Is this Lawful Good or Lawful Neutral?
shoot yourself
>>47296321
Not until you answer the question.
>>47296311
Fairly certain it's an advertisement, one that's trying to get you to buy something by spinning some shitty convoluted story. I've got an old mini booklet much like this talking about how you've got to stay classy by buying a wallet, then shilling a wallet at you. Seems like a pretty common form of advertising from way back when, and somewhat hilarious to read.
>>47296311
>Randian Objectivism
Lawful Evil, by D&D standards. Follows a rigid code which extols service of the self at the expense of the other.
Any other babby-tier questions?
>>47296345
Lawful Neutral
now go to sleep?but don't kill yourself.
It kind of reminds me of a thing Gygax once said
>>47296345
I'll be waiting for your end of the bargain
>>47296311
LN. possibly even LE. according to the book of exalted deeds, the abandonment of mercy when evil pleads for it is evil. note that this does not mean that you cannot kill people who are attacking you. good should always take priority over law for a LG character. also, read the Book Of Exalted Deeds for all your alignment related questions.
>>47296351
I'd buy some justice desu.
>>47296311
Justice: Lawful Good
Mercy: Lawful Neutral, or Lawful Evil. Maybe even True Neutral
>>47296420
well he was dumb. does he not understand that Good means respect for life? also executing noncombatants is lawful/good? what?
>>47296456
are you serious, or are you making fun of OP's pic?
>>47296435
Pleaing for mercy isn't something that should always be listened to. It's one of the ways to damn yourself in many faiths if you're obviously guilty and are just trying to save your skin as it's sign that you aren't truly remorseful of your actions.
Posting objectivist characters.
>>47296523
>>47296529
>>47296536
>>47296507
well, pleading for mercy/pleading guilty will get you life in prison instead of instant death for most crimes by modern standards
>>47296545
>>47296564
>>47296553
p.s. I recognize that mercy isn't applicable in every situation.you *can* choose to temporarily take law over good in order to kill someone pleading for mercy, but it is a sorta evil action. also, good can kill evil while in a fight, but those who surrender should be spared & captured (think spiderman leaving the baddies to the cops).
>>47296420
Ah, systemic and justified racism.
Children don't remember when genocide was the pinnacle of Chaotic Good.
>>47296345
Is it not a fault of the guilty that they cannot process misfortune without seeing an ill fate brought to those who may be the cause?
It's misguided lawful good. Lawful Neutral is more rational, the desire to be good is emotional. Neutral doesn't care what your feelings are, it doesn't care if you want to see the kid who took your toy spanked. Law is about maintaining order, not making the juvenile and irrational feel better. Retribution for the sake of solace is and always has been irrational.
>>47296482
>using modern standards of what is Good and Evil.
>to describe medieval era
>>47296607
>Pretending a high magic polytheistic fantasy setting is medieval in anything other than mundane tech.
It's a good pic though.
Look at it yourself.
The image is troublingly free of specifics, a typical flaw of this style of sophistry.
Of particular issue is the implicit assumption that it is always (or even often) feasible for a system of laws to "recognize a man for what he is."
From connotations of typical definitions of justice and mercy, I'm going to assume their definition is something like "eye for an eye" "justice", that is, that is that appropriate and correct action when a person is harmed by another is to visit equivalent harm upon the first cause, and therefore mercy would be visiting harm less than what they caused.
This is Lawful Neutral or Lawful Evil depending on context and degree.
The idea that justice is equivalent to vengeance is contrary to the guidelines established by most D&D (and derivatives thereof) materials as "good" (not to mention most real world philosophies of moral action).
(As a funny historical note, most people don't understand that the Code of Hammurabi was demanding restraint with its "eye for an eye" line, not Draconianism. The previous standard having been "If you take my eye, I'll kill you and take an eye from all of your relatives, to make sure nobody will ever dare cross me or my family again". Which of course lead into absurd vengeance spiral feuds.)
>>47296420
I'd seriously like to see his thoughts on the other 8.
It's not a completely invalid line of thinking (and totally destroys my belief of 'Lawful Good as zealous hardliner is a direct result of hating muh Christian parents in the Satanic Panic days'), but I want to know how he'd define the rest.
>Never use alignment in games but don't have kneejerk hatred of it and like seeing discussion about it.
>>47296447
With your luck, if it is one of those packet ads to try and sell you shit, it's probably going to try and hock fedoras at you.
>>47296645
>using modern standards of what is Good and Evil.
>to describe a high magic polytheistic fantasy setting
There. Fixed it for him.
Don't, uh...don't really see much difference, anon.
>>47296746
As a general rule people wont really think about your alignment unless you do stupid shit often anyway, and after that happens it's just sort of your last chance to justify yourself
![Louis_Boilly_Robespierre[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/G0c4Mhw.jpg "Louis_Boilly_Robespierre[1].jpg")
>>47296311
Depends on your view on mercy, which in the way most of us interpret it is a Christian concept. One could also separate between the public and the private sphere, dictating that mercy is limited to private interactions (forgive your enemies) whereas justice is a public affair (make sure enemies of the state meet their rightful demise). That's what I personally do: as hard as it is, it's better to not hold a grudge as a personal entity. However, a state that makes exceptions in the name of mercy is a state that's unpredictable, cannot be relied on to enforce justice and deserves to be overthrown.
tl;dr: Separate private and public.
![A8ai7PI[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/ySIsdZ1.png "A8ai7PI[1].png")
>>47296311
>>47296808
>Go on a rant
>Forget to answer the question
Fuck me. He's lawful neutral.
>>47296808
> Separate private and public
Hegel would like a word with you, and it begins with 'the private sphere is inherently public because recognition of our right to property and freedom requires reciprocal recognition from the state'
>>47296311
Lawful Neutral with evil leanings
![RageFace[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/1qJZFeH.png "RageFace[1].png")
>>47296834
I tried to read Hegel. Tried. Even in translation his work might as well have been written in a secret code.
>>47296420
I can see how in the specifics of a sort of medieval fantasy fun time land his interpretation is correct.
Without ever present police, medical attention and a gigantic legal industry primitive justice systems would rely more on prevention through examples and absolutism.
We struggle to rehabilitate people in the modern world with more resources than people have ever had before, how would more deprived peoples manage it?
They wouldn't. Rehabilitation would be almost always a failure and so any attempt at it would be irresponsible.
>>47296311
Trying not to be an edgelord, but this looks like LN to me.
But, if being merciful means letting someone have the opportunity to show his repentance (to be sure they're not faking it), then denying that opportunity is definitely leaning towards LE.
However, those who spend their whole existence doing evil on purpose deserve no mercy, so denying mercy to them looks LG to me.
>>47296864
I think there's also a theory about why duels developed as a thing in this period. It's more or less "frontier justice", but without the frontier. When the state is too weak to monopolize violence, you need to take care of things yourself. Even the slightest offense to your honor could undermine your authority, so you're expected to rapidly demand compensation (a formal apology) or force one.
When we judge our ancestors, we often forget that we do so from a position of unmatched luxury. Unmatched luxury that almost certainly isn't sustainable.
>>47296858
You realize you can read other people's interpretations and papers on their theory to get a broader understanding, right?
Don't just try to read Hegel straight off the top
>>47296893
Anything you'd recommend in particular? Preferably in translation please, my German is worse than it should be.
>>47296960
Easiest introduction to his work (i.e. basic intro to the text) is Reyburn's article "The Ethical Theory of Hegel", or if you feel like reading something by an actual Jew, Shlomo Avineri's "Hegel's Theory of the Modern State". They're just articles that skim over his work and pull out the important details, so you can read deeper into the actual text when you get to it. It's pretty much akin to reading Wikipedia but with a bit more depth and explanation.
Speaking of which, The Philosophy of Right is the only work of his that was classically translated into English as far as I can remember, so if you get a decently translated copy of that it'll make sense.
Basically Hegel = dialogical process of obtaining more freedom by mutual recognition of rights, property, etc.
>>47296311
Lawful Evil
>>47296834
>Hegel
no one cares what counter enlightenment philosophers think. no one cares what continental philosophers think either.
>>47296858
dont. its a waste of time. hegel is the begining of the suicide of western civilization. marxism, nazism, communism, postmodernism can all be trace back to that faggot. dont stray from the enlightenment. in fact, just avoid german philosophy completely.
the germans destroyed civilization once before, and the west spent 1000 years in fuedal and religious stagnation and slavery as a result. the enlightenment happened, bringing freedom and progress once again to the west. Again, the germans and the german philosophies attacked, first "kulture" which resulted in the european suicide of WWII. Then marxism and communism infected and ruined half of europe for 80 years. then the germans tried to attack again, with nazism, leading to another suicide.Then heiddegarism and post structuralism infected the west as the nazi empire was in its death throes, resulting in SJWism.
all in all, germans and german ideologies have attempted or succeeded in destroying western civilization 5 times.
go back to the light. the light of freedom, individualism, reason, and empiricism
>>47297078
It's like I'm actually on /vg/and I love it
>>47297078
whoops, correction
kulture was wwi not wwii
>>47297078
You overstate the rational freedom blah blah blah dark ages whoopty doo. Hegel sucks and Germans suck though, that much is correct.
>>47297078
You also neglected to mention Martin Luther. That guy was the worst. Europe was ready for a humanist turn in the 16th century NOPE WARS OF RELIGION AND GROWTH OF FANATICISM AND IDEOCRACY ON BOTH SIDES FOR CENTURIES
>>47297078
> the idea that property isn't solely private
It's a legitimate theory. Say what you will about the 'expanding freedom' and dialogical processes, but if property is truly private like Locke and now libitaritards suggest, then there'd be no way to actually advance any sort of society at all. Corporations aren't private, and the fact that you can jointly have possession of property means that it isn't either.
Marxism a shit, but Mill agreed that no one person could hold a complete bundle of rights.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD7EKZ32ODQ
Alan Moore on Mr. A
>>47297088
hmmm?
>>47297136
enlightenment freedom and reason literally revolutionized the way humans live. everything we know today, science, democracy, technology, medicine, etc is a result of it. its the most important thing in human history besides agriculture or writing.
>>47297149
alot of people think martin luther was one of the helpers of the enlightenment. letting people read the book themselves is a major step toward individualism. im not knowledgeable enough to say.
>>47297184
huh?
>>47296311
That's lawful neutral.It's a conclusion that both would come to, but they take a different route to get to it.
This one says "They went against the system that's supported them", so they "deserve" the suffering that comes to them.
LG would say that they had harmed an innocent, and would assess if there was a way to prevent further death/harm. If the answer was no, then they'd die.
>>47296960
Not that guy,>>47297014
, but you have read Kant, right? At the very least read the prolegomena before reading hegel, as hegel was very much in a dialogue with Kant.
>>47296420
>convert evil people to good, then kill them before they backslide so they go to heaven instead of hell
This is genius, why doesn't the real church do this?
>>47297264
>alot of people think martin luther was one of the helpers of the enlightenment. letting people read the book themselves is a major step toward individualism.
Yeah
Too bad he wasGerman
>>47297396
Oh boy, this thread is gonna get good.
>>47297078
>Hegel
>Counter enlightenment
the dude was a late enlightenment scholar
also
>Germans are anti-enlightenment
>Kant was anti-enlightenment
>>47296597
I think I found one of your family photos.
>>47297353
That's basically how the medieval Church did it in the old days. They'd force you to confess your crimes and publicly repent before execution under the supervision of a clergyman, who, while emphasizing the gravity of your sins, would plead for divine mercy on your behalf.
>>47297464
I didn't mean to imply you're not (even if that is a possibility), I was just anticipated emotional shitfest that is likely to follow.
Personally I don't have a lot of issues with their tenets as much as with sanctimoniousness, hypocrisy and vitriol some people demonstrate when acting out their convictions.
>>47297464
Fuck off, I'm not paying for your chicano studies degree.
The problem with your ideology like >>47297484 said is that you're arrogant, condescending "end of history" types who are entirely hypocritical.
Oh but what do I know, I'm just an evil straight white male who surfs through life on a raft of privilege I need to pay for Tyrone's welfare, give up my career options for affirmative action and accept that like, everything is subjective man, nothing is real and my pizza is made out of stars *hits blunt* Except for right wing ideas of course, those are objectively bad and you're ignorant if you even question your moral overlords.
>>47297513
not the guy your talking to but the "end of history" concept was one proposed by a conservative historian/political theorist.
>>47297522
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCB6osB5SYU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWnOes3wQiM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilCmywMin8I
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/10/it-begins-chicago-coffee-shot-hit-with-racist-graffiti-white-people-out-of-pilsen/
http://canyounot.org/
ayyyyyyy lmao
ayyyyy lmao
>>47297430
>Hegel
>Counter enlightenment
yes, isaiah berlin identified hegel as one of the major counter enlightenment figures. he was a major figure of german romanticism
are you trying to tell me that the dude that invented idealism is enlightenment?
>Kant was anti-enlightenment
in some ways was he was, and this aspect of him is heavily cited by following counter enlightenment figures. he adopted alot of david humes shit. kant said that reason is completely detached from reality.
"in order to make room for faith, i crucified reason"
>>47297396
>whys SJWism bad
because it treats people as collectives instead of individuals. as expected, alot of its philosophy comes from literal card carrying NAZIs and communists such as heideggar and foucalt and derrida.
>>47297396
>>47297424
>>47297464
>>47297467
>>47297484
>>47297513
>>47297522
>>47297537
>>47297544
>>47297551
>>47297570
Well, it appears this thread is all but unsalvageable by now. If I was a mod or janitor, I would snuff out the off topic posts and if that doesn't work, nuke the thread.
>>47297570
>Presenting actual liberal arguments in the current year
>S-STRAWMAN I'M ALWAYS RIGHT LALALALALALA
>>47297612
ok famalam taking the bait one last time
>We're all equal, so in order to be equal, I'm stealing all your wealth and giving it to people who have done nothing to earn it
>We're all equal, that's why we can start a political action to keep whites out of politics but if we did the same to blacks it would be literally hitler
>We're all equal so that's why we're going to leverage sex, gender identity and race to give jobs to people who do not always meet the qualifications
>We're all equal so we're going to shit on white people and only white people in college education and make "diversity credits" mandatory
>We're all equal so that's why we're going to let violent dindus out of prison because there's too many of them in there! They don't commit crime it's all whitey conspiring to keep them down
>We're all equal so that's why when a white cop shoots a black man he's a racist but a black man attacking a white man with a machete in toronto screaming 'Fuck whitey' isn't
Are you starting to see the trend here or are you going to keep playing dumb?
>>47297612
Identity politics demonizing anyone above an arbitrary privilege line.
They're slowly turning on gay men, as apparently they're no longer oppressed.
Social justice warriors rifted away from social justice a long time ago friend.
>>47297014
I'm sorry, what does "an actual Jew" matter here?
>>47297648
>We're all equal so that's why when a white cop shoots a black man he's a racist but a black man attacking a white man with a machete in toronto screaming 'Fuck whitey' isn't
You could try to learn what "racist" means. The black man in your example is bigoted, but racism also implies privilege so that's why minorities in the US aren't racist. If you're white and live in Japan and talk at length about hating all Japanese people, you're a bigot but not a racist.
>>47297806
>racism also implies privilege
No. Brush up on your definition instead of preaching
>implications
bullshit.
>>47297806
Just because you renamed it, doesn't mean you changed its nature.
>>47297806
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
Systemic/oppressive/"privileged" racism is but one variety of racism. Both examples are racist.
>>47297806
>racism also implies privilege so that's why minorities in the US aren't racist
This must be bait. Please be bait. No one is this fucking retarded. People with Down's Syndrome are less retarded than this.
>>47297821
>>47297822
>>47297830
>Systemic/oppressive/"privileged" racism is but one variety of racism.
It's absolutely the variety people mean when they say a black man attacking a white man with a machete isn't racist. It's not because they're trying to attack white people or trying to imply that only white people are racist: they're using a specific definition of racism that means bigoted oppression.
>>47297856
>absolutely the variety they mean
And they are absolutely wrong by suggesting that because the black man isn't practicing one type of racism he is not being racist at all.
>they're not trying to imply that only white people are racist
Many people certainly are, though you're right. Some are just ignorant.
>bigoted oppression
Bigotry can be a bias against all kinds of things. Bigotry or prejudice based on race/ethnicity specifically is defined as racism. It's funny that in order to separate race from racism and try to redefine it wholly as "oppression," you end up using an even broader term.
>>47297650
The problem is that a) there's still some intersection on issues and b) there's a frequent conflation of concern with actual social justice issues with being an SJW boogeyman.
>>47297648
>Implying the rich work harder rather than being luckier
Hard work and ridiculously good luck are required to get rich, unless you're born to it, in which case it's just luck. Only a little luck and work is required to stay rich. But an assload of work and moderately good luck are required to stay middle-class. Even more work and waaaaaaay more luck are required to rise out of poverty in less than a couple generations.
>Whites kept out of politics.
Ummm, what? Have you seen the presidential race? Or the voter ID laws designed to keep poor people who don't drive (mostly black) from voting to prevent essentially non-existent fraud?
>Affirmative action
This one has a valid point, but a full discussion of both sides' merits is something that would take more time than I have this morning. It's a complicated issue.
>Diversity credits
Yeah, that shit is stupid. Every raceand culture has more than enough nastiness to go around and then some.
>Let violent dindus out of prison
Citation please? Most work on prison population reduction is about non-violent offenders like potheads, and people who should be receiving mental health treatment rather than prison time.
>Black on white vs white on black
Again, legitimate grievance, that shit is crazy.
>>47297872
>And they are absolutely wrong by suggesting that because the black man isn't practicing one type of racism he is not being racist at all.
I'd argue that they're not wrong, there's just a communication breakdown happening. They're definitely correct under one of the definitions of racism, but anyone who prefers a different definition isn't hearing the actual message they're trying to get across.
>Many people certainly are, though you're right. Some are just ignorant.
Yes, I don't mean to imply that none of them are. It's a bit like trying to discern the true believers on /pol/ from the people just taking the piss out of the true believers on /pol/. They're indistinguishable. Though now you're implying that they're either attacking white people or ignorant, with no room for anyone falling outside of those two camps.
>you end up using an even broader term.
Am I? I think I was, though accidentally because I've been up all night. I should have specified racial bigotry and I apologize for not doing so. Racism as racial bigotry being utilized to oppress minorities is a pretty specific definition though.
>>47297916
>one definition
>a different definition
There is one basic definition of the word racism. Other meanings are secondary or describe specific types of racism. Anyone saying "no the black guy can't be racist here" is either intellectually dishonest or drank the kool-aid.
>no room for anyone outside those two camps
Yes, we are discussing SJWs specifically. Most people who use it pejoratively, which is what you responded to, don't define well-intentioned people striving for actual justice as SJWs.
>racial bigotry
Yes, there's a single word for that, and it's racism. You can just say racism. If you want to use two words for a more specific one, like systemic racism, that's fine. But that meaning does not somehow supercede the more broad and basic definition of the word.
>>47297953
>Most people who use it pejoratively, which is what you responded to, don't define well-intentioned people striving for actual justice as SJWs.
No, anyone who supports any remotely progressive issue is immediately branded an SJW on much of the internet.
I don't necessarily think you're wrong about the definition or racism but calling anyone using a "secondary" definition intellectually dishonest makes you sound like you have no interest on coming down off your high horse, so peace anon. Happy International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia, and Biphobia.
>>47297995
>I'm talking about a group of people I define as malintentioned and dishonest
>I describe a tactic of theirs
>"Wow get off your high horse calling everybody dishonest"
yeah bye
>>47296607
>medieval
>fantasy
pic one
>>47297806
>[blank] can't be sexist and/or racist because they aren't in power!
If someone accuses you of being a racist and your only defense is that you can't be racist because you aren't in power, then you've tacitly admitted that you would be a racist if given power. So if we want to combat racism/sexism, your opinions should be discarded. Even within your own definition of racism you've fucked up.
Thank you for providing a live demonstration of SJWs being a bunch of goobers.
Am I the only one here from a country that has none of all this SJW/anti-SJW shitthe worst thing we have, in the whole "social justice" thing, is the Standing Sentinels, groups of people that start reading while standing in the center of a square as a form of "protest" against basically everything gay, that are for the most part just mockedand is here just to enjoy people insulting each other?
>>47298047
>If someone accuses you of being a racist and your only defense is that you can't be racist because you aren't in power, then you've tacitly admitted that you would be a racist if given power.
Not at all, it means that they don't have any arguments and so they'll deflect the discussion towards semantics instead.
It's like someone telling you that they had their house robbed and you would say "nu-uh, it couldn't have been robbing, it must have been home invasion instead!"
Point is that people prefer to feel "being right" by grasping at irrelevant technicalities rather than seek common language to discuss the underlying issue.
For instance I'd say that both SJW and most bigoted people would agree that it's fundamentally wrong to apply principle of collective guilt or punish an innocent for crimes committed by someone else, but in a shitflinging contest they will both prefer to call each other names.
>>47298107
>For instance I'd say that both SJW and most bigoted people would agree that it's fundamentally wrong to apply principle of collective guilt or punish an innocent for crimes committed by someone else, but in a shitflinging contest they will both prefer to call each other names.
We would rather be right and someone else be wrong than accomplish any actual sociopolitical goals.
>>47298066
>Am I the only one here from a country that has none of all this SJW/anti-SJW shit
What country might that be? Probably something Eastern European.
>>47296311
Could someone post the rest of this?
>>47298130
It's actuallyItaly
MummyChurchkeeps us safe from most of those evil, evil queer stuff, to the point that the only way to have gay marriage (that was literally approved just last week) was by giving it a different name and thus creating additional legal problems, all because we couldn't have those queers have the same word of the natural, traditional marriage.
The local racist party is the third party, while the second has literally no ideas except "we are different from the others, we are beyond left-winged and right-winged, fuck the politics"
>People having arguments on wether or not mercy is good when there are actual gods and magic that are clearly labeled GOOD and EVIL.
>>47298183
>MummyChurchkeeps us safe from most of those evil, evil queer stuff
But not fromimmigrants, at leas not withFrancisin charge
>>47298253
What else could they do after having literally the Star Wars' Emperor aspopeand having more scandals than even Trump? They needed a fig leaf
Also the immigrants aren't a problem either. We have theMovement 5 Starsand theNorthern Leaguethat will defend us against those niggers
>>47298298
>Also the immigrants aren't a problem either.
>Implying
Ever heard of a place called Lampedusa? Literally the only thing saving Italy is, ironically enough, that France, Britain and Germany are richer and thus more attractive destinations.
>Northern League
Because splitting the country in two will solve the problem. The North will only become richer and richer, meaning nobody will bother going past cities like Milan and Venice anymore.
>>47298313
I suppose you didn't notice the sarcasm of those posts
![nyoro_n_by_blue_ivy[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/ccGaaCY.png "nyoro_n_by_blue_ivy[1].png")
>>47298341
I always have a hard time noticing sarcasm in written form
>>47298253
>But not from immigrants, at leas not with Francis in charge
Pope Francis is a moral compass and he does his job well.
Internal security and external security is job of the state.
Murdering people just for wanting to cross a border is wrong.
I'm starting to see people who make alignment threads as a separate and inferior sub-species of humanity.
>>47296311
Lawful stupid. Next question.
>>47296864
People are really shitty at encouraging rehabilitation. I mean, people say they want rehabilitation, but what people consistently actually want to do is torture criminals forever. You wouldn't stop ex-criminals from getting jobs if you wanted them to avoid further crime.
>>47298511
People want rehabilitiation as long as someone else has to pay for it.
>>47296311
LN; I feel like, under this extreme rhetoric, if he was LG he'd be more for second chances.
LE because objectivism is self-centered and rejects all forms of altruism. That said, that speech alone is simply L, and could be delivered by an LG paladin, an NG fighter, or an LG blackguard.
>>47298574
Is respecting other people's egoism and right to live their life as they want and not trying to make them heed anyone's entitlements not altruistic?
>>47297889
>non-existent fraud
>precincts reporting over 100% turnout, 99.9% of it for one party
>Black Panthers blocking the entrance to a polling station to chase away voters
>undead voting
>college students voting in multiple states
>busing in voters to multiple polling stations to cast provisional votes in multiple districts
Nosiree, no fraud here, just ask Jimmy Carter.
>>47297889
>intersection
That word triggers me.
>>47298535
It's partly greed/laziness, but even then people victimise people who've served their time. It's meant to be a case of taking your punishment and returning to society, hopefully now mindful not to do it again, but in practise you serve a punishment, then are barred from polite society forever so returning to crime is the only way to make an income. Yeah, some of this is people being cheap, but a lot of it's straight-up prejudice.
>>47298671
Like I said, people want to rehabilitate criminals as long as they don't have to pay for it. Not just pay with money, but with safety or prestige.
>>47298183
Too bad you don't have free markets and a strong concept of individual liberty, or emigration would sound enticing.
>>47298385
Go back in time and tell that to Poland when German troops cross the border.
>>47297995
>No, anyone who supports any remotely progressive issue is immediately branded an SJW on much of the internet.
Kinda. Things at the evolving edge are always going too far. Everything behind that edge is just a common-sense opinion decent people share. Everyone (aside from /pol/) accepts segregation is wrong, but looking for a reform of how police operate is a crazy and wild opinion, political correctness gone mad. Give it twenty years, police killings are going to get changed, and everyone's going to be really upset about robots or drones or something.
>>47298671
That recently came up in Australia. With a guy speaking on a program where the public can ask questions of politicians...then the media tearing him apart because he had a criminal record from 15 years ago.
>>47298708
That's not 'Just' wanting to cross the border. That's kinda an inaccurate analogy.
>>47298715
We are already angry about drones. Have you not seen all the clusterfucks about them either dropping missiles on stuff or being bought and used to spy on other people by the public.
>>47298746
>We are already angry about drones.
See, I'm right already.
>>47298641
thats chaotic in the gygaxian alignment
CHAOTIC GOOD: To the chaotic good individual, freedom and independence are as important to life and happiness. The ethos views this freedom as the only means by which each creature can achieve true satisfaction and happiness. Law, order, social forms, and anything else which tends to restrict or abridge individual freedom is wrong, and each individual is capable of achieving self-realization and prosperity through himself, herself, or itself.
CHAOTIC EVIL: The chaotic evil creature holds that individual freedom and choice is important, and that other individuals and their freedoms are unimportant if they cannot be held by the individuals through their own strength and merit. Thus, law and order tends to promote not individuals but groups, and groups suppress individual volition and success.
>>47298386
They're not sincere posts most of the time. They know exactly what they're doing.
>>47298782
To be honest, I'm not sure why drones are a special evil. Airstrikes? Oh, hell yeah, airstrikes kill a ton of innocent people, always have done. I completely understand why people are mad about them. But a drone's just an airstrike conducted via remote. It's not like it's got special baby-killing AI on board.
Drones for surveillance make sense, at least.
>>47298708
Well troled, m'lady, 11/10
You even succeeded in making germans look like sole aggressor, that's +10 points for subtlety.
>>47298885
>baby-killing AI on board.
One of the things I like about drones is that they don't put western soldiers at risk (well unless ordered to strike at own position).
The other one is western policy against giving murder machines autonomous AI, which is not something that should be taken for granted.
>>47297544
Come no, anon, we all know people who make an ideology look bad are not true Scotsmen. The ideology is pure and undebatable. Just like communism. Only reason it hasn't worked is because we've never had true, pure communism. I'm sure if we just gave it a try we'd get it to work.
>>47298885
Up until we actually get AI involved, I have to agree with drones.
It's not any more evil than what is already being done. It's just scary and impersonal. But then, dropping a bomb from as high as our high-atmosphere bombers go is already impersonal.
>>47296311
>Mr. A can be defined by your faggot elf morality system.
Get with it man. There is black and there is white. The old 3x3 don't work here since there is a definition only of good or evil.
>>47299138
Mr. A's morality is simplistic and dumber and of course it can be defined by faggot elf morality system which is more complex.
It could also work the other way around, you could define various faggot elf alignments in mr. A's system. In this case you'd lose some nuance though.
>>47296311
Lawful Stupid.
>>47298885
>>47299028
It lends the enemy a dangerous propaganda advantage to blow up whole streets of people with killer robots while remaining beyond reprisal. They create a lot of sympathy for the regimes or groups they're supposed to be diminishing.
>>47299234
I think the issue directly here is that showing compassion is not showing compassion to the other parties. The most extreme example would be a criminal getting a light sentence for his crimes an thus it degrades the value of the criminal's victims.
You can't show mercy to the wronged in this sense, you can only show them justice. And to show justice you must not show mercy, as it's explained.
>>47298647
Got a citation for those that isn't Drudge Report?
>undead voting
>implying fundamental rights stop being fundamental just because you're dead
Lawful neutral
>>47296311
>lawful
>not the law where he operates
It's Neutral.
>>47298647
Non-existent in the places where the laws are implemented. Not saying electoral fraud doesn't happen anywhere, though I should note that both parties have been known to involve themselves in. And even were this not so, the laws are pretty clearly designed to make it harder for people without a driver's license to vote.
>>47298663
I mean it in the mathematical sense, not the social justice sense, actually. But social justice intersectionality is in and of itself an entirely legitimate concept - it just gets abused for the victim Olympics thing that has become so prominent as of late.
>>47296545
Just checking: you realise that guy is a deliberate reference to the one in the OP, right?
>>47298196
>That moment when I take a look at Debbie's facial expression
>>47299337
But wait, that's a pile of bullshit! Lex talionis is not justice. Justice is the victim not being victimized in the first place. Justice is the victim being reimbursed if possible.
>>47296597
Racism is less of an issue in a setting where you can have inheritable particules of cosmic Evil™ in your blood.
Unless alignment is tied to the soul rathen than to the body ; in that cas it's not racism at all. But DnD rules where never clear on that issue.
Is a phoney medicine man considered chaotic or lawful? Kind of like the guy from red dead, selling fake medicine that cures everything.
Sure he's a businessman but he's also a con artist, so it could go either way.
>>47302525
This is not the definition of Justice. Justice has nothing to do with victimization and is only incidentially related with monetary compensation of the victim. The three pillars of justice are Law, Equity, and Autority, which means that the law of Talion is one of the olderst and purest example of Justice. It's codified absolute equitiy enforced by the state or a moral autoritity via punishment mirroring the fault.
Ftr, it's the Theodosian code introduced monetary compensation, resulting in much improved social results.
>>47303955
Why would he be lawful ?
>>47296536
Lex is not objectivist tho.
Lawful Lawful
>>47296834
>be stuck on a deserted island
>No state
>I still have my hut
>I am basically free to do whatever I want
Is privet sphere still public in that scenario? And if it is, does it mean that Hegels statement is incorrect?
>>47297806
>>47297830
>>47297856
Racism is the belief that some races are inherently superior/inferior to others.
Races are defined by the sharing of an arbitrary set of inheritable characteristics.
Ergo, racism is :
>The belief that people presenting a certain set of inheritable characteristics are inherently superior/inferior to others.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Racism is based on purely biological notions and has no social requirements at all.
And since it's a belief, it can be completely separeted from actions.
>>47304395
Society doesn't exist when you're alone. There is no public or private sphere in that scenario.
>>47296311
Justice =/= pain
Mercy =/= injustice
It really isn't possible to discuss alignments without it immediately devolving into pure retardation.
>>47296311
It is lawful evil. Punishment and revenge are egotistic and childish sentiments.
>>47297078
As a History / Poly Sci major who's studied a lot of Early Medieval and 19th century European History, this post is triggering me.
I don't know even where to start. The Germanic tribes that conquered Roman territories in the 400's have literally no ideological or political relation to "Germans" which you are referring to in later history. And they weren't solely responsible for Rome's fall either. The Huns and other Turkic groups were there too.
And to say that German ideologies helped lead to WWI isn't completely wrong, but it ignores France's ideological issues as a major cause of the war. (also Serbia and the Balkans) Also Prior to the 1890's Otto von Bismark's (German Chancellor) Weltpolitik ideology is what kept Europe together and (mostly) at peace for decades.
Fuck I don't want to write an essay. Idk what you've got against the Germans but blaming them for everything is some serious fucking tunnel vision.
>>47304912
But your parents punished you in your youth. They weren't childish.
>>47299279
I guess I still don't understand why, since it's not like regular airstrikes are any more practical to stop. ISIS isn't operating a fleet of Fulcrums: coalition forces basically have uncontested airspace anyway.
>>47299028
>But then, dropping a bomb from as high as our high-atmosphere bombers go is already impersonal.
Yeah, exactly.
>>47296311
>And therefore the victim less than he deserves
Find your problem.
>>47305710
>If anything, blame the fucking Austrians
>>47307507
>Implying they weren't
>>47296311
Ah, Ditko, we miss your special brand of nutty.
>>47297353
Somebody never heard of the Albigensian Crusade.
>Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.
"Kill them all, surely God shall know His own."
>>47302438
>that guy is a deliberate reference to the one in the OP, right?
Not quite. Rorschach is an obfuscated Question (because DC didn't want Moorekilling the character off), OP's pic is of Mr. A, whom Ditko created when he lost creative control of The Question. Mr. A is a lot more hardline than The Question, either because Ditko's views hardened over time or because lack of editorial oversight meant he could write his ideas more freely.
>>47296311
Lawful Neutral. A lawful good character would understand that mercy is a necessary component of justice, without it all that's left is vengeance.
Having read this thread I realized I have a varying amount of knowledge about politics, Objectivism, philosophy and it's all going to either "I don't want to know", "maybe I should know so I don't look like an ignorant Mongolian" to "I know little of it". Which way should I go?
>>47310684
Learn more, ofc, but think critically about what you're reading.
>>47310842
Right. Anything I should definitely avoid?
>>47296507
Supposedly in ancient Scandinavia admitting guilt of killing someone without trying to hide the act or avoid punishment was met with a hefty fine, trying to hide the act landed you exile or worse. In effect that was how they judged remorse.
You assume that you will know whether the plea is true remorse or just a facade, but that's just ridiculous not to mention unjust.
The word objective should mean you're looking at the facts and the cases both sides present you, not saying the victim wants "justice", and obviously the perpetrator isn't remorseful ( just because I can tell that's why) so I'll give the victim "justice"
Not to mention how many plea deals are taken by innocent people, the world isn't as retartedly simple as you wish.
>>47310684
SAUCE
>>47310884
The usual. Anything that does not provide a fairly objective (fnar fnar) view of whatever you're learning about. Anything that seems off. Anything that chooses to deride or ignore criticism instead of answering it.
>>47311065
U'm honestly inclined to wonder how the rate of false guilty pleas has changed over time. In the US, that's mostly done nowadays to avoid expenses and because our justice system is such a clusterfuck you could end up having already spent the majority of your jail time just waiting for your case to be heard (AFAIK - I'm not any kind of expert, I'm probs wrong, but I've heard stories about people spending just under a year in jail waiting for the trial, pleading guilty, getting a year's jail as their sentence, and walking out a week later having officially served their time).
>>47312353
*I'm, and specifically the rate of false guilty pleas that were NOT the result of crooked cops/crooked judges/being forced to plead guilty by the state/etc. Non-duress, I guess you could say.
>>47305710
>david bowie vs. the sea weasels.jpg
>>47304732
Mercy toward offenders is always unjust. Offenses come in different degrees and warrant different responses, but for every offense there is a just response or punishment, and anything more or less than that is unjust. Ignoring a law whenever we want to, without changing the law or deeming it unjust, just because we don't feel like acting in a self-consistent way, is pretty much the purest form of injustice.
>>47304211
He is. In fact, I made an analysis of him on the regular Badkind mauling threads on the ASOIAF forums which I'll post here:
>Thinks that Superman doesn't really care for anyone he saves and only does it to flaunt his superiority over mankind. This is very much the view of objectivists and why every character in an objectivist work that gets described as an altruist would be considered a bad samaritan by people who aren't a part of the philosophy. In a similar manner he can't comprehend that Superman wants to be obsolete and for people like him to not be needed anymore. This is exactly the same as objectivists claiming that altruists want people to suffer because it makes them feel superior to others. It's a rather typical example of an utterly ruthless self-serving person being unable to comprehend why everyone else isn't as ruthless and self-serving as they are.
>>47313945
>In "Lex Luthor: Man of Steel" he makes a bunch of humanist justifications for his actions until the end where he suddenly reverses his position claiming that there isn't a single soul in metropolis that wouldn't have killed the toyman if placed in the same position. This goes together with the Objectivist world view of all that truly matters to anyone being themselves and that all acts of goodness towards others as having a purely self-serving ulterior motive. In addition his enormous ego makes him view all of humanity as stupid, messy, chaotic and constantly making the same mistakes. This ties in with author tracts from "The Sword of Truth" and statements from Ayn Rand that the masses cannot be trusted to act rationally. Lastly, Luthor's claims that no one in Metropolis would show mercy to the Toyman as if that's a positive trait which combines with the author tracts of Mr A who claimed that acts of mercy are at the expense of the victims with the implication that every victim wants to pay back their tormentors a hundred-fold. Objectivists claim that mankind is a noble, rational being but strip away flim-flam and humbug and they really expect everyone to be irrational, vindictive and self-serving. The response to the first is to pretend to be a paragon of rationality and the response to the second and third is to say "I'm ruthless and self-serving, so is everyone else. At least I admit it".
>>47313952
> In "All Star Superman" Luthor realizes that all of his rationalizations are delusions, learning that he could have saved the world years ago if it had mattered to him. This is a lot like the actions of the designated heroes of "Atlas Shrugged" who won't lift a finger to prevent the collapse of the world and even help it along so that they can build it on exactly their terms, collateral damage from their actions be damned.
>From an objectivist standpoint, Superman is evil since he allows and helps evil exist due to his policy of never killing and always saving the villain. He also helps people without regard for if they deserve it or who they are which flies in the face of objectivists only doing good things when it benefits them later.
>Constantly claims that Superman is jealous of him. Quite similar to how objectivists react to criticism by claiming that the person doing the criticism is jealous of their talent.
>In one of Lex's crueler moments, he cures his sister of a disease and then gives it back to her to fuck with Superman. At one point, an objectivist argued on this very board that laying people off to save a few pennies isn't villainous because it is just returning them to a previous state which reminded me of that scene.
>>47313945
>>47313952
>>47314007
That's what objectivists are, not what they want to be. Kind of like "this is not true communism" argument.
Nicely done though.
so you're lawful good for ignoring the law at your own whim and showing mercy whenever you feel like it, and lawful evil for actually upholding the fucking law. lol okay
>>47313945
>>47313952
>>47314007
LE done to perfection.
>>47297078
>no one cares what counter enlightenment philosophers think. no one cares what continental philosophers think either.
REEEEEEEEEEEE
I bet you shit on Voltaire too for being continental, or Socrates.
>>47296311
Depends on that faggots definition of "justice." Might be Chaotic Evil for all we know.
>>47297264
>Germans suck.
Well, thank you very much.
Dickhead.
>>47304191
>The three pillars of justice are Law, Equity, and Autority
Question: What is the just punishment I should mete out to somebody trying to punish me for a law he invented that I never agreed to follow, under an Authority I do not recognize?
(Or in other words: You can't dissolve the confused word "justice" into three other words without then explaining what you mean by THOSE words.)
>>47296420
It doesn't matter how many times this is posted.
It's just as retarded as the first time it got posted in 2005, and it's fucking retarded now.
If you act like this and cite this post in my game I will throw you out of my house.
>>47312808
>but for every offense there is a just response or punishment, and anything more or less than that is unjust
>And I know what that just response is so you should do the punishment I suggest.
>Trust me. Trust me. Trust me.
Take your despotic faggotry elsewhere, tyrants are not welcome here.
>in 2016 there are still """""humans""""" who continue to play tabletop games wherein their mechanics and function are tied to and hinged upon a ridiculous and unsalvageable morality system
Why do you persist? Very first reply to this thread had the right of it. This shouldn't be a point of argument anymore. If you play these games you are dumb. If you talk about these games as if they can make sense, you are dumb.
Stop.
Stop.
>>47305710
>Idk what you've got against the Germans
He's both kinds of frogposter, obviously.ALLONS RIBBITS DE LA PATRIE
what do you call a character who repeatedly breaks the law and takes genuine pride in his ability to do so with impunity?
Lawful Good Paladin.
>>47296311
Clearly Lawful good, how else can a society operate.
>kicking the victims while they're down
That's straight up evil only Sweden could come up with.
Example:
http://www.amren.com/news/2015/07/immigrant-to-sweden-rapes-12-year-old-girl-gets-community-service/
Purpose of the law is to provide some consistent rules for us. If you do this and that, you gonna get punished. The benefit of this is threefold - now being a good person is not as crippling compared to being an asshole, I get guarantees that somebody won't fuck me over and people can trust me to not fuck them over. At least partially.
Failing to adhere to consistent rules on a whim is a step back into realm of anarchy.
>>47315123
>There can't be justice if i don't recognize the authority.
That's another debate entirely.
Also, have you read the entire post ? I gave an explanation two sentences after the part you quoted.
Law = codification (also customs, but let's not include that one to keep it simple)
Autority = state or morals (temporal and spiritual authority)
Equity = mirroring punishment or adequate compensation (equal social value of the crime and punishment)
About your question : It's vendetta, it predates the talion and is usually recognised not to be justice. We invented the Lex Talionis to deal with mindsets like those.
>>47315299
Dunno, french people have very few gripes against the germans, in my experience.
>>47315139
I'm not claiming that I know what it is, but I am claiming that it exists. I don't even know how it can be determined, but if you respond to the same situation in different ways at different times depending on how you feel, instead of depending on the facts of the case, that can't be just. No matter what the just course of action is, it has to be something that is determined only by facts and not be feelings.
>>47311957
http://medabots.wikia.com/wiki/Metabee_(character)
>>47296311
It's autism.
>>47315189
A lot of this thread is discussion, fagtron, not argument. Fuck off if you don't like it, nobody's keeping you here
>>47311065
>>47312353
Plea bargains are themselves unjust. The sentence for a crime should be the same no matter whether the defendant pleads guilty or not guilty, because it's the same crime no matter what. They create a perverse incentive for prosecutors to press more charges and/or more severe charges than can be justified with evidence, just for the sake of encouraging a guilty plea through fear. They're inherently coercive.
>>47296311
The notion that a victim is deprived by mercy towards their assailant is critically flawed. The only injustice born from mercy occurs when mercy comes at the expense of the future safety of innocents.
>>47318531
"Mercy" suggests that it's some kind of special treatment, a deviation from the normal standards of justice. If an act of mercy is ever justified, then the standard compared to which it is merciful is not. The goal of a justice system should be to make all mercy wrong, because everybody is being treated exactly the way they should be and any deviation from that would be worse.
>>47297806
>but racism also implies privilege
Ok this is bait
>>47316396
>I'm not claiming that I know what it is, but I am claiming that it exists. I don't even know how it can be determined, but if you respond to the same situation in different ways at different times depending on how you feel, instead of depending on the facts of the case, that can't be just. No matter what the just course of action is, it has to be something that is determined only by facts and not be feelings.
The FACT of the case is that I feel more mad about this today than I did yesterday. Different facts, different punishment.
Am I doing this right, or are you explaining poorly?
>>47296607
>Going against what is directly said in the book of exalted deeds
>>47296351
It's Steve Ditko. It's not an ad, but an actual comic he put out.
>>47296435
To be frank, BoED was silly, and many angels/outsiders who are literal embodiments of that alignment can't be expected to hold those standards.
>>47296311
If you read the rest of it it is quite clear that this particular philosophy is chaotic evil.
It's lawful good, easily.
It's also the right way to view things irl.
>>47317664
kys
>>47315488
In my opinion he was punished too harshly. Having to do 15,000 dollars worth of work in community service is likely much more costly than an hour with one of the most expensive prostitutes. He should have been forced to pay her the equivalent of an hour with a prostitute which is a much more just punishment than the current feminist imposed mindset of considering rape worst than murder.
>>47297264
>enlightenment freedom and reason literally revolutionized the way humans live. everything we know today, science, democracy, technology, medicine, etc is a result of it. its the most important thing in human history besides agriculture or writing.
Build a wall, and throw everybody who thinks alignment is a good thing to put in a game over it.
>>47301393
>implying fundamental rights exist at all
>stirner.jpg
Exterminate this thread.
>>47310884
Anything that suggests something you don't already agree with.
Anything that advances ideas that make you uncomfortable.
>>47323561
Fundamental rights exist because a lot of people agreed they should. They're not an immutable fact of the universe but they should be the basis of every society.
>>47323561
you wanna grab another look at the picture I posted there friend
also
>stirner.jpg
>all I know about philosophy, I learned from memes
>>47323608
A lot of people don't, too. Why are you right?
>>47323624
>i can't articulate rights or why they exist
>just call it memes
>>47315133
>I will throw you out of my house over a disagreement about an esoteric rule in a tabletop game
K. Enjoy your game full of weirdo autists that overreact to everything, I guess...
>>47323756
You're talking to more than one person
also, posting memes is not helping your case that you are aware of how philosophy works outside of memes
>>47323807
You're not making any case at all, so I may as well meme.
>>47323884
>You're not making any case at all
Yes, that's what I was trying to get at. The guy I posted was Reg Shoe, a zombie from the Discworld series who campaigns for undead rights. I was posting in his voice, as a joke, and you responded to it seriously. That was stupid of you.
>>47296311
Lawful Neutral at best. More like some form of evil using rhetoric or fuck with people.
Justice vis a vis mercy is not a zero sum game, after all.
Nothing is lost by the victim if mercy is given, and so the value of such an act is measured in "Lives saved" versus "Lives Endangered" and "Acting with kindness."
>>47323645
Luckily for me and people that agree with me, there's less of those and they have less power.
>>47296523
Light wasn't objectivist; he just murdered people because it fueled his giant god complex boner.
Ryan is, but the creator of him said his philosophy was stupid.
And Lex is just a guy that wants money and power. He doesn't have a philosophical reason for it, he's just a greedy genius.
>>47323366
Are you even trying?
Setting aside age for a moment, consent is an important part of the process as well. Rape isn't a crime because it's theft of service, it's also that we as a society place value on individual protection from force.
Good thread.
>>47323422
Nice unlabeled (and bullshit) y-axis.
>>47327031
That's what your problem with it is? Not the fact that it has a childlike understanding of history?
>>47327338
>>47327031
Yeah, the biggest unwarranted assumption is that the church was always anti-science. In fact it had no reason to fear science until well into the Renaissance when people started discovering things that contradicted the Bible. Before then, it was perfectly happy to fund universities and all kinds of research. Because they believed that their faith was true, they didn't have any reason to suspect that scientific discoveries would contradict their faith until it actually happened.
>>47328500
Not to mention that the popular idea of "the dark ages" is completely bullshit. For starters, they were called the dark ages not due to a relative lack of enlightenment, but from a historical perspective we know less about the era due to less centralized recordkeeping. The idea that Rome was a period of relative enlightenment and the "dark ages" were backwards and full of squalor with no advancement of society or technology is also full of shit, an idea invented by the Renaissance era revival of interest in greco-roman culture.
You're right about science being secular being a recent invention, though.
Oh, and a bonus reason why it's full of shit: The advancement of mankind amounts to more than just Christian Europe. Given most fedora tippers who make images like that also happen to be multicultist SJWs, you'd think they'd acknowledge the huge advances in science made by muslim empires of the "dark ages" era.
>>47296311
Restorative justice has been shown to be more satisfying to the victim and have a lower rate of repeating the crime than purely punitive justice.
The idea that punishing the guilty is the core element of helping the victim is absurd as well.
>>47328500
Any dogma to science is like a leash. At first it won't really hold it back, but since it elevated random assumptions into final truth, it will eventually start holding search for new knowledge back and eventually either strangle it or snap.
>>47327338
Yes. Because it's bad enough to be full of shit, but bad infographics trigger me hard.
>>47296311
Lawful evil.
>>47296435
>read the Book Of Exalted Deeds for all your alignment related questions.
Literally the worst alignment advice I have ever seen.
The BoED is horribly confused.
It was only written because they needed a (Book of Vile Darkness)*(-1), and they got Christian fundamentalists to do it.
>>47329039
> Restorative justice has been shown to be more satisfying to the victim and have a lower rate of repeating the crime than purely punitive justice.
But it doesn't make uninvolved observers like Steve Ditko feel better about themselves, so obviously it's inferior.
>>47296311
I would say Lawful Good. It is a very extreme moral stance even within the framework of LG, but it isn't incorrect. If you believe that Justice is something that is due to both the victim and the guilty, then you de-facto agree with Mr. A. Most people would have provisions, however.
The question that would usually come up is, is it sometimes acceptable to afford mercy to the guilty at the expense of the victim, if it would be better for society as a whole?
For example, let us say that you and all of society agree that murder is a crime for which the just punishment should be death. You could, despite this, oppose execution as a punishment for murder, because within the legal system there are cracks that would inevitably result in the conviction of innocent men. Since execution is the one form of punishment from which there can be no recovery or reconciliation, the maximum punishment should be imprisonment.
This does, under the above framework, under-punish the guilty at the expense of the victim, but it also protects the people at large from possibly being murdered by the government itself over a mistake. Thus it is acceptable to lose a small amount of justice to prevent a far greater injustice from being committed.
A more extreme argument against this would be that an injustice committed as a result of imperfect information is forgivable, whereas one committed intentionally for any reason is unacceptable, so it is actually acceptable for innocent people to die because of faulty evidence or human error if that means that the guilty never go unpunished when they could otherwise receive their just desserts. These two lines of thinking lead to very different societies, but they are both still concerned first and foremost with Justice, and thus in my opinion are LG.
>>47329039
The study of the actual effects of restorative justice have always been skewed by the demographics of the countries in which such systems have been implemented.
I would preface this by saying that I support the idea in principle.
When you actually look at studies of restorative justice as opposed to punitive justice, you generally get a comparison between countries that have one sort of system, and countries that have another. This, to me, is a problem. Comparing Norway, for example, to the United States, is utterly disingenuous. An ethnically homogenous country with high levels of social trust and an enormous HDI will naturally have lower rates of criminal behavior and recurrence than countries with the opposite, no matter how their court systems function. Japan, for example, still hangs people. Its justice system is in fact notoriously punitive and cruel (the treatment of condemned prisoners in Japan is actually a human rights violation by many observers' estimation) but they still have one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world, a very low rate of reoccurring convictions, etc.
Is this because Japan brutally executes people after keeping them in solitary confinement for years? No, it is because Japan is the most ethnically homogenous developed nation on the planet Earth, has a very high HDI, low unemployment, etc. It is a very successful state where very few people are put into a position where they would commit violent crimes. Norway is similar, Sweden is similar, etc.
But then some would point to Brazil and say "well, look at their punitive system, it doesn't work!" What is the actual evidence for that? Is there a Not!Brazil that has implemented restorative policies and seen a great decrease in crime? There is not. The evidence is in my opinion speculative, and at this point there have been no thorough studies done to overcome this because it is easier for the rich and safe to condescend the poor and unsafe.
>>47332682
>Sweden
>ethnically homogenous
>>47332740
Well, they are.
>>47332682
I like how you claim comparison is imperfect because it doesn't take into account other factors and then go on into committing the same error in claiming that reason why scandis and japan have lower crime rate than brasil is because they are rich and ethnically homogenous.
Human behaviour, and collective behaviour, is too complex to be dumbed down to a single concept, be it their approach to justice, HDI or whiteness/yellowness.
>>47329039
Restorative justice isn't tied to mercy.
And even criminal justice isn't purely punitive since Beccaria.
>>47332740
Please do not remind me.
>>47332782
I do not consider it an error, because there is far more evidence connecting HDI and social trust to the occurrence of criminal behavior than there is connecting the exact machniations of the justice system to it, whereas the speculation as to the effect of restorative justice has been made almost exclusively in societies that meet the same criterion we already have for reduced crime.
And yes, I agree that human behavior is too complicated to nail to any one factor, I am not trying to lay the blame entirely at the feet of any one, but I am saying that while we definitely know that X Y and Z contribute to a safer, healthier society, Q, which only exists in societies that already have X Y and Z, is being touted as a miracle cure by many, who do not stop to consider that Q may be a product of a successful society, rather than a contributor to one.
It is akin to the idea that, because all first world countries have monorails, installing monorails in Nepal would make it into a first world country.
>>47332682
>The study of the actual effects of restorative justice have always been skewed by the demographics of the countries in which such systems have been implemented.
There's been studies within the USofA between states that have otherwise been comparable. Sure, it's a complex system, but look at meta-studies and you'll see that there's a lot of data suggesting that the anon you're replying to is right.
>>47332857
I have read some, and the data is to a degree compelling. As I've said, I support the idea, but like most social policies, the effects of a system should not be considered separate from the means by which it must be implemented.
Consider the number of inmates presently incarcerated in California. The number is 218,000. The average cost of containing each of those prisoners is about 31,000 dollars, by an aggregate estimate.
The estimated cost of restorative care for each inmate has been estimated at about 41,000 dollars (this could potentially be lower if the government negotiated for rates or accepted educational programs at lower than Community College levels of quality.) This is on top of merely incarcerating people.
So that's essentially a doubling of the current expenses per inmate. Assuming that you then shorten all sentences significantly because you expect to reintroduce the criminals to society where their new educations and therapy can benefit them, say, to a maximum of eight years, that still gives us eight years in which the cost per-inmate has more than doubled.
The Californian government spent 6 billion dollars on prisons last year. Under this model that cost would increase to 15 billion, but the total number of inmates would drop dramatically after eight years. Still sounds like a good deal.
The problem is that California's total revenue last year was just over 100 billion dollars. So we're talking about nearly a 10% (there's change so it's probably closer to 8%) increase in revenue needed to implement these policies.
So, is this system worth increasing taxes so as to increase tax revenue by 8%? Would that money be more effectively spent on more law enforcement? Would increased taxes further damage the already fragile Californian economy, alienating and impoverishing more people?
Moreover, what happens when those inmates emerge to find a crumbling economy that cannot afford them the opportunity for which they were groomed?
>>47332857
Problem with restorative justice studies is that they require a victim willing to participate in the program. So they're a bit biased to begin with.
90% of voluntary victims satisfied by the program (voluntary for the program, not the crime ofc) may translate in something like 5% of the total number of victims satisfied by the program (numbers pulled out of my ass, but you get the general idea).
It's like looking only at a vegan training camp to see how many americans think eating meat is bad, in a way.
That said, restorative justice is an interesting element to include in a penal system, even if it muddy the frontier with civil trials.
>>47296545
> there are people who actually think WWIII would've happened in watchmen if adrian's peace through genocide didn't happen
>>47335005
It might have since it's alternate history. But either way, you can't judge choices with hindsight. Adrian couldn't know for sure if it happens or not.
>>47296420
>slavery is Chaotic Good
I don't think mercy is necessarily evil (though it certainly is if you're, for example, knowingly releasing a dangerous murderer so he can kill again), but I do think it's inherently chaotic.
If you're lawful, you acknowledge that there's a "right" way to deal with criminals, and that such a "right" way should not be left up to emotion or individual whim. Even if you decide that a certain criminal should not be punished (which isn't too far-fetched depending on the specific rulebook you follow - think of a starving child stealing bread), that's not mercy, but rather applying the rules with mitigating circumstances. Mercy is essentially when the law (or whetever rules apply to the situation) calls for punishment, but an individual decides that, for whatever reason, punishment is unnecessary or undesireable. That's chaotic as fuck, even if it's done for "good" reasons.
A lawful good character will execute a criminal without remorse, if their crimes warrant such punishment. A chaotic good character, or perhaps a neutral good one under certain circumstances, might let pity or benevolence stop them from doing what's right.
>>47335083
but the thing was that he basically caused the tensions to rise in the first place with his conspiracy.
would the planes be in the air if he never orchestrated his plan?
>>47335349
What's so special about slavery anyway? If I own slaves am I more evil than some "job provider" who treats his wage slaves the same way? Is there a difference to clear like slavery and 8 hours working day is as bad as 12 hours serfdom and 14 hours regular employment?
>>47336261
It's the personal freedom part. If your slaves are free to do whatever they want outside of their work hours and can seek employment at a different slaver if they wanted to, then it wouldn't be evil.
It's also why slavery as a potentially Chaotic Good act makes zero sense, since Chaotic Good is all about muh freedoms.
>>47336565
Slavery only works if there's some law-based framework to keep your slaves slaves.
Good indicates selflessness and striving toward improving the lives of others.
Unless you're specifically robbing people of their freedom in order to help them in some significant way (rehab?) there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of even hitting the minimum requirement for being able to call it "good".
Calling it chaotic good is just one of those cheeky far-fetched stretches that gets guaranteed (you) on here.
>>47336654
I see your point, but "not evil" isn't the same as "good". Lawful Neutral slavery makes perfect sense.
The Chaotic Good comment was because apparently Gygax thought that enslaving people to stop them from becoming evil is typical Chaotic Good behaviour >>47296420, which doesn't make any sense to me.
>>47336565
Is a guy who run a company town, where all people get is another day older and deeper in debt evil? A sole provider of employment can often be predatory, migration away from him is hard and his competition is often as predatory.
>>47336834
You could argue for neutral or evil depending on circumstances and >opinions, but he sure as hell isn't good.
>>47336881
So, I'm going back on my question. Is such predatory practice less evil then just plain owning people? Does it have lead in treatment, like I described hypothetical comparison.
>>47336959
It could still be argued that a wageslave is compensated for their labour and that they're at least free to spend their time off however they want, but the basic principle isn't that different. If the guy running the town is purposely taking away people's freedom for his own profit, then you could easily judge that my the same standard as "actual" slavery.
>>47337093
Well, slave is also, in a sense, compensated. If I fail to provide my slaves food and shelter soon I won't have any slaves.
>>47323366
You are an idiot.
>>47324663
Have you ever contacted MRAs? I don't think it's bait, though I wish it was.
>>47315488
I was appalled by this until the last three paragraphs, because I missed a detail in the first paragraph.
Without more detail, I'd say that the punishment is likely to be reasonable. Wanting more regardless of particulars smacks more of vindictive pandering than actual effective policy.
