Someone please explain.
Jaheira is clearly a good person. She is a harper, which is a very good aligned organization. She fights slavers, seeks to keep the realms safe. She balks at any evil course of action and can be counted on to always do the right thing. She comes across as being very clearly neutral good.
Faldorn is clearly an evil person. She is a shadow druid, which we clearly see resorts to murder (BG1, the poisoning of a druid enclave), terrorism (kill people so they don't even enjoy nature, which does happen in BG1) and all out warfare on population centers merely for existing (BG2). She also goes a step further in BG2 and poisons nature itself just to make herself immune to harm, which is so blatantly selfish that it is mind boggling.
How do they share the same alignment?
As I see it, you can believe that both good and evil are necessary for existence. That is being reasonable. But from there, you have intentions.
Would you sacrifice your own well being to help others? Do you try to make the world a better place? Congrats, you are neutral good!
Do you believe in the letter of the druid code, and are willing to enforce it no matter what (such as the druids who side with Faldorn even though they are unhappy with the way she is doing things)? Then you are lawful neutral.
Do you not give two figs about the happiness, well being, safety or survival of your fellow human beings? Will you kill people for disagreeing with you? Are you willing to destroy the very thing that you claim to protect for the sake of your own protection? Then you fall into the evil spectrum, depending on what you said yes to.
And yet, all of those very different people all share the same alignment. I just don't get it.