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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6624023" data-attributes="member: 177">I am not entirely sure this is accurate, in that I think you have inadvertently cherry-picked one instance, and come to a false conclusion from that.  There's another way of looking at it...A person who is on the "corners" of the grid has two basic goals:  "Law and Good"  or "Chaos and Evil".  A person on the "side" of the grid has only one real goal "Good" or "Chaos" - neutrality is not, in and of itself, a goal.Now, as with most folks who have goals, sometimes, they come into conflict.  Sometimes you can't have full individual liberty and great welfare, and you must compromise.  But this holds for the other side as well, as sometimes you cannot have solid, rigid organization and welfare, and you must compromise.  The traditional paladin sometimes must choose between that which is most good, and that which is most organized, and cannot always have it both ways.  Mortal creatures sometimes must deal with practical situations that don't fit the theory, and that includes the lawful ones.  For example, a traditional paladin is a stickler for the letter of the law.  If you are accused, you are arrested and go through the system - the innocent person has nothing to fear.  But, when put in a position where it is not clear that the innocent person will have a good outcome, the LG may have to choose to evade the normal social order to seek justice.  Thus, sometimes the LG must be less than perfectly lawful to have the good.  And vice-versa - darn it, you *will* pay your parking tickets, even if your budget is tight this month!This in contrast with Inspector Javert, from Victor Hugo's Les Miserables, who has no such issue - he is, as you call it, a law fetishist.  He never has conflicting goals, and so never has to compromise.  Lack of compromise is his single most obvious characteristic!  But, even he *thinks* he is LG, and does not even recognize the difference between Law and Good.  It is only when the difference is demonstrated so as to get through his thick skull does he get the point, which causes him so much cognitive dissonance that he commits suicide over it.Going back to how the different axes are characterized, one form I have seen that is sometimes useful is that the Good-Evil axis is about the ends (general welfare vs self-aggrandizement), or what we'd typically call "morals".  The Chaos-Law axis is about the means (freedom vs. social organization), or what we'd usually call "ethics".Note above that I place self-aggrandizement in the Evil camp, not the chaotic one as you did upthread.  A hermit in the woods may be eschewing the norms and rules of society, and may be deemed chaotic, but is not aggrandizing himself - he may instead be deeply humble and asetic.</blockquote>

Verification