Criminal Minds Alignment

[Bartmanhomer]

Hey everybody I thought that I want to discuss Criminal Minds Alignment. I believe that the TV show have been on the air for 13 years and I just realized that the all the members of the BAU is Lawful Good and the Unsub varies from Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil. So what do you think of the Criminal Minds Alignment?

[MikelaC1]

Im not sure that L/G describes all the members of the BAU. Most of them keep secrets from each other all the time, or have their own agendas constantly, some of which are counter-productive to the team.
As for the unsubs, I'm not sure that alignment applies to someone who is criminally insane.

[Bartmanhomer]

Im not sure that L/G describes all the members of the BAU. Most of them keep secrets from each other all the time, or have their own agendas constantly, some of which are counter-productive to the team.
As for the unsubs, I'm not sure that alignment applies to someone who is criminally insane.

Well how do you describe the members of the BAU?

[MikelaC1]

Some are L/G, some are N/G and some are C/G.

[Bartmanhomer]

I see Spencer Reid as Lawful Good. :smile:

[MikelaC1]

Emily Prentiss, for example, cannot be classified as Lawful, she had a whole arc where she would not trust the team, and went off on her own, leading them to think at one point that she was dead. David Rossi was not a team player when he rejoined the group and often had to be pulled back by Hotch. Dont even get me started on David Morgan who repeatedly refused to discuss any of his personal issues which affected his performance and threatened anyone who tried to help. Garcia is just too quirky to be considered Lawful, and is, in fact, a former hacker who is only with the team in lieu of being in jail.

[Keltest]

Emily Prentiss, for example, cannot be classified as Lawful, she had a whole arc where she would not trust the team, and went off on her own, leading them to think at one point that she was dead. David Rossi was not a team player when he rejoined the group and often had to be pulled back by Hotch. Dont even get me started on David Morgan who repeatedly refused to discuss any of his personal issues which affected his performance and threatened anyone who tried to help. Garcia is just too quirky to be considered Lawful, and is, in fact, a former hacker who is only with the team in lieu of being in jail.

Lawful doesn't necessarily equate to being able to be part of a team. Its entirely possible for there to be two people who's idea of a necessary order are mutually exclusive. Likewise, struggling to trust or participate in a group does not make one chaotic.

[MikelaC1]

Lawful doesn't necessarily equate to being able to be part of a team. Its entirely possible for there to be two people who's idea of a necessary order are mutually exclusive. Likewise, struggling to trust or participate in a group does not make one chaotic.

It might not make you chaotic, but it certainly isnt lawful. Not obeying the rules of the group you belong to is the very definition of not being lawful. N/G is closer to that behaviour.

[Keltest]

It might not make you chaotic, but it certainly isnt lawful. Not obeying the rules of the group you belong to is the very definition of not being lawful. N/G is closer to that behaviour.

A lawful person doesn't have to obey the rules of a group they belong to, they only have to have their own code of behavior. If im a member of a nation that allows slavery, and my personal code says slavery is wrong, I don't have to accept slavery just because im nominally a member of a group that allows it. It just means I don't think very highly of my membership in that group.

[Brother Oni]

A lawful person doesn't have to obey the rules of a group they belong to, they only have to have their own code of behavior.

Now you're getting into subjective definitions of alignment as opposed to objective measurements. The problem is, D&D runs off external objective measurements of alignments - devils and demons are universally evil for example.

If you define lawful as sticking rigidly to their own personal code of behaviour, that makes most serial killers Lawful since they stick to very specific behaviour patterns, methodology and victim selection criteria.

[Keltest]

Now you're getting into subjective definitions of alignment as opposed to objective measurements. The problem is, D&D runs off external objective measurements of alignments - devils and demons are universally evil for example.

If you define lawful as sticking rigidly to their own personal code of behaviour, that makes most serial killers Lawful since they stick to very specific behaviour patterns, methodology and victim selection criteria.

That's entirely possible. They have rigid patterns of behavior, they believe that there is a Correct Way For Things To Be Done. They aren't arbitrary, theres a methodology and consistency to their thought process based on an idea of order. That sounds lawful to me. The fact that others don't share this particular pattern doesn't change that.

[MikelaC1]

I can accept that many serial killers are lawful (L/E yes, but still lawful), crossing over in this show to N/E or C/E as they pass through the stage of devolving. However, I stand by my opinion that if you are in a group but frequently go your own way, or ignore rules that you consider to be wrong or hampering, then that by definition is N/G or C/G.