Tuvix Was Murdered

"Thanks to Pro for his detailed reply. This is a lot of fun =D" Don't mention it, I would like to thank my opponent for the quality of his arguments and his detailed knowledge of Star Trek. "1. Pro believes Tuvok and Neelix would have opposed separation, offering only his own interpretation of their values as proof." My opponent is mistaken, I have not argued that Tuvok and Neelix would have opposed separation, rather that their opinion can not be established and this is a deficiency in the moral authority of the Captain to authorise separation. In addition the post separation actions and opinions of the Tuvok and Neelix can not be retroactively extrapolated to ascertain their opinions prior to the separation. "There is no feasible argument that suggests they would support separation after the fact but not before." The morality of the two choices is completely different, to choose to separate is to choose to murder Tuvix, an innocent. To choose to rejoin is to choose to sacrifice yourself for a stranger. "Pro goes on to claim Tuvix was not morally responsible for the circumstances of Tuvok and Neelix. In doing so, he ignores my argument that Tuvix's conscious decision not to restore their lives was entirely selfish, makes him responsible for their continued deaths, and necessarily forfeits his own right to life." In actual fact I have addressed this point, but I will do again. My opponent does not question the concept that a sentient free willed being has a right to life, he has not attempted to contradict this under ‘our' legal/moral framework, nor that of the Federation. We can therefore assume he accepts this. As Tuvix has a right to life it is unreasonable to expect him to commit suicide, he can not be morally or legally held responsible for the continued ‘deaths' of Tuvok and Neelix. My opponent also fails to address a very important issue here, one that I only briefly touched upon and is admittedly not entirely consistent with every argument I have employed, that of existentialist doubt. My opponent is treating Tuvix, Tuvok and Neelix as three separate beings, failing to reflect on the fact that Tuvix is Tuvok and Neelix combined. Tuvok and Neelix are not dead, they are in a different form, they are in a differing state of personality, they are combined. By destroying Tuvix you do destroy one life, it does not truly follow that you restore two. Tuvix is Tuvok and Neelix. "It was also inappropriate for Tuvix to speak on behalf of the fallen officers. He held a vested interest in their deaths and could not be trusted to accurately depict their desires. On the other hand, Kes [1], Neelix's mate, and Captain Janeway [2], their commanding officer, were the only legitimate choices on the ship to speak for the missing officers. With both women agreeing to the separation [1, see: Neelix] and the intentions of Tuvok and Neelix already known, Tuvix's right to object diminishes." Neither your commanding officer, nor your girlfriend has the right to decide on the rights of life of your free willed sentient progeny. Therefore Neither Captain Janeway nor Kes possess the right to destroy the union of Tuvok and Neelix. It surely stands to reason that a sentient being has greater rights over their life then people who knew their parents. "2. Pro concedes his pragmatic contention but ignores by counter-argument. Merging two invaluable officers with essential roles in ship safety endangers them all. Though I have conceded the pragmatic contention, I do not feel that this counter-argument has full merit. Neelix's duties were either trivial or redundant. Chef, several crew members would be able to cook. Morale officer, again hardly a unique skill. Navigator, primarily handled by computers or those with proper training. Ambassador, numerous crew members, including the Captain can act in this role. As a result Tuvix could easily resume Tuvoks duties, and others could step up to fill the shoes of Neelix. "3. Pro cannot simultaneously defend Tuvix's right to life and ignore that right in others." If Tuvok and Neelix are held to be dead then they have no right to life, at least not one over and above a living creature. If they are held to be alive in the combined form of Tuvix then again their separation entails the death of an innocent life, which is murder. "The hybrid obtained matter that did not belong to him and which was necessary for the survival of its original owners." The matter in question is the hybrid, the very substance of him, what he was born with. If it can not be argued that he has rights over that, then how can anyone claim to have ownership of anything. "4. My opponent's attempts to rationalize these examples of law-breaking only demonstrate that the doctor, like any member of the crew, made decisions using his own circumstantial moral rubric. Pro also argues that these incidents were the result of program degeneration that occurred much later. However, the doctor's program had been active for roughly 1 year by the time Tuvix arrived [5, see: "Tuvix"], 6 times longer than its recommended maximum usage [5, see: "The Swarm"]. In fact, he required a memory wipe to clear his cluttered database only one year later! Clearly, the doctor's personality was well established by this point and his moral decisions were thus susceptible to bias and whim." Then I am forced to retract this point and accept that the Doctor is only a ‘circumstantial' moral authority. In Conclusion If we regard pre-separation Tuvok and Neelix as dead, even if this is a rectifiable situation my opponent still recognises that Tuvix as a sentient being has rights. It can not be expected that Tuvix would choose to kill himself and as a result his forcible destruction is murder. Therefore only a vote for Pro is valid. If however, we regard Tuvok and Neelix as not dead, simply transfigured and combined in the form of Tuvix then the issue is not two lives against one. To keep them combined is, in a sense to maintain the lives of three entities. To separate them is to destroy one being. To forcibly separate them without permission from any of them is murder. Therefore only a vote for Pro is valid. The point also remains that irrespective of rights, or overlapping rights Tuvix was an innocent, sentient being that was destroyed against his will. This is surely murder, surely immoral and almost certainly illegal. Therefore I strongly urge a vote for Pro. Thank you for an excellent debate!