Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Is any one alignment intellectually superior?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Al" data-source="post: 2159542" data-attributes="member: 2486"><p>I'm still going to advocate the "None" position, but this time I be a little less concise - I managed to get the second post before the discussion had really started.</p><p></p><p>The fundamental problem with discussing the relative intellectual merits of the various different alignments is that the reasoning process in ordinary rational thought is generally the construction of a chain of events from a certain starting position (A) to a final destination (B). So, a very simple rational response to "I'm hungry" would be "go to the kitchen, get some food out of the fridge, and eat it". </p><p></p><p>The problem is that even within the *same* alignment, societal goals can be radically different. I would vehemently reject the notion that alignment, religion and politics conform: one can be either a Christian Socialist or a member of the religious Right and still remain a Christian. Two divergent "Good" goals would be the maximisation of happiness for all (altruistic utilitarianism) but this could encompass the use of brutal methods for oppression of some section of the population. "Average happiness" as a qualifier of utilitarianism is similarly subject to problems over methodology: can a good person torture for utilitarian benefits? At the other end of the spectrum, Evil can either be pure egoism, which would entail the maximisation of long-term (or short-term: another potential conflict!) advantage; or the minimisation of the happiness of others (i.e. reverse utilitarianism) even if your own welfare is hampered. Lawful characters can be adherents of the traditional status quo (traditionalist lawful), or advocate of rational reform of decayed structures (reformist lawful) or even in favour of the construction of an entirely new system of government (radical lawful). Chaotic can be a rejection of society per se (anarchy) to the maintenance of some semblance of order with the goal to minimising coercion (libertarianism/minarchism) or any host of other moral/political philosophies.</p><p></p><p>No alignment can be "intellectually" superior because no alignment is reducible to a single set of canon beliefs, goals or objectives. No alignment is proscriptive in the values derived from it, much less the methods undertaken to fulfil those values. There is no simple A to B chain of reason. Alignment is descriptive, and therefore cannot be "intellectual" at all.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Al, post: 2159542, member: 2486"] I'm still going to advocate the "None" position, but this time I be a little less concise - I managed to get the second post before the discussion had really started. The fundamental problem with discussing the relative intellectual merits of the various different alignments is that the reasoning process in ordinary rational thought is generally the construction of a chain of events from a certain starting position (A) to a final destination (B). So, a very simple rational response to "I'm hungry" would be "go to the kitchen, get some food out of the fridge, and eat it". The problem is that even within the *same* alignment, societal goals can be radically different. I would vehemently reject the notion that alignment, religion and politics conform: one can be either a Christian Socialist or a member of the religious Right and still remain a Christian. Two divergent "Good" goals would be the maximisation of happiness for all (altruistic utilitarianism) but this could encompass the use of brutal methods for oppression of some section of the population. "Average happiness" as a qualifier of utilitarianism is similarly subject to problems over methodology: can a good person torture for utilitarian benefits? At the other end of the spectrum, Evil can either be pure egoism, which would entail the maximisation of long-term (or short-term: another potential conflict!) advantage; or the minimisation of the happiness of others (i.e. reverse utilitarianism) even if your own welfare is hampered. Lawful characters can be adherents of the traditional status quo (traditionalist lawful), or advocate of rational reform of decayed structures (reformist lawful) or even in favour of the construction of an entirely new system of government (radical lawful). Chaotic can be a rejection of society per se (anarchy) to the maintenance of some semblance of order with the goal to minimising coercion (libertarianism/minarchism) or any host of other moral/political philosophies. No alignment can be "intellectually" superior because no alignment is reducible to a single set of canon beliefs, goals or objectives. No alignment is proscriptive in the values derived from it, much less the methods undertaken to fulfil those values. There is no simple A to B chain of reason. Alignment is descriptive, and therefore cannot be "intellectual" at all. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Is any one alignment intellectually superior?
Top