Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5427450" data-attributes="member: 42582">That quote brings to mind another feature of pre-4e D&amp;D alignment that I tend to find frustrating, but that is distinct from my criticism in the OP.If you actually review serious moral philosophy - whether philosophical accounts of how we should live, or philosophical accounts of what it means to reflect on how we should live - none uses a framework like the D&amp;D alignment system.Which is to say - the D&amp;D alignment system is not a very fruitful framework in which to conduct serious discussion of moral and ethical matters. And this is not surprising - the notion of Law vs Chaos comes not from moral philosophy but from a certain body of fantasy literature, the function of which wasn't to establish a powerful system of evaluative conceptualisation, but rather to produce a compelling story. Likewise the notions of Good vs Evil that are found in fantasy literature of the Tolkien sort.An aside on literary paladins, also - in (I think) Chretien de Troyes version of the Arthurian legend, Lancelot kills 6 (or so) of his friends in the course of rescuing Guinevere. He is personally saddened by this, but neither he nor his enemies who take Arthur's side in the dispute seem to think that this is a moral failing on his part. Killing other knights is what knights do, and the risk of being killed in battle is one that a knight runs. Now had he poisoned them or killed them in their sleep, it would be another matter - but that's not what Lancelot did.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5427450, member: 42582"] That quote brings to mind another feature of pre-4e D&D alignment that I tend to find frustrating, but that is distinct from my criticism in the OP. If you actually review serious moral philosophy - whether philosophical accounts of how we should live, or philosophical accounts of what it means to reflect on how we should live - none uses a framework like the D&D alignment system. Which is to say - the D&D alignment system is not a very fruitful framework in which to conduct serious discussion of moral and ethical matters. And this is not surprising - the notion of Law vs Chaos comes not from moral philosophy but from a certain body of fantasy literature, the function of which wasn't to establish a powerful system of evaluative conceptualisation, but rather to produce a compelling story. Likewise the notions of Good vs Evil that are found in fantasy literature of the Tolkien sort. An aside on literary paladins, also - in (I think) Chretien de Troyes version of the Arthurian legend, Lancelot kills 6 (or so) of his friends in the course of rescuing Guinevere. He is personally saddened by this, but neither he nor his enemies who take Arthur's side in the dispute seem to think that this is a moral failing on his part. Killing other knights is what knights do, and the risk of being killed in battle is one that a knight runs. Now had he poisoned them or killed them in their sleep, it would be another matter - but that's not what Lancelot did. [/QUOTE]

Verification