[Questions From a Newbie Author] The Morality of Dark Magic Used For Good

[Leliel]

Anyway, part of this little story 'verse I'm working on, the Redeemer Universe, has, as one of its main protagonists, a person who was once would be a BBEG in another world, turned part-demon because of his abuse and mastery of Qliphotic sorcery, the mystical art/science of calling on the darker aspects of the supernatural, and metaphysically related to transformation of virtue to sin through excess and lack of moderation.

Thing is, he's not. He's actually the quite wise and kindhearted priest of a religious group meant to protect mutants from the Confederation of Light, the local ur-xenophobic empire, and find Void Apostles, people whose personality and nature allows them to communicate with specific Titans, his gods sealed in the depths of the astral plane (coincidentally, where demons come from-in this universe, demons are "negation spirits", beings who do not so much embody things as they embody the opposition to other things-a demon of health is more accurately a demon of negative-disease, and a war demon is more accurately a demon of negative-peace). Qliphotic sorcery does depend on negative emotions and letting his baser nature run free, however.

I've gotten the idea that his school of it, the Belialite path, actually views it in a similar way to Hindu ideas of the left-handed path, the way to virtue and enlightenment that shatters taboos and exalts passion rather than aestheticism and dogma. More specifically, I've developed a bit of a mantra for them to mull over.

Through my journey into the earth, I find the foundation of heaven.

Through my primal passions, I hear what fuels my thought.

Through my embraced chaos, I feel the patterns within.

Through my inner beast, I scent the instinct of divinity.

Through my indulged sin, I see the beginnings of virtue.

Through my wanting self, I follow to selfless enlightenment.

Through the Tree of Death, I reach the Tree of Life.

So yeah. The idea is that Belialites ultimately hope that by understanding the darker parts of their psyche and mastering them, not through denial, but through finding constructive outlets, they can create a "shell of darkness" that is ultimately a protection and furnace for the virtue and light within.

Only thing is...I don't know how they apply it. Enlightened self-interest only gets you so far, especially when the idea is to eventually transcend the need, though not the existence, of self-interest.

So, a little help designing the modus operandi of the philosophic view of Belialites? What is their moral code that praises sin and passion but scorns evil and ignorance, and how do they apply it?

EDIT: Before you ask: I'm not romanticizing his flaws, either. Part of the story's conceits is that the main protagonists are archetypal dark fantasy villains (think Conan or Warhammer), but dissected to show that, from their prospective and the people who follow them, they're pretty darned heroic, and especially casting a very critical eye at some of the more xenophobic underlying assumptions (barbarians breaking down civilization are always evil? Deformity is a sign of spiritual corruption? Knowledge of certain subjects turns you evil? Really?).

Which isn't to say, however, that they could never be viewed as villains, and they all have their flaws; Raziel here is a zealot who is willing to accept any action to further the cause of mutant equality and freedom, if he's convinced the ends will justify the means. It's just that, well, he's aware he's on a narrow edge and tries to moderate himself.

[Leliel]

Also, should this be moved somewhere? I honestly don't know where else.

[ReaderAt2046]

You could take an angle like Black in Magic: The Gathering, which in essence argues, "The world is fundamentally unfair, existence is a zero-sum game, I can only achieve my good by stopping you from achieving yours. Everyone knows this, but I'm the only one who admits it."

[Leliel]

You could take an angle like Black in Magic: The Gathering, which in essence argues, "The world is fundamentally unfair, existence is a zero-sum game, I can only achieve my good by stopping you from achieving yours. Everyone knows this, but I'm the only one who admits it."

That's actually a good point. The faction (the Malandanti) Raziel has nominal dual membership in argues that things can be made better, but they gleefully acknowledge it will come at the Confederation's expense, often by their own hands.

Hence the name "Redeemer"; the Confeds think their way is the best way to make the world better too, but it's a way that completely goes against the Manadanti's way, and since I recognize I'm not skilled enough to write complete moral ambiguity, fundamentally flawed (as their redemption is based on complete eradication of everything they deem impure, which includes other people).

Any other ideas?

[ReaderAt2046]

Another angle to argue would be to point out that rage, hatred, lust, etc. are not intrinsically evil. They are facts, like heat or cold. It is what we do with them that makes them good or evil. A man could be motivated by rage and hatred to unseat a tyrant, or driven by love to smother someone's life and try to control them. So argue that "dark" passions, if properly directed, are exactly as "good" as the "positive" emotions.

[AMFV]

Well you want a hedonistic system certainly, one that advocates various aspects, I'll look at some of your core concepts in a second and go into greater detail, but this is sound close to a form of hedonist humanism.



Through my journey into the earth, I find the foundation of heaven.

This one is pretty hard to get a better read on, since this could mean a multiple of different things, I assume that you're referring to a journey toward baseness, so basically what we're looking at here is a kind of reverse gnosticism, the elevation of the condition of the flesh, baser pleasures are better.



Through my primal passions, I hear what fuels my thought.

This one is easier from a philosophical standpoint, you'd have the follower want to embrace emotionality rather than fighting it, in fact you'd want to try to feel any emotional outburst immediately, savoring it. This might actually lead to less emotive acting since your spending time relishing and feeling the emotion rather than necessarily acting on it. Also some degree of emotional control wouldn't be present, all instinctual feelings are inherently good by this logic, so any lust or anger, should be explored, the reasoning behind it particularly.

Since we have a mention of the primal then maybe we should focus some on an instinctual approach or an evolutionary one, emotions should be felt and evaluated because they are important to humankind (which also fits with the anti-gnostic approach I took earlier). So you feel lust, then you evaluate in what evolutionary context that would be useful to you, anger is a territorial feeling so you embrace territorialism.



Through my embraced chaos, I feel the patterns within.

Harder to deal with in the lines that you've originally drawn, it probably would expand to a kind of recognition of the "best laid plans of mice and men", the practitioner of this philosophy knows that rigid plans are limiting, and not really natural, so being reactive is the way to properly deal with the world, the way to really embrace it's patterns.



Through my inner beast, I scent the instinct of divinity.

Well since we've already talked about the evolutionary standpoint, in at least my reading of this philosophy we won't belabor the point, except to say that it would be definitely more important, since the idea is that to be the apex predator is a higher calling, also it would have some divine right of humanity type aspects to it.



Through my indulged sin, I see the beginnings of virtue.

Harder to evaluate as a principle, particularly since it doesn't really fit with the preceding principles which can be easily evaluated from the same framework, this sort of framework puts things into a moralistic system, which is not as inherently compatible with the kind of humanistic system you were using earlier. You could have it be some kind of relic of a previous system, or the idea that baser and earlier humans were closer to the divine, so replicating the original sinful conditions is closer to the divine (however this is sketchier, I might just drop this bit, were I you)



Through my wanting self, I follow to selfless enlightenment.

Well again this fits the evolutionary pattern, selfishness can be argued to be supremely evolutionarily useful, so by acting in a self-indulging manner you are making the species last as long as it can, you are improving the species. Making mankind better, so selfishness is selfless to this particular sort of system.



Through the Tree of Death, I reach the Tree of Life.

Well that last bit is pretty fundamentally easy to put into a philosophical context, and the idea that only through death is true life reached is a pretty old one.



So yeah. The idea is that Belialites ultimately hope that by understanding the darker parts of their psyche and mastering them, not through denial, but through finding constructive outlets, they can create a "shell of darkness" that is ultimately a protection and furnace for the virtue and light within.

Only thing is...I don't know how they apply it. Enlightened self-interest only gets you so far, especially when the idea is to eventually transcend the need, though not the existence, of self-interest.


I think the evolutionary context is the best way, because then you're furthering and supporting humanity, by having enlightened self-interest, they would be very interested in Carnegie, or Frick as far as their models go, because those men were ruthless, self-interested and they did benefit humanity in the end, or attempted to, so that would fit their model well.



So, a little help designing the modus operandi of the philosophic view of Belialites? What is their moral code that praises sin and passion but scorns evil and ignorance, and how do they apply it?


I think a hedonistic evolutionary humanism is your best bet. At least to my reading of their overall general philosophy.

Edit: Fixed a quote error.

[LibraryOgre]

Also, should this be moved somewhere? I honestly don't know where else.

As locations go, this isn't too bad, since this deals with more the philosophy of such things.

The view you might also take is that of the Operative in Serenity... he's creating a better world. A world that will be too good for him, soiled as he is, to have a part of.

[Leliel]

@ AMFV: Good points. I actually read somewhere that the "primal emotions", besides Lust, Fear, and Anger, also include Curiosity, Grief, and Play. They've studied rats on those things. I can look it up for you.

Also, the "journey into the Earth" bit is a reference to the system of occultism this draws on, which I would go into if I was sure it wouldn't accidentally tread on real-life religions and beliefs, and get {scrubbed} for my troubles (Disclaimer: That isn't a mod, it was me).

Suffice to say that, rather than going up towards heaven and more human divinity, this goes down into the earth to meet the literally cthonic powers below. The thing about finding the beginnings of virtue is also a reference-if virtue without limited form becomes vice, than vice in controlled form becomes virtue.

EDIT: If this sounds paradoxical given their attitude towards free passion, it is. Nobody said philosophy provided straight answers, and frankly, there's a difference between enjoying vice and being ruled by it.

[AMFV]

@ AMFV: Good points. I actually read somewhere that the "primal emotions", besides Lust, Fear, and Anger, also include Curiosity, Grief, and Play. They've studied rats on those things. I can look it up for you.

I'm familiar, I just figured that the other examples would be better as examples, since those are the more typically stylized "negative" emotions.



Also, the "journey into the Earth" bit is a reference to the system of occultism this draws on, which I would go into if I was sure it wouldn't accidentally tread on real-life religions and beliefs, and get {scrubbed} for my troubles (Disclaimer: That isn't a mod, it was me).

Suffice to say that, rather than going up towards heaven and more human divinity, this goes down into the earth to meet the literally cthonic powers below. The thing about finding the beginnings of virtue is also a reference-if virtue without limited form becomes vice, than vice in controlled form becomes virtue.

EDIT: If this sounds paradoxical given their attitude towards free passion, it is. Nobody said philosophy provided straight answers, and frankly, there's a difference between enjoying vice and being ruled by it.

Well if you're aiming for something that's closer to that sort of thing then it'd be slightly different philosophically, with different perspectives on right. So we'd need to have a better exploration as to why we're identifying vice as we are, since few philosophies simply identify vice in that manner.

[The Oni]

If the Belialites are supposed to be the good guys, their enlightened hedonism and emphasis on passion and force of will sound a lot like a cross between the Sith Order and the Dai-Gurren Brigade. I suggest you read up on Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagaan and Knights of the Old Republic, Revan specifically, since he really came across as the epitome of Dark Is Not Evil for the Sith.

[Prime32]

A bit longer, but maybe take a look at Kamen Rider OOO (http://www.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Series/KamenRiderOOO).

Kamen Riders generally have the same powers as the monsters they fight, but have managed to turn them towards good (e.g. one Rider was the archetypical "half-vampire turned vampire hunter"). OOO in particular has the theme of whether it's better to indulge or suppress your desires. Most toku writing isn't exactly Oscar-quality, but there's some definite thematic inspiration to be found.

[erikun]

Well, the first thing I note is that there doesn't seem to be anything dark or evil about these powers. They tend towards the greedy or selfish, yes. They seem to be unpopular with society, which probably nets the users of them negative labels. But being negative or selfish does not automatically make a person evil.

While I think analysing the thought pattern is a good thing in defining the characters, the most convincing conflict would probably be social pressures from without. That is, a society that thinks the characters are demon-worshippers because they work with demons. Or perhaps Qliphotic sorcery is tied to a specific region, and there is local troubles. If you're just writing a story for a particular character, then it can be all internal struggles as they seek to find that balance and discover the enlightment in the taboo - but if we're talking about a society for something like a RPG, then you'd want something for that society to challenge them.

[Leliel]

Well if you're aiming for something that's closer to that sort of thing then it'd be slightly different philosophically, with different perspectives on right. So we'd need to have a better exploration as to why we're identifying vice as we are, since few philosophies simply identify vice in that manner.

I would...

Except, uh, the no-religion rule. I'll try to explain-the idea in the inspiration is that every virtue has a discarded "shell" about it that embodies the dark, selfish version of that virtue. Unity becomes division and inability to reconcile, wisdom becomes confusion and use of intelligence for selfish purposes, and thereon.

[Coidzor]

Hence the name "Redeemer"; the Confeds think their way is the best way to make the world better too, but it's a way that completely goes against the Manadanti's way, and since I recognize I'm not skilled enough to write complete moral ambiguity, fundamentally flawed (as their redemption is based on complete eradication of everything they deem impure, which includes other people).

Conveniently hitting upon the usual problem of how one remains good while constantly doing evil that comes up with using evil powers for good ends. :smallamused:

[MonochromeTiger]

Conveniently hitting upon the usual problem of how one remains good while constantly doing evil that comes up with using evil powers for good ends. :smallamused:

the same way everyone maintains a charade of good. by being big enough and strong enough that when you define what is "good" no one in the room can argue without risking being labeled "evil" or being destroyed.

[Leliel]

the same way everyone maintains a charade of good. by being big enough and strong enough that when you define what is "good" no one in the room can argue without risking being labeled "evil" or being destroyed.

And because the Confeds aren't the protagonists, either.

I will put what I can-part of what I was doing when writing the Redeemer verse was putting the Warhammer universes (both of them) under a highly critical light, showing that a lot of the bleak mood in the games' canon comes from some highly problematic internal assumptions. Xenophobia and authoritarianism mainly, though there's some elitist elements there too..

I'm not saying I don't like the mood, but that's the idea-much like Superman and Irredeemable, you don't write a deconstruction of something you hate, you critique it. I'm trying to see what happens if those same problematic elements out...and nobody told the designated heroes of the Warhammer universe.

Quite simply, they'd come off as some of the most morally repugnant empires in fiction.

Thus, the Confederation-in another universe, they'd be heroes, but thankfully for the inhabitants of the Redeemer verse, they're not that universe. As it is, they're simply the source of most of their own problems (emphasis on most-there is a race of despair-eating monsters fond of playing sadistic games with their prey out there).

[Geostationary]

Since you're already looking to the idea of the left-handed paths, looking more closely at tantra would be a good start. For the ethics, dharma literature may also be a good place to go since as an ethical system it recognizes that ethical behavior is hard and not always nice or absolute.

I'd rather not get into more detail, as it's likely that I'd be treading a bit too closely to the 'no religion' rule.