This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

10
11

The alignments of philosophies? (self.Pathfinder_RPG)

mindlance が 投稿

I am working on something where philosophers would have some of the power of clerics (essentially a clerical archetype.) As part of it, I want to present philosophies for the philosophers to follow, and I want to fill out the full roster of alignments available. Trouble is, I'm missing some correspondences, and I was hoping you could help me fill in the gaps. Here's what I have so far:

全 19 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]dregoth151 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Interesting, I'd debate some of the categories however, Taoism is probably more neutral or maybe neutral good (due to the aspects of the philosophy that deal with cultivating the te, and the aspects of the philosophy expressed through wu-wei). Even mohism I'd probably push further up the good... or lawful scale.

Anyways, you may want to include Utilitarianism, [active] Nihilism (perhaps a substitute chaotic neutral), and Eudaimonism (a possible candidate for your lawful good slot). Perhaps Machiavellianism for Neutral evil, though normally it might get cast as lawful evil.

Unfortunately these systems are very hard to categorize on the polar scales of Law/Chaos, Good/Evil

[–]mindlance[S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

If we accept Confucianism as LN (which I think is a pretty good fit), then Taoism, which is so many ways is presented and presents itself as the opposite of Confucianism, seems to slide into CN. A lot of what I've read on Taoism, as well as the fiction that deals with Taoism, presents its adherents of pursuing their own way (which, of course, is their interpretation of The Way) with very little thought given to hierarchies, social niceties, or conventional morality. That sounds pretty CN to me.

Mohism, again from little I've read about it, seems to be to be above all a pragmatic philosophy. If it works, use it, if it doesn't work, get rid of it. Don't let sentiment or personal connections get in the way of getting the right people in the right job. Recognizing the need for good rules without worshipping all rules, wanting to do good, but in a very big-picture, society-benefiting kind of way- that seems to be True Neutral to me.

I think you're one the right track with Eudaimonism for LG. Looking at the different varieties out there, Stoicism seems the best fit for classic LG slot. I could see a paladin of Stoicism.

[–]dregoth151 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Its funny, I started responding in the thought that I agreed with how you put it all.

Then I thought I'd offer alternative viewpoints for some based on different interpretations I could see for some.

Then I started to read up on Mohism more so that I could be sure in my interpretations, and decided that I disagreed with myself. I thought I thought Mohism would be LNish, but instead I think now it could definately be more NGish. So since I'm bouncing around and not actually contributing to your list anymore I'd simply say," classifying some of these is certainly an undertaking ;), goodluck!" HAHA

If you haven't considered, Buddhism might be useful for NG, or if not that, then Jainism (though that'd be rough as heck to be a cleric of)?

[–]mindlance[S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Which of course leads into that weird, squishy discussion of, 'Is it a philosophy, or is it a religion?'

[–]dregoth151 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Haha I was hoping you'd not call me on that one. If you hardline it as Mahayana I mean... all it is is an ethical philosophy based on some metaphysical assumptions riiiight? :P

[–]mindlance[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh, a case could be made, definitely. Hell, I made the case when I chose Taoism as a philosophy.

[–]ColonelKoboldBecause underdogs are fun! 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Kantianism (not sure of the actual name) Neutral Good

[–]pilgrim216 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Deontological ethics, and I think it fits better as LG. Doing things out of moral duty rather than just because it is good and you enjoy doing good things.

[–][deleted] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I would consider Utilitarianism as Neutral Good.

Anachro-communism could be considered Chaotic Good.

May edit later if I think of others.

[–]tikaelGM 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Utilitarianism would be neutral good, rule utilitarianism would be lawful good.

[–]Eain 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Kant is pretty LG, no?

[–]tikaelGM 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Probably, the categorical imperative comes to a similar resting place for most issues that rule utilitarianism comes to. Whether we decide that a rule is to be followed because it generally leads to good outcomes or we decide to avoid a behavior because universalizing that behavior would lead to a ridiculous end the actual results are pretty similar.

[–]Eain 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

True, but I feel like using variations of one theory (rule vs standard utilitarianism) seems a little silly in this use-case, and Kant seems more completely fitting. The catagorical imperative is the poster-child for deontology, from my experience, which is LG to a tee.

[–]crimeo 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Lawful good makes me think Kant. True neutral seems like stoicism is better known.

[–]EknobFelix 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd say Humanism is a decent candidate for Chaotic Good

[–]jerothattallguy 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Revolutionary Communism= Chaotic Good At least in it's goals anyway. it also shows how good ends can have bad means. ideal example: Robin Hood "Take from the rich and give to the poor"

[–]jerothattallguy 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I've always thought of lawful neutrals as Hobbesian but that isn't a massive tradition

Libertarianism seems like a chaotic neutral movement to me with Objectivism getting pretty chaotic evil (greed is good)

Toryism is about as lawful neutral as you can get with the praise "God, King, and Country" justing being soaked in LN.

[–]jadx380 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I feel like egoism has a place on the evil side of the board. The idea of always looking out for number one could definitely fall under chaotic or neutral evil.

[–]mindlance[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I get that, and while I certainly wouldn't put it under good, I would reserve 'evil' philosophies that allow or encourage terror and cruelty in the furtherance of their goals. I don't think egoism necessarily does that.