>>45100365 I don't know, I'd judge any action morally based on the intent of the actor.
If an action is made with malice or selfishness, then it is evil. If it's motivated by altruism, then it's good. If neither, then neutral.
A lot of people would then use this to justify all kinds of stupid shit, "But my paladin can kill all these orc babies because he really means well!" Fuck 'em. It's impossible to commit an evil act for completely good reasons. It's quite possible to commit a stupid one, but everyone who's ever committed an evil act knew deep down it was wrong.
>>45100523 Still probably evil. Someone worked to make them and someone went to the trouble of preserving them. Destroying a thing just because you don't like it is the same as stealing a thing because you want it. It's acting drasticly one personal impulse or desire without consideration for how it might effect others.
Alternatively, if they were in fact preserved by someone, what if the people who were preserving it were in fact thieves who took other people's statues and then took care of them as if they were their own, though they were not?
>>45100935 Then those thieves obviously cared deeply about those statues or what they represented if they went to such trouble to take care of them. And the fact that those people are breaking them makes the argument even worse - sure, there's no one to return it to, but in that case you should leave it with the thieves or return it to the people with the most legitimate claim.
t's a fucking piece of rock, anon. A fucking piece of rock that some heretic hammered a face on a thousand years ago. It's not important. Unfortunately, some people think it IS important, so you smash it to make sure they have no heritage to go back to but the Prophet.
Personally I think it's genius to destroy the museums. To leave the idolatry of other civilizations standing is a form of moral cowardice; like saying you don't truly believe in the final perfection of your own civilization. 10/10, cultural genocide best genocide.
I think it's stupid because if they conquer Saudi Arabia, then eventually the Russians will go into Mecca and destroy the Kaaba.
Russia's had its eye on the whole Arabian peninsula, bit is stymied by Americans being allied with the Saudis on one hand, and Islamic radicalism on the other. ISIS is clearing away the first, and bulldozing Mecca shatters the second. Between terrorism, religious intolerance, and desecration of historical and religious artifacts, they're building the case for turnabout being fair play.
Not that the world community won't bitch and moan. But they won't do anything else, especially if the oil keeps flowing cheaply. Privately, many world leaders will heave a sigh of relief.
It's not that ISIS hasn't thought it through. They just can't believe that they can lose. And they think, "if the Russians dare, we will go at them with all our might". Except that they're already doing that. Destroying Mecca would shatter Islam into a million screaming factions blaming each other.
If you're a Muslim and haven't done so yet, you should do the Hajj while you still can.
Sad that once Muslims take over the world, their people won't even be able to look at the past and wonder how much better the world could have been. To me, that is what is most scary about that religion, look at what they did in Afghanistan and to the pagans in the Arabian peninsula.
If you could create a spell that forced everyone in the universe to turn good, and follow it up with a spell that killed everyone in the universe before they had a chance to turn back to evil, would combining the two be an evil act?
>>45103231 Well, I ask them if they've done anything wrong. If they have, the goodliest good deed I could do is let the law deal with them instead of an instant execution. If they're innocent, I should let them go.
>>45103339 I find it odd how the LG guy would execute or imprison the enemy, and the NG guy would just let them free. The former doesn't seem like particularly good behavior, more neutral, and the latter seems like the most pansy kind of good that you'd expect from a paladin afraid to fall.
I take it from your posts that you had an argument with a total stranger on a board about traditional games about a subject that had nothing or little to do with traditional games, and from that totally irrelevant and utterly inconsequential duel of wits you decided that an entire section of an anonymous image board has made the horrifying and woeful decision to subscribe to a set of beliefs in direct opposition to your own?
>>45103710 Well, morality is a bit more general and all-encompassing, and right or wrong is more a matter of law and specific situations, and can be a bit of a gut instinct, at least as far as I understand.
So when asking questions about alignment, shouldn't we have to take a moral viewpoint, especially when part of the question is a question of what is good or evil, and we have to think critically about this?
>>45103572 I hate to break this to you, but random statues are not History in some physical sense. You can derive history from them, sometimes, but never conclusively and they aren't history in and of themselves.
Most statues are gaudy pop-art that say little to nothing about events or contexts. And they can always -- always -- be recreated. Don't fetishize marble, anon. It's not healthy.
>>45104022 Some of those statues are irreplacable though, and can tell us a lot. For instance, for a while it took the Babylonians a while to make a proper three-dimensional winged lion that was correct from all sides, so they had three legs to make an optical illusion of the creature having four from most angles.
>>45100365 In a Muslim universe? Lawful Good: those statues are idols, and idols are to be cast down, because the prophet said so (and so their destruction is Lawful) and because idols cause men to sin and risk damning them to Hell (and so their destruction is Good).
>>45106068 It's because ancient relics are irreplaceable.
When ISIS kills random Arab peasants, it's unfortunate, but it doesn't really change anything. The thing about people is that we just keep making more of them. A generation after ISIS is gone, those lands will still be full of people more or less identical to the ones ISIS is killing, and it will be almost like nothing ever happened at all.
But when art is destroyed, it's gone forever. You can't just order a replacement idol from a Babylonian sculptor, because Babylon is gone. What we've got in museums is all we'll ever have of these things, and each time one of them is destroyed, the cultural legacy of our entire species gets a little bit poorer in a lasting way.
>>45100365 it's a chaotic act (destruction of the property of others, destruction of historically important items, vandalism) but not itself evil, I think. I'd have to know the motivations and intent of their actions.
Javert isn't Good, he doesn't believe that criminals can repent or sins can be forgiven. That's why he falls. But he isn't evil either as he doesn't use law as an excuse for more crimes. To him, the Law is the word of God and everyone has to live by it and failure to do so is a mortal sin.
Valjean is Chaotic Good. He keeps breaking the Law, but to do the greater good. He jumps in the middle of the Barricade to save his daughter's boyfriend from dying, but lets everyone else behind.
The real question is what class are they. Paladins?
>>45100365 In no way conceivable is that an Evil act according to D&D alignments, unless they're some type of magic ward being destroyed to let evil loose upon the world. >>45100468 Paladins can, according to Gary Gygax, absolutely slaughter orc children in the name of Good.
>>45100935 The fact you tortured the caretaker and executed him when he didn't tell you where he'd hidden artifacts so you couldn't destroy them makes you CE, whatever your other intentions or motivations, and this includes your co-durkas.
>>45108164 >>45108387 Never saw the movie. Javert is LG, he follow the Law because he believe it is Good and Right. He also believes that once a criminal, always a crimina. When he realize the error of his way, he kill himself because his world his shattered and he doesn't know how to deal with it. Jean Valjean is CG, or LG in a way. He doesn't follow the Law and only follow his heart, but he also follow the word of God.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.