What's the Latest on True Neutral?


Pathfinder Online

51 to 77 of 77 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Scarab Sages

@Being

Your sense is exactly. :D

Could you explain me the holistic and integral approaches of work with knowledge?

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
Cinderwell wrote:
Actually never heard the word "gownsman" before today.

Nor had I, but I've enough knowledge of European university-stuff to grok the fullness. Another great word.

Oddly enough, the easiest language--and one of the easiest things--I ever learned was Japanese. It was described to me in the beginning as "5000 years old, and all the irregular verbs have been worked out".

That's interesting, I figured learning the characters would be a harrowing experience.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:

The Devs have also said that for most people, alignment core and active alignment do not have to be exactly the same and with no negative consequences for being one step askew.

You can be NG core, but be TN, CG or LG active with no negative consequence.

Only Paladins need to be very concerned about alignment. Clerics, Druids and Barbarians a little less do. Everyone else, not at all except for Core.

How can you forget monks?

Goblin Squad Member

Cinderwell wrote:
...I figured learning the characters would be a harrowing experience.

Simplicity, actually. Each word in Japanese consists of regular syllables, and they have two syllabaries--one for native words, one for foreign--with a single symbol for each existing syllable.

When one begins to learn Kanji, the characters adopted from the Chinese, one learns each character consists of pieces with meanings that're easier to remember mnemonically than memorising entire characters at once. After studying for two years, I had enough characters to read a newspaper.

After those two years, I was at about eighth or ninth grade level (for our overseas brethren: 13-15 years old). I always told people to think how well they could speak their native language(s) at that age; it gives a pretty good idea of how far one can get quickly at Japanese.

Sorry for the dissertation.

Goblin Squad Member

Kemedo wrote:

@Being

Your sense is exactly. :D

Could you explain me the holistic and integral approaches of work with knowledge?

I'm it.

Scarab Sages

Being wrote:
Kemedo wrote:

@Being

Your sense is exactly. :D

Could you explain me the holistic and integral approaches of work with knowledge?

I'm it.

Ok. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kemedo wrote:
...holistic and integral approaches of work with knowledge?

Perhaps this wraps some of it up: he wrote a good book.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kemedo wrote:


I can't imagine a non-Lawful long term pursuing of all knowledge. Maybe it's my bias from Irori's point of view.. :D

What's more chaotic than pure curiosity?

Goblin Squad Member

As to TSVs stance on knowledge, I prefer to keep my rationales IC. Our early lore was based upon the philosophy/religion that the Material Realm was composed of static illusions layered over a more mutable world (such as the First World, if not actually some distant or purposely hidden part of the First World). We acquire knowledge from the world, searching for the cracks and inconsistencies in the illusions that will help us identify them as such...in order to disbelieve them, revealing the greater Mystery beneath. Since alignment is part of the illusion, like the rest of the world, we live within but do not feel bound by it. We realize we must sustain ourselves even if we question the nature of that sustenance.

Finally, another reason to be TN is a belief in balance. War might be destructive, but peace can be even more so. Any extreme can be tyrannical without opposition. Fervent LG, if unopposed and unfettered by consequences, would destroy even the teachings of CG and LE. TN, the defenders of balance, are necessary to insure no side ever becomes too powerful nor unchecked.

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
Kemedo wrote:
...holistic and integral approaches of work with knowledge?
Perhaps this wraps some of it up: he wrote a good book.

Have I mentioned how handsome you have grown, Jazz?

Actually you will find a fairly salient exposition in that book. If I'm not mistaken it is even there in the preview section you can read without purchasing.

<later> Checked and it isn't there in the preview, but it is in Chapter 7: Fanatics.

Here is an exerpt:

"Tibs smiled as he explained. "We Aldebari are the descendants of scientists. We examine what is presented to us, through our senses and through our instruments. We note but distrust belief, and continuously test what we think may be. We are never satisfied that we know much of anything. What we worship is the universe. Not our concepts of it. Not our impression of it. Belief for us is the most suspect of sentiments." ~from Modulus Ch. 7: Fanatics

There is Science in realizing that we know not, but continually test. Your belief that knowing is ruled by law is the legacy of a caveman in the dark, listening to the thunder outside the cave, fearful of the wild lightning. Structure, grouping like to like, categorization... each is a refuge, and each is useful, but each is also artificial.

Unless we are very careful to readily disbelieve and disprove the 'Law', then that Law will effectively blind us as thoroughly as the 17th century scientist who proudly proclaimed that all there is to know is known.

Not everything fits the human mind.

Scarab Sages

I guess I will understand our before disagreement.

I was classifing the way of producing (or working with) knowledge as lawful. But a best fit term for it was "systemic". I was thinking about a certain way of doing it by be a form of patern and thus somewhat related to a lawful behavior. Not "following the laws", but following a patern extensively.

But that was my mistake, since even chaotic have paterns of behaviors in some level and they are not lawful for that.

Goblin Squad Member

Disagreement is of critical importance to knowledge. Disagreement provides antithesis, and antithesis fuels synthesis. Without an adequate antithesis knowledge grows somewhat stagnant. It develops a musty smell like old men locked in dungeons rather than fresh dreamers in tall towers.

The process by which we approach knowledge seems quite lawful. But we only get to those laws by questioning well. And the best answers always suggest better questions.

Goblin Squad Member

Questioning, almost by definition, is chaotic :-).

Goblin Squad Member

That truly is a matter of intent and outcome. You can question to create better laws.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

...but those supporting those laws may not consider you Lawful whilst that's your pursuit.

Goblin Squad Member

That does not mean I am not Lawful. It depends on how the questions are asked. Did I try to change to much at once and incite chaos or did I bring about the beginning of an incremental change.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Which is why the group also contains Lawful people. :P

Chaotic people aren't bound to incite chaos. Sometimes they're just not inclined to do and believe what they're told.

In a society driven by the pursuit of knowledge, those of an orderly bent like being able to contribute, while those of a disorderly one can enjoy learning new things and satiating their curiosity.

Goblin Squad Member

...perhaps it is only my imaginative inclination, but I suspect Sir Newton was a fairly curious lad once.

Goblin Squad Member

@KC
That was meant to be but one example. Like I said before intent and outcome are important.

Goblin Squad Member

Feynman was definitely not a lawful type.


Why'm I being responded to like I said only Chaotic people are allowed to be curious or something? I'm saying everyone has reasons to work for a knowledge-gaining organization.

Goblin Squad Member

@Guurzak
How so? I will admit I have not read much of his life, but throughout his life he sought to quantify reasons for things being the way they are. Physics and Math are the greatest laws there are and the quest to understand them....well.

@KC
Not the meaning of my post. It is the second line of your comment I was addressing. It appeared that you were of the opinion that I was saying, inciting chaos is the only way to be chaotic.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
<Tavernhold>Malrunwa Soves wrote:
Physics and Math are the greatest laws there are

...and include the sub-fields of quantum physics and chaos theory respectively.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
In a society driven by the pursuit of knowledge, those of an orderly bent like being able to contribute, while those of a disorderly one can enjoy learning new things and satiating their curiosity.

Order... uhmmm..

I think, Lawful is not about laws, but order. Order in the sense of a structured system or well patterned of behavior.

While chaos is not only about entropy, but randomness, disorder, not possible to pattern or too much arbitral variation in different scales.

While the definitions of the order and chaos evolve thought the systems (from D&D 1 to D20), they tend to separate the lawful to a consevationist and the chaotic to a destructor. In this aspect, subjectively, pursue a well defined objetive is a well patterned behavior, rhus order. Maybe not a suficient pattern to rule every aspect of people behavior, to label him at lawful alignement.

And of course, neighter lawful or chaotic have to be an iconic representation and spreader of those aspects. Well, because I behave of determinated way, doesn't mean automatic I want everyone behave the same way. I can see Order in order/chaos balance while I can enjoy the Chaos in order/chaos balance.

Forencith of Phaeros, TSV wrote:
...and include the sub-fields of quantum physics and chaos theory respectively.

~Chaos theory is a silliest try to ordering the chaos.~ Should say a Barbarian (and then enraged and frenzy kill everyone in the audience)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Always relevant. :)


Heh. Butterfly the Barbarian.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.
T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
I've met no one who thinks English is an easy language. Our habit of stealing loan-words from other languages, if nothing else, is enough to make people want to continue using their mother-tongues.
James Nicoll wrote:
The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.
H. Beam Piper wrote:
English is the result of Norman men-at-arms attempting to pick up Saxon barmaids and is no more legitimate than any of the other results.

Borrowing from so many other languages makes English very expressive, but it also makes our spelling and grammar a hodgepodge of variant rules and exceptions.

Also, one more cheer for tall redheads!

51 to 77 of 77 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / What's the Latest on True Neutral? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Online