D&D General Muscular Neutrality (thought experiment)

[Shardstone]

We have actually seen this repeated, many times, in the thread.

I call it "Good is secretly evil" because it relies on the idea that alllll the forces of good and alllll the good people can just stop being good and start being evil once evil is conquered and still be considered "Good, even though what they're doing is bad".

I skipped the entire thread before I posted

 

[Shardstone]

We have actually seen this repeated, many times, in the thread.

I call it "Good is secretly evil" because it relies on the idea that alllll the forces of good and alllll the good people can just stop being good and start being evil once evil is conquered and still be considered "Good, even though what they're doing is bad".

I'll say what you posted and what I posted are not the same thing, though I can see how you got them confused.

 

[Steampunkette]

I'll say what you posted and what I posted are not the same thing, though I can see how you got them confused.

Okay. Sure. It's "Good becomes evil" but it's generally presented as "The LG people in charge FORCE everyone to be good, which is bad!" type stuff or other variations on the song. This is that, but acknowledging that they 'become' evil. It's still "The goodest gods and people will be the new evil once evil is gone".

The point is that deep down everyone is evil especially the good people who will turn on each other once "Evil" as a force is defeated.

 

[Shardstone]

Okay. Sure. It's "Good becomes evil" but it's generally presented as "The LG people in charge FORCE everyone to be good, which is bad!" type stuff or other variations on the song. This is that, but acknowledging that they 'become' evil. It's still "The goodest gods and people will be the new evil once evil is gone".

The point is that deep down everyone is evil especially the good people who will turn on each other once "Evil" as a force is defeated.

Hmmm I suppose. I think probably the more interesting permutation isn't that people are evil, it's that unity doesn't make limited resources infinite, which leaves cracks for Evil to seep in and flip the script suddenly. I can't use real-world examples due to the Forum rules, but just imagine a certain superpower right now whose weak systems rely on common Good and then get flipped by an Evil minority, leading to an oppressive state.

So really it's more like when there is ONLY Good things are too easy to exploit, so gotta have some false flag terrorism to keep adventurers on their toes.

 

[Steampunkette]

Hmmm I suppose. I think probably the more interesting permutation isn't that people are evil, it's that unity doesn't make limited resources infinite, which leaves cracks for Evil to seep in and flip the script suddenly. I can't use real-world examples due to the Forum rules, but just imagine a certain superpower right now whose weak systems rely on common Good and then get flipped by an Evil minority, leading to an oppressive state.

So really it's more like when there is ONLY Good things are too easy to exploit, so gotta have some false flag terrorism to keep adventurers on their toes.

Now imagine that weak state -without- an evil minority.

In fact, imagine -no- evil anywhere on the planet except in movies and stories. Imagine everyone is kind and caring and not striving to gain at the expense of everyone else.

How long would it take before we "Forget" what evil looks like? We'd still have stories. We'd still have movies. We'd still have the internet.

In our world we have more than enough of everything for everyone, we impose artificial scarcity to gain wealth and power. Imagine if we -didn't- do that.

Now imagine there were literal Gods of Good and Gods of Evil. And in a great war, that we as humans took part in, -all- the Evil Gods were killed.

Like... I get where you're going. But consider the premise that -all- evil is to be destroyed. Only good remains. Wherefore comes evil?

 

[Shardstone]

Now imagine that weak state -without- an evil minority.

In fact, imagine -no- evil anywhere on the planet except in movies and stories. Imagine everyone is kind and caring and not striving to gain at the expense of everyone else.

How long would it take before we "Forget" what evil looks like? We'd still have stories. We'd still have movies. We'd still have the internet.

In our world we have more than enough of everything for everyone, we impose artificial scarcity to gain wealth and power. Imagine if we -didn't- do that.

Now imagine there were literal Gods of Good and Gods of Evil. And in a great war, that we as humans took part in, -all- the Evil Gods were killed.

Like... I get where you're going. But consider the premise that -all- evil is to be destroyed. Only good remains. Wherefore comes evil?

Trauma can beget evil pretty easily, and trauma can be caused by non-sentient sources. Man helps build a bridge. Man makes earnest mistakes building the bridge. Bridge collapses and wipes out half of a family. Survivor of the family wants justice but the system respects that this was a mistake and gives the bridge-builder a hefty fine. Man who lost half his family spirals due to having little support in his small peasant community. Begins to have dark thoughts. Eventually acts on dark thoughts.

This may seem implausible, but C-PTSD can cause some people to veer towards antisocial behaviors. Trauma can also trigger other disorders, like Bipolar, which can lead to manic episodes wherein the sufferer does out-of-character things that can easily be perceived as evil or, at the very least, chaotic or harmful. Likewise, drug addition can happen even when prescribed rugs like opiates -- milk of the poppy in ancient times -- and can cause people to resort to pretty loathsome behaviors as the addiction twists and turns them.

We can par back all the realistic stuff and go pure Fantasy, saying: man's child dies. He can't accept it. He'd do anything to have them back. They were his rock, his everything. Over time, he spirals and turns to black magic to try and ease the pain of the loss.

Everyone in the world, including the gods, can be universally good, but tragedies and misfortune still happen, and tragedies make more villains then evil gods do. That's because pain + human creativity and problem solving ability = dark "evil" things being reinvented.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Trauma can beget evil pretty easily, and trauma can be caused by non-sentient sources. Man helps build a bridge. Man makes earnest mistakes building the bridge. Bridge collapses and wipes out half of a family. Survivor of the family wants justice but the system respects that this was a mistake and gives the bridge-builder a hefty fine. Man who lost half his family spirals due to having little support in his small peasant community. Begins to have dark thoughts. Eventually acts on dark thoughts.

Or even, the fact at some point everyone is Good (but the existence of Evil is remembered) proves that there is only Good people. Why not. 20-30 years later, most of these Good people got offsprings, who aren't brainwashed so are free to do Good or Evil themselves. While most will stay Good and accept their lives as semi-starving peasants, a few will see the Evil in book, plays, cinema and say "hey, I could steal and get better living standards too, what's preventing me?" One doesn't need a tragedy to consider breaking the rules at his advantage.

 

[Steampunkette]

Trauma can beget evil pretty easily, and trauma can be caused by non-sentient sources.

... So I feel like this is a HUGELY problematic statement, and I'm not equipped to unpack that so let's just throw out the suitcase.

Man helps build a bridge. Man makes earnest mistakes building the bridge. Bridge collapses and wipes out half of a family. Survivor of the family wants justice but the system respects that this was a mistake and gives the bridge-builder a hefty fine. Man who lost half his family spirals due to having little support in his small peasant community. Begins to have dark thoughts. Eventually acts on dark thoughts.

So let's touch on this one:

1) Why is there a fine? What good does a fine do for anyone? What good does punishing the builder do? Or is it just because we've been raised to expect punishment for misdeeds and mistakes?
2) Why doesn't he have support? It's a community of good people. That's altruistic, kind, caring. People support each other in the modern day when there is a loss. Why would that not happen in a world where only good exists? In a society that is good, people would see him struggling, and seek to get him the support he needs (Whether they can personally provide it or help him get professional support).
3) Why doesn't the good man who lost his family see that it was an accident and thus place blame? Is it because we're culturally pre-disposed to seeking someone to blame? In Spanish "Timmy broke the table" is a grammatically weird sentence and "The table broke" is a grammatically normal one. Would we have the same expectation of blame if our culture didn't value revenge?

This may seem implausible, but C-PTSD can cause some people to veer towards antisocial behaviors. Trauma can also trigger other disorders, like Bipolar, which can lead to manic episodes wherein the sufferer does out-of-character things that can easily be perceived as evil or, at the very least, chaotic or harmful. Likewise, drug addition can happen even when prescribed rugs like opiates -- milk of the poppy in ancient times -- and can cause people to resort to pretty loathsome behaviors as the addiction twists and turns them.

Now imagine a society where people with C-PTSD, and all other forms of PTSD, and all other neurodivergences, get the love and support they need to heal, instead of a world of goodness where somehow this one example of casual callous cruelty is just allowed to fester.

We can par back all the realistic stuff and go pure Fantasy, saying: man's child dies. He can't accept it. He'd do anything to have them back. They were his rock, his everything. Over time, he spirals and turns to black magic to try and ease the pain of the loss.

What black magic? It's gone. All the evil is gone.

This is like saying "In a world where there are no guns, a man shoots his neighbor with a Remington 30/30"

Everyone in the world, including the gods, can be universally good, but tragedies and misfortune still happen, and tragedies make more villains then evil gods do. That's because pain + human creativity and problem solving ability = dark "evil" things being reinvented.

Tragedies happen. But not every tragedy leads to people committing war crimes.

There's a lot of off-ramps between A and Z that make it a -very- bumpy slope, rather than a slippery one.

 

[Shardstone]

... So I feel like this is a HUGELY problematic statement, and I'm not equipped to unpack that so let's just throw out the suitcase.

So let's touch on this one:

1) Why is there a fine? What good does a fine do for anyone? What good does punishing the builder do? Or is it just because we've been raised to expect punishment for misdeeds and mistakes?
2) Why doesn't he have support? It's a community of good people. That's altruistic, kind, caring. People support each other in the modern day when there is a loss. Why would that not happen in a world where only good exists? In a society that is good, people would see him struggling, and seek to get him the support he needs (Whether they can personally provide it or help him get professional support).
3) Why doesn't the good man who lost his family see that it was an accident and thus place blame? Is it because we're culturally pre-disposed to seeking someone to blame? In Spanish "Timmy broke the table" is a grammatically weird sentence and "The table broke" is a grammatically normal one. Would we have the same expectation of blame if our culture didn't value revenge?

Now imagine a society where people with C-PTSD, and all other forms of PTSD, and all other neurodivergences, get the love and support they need to heal, instead of a world of goodness where somehow this one example of casual callous cruelty is just allowed to fester.

What black magic? It's gone. All the evil is gone.

This is like saying "In a world where there are no guns, a man shoots his neighbor with a Remington 30/30"

Tragedies happen. But not every tragedy leads to people committing war crimes.

There's a lot of off-ramps between A and Z that make it a -very- bumpy slope, rather than a slippery one.

There's nothing probelmatic with that statement. We see it in fiction all the time now; the tragic villain backstory is a popular trope because it rings true. I've been listening to a podcast on dictators recently that goes over their entire lives, and you know what's pretty common between them? Abusive childhoods. Trauma can beget evil, and you throwing it out is just you ignoring my entire argument essentially.

THe rest of your post is basically saying that Good = Perfect. Good does not mean Perfect. We are not talking about a Perfect Society vs an Evil One, we're talking about a Good Society vs an Evil One. A good society means one where good is endeavored towards, people are generally kind and compassionate, and everyone is working towards a better future for all. I'm uninterested in debating hypothetical utopias because that's outside of this paradigm.

 

[Steampunkette]

There's nothing probelmatic with that statement. We see it in fiction all the time now; the tragic villain backstory is a popular trope because it rings true. I've been listening to a podcast on dictators recently that goes over their entire lives, and you know what's pretty common between them? Abusive childhoods. Trauma can beget evil, and you throwing it out is just you ignoring my entire argument essentially.

There is a problem in saying "People who have experienced bad things are in danger of becoming evil."

THe rest of your post is basically saying that Good = Perfect. Good does not mean Perfect.

Only perfect in that it is perfectly good. Because there is no evil. In a society where there is only good and neutrality there would be abundant kindess and support.

Also our cultural obsession with punishment is evil, but that's a different argument.

We are not talking about a Perfect Society vs an Evil One, we're talking about a Good Society vs an Evil One. A good society means one where good is endeavored towards, people are generally kind and compassionate, and everyone is working towards a better future for all. I'm uninterested in debating hypothetical utopias because that's outside of this paradigm.

In a world where good people, truly good and kind, strive toward a better future a utopic society is the most reasonable outcome.

The only stumbling block would be "Neutral" people saying "I don't really care about whether or not we have a good society so long as my needs are met"

And in a good society, those needs would be met.

Sooo...

Anyway. Yeah. In a world where everyone is good, or at worst not bad, things would be markedly better than they are. And as much as we complain, they're not nearly as bad as they -could- be... they're just not as good as they could be, either. And in a society without evil, nothing would oppose us from making it better.