Alignment, Motivations, and Actions

[Leliel]

Yes, another debate thread. Hulooh.

First, a little backstory: I am a fan of the-admittedly anvillicious, but insightful-webshow known as Extra Credits (it's on the Escapist) and they recently sung the praises of a video game based charity.

Now, that's all well good and all, except on the forums, some now-banned idiot-and I say "idiot" as in "not a troll" because he seemed to truly believe his spiel-that donating for charities is for suckers, because giving to children is an inherently selfish activity.

Yeah. The other commenters didn't quite follow that logic, either.

An interesting point that was raised, however, was that just because one gives to charity to make one feels better about himself, it doesn't mean the donation is "tainted" somehow-if your narcissism manifests as "I must make excessive anonymous donations", all the more power to you.

Which brings me too my point:

If someone is doing altruistic things for selfish reasons, does he qualify as "good"?

[Gamer Girl]

If someone is doing altruistic things for selfish reasons, does he qualify as "good"?

Yes.

The reason does not matter much at all, the actions do.

And the tricky thing is, even good folks can be selfish. For example a paladin that does good deeds to gain fame and fortune.

[Eldan]

I'd go a step further and say that, if you go far enough, every possible motivation is selfish. Altruism is selfishness with more perspective.

[the Riddler]

I'd go a step further and say that, if you go far enough, every possible motivation is selfish. Altruism is selfishness with more perspective.

Yup. That's why I don't really trust real life "good" people

[Zonugal]

I'd go a step further and say that, if you go far enough, every possible motivation is selfish. Altruism is selfishness with more perspective.

I might not go that far. For a large part this sort of claim may hold true in that good actions make people feel good, thus reinforcing the action. But there are individuals who do good actions merely because they are good.

[boomwolf]

Realistic action and motives are never purely good or evil.

However, helping others without anyone (perhaps maybe yourself) getting hurt can't be anything BUT good. even if the donation DOES hurt you (you lost money), you might still be "gaining" in the process. (becoming more respected, famous, just feeling better.)

In order for something to be evil-it must come at the expense of others, entire as directly hurting them, or having no care for side-effects that your actions might have on them.

Neutral actions are mostly things you do for yourself, but does hurt or risk anybody in the process. (eat, sleep, exercise, pray, meditate, etc...)

[snoopy13a]

If someone is doing altruistic things for selfish reasons, does he qualify as "good"?

For the purposes of DnD, which has bright-line rules for "good" and "evil", then yes. For the purposes of "real life", I think you won't find a definite answer.

[Jack DeCoeur]

I too am a big fan of the escapist and found this a very interesting read.

TL;DR summary of the article:
Law- The action itself is all that matters
Chaos- The outcome of the action is all that matters
Good- Equal care for all sentient beings
Evil- Only those very close to oneself (or perhaps only you) matter

It actually lines up with my personal feelings on alignment quite well.

Anyway, as far as the alignment system in that article would place it, well, a LG person would see such an action as 'Good' (the action is good, the consequences don't matter) whilst a CG person would see the action as, at least partly, selfish (the result of the action matters) although in this case the result still helps people, so the action would likely be, in the grand scheme of things still be considered 'Good' by people with this outlook on life.

Edit: In answer to your question- In D&D, yes the action would be considered 'Good' as both the action itself and (at least part of) the result are also 'Good'.

[Keinnicht]

Yes.

The reason does not matter much at all, the actions do.

So if I care for the sick and wounded, help them recover or die in peace, and just happen to be gathering the accumulated disease-energy in the area of my hospice to summon a hideous demon lord that will annihilate all life, I'm a good guy?
Sounds wrong.

[Sucrose]

So if I care for the sick and wounded, help them recover or die in peace, and just happen to be gathering the accumulated disease-energy in the area of my hospice to summon a hideous demon lord that will annihilate all life, I'm a good guy?
Sounds wrong.

The caring for the sick and wounded is still good. However, your final action, summoning a hideous, world-ending demon lord, is so very evil that all your years of service are totally overwhelmed by the evil of your summoning, putting your alignment properly back at evil.

[Serpentine]

So if I care for the sick and wounded, help them recover or die in peace, and just happen to be gathering the accumulated disease-energy in the area of my hospice to summon a hideous demon lord that will annihilate all life, I'm a good guy?
Sounds wrong.

Probably a better way of wording the original question is "does the action still qualify as Good?" Because a single action does not a whole alignment make.

[Leliel]

So if I care for the sick and wounded, help them recover or die in peace, and just happen to be gathering the accumulated disease-energy in the area of my hospice to summon a hideous demon lord that will annihilate all life, I'm a good guy?
Sounds wrong.

...Dude?

Maybe because that's an evil action to begin with.

You're just using the hospital as a cover for your real actions, and by the looks of it, diverting suspicions. Very much a non-altruistic deed.

[Telasi]

It's no longer altruism if you have a selfish motive, in my opinion. I'd call it a firmly neutral act with good leanings, but I'm known to play fast and loose with alignments and weigh intent along with action.