interdiscipline arrogance

I fear that my Anthropology of Religion class is rather more infuriating than educational.  Even given the bias of my having been (officially) in a single discipline for four years, these class discussions are wishy-washy nonsense with apparently little to do with logic or analysis and rife with the kinds of assumptions for which any half-decent philosophy professor would fail a student.  Granted, anthropology is a subject that by definition is more concerned with cultural evidence, not potentially biased judgment, but...seriously, logic shouldn't be anathema.  *violent twitch*

scifi ethics

In my scifi class we were discussing something for which I'd be interested in hearing other opinions.  You have a choice of two societies:

1. One society is the one we have now - human, flawed but changeable, subjective but constantly evolving. 

2. The second society is one in which the government is composed of immortal beings (say true A.I.) that are superior to humans in every way, including morality; and in this society you could be guaranteed that these beings would be, and remain, completely benevolent and with human interests as their greatest priority.

Which would you choose?

( Cut so my own opinion doesn't influence yours ~ )