(February 27, 2018 at 3:03 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

---

(February 27, 2018 at 6:44 am)Mr.Obvious Wrote: lawful evil
Not even kidding.

How are you evil though? I'm intrigued by this. Let's talk.

Well...
I've had discussions about this before. In one of the more animated ones, my conversational partner pointed out that good and bad were human concepts and not objective things. And I told him that didn't matter, because we are, as a matter of fact, humans. We use good and evil to describe ourselves and these terms being subjective and open to interpretation, does nothing to diminish them. Any action or lack thereoff can be assigned as good or evil. But neutrality is therefore the one aspect that is unobtainable. If every action and decision AND lack thereoff can be weighed, there can be no true neutrality. At best one could say everyone is a bit of both. That's not neutrality, in my opinion. It's human inconcistency. (Which is fine, as we are, again, just human.)
Now our intentions are important. As are our thoughts and hopes and wishes for others, the world and the future... But these are withouth substance. Indeed, except for intentions, I can't assign any weight to them at all. If for instance you wish for everyone to be safe and happy but you don't try to intervene when you see someone getting mugged, what good is your 'good heart'. Talk is cheap. Actions are what matter.
So it comes down to, what do we do and lack to do in our lives. This last part is very important. The entire: 'All it takes for evil to triumph...' thing.
And what do I do, when I try to take a step back and evaluate my life from a different POV than my own? Because in my POV I might see myself as rather driven social worker. I spend a lot of hours, more than I should and more than I get payed for, trying to help people get their lives in order, financially, socially, societally, administratively, ... When I find a wallet or purse, I make sure to give it back to the person it belongs to. I help my friends. I care for my family. I do all I can to make the woman I love happy. I help the people I know by volunteering to drive them to the airport, help them fix up their house, take out their trash and ...
But does that make me a good person? Is that enough? To be concidered good? It can't be.
Just what happens when I leave behind that self-centered, preoccupied POV? I see myself as a petty, greedy little push-over of a cog in a great horrid machine. I see how limited my human empathy is. I just want to go home at the end of the day and rest in my warm house. Eat my nurishing meal and watch my brain-killing shows or write my pointless drible. Meanwhile out there, most of the world is starving. And I just shut myself off from all of it. I border on being slightly overweight, eating crap and going to restaurants, when out there my clients and people all over the world starve. There are people actually dying as you and I have our little chat here. You know what I could be doing? I could be learning to knit. And instead of having this little conversation in which I could pretend that I'm such a swell guy, I could buy wool and knit sweaters for the homeless people who are freezing all over europe as the vortex strikes. But no. I'll just spend my time online or watch a movie or play a videogame. Instead of inviting someone in to share my excess food, really I could do with a lot less a bit of hunger would not kill me, we throw out food now and again because it got spoiled. I bitch about taxes and the expenses the house I'm renovating cost, when I could do with a house half or a third the size and still be better off than most. I could use all that money to give to people who have a whole lot less. And it's not that I'd have far to look.
We are part of the world, you and I and most here, that has less worries than 99% of all people that ever lived and currently live. And yet we are not satisfied. And rather than sharing this wealth. 'The first world' just keeps importing cheap products that screw over the rest of the world that makes them. We exploit children in bangladesh and wherever because we want designer clothes cheap. We don't bat an eye at the horrid conditions in iphone city, we just like our latest gadgets. We want fruit from all over the world, and the best fruit and none of that odd-shaped crap (throw that away, would you?) rather than  locally grown products that wouldn't damage the environment so much. Same with how much meat I eat, overproduction of cattle is even worse than how much polution our rides cause. Oh yes, we bitch about the environment. It's a shame that people like Trump don't do anything about it, isn't it. But meanwhile we take the plane twice a year to go skiïng or to go somewhere sunny. And I drive my car more than I should. 
But that's okay, right? As long as I can blame someone else... The people in power... Or perhaps the system itself... Or even my peers... It's not my fault, right? I'm just stuck in traffic. I couldn't possibly be traffic?
Well... I might not be a good person. But I'm not lying anymore. I'm done with that. And I'm definitely not lying to myself anymore. I'm not fighting the system with my every being. I'm lazy. I'm weak. I'm vile and disgusting in my apathy and selfishness. And I'm human. And that's just how humans operate. But that does not make it good. I'm not a good person. So that leaves me little alternative.

You know... I don't think there truly are a lot of good people out there. Not if we look at it honestly. And I try not to have heroes, because of it. Because it's unfair to hold them to such a standard. The people I admire, are just people, deep down. They are allowed to have faults. But despite me trying not to have any, you want to know what person I keep as a hero despite my efforts? I know rationally that he's just an ideal I keep in my head that probably wouldn't be the same as the real person... But it's father Damian of Molokaï. I see him as a man who gave everything. Despite me disagreeing with him on a spiritual and theological level... I admire that he didn't just talk the talk of his faith. He walked the walk. It destroyed him. It turned him into the ones he was trying to raise up. But he gave everything he had to give. That kind of person is a good person.
I'm no Damian.

(February 27, 2018 at 3:56 pm)Mr.Obvious Wrote:

(February 27, 2018 at 3:03 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

---

How are you evil though? I'm intrigued by this. Let's talk.

Well...

It's always amusing watching people try to dance around why their spending a bunch of money on something unnecessary instead of using it to save people's lives doesn't make them 'evil.'  Nice to see someone own it.

(February 26, 2018 at 2:16 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: I'd say I'd you work a 40 hour a week job and/or pay all your taxes if you're less wild and chaotic than Hammy, you are automatically disqualified from a chaotic alignment.

Fixed.

No but seriously, you're taking it all way too literally. And I can't believe it's ME who is being less literal for once.

(February 27, 2018 at 2:21 am)Thena323 Wrote: I transition between Neutral Good and Chaotic Good as conditions may warrant.

After reading the more in-depth descriptions it would appear that Neutral Good is indeed, quite accurate. I asked my son (who actually plays) to take a stab at guessing and he pegged me as Neutral Good right away.

Then he asked me to guess his alignment. I told him "Chaotic Dork".
'Cause I'm too cool for D&D....but not for Magic. 

(February 27, 2018 at 3:56 pm)Mr.Obvious Wrote:

(February 27, 2018 at 3:03 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

---

How are you evil though? I'm intrigued by this. Let's talk.

Well...
I've had discussions about this before. In one of the more animated ones, my conversational partner pointed out that good and bad were human concepts and not objective things. And I told him that didn't matter, because we are, as a matter of fact, humans. We use good and evil to describe ourselves and these terms being subjective and open to interpretation, does nothing to diminish them. Any action or lack thereoff can be assigned as good or evil. But neutrality is therefore the one aspect that is unobtainable. If every action and decision AND lack thereoff can be weighed, there can be no true neutrality. At best one could say everyone is a bit of both. That's not neutrality, in my opinion. It's human inconcistency. (Which is fine, as we are, again, just human.)
Now our intentions are important. As are our thoughts and hopes and wishes for others, the world and the future... But these are withouth substance. Indeed, except for intentions, I can't assign any weight to them at all. If for instance you wish for everyone to be safe and happy but you don't try to intervene when you see someone getting mugged, what good is your 'good heart'. Talk is cheap. Actions are what matter.
So it comes down to, what do we do and lack to do in our lives. This last part is very important. The entire: 'All it takes for evil to triumph...' thing.
And what do I do, when I try to take a step back and evaluate my life from a different POV than my own? Because in my POV I might see myself as rather driven social worker. I spend a lot of hours, more than I should and more than I get payed for, trying to help people get their lives in order, financially, socially, societally, administratively, ... When I find a wallet or purse, I make sure to give it back to the person it belongs to. I help my friends. I care for my family. I do all I can to make the woman I love happy. I help the people I know by volunteering to drive them to the airport, help them fix up their house, take out their trash and ...
But does that make me a good person? Is that enough? To be concidered good? It can't be.
Just what happens when I leave behind that self-centered, preoccupied POV? I see myself as a petty, greedy little push-over of a cog in a great horrid machine. I see how limited my human empathy is. I just want to go home at the end of the day and rest in my warm house. Eat my nurishing meal and watch my brain-killing shows or write my pointless drible. Meanwhile out there, most of the world is starving. And I just shut myself off from all of it. I border on being slightly overweight, eating crap and going to restaurants, when out there my clients and people all over the world starve. There are people actually dying as you and I have our little chat here. You know what I could be doing? I could be learning to knit. And instead of having this little conversation in which I could pretend that I'm such a swell guy, I could buy wool and knit sweaters for the homeless people who are freezing all over europe as the vortex strikes. But no. I'll just spend my time online or watch a movie or play a videogame. Instead of inviting someone in to share my excess food, really I could do with a lot less a bit of hunger would not kill me, we throw out food now and again because it got spoiled. I bitch about taxes and the expenses the house I'm renovating cost, when I could do with a house half or a third the size and still be better off than most. I could use all that money to give to people who have a whole lot less. And it's not that I'd have far to look.
We are part of the world, you and I and most here, that has less worries than 99% of all people that ever lived and currently live. And yet we are not satisfied. And rather than sharing this wealth. 'The first world' just keeps importing cheap products that screw over the rest of the world that makes them. We exploit children in bangladesh and wherever because we want designer clothes cheap. We don't bat an eye at the horrid conditions in iphone city, we just like our latest gadgets. We want fruit from all over the world, and the best fruit and none of that odd-shaped crap (throw that away, would you?) rather than  locally grown products that wouldn't damage the environment so much. Same with how much meat I eat, overproduction of cattle is even worse than how much polution our rides cause. Oh yes, we bitch about the environment. It's a shame that people like Trump don't do anything about it, isn't it. But meanwhile we take the plane twice a year to go skiïng or to go somewhere sunny. And I drive my car more than I should. 
But that's okay, right? As long as I can blame someone else... The people in power... Or perhaps the system itself... Or even my peers... It's not my fault, right? I'm just stuck in traffic. I couldn't possibly be traffic?
Well... I might not be a good person. But I'm not lying anymore. I'm done with that. And I'm definitely not lying to myself anymore. I'm not fighting the system with my every being. I'm lazy. I'm weak. I'm vile and disgusting in my apathy and selfishness. And I'm human. And that's just how humans operate. But that does not make it good. I'm not a good person. So that leaves me little alternative.

You know... I don't think there truly are a lot of good people out there. Not if we look at it honestly. And I try not to have heroes, because of it. Because it's unfair to hold them to such a standard. The people I admire, are just people, deep down. They are allowed to have faults. But despite me trying not to have any, you want to know what person I keep as a hero despite my efforts? I know rationally that he's just an ideal I keep in my head that probably wouldn't be the same as the real person... But it's father Damian of Molokaï. I see him as a man who gave everything. Despite me disagreeing with him on a spiritual and theological level... I admire that he didn't just talk the talk of his faith. He walked the walk. It destroyed him. It turned him into the ones he was trying to raise up. But he gave everything he had to give. That kind of person is a good person.
I'm no Damian.

This is definitely some interesting food for thought. I find myself very much like you, actually. We give to charity every month and help out here and there, and of course, always do what we can for friends and family, etc. But I certainly haven't given everything.

I think at worst though, this would make us neutral. Not evil.

(February 27, 2018 at 4:49 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: This is definitely some interesting food for thought. I find myself very much like you, actually. We give to charity every month and help out here and there, and of course, always do what we can for friends and family, etc. But I certainly haven't given everything.

I think at worst though, this would make us neutral. Not evil.

When you read the ole camel through the eye of a needle bit, and Jesus is all 'give up all your stuff, and follow me', do you think he really meant 'Give 15% and go to church on sundays for an hour"?  Or do you think that was a necessary interpretation by the church, because taking him at his word would result in a church with about 8 people? 

Is having excess while others are dying from having none not being evil based on geographical distance?  If your neighbor was starving to death, and you had more than enough food, it'd be evil not to help them, I assume?  But if it's a kid in Africa, same situation, people can rationalize themselves as neutral or even good in the same situation.

I'd hate to have a conscience and have to grapple with that.

Probably lawful neutral. I obey the law, and I have tried to be a good person, but I've also been hustled and cheated enough that I don't stick my neck out for people as much anymore. I want to be good, but I have to preserve my interest in the face of leeches who prey on generosity.

(February 27, 2018 at 12:02 am)The Valkyrie Wrote:

(February 26, 2018 at 7:32 pm)Cathooloo Wrote: That's lawful evil.

No, it's chaotic bastard.

Your kidding me. Their something has got to be not write with you both.

(February 27, 2018 at 5:31 pm)wallym Wrote:

(February 27, 2018 at 4:49 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: This is definitely some interesting food for thought. I find myself very much like you, actually. We give to charity every month and help out here and there, and of course, always do what we can for friends and family, etc. But I certainly haven't given everything.

I think at worst though, this would make us neutral. Not evil.

When you read the ole camel through the eye of a needle bit, and Jesus is all 'give up all your stuff, and follow me', do you think he really meant 'Give 15% and go to church on sundays for an hour"?  Or do you think that was a necessary interpretation by the church, because taking him at his word would result in a church with about 8 people? 

Is having excess while others are dying from having none not being evil based on geographical distance?  If your neighbor was starving to death, and you had more than enough food, it'd be evil not to help them, I assume?  But if it's a kid in Africa, same situation, people can rationalize themselves as neutral or even good in the same situation.

I'd hate to have a conscience and have to grapple with that.

To put the camel saying it into context, Jesus was talking about being rich. And "going through the eye of a needle" was a pain, but not impossible. People had to do it all the time.

I'm not saying greed isn't a major sin, because it is. But I don't think any of this means it's sinful to not give away all of our money, especially when we have to take care of our own needs and that of our families/children's. According to the bible, we should all give *at least* 10% once our own basic needs are met. If you're rich and buying useless stuff, or otherwise hoarding excessive amounts of money, you do have the moral obligation to give more.

If your neighbor is starving and you have extra food, of course you are morally obligated to help. And I imagine any decent person would. As for hungry people in other parts of the world, same rule applies, except you'd need to give through charities in that case, rather than directly.

I voted chaotic good by accident. I am 100% chaotic neutral.