Talk:Ethics, Sophistry and the Alternate Universe

While we find a very plausible interpretation of the book title here, I am wondering about the sources for it.--Skon 01:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Um... what? It was specifically called Ethics, Sophistry and the Alternate Universe in ... I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you wondering how the writers translated the text? If that's the case... I have no idea. :P --From Andoria with Love 03:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the issue is that nobody on screen ever said what the book was about. Still, the summary here sounds like it would make an interesting read. Exolinguist 03:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Exactly what I meant. Only the title was mentioned in 'Captain's Holiday', but nothing about the content. As I said, I find the conjectured content quite plausible in view of the title. (Such issues have also been discussed in real-world philosophy.) But the book could also be an anthology of essays by Ving Kuda on three separate subjects, couldn't it? Or something completely different. --Skon 12:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I see what you're saying. Good point. Hmm... I dunno. If it's a real book, then a short real-world description of its contents is fine (some minor real-world details about real-world subjects not revealed in canon are allowed, as per discussions on certain real-life presidents). However, if it's a fictional book, then the whole description should probably be removed. --From Andoria with Love 16:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * As far as I know that's not a real book and Ving Kuda is not a real philosopher. I agree that the stuff should be removed soon. (Except for book title and author, of course.) No comment has come from the original contributor thus far, so I think I'll wait until tomorrow and then delete the parts which appear to be fan fiction.
 * In case anyone wants to know: In the real-world the subject of ethics and alternate universes was discussed by US philosophers Robert Adams and David Lewis in the 70s and 80s.--Skon 19:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Here we go
Well, we 've been discussing it above. I was so bold to remove the warning box because:
 * Book title and author were named in the episode
 * Riker commented that the book wasn't light reading in the episode
 * We could see that it was a voluminous book in the episode
 * Even if it was not said that the book was about philosophy, that is evident from the title.

--Skon 09:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Where do the references come from?
I don't believe it was ever mentioned in the episode that this book had anything to do with either Kirk or the mirror universe. I believe that episode was the only mention. If none of this new material is canon, it should be removed. 31dot 19:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)