Process
Status Items Output None Questions None Claims None Highlights Done See section below
Highlights
id583727215
Today, Roddenberry’s flaws and hypocrisies are well documented. According to his last wife, Majel Barrett, he identified as a communist. But we know from the many accounts of his unethical business practices that he was also obsessed with making money. He preached peace and love but was infamously difficult to get along with. And he flew the flag for feminism while being a notorious womanizer.
✏️ This opens up within me the age-old argument about art and artist and the ability/inability to separate them. Can you separate them, and should you? Think about Star Trek, or Cosby Show, or Harry Potter, etc.? Do you have to throw out the art itself because the artist is objectionable? Keeping in mind that, here, we’re talking about art that isn’t reflecting the artist’s objectionable traits or views… and more often than not, reflecting completely opposite and very positive views. The art itself is promoting and influencing a more positive society, so it has a positive effect really, and the world would be at a loss if we got rid of it. A complication arises if the consumption of that art rewards the artist with monetary and influential gain that they then spend to further their objectionable habits, views and actions. Now it gets more grey or even problematic, because your consumption is potentially feeding into direct/indirect harm. #followup questions 🔗 View Highlight
id583729929
What capitalism renders unthinkable is the politics behind technology: that developments in technology might benefit us rather than usher in further alienation.
✏️ Goes back to the usual thought that it’s not technology that’s problematic, it’s the political (in our case capitalistic) view behind it. 🔗 View Highlight
id583729998
Star Trek provides an antithesis to how capitalism predisposes us to view technology, allowing us to imagine what society might look like if technology were used purely for improving our quality of life. Instead of following this path, the morsels of convenience we’ve received through technological advancements are only enough to numb us to the realization that we’ve become locked into a cycle of consumerism and surveillance capitalism.