Search results

No, I chose to be subservient to a dominating influence. I was not the originator nor a proponent of Moronville’s alignment definitions.

Per Google search: Slavery is “the state of being a slave.” Per MW, a slave is “someone or something that is completely subservient to a dominating person or influence.” I can choose to be subservient. I can then choose not to be. If a society thinks the most highly of slaves, one might enter...

I interpreted the OP as asking why MN might take out good people. Sort of a brainstorming session. I gave my two cents. Infinity people challenged what I said. I’m fine with that. I never said I’m right and others are wrong, though I think what I said is plausible, I.e. there is a possibility...

The MN won’t be taking me out, though they may remove my shackles on the way to killing the good. If I have to be altruistic to be good, and I desire a reputation as a good neighbor, I have to enter into slavery. I agree no one is forcing me. I could instead choose freedom, but my reputation...

It can be that. It can also be having to do something for someone else. Having to serve others is slavery, even if voluntary.

Subservient to others. I have to be concerned about and try to help others. Having to serve others is a form of slavery as is being owned by people.

To be altruistic is to be subservient. If I’m altruistic, I enter into voluntary slavery. If I believe being good requires one to be altruistic, I expect that good folks will also enter into slavery. Doesn’t sound like a call for freedom. I’m okay with an obligation to not impose a negative to...

So if opposing slavery is evil, I would imagine those who are good or neutral would at the least be indifferent to slavery and perhaps for it. They might even own slaves themselves.

…because they oppose slavery. Okay.

It’s part of being a good neighbor when altruism is part of the definition of being good. MN opposes this slavery mindset.

Don’t want a reputation for helping others. Helping others is like having a preference for the color purple or liking burritos. I just want a reputation for being a good neighbor. That shouldn’t include a mandate to enslave oneself or to like purple the best.

In my system, one is incentivized to be LG. Not only will your LG neighbor not murder you, they won’t lie to you or scream in your face. If the definition of LG includes altruism, someone (whoever defined LG as including altruism and/or those in support of that definition) wants me (just a guy...

Don’t disagree with any of that. In my make-believe perfect reality, the only “laws” that would exist are basically don’t physically agress against another or their stuff. It’s not perfect and there are a lot of what-if’s (electronic stealing of money, pollution from one neighbor’s yard to the...

That’s why altruism being part of good per OP doesn’t work as altruism is essentially unselfishness, which arguably doesn’t exist.

I was just going off Wikipedia’s “the principle and practice of concern for the well-being and/or happiness of other humans…”

Gygax: “I pronounce it to rhyme with ‘cow,’ but if you prefer to pronounce it differently, that’s perfectly okay. Whatever works for your campaign.” I’ve always gone with the non-cow version, because it sounds cooler, everyone uses the cow version, and cows are lame.

I’m okay with that. I guess it comes down to the definition of altruism. I would use a different word. It would be a shame if a bunch of do-gooders got mowed down by Team Muscular N due to poor word choice.

That’s cool. Muscular N folks would oppose both enslavers and altruists in support of freedom.

I’m down with only a “do no harm” definition of good. In fact, that’s basically my definition of good. Altruism is what inserts the obligation. If altruism is part of being good, then that tired hero that just wants to take a nap has to don their gear and go help that person in need, all to...

That’s fine. They still have to think of others and possibly help them. Slaves.