Originally Posted by janeway72
Did Gene Roddenberry not originally mean for Star Trek, in some respects, to be a social commentary?
I teach Religious, Moral and Philosophical studies in High School and I have used episodes of Voyager for discussions on the death penalty, human sexuality and utilitarianism. I have not got far enough into DS9 to find any stories of particular use for our curriculum but I'm sure i will. I may be slightly more in tune with finding moral and ethical plots in TV programmes as I do it for a living (I also use West Wing, Simpsons, Friends and a number of movies). I just have to get the pupils to stop telling me they don't want to watch star trek as it's for geeks- though STXI turned a few of them round on it.
That's a cool idea. There are so many DS9 episodes for every subject after all. ~I'm studying Museum Studies at the moment so I thought it might be fun to look at some of the politics of DS9 at some point especially as regards issues of conquest and cultural appropriation. Even the Federation is made just slightly guilty of this sometimes.~
Also you've got so many possible paths for exploration of moral issues. Guilt and responsibility (Duet, Dax, Things Past, the Darkness and the Light), Value of life (The Quickening, Shadowplay, Playing God, Life Support), War politics (Pale Moonlight - of course, Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges, Homefront / Paradise Lost) and even the whole question of "following orders" (Rocks and Shoals, Hippocratic Oath, one might even argue for the On Little Ship as another example.)
There is also the question of whether the Federation really is as "insidious" as Quark and Garak seem to believe it is in "Way of the Warrior". After all, Sisko comes to the station with