Dragonlance Dragonlance Philosophy thread

[GMforPowergamers]

Michael Carpenter

Michael Joseph Patrick Carpenter[1] is a human male. He is the wielder of Amoracchius. He first appears in Grave Peril. Michael Carpenter is approximately fifty years of age, with grey eyes, and greying dark brown hair. He's slightly shorter than Harry Dresden but is of a more muscular build.[2]...

dresdenfiles.fandom.com

This is a character from a novel series I have read. He is FAR from a perfect person, but he is a GOOD person (I will try not to start the LG NG argument and just go with he is good)

by this logic if he became king of a kingdom in Krynn he would cause evil.

I just don't see it. It makes no sense to me. What about this world makes good people cause evil?

 

[Scribe]

Who wouldn't want to adventure in a world where every good deed MUST be balanced out by evil ends or the gods will drop a mountain to reset the world? A "heroic" setting where doing good just sets evil up for victory? Where even the gods of good say neutral is better.

And nowhere does it say that the slave owning intolerant elves were anything but good.

Find me the quote that says every single deed must be weighed and balanced.

 

[RuinousPowers]

It isnt just a singular "Good" person. It isnt even a singular "Good" organization. It was many people, multiple organizations, and the view of an entire race (Elves).

This is the point. When "Good" runs the show, and becomes too powerful, too unchallenged, it becomes twisted into well, exactly what the quote says.

I mean its right there...

But it's still "good". It doesn't become "not good". Just somehow the definition changes into a bad thing?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

It isnt just a singular "Good" person. It isnt even a singular "Good" organization. It was many people, multiple organizations, and the view of an entire race (Elves).

This is the point. When "Good" runs the show, and becomes too powerful, too unchallenged, it becomes twisted into well, exactly what the quote says.

I mean its right there...

nothing in the quote explains it. The quote says that Good creates evil and evil is bad... but then blames the bad of evil on good.

It's like saying "I am a good person that helps everyone I can, one day I help a stranger who is bleeding get to a hospitol. In the Hospital a GOOD doctor heals him of his wound, so this person doens't die. The next week this guy gets into a shoot out and kills a cop."
all of this shows 2 good people doing good things and 1 bad person doing a bad thing... nothing about the good caused evil.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

But it's still "good". It doesn't become "not good". Just somehow the definition changes into a bad thing?

exactly. Nowhere has anyone shown or brought a quote of good CAUSEING harm... it is always Good gets corrupted by evil then the EVIL does harm and somehow that is the fault of the good...

 

[Scribe]

But it's still "good". It doesn't become "not good". Just somehow the definition changes into a bad thing?

Considering the nature of the last 2 threads on this, I'm more than happy to just move on. The text is there, I clearly am not able to explain it better, sorry.

 

[RuinousPowers]

Find me the quote that says every single deed must be weighed and balanced.

Don't you know how pendulums and scales work?

 

[Scribe]

Don't you know how pendulums and scales work?

I do, and I know that the concept of 'perfect balance' is in every way, an impossibility on a global scale, with there being a general flow. Again, reference the quote.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Don't you know how pendulums and scales work?

I am not being snarky, nor do I want to come off as rude, but my answer is no and yes... like I could explain a scale to a 4 year old or a physicist and get it both understandable and close enough... pendulums I could get the 4 year old (maybe even most people) to except my answer but it would really not be close to understanding it... like pendulums might as well be magic to me.

 

[Scribe]

nothing in the quote explains it. The quote says that Good creates evil and evil is bad... but then blames the bad of evil on good.

It's like saying "I am a good person that helps everyone I can, one day I help a stranger who is bleeding get to a hospitol. In the Hospital a GOOD doctor heals him of his wound, so this person doens't die. The next week this guy gets into a shoot out and kills a cop."
all of this shows 2 good people doing good things and 1 bad person doing a bad thing... nothing about the good caused evil.

No, its like this.

Good, is Good.
Good, then becomes centralized on a singular view of "Good".
Good, being "Good, and the only Good." then leads to, in the eyes of "Good" everything else being wrong.
Good, seeing wrong, wants to remove wrong.

Its kind of "the perfect is enemy of the good" taken to a self referential looping extreme.

The red one, is the problem inflection point.