Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32
  1. #1
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,088
    Post Thanks / Like

    The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Maybe this is more appropriate for the Clubhouse forum but I am going to make some arguments so I'm posting it here.

    The game Dungeons and Dragons (I said this was a nerdy debate) divides morals into a three-by-three grid with nine alignments based on evil to good and lawful to chaotic. I came across this image with fictional examples of each of them (from sci-fi or fantasy movies and TV Shows.



    So the debate issue do you disagree with any of them or can think of better examples or examples that are as good.

    IMO, overall it's a pretty good list and I think another really good example of Chaotic Evil would be Alex from A Clockwork Orange but The Joker is still an excellent example and more current.

    Where I think the list isn't quite right:

    I think the Aliens are true neutral and not actually evil. Yes, they are clear enemies to humanity but it's through malevolence but just survival instinct and no more innately evil than a lion is for killing an antelope so it can eat.

    And I would say Malcolm Reynolds is Chaotic Good, not Neutral Good. He seems very much about staying outside of "the system" and recognizes no authority beyond himself. But then he is a leader and expects his crew to obey him so perhaps he's not entirely chaotic and would perhaps follow society's laws if he did not live under what he views as a tyrannical and evil (Lawful Evil) government. So I'm a bit torn on that one.

    I'm trying to come up with a good Neutral Evil substitute for the Aliens, sticking with the sci-fi and fantasy realm but I'm drawing a blank. I'm sure I'll think of something later.

    So if you disagree with the chart or with me or can think of better examples (or equally good) examples for the chart, chime in.

    Let the geekiness begin!

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago IL
    Posts
    1,241
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    You could place a Jedi in Superman's place, but what determines lawful? I'd put Batman in the Neutral Good, I'd almost say he is Chaotic simply because of his unorthodox methods, and his willingness to break the law, but in The Dark Knight we see his system for tracking people using their own cell phones destroyed like he said it would. So perhaps he really doesn't see himself as above the system. Or perhaps I'd move Jean-Luc there to Neutral Good.

    I agree with the Alien assessment 100%, and I think the Joker makes a good addition.

    I'd say you could also place Joe (Fistful of Dollars) in the place of True Neutral. He takes neither side and is merely interested in playing both for money; though at the end we see a Neutral Good when he saves the woman and kills the Rojo family.
    Witty puns...

  3. #3
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,088
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilPup John View Post
    You could place a Jedi in Superman's place, but what determines lawful?
    Usually it's following a set of laws and an accepted hierarchy and believing that an orderly society where people follow laws is what's desirable. As I understand it, Jedi are generally lawful.


    Quote Originally Posted by DevilPup John View Post
    I'd put Batman in the Neutral Good, I'd almost say he is Chaotic simply because of his unorthodox methods, and his willingness to break the law, but in The Dark Knight we see his system for tracking people using their own cell phones destroyed like he said it would. So perhaps he really doesn't see himself as above the system.
    I think him destroying the cell phones is because he knows it would lead to evil (power corrupts) but I think he is generally Neutral Good (which means that one uses law or chaos for good in accordance to what is most effective in achieving good) and his unlawful actions are a reaction to the corruption in Gotham where working within the law does not yield effective results. Also in The Dark Knight he was hoping to retire if Dent managed to restore order so he was primarily working to improve society.

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilPup John View Post
    Or perhaps I'd move Jean-Luc there to Neutral Good.
    I think Picard is definitely Lawful but perhaps Lawful Good instead of Lawful Neutral. But the chart makes a good argument that he's follow the rules even if it wasn't always always for the best good but then that's probably because he believes that following the rules ultimately leads to the best good so I'd say he's Lawful Good.

    But then in First Contact he did violate orders in joining the battle against the Borg which would suggest Neutral Good but I'd say that that was an extreme circumstance.


    Quote Originally Posted by DevilPup John View Post
    I'd say you could also place Joe (Fistful of Dollars) in the place of True Neutral. He takes neither side and is merely interested in playing both for money; though at the end we see a Neutral Good when he saves the woman and kills the Rojo family.
    While I'm sure your assessment is correct, the chart is focused on modern sci-fi and fantasy so I'm trying to keep it there as well so I wouldn't call Joe a better example just like I think Alex from A Clockwork Orange is a great example of Chaotic Evil but isn't better than The Joker due to the context.

    And I still haven't thought of a good example of Neutral Evil yet...

  4. #4
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago IL
    Posts
    1,241
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Perhaps the Predator for Neutral evil. It's more a conscience being able to make decisions based on more than just predatory instinct?

    The Alien is like an alligator. It seems evil because it may kill a baby... but it's just an instinct to survive.

    The Predator kills purely for sport, the best game. It's more humanoid, and shows more human characteristics.

    Agreed, it's a difficult challenge.
    Witty puns...

  5. #5
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,388
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Joker is a good chaotic evil. However, I've been into foreign films lately, specifically, Korean films (they are just so different and go beyond typical boundaries that Hollywood usually stays within). I have new additions to "Chatoic Good" and "Chaotic Evil" that I think perfectly epitomize the alignments and put it into more realistic context (that of human beings and their actions, vs exaggerated, fictional characters).

    My favorite foreign film atm, is one I watched about 8 months ago. It's called "I Saw the Devil" (watch the trailer). It's about a policeman whose fiance is murdered by a serial killer. Instead of arresting the killer...or even killing him for revenge...he hunts him down and stops him before every attempted future murder. He beats up up, lets him heal and go on his way, all to begin the cycle again. It's a terrific, unique story. The acting is superb and it explores dramatic moral boundaries by both the good and the bad guy. There is absolutely no limit that the bad guy has (I'll leave it at that). And there is absolutely no limit the good guy has, other than staying within the boundaries of his objective and never unnecessarily harming the innocent.

    Chaotic Evil vs Chaotic Good...in the same movie.




    ---------------------------
    Another film I highly recommend and one that has perhaps one of the most shocking, unpredictable spins in movie history (if not the), is made by the same writer/director and stars the same actor who plays the bad guy in I Saw the Devil. It's called "Old Boy". A must see for fans of cinema.

    Premise: Imagine going about your daily business. One day, seemingly random, you are kidnapped and thrown into jail. You don't know why. You don't know by whom. You don't know how long you are going to be there. Then one day....15 years later...you are let loose...still, without being given a reason or being told by whom.

    Korean revenge movies are the bomb.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  6. #6
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,088
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilPup John View Post
    Perhaps the Predator for Neutral evil. It's more a conscience being able to make decisions based on more than just predatory instinct?

    The Alien is like an alligator. It seems evil because it may kill a baby... but it's just an instinct to survive.

    The Predator kills purely for sport, the best game. It's more humanoid, and shows more human characteristics.
    Based on the first Predator film, the Predator is evil because he seeks to kill other sentient beings but since he's outside of his normal society, it's hard to deternime if he's Lawful or Chaotic or Neutral evil. Probably not Lawful Evil because he probably doesn't have a lawful reason to hunt humans, but you never know.

    I thought of a good Neutral Evil Character - La Schiffe from Casino Royal. He'll make deals but may take a chance and break them if he thinks it won't really cause a problem for him. Michael Corleone from The Godfather series is also Neutral Evil while Don Corleone was probably Lawful Evil. Also the Tom Hanks character from Toad to Perdition was Lawful Evil, even though he was basically the hero.

    Another fun thing to apply alignments to is Cartoon Characters.

    Bugs Bunny is Chaotic Good
    Elmer Fudd is Lawful Neutral (sometimes Lawful Evil)
    Yosemite Sam is Chaotic Evil
    Daffy Duck was originally Chaotic Neutral and later was Neutral Evil.
    Porky Pig is Neutral Good

    Sylvester is hard to nail down as he may have just been acting by his instincts in wanting to eat Tweety and therefore is more of a neutral character instead of evil.

  7. #7
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,794
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Shout out to "old boy"
    Quote Originally Posted by APOK
    Another film I highly recommend and one that has perhaps one of the most shocking, unpredictable spins in movie history (if not the), is made by the same writer/director and stars the same actor who plays the bad guy in I Saw the Devil. It's called "Old Boy". A must see for fans of cinema.
    I can vouch for this 100%... HOWEVER!. It should be noted that the film contains possibly THE most disturbing, graphic scene ever in a film. (Which is why it is such a great Revenge film).



    Below are a few thoughts.. but I wouldn't argue any of them are "better" than the ones listed in the OP.
    Neutral Evil
    I think the Alien is the perfect Neutral evil.
    It is a danger to everyone, but not based on any moral grounds. It doesn't kill because it hates, it doesn't kill to oppose the law, and it doesn't kill to support the law. I just kills, and is an opponent of and to all.

    This is different than the Joker, because the Joker thinks that Chaos is good.
    The Alien doesn't think anything of chaos.


    Neutral Good


    Tell me to get off your ship, leave me on a deserted ice planet and I'll STILL beam myself back aboard even if you are moving at warp 3 and the technique hasn't been invented yet. Why.. because he is the damn captain.. even if he doesn't actually hold the rank.

    He is going to do what is "best" no matter what the "law" says. The difficult choices are clear to him.


    Lawful evil

    QUOTE "I CAN'T LIE!!"

    He can't lie, but he is still going to seek is own self-interest over that of others... and he is a lawyer so of course he is evil


    From the transporter.
    He is braking the laws of society, but he does have his own laws.


    Except for the mission he is on.. what is "good" about the guys actions?(another disturbing film) The character doesn't see himself as "evil", but by the actions I would say he was.

    Chaotic Evil

    Another guy that thinks bad is good.
    To serve man.

  8. #8
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,088
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I think the Alien is the perfect Neutral evil.
    It is a danger to everyone, but not based on any moral grounds. It doesn't kill because it hates, it doesn't kill to oppose the law, and it doesn't kill to support the law. I just kills, and is an opponent of and to all.
    Again, I think the argument can be made that the Aliens are true neutral instead of evil (this is a debate thread so I guess we should debate something).

    As an example, a Lion is a killer but it's just going on instinct when it kills so it's true neutral, not evil. And the Aliens don't seem much different in that respect. I suppose a very significant aspect of evil (but not an absolute one) is how one reacts to its own species and other species. We don't consider a man who hunts other animals to be evil by definition, especially if he's hunting to eat, but we would most certainly consider a man who hunts other men to be evil. So if the Aliens are just using other species for food and to procreate in order to ensure its own survival as a species and it's not evil when a man does the same thing, then it can be argued that the Aliens are not evil.

    And Anton Chigur is a great one for this debate (I was him for Halloween a couple of years ago, with air compressor and shotgun). I would say that he's not chaotic evil because he follows some apparently strict codes (if you win the coin flip he will not kill you) and he only appears to be chaotic because he's a little (or maybe more than a little) insane. And while I'm a little fuzzy on why he was chasing the money, if it was because he was tasked to retrieve the money for someone else as opposed to trying to get it for himself, then his motivations seem to be primarily duty-bound and he's most likely Lawful Evil. If he's trying to get the money so he can have it, then I'd say Neutral Evil.

    And I would say that Jim Carrey's character in Liar Liar is Neutral Evil as he works withing the system and yet breaks the rules when it's to his advantage as opposed to operating without rules like The Joker or Alex. The only reason he can't lie in the film is that he's magically prevented from lying so his lack of lying in that situation does not reflect his actual alignment.
    Last edited by mican333; February 4th, 2012 at 01:11 PM.

  9. #9
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    I don't know if Mal is right for "Neutral" Good. Or even "Good" for that matter. He's more Neutral...

    Also, why would a Neutral Good person feel the need to fight fair? That's more of a "follow the rules of warfare" kind of thing, which strikes me as a Lawful trait.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  10. #10
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Puyallup, WA
    Posts
    230
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    I'm going to agree that the Alien doesn't belong to the Neutral Evil persuasion. As I'm a Star Trek geek mostly, might I suggest Qark from DS9 as a true Neutral Evil persona - he can see the benefits of order (demanding Star Fleet repair damaged holosuites as a member of the business community) but also of chaos (cheating and such), and is motivated only by selfish concerns (thus evil).

    Mal is definitely an odd character (thus making him one of my favorite Sci Fi personas of all times). He seems to have a sense of honor (Lawful), but is in fact a smuggler/criminal (Chaos). He seems to want to do right, but then will shoot an apparently unarmed Agent if he thinks it'll get him an advantage to save the girl. I'd probably move him to Neutral... maybe leaning towards Neutral Good.

    Perhaps Seven of Nine from Voyager could be the Neutral Good - didn't seem to care much for the "rules," but certainly always acted as she thought was "right."
    “Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves.”
    ~Carl Gustav Jung
    "When dealing with the insane, the best method is to pretend to be sane."
    ~Hermann Hesse

  11. #11
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    767
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Gollum would be an example of a neutral evil. He follows Frodo's lead and rules sometimes, but is also constantly debating with himself to break them and snatch the ring in the moment.

  12. #12
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,794
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Again, I think the argument can be made that the Aliens are true neutral instead of evil (this is a debate thread so I guess we should debate something).
    I could very easily concede that point, as I think it has a lot of merit... however that wouldn't be much fun so I will play "alien" advocate for a bit.

    The Alien is far to smart to be said to be driven by pure instinct, and thus an animal. I think the Alien is simply an enemy to everyone and the other Aliens are seen as convent Allies until they are no longer needed or their is a need to kill them, such as escaping the cage scene in Aliens Resurrection (correct me if I'm wrong there).

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    As an example, a Lion is a killer but it's just going on instinct when it kills so it's true neutral, not evil. And the Aliens don't seem much different in that respect. I suppose a very significant aspect of evil (but not an absolute one) is how one reacts to its own species and other species. We don't consider a man who hunts other animals to be evil by definition, especially if he's hunting to eat, but we would most certainly consider a man who hunts other men to be evil. So if the Aliens are just using other species for food and to procreate in order to ensure its own survival as a species and it's not evil when a man does the same thing, then it can be argued that the Aliens are not evil.
    Well, that is a very hard point to argue against. I think that from our perspective though the Alien are enemies and therefore a kind of evil. Suppose that you have super-man (definitive "good" from the op) anything that would be his enemy would inherently HAVE to be evil. Because it takes an opposite to be enemies. The alien would be Superman's Enemy, and therefore would be evil. One may be tempted to say that the same argument could be made in regards to the Joker, as the Alien would be his enemy as well. But the conclusion doesn't follow as two evils can be legit enemies, but not two goods. Evil can turn on itself, but good can not.
    (how is that approach?)

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    And Anton Chigur is a great one for this debate (I was him for Halloween a couple of years ago, with air compressor and shotgun). I would say that he's not chaotic evil because he follows some apparently strict codes (if you win the coin flip he will not kill you) and he only appears to be chaotic because he's a little (or maybe more than a little) insane. And while I'm a little fuzzy on why he was chasing the money, if it was because he was tasked to retrieve the money for someone else as opposed to trying to get it for himself, then his motivations seem to be primarily duty-bound and he's most likely Lawful Evil. If he's trying to get the money so he can have it, then I'd say Neutral Evil.
    Honestly I didn't read the book, and the book does a better job of explaining Sugars(movie pun) actions and motivations. From the movie I didn't get that he followed any "rules" except maybe the random ones he picked at the moment. I think the argument would be stronger for him to be the Lawful evil from what I hear from the book, so I will gladly concede that my first assessment was wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    And I would say that Jim Carrey's character in Liar Liar is Neutral Evil as he works withing the system and yet breaks the rules when it's to his advantage as opposed to operating without rules like The Joker or Alex. The only reason he can't lie in the film is that he's magically prevented from lying so his lack of lying in that situation does not reflect his actual alignment.
    Well, he is a lawyer, so he answers to a judge and thus the "law". So he must operate within the system. He simply finds the cracks and exceptions. The lying part is convenient allegory of this.
    I suppose that you could say that because he was willing to lie, that he was really breaking all of the rules, but he didn't see it that way unless he was caught. Thus he was willing to do anything as long as it fit within the "law".

    I'm not quite convinced that he was Neutral evil.
    To serve man.

  13. #13
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,088
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    I don't know if Mal is right for "Neutral" Good. Or even "Good" for that matter. He's more Neutral...
    I think Mal is definitely good - there are many example of this in the show.

    The most clear one that comes to mind is when he gave the medicine he stole to the townspeople when he learned that they were in dire need of it and he also returned the payment for the heist to the guy who hired him.

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    Also, why would a Neutral Good person feel the need to fight fair? That's more of a "follow the rules of warfare" kind of thing, which strikes me as a Lawful trait.
    I agree. Neutral good doesn't have to fight fair.

    ---------- Post added at 03:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:09 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Socialgremlin View Post
    Mal is definitely an odd character (thus making him one of my favorite Sci Fi personas of all times). He seems to have a sense of honor (Lawful), but is in fact a smuggler/criminal (Chaos). He seems to want to do right, but then will shoot an apparently unarmed Agent if he thinks it'll get him an advantage to save the girl. I'd probably move him to Neutral... maybe leaning towards Neutral Good.
    Again, NG doesn't need to fight fair. I'd go with Neutral Good. His lawlessness is a reaction to living under a tyrannical government where he feels he would be engaging in evil or condoning evil by joining the system.

    Beyond the classic Star Trek and Next Generation, I don't do Trek so I can't comment on your other choices.

    ---------- Post added at 03:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:12 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Soren View Post
    Gollum would be an example of a neutral evil. He follows Frodo's lead and rules sometimes, but is also constantly debating with himself to break them and snatch the ring in the moment.
    He's a split character so really he's Gollum and Smeagle. Gollum is Neutral Evil - just looking out for himself. Smeagle is the not-evil side of Gollum and seems somewhat honorable.

    Samwise is a clear example of Lawful Good.

    ---------- Post added at 03:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:16 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I think that from our perspective though the Alien are enemies and therefore a kind of evil.
    Really, it's kind of hard to know. We only see the Aliens in context with humans and just like a Lion is always an enemy to its prey, it is not evil - just a creature living by instinct. If Aliens are inimical to all living things, not just humans, then it's easier to claim that they are evil.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Suppose that you have super-man (definitive "good" from the op) anything that would be his enemy would inherently HAVE to be evil. Because it takes an opposite to be enemies.
    Not really. A chaotic good person could run afoul of Superman just because he's breaking the law, like robbing from an evil rich man to give to the poor. Superman would still be obliged to stop him.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Honestly I didn't read the book, and the book does a better job of explaining Sugars(movie pun) actions and motivations. From the movie I didn't get that he followed any "rules" except maybe the random ones he picked at the moment. I think the argument would be stronger for him to be the Lawful evil from what I hear from the book, so I will gladly concede that my first assessment was wrong.
    I didn't read the book either and again, I would say whether he's Lawful or Neutral depends on why he was chasing the money. If it's because he's trying to return it to whoever hired him to retrieve, then it's a pretty strong argument for Lawful Evil (but insane). If he's trying to keep it, then I'd say Neutral Evil. But I think he's got too many codes that he strictly follows to be Chaotic Evil.

  14. #14
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,794
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Really, it's kind of hard to know. We only see the Aliens in context with humans and just like a Lion is always an enemy to its prey, it is not evil - just a creature living by instinct. If Aliens are inimical to all living things, not just humans, then it's easier to claim that they are evil.
    Well, in every context we see the alien it is always attacking. To any other species other than it's own it appears to be an inherent enemy. Hence Predators love of fighting it, it is a worthy opponent.


    What would Predator be?
    Lawful evil.

    Again, I say evil because they hunt everyone worth hunting and while they don't mind the death of the helpless, they don't actively seek it out.
    That makes them the enemy of all races, except in the cases where their law doesn't encourage it.

    It is along those same lines that I say the Alien is "evil". I suppose if we said the alien didn't know the difference between right and wrong/good and bad that they would have to be some version of neutral. .. maybe even Neutral Neutral, but some how very different from the Ents (tree creatures in LOTR). '

    I'm not sure now, you have me doubting.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    Not really. A chaotic good person could run afoul of Superman just because he's breaking the law, like robbing from an evil rich man to give to the poor. Superman would still be obliged to stop him.
    Good point. It is more that they would have to be an enemy of one of the traits. In the case you are saying it is the "lawful" part not the "Good" part.
    Still, would the alien run into conflict with Super Man on those grounds? I don't think so. I think that in the instance that the alien was in conflict with Super Man, it would be on the moral grounds of "evil" not the chaotic or neutral ground of the law.
    So while it is possible for a "good" character to be an "enemy" of Super Man, they would have to be opposed to him in at least one of the categories, and acting in a way that was Opposite.

    For example, while stealing is compatible with a neutral/good character, the theft is a chaotic act in direct opposition to the law. Theft is not a "neutral" act, it is an unlawful one. Super Man would not have a problem with the character if the act was "neutral".
    To serve man.

  15. #15
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,088
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Well, in every context we see the alien it is always attacking. To any other species other than it's own it appears to be an inherent enemy.
    You have too small a sample to know if it would attack any creature. For all we know, humans are the only creature that they attack.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    What would Predator be?
    Lawful evil.

    Again, I say evil because they hunt everyone worth hunting and while they don't mind the death of the helpless, they don't actively seek it out.
    That makes them the enemy of all races, except in the cases where their law doesn't encourage it.
    I've only seen the first Predator film but I would say that it is evil as it hunts sentient creatures (humans) for sport. But it could be any evil alignment. Again, alignment is usually associated with one's own society and the Predator could be anything. It could be a lawful creature who is given a license to hunt humans or it could be an outcast who is without a society and just kills whatever he comes across.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    It is along those same lines that I say the Alien is "evil". I suppose if we said the alien didn't know the difference between right and wrong/good and bad that they would have to be some version of neutral. .. maybe even Neutral Neutral, but some how very different from the Ents (tree creatures in LOTR).
    Again, I'm going on the theory that they are just animals and act on their nature and therefore are neutral. But I'm working with incomplete information so I don't know for a fact that they aren't evil.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Good point. It is more that they would have to be an enemy of one of the traits. In the case you are saying it is the "lawful" part not the "Good" part.
    And the further they are from the alignment the more likely they will be enemies. Superman could be on good term with chaotic good person and have an understanding with a Lawful Evil politician who has not broken any laws. But most Chaotic Evil types will be his enemy since they will likely break the law for bad reasons.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Still, would the alien run into conflict with Super Man on those grounds? I don't think so. I think that in the instance that the alien was in conflict with Super Man, it would be on the moral grounds of "evil" not the chaotic or neutral ground of the law.
    But what if a Lion escaped from the Zoo and was about to kill a child - Superman would then have a conflict with the Lion.

    But if the Aliens were not a threat to any humans or other sentient beings Superman would be justified in leaving them alone.

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    So while it is possible for a "good" character to be an "enemy" of Super Man, they would have to be opposed to him in at least one of the categories, and acting in a way that was Opposite.
    I suppose even a Lawful Good being could have a conflict with Superman like if they had different goals and their goals interfered with each others. But yes, the farther away the alignment the more likely that there will be a conflict. But there are other factors as well. Both a lion and an otter are true neutral but Superman will never be in conflict with an otter.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    For example, while stealing is compatible with a neutral/good character, the theft is a chaotic act in direct opposition to the law. Theft is not a "neutral" act, it is an unlawful one. Super Man would not have a problem with the character if the act was "neutral".
    Not as big a problem but I'm sure he'd prefer everyone act Lawful Good as much as possible so while neutral is tolerable, lawful is better.

  16. #16
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    The most clear one that comes to mind is when he gave the medicine he stole to the townspeople when he learned that they were in dire need of it and he also returned the payment for the heist to the guy who hired him.
    Nothing would prevent a True Neutral person from doing that. In fact, the True Neutral person would just do whatever they wanted without any thought of whether it corresponded to Good or Evil. That sounds like Mal (and all of Joss Whedon's protagonists) to a tee.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  17. #17
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,088
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    Nothing would prevent a True Neutral person from doing that. In fact, the True Neutral person would just do whatever they wanted without any thought of whether it corresponded to Good or Evil. That sounds like Mal (and all of Joss Whedon's protagonists) to a tee.
    A person who does whatever they want without a thought to whether it was good or evil would be Chaotic Neutral.

    A true Neutral would have concern for law to some extent since complete lawlessness would, again, be Chaotic Neutral instead of True Neutral.

    Also a True Neutral will have committed evil deeds to balance his good deeds. I don't recall many deeds that would balance the good deeds that he has done. He is a thief of course but he primarily targets that he thinks are evil. This point was even made when Saffron talked him into stealing a valuable artifact by convincing him that the owner was evil. If he didn't care if his targets were good or evil, there would be no need for Saffron to lie about the target.

  18. #18
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    A person who does whatever they want without a thought to whether it was good or evil would be Chaotic Neutral.

    A true Neutral would have concern for law to some extent since complete lawlessness would, again, be Chaotic Neutral instead of True Neutral.
    But a completely neutral position on the law, neither positive (inclined toward lawful behavior) nor negative (inclined toward unlawful behavior) would be true neutral, not chaotic neutral. If I do what I want without caring whether it's lawful, then I'm not skewing my behavior toward unlawful action nor am I skewing it toward lawful action.

    Also a True Neutral will have committed evil deeds to balance his good deeds. I don't recall many deeds that would balance the good deeds that he has done. He is a thief of course but he primarily targets that he thinks are evil. This point was even made when Saffron talked him into stealing a valuable artifact by convincing him that the owner was evil. If he didn't care if his targets were good or evil, there would be no need for Saffron to lie about the target.
    He might care whether his targets are good or evil, but that's irrelevant. The question is whether he tries to make his actions skew toward good or evil.

    If I remember correctly, doesn't he steal, kill, evade arrest, smuggle, and lie? And he does so based not on whether his actions are truly Good, but whether he wants to do those acts. That's either Neutral or Evil, certainly not Good.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  19. #19
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,794
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    You have too small a sample to know if it would attack any creature. For all we know, humans are the only creature that they attack.
    Well, specifically the list is. Humans, predators, other Aliens, and the race that was in the ship sending the distress signal found in alien #1.

    It is a small sample, and you are more than reasonable to say that it is too small. It is an assumption that they are hostile to everyone.
    But, so far they are hostile to everyone.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    I've only seen the first Predator film but I would say that it is evil as it hunts sentient creatures (humans) for sport. But it could be any evil alignment. Again, alignment is usually associated with one's own society and the Predator could be anything. It could be a lawful creature who is given a license to hunt humans or it could be an outcast who is without a society and just kills whatever he comes across.
    Well, it is portrayed as a society that respects hunting of other sentient creatures, they have an internal order.
    Now, they are evil because they are killing "people" for sport. That is evil.

    Quote Originally Posted by MICAN
    And the further they are from the alignment the more likely they will be enemies. Superman could be on good term with chaotic good person and have an understanding with a Lawful Evil politician who has not broken any laws. But most Chaotic Evil types will be his enemy since they will likely break the law for bad reasons.
    But what if a Lion escaped from the Zoo and was about to kill a child - Superman would then have a conflict with the Lion.

    But if the Aliens were not a threat to any humans or other sentient beings Superman would be justified in leaving them alone.
    I'm afraid I'm going to have to concede the point.
    Good show.... I did try though
    To serve man.

  20. #20
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,088
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The Nerdiest debate on ODN

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    But a completely neutral position on the law, neither positive (inclined toward lawful behavior) nor negative (inclined toward unlawful behavior) would be true neutral, not chaotic neutral. If I do what I want without caring whether it's lawful, then I'm not skewing my behavior toward unlawful action nor am I skewing it toward lawful action.
    A true neutral seeks balance within society and therefore is concerned with how lawful or chaotic things are. If things are too chaotic a True Neutral will try to make things more lawful and vice versa.

    And a chaotic neutral is not necessarily concerned with how chaotic his actions are. if one is naturally chaotic they will just do what they want and not be concerned with whether their actions are lawful or chaotic and the chaos just comes from them doing as they please and it so happens that they don't have a particularly good or evil nature which is what prevents them from being chaotic good or chaotic evil.

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    He might care whether his targets are good or evil, but that's irrelevant. The question is whether he tries to make his actions skew toward good or evil.
    And who he targets is entirely relevant. And even more relevant is why he is targeting those people.

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    If I remember correctly, doesn't he steal, kill, evade arrest, smuggle, and lie?
    None of which is innately evil for there can be a good (or neutral) reason to do any of those.

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    And he does so based not on whether his actions are truly Good, but whether he wants to do those acts. That's either Neutral or Evil, certainly not Good.
    I'm unaware of him doing any of those things for evil reasons. He's certainly killed in self-defense which is not an evil act nor is it necessarily good - it's just a reasonable reaction to a threat to one's life so can be considered neutral. The other crimes are not inherently evil either depending on why they are committed although they certainly reveal that he is not lawful. So let's say his crimes are morally neutral (maybe if given time I could think of a crime he committed for good reasons but such a thing is not currently important to my argument so I won't bother).

    But good people can commit neutral acts (most actions that anyone takes are morally neutral - brushing my teeth this morning as an example). It's whether they commit good acts when such a choice is relevant and/or have a philosophy of goodness (probably the most important factor) that determines whether they are good or something else. And Mal returning the medicine shows that he does care for the well-being of the citizens of that town, even though giving the medicine disadvantages him personally in many ways (having to return the money he was paid as well as making a powerful enemy) so he directly puts the well-being of others, people he doesn't even know, above his own well-being which reveals a good nature.

    ---------- Post added at 12:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:54 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Well, specifically the list is. Humans, predators, other Aliens, and the race that was in the ship sending the distress signal found in alien #1.

    It is a small sample, and you are more than reasonable to say that it is too small. It is an assumption that they are hostile to everyone.
    But, so far they are hostile to everyone.
    I'll stick with the notion that it's inconclusive since the types of pretty is quite limited. Again, a Lion will kill any prey that is sufficiently large enough to make a meal which means that it has multiple potential prey that is is "hostile" towards and wouldn't bother with prey that's too small.

    And similarly the alien in the first movie apparently was not hostile to the cat - when it killed one crew member the cat was around and it apparently didn't go after the cat. That's not proof that it wouldn't go after the cat in another situation (like when there wasn't larger prey around) but again, it's not proven that it is hostile to everything.


    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Well, it is portrayed as a society that respects hunting of other sentient creatures, they have an internal order.
    Now, they are evil because they are killing "people" for sport. That is evil.
    Going by that (I assume you are using information from the second movie which I don't remember much because I didn't like it enough to pay attention when it was on cable), I would say that it's either Neutral Evil or Lawful Evil.

    So we probably agree on that.



    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I'm afraid I'm going to have to concede the point.
    Good show.... I did try though
    No big deal. We're just "tossing the ball around" and seeing where the debate goes so it's perfectly fine to try out an argument and see how it holds up.

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Putting more "debate" into Online Debate Network?
    By Apokalupsis in forum Site Feedback
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: June 27th, 2011, 10:27 PM
  2. Gaius, A debate on how to debate.
    By wanxtrmBANNED in forum General Debate
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: May 22nd, 2007, 03:48 PM
  3. What's the real decline of debate on ODN?
    By GoldPhoenix in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: July 16th, 2006, 04:46 AM
  4. Debate This!
    By Snoop in forum Writing Club
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 12th, 2005, 11:15 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •