Skip to main content

star trek - Why didn't Picard go through with the "geometric pattern" plan against the borg?


In ST:TNG Season 5, episode "I, Borg", the crew comes across a damaged Borg individual that they isolate from the collective, and name him "Hugh".



They develop a plan to show an irrational geometric shape and return Hugh to the collective. Their goal was that the unsolvable shape would, over time, overwhelm their processing power and effectively 'lock up' their systems.




Toward the end of the episode, they decide to give Hugh a choice of asylum or returning to the Collective.



After Hugh chooses to return, Picard hopes that his humanization would spread to the Borg. But he portrayed it as if it was an optimistic hope at best.



Why didn't they go through with their original plan anyway? It wouldn't have changed anything for Hugh since the crew already established that they assumed that if it was discovered by the Borg that Hugh had thoughts or ideas contrary to the best intentions of the Collective, his memory would be erased.


Earlier in the episode, Picard made it clear that since they are not open to peace negotiation and only seek to annihilate the Federation, in Picard's mind any action is justified. (Which of course is somewhat contrary to other Picard lines in different episodes/movies. So this is assuming Picard's current frame of mind.)


I understand he wanted to make an exception for the recently-humanized Hugh, but shutting them all down would still accomplish his goal. He could then find Hugh again, without threat of destruction, and replace his neural processors as they suggested they could earlier in the episode, to undo any overload that the geometric pattern may have caused, and thus easily returning Hugh to a working state again.


Is there some other reason I am missing, or is this a plot hole?



Answer



Picard's change of heart hinged on his realization that Borg members retain individuality, sentience and autonomy when not submerged in the collective. He initially believed that the Borg members were functionally equivalent to organs or limbs in a human; they should be given no more regard than a severed arm or leg. If Borg members retain a separate viable existence when removed from the collective, then the rules of war apply with regard to individuals and states, and how individuals must be treated when no longer acting as combatants for that state.



Also, if Borg members retain individuality, then it becomes immoral to wage total war, i.e. commit genocide without any allowance for surrender for individuals suddenly left without a functioning government. The Borg collective as a form of government was a legitimate military target, but totally wrecking the collective with nothing in place to sustain the members suddenly cast adrift is as good as genocide. The weapon was too big; Picard realized that it was immoral to use it.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize Missy right away?

So after it was established that Missy is actually both the Master, and the "woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS number... ...why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize her right away? I remember the Tenth Doctor in The Sound of Drums stating that Timelords had a way of recognizing other Timelords no matter if they had regenerated. And Clara should have recognized her as well... I'm hoping for a better explanation than "Moffat screwed up", and that I actually missed something after two watchthroughs of the episode. Answer There seems to be a lot of in-canon uncertainty as to the extent to which Time Lords can recognise one another which far pre-dates Moffat's tenure. From the Time Lords page on Wikipedia : Whether or not Time Lords can recognise each other across regenerations is not made entirely clear: In The War Games, the War Chief recognises the Second Doctor despite his regeneration and it is implied that the Doctor knows him when they fir

the lord of the rings - Why is Gimli allowed to travel to Valinor?

Gimli was allowed to go to Valinor despite not being a ring bearer. Is this explained in detail or just with the one line "for his love for Galadriel"? Answer There's not much detail about this aside from what's said in Appendix A to Return of the King: We have heard tell that Legolas took Gimli Glóin's son with him because of their great friendship, greater than any that has been between Elf and Dwarf. If this is true, then it is strange indeed: that a Dwarf should be willing to leave Middle-earth for any love, or that the Eldar should receive him, or that the Lords of the West should permit it. But it is said that Gimli went also out of desire to see again the beauty of Galadriel; and it may be that she, being mighty among the Eldar, obtained this grace for him. More cannot be said of this matter. And Appendix B: Then Legolas built a grey ship in Ithilien, and sailed down Anduin and so over Sea; and with him, it is said, went Gimli the Dwarf . And when that sh

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed.