PDA

View Full Version : Alignment Marble Analogy



rayne_dragon
2011-01-13, 09:48 AM
So... with the number of alignment related threads going around, I've thought up a metaphor that I think explains alignments. I'd thought I'd share it and see if people think it's a good analogy or if it needs work. Personally, I find it a bit weak with Neutral on the law-chaos axis... I wonder if neutral just shouldn't care about how the silly marbles are painted.


The basic metaphor is a group of children with a bag of marbles:

Good thinks that everyone should have their own, equal number of marbles.
Neutral just wants some marbles for theirself and doesn't care if others have more or less.
Evil wants ALL the marbles for theirself.

Law thinks all the marbles should be painted the same, or at least following a set scheme.
Chaos thinks all the marbles should be painted differently by their owners.
Neutral thinks the marbles should be the same base colour, but that people can paint their own design on them.

The White Knight
2011-01-13, 10:03 AM
I am amused by the mental image that materializes when you change this from a metaphor to a literal and Lawful Evil people become kleptomaniac, compulsive marble painters.

Maybe the Neutral on the Order axis could be something like "appreciates or is indifferent toward all marble designs"?

Trekkin
2011-01-13, 10:31 AM
Perhaps Lawful requires there to be a reason behind the coloration of a given marble, Chaos is opposed to the painting of any marble according to any rationale other than whimsy, and Neutral will accept any given marble coloration as valid?

Also, because I have to do it:

Chaotic Stupid: lost his marbles.

Cruiser1
2011-01-13, 10:35 AM
Also, because I have to do it:
Chaotic Stupid: lost his marbles.
And of course:

Lawful Annoying: Has marbles up his rear end. :smallwink:

Vladislav
2011-01-13, 11:52 AM
Good thinks that everyone should have their own, equal number of marbles.That's not Good, that's Lawful.

Good thinks that everyone should have as many marbles as they need to enjoy themselves.

Defiant
2011-01-13, 11:55 AM
Good thinks that everyone should have their own, equal number of marbles.

That's socialism, independent of the good-evil axis.

Good wants the best for everyone.

So it's possible to have a good communist, who believes that everyone should have an equal number of marbles that everyone should share in. It's possible to have a good socialist. And it's possible to have a good capitalist, who believes that the best thing for society is for the rich to have a lot of marbles while the poor don't have that many marbles.

Kyeudo
2011-01-13, 12:01 PM
That's socialism, independent of the good-evil axis.

Good wants the best for everyone.

So it's possible to have a good communist, who believes that everyone should have an equal number of marbles that everyone should share in. It's possible to have a good socialist. And it's possible to have a good capitalist, who believes that the best thing for society is for the rich to have a lot of marbles while the poor don't have that many marbles.

Actually, I think a good capatalist wants people to be able to get as many marbles as they can earn.

Defiant
2011-01-13, 12:05 PM
Actually, I think a good capatalist wants people to be able to get as many marbles as they can earn.

Resulting in the rich 5% having 90% of the marbles, and the bottom 5% having no marbles whatsoever. Which is what I said. They believe that this is the best way for society to function, which is why they are good.



Of course, it's also possible to have an evil capitalist, who wants to live in a system where he can earn as much as possible without care for the common person. You'll be hard-pressed to find an evil socialist or communist, though. There's nothing inherently evil about wanting the fruits of everyone's labour to be shared equally (though I guess it can be perceived as evil by others, the selfish ones who want to keep all their gains).

And of course, this includes actual socialists and communists, not dictators who are just in it for the power.

Kyeudo
2011-01-13, 12:10 PM
Resulting in the rich 5% having 90% of the marbles, and the bottom 5% having no marbles whatsoever. Which is what I said. They believe that this is the best way for society to function, which is why they are good.

Well, a system based around wanton greed has more chance of actually working than a system requiring perfect altruism to function.

Defiant
2011-01-13, 12:14 PM
Well, a system based around wanton greed has more chance of actually working than a system requiring perfect altruism to function.

Contrary to what you've been told, society isn't completely greedy nor will it always be completely greedy. If you're raised in a communist environment, you'll be in the system, and accept it as it is - I know from experience, from Communist Romania (more like quasi-communist, but whatever).

The sense of society and community takes over. You are provided with a place to live and food to live your life happily. But if you don't give back, then you will be shunned. And sure, you can say right now "whatever, I don't care", but if you're raised in that environment, it isn't like that. Everything in communism is about community, and everyone is close.


It's basically an upbringing. Maybe it's wrong to raise your children this way - they should instead be raised to be as greedy as possible, and put into a system that works around or with that greed. But it is more than possible.

Kyeudo
2011-01-13, 12:50 PM
I think we are awefully close to breaking the "no politics" rule and should probably stop this line of discussion.

Defiant
2011-01-13, 12:59 PM
I think we are awefully close to breaking the "no politics" rule and should probably stop this line of discussion.

Might have gone quite a bit over the line :smallsigh:

Let's try to save this thread then. My recommended solution:

Good wants what's best for everyone
Neutral wants what's best for themselves
Evil wants to be number one, while crushing number 2

Tvtyrant
2011-01-13, 01:34 PM
Evil wants everyone else to suffer so that their stuff seems better. So they want all of the marbles painted black, and then given to them so they can wave them in other people's faces.

rayne_dragon
2011-01-13, 05:38 PM
Perhaps to keep the original metaphor:

Good wants everyone to be able to share the marbles.

Leaving it open as to how evenly the marbles are shared.

Chilingsworth
2011-01-13, 05:46 PM
Chaotic Evil is quite happy to leave marbles lying on the ground, to watch people slip and fall on them.

Vangor
2011-01-13, 06:06 PM
Law thinks all the marbles should be painted the same, or at least following a set scheme.
Chaos thinks all the marbles should be painted differently by their owners.
Neutral thinks the marbles should be the same base colour, but that people can paint their own design on them.

The issue most people have with alignment is this lawful/chaos axis, and this, while perhaps useful to you, still has the major difficulty of being a singular facet. Lawful marble gatherers may want all marbles to be the same color, or similarly colored, or with similar schemes, or only concerned with the color, similarity, and scheme of their own set, or collaboration in determining how the marbles will be colored regardless of the end results of marble color similarity. Chaos has similar other facets, but with marble coloring this is rather hard to give examples; chaos may ignore law, break the law intentionally, free others from oppression, destroy institutions of order, venture beyond the reach of civilization, or other.

This is why analogies tend to fail, because they seek to place a range which order, neutrality, or chaos and good, neutrality, or evil cover into a single dimension.

nedz
2011-01-13, 06:55 PM
Surely Chaos could want marbles to have their own choice of colour; without anyone imposing their choice of colours on the marbles by painting them ? :smallbiggrin:

Defiant
2011-01-13, 07:06 PM
Guys, law means structure. It does not necessarily mean law. You could have a lawful rogue or rebel.

It just so happens that the law is an excellent form and source of structure, so a lawful person would find plenty of nice things in it.

Maryring
2011-01-13, 07:40 PM
I think you guys are overanalyzing this. Sometimes, a marble is just a marble. And sometimes you play games with marble and realize that it is part of the game to gain marbles and lose your marbles.

Defiant
2011-01-13, 07:41 PM
I think you guys are overanalyzing this. Sometimes, a marble is just a marble. And sometimes you play games with marble and realize that it is part of the game to gain marbles and lose your marbles.

Losing marbles is never part of the game, unless you're losing. If you are losing your marbles, then you are failing.

IF YOU AIN'T FIRST, YOU'RE LAST!

Maryring
2011-01-13, 09:06 PM
Second place is the first loser and all, but my marbles are still glittery!