And yes, I am not reliable at all. I'll do things like say I'll go to a party, but never show up, not even bothering to call or text to let them know I wont be there. Which I found pisses people off. If you ask any of my friends one thing about me, they'd probably say, "Yeah, he's flaky as f*ck."
This had me LOL. Actually it still has me LOL while I'm typing this. It's just so recognizable I've learnt to stop making promises so as not to piss people off as much.
Another reason I define myself as Chaotic Neutral is that I feel the system we live in is corrupt, but make no effort to change it. I believe the monetary system is an outdated way of living, as of now, holding human civilization back. Once the middle class shrinks into oblivion, and american socioeconomic status measures up to the rest of the 3rd world countries, there will be a day of reckoning. Everyone will find out just how chaotic people really are.
I agree with you here. The reality we live in has aldo shaped my personality/alignment. I hope the future will be a bit like this:
@jacobtan The dude's like 14, of course his mental development is not at an adult's level. Interesting discussion nonetheless.
So am I, and I don't get any of this crap :P but yeah, that's why I told @jacobtan to give it a few years. I think crevs, from what I seem, has his life in pretty good order for his age. He seems to put a huge priority on grades and studinging, which is better than I can say.
I don't think that insulting a teenager's intellectual ability or wisdom is any way to get them to learn or benefit from dialogue with "adults". The teens I've seen writing here who admit to being teens actually do a pretty good job writing and expressing their thoughts, and seem like very bright teens. That's doubly true when you consider that someone like Crevs is writing in English as a second language. (I think he told me that once, if I'm not mistaken.)
I've been a high school teacher before, and from that and my own memories of being a teen, I know that the quickest way to get a teen to totally stop listening to you is to say something that implies "Oh, you don't know anything, you're just a teenager, your brain isn't fully wired and you don't have enough life experience. You'll agree with me when you get older."
If your goal is to advise or educate, that's a very ineffective strategy. It makes you sound like your goal is self-aggrandizement at the expense of the teen, as well as making you sound arrogant.
That said, I also have a hard time believing that you're evil, Crevs. Maybe part of you wants to claim to be evil because you need to hear other people reassuring you that you're not.
I remember once when you helped Heindrich use Near Infinity to work on an idea he had for a Black Pits game. It took you some time, and as far as I know, you got nothing for it except Heindrich's appreciation and thanks. That's not something an evil person does, not without being paid somehow. I think you may even be chaotic good, based on your actions - the way you treat people who ask for your help, and even the way you treat people who disagree with you or insult you.
I've been a high school teacher before, and from that and my own memories of being a teen, I know that the quickest way to get a teen to totally stop listening to you is to say something that implies "Oh, you don't know anything, you're just a teenager, your brain isn't fully wired and you don't have enough life experience. You'll agree with me when you get older."
That a good way to,get them to stop listening, but the best way is to tell them something the don't want to hear.
Um..
Yeah thats not relevant at all but I felt like saying so.
Affably evil, the only type of evil that I could also befriend. I'm not surprised that the friendship didn't last though. I think many people fluctuate. I know I fluctuate between CN and CG.
Btw I think Eldoth can be seen as affably evil, but Monty? That bugger seems way too violent and aggressive to me.
Ohh, he had his moments. The only reason I use the past tense is that we moved away.
I'd like to say TN, CN tendencies when I was younger (from ages thirteen to eighteen), but now it's gone from TN to NG with CG tendencies (twenty-five years). I can still be incredibly petty like I was, but I temper it and keep any vindictive behaviours reined in for the most part. Hard-learned lessons when I was younger. I'm young, and life happens to people. My "alignment" isn't set in stone. My family tends to be ethically Chaotic or Neutral, and morally Neutral. Lots of posturers, though. Very few Lawful individuals...
In thinking about @Blackraven's self-assessment of Good versus Neutral for him, I can identify with a lot of what he says. I guess there is a question for me about whether Good must be defined as altruism...
I define Good as a philosophical attitude and impulse to be helpful, supportive, nurturing, etc., to others to promote their growth and well-being. This in contrast to evil, which I define as to intentionally and maliciously inflict harm and/or to control/dominate others with malice of intent (in my view taking away freedom of self-determination can be harmful, although there are times when society does it for safety and justice reasons, e.g., locks up criminals for society's protection. On the other hand, slavery is evil. So the context obviously matters here).
If we draw Good out along a continuum, at one extreme end we have altrusim... And I think there is a fair argument to be made that modeling self-responsibility to be self-determining and self-sufficient for others is also a way of being helpful, supportive, and nurturing that lies at the other end. One's intentions are prosocial in behaving altruistically. But, in fact, if one is constantly doting on another by doing things for them at every turn, that typically fosters dependence and an avoidance of growth in the person. That would be an unintended negative consequence of altruism that is not evil, certainly. But it is (ironically) not actually doing the greatest good for the person.
Anyway, it is according to that line of thinking that I self-identified as Chaotic versus Lawful or Neutral. I do not feel bound to a particular methodology in being supportive; and I support people in being independent, self-sufficient, and self-determining. I'm sort of creative and intuitive in how I approach the problem.
@Lemernis, so you're saying that one who decides to refrain from self-sacrifice (or altruism) in a given situation can still be Good, as long as one doesn't act out of selfishness but out of a desire to inspire the needy* to look after themselves? Am I right?
I can't argue against the reasoning, though it could be dangerous to apply it in practice, a bit too convenient if one isn't careful.
My definition of Good tends more toward altrusim. It's what I aspire to: to always help, and always give. I once formulated as a rule for myself, that everytime I was in a moral dilemma or everytime I felt unwilling in any way, I had to ask myself 'What would Jesus Christ have done in this situation?" Unfortunately, I don't have that question on my mind all the time (ego distracting me, consciousness of here and now failing).
But, in fact, if one is constantly doting on another by doing things for them at every turn, that typically fosters dependence and an avoidance of growth in the person. That would be an unintended negative consequence of altruism that is not evil, certainly. But it is (ironically) not actually doing the greatest good for the person.
^^ This is very true though, making it sometimes difficult to decide what the right course of action would be. Like you I'm kind of intuitive and pragmatic (i.e. Chaotic) in approaching this issue.
* Lol Nalia has almost monopolized the word 'needy' for me. I cant help but think of her whenever someone (including myself) uses it.
@Lemernis, so you're saying that one who decides to refrain from self-sacrifice (or altruism) in a given situation can still be Good, as long as one doesn't act out of selfishness but out of a desire to inspire the needy* to look after themselves? Am I right?
@Blackraven Yeah, that's an accurate summary, more or less.
As far as there being a danger to not stepping in to help the disenfranchised, disadvantaged, marginalized, etc, i.e., social justice concerns, I agree that we can all too easily rationalize not helping those who truly need assistance. That's a judgment call made in the realm of conscience, I guess--but it can also be based in the practical realities of the situation. What is the "intervention" likely to yield (once we have studied the situation)?
There's always risk involved in making any sort of change from the status quo. For what we're considering here there's a risk of "enabling dependency" in another person by helping them without challenging them to be self-responsible as well; and there is a risk of failing to act in good conscious to assist someone who really needs help by remaining uninvolved. I think the middle ground is to offer help but in a way that includes encouraging and building of self-empowerment and self-efficacy.
This question so much depends on what our life experience has been. Imagine being in Nazi-occupied France, Myanmar[Burma] up until a few years ago, Afghanistan or Northern Pakistan today, the former Soviet Union after 1990, the American South after the Civil War, Ancient Egypt, N. Ireland....
For me, each of us is creating something like a work of Art, a dance, a poem, a song, or perhaps a marvel of engineering and "all the world is a stage".
The problem with Lawfulness becomes the point at which "Everything not compulsory is forbidden", a completely ratiocinated world in which we are simply punching the clock and keeping appointments already made for us by Big Brother, the All-seeing Eye. No room for individual expression.
When that happens psychological pressure builds until the board is erased in a destructive binge. So I think Chaotic is not really an alignment but something more like an episodic part of the Biosphere and also History.
From the Native American POV all legalized ownership of sacred Mother Earth might be considered a Lawful Evil.
Comments
I've learnt to stop making promises so as not to piss people off as much. I agree with you here. The reality we live in has aldo shaped my personality/alignment. I hope the future will be a bit like this:
(Great movie imo. Worth the watch!)
I've been a high school teacher before, and from that and my own memories of being a teen, I know that the quickest way to get a teen to totally stop listening to you is to say something that implies "Oh, you don't know anything, you're just a teenager, your brain isn't fully wired and you don't have enough life experience. You'll agree with me when you get older."
If your goal is to advise or educate, that's a very ineffective strategy. It makes you sound like your goal is self-aggrandizement at the expense of the teen, as well as making you sound arrogant.
That said, I also have a hard time believing that you're evil, Crevs. Maybe part of you wants to claim to be evil because you need to hear other people reassuring you that you're not.
I remember once when you helped Heindrich use Near Infinity to work on an idea he had for a Black Pits game. It took you some time, and as far as I know, you got nothing for it except Heindrich's appreciation and thanks. That's not something an evil person does, not without being paid somehow. I think you may even be chaotic good, based on your actions - the way you treat people who ask for your help, and even the way you treat people who disagree with you or insult you.
Um..
Yeah thats not relevant at all but I felt like saying so.
I'd like to say TN, CN tendencies when I was younger (from ages thirteen to eighteen), but now it's gone from TN to NG with CG tendencies (twenty-five years). I can still be incredibly petty like I was, but I temper it and keep any vindictive behaviours reined in for the most part. Hard-learned lessons when I was younger. I'm young, and life happens to people. My "alignment" isn't set in stone.
My family tends to be ethically Chaotic or Neutral, and morally Neutral. Lots of posturers, though. Very few Lawful individuals...
I define Good as a philosophical attitude and impulse to be helpful, supportive, nurturing, etc., to others to promote their growth and well-being. This in contrast to evil, which I define as to intentionally and maliciously inflict harm and/or to control/dominate others with malice of intent (in my view taking away freedom of self-determination can be harmful, although there are times when society does it for safety and justice reasons, e.g., locks up criminals for society's protection. On the other hand, slavery is evil. So the context obviously matters here).
If we draw Good out along a continuum, at one extreme end we have altrusim... And I think there is a fair argument to be made that modeling self-responsibility to be self-determining and self-sufficient for others is also a way of being helpful, supportive, and nurturing that lies at the other end. One's intentions are prosocial in behaving altruistically. But, in fact, if one is constantly doting on another by doing things for them at every turn, that typically fosters dependence and an avoidance of growth in the person. That would be an unintended negative consequence of altruism that is not evil, certainly. But it is (ironically) not actually doing the greatest good for the person.
Anyway, it is according to that line of thinking that I self-identified as Chaotic versus Lawful or Neutral. I do not feel bound to a particular methodology in being supportive; and I support people in being independent, self-sufficient, and self-determining. I'm sort of creative and intuitive in how I approach the problem.
I can't argue against the reasoning, though it could be dangerous to apply it in practice, a bit too convenient if one isn't careful.
My definition of Good tends more toward altrusim. It's what I aspire to: to always help, and always give. I once formulated as a rule for myself, that everytime I was in a moral dilemma or everytime I felt unwilling in any way, I had to ask myself 'What would Jesus Christ have done in this situation?" Unfortunately, I don't have that question on my mind all the time (ego distracting me, consciousness of here and now failing). ^^ This is very true though, making it sometimes difficult to decide what the right course of action would be. Like you I'm kind of intuitive and pragmatic (i.e. Chaotic) in approaching this issue.
* Lol Nalia has almost monopolized the word 'needy' for me. I cant help but think of her whenever someone (including myself) uses it.
As far as there being a danger to not stepping in to help the disenfranchised, disadvantaged, marginalized, etc, i.e., social justice concerns, I agree that we can all too easily rationalize not helping those who truly need assistance. That's a judgment call made in the realm of conscience, I guess--but it can also be based in the practical realities of the situation. What is the "intervention" likely to yield (once we have studied the situation)?
There's always risk involved in making any sort of change from the status quo. For what we're considering here there's a risk of "enabling dependency" in another person by helping them without challenging them to be self-responsible as well; and there is a risk of failing to act in good conscious to assist someone who really needs help by remaining uninvolved. I think the middle ground is to offer help but in a way that includes encouraging and building of self-empowerment and self-efficacy.
For me, each of us is creating something like a work of Art, a dance, a poem, a song, or perhaps a marvel of engineering and "all the world is a stage".
The problem with Lawfulness becomes the point at which "Everything not compulsory is forbidden", a completely ratiocinated world in which we are simply punching the clock and keeping appointments already made for us by Big Brother, the All-seeing Eye. No room for individual expression.
When that happens psychological pressure builds until the board is erased in a destructive binge. So I think Chaotic is not really an alignment but something more like an episodic part of the Biosphere and also History.
From the Native American POV all legalized ownership of sacred Mother Earth might be considered a Lawful Evil.