PDA

View Full Version : The Many Systems of Good and Evil



balistafreak
2010-05-22, 12:47 PM
I've recently taken an interest in the amount of ways that people define what is Good and Evil. Established rules notwithstanding, how do you personally see it?

Currently, I have:

Altruism vs. Selfishness. You are good when you donate money and time to a good cause like charity and evil when you spend it all on a mansion with no regrets. This system has a flaw in that it is arguable that selfishness is sometimes a question better suited to Lawful vs. Chaotic. I imagine many people don't view mansions as inherently evil. :smalltongue:

Physical traits. You're an angel? You're good. You're a devil? You're evil. Naturally, this system falls flat on its face on too many levels to really be worth considering for long.

Actions. Some actions are inherently good or evil. This needs a scale (such as the above Altruism vs. Selfishness) to be fully applicable.

Intention. It doesn't matter what you do, it's what you mean or feel about it. Again, this also requires a scale.

Personally, I'm a fan of the Intention system applied to Altruism vs. Selfishness. You can commit genocide and still be Lawful Good if you meant to better the world, and run an orphanage and still be Chaotic Evil if you really would prefer not doing so.

What other systems and scales exist? Give an example of what is Good and Evil in the given system, if at all possible. Leave your righteous umbrage at a manageable level, lest this thread be swiftly locked, please. However, I do want to see some open discussion and dispute. That's how the world progresses, after all. :smallbiggrin:

hamishspence
2010-05-22, 12:58 PM
As far as I can tell, D&D uses a mixture of components.

You can't (going by BoED) be good, and not be altruistic. However its possible to be altruistic, and not be good.

Similarly, acts seem to incorporate both intention, and intrinsic nature of the act.

Intention seems to matter for "good" acts- ones of benevolence- helping others that need help. If the intention behind it, was selfish, then the acts become Neutral, not Good.

There's also an element of "sacrifice" demanded- the idea that a benevolent act, that costs you nothing (or actually benefits you) is Neutral rather than Good.

For traditionally evil acts (torture, casting evil spells, and so on) - good intentions generally don't count. A person who tortures others regularly (even if its their job and they believe it's necessary to protect society) is Evil rather than Neutral or Good.

Some acts are associated with evil, but not always Evil themselves. Lying, for example, according to BoVD, is not always Evil, but still morally risky.

Another major factor is personality- a being can be Evil without ever having committed any evil acts, if its personality is nasty enough. A newborn chromatic dragon, or a Good person who has had their alignment changed via one of the various magic means, for example.