www.ditl.org

Sapience is self-awarness. Being able to go "what are we here for", and other such things. It's what defines us from other animals.

Apparently, I have a different dictionary.

No, your dictionary is right. I'm just pointing out that it meant having self-awareness.
For example, humans are sentient, but they're also sapient.
Dogs are sentient, but not sapient.

Well, if the definition includes self-awareness, I agree. I just believed them to be seperate but philosophically related concepts.

Ah, I see what you mean now.

Blackstar - why would you call someone an idiot because you failed to write what you meant?

Anyway...
I've said before that there were parts of ENT that I liked. The forehead arc may have been unnecessary, but I do appreciate what it did. Peter Weller's performance was great. However, saying - as you have - that ENT isn't contradictory and that maybe the PREVIOUS shows were the ones in the wrong is just being an apologist; and a false one, at that.

Now, claiming as a detriment the fact that TNG's theme was the same as that of TOS is nuts - TNG was SUPPOSED TO BE exactly that. Sure, some of the early eps were excruciating, porrly-done direct re-hashes of TOS eps; but the quality of the show - inlcuding number of stand-out eps, performance, production values, etc. - taken in toto from start to finish was much higher than that of ENT. Would the gap have been as great if Coto had helmed ENT from the beginning? Probably not, but unfortunately he didn't.

Blackstar wrote:I meant sentient species you idiot.

I would just like to point out to everyone for future reference that Blackstar was the first to throw an insult for no reason.

Teaos wrote:

Blackstar wrote:I meant sentient species you idiot.

I would just like to point out to everyone for future reference that Blackstar was the first to throw an insult for no reason.

You're right. Idiot comes from from the Greek word idiōtēs which is a person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally being unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. He was actually acting like a moron from the Greek word mōron which is a person of mild mental retardation having a mental age of from 7 to 12 years and generally having communication and social skills enabling some degree of academic or vocational education. I'm sorry for the mistake. [/sarcasm]

Chak, you are right in that a person can be so cynical and bitter that they only see the bad in a product; one could have a delicious bottle of Coca-Cola in their hand and complain about the color, for example.

But I gave Enteprise two full seasons to impress me and it did not. I watched it intermittently during season three and was not impressed. I gave some of the multi-part story arcs of season four a shot and was still not impressed. And it by far had the absolute worst series finale of all Star Trek episodes.

You rip on TNG, well Enterprise is largely TNG lite. Most of the stories in Enterprise's first two seasons, with a little tweaking, could have been told on TNG or Voyager.

Enterprise was full of potential. One thing I would love to have seen was Archer constantly fighting for his job. Political forces back home want to replace him with a more hawkish captain, while others realize a diplomat is in order (a pity Archer isn't very diplomatic; A Night In Sickbay, anyone?). Instead it looked like Admiral Forrest is king of Earth because the Vulcan ambassador is always talking to him. How many ambassadors actually talk to military personnel directly? None. That is what the Secretary of State is for.

We should have seen an Earth still getting used to a world government, and the xenophobia witnessed in season 4 should have been rampant throughout the series. We are supposed to be seeing Kirk's Federation's birth, it's growing pains. And part of that is seeing Earth's peoples growing up, setting aside petty differences and prejudices as they join the intergalactic community.

And another thing, Chak. This series should have been full of aliens we had already seen in earlier Trek from day one. In Fortunate Son we saw the Nausicans and I cheered. Instead we got a whole lot of funny foreheads we had never heard of before, despite the fact almost every one of them had warp drive. It was sloppy writing and producing. Worse, it was lazy.

I liked TNG a great deal. Yeah, it was rough at the start, but episodes like Heart of Glory, The Measure of a Man (seasons one and two had a few gems), The Hunted, Remember Me, Darmok(!), The Chain of Command, and Parallels made me love this series. There were rough spots to be sure, and crappy episodes, but overall it was some of the best 'Trek produced.

ENT really had more potential for political plots than DS9 did and thats what made DS9 so good.

The thing I dont get is, sure the Vulcans dont want to give Humans advanced tech... so why the hell wasnt Archer sent out into space with a cargo hold full of stuff to barter with for advanced tech?

I'd imagine that Enterprise was sent out to find those groups first, and the trade ships would have come later.

Chak

Is she talking to me? Should I take that as an insult?

But I gave Enteprise two full seasons to impress me and it did not

You know, I did the exact same thing with TNG. Same results. I watched other TNG seasons on and off, but not too impressed. I however have noticedthe first two seasons of most of the spinoff series sucked. When did TNG pick up? Well...never but there's always the exception to the rule. When did DS9 pick up? Season 3 after introducing the dominion. When did Voyager pick up? Season 3 after they stopped doing the idiotic stuff with the Kazon. When did ENT pick up? Season 3 with the Xindi/Sphere Builder story arc.

Is she talking to me? Should I take that as an insult?

I'd take that as a new member who hasnt read your sig and who, like the vast majority of people, has no idea what a Chakat is. So I wouldnt take it as anything.

ChakatBlackstar wrote:
Is she talking to me? Should I take that as an insult?

Yes she's talking to you and no you should not be insulted. It's just a username, as I've pointed out before do Captain Seafort or myself lose their marbles because our name was abbreivated?

Cpl Kendall wrote:

ChakatBlackstar wrote:
Is she talking to me? Should I take that as an insult?

Yes she's talking to you and no you should not be insulted. It's just a username, as I've pointed out before do Captain Seafort or myself lose their marbles because our name was abbreivated?

But people abbreiviate your usernames correctly as Seafort and Kendall. I even specified it in my sig. What else am I supposed to do?