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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6736604" data-attributes="member: 16814">I strongly disagree that law/chaos is based on in any way on selfishness, and especially that is should be implicit that it is so.  A lawful person defines themselves according to a social construct rather than an individual one, and a chaotic person defines their self based on an individual construct rather than a social one.  Those constructs can be selfish or selfless in any degree, but that doesn't change the law/chaos aspects of them.  In fact, to me, that's the best description of law/chaos -- how do you define yourself.  The key word here is define.  If the core of your sense of self is tied to being part of a social construct, then you're lawful.  This could be an order of knights, or dedication to the laws of your nation, or even a member of a clergy.  This is who you are, and you are not sure who you would be if you weren't part of that thing.  If you're chaotic, you define yourself according to yourself.  You do not need any social construct to know who you are or what you would do.  You don't need a set of rules or precedents to make your way.  You may value something, like a God, but that value is because it reflect you, not because of what it is.  If you're neutral on this axis, you take some of each -- some part of you is defined as being a part of something, and another is defined solely based on your individuality.  But none of that is selfish or unselfish.  The order you define yourself by could be incredibly selfish.  Your individual sense of self could be very concerned about others (even if that concern is ensuring that they're freed from the tyranny of good so that the strong rise and the weak are culled for the good of the whole).  I see no room in the definitions of law and chaos for selfishness.</blockquote>

Verification