Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Deset Gled" data-source="post: 4703937" data-attributes="member: 7808">On the subject of Lawful vs. Chaotic, and having a "personal code"...I believe that a person can be considered lawful as long as they follow a personal code of beliefs.  No external authority or review is required to be a lawful person.  However, I also believe that such a code must meet a number of strict standards to be considered.1.  The code must be universally encompassing.  It must lead a person in all aspects of life, giving guidance in everything that is done, on every day.  This isn't to say that it must be the only thing on a person's mind all day, but you cannot claim that a strict adherence to vegetarian is a sufficient system to base one's life on.2.  The code must be specific.  If must give detailed answers and specific solutions for a vast majority of issues.  There may still be gray areas in interpretation and application, but something as simple as "X is good, Y are bad" is not enough of a statement (by itself) to guide a person in life.3.  The code must be unchanging.  Let's face it, a code is only a code if it is a constant.  If the code as you change in your life, that means that it really wasn't a personal code in any sense of the word.  It is possible for the code to change occasionally, but a re-visiting of one's inner principles should be a life changing event.4.  There must be punishment if the code is broken.  To err is human, and it is inevitable that a person will occasionally do something hypocritical.  If the personal code is true, then a person who falls from it will realize what they have done, and mourn or punish themselves in some way.  Otherwise, they are not complying with the above criteria.Considering these criteria, I would consider Rorschach to have heavy Lawful leanings, but he comes up a little short.  His personal code is that the wicked must be punished, and he follows it in all aspects of his life, which definetally meets criterion 1.  However, it is not particulary specific as to how to define people as wicked, and how they should be punished.  Rorshach makes snap decisions about whether a person is good or evil, and arbitrarily decides how to punish them.  Someone who annoys him may be killed, but a known long-term villian like Mollock is allowed to live after spending time in jail, and someone who commits a crime while in jail is killed in the most painful method possible.  The actions lead me to believe Rorschach does not have a well defined system for judgement or punishment, which are key aspects of a personal code based on judging and punishing the wicked.Based on his close-but-not-quite code of ethics, I would actually consider Rorschach to be neutral in the Law-Chaos axis.  He has the start of a code, but not all of one.  He tries to uphold his code, but does a number of chaotic things in his attempts to do so.  For reasons others have mentioned, I also place him squarely neutral in the Good-Evil axis.So, in the end, I think Rorschach is true neutral.  The same alignment that Dr. Manhattan is.  Go figure.</blockquote>

Verification