That comes up in one of the novels (“Dark Mirror”) - in the mirror universe, Deanna is the “political officer” on the alternate Enterprise-D
I always though Troi was stationed in ops because her empathic ability was (theoretically) of some use in first contact/negotiation situations.
Basically she was another sensor suite.I doubt it even got to that level of thinking. The time when TNG was born was the heyday of Woo, after all, and Roddenberry was grossly afflicted with Woo. He was a lot of things, but he wasn’t actually a great writer or a clear thinker. Roddenberry seemed obsessed with the early 1980’s vision of the world - which is one reason those seasons are so badly dated. And let’s just say his ideas about what humanity even should be like are pretty revolting.
Compare sfdebris’ take on it here: http://sfdebris.com/videos/startrek/t101.asp
Adm. Satie in “The Drumhead” had a Betazoid on her staff who essentially functioned as a thought policeman for her.
Welcome to the board. It is nice of you to note the bump of the old discussion. It shows concern for etiquette on the board.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the arguments you make; however, I think they are misguided. I don’t think Acsenray was dismissing that people perceive and conceive through the filter of their own experiences. Rather, he was trying to point out that just because our modern military has a particular philosophy, that does not mean that all militaries must have that same philosophy in order to function.
Roddenberry may have had actual military experience, but it did not necessarily translate to the screen or to the methodology demonstrated in Star Trek. Now one can argue that Roddenberry was deliberately changing things to fit his own agenda and ideas of the things should be, or one can point out that much of the writing wasn’t done by Roddenberry, or one can argue that Roddenberry’s ideas aren’t congruent with the needs of a military organization and argue the basis for that determination. But it is obvious that some things that appeared in Star Trek are determinedly different than what makes sense for a military traditioned off our current one.
In this particular instance, “unnecessary assumptions” appears to be things like officers who refuse a promotion thereby demonstrate their lack of confidence in their own abilities, and their lack of dedication to the needs of the military as a whole, and thereby demonstrate that they are not suited for further consideration for promotion, and may not be suited for the job they currently hold. By the way, that idea has been expressed numerous times by military and ex-military, such as, for example, Michael Stackpole (SF author). The assumptions appear to be “our military works this way, therefore it is the only logical way for any military to work”. Or some variant.
Two questions:
-are there chaplains on the Enterprise?
-the enlisted men/women: do they ever get promoted?
As far as I can tell, we never see any Chaplains in the series. In the TNG era, the Counselors seem to fulfill that general role.
Also in the TNG era, we never see any enlisted personnel, other than Chief O’Brien (whose rank, as I recall, they never could quite pin down through most of TNG. If you look at his rank pips, they’re always changing). O’Brien being finally pegged as a senior NCO was part of the franchise’s gradual shift into Darker and Grittier territory (compare DS9 to TNG)
There are some enlisted crewmen in the original series, a few of which have cameos as officers in the movies (Yeoman Rand and the transporter tech both turn up as Commanders in the movies)
The existence and role of enlisted in the Star Trek universe is somewhat murky.
In TOS, there was Yeoman Rand, and there were any number of people running around in jumpsuits (not the two-piece uniforms) that might have been enlisted personnel. However, the focus of that show was the officers, especially the big 3. There also was the typical TV glossing over of personnel (i.e. how many staff does it take to run a bridge? How do you cover 3 shifts? Etc.)
Some people seemed to take that and other statements about Starfleet Academy and whatnot and assume that meant there were no enlisted personnel. Also, IIRC Roddenberry said that at some point, which is amusing and confusing.
O’brien’s role on Next Gen was some nebulous officer responsible for running the transporter. He was given a title, Transporter Chief. When the character was fleshed out in the move to DS9, there was some consideration given to the traditional use of “chief” in the US military as an enlisted designation. Ergo, they decided to make O’Brien an NCO.
Consistency is just something they did not fully adhere to in the Star Trek universe.
Even weirder in DS9 O’Brien was shown to have Starfleet officers working under him on occasion.
The fact that they could never figure out what O’Brien’s rank and position in things was serves as yet another example of O’Brien being the universe’s chew toy. At least he’s a quite badass chewtoy by the end of TNG (by the 6th or 7th season of TNG, they were working on O’Brien’s pedigree as a badass veteran of a previous war, and DS9 ran with that)
The Chief O’Brien problem can be explained away by having him be a Chief Warrant Officer instead of a Chief Petty Officer. In the present day military most don’t know what WO’s are supposed to do, who they answer to and what their responsibilities are. Which is just how the WO’s like it.
The original ST Writers’ Guide, quoted extensively in The Making of Star Trek (Whitfield and Roddenberry, 1968), stated that in Starfleet, the “enlisted man” category did not exist. Everyone who served on board a starship (and other vessels, one would presume) was the equivalent of a trained astronaut and hence an officer.
In the TNG episode “The Drumhead,” the poor shlep who’s courtmartialed “enlisted” in Starfleet without going to the Academy and, as far as I remember, was not considered an officer.
Regulations and standards apparently changed in the 78 years that lapsed between Kirk and Picard.
With respect to O’Brien, his status seems to be similar to that of Warrant Officer due to his transporter engineering expertise (even though the title “Chief” would imply that he’s a noncom, i.e., a glorified enlisted man).
In the military, it’s not at all uncommon for, say, a bird colonel to take “orders” from a warrant officer when dealing in his area of specialization.
Working as “human engineers” (more like glorified pshrinks), yes. If something of a more “spiritual” nature is required, e.g., a memorial service or a wedding, that duty would seem to fall to the Captain or Acting Captain. (In “The Tholian Web,” Spock presides over the memorial ceremony when Kirk is missing and presumed dead.)
Even in the TOS era, it would have been difficult to justify a Chaplain on board because there were, one would assume, so many different beliefs held by the individual crew members. There was a tiny chapel set aside for those who wished to use it for prayer or meditation, and people occasionally did (e.g., Angela at the end of “Balance of Terror”).
I don’t recall anything of the sort existing on board the Enterprise-D, but it could easily have been conjured up on any one of the ship’s holodecks, along with a clergyman of your choice. (I think Worf actually did do that a couple of times.)
I think Worf would initially have preferred it, actually. He had to know the Trill transfer was a possibility, and Ezri (though not nearly as hot as Jadzia) was close enough to stir up weird feelings and confusion. He could simply have murdered a male, after all. 
Nice fanwank, but O’Brian’s rank is specifically noted as being a Chief Petty (or possibly a Senior/Master Chief–I’m too lazy to look it up).
Tam Elbrun was able to communicate with the sentient ship Tin Man/Gomtu from thousands of light years away, but his lines in the episode suggest that was more due to the ship’s telepathic abilities than his own. Also, he was some kind of super-duper telepath.
Irishman answered before I got a chance to, but he answers it well. One of the purposes of speculative fiction is to break free of the bonds of the status quo.
And if I might add, one of the axioms of literary criticism is “don’t question the premise.” A premise of Star Trek’s future is a quasi-military scientific and diplomatic organization in which personnel matters are treated in a way that is intentionally counter to how they are treated in the U.S. military. And it isn’t even all that far-fetched, since human societies have had all kinds of ways of organizing militaries.
Now, what you could do is question inconsistent application of the premise. For example, one of the premises of Star Trek is that the Federation has no currency. Well, this premise is inconsistently and badly applied throughout the series, so that is fair game.
It’s not so much that they don’t have money; it’s that, within the Federation, it’s all electronics. As that is, sadly, the way the world seems to be heading now, I can believe it.
What’s harder to believe is that Uhura, in “The Trouble with Tribbles,” even pretended to think she was gonna have to pay for a pet. She had to be perfectly aware that she could have walked up to most shopkeepers, asked for something, and been given it simply for a smile. 
If by that you mean she had a spectacular rack, you’re absolutely right. 
On the other hand, if there were no medium of exchange, Cyrano Jones and Trader wouldn’t have spent all that time haggling over the price of tribbles, would they?
Of course “credits” can all be managed electronically, but you still gotta pay for things!
I think the idea that money will become obsolete once replicator technology can cater to our every, every need is nonsense. Even if professional skill and physical labor cease to be factors in the economy, the most precious commodity of all is time, and people will certainly insist on being reimbursed for that which they spend doing something for others, regardless of how much they may enjoy it.
I’m more of a face & leg man. Whem I praise a smile, it is the smile I refer to.