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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 9739695" data-attributes="member: 4937">I think it would be a mistake to think that everyone of the same alignment agrees on every issue or that everyone of different alignments have different views on an issue.  In fact, some alignments are such that disagreements with members of your own alignment are probably more common than disagreements with members of other alignments.  In the case of LE and CE, your own worst enemies with the strongest disagreements with you are probably other members of the same alignment.  Lawfuls because you can have two hierarchies that broadly agree on the same thing like ("We should rule the world") but each contain a different set of members ("LE Dwarf Supremacists vs. LE Goblin Supremacists), and chaotic because it's every man for oneself and the most aggressive and ambitious and ruthless people you encounter are going to be other CE's who want the same things you do (climb to the top of the ladder, have the most toys, etc.).Everyone with an alignment in a broad sense believes in the same ends and means, but the path to getting there could vary greatly depending on ideological differences that are lower than the broad overarching level of alignment.  You can very much have two NG characters, one of whom believes strongly in protecting the innocent and the weak from evil in any form, and another who sympathizes with that but also believes that violence against natural living beings or persons is never the way forward and only increases the net evil in the end.  And the two can recognize that the other is honorable, and respect them very deeply, and still passionately disagree with each other (in a compassionate, loving, respectful manner).   If you deal with something concrete like, "Should we have a minimum wage?  And if so what should it be?" (and please don't debate this here, it's just an example where hope this disconnect should be obvious) the things that motivate a desire for society to have a minimum wage can be broadly disagreed over or broadly in common - for example a LE society might believe in basic equity to its members and a CN society might believe I shouldn't be taken advantage of and so if I shouldn't then others being persons shouldn't as well - but even if everyone involved agreed on the basic weal that was trying to be achieved, there would still be broad disagreement even between say LG's and other LG's and CG's and other CG's over whether such a program was wise and actually helped to achieve the desired ends of helping people.  You could legitimately want to help people and not think such a program actually did so.  To get into such fine distinctions we can't get there with just 9 alignments.  We can from 9 alignments get into the motives behind what they want to achieve, but you could legitimately have a NE character that believes in a very high minimum wage because they believe (rightly or wrongly) that such a program would cause "the world to burn".  And again, I don't want to debate here whether that character is right or wrong in their assertion, I just am trying to point out how I think your attempt to relate alignment directly to endorsement of specific courses of action overly simplifies things.  Different people can come to different conclusions for any number of reasons as to what a particular course of action is actually going to achieve, just as different coaches might have different plans for how to play football doesn't imply some of them aren't trying to win the game.</blockquote>

Verification