Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4701636" data-attributes="member: 4937">Most rebuttles to what I wrote seem to have this misunderstanding at there heart.A code of ethics does not make one lawful.&nbsp; Adhering to a reviewable defined code of ethics defined by some external authority makes you lawful.&nbsp; Accepting some external source as the primary judge of what is right and wrong makes you lawful.&nbsp; If you personally write the code, and believe it applies to you, and only you know it's rules, and only you know how to abide by them, and only you get to judge whether you are abiding by them, and you believe you are answerable to your own consciousness, it doesn't matter how rigidly and fanatically you adhere to your code - you aren't lawful; you are an individualist.A lawful person follows the dictates of an external code of ethics, even when such an action goes against his own judgment and consciousness.&nbsp; The lawful person assumes the primacy of 'the law' over his own reason and judgment.&nbsp; If the two conflict, it's probably his reason that is faulty.&nbsp; The chaotic person follows the dictates of their own consciousness, even when such an action goes against the laws of their community or society.&nbsp; The chaotic person assumes the primacy of his own judgement and reason over that of the law of their community or society. Can anyone imagine Rorshach accepting the authority of anything over his own judgment and reason?&nbsp; Most people's relationship to internal and external authority is pretty complicated.&nbsp; They might except one in one case, and another in a different case and we could only talk about them 'on the balance'.&nbsp;&nbsp; But for Rorschach the problem is 'black and white'.&nbsp; Clearly in Rorschach's opinion, Rorschach always knows best.&nbsp; He's an extreme example of 'Chaotic'.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 4701636, member: 4937"] Most rebuttles to what I wrote seem to have this misunderstanding at there heart. A code of ethics does not make one lawful. Adhering to a reviewable defined code of ethics defined by some external authority makes you lawful. Accepting some external source as the primary judge of what is right and wrong makes you lawful. If you personally write the code, and believe it applies to you, and only you know it's rules, and only you know how to abide by them, and only you get to judge whether you are abiding by them, and you believe you are answerable to your own consciousness, it doesn't matter how rigidly and fanatically you adhere to your code - you aren't lawful; you are an individualist. A lawful person follows the dictates of an external code of ethics, even when such an action goes against his own judgment and consciousness. The lawful person assumes the primacy of 'the law' over his own reason and judgment. If the two conflict, it's probably his reason that is faulty. The chaotic person follows the dictates of their own consciousness, even when such an action goes against the laws of their community or society. The chaotic person assumes the primacy of his own judgement and reason over that of the law of their community or society. Can anyone imagine Rorshach accepting the authority of anything over his own judgment and reason? Most people's relationship to internal and external authority is pretty complicated. They might except one in one case, and another in a different case and we could only talk about them 'on the balance'. But for Rorschach the problem is 'black and white'. Clearly in Rorschach's opinion, Rorschach always knows best. He's an extreme example of 'Chaotic'. [/QUOTE]

Verification