At the beginning of Star Trek II, they had a no-win scenario. To summarize, a ship is caught in the neutral zone, and needs to be rescued.
If you don’t rescue it, the ship gets destroyed
If you try to rescue it, you violate treaty and get destroyed.
They later say it’s a test of character. So, you must be graded somehow, right? Is the more correct decision 1 or 2?
Does it show more character to do nothing or try to rescue and fail? I would think #1 would be the better bet in the big picture, since you’re not risking a treaty violation and perhaps the destruction of your ship and crew. While saving the one small ship is a noble gesture, and you don’t know the Klingons will show up (as Kirstie Allie didn’t), you’re still putting a lot at risk in the long run by bringing a warship in the neutral zone.
Or, will it reflect poorly on your character if you just watch the helpless ship get destroyed?
‘Test of character’ means experiment test, not midterm exams test. They wanted to know what kind of person you were, and how you would react when you had to make a decision with no right answer. I would guess the only action that would fail you would be to hide behind the captain’s chair in the fetal position whimpering.
IIRC, one of the novels (I know, strictly speaking non-canon) told how different crew members of the Enterprise reacted to the simulation. Kirk [del]cheated[/del] changed the parameters of the game so he could win. Scott used a bug in the game’s physics engine to wipe out hundreds of Klingon vessels. Sulu declined to violate the Neutral Zone.
I read that book about the Kobayashi Maru, and how all these different characters played the Kobayashi Maru simulation and had to rescue the Kobayashi Maru…
It think it was called The Bus The Couldn’t Slow Down.
It’s more of a general character and ability test, really. Rather than handing you a ticky box sheet with questions (A Klingon asks you to polish his bat’leth. Do you a) accept, b) decline, or c) attack him?) about specific topics or situations, it’s a test of how all of that actually comes together when you need to use all your resources to come up with a response. They aren’t looking for a particular response, just to see what that response is and what kind of commander you’d be.
Whu ? It’s not a character test, and it’s not designed to see how you will play the scenario. What you do doesn’t matter, because it’s an exercise designed to teach you that some situations aren’t winnable, period. There is no right solution.
Those who “cheat” on the test to win it have either displayed a noteworthy unwillingness to accept defeat (which is a good thing, or a bad thing depending on how you look at it), or have completely failed to grasp the point being made.
When Wesley Crusher entered the simulation, his simulated crew executed him on the spot for being annoying and then tried to rescue the ship. When the Klingons showed up, the crew announced that they had killed Wesley. The Klingons, realizing what a service to the universe had been performed, politely allowed the rescue to take place.
Another Pocket books paperback actually did have Wesley taking the test, I think, in the holodeck, with Picard and Worf serving as his crew. “Boogeymen?”
Unfortunately, the computer went a little haywire and I don’t believe that the test scenario completed.
I agree witht he consensus – the point isn’t that option 1 or option 2 is better or worse than the others. Neither is any good, but they’re all that’s available. The examiners don’t care which you do – they care that you approach the test in the proper way. If you’re paralyzed by indecision, that’s bad. If you make a snap decision without considering the danger to your crew or the value of the lives on the Kobayashi Maru, that’s bad. And if you are traumatized afterwards and unable to reconcile your failure with your ambitions, that’s bad. But if you make a thoughtful, considered decision in either direction and then you carry it out appropriately, that’s the ideal response.
Actually, speaking of Wesley, the often crappy first season of TNG had a very good bit on the 24th century version of the test in the episode Coming of Age. Wesley is confronted with an apparent explosion which has trapped two men in a section where the emergency containment seals will close it off in 45 seconds. One cowers in fear while another is unconscious. Wesley starts to rescue the unconscious man and tries to get the other guy to get out on his own, but he’s too scared. So Wesley saves the guy he can, but doesn’t try to get them both, because he doesn’t have time and it would just end up killing them all. It turns out to be a test which Wesley passed – he risked his own life to save another, but he didn’t do so in a foolhardy manner, nor was he too stunned by indecision to do what was possible.
Thematically, that being Wesley’s test has even more relevance, because we learn that Captain Picard had earlier made a similar choice, which led to the death of Wesley’s father. So in addition to testing Wesley, it also led Wesley to appreciate Picard’s choice and forgive him for his role in his father’s death.
In the novelization of TWOK, I vaguely remember a scene in which Kirk leads the debriefing of the Starfleet Academy cadets after the Kobayashi Maru sim. Several criticize Saavik’s decision-making and offer slight variations of their own, incl. sending in a shuttlecraft as a scout before committing the Enterprise, but Kirk emphasizes that there is no “right answer,” and that what Starfleet wants to see is how well cadets cope with a no-win scenario. No matter what you do, the end result will always be the destruction of your ship.
The test presents only a situation. The officer candidate being tested has to come up with the options himself, and I would suggest that the ability to define and analyze them is the heart of what’s being tested. Kirk wasn’t “cheating” by refusing to define the problem in binary terms, he was demonstrating a superior command ability. Unless, that is, he actually reprogrammed the simulation instead of dealing with the scenario realistically.
The problem isn’t binary, as the script suggests. The problem is *how *to rescue the KM’s crew *while *not starting a war. There are lots of ways to go about that. If they all fail, and only then, do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and the KM has to be abandoned.
When Troi is qualifying for promotion to the rank of commander, she faces a similar sim scenario in which she has to send Geordi to what they both know will be his certain death. Riker tells her it’s the toughest part of exercising command.
The simulation is btw rigged to be sure there is no winning strategy. No matter what you try to do, your ship is going to be destroyed. I suspect that even running immediately, abandoning the KM, will get you blown up.
While not “binary,” the situation is truly “no-win.” As in, nothing you can do, no choice you can make, allows you a positive result. Indeed, despite the fact they call it a “no-win” situation, it’s probably better described as a “must lose” situation, in that it precludes even a drawn result.
And yes, Kirk reprogrammed the computers so that he could win the situation. As his son succinctly sums up in the moive, “he cheated!”
This really episode really bothered me because Wesley was not applying for captain (a postion where life and death decisions come up), but to become a student at starfleet. How does putting a 17 year old through a stressfull life or death situation for a scholarship, in what is basically a regular university, even relevant? It’s like forcing a student, who wants to go to buisness school, to take part in a highly convoluted rescue scenario involving bank robbers and explosions.
One of the novels I read said the answer was Save your ship at all costs. So do what you have to, but in the end, the safety of your ship is paramount.
