Don't get me wrong. As a character, Picard was very rich and Stewart performed him well.

But he thought the Iconians were peaceful victims. He hated children. He didn't reconcile with his family. He spurned every woman who loved him. He believed the future in "All Good Things" was an illusion, despite later evidence to the contrary. He thought he was over the Borg when he wasn't. He hesitated in defeating the Borg. His insolence towards Q led to the Borg attacks and the deaths of a lot of good people, including Jennifer Sisko. He advised Riker against using his temporary Q powers to save a dead girl.

I'm not sure I agree with his speech in "Measure of a Man" even though I agree that Data is sentient and has rights. (His reasoning is what I find flawed.)

I think Picard was a great strategist and diplomat. Nuanced. Charismatic.

But I walk away from TNG with the impression that nothing Picard says about anything is really to be trusted and, basically, if Picard said it, it must be wrong.

I doubt Kirk's moral compass too, but find him entertaining. Likewise, I think Janeway had similarly awful judgment but was entertaining.

But I can't think of any occasion where I think Picard was right for the right reasons. Engaging? Sure. And I admire him on many levels. I just think he couldn't consistently be more wrong if he tried, was self-righteous, and just incapable of being correct about any assertion made about anything.

I suppose I can chalk a lot of it up to his tendency to say things like "Somehow, I don't think we'll have anything to worry about..." way too often.

Every big threat in Trek history seems like something he was ready to dismiss.

Nah.

He only implied the possibility the Iconians were actually peaceful, and it's not like he could have known what we know now when he said as much.

Hating children is hardly anything unique to him.

He patched things up pretty well with his family by the end of that episode. It wasn't perfect, but he made some serious progress with his brother before they all got arbitrarily killed off.

He didn't spurn every woman that ever loved him, most left him for various reasons (treasure hunter chick went with Q, that one princess had to marry the other guy, the science chick decided to leave for both their sakes, etc.).

How could he have known the AGT future WASN'T anything but an illusion? Even if it was true, his dealing with the anti-time event wound up changing things anyway.

His claims of being over his assimilation could very well have been true to his mind when he said them, and it wasn't until he was really forced to deal with them face-to-face in First Contact that buried emotions came back to him.

He hesitated because he's not a fighter (usually). Starfleet's mission is one of peaceful exploration, and that's what he went with. Yeah, Kirk probably would have been more aggressive up front, but would it have really changed anything?

His reactions to Q were hardly different from any of the other captains', and I doubt my own reactions would be much different. I'd hardly blame him for introducing the Borg to the Federation.

And again, he stuck to his principles when he advised Riker. The same thing he did when he was willing to take an arrow to the chest to prove his mortality to the Mintakans after they started worshiping him.

I found that to be Picard's first truly crowning moment of awesome. Please explaim your reasoning for why his defense was flawed? It made perfect sense to me:

Data's physical nature is irrelevant. Riker's case dealt only with that, and does not address the idea that the whole could be more than the sum of its parts.

Data may indeed be sentient. Three things are needed:

Intelligence (proven by Picard)
Self-awareness (proven by Picard)
Consciousness (unprovable for any living being from an outside perspective)

Therefore the possibility that Data may have consciousness means that his rights must be protected, because ruling him as property would be a much deeper and further-reaching crime if he really is sentient, than ruling him as a free being who might not be sentient.

Sfdebris has a great review of the episode.

He sums it up from an Asimov novel:

"There is no right to deny freedom to an object with a mind advanced enough to grasp the concept and desire the state."

The one thing he was right about, was picking his bridge officers who could get him out of trouble.

Except that one time his first officer lost the entire ship because he was too busy trying to figure out how to exploit some weakness of a crappy old bird of prey when he could've fired all weapons constantly at it until it died.

My Problem with Picard was the Star Gazer incident. He abandon his ship fully armed in enemy space and made no effort to self distruct... First off if his ship was even remotly habitable it still would be better then everyone stuffed in to escape pods, second...no distruct? Why the heck not.

I wouldn't say he "hated children"; I think he mainly just hated Wesley [and that was basically because Picard felt Wesley was always where he shouldn't have been].

'Cause I can remember in that one episode where Picard was trapped in the turbolift with those kids who had done those science projects and he seemed to be pretty good with them.

they were until STO changed it, so hardly his fault than a non canon game suggested he was wrong (and even then they might have been peaceful then. does not mean they have to be peaceful now.)

he changed his tune later. also is hating kids a crime? not that i consider hate the right word. uncomfortable is more appropriate. not everybody like children or feels comfortable around children. does that make him wrong?

err yes he did.


wrong. crusher and that other lady with the piano spurned him. Vash was too free spirited for picard to stick around. the only one he turned away was that perfect mate and she was not meant for him.

now your just being pedantic. Q made him disorientated for the first few jumps and put him in a body with a disease that affects memory. once he got the hang of it he was on top of the situation.

and your point is? that humans cant have a traumatic experience and think they are over it. happens all of the time.

When exactly?

i'll agree to this. his actions towards Q where dangerous considering Q's attitude.

Honestly i have no idea what you are talking about in any of this except for the Q bit which i think he got wrong and admitted at the end of the episode he was wrong. the rest is trivial moments.

the rest. your opinon i guess but dont agree with a single word of it .

All these things are what make a fictional character human and that much more believable in my opinion.