The Paladin's Code...and TIME TRAVEL!

[Alhandra]

You guys know nothing about a paladin's duty, or responsibility to society.

We are not required to attempt to convert someone that has already been given a chance to prove their innocence. They failed, utterly, in proving to the world that they deserve to exist.
Their own actions have signed their death warrant - my diety, and the Greater Good, has seen fit to provide me this duty to perform, and I will not shirk.

Hesitation is a sign of the weak.

If you don't take such a golden opportunity to rid the world of a great Evil, you are effectively CAUSING that evil to be unleashed upon the world, and innocents to suffer.

You namby-pamby Politically Correct, jury-of-your-peers, modern-day revisionists would actually condone Evil to live?
You sicken me.
Your moral outrage is wasted on this slime - he's proven his soullessness over and over, and it wasn't because he wasn't loved as a kid.

It's not society's fault this guy slaughtered that village, for no reason other than he was bored.
He had every chance in the world to change his ways,m but didn't - you think a time-travelling paladin could convince him the error of his ways?

You people are sorely in need of facing Evil in its truest form, and you would not be so quick to spare it when granted a divine opportunity to end it before it got too powerful to stop without causing innocent lives pain.

 

[Alhandra]

I'd have to say no. Regardless of what evil the person will perform, its not for the paladin (or anyone else) to go back and judge that person before he commits his vile acts.

You are woefully confused about a paladin's right to judge.

Angcuru wrote:
Evil is necessary.

You complicitous dupe.
I've seen your kind too much- that will not bother fighting for what's worth fighting for.
You see Evil, but convince yourself that it is so prevalent, that there's no point in fighting it.

Even worse, you quickly move on to rationalize that Evil is not only gonna be around awhile, but is actually NECESSARY for Good to exist!

What a load of relativistic claptrap.

It's simple.

Good is hurt by Evil.

Evil is Bad.

Evil won't change.

Evil must be made sure not to hurt Good again.

 

[Umbran]

If a paladin could travel back in time and murder a person who would eventually do evil things...

...then he could also go back in time and do something other than murder to keep the evil things from happening. Much as Alhandra would like you to think otherwise, outright murder isn't the only tool at the paladin's disposal.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

What a load of relativistic claptrap.

It's simple.

Good is hurt by Evil.

Evil is Bad.

Evil won't change.

Evil must be made sure not to hurt Good again.

Ahh, but how are we to know Good without knowing Evil? Without Evil...there is nothing to be Good...so...then we're back at Neutral. And wait...why is Good allowed to hurt Evil if Evil should be punished for hurting good? And what about us Neutrals here? You're all just a bunch of fanatics.

 

[Alhandra]

Re: Re: The Paladin's Code...and TIME TRAVEL!

...then he could also go back in time and do something other than murder to keep the evil things from happening. Much as Alhandra would like you to think otherwise, outright murder isn't the only tool at the paladin's disposal.

You are ascribing greater flexibility to the hypothetical situation than was revealed.

You can't wave your hand and say "The Paladin could stop him some other way", or "He could force him to rehabilitate!"

Those are not options in this scenario, so digressing into the infinite options available is blunting the original question.

similarly, the question is not one of time-travel, or it's potential for paradoxes and the like.

It's a question of a paladin's behavior.
And I, for one, have already killed so much evil, why would i flinch when my skills are needed once again?
I am not stupid enough to need Evil to be in the act of commiting evil to take it out - that would hamstring me into uselessness.

All I need is to have the Evil prove to me that he is Evil be sensing it myself.

If when I time travel back, and the being is not Evil at the time, thats a tougher question. If that was the case, I'd prefer to timetravel back to when he was most assuredly Evil, but before he'd done much harm.

If I had to decide whether to kill an innocent, who was NOT evil yet, but one that was destined, without possibility of converting, to become Evil and do much harm, than I would still do it, unflinchingly.

It would kill a part of me, to kill an innocent, but I would do it for the benefit of all.
even if it damned my soul - I am but an instrument of god's Justice, sent to weed thru the chaff, and cut the bad out before it spreads.
and if I was sent back, than it was proof that my diety wanted me to do this act.
Plus, I could always consult my Phylatery of Faithfullness <-- pure cheesy way out

 

[Umbran]

Re: Re: Re: The Paladin's Code...and TIME TRAVEL!

Those are not options in this scenario, so digressing into the infinite options available is blunting the original question.

Trust a paladin to say that the options available in the scenario are only those that are clearly stated, and to suck on a lemon when they could make lemonade instead . You don't need the Decipher Script skill to be able to read between the lines, and find options other than those that others point out for you.

Heck, is it not the paladin's duty to seek the best of all possible options, rather than to bliindly accept the options presented by one who's motives may be questionable?

[Sorry Mark, but you made a useful scapegoat ]

 

[Gargoyle]

If a paladin could travel back in time and murder a person who would eventually do evil things, is it incumbant upon him to do so...?

Time travel and paladins in one thread? I can't resist.

I'd guess that what would happen is that the paladin would travel back in time and stalk the individual, waiting for them to turn to evil, then thwart their evil schemes and protect the innocent. I don't think they'd strangle Hitler in his crib.

I think maybe time traveling paladins might be stalking you right now, waiting for you to start threads like this...

 

[ThoughtBubble]

Approaching this from the wrong angle....

The question isn't one of if it's incumbant upon the paladin to do so. A paladin knows exactly what to do. That's why he or she is a paladin. The decision made will be the correct one. The forces of (insert good, diety, or what have you) know that the decision will be correct. That's why they empowered the paladin in the first place.

Unless the paladin in question is one of those angsty paladins. Then there will be an hour or two of moaning and soul searching, and then the decision will still be the right one.

It's only when you throw those diabolical wizards into the equasion that a paladin may do something that's wrong. They always know what buttons to push, those foul masters of evil. Or when you add those silver tongued Bards. Or.....

(edit: clarification)

 

[PowerWordDumb]

IMO, Alhandra and Thoughtbubble are exactly right.

Since when did Paladins get redefined into the Guidance Counsellors of the Gods, anyways? "Don't do evil, or we'll have to come give you a stern talking to about what you've done and why you should change your ways... and if you do it again, we'll talk louder the next time! We might even give you a loving home and a role model to look up to, so take that!"

Bah. Paladins are empowered to know evil so that they can destroy evil. If the paladin believes the evildoer can be redeemed, you can trust the paladin to do so - the paladin inherently does what is right. Her mere continuance in the role of paladin gives the proof of that, for were she to stray, she would no longer *be* a paladin.

The greater good requires the destruction of evil. No ifs, ands, or buts. Accordingly, if the paladin could travel through time to change a great evil, you bet your behind she would do whatever necessary. Besides, destroying evil is never evil in and of itself, so talk of "murder" is misplaced.

 

[Goobermunch]

You people are sorely in need of facing Evil in its truest form, and you would not be so quick to spare it when granted a divine opportunity to end it before it got too powerful to stop without causing innocent lives pain.

Ahh the elegance of the moral calculus. It's okay to kill the evil guy because that prevents harm to others.

Utilitarianism is flawed in a world of absolute morality.

Of course, with your mortal arrogance and limitations, you may be wreaking greater harm than you cause . . . and you'd never know it. So you kill the big bad when he or she is just a little bad. But how do you know that you've solved the problem. Evil isn't just a person. Evil is opportunity.

Kill this little bad now, but know that the social, political, and economic factors that made great evil possible will still exist. And who's to say that some other person won't take advantage.

Paladins shouldn't focus on defeating evil beings, they should be addressing the factors that make true evil possible. Otherwise, all they can do is fight a losing battle against an ever shifting foe.

The ultimate problem with your underlying assumption (that the paladin should kill the bad guy to prevent the suffering of the good) is that it paves the way to a hell where the lives of the few can be freely sacrificed for the lives of the many. With morals like these, I'm sure that there's a plot in Baator with your name on it.

--G