Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 3291128" data-attributes="member: 22424">I agree with your principle (failure to do good is not evil), but disagree with your specific example. It is generally accepted that before logging an area there is a certain amount of due diligence that should be done to ensure the area is safe and clear, to ensure that the woodsman himself is working in safe conditions, and so on.By failing to do this, the woodsman is gaining a benefit to himself (it's quicker) at the expense of others (the child who is slain). This moves it beyond a simple accident to negligence, IMO, and shifts it from being merely Neutral to being actively Evil.Edit: this presupposes, of course, that the woodsman has the wit and wisdom to realise that he should be doing the due diligence. If he's truly incompetent, he gets off the hook from an alignment perspective. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I think there's a "law of unexpected consequences" that has to apply.Further Edit: Actually, on further reflection, the above about the logger being required to check the area and so on... is dead wrong. Inaction is neutral, and so Kamikaze Midget is right. The question of whether cutting down the tree is Evil or not would come down to this: did the logger cut down the tree because he wanted the tree cut down (and the death was just an unfortunate side-effect), or did the logger want the child dead, and cut the tree down as the means to achieve that?</blockquote>

Verification