So i was thinking about Alignments, like those proposed and used in common RPG’s, and it struck me that the “Good & Evil” alignment axis is fairly poorly defined, as most folks only understand an Absolute reality. It has been shown over and over that existence is Relative, and Relational Morality is one of those concepts most folk I have associated with haven’t meditated on.
When a Hawk catches a Mouse, it is Good for the Hawk, and Evil for the Mouse. That’ fairly simple and straightforward, no? So is any act Good or Evil overall? It can depend on who you ask and what their involvement was. This leads me to mistrust the Altruist. I cannot grasp the motivations.
I like the following definition for Good vs. Evil – It is the character’s Outlook on their fellow Sentient. Not a Case by Case basis, but Overall.
A “Good” aligned character would react to NPC’s and other characters as though they expected Good from them. They would trust the common person to make Intelligent decisions, and to act in a manner consistent with traits Selected for Survival. They see the “Good” in society, or their fellow Orc, or whatever. They would expect the majority of interactions to be mutually beneficial, and when someone abuses their trust or takes advantage, they would be wary of that person as they have proven themselves un-Good. They are disappointed when someone shows or acts in a selfish, lazy, hateful or otherwise negative fashion.
Evil would expect the worst, Regardless. Evil’s Outlook believes all sentient are lazy, greedy, corrupt, skanky, useless gits whose termination should come as a grateful surprise, as life is not just hard, it’s a killer. Looking out for your own interests, as no one else will, and Damn anyone who gets in your way is the attitude of Evil, if the above ideas are consistent.