Helm of Opposite Alignment ... Think "A Clockwork Orange"

[Kahuna Burger]

It was a reply to your wanting to see the effects a generation or two on (20-40 years). 28 years slots nicely into that span of time. You should check it out.

IME when someone says that sort of thing about wanting to see the long term effects, they rarely mean it. But I might have been numbed into cynicism by decades of internet arguments. :\

 

[Celebrim]

It was a reply to your wanting to see the effects a generation or two on (20-40 years). 28 years slots nicely into that span of time. You should check it out.

You seem to think me ignorant of where you were sitting and when the law was put in place. I was able to infer where you were and I wasn't ignorant of when this experiment began.

I meant 20-40 years from now. That would be the 'couple of generations' I feel you need to wait before pronouncing judgment. One generation is not enough. We are only just seeing the first generation raised in this manner having children, and really I think we should wait until they start to have children. Social change doesn't happen in an instant.

Likewise, you seem to think me ignorant of in what the first line was in reply to. On the contrary, I got that part. It was the next line which seemed to have no place in the conversation, irrespective of all the other questions you weren't addressing. But as I said, let's move on before the mods get trigger happy.

UPDATE: Now that I wasn't able to infer from your prior conversation. Yeah, that would explain alot.

 

[green slime]

You seem to think me ignorant of where you were sitting and when the law was put in place. I was able to infer where you were and I wasn't ignorant of when this experiment began.

I meant 20-40 years from now. That would be the 'couple of generations' I feel you need to wait before pronouncing judgment. One generation is not enough. We are only just seeing the first generation raised in this manner having children, and really I think we should wait until they start to have children. Social change doesn't happen in an instant.

So, if my mother was never spanked by her parents (she wasn't), and I wasn't spanked by mine, and I haven't yet had to spank my children, it isn't enough that my children are generally regarded as well behaved to prove this, but we should wait until 2047 to determine whether this actually works? Or are you saying am I a complete social nitwit (ENworld message gaffes excepted)?

 

[Celebrim]

So, if my mother was never spanked by her parents (she wasn't), and I wasn't spanked by mine, and I haven't yet had to spank my children, it isn't enough that my children are generally regarded as well behaved to prove this, but we should wait until 2047 to determine whether this actually works? Or are you saying am I a complete social nitwit (ENworld message gaffes excepted)?

Quite the contrary. Just so the mods don't think this is diss someone's culture thread...

Sweden intrigues me. I have a great deal of respect for Sweden. I've never met a Swede I couldn't tolerate. And, Sweden seems to be one of the few places in Europe that isn't objectively falling apart. I'm far from being one of the people who is saying, "We should be just like the Swedes.", but on the other hand there is alot in Sweden that evidently just plain works (even when it doesn't seem to work when tried elsewhere). So, I'm quite intrigued by what it is that manages to make Sweden work, and whether or not it will continue to work. And, the moment Sweden stops working, if it does, I want to be able to notice so that I can figure out what exactly it is that went away.

Oh, and you are a social nitwit, but that probably has more to do with the fact you are hanging out at EnWorld than anything in your parenting, heritage, or government.

 

[Deset Gled]

After thinking about this for a little, and reading some of the replies, I'm going to add to my list from before:

5. Economic equality. I couple of people have suggested that the 4k gp cost of the Helm can be recouped by using it on evil geniuses with stockpiles of magic items, who would then reveal the location, or otherwise pay back the government (since they are happy with their new alignment). This basically means that only wealthy prisoners can get released. They are buying their freedom. The existence of a plutarcracy with such strong values that they refuse to use capital punishment seems... unlikely. Throughout history, there are many cultures that allowed people to litterally pay off their crimes, but all of the ones I can think of also used the death penalty (sometimes, rather liberally).

6. Penal equality. Somewhat related to #5, many people have noted that the Helm treatment only works on those that are CE. I think a lot of people would take issue with the fact that someone who is CE can get released from prison with a one-time act, but someone who is CG or LN who broke the law cannot. I know that if I was a poor NG serf who was imprisoned for stealing bread to feed my family, I would be pretty pissed if a murderer and rapist was allowed to go free for wearing a special hat.

 

[green slime]

This is a serious contridiction in his position. How can a thing be both evil and justifiable?

Isn't this the definition of justifiable: "capable of being justified; that can be shown to be or can be defended as being just, right, or warranted; defensible?"

Those things that are not justifiable are wrong. Those things that are justifiable are right. An evil act is precisely identical to an act that is not justifiable. We know that it is evil because there can be no justification for it. If on the other hand the act was right and just, then it can't be evil. "Justifiable evil" is an oxymoron, and in my opinion a very subversive and evil phrase. Because the implication of that phrase is that we can do things that we know to be wrong, unjust, and evil, but it was ok to them nonetheless. That seems to me to be a very dangerous line of thinking.

Because you are twisting words.

Firstly, the use of violence against another is evil.

Secondly, saving a life is good.

Thirdly what happens, when you are use one to achieve the other? Obviously the act of saving cannot be both good and evil. Therefore, there must be some compromise. What level of violence was used, and against whom? When this is defined, some measure must be taken. Now, I am not fully qualified to do this, (I am not yet all knowing, nor do I pretend to be able to measure all the qualities of men and their ilk). Taken as a whole, the act of dragging someone to safety is good. However, use that same level force on someone just standing on the street corner minding their own business, isn't even remotely neutral. Therefore, without the context of saving, on another person, the act of violence is evil. It is only commutted by the sheer neccessity of rescue.

So grabbing the individual and dragging them from the flow of onrushing traffic is generally regarded as a good act, because the act of saving far outweighs the use of violence in this example. You cannot take something out of context.

There are all sorts of other more complicated, contrived examples we could discuss, yet it boils down to the same basic fundamentals. If violence is merely a neutral act, when does an act of violence become evil? at what level? Is it OK to beat a wife for talking back? Punch someone on a whim "he looked at me strange" or "he said he doesn't like green"?

I find it far easier to assume all violence against others wrong, until it is proven it was absolutely neccessary.

With regards to team sports, this is really starting to get ludicrous. I suppose consenting sex is violent as well. Most players on the field of sports have consented to playing according to a strict set of rules. I suppose there could be a few football players with too few grey cells remaining to actually have any free will. But I seriously doubt it. Now if the players are forced upon the field in a similar fashion to the "games" of Rome, then yes, that is evil.

 

[green slime]

Oh, and you are a social nitwit, but that probably has more to do with the fact you are hanging out at EnWorld than anything in your parenting, heritage, or government.

Hooray!

 

[green slime]

Sweden intrigues me. I have a great deal of respect for Sweden. I've never met a Swede I couldn't tolerate. And, Sweden seems to be one of the few places in Europe that isn't objectively falling apart. I'm far from being one of the people who is saying, "We should be just like the Swedes.", but on the other hand there is alot in Sweden that evidently just plain works (even when it doesn't seem to work when tried elsewhere). So, I'm quite intrigued by what it is that manages to make Sweden work, and whether or not it will continue to work. And, the moment Sweden stops working, if it does, I want to be able to notice so that I can figure out what exactly it is that went away.

Oh don't worry. It is falling apart, but the reasons I'd give are rather controversial, and far too controversial for ENWorld.

Most of the decline is connected to the general decline of the West as a whole anyway.

 

[Felix]

This might make some sense if the 4th level spell did something wholly destructive, but by no understanding of destructiveness can we explain what a helm of opposite alignment does. It not only destroys, but it puts something back in its place

Perhaps if instead of destruction and creation, the Helm merely reverses polarity? Although in this case I would think that True Neutral folks should be immune.

 

[Felix]

I suppose consenting sex is violent as well.

Well, violence is force at a high speed. Force is mass x acceleration.

So no, consenting sex isn't violent if you don't have any mass to move or if you don't move it very quickly.