Good, by any means nessecary? Alignment question.

[LudicSavant]

Of which edition of DnD?

3.5e for the Mialee/Ember thing.

I can address 5e's as well (though for 5e I only have one book: The PHB). 5e's descriptions are short and vague (the whole thing is about half a page, maybe there's more in other sources besides the PHB?), encouraging players to fill in the blanks themselves.

"Lawful Good creatures can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society." That's the entirety of the description we get in the alignment section.

Maybe "society" expects that brainwashing is the wrong thing. Maybe it expects it's the right thing (brainwashing the Geth was Paragon in Mass Effect 2!). More realistically, parts of society will think it's the right thing and other parts will think it's the wrong thing. And different societies will have wildly different values, which raises the question of how the heck you can have a single cosmic alignment dedicated to conforming to societal expectations in the first place. I can't wander from medieval Italy to the Trobriand Islands and have the same attitudes about relationships or eating habits and be considered a decent person by both societies.

There's an argument to be had on "is this person doing the right thing." There isn't really an argument to be had on "is this person X alignment" because everyone has to interpret the alignment system and fill in the blanks (or, as the case may be, selectively filter out the contradictory bits), and how those blanks are filled in is relevant to the answer.