be possible?" So the fake technology inspired the reality. In the Star Trek series, a rule like the Prime Directive, about not interfering in the development of another world but instead allowing it to develop its own way, mirrors debates on the activities of imperial powers in Africa in the 19th century, or the behaviour of the US, and previously Spain and Portugal, in the Americas.
In STTNS a fascinating debate took place that got to the heart of the right to life. An android (artificial life form similar to humans), called Data, had developed self-awareness, ethics and human traits. Only one android had been made. A scientist wanted to completely dismantle Data, effectively killing him, to study how worked, so he could create vast numbers of androids to benefit humanity.
A trial took place to analyse Data to judge did his human characteristics, self-awareness, ethical self-awareness and personality mean that he had a right to life? Was his right to life equal to humans? Did the potential benefit to humanity from creating many androids outweigh his individual human rights, or were his human rights superior? It is a core issue in ethics.
I was in UCD at the time. I remember a lot of academics and post-grads sitting in UCD restaurant for hours discussing the whole issue, the episodes, the writings of many great philosophers on the issue, etc. They all agreed that the tribunal ruling that Data may not be physically human but had all the ethical characteristics of humanity - plus full self-awareness and a desire to live, so could not have his existence terminated even to benefit society - was correct and reflected the conclusions of many ethicists and philosophers throughout centuries, as well as many theories in major religions.
I remember one philosopher commenting that it was striking that a major programme like Star Trek: The Next Generation could build an entire episode around a core issue in ethics and have millions of people worldwide debating the issues of human rights, what is a human, and does the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of society? Or does the right of society outweigh the rights of the individual?





















