# Spectrums: Who is really good and evil?



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I know a similar post has been covered before, but this is my view based on what i have come to believe. Control is at one end of the spectrum, chaos is at the other. Then there are many levels in between.

The only true evil is that with either no boundary or with no freedom. Absolute chaos, or absolute control, represented by chaos (surprise) and necron respectively. By that logic, everyone else can be considered good.

TYRANIDS: Bring everything under their control through constant change.
ELDAR: Adopted a new way of living to preserve a measure of peace.
TAU: Want control of everything, but are open to new ideas and change.
ORK: Fairly inventive (meks), but have a generally routine existence.
IMPERIUM: Again want total control, but willing to accept that war will be constant.

These can all be considered good in their own way. They are all facets of life.

CHAOS: Constant discord, no law, no boundary, no security.
NECRON: Absolute control. This WILL happen WHEN we want. No freedom, no voice, no change. Constant unyielding routine.

In reality, these would be terrifying. 

All of the above races are "mortal." The two below are "immortal." I believe that really, it is a matter of LIFE vs DEATH.

Any other thoughts or opinions?


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Meh like everyone usually says, in WH40k there is no good and bad, and our definition of the word doesn't suit the universe well.


----------



## Coder59 (Aug 23, 2009)

Actually I find that many of the races run the entire range of the morality scale. With the exceptions of Chaos and the Necrons those two are as you states at utterly extremes of the scale. 

However I disagree with the idea of Order Vs Chaos. I would much use empathy as my scale of good vs evil. To quote Robert Jackson the guy who prosecuted Herman Goering at his war trial "Evil is the absence of feeling for your fellow man." Not terribly accurate from the perspective of a galaxy filled with aliens and daemons but since I'm human I have to view the universe through human eyes.

For example The Necrons kill without remorse or feeling merely regarding it as a function and giving no thought to the beings they slaughter. The same is true of the Chaos Legions thus I would say that their lack of feeling and emotion makes them (to my mind at least) Evil. 
On the other end of the scale we have the "Good" guys. Now nobody is blameless in this blood soaked galaxy but I would say you could define the good guys by what they actually fight for. For Instance the Imperial Guard are merely normal humans doing a tough job and I don't believe can be considered evil anymore than modern soldiers can be considered evil. 
However others such as the Ultramarines or perhaps more so the Salamanders will hurl themselves into battle in order to protect civilians and non-combatants. The Salamanders are noted especially for being a chapter willing to battle to the end in order to protect those who cannot defend themselves. Just look at their actions on Armageddon when they decided to protect the refugee convoys rather than accepting more glorious or strategic duties. 

I guess what I'm trying to say in my own rambling style is that most of the organisations in the 40k universe are too monolithic and huge to be considered good or evil (apart from the Necrons or Chaos of course) just as the United States, Soviet Union, British Empire or Roman Empire in our own world cannot be considered "good" or "evil". They are power groups but they contain smaller groups of individuals who can be considered good or evil. It's the same with the other races, for every Tau who's a complete scumbag parroting the greater good stuff there will be one who will fight and die in order to protect an eldar maiden world. It's the same with the Eldar some may be pirates slaughtering the Mon'Keigh for being so thick, while another may swoop in and save a human settlement from the local Nid infestation. Some of these guys may rip people apart when they fight, but that doesn't really matter you need to consider what at the heart of things they fight for not the dogma or excuses they give but the core hard reason. That's why the Imperium is seen as generally "good" even when they go around committing genocide in this Universe that really is the only way they can protect themselves.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I understand your individual POV arguments, Coder, but noticed that you failed to comment on Orks or Nids. No opinion? Or do you find it hard to consider them "good"? Certainly not by our standards, but you cannot really hold them at fault, it is all they know. Necron and Chaos, however, were and are fully aware of what they`re doing and what the consequences will be. Pain, suffering, anquish and death.


----------



## Coder59 (Aug 23, 2009)

Serpion5 said:


> I understand your individual POV arguments, Coder, but noticed that you failed to comment on Orks or Nids. No opinion? Or do you find it hard to consider them "good"? Certainly not by our standards, but you cannot really hold them at fault, it is all they know. Necron and Chaos, however, were and are fully aware of what they`re doing and what the consequences will be. Pain, suffering, anquish and death.


Actually I purposfully didn't address the Nids or the Orks. :biggrin: But what the hell I'll give it a bash. 

The Orks I view as too primitive and childlike (yes I said that) to really be aware of the consequences of their actions. And really their status in the franchise means that any argument about morality or philosophy with regards to 40k really has to leave them out to maintain credibility. Why? Because they were started as a joke and remain in the game because they're hilarious! Arguing ethics and morality over the orks is like Arguing over whether The Loony Tunes understand the principles of government. My stance is to treat them as a random act of God, like a Tornado or sudden plague of Rugby Supporters.

The Nids are a different matter. Nothing like the Nids could evolve naturally and whoever originally created them must have hard coded all the hunger and drive to consume into their DNA lets just hope it was stupidity and not sheer malicousness that made them do that. We also known that the Hive Mind is fully aware and Intelligent so it must understand how sentient other races are. But it obviously doesn't give a crap. 

Therefore Nids = Evil.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Coder59 said:


> The Nids are a different matter. Nothing like the Nids could evolve naturally and whoever originally created them must have hard coded all the hunger and drive to consume into their DNA lets just hope it was stupidity and not sheer malicousness that made them do that. We also known that the Hive Mind is fully aware and Intelligent so it must understand how sentient other races are. But it obviously doesn't give a crap.
> 
> Therefore Nids = Evil.


Without eve knowing why they`re doing it? Maybe they are the last creation of the old ones. Maybe the only way to disempower chaos is to take away all life forms that feed their essence. In the process, they are creating a unified military force that is (probably, I hope) completely under their control, has every aspect of war covered, and has no regrets or second thoughts, only a single minded determination to achieve its goal.

To arbitrarillary call them evil without knowing their story is just stubborn ignorance. I`m trying not to take this too seriously, (it`s a game remember) but the attitude of "that`s evil. End of story" is not one I smile on.:angry:


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Coder59 said:


> Not terribly accurate from the perspective of a galaxy filled with aliens and daemons but since I'm human I have to view the universe through human eyes.


And that is where the problem arises. Humans generally percieve 'evil' ultimately as something utterly unproductive to society, or something which goes against the social norm. But that doesn't necessarily mean such acts are universally and objectively evil, if such a concept even exists objectively.

From this human perspective Chaos is 'evil' because it corrupts, kills and generally goes against human perceptions of 'good'. But what Chaos truly represents is ultimate Chaos, pure and untroubled freedom. Unrestraint and liberty from social burdens. But does make it inherently evil? I would say not, it is a natural and elemental force - shaped by the base desires of mortals - so in this regard its no more evil than the base desires of humanity.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Serpion5 said:


> I know a similar post has been covered before


nah, only 5 or 6.......billion times before


----------



## deathwatch_v (Mar 18, 2010)

Coder59 said:


> The Nids are a different matter. Nothing like the Nids could evolve naturally and whoever originally created them must have hard coded all the hunger and drive to consume into their DNA lets just hope it was stupidity and not sheer malicousness that made them do that. We also known that the Hive Mind is fully aware and Intelligent so it must understand how sentient other races are. But it obviously doesn't give a crap.
> 
> Therefore Nids = Evil.


Coder i'm gunna have to disagree with you. When you say nothing could evolve naturally, i'm seeing locusts as extremely close cousins of the Nids. They move into an area and eat until they've eaten everything and then move on. Also Humans, we act very much like Nids. Although we haven't yet consumed all the resources on our planet, we will eventually, and then we will move on (plans to Terra form mars anyone). We, as a race have not considered what will happen to all the other species (until recently, and even now most of us don't care about whales or endangered animals) on our planet. And in an incredibly hostile future like the 41st millennium you could see our conscience being bred out of us easily when faced with our species extinction.

The human races leader in the future will be just like the hive mind, sending us worker humans out to collect resources from around our galaxy sustaining our species but would we really care about any of the other races???


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Evil in Spectrum?

Um, well let's see. Captain Black is pretty evil, he keeps trying to kill loads of earthlings and stuff.

Captain Scarlet and Blue are probably at the other end, as the good guys. They are blatantly homosexual, but this is the 21st century and doesn't stop them being good.

Colonel White is probably slightly good, he keeps telling people to do stuff but doesn't do it himself, just sits in his base. Pussy.

Lieutenant Green is probably an evil person, deep down inside... just look at his hair! EVIL!!!

The Angels are pretty good, but I'd love to "corrupt" them... C'mere Destiny, I'll help you taste the rainbow...

Yeah. Spectrum Good and Evil. My 2 cents.

:laugh:


----------



## StargateNerd (Mar 25, 2010)

I always say that in 40k, there are evil races, and a little less evil races


----------



## The Thunder of KayVaan (Jun 19, 2009)

The more i think about it, the more i think that not one race is good or evil. But the main problem is that i can not see it through the perspective of that person/deamon/xenos 's eyes.

im mean lets take the nid Lictor. it is being told what to do and has lived and been taught in one way. If i was born and told that marshmellows were alive but if anyone saw them then they didn't move or make a sound, i would believe it as no one else has infulenced my mind onthe matter.

Just my pound and a pence :victory:


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Sethis said:


> Lieutenant Green is probably an evil person, deep down inside... just look at *his* hair! EVIL!!!


or Her hair


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

My general understanding of the 40k universe is that Chaos/necrons/tyranids are inhuman monsters, and the rest of the factions can be described at best as nazies. The reason most are having trouble applying our human morality to 40k is the simple fact 40k is a horrible place where genocide is a accepted means of defense. I mean we can wax philosophic, and change the facts, but any act of intentional murder/aggression any case, but when its compleatly nessecarry is evil, and most armies in 40k go out looking for excuses to kill peaple.


----------



## Coder59 (Aug 23, 2009)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> From this human perspective Chaos is 'evil' because it corrupts, kills and generally goes against human perceptions of 'good'. But what Chaos truly represents is ultimate Chaos, pure and untroubled freedom. Unrestraint and liberty from social burdens. But does make it inherently evil? I would say not, it is a natural and elemental force - shaped by the base desires of mortals - so in this regard its no more evil than the base desires of humanity.


Hmmm I wouldn't offend you for the world COE but that strikes me as Semantics. Yes the raw potential of Chaos is Freedom. But...

"Freedom of the type craved by Angron was an empty existence. Removed of all measure and boundrey so that no act had meaning because it served no end." Corax: Raven's Flight.

Yes Chaos represents absolute Freedom but in a way those who fall to it are eternally bound to never serve a purpose never to have a goal other than to tear down and destroy and create more chaos. They'll never build, never create, never imagine or dream without those things being funneled into the "freedom" to destroy. In the same way they'll never know what it means to Love, to connect and empathise with other people. In many ways their "freedom" means that they're even more enslaved and pitiable than the lowest engine serf on a battleship.

So yes while the primal energy of the Warp may be free from motive those we call the "Forces of Chaos" are most certainly in no way shape or form anything other than evil. Claiming that "Oh yeh but maybe they have to be that way because the Imperium are such Douchebags" is a very one sided argument. We know that the Imperium used to be a far more tolerant liberal regime. It wasn't until the aftermath of the Heresy which was started thanks to the forces of Chaos that the brutal theocracy we know and love was created in response to the threat posed by Chaos. If anybody is to blame for the current state of the Imperium which they supposedly rebel against it's them! 
For Chaos warriors to scream out that the Imperium drove them to their actions is a but weak hollow excuse. They all had the chance to turn away from the darkness the fact that they didn't goes to show they didn't care enough about what they were supposedly fighting for and put their own ambitions and (in some cases) quite petty desires above all other things.

In short they're fighting for nothing more than mindless self indulgence and they'll kill anybody who gets in their way or tries to stop them. That's pretty damn evil in my book.



Serpion5 said:


> Without eve knowing why they`re doing it? Maybe they are the last creation of the old ones. Maybe the only way to disempower chaos is to take away all life forms that feed their essence. In the process, they are creating a unified military force that is (probably, I hope) completely under their control, has every aspect of war covered, and has no regrets or second thoughts, only a single minded determination to achieve its goal.
> 
> To arbitrarillary call them evil without knowing their story is just stubborn ignorance. I`m trying not to take this too seriously, (it`s a game remember) but the attitude of "that`s evil. End of story" is not one I smile on.:angry:


Eeeerrrrmmmmm no. The Nids are from outside the galaxy so I can't really see why the nids would be their creation. Also the timelines don't add up. It would take BILLIONS of years for the Tyranids to cross the pan galactic gulf. Which means that technically they would have to be far older than the Old Ones and the Necrons since they died out Millions of years ago. 

It might strike you as Ignorant but the Nids to me come off as Evil. At best they're a Bio-Weapon that got away from sombody. At worst they're a Plauge a Galactic disease or the creation of utter insanity. You don't really need to know their story you can judge them on their actions. Anything else is just making up excuses.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Coder59 said:


> Hmmm I wouldn't offend you for the world COE but that strikes me as Semantics. Yes the raw potential of Chaos is Freedom. But...
> 
> "Freedom of the type craved by Angron was an empty existence. Removed of all measure and boundrey so that no act had meaning because it served no end." Corax: Raven's Flight.
> 
> Yes Chaos represents absolute Freedom but in a way those who fall to it are eternally bound to never serve a purpose never to have a goal other than to tear down and destroy and create more chaos. They'll never build, never create, never imagine or dream without those things being funneled into the "freedom" to destroy. In the same way they'll never know what it means to Love, to connect and empathise with other people. In many ways their "freedom" means that they're even more enslaved and pitiable than the lowest engine serf on a battleship.


Maybe so, but that doesn't mean its inherently evil.



Coder59 said:


> Claiming that "Oh yeh but maybe they have to be that way because the Imperium are such Douchebags" is a very one sided argument.


Whose claiming that? 



Coder59 said:


> We know that the Imperium used to be a far more tolerant liberal regime.


I wouldn't go that far, even during the Great Crusade it was still a harsh and vile regime. Full of hypocrisy and ruled by an apparent crazed tyrant. 



Coder59 said:


> It wasn't until the aftermath of the Heresy which was started thanks to the forces of Chaos that the brutal theocracy we know and love was created in response to the threat posed by Chaos.


Indeed. But you _could_ easily argue that the Horus Heresy occured merely in self-defence.



Coder59 said:


> For Chaos warriors to scream out that the Imperium drove them to their actions is a but weak hollow excuse. They all had the chance to turn away from the darkness the fact that they didn't goes to show they didn't care enough about what they were supposedly fighting for and put their own ambitions and (in some cases) quite petty desires above all other things.


But calling the Chaos Astartes evil is very different from calling the Chaos Gods evil. In most cases the Astartes willingly chose to turn from the Emperor (so you have much more of a leg to stand on if you want to label them evil), the Chaos Gods act as they do because they have no choice. They are the manifestations of the galaxy's most prominent emotions/thoughts/actions. Khorne cannot not kill people, because he literally _is_ rage, anger and bloodshed. If he is evil, then anger in itself is evil. I think most people would agree that in order to be described as 'evil' at the very least you need free will and autonomy, something which *in this regard* the Chaos Gods do not have.



Coder59 said:


> You don't really need to know their story you can judge them on their actions. Anything else is just making up excuses.


But the problem there is that your judging their actions based from a human perspective. Humanity may see them as evil because they kill and devour. So by that you could label them as evil in a subjective sense, from a human viewpoint. But to call them universally evil is fraught with problems. Only if there is a universal morality, which the Tyranids oppose/go against can we then describe them as immoral/evil. Otherwise they are only evil according to humans who percieve them as such, and then its really only down to opinion.


----------



## Coder59 (Aug 23, 2009)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> Whose claiming that?


They and many who play them claim this :biggrin:



Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> I wouldn't go that far, even during the Great Crusade it was still a harsh and vile regime. Full of hypocrisy and ruled by an apparent crazed tyrant.


Ah but it was certainly better than the current state of the Imperium in the 41st Millenium. 



Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> Indeed. But you _could_ easily argue that the Horus Heresy occured merely in self-defence.


Errrmmm Only if you argue from the narrow self interested view of the Chaos Powers. If you're talking about the actual people who rebelled during during the heresy then really they didn't have much of a leg to stand on...particularly Horus who it would seem believes just about everything you tell him. Actually that might be a way to have stopped the heresy.

"Hey Horus theres a bunch of Aliens beyond the galactic rim who think you're too fruity to be warmaster"
"What! I'll show them! YYYAARRRGGGHHH!" *leads his fleet out of the galaxy and gets lost then eaten by Tyranids* 



Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> But calling the Chaos Astartes evil is very different from calling the Chaos Gods evil. In most cases the Astartes willingly chose to turn from the Emperor (so you have much more of a leg to stand on if you want to label them evil), the Chaos Gods act as they do because they have no choice. They are the manifestations of the galaxy's most prominent emotions/thoughts/actions. Khorne cannot not kill people, because he literally _is_ rage, anger and bloodshed. If he is evil, then anger in itself is evil. I think most people would agree that in order to be described as 'evil' at the very least you need free will and autonomy.


That's because the Chaos Gods are more manifestations of the darker aspects of the mortal psyche rather than sentient beings. In a lot of ways they're subservient to mortals rather than the other way around.




Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> But the problem there is that your judging their actions based from a human perspective. Humanity may see them as evil because they kill and devour. So by that you could label them as evil in a subjective sense, from a human viewpoint. But to call them universally evil is fraught with problems. Only if there is a universal morality, which the Tyranids oppose/go against can we then describe them as immoral/evil. Otherwise they are only evil according to humans who percieve them as such, and then its really only down to opinion.


We can argue that HUmans do indeed see them as evil. But I bet if you got the Tau the Eldar and all the other sentient races (apart from the Orks who would think the Tyranids are fun play pals) I'm betting they would all say the same thing Tyranids = Evil. It's pretty hard not to look at a parasitic race which is treating the galaxy like a giant Buffet and think "oh they can't help it."

Why are people trying to Justify the actions of a galactic scale tick infestation?:shok:


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 27, 2010)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> And that is where the problem arises. Humans generally percieve 'evil' ultimately as something utterly unproductive to society, or something which goes against the social norm. But that doesn't necessarily mean such acts are universally and objectively evil, if such a concept even exists objectively.
> 
> From this human perspective Chaos is 'evil' because it corrupts, kills and generally goes against human perceptions of 'good'. But what Chaos truly represents is ultimate Chaos, pure and untroubled freedom. Unrestraint and liberty from social burdens. But does make it inherently evil? I would say not, it is a natural and elemental force - shaped by the base desires of mortals - so in this regard its no more evil than the base desires of humanity.


I agree that chaos in its actual definiton is not evil and one of the forces of nature that helps maintina equilibrium. However, Chaos in 40k terms is a different concept. 

In a way, its not chaos at all, but corruption and the destruction of natural equilibrium. Basically the warp reflects the psychic emotions of individuals and these emotions (if enough individuals continually produce them) form into concious entitys becomeing gods. In that way, what are normal and productive aspects of everyday life, become corrupted and dominant. So for example, the emotions of anger and hatred can motivate and encourage people to prevent things from happening. Instead they form into a God of blood shed who is determined to get everyone stuck in eternal wars of hatred.

Likewise, decay and things ending are natural and necessary for newe life to thrive and change to happen. Part of building life involes the breaking down and changeing of old life. But this aspect is then parodied and mirrored with chaos, so that only decay and breakdown occurs.

Chaos is simply a parodied reflection of human emotions and societys, stuck on its extremes. In this sense it is evil, but for it to exsist it requires these emotions to be allowed to run riot. So for chaos to exist in its current form and not simply burn itself out, it needs the continuance of the imperium to produce the emotions it feeds on.

I always liked the ideas of the radical inquisitors. Namely that chaos needed to be fought against, but was in essence neutral. The tools of chaos could be reversed and turned against it because anyone could use the warp. they also argued that the very basis of the Imperiums power was based upon the use of the warp and chaos (i.e. navigators, warp travel, the ability to communicte, the Emperoro being a powerful psychic and so on).

It is also interesting that the very basis of the Emperor being a god and his followers being able to use his powers, is dependant upon the warp working on peoples emotions in exactly the same way as it does with chaos.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Coder59 said:


> Ah but it was certainly better than the current state of the Imperium in the 41st Millenium.


True 



Coder59 said:


> Errrmmm Only if you argue from the narrow self interested view of the Chaos Powers. If you're talking about the actual people who rebelled during during the heresy then really they didn't have much of a leg to stand on...particularly Horus who it would seem believes just about everything you tell him. Actually that might be a way to have stopped the heresy.
> 
> "Hey Horus theres a bunch of Aliens beyond the galactic rim who think you're too fruity to be warmaster"
> "What! I'll show them! YYYAARRRGGGHHH!" *leads his fleet out of the galaxy and gets lost then eaten by Tyranids*


:biggrin: yeah sorry I was referring to the Chaos Gods rather than Horus or the Chaos Legions.



Coder59 said:


> That's because the Chaos Gods are more manifestations of the darker aspects of the mortal psyche rather than sentient beings.


I disagree there. The Chaos Gods are the manifestations of the mortal psyche pushed to what the mortals base desires truly wish. Love for example is pushed its extreme, becoming mere lust and excess, for that is arguably what the base psyche ('Id') actually desires. Hope becomes flippant and constant change. Any sense of Honour or martial pride is pushed to rage and anger (and so on).

Its not that these things are evil or even 'darker' as you said. They just represent what truly free (from social burdens etc) and natural mortals would long for. And yes these things obviously have to be suppressed in order for human culture and society to function (it gets a bit Freudian here!) but they are ultimately what our base desires yearn for.



Coder59 said:


> In a lot of ways they're subservient to mortals rather than the other way around.


Yeah, its plays out like a cycle really:

"...So the circle is established, with Man's follies feeding the Chaos Gods and the Chaos Gods encouraging Man to further follies." - Page 23 CDC.



Coder59 said:


> It's pretty hard not to look at a parasitic race which is treating the galaxy like a giant Buffet and think "oh they can't help it."


Indeed. But thinking about it do the Tyranids truly have free will? (for how can you describe something as 'evil' if they dont have free will) - They are *essentially* controlled by the Hive Mind are they not? And if not that then they act purely out of instinct.



Bakunin said:


> Chaos is simply a parodied reflection of human emotions and societys, stuck on its extremes. In this sense it is evil, but for it to exsist it requires these emotions to be allowed to run riot. So for chaos to exist in its current form and not simply burn itself out, it needs the continuance of the imperium to produce the emotions it feeds on.


Aye. But again I would find it a struggle to call such a thing inherently evil. Humans may well percieve it as an evil force because it cannot coexist with established and 'civilised' norms, but in essence it as you said just reflects the emotions, thoughts and actions of mortals. 

Personally, to describe something as 'evil' at the very least they would need Free Will - and I think most people would agree with that.

Now you could argue that the Chaos Gods don't have free will at all. They are not only utterly enslaved to their respective emotions, but actually are said emotions incarnate. Khorne is not an entity which experiances anger or hate, he literally _is_ anger and hate. He cannot not kill people or cause as much bloodshed as possible - because thats what he is with every single fibre of his being. He does not have the choice to show mercy or to not cause bloodshed, he has to.

This is further enforced by the fact that the Chaos Gods are natural occurences, just as much as humanity. They are wild and elemental, but I cannot bring myself to describe them as evil - because they represent the base desires of mortals, regardless or not if it is productive towards society.


----------



## K3k3000 (Dec 28, 2009)

Good:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Evil: Everything and everybody.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

K3k3000 said:


> Good:
> -
> -
> -
> ...


You uh... don`t quite seem to grasp the context of a SPECTRUM! So by your (narrow) logic, chaos is as good as tau? Eldar are as barbaric as orks? The imperium is as friendly as the necrons?

Stop wasting thread space:nono:


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

I believe good and evil are a matter of perspective. Although I would have to say tyranids are not evil, they are neutral. As animalistic beings they can neither be good nor evil since they only operate on basic animal instics, this would mean they they would be moraly neutral (being neither good nor evil.) Other than maybe orks, all of the other 40k races could be considered to be evil in some way shape or form.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Serpion5 said:


> You uh... don`t quite seem to grasp the context of a SPECTRUM! So by your (narrow) logic, chaos is as good as tau? Eldar are as barbaric as orks? The imperium is as friendly as the necrons?


Actually those comparisons are just another matter of perspective, and may well be true to some people. Eldar are as barbaric as Orks? Why not, they would kill millions of humans to save a single Eldar, the Orks were created with the genetic code and the Waaagh! to simply fight - that is what they were designed to do. The Eldar on the other hand have more of a free choice, yet still act in savage ways. And as for the Orks being barbaric, they may seem so from the perspective of the Eldar for example (but they think everyone but themselves are barbarian upstarts anyway) but this quote is interesting:
_
"The Orks are the pinnacle of creation. For them, the great struggle is won. They have evolved a society which knows no stress or angst. Who are we to judge them? We Eldar who have failed, or the Humans, on the road to ruin in their turn? And why? Because we sought answers to questions that an Ork wouldn't even bother to ask! We see a culture that is strong and despise it as crude."_


----------



## K3k3000 (Dec 28, 2009)

Serpion5 said:


> You uh... don`t quite seem to grasp the context of a SPECTRUM! So by your (narrow) logic, chaos is as good as tau? Eldar are as barbaric as orks? The imperium is as friendly as the necrons?
> 
> Stop wasting thread space:nono:


Excuse you?

First of all, the topic title reads "Spectrums: Who is really good and evil?" I wasn't aware barbarism and friendliness were qualifiers for evil or good. 

But since you, rather rudely, demand elaboration, I'll provide it. Yes, basically all sides are roughly as evil as one another. Virtually every side commits mass genocide in the name of their petty ideals. Virtually every side is completely callous and uncaring toward their fellow life form. 

The Imperium demands abject servitude to their tyrannical regime and providing anything less is a crime punishable by death. The eldar are a race of genocidal bigots who continue to sacrifice and manipulate countless lives rather than face the fate they created for themselves. The tau are rumored of brainwashing the masses to selflessly give themselves up to the greater good, a philosophy that probably doesn't translate to "what's good for everyone" so much as "what's good for the Ethereals." The necron kill and slaughter to feed their gluttonous gods, who could survive completely on a vegetarian diet of stars, and the chaos cultists are similarly vile in their worship of beings most of them don't even beging to understand. The Orks were basically created to be a race of perfect homicidal loons and fulfill this role to a tee. The only beings exempt from this immorality would be the animalistic tyranids, which itself is arguable since it's driven by an intelligent and rationing hive mind, and the chaos powers, which CotE has made a rather compelling argument for. An argument I don't quite agree with, but a compelling one nonetheless.

Nothing in the 40K universe has any claim to morality whatsoever, and they all fall so close together on the spectrum that differentiating between them is as pointless as differentiating between two snow flakes.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

OK I have been watching this thread for a while and no offense Serpion5, but half of the posts your encountering counter, or irrelevant to your own perspectives what factions are good and evil, is your own god damn fault.

I mean in any sensible F%%%ing debate where a vaguely defined concept like good, and evil is introduced you have to set up a operational definition of what your view of defining good or evil is. I mean Christ it would be like me going up to you and asking do you think ob over their is a manly man, firstly many different cultures have completely different F&%&ing definitions of what being a man is making, hence making the whole question idiotic.

Now if you establish criteria for such a vague concept as good, and evil such as what their goals are, or the cost to others vs the benefit to their own people then one could have a rational discussion, but at the moment no one else has any god damn idea how your defining these concepts since you seem to keep flip flopping on how your defining them. Which is often what people do when they are trying to corner people into their own understanding of the topic rather then genuinely asking for their perspective.


----------



## Helvron (Jan 4, 2010)

Orks= Force of Nature
Necrons= Evil
Chaos= Evil
Imperium= good
Tau= Evil
Tyranid= force of nature
Eldar= fickle Good guys
Dark Eldar= Evil

from 1 to 8 1 being the paragon and 8 being absolute Evil
1-Imperium
2-Eldar
3-Tau
4-Orks
5-tyranids
6-Darkeldar
7-Necron
8-Chaos

In Sectrum Form
View attachment 5781

click to get Bigger picture so you can read it.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

LukeValantine said:


> OK I have been watching this thread for a while and no offense Serpion5, but half of the posts your encountering counter, or irrelevant to your own perspectives what factions are good and evil, is your own god damn fault.
> 
> I mean in any sensible F%%%ing debate where a vaguely defined concept like good, and evil is introduced you have to set up a operational definition of what your view of defining good or evil is. I mean Christ it would be like me going up to you and asking do you think ob over their is a manly man, firstly many different cultures have completely different F&%&ing definitions of what being a man is making, hence making the whole question idiotic.
> 
> Now if you establish criteria for such a vague concept as good, and evil such as what their goals are, or the cost to others vs the benefit to their own people then one could have a rational discussion, but at the moment no one else has any god damn idea how your defining these concepts since you seem to keep flip flopping on how your defining them. Which is often what people do when they are trying to corner people into their own understanding of the topic rather then genuinely asking for their perspective.



Pretty hard not to take offense, but I can see your point. Very well, I`m trying to see things from each individual race`s POV if that is possible befor I judge them. Everyone is accountable in a way, and somewhat justifyable in their actions.
Tyranids hunger, Orks aggravate, Humans colonise, Tau explore, and Eldar do what they can to survive. All of these things are only natural to the races they represent. 
It`s probably my fault, using an idea to rate good vs evil from a source I doubt any of you would have even heard of (forgive me if I`m wrong, I`m referring to Conclave of Shadows). In that source, the mortal races inhabit a world between many others, each one getting closer to one end of the evil spectrum. Chaos or Control.
Let me rephrase my question to prevent anyone else having a go at me (or vice versa, I`m sorry).

WHERE DO YOU THINK THESE RACES FIT ON THE SCALE, WITH CHAOS ON ONE END, AND NECRON ON THE OTHER.

Here is how I rate it, agree or disagree.

CHAOS-----------------------------------------CONTROL
Daemons-CSM-DE-Ork-Eldar-Tau-Tyranid-Imperium-Necron

Therefore, I would rate Eldar as closer to being good. etc.

I`ll try to be clearer in future, LV. But in the meantime, rather than revive a dead thread that i couldn`t even find, I thought I`d have a go at making one myself according to my own views? Isn`t that the point of a forum? To share and argue your views on this hobby we all share interest in? Debate said issues if you don`t agree? You`re entitled to your opinion of course, but that doesn`t mean I give a shit.:ireful2:

Everyone else, sorry for the misunderstanding again.:victory:


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

And let me add that I`m referring to races in general. I`m well aware that an individual`s viewpoint can differ greatly from his or her peers, but that`s not what I`m asking, this is just a general question.


----------



## Scholtae (Aug 16, 2010)

Taking Serpion's revised context into account if chaos is at one end of the spectrum, then orks would be closest on the left(chaos), next to tyranids and the dark eldar. Then we come to the centre, with the eldar then heading out right(necrons) we have first the stagnating imperium, then the mind controlling tau and finally the necrons.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Heres the Fact as far as Armies go.

Good to Bad

Eldar, they actually tried to tell Fulgrim and Alpha Legion of the coming Heresy. They help other Races if it suits them without trying to backstab. They have a sense of Honor. Yes they value our lives as little, but the way the Imperium is who blames them?

Certain CSM Chapters, Dare I say Ultras, Sallies, Soul Drinkers, SWs, and many others have shown complete self sacrifice for the common man. Belive in Humanity even if they themselves are above it. Still Bias on Xenos and Mutants that are not bad.

Imperium/Admech/Inquisition..... There more BIAS and SELFG SERVING people in these categories than even the SMs, but they do have Characters that are truly self sacrificing.

Tau, they at the least try to make friends with other races. The bad side is that they dominate them like slaves in the end. Communist.

Orks are truly a Force of Nature and Instincts, but aggressive beast just the same.

Nids are Locust, no self thought. The Hive Mind however does think and thus is pretty evil in its complete self serving needs.

CSMs, Not ALL CSMs are evil or even that bad. Blood Gorgons, Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Violaters, ect have shown to be superior to common man and mutant... but will not needlesly kill their servants on a whim. However others like WBs, WEs, IWs, Skull Takers, are just flat out wrong and mean. Respect nothing and self destructive to anything but their own goals.

Dark Eldar, they have NO respect for anything not DE, and even then they have little respect for eachother. Forget about not being a DE, your screwed.

Necrons, they have a General HATE for the living and despies life. Hundred Percent Self Serving.

Daemons, the absolute worst and totaly self destructive. They cannot survive without corrupting the Material Universe. So self destructive that if Horus won and plunge all into Chaos it would burn itself out like a fire. Totaly EVIL and Self Serving. No Unity except with the Emperor. Great Game is constant undermining. _However_ I would say at one time it wasnt all so evil, only now. Example is the ELDAR Warp Gods and even Gork and Mork.


My 2 cents.


----------



## Moonschwine (Jun 13, 2011)

Hmm - interesting to try put things onto a scale of anything really.

Not to hammer a point but there's so many shades of grey here but what the hell:

Scale 1-10, Benchmarks: 1 = The pinnacle of good. 5 = Neutral like Neutronians on Neutral Day. 10 = Evil like a baby-eating mouth breather. 

Eldar - Self-serving, but caretakers of the long-game of the universe. Acts of true nobility combined with a concern of the future of all races puts them on the low neutral good end of the spectrum (4).

CSM - Legion dependent, but with a built in Dichotomy - They need a status quo to cause chaos in to begin with; the axiom of "Enemies...we need Enemies" holds truer to CSM's more than anything - at the extreme they are high-level evil burning worlds, raping, slavery etc (9) at their best they have a code of malicious conduct (7) so I'll say they come in at a steady rating of 8 on the scale. 

Imperium - The value of self-sacrifice and acceptable losses in the face of a Nietzschean universe could occupy a library's worth of papers and debate. At the end of the day though the Imperium seeks to endure by any means necessary - which places them in the neutral evil bracket of things (6-7) because what they often have to do is dirty (sacrificing worlds etc), obviously with extremes like Exterminatus this places them more in the 7 / 8 section of the scale but as a whole I'd call it a 7. 

Nids - Much like the imperium does what it needs to survive. By nature its the hive mind behind the swarm thats malicious not the creatures. So nid's as a race - evil because what they represent (annihilation of everything in their path) but hardly pre-planned. I'd rate them at a 6.5/7 

Dark Eldar - They have to kill, torture, maim and destroy to survive. Much like nid's and Imperium they do what they must given their circumstances. However the manner the go about it is far too malicious prima facie, and they enjoy being bad for the sake of being bad so I'd rate them at a solid 8 alongside CSM's

Tau - Too much of a focus on the greater good to distract from the society fuck they do to you. Yes you benefit technologically, however you sell your soul to play with the tools of the gods. For this reason its a malicious 6.

Necrons - Mindless hatred for all life. Pushing a 9. 

Deamons - Anything goes in the game of evil - 10.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Moonschwine,

Good analysis!

Fact is, though, the Dark Eldar _don't_ have to engage in their gruesome activities. Craftworld and Exodite Eldar alike have proven this.

Similarly, I would point out that the Craftworld Eldar should have a range of 4-6, to compensate for their willing sacrifice of entire worlds of humans to spare their own communities.

By contrast, though, I think Exodites should be anywhere from 1-4, since they look for a more or less peaceful, independent existence that doesn't require someone else to die/be miserable. I give them the range all the same, though, since they can be - and are - warlike all the same.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## the_man_with_plan (May 3, 2011)

I don't think chaos is completely evil. there are chaos civilians in the night lords books, and they're perfectly fine people. the chaos marines are sometimes forced to do what their god's want by voices in their head. they too fear the ruinous powers. the ruinous powers themselves aren't so much evil as uninformed. they seriously cant thell the difference in value between turning someone into a daemon prince, or turning them into a chaos spawn. either they are completely apathetic or too alien to understand value judgements(like daemon prince versus spawn, or good versus evil)


----------



## ThatOtherGuy (Apr 13, 2010)

If you see this through the eyes of nature, only three forces can be considered truly evil: The Necrons, The Tyranids and Chaos. These three forces in the balance of nature, cause nothing but unproductive destruction. Yet again, this is through the eyes of the cosmic scheme of nature, not that of a mortal. Just a different take if you ask.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Everyone's evil, and there's nothing they can do about it! D=


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

I'd say the only truly evil thing in the WH40k universe or related to the list in the OP are the C'tan and no not the Necrons.

The Imperium post Heresy does what it does to survive and this is unquestionable. Pre-Heresy however with the Emperor running around with his Primarchs on his side, encountered many offshoots of humanity and alien races that posed no threat to mankind or had nothing of value to take and yet found themselves wiped out. So I would say in those days, the Imperium wasn't necessarily _evil_ but they certainly were more bloodthirsty than post-Heresy.

The Dark Eldar do what they do to survive as some have mentioned. However, their cousins seem to be doing just fine with the spirit stone technology they've got going so I don't see why the Dark Eldar can't follow suit. This however brings me to another question, the Dark Eldar torture slaves to ward off Slaanesh which in turn reverses their ageing process. What do the Eldar do to ward off the ravages of time on their bodies? 

Another topic for another time I suppose.

Moving on, the Orks clearly are programmed to fight and do just that. They have no other goals or motivations and so can't be classified as evil.

The same with the Tyranids and we don't know what the goal or the reasoning of the Hive Mind is. Perhaps they too have a need for their never ending need to feed on other races. So until then I give them a big ? in the evil department.

The lolTau I would deem as being potentially evil. Clearly they have ego problems, as they deem superior races to their own as being inferior. They give races they defeat the chance to enter their ranks or perish but it is not because they truly believe in their _Greater Good_, rather embracing various alien races into their own adds to their military prowess in various ways. I say they are potentially evil because right now they still only have a fledgling empire and only when it increases in size and strength can we see what path the empowered Tau will take. But it would seem that they are on the course to being a race that destroys and consumes only for themselves.

The Chaos powers as CoTe, the third missing Primarch, aptly described can't be defined as evil because they are emotion incarnate and emotion cannot be held accountable or be blamed for its nature. The followers of Chaos are a different story for they often choose their path into damnation and arguably the Chaos powers cannot force mortals to do their bidding, rather they rely on seducing them with false promises of power, etc.

Finally, we have the Necrons, enslaved to the unworldly beings known only as the C'tan. The C'tan were perfectly capable of surviving off the energy of stars but once they learned about the mortal races, decided that they tasted better. They had/have no reason for feeding off of mortal races and ultimately had no reason for enslaving/misleading the Necrons into their current state. Presumably, they can even switch to going back to feeding on stars but choose not to.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Epic revival. :laugh: 

My views have long since evolved since I made this thread. 

Chaos is by its nature simply chaotic and cannot be any other way. On the other end, the necrons now crave stability and control, having lost the will to be anything else so again, it`s simply their nature.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Chaos is not by its nature evil. However at this point and time its completly evil. As I said before the Eldar Gods were not Evil at all. But that was when the Eldar were not all that Evil. The Universe as a whole was not that evil. Now with Negative feelings spread to every inch of the Galaxy thanks to the Imperium, DE, CSMs, and other angry Xenos we have completly Self Serving Chaos Gods that feed of negative feelings and breed negative feelings. 

Anyone who thinks Blood for the Blood God, or being infected with disease as a sign of love is natural needs to see a therapist. Its self destructive and self serving. No natural balance. Evil.


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

Evil is purely based upon opinion and bias. Therefore, all races can be considered both good and evil and are therefore neither seeing as evil does not technically exist.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> From this human perspective Chaos is 'evil' because it corrupts, kills and generally goes against human perceptions of 'good'. But what Chaos truly represents is ultimate Chaos, pure and untroubled freedom. Unrestraint and liberty from social burdens. But does make it inherently evil? I would say not, it is a natural and elemental force - shaped by the base desires of mortals - so in this regard its no more evil than the base desires of humanity.


Excellent post. 

For what its worth I doubt there exists such a thing as evil, rather a particular space and time produces notions which are good and evil depneding upon the existing structures of the time.

In the above quote, I would argue, we could easily use Nietzsche (and others) to elaborate Chaos as a postive (or at worst neutral) force in the 40k Universe.


I'm a bit pressed for time, so I'll give my opinion of which races are 'evil' later, but ATM the only one I can really consider in that way are the Necrons as they simply purge the galaxy, but then again, I am weak on their specific fluff, and their new codex might elaborate things.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

So is say Hitler Evil? Or was he misunderstood? Is Raping a mother of 2 starving kids and killing her cause you can Evil? Or is it Neutral at best? How about a Daemon that wants to kill your children in front of you to feed of your anguish and then slowly cut your skin from your body, or maybe they're good cause Chaos is pure????


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Warlock in Training said:


> So is say Hitler Evil? Or was he misunderstood? Is Raping a mother of 2 starving kids and killing her cause you can Evil? Or is it Neutral at best? How about a Daemon that wants to kill your children in front of you to feed of your anguish and then slowly cut your skin from your body, or maybe they're good cause Chaos is pure????


I think that questions like these can be pretty easily answered by this: There is no objective definition of good or evil. They are meanings that humans attribute to things, and they are therefore a matter of perspective. Every person views them differently.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Jackal,

No offense, but all of the above are categorically evil. I don't think there's a sane, adjusted, or otherwise fair society, ideology, or philosophy that would embrace (A) genocide, (B) rape, or (C) pre-meditated, murderous sadism.

If you're trying to imply that someone out there could "view the above examples differently" and that this somehow muddles the debate of whether something might be evil... allow me to vehemently disagree with you.

There certainly is, and has been, a long-standing debate on what defines evil. That having been said, even the world's foremost thinkers haven't flinched from denouncing those actions that, unhampered by lack of sanity or other similar concerns, unquestionably demonstrate malice or an intent to willfully harm or otherwise degrade other living beings.

There is, for instance, a debate centered on the cruelty against animals where the food industry is concerned. Advocates for the industry argue that their intent is not to hurt or degrade animals, but to provide needed meat products. Opponents of such institutions argue that they nonetheless DO degrade and hurt animals. That's a debate.

No one, however, would bother to debate necessity, the absence of pain in animal's death, or the animal's capacity to suffer during its stay in that environment if the OBJECTIVE of the farm was to hurt and degrade animals first and foremost.

Are there factions in 40k who espouse such objectives as their raison d'etre? Yes. They are evil, through and through. Are there other factions who commit evil in the course of trying to survive in a dystopian universe populated by gods that thirst for souls? Yes. They are relative to one another on a scale of morality, with some being no more than war-mongering barbarians with no concern for the havoc they wreak (Orks)... and others being cold, calculating, strategists who willingly sacrifice great numbers of their enemies to prevent the loss of even a few of their own.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Phoebus said:


> Jackal,
> 
> No offense, but all of the above are categorically evil. I don't think there's a sane, adjusted, or otherwise fair society, ideology, or philosophy that would embrace (A) genocide, (B) rape, or (C) pre-meditated, murderous sadism.
> 
> ...


Evil is a human-made concept. An abstract one. There can be things that are considered evil, but there is no actual quality of evil. If you're going to label one evil, you'll have to label all of them evil, including the xenophobic Imperium, the genocidal Tau, and the other nasties in the 40k universe.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

See previous post.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Phoebus said:


> See previous post.
> 
> Cheers,
> P.


And, see my previous post. It is the height of foolishness to believe that our man-made concepts are immortal or unassailable in any way. Evil is a matter of perspective.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Everythin is Evil in 40k. Hell as I said even Chaos can be good. Look at the Eldar Gods and Gork and Mork for the Orks Race. Nothing can be set in the solid category "Good" or "Evil". Some Races are promoting Evil as a way of life than others who are evil just to survive.

Hey Look a Definition of Evil on Websters Dictionary.
http://www.websters-online-dictiona...dlq&cof=FORID:9&ie=UTF-8&q=evil&sa=Search#922

Do Some races sound more like this than others? 

There is Good and Evil. Just like there is Hot and Cold. Im from Florida and I live in Virginia. Im use to the heat, where Virginians are not. So its not that hot here to me as it is to them. Does that mean Hot and cold are a matter of perception? Hell No. It exist. Same applies to good and evil. To some Evil may be acceptable or not evil. Does that make those people right? Hell no, they're the ones that will strap bombs to themselves or join a cult. It exist no matter what your perception may be of the world.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Warlock in Training said:


> Everythin is Evil in 40k. Hell as I said even Chaos can be good. Look at the Eldar Gods and Gork and Mork for the Orks Race. Nothing can be set in the solid category "Good" or "Evil". Some Races are promoting Evil as a way of life than others who are evil just to survive.


Speaking of the way of life thing, this is a good example of just how much of good and evil is perspective. Some societies approve of things that would be absolutely abhorrent in another. There are a few universals, but even those are just caused by evolutionary concerns.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Masked Jackal said:


> Speaking of the way of life thing, this is a good example of just how much of good and evil is perspective. Some societies approve of things that would be absolutely abhorrent in another. There are a few universals, but even those are just caused by evolutionary concerns.


Now were talking philosophy!:biggrin: If life has taught us one thing is that 1)Might makes Right 2) History is written by the Victor 3) The Masses Rule. As it stands in todays world Evil is listed as these things. Few hundred years down the line who can say how it will be perceaved.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Warlock in Training said:


> Now were talking philosophy!:biggrin: If life has taught us one thing is that 1)Might makes Right 2) History is written by the Victor 3) The Masses Rule. As it stands in todays world Evil is listed as these things. Few hundred years down the line who can say how it will be perceaved.


Exactly! I hope that humanity takes a path that will be more beneficial to itself, but that seems unlikely at this time.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Masked Jackal said:


> Evil is a human-made concept. An abstract one. There can be things that are considered evil, but there is no actual quality of evil.


That's an opinion, and one that is still being debated by bigger brains than ours.



> If you're going to label one evil, you'll have to label all of them evil, including the xenophobic Imperium, the genocidal Tau, and the other nasties in the 40k universe.


Per my last post:



> Are there factions in 40k who espouse such objectives as their raison d'etre? Yes. They are evil, through and through. Are there other factions who commit evil in the course of trying to survive in a dystopian universe populated by gods that thirst for souls? *Yes. They are relative to one another on a scale of morality,* with some being no more than war-mongering barbarians with no concern for the havoc they wreak (Orks)... and others being cold, calculating, strategists who willingly sacrifice great numbers of their enemies to prevent the loss of even a few of their own.


Bottom line, I never said the concept of evil is either "immortal" or "unassailable". I argued that certain actions, absent mitigating conditions (e.g., a murderer driven to his or her actions by extreme fits of insanity), fall well within the established definitions of evil as they exist today. Definitions that, as with their overarching concept (evil), are debated to this day, all the same.

You, on the other hand, seem to be trying to define whether there is such a concept to begin with. I would argue that yours, in fact, is the example of hubris (no offense, I'm just using big, fancy words at this point). :wink:

At the end of the day, though, my main disagreement with you is over your statement that, if you name one faction as evil you have to name all of them thus. That's a false argument, since it pre-supposes that all factions have the same motives for their actions and share the same conditions that led them to said motives.

Do Eldar commit evil actions? Of course. Sometimes. Are the Eldar as bad as, say, Chaos Space Marines? No, because their actions are taken with self-preservation in mind. Their existence, and that of the Exodites, disputes the assertion that Dark Eldar do the same, since they are able to survive without degrading and hurting other sentient beings. Doubtlessly the Dark Eldar's methods DO stymie their own slow death, but also doubtlessly said methods are intrinsically tied to the customs, traditions, and moral values (or lack thereof) that led to their condition to begin with.

So, there is a relative moral scale, as I posited earlier. And there is an even greater difference between factions that perform acts that could be debated as evil and factions that *embrace* such acts as their ideological core. Comparing the actions of every human serving the Imperium - and his or her mitigating circumstances of oppression, abuse, ignorance, insanity, threats from within and without, etc. - with those of every Daemon serving Slaneesh, whose *stated ethos* is to "stretch [the limits and standards imposed by a culture] to the breaking point, to exceed them, and to wallow in the act of violating every more of civilized society", would be, in fact, "the height of foolishness". :wink:

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

It *isn't* an opinion however. It is a psychological fact, the same as how we pursue mates to propagate the species, and learn by association. Good and evil are the abstract, man-made concepts that society uses to enforce its will upon the whole. Just because Plato said there is concrete good and evil, doesn't mean there is such a thing, despite what religion says.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Look, I don't dispute that "good" and "evil" are concepts as opposed to people, objects, or elements. And yes, there are debates out there ranging from how useful evil is as a concept, what drives evil and/or our ideas of what constitutes evil, etc.

Fact of the matter though, is that the idea of evil as an intent to harm another in the course of violating established moral code - that is, the concept of malicious antagonism - has been established for some time now. Certain camps of absolutists in the philosophical debate on the matter might argue that good and evil stem from theological concepts, but relativism is the mainstream and takes into account society, culture, upbringing, wealth, etc.

Fact of the matter is, every society is organized along certain lines. Just societies establish laws, regulations, etc., in a pact to ensure that people are protected from unjust actions. Said rules establish "right" and "wrong", the latter of which is substituted by "evil" when malicious intent absent other mitigating (or, if you will, justifying) factors is in place. This concept is not predicated on religion by any means.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Even those concepts are fluid in society's eyes. Killing is wrong, yet wars are constantly waged, stealing is wrong, so long as it's the others in a persons society. Many excuses are given to these things, most often patriotism, but the simple fact is that the context changes what a person considers right. It isn't an act that is considered evil, but an act in a certain situation.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Masked Jackal said:


> Even those concepts are fluid in society's eyes. Killing is wrong, yet wars are constantly waged, stealing is wrong, so long as it's the others in a persons society. Many excuses are given to these things, most often patriotism, but the simple fact is that the context changes what a person considers right. It isn't an act that is considered evil, but an act in a certain situation.


Absolutely, welcome to the world of moral relativism.

But guess what? At the end of the day, "good" and "evil" are simply interchangeable terms that are applied to "moral statements", or, more appropriately for the latter of the two, actions wherein malicious violation of established moral tenets _provides the impetus behind said act._

Hence why, as stated earlier, you can't apply the same label to all factions. Hence why, as stated earlier, some factions deserve the label of "evil" outright, while others don't.

This is a good discussion--thanks! 

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

I think that a far better mode of classification is that of traits. It's not as easy to just label everything in that way, but it is far more descriptive. Orks have a brutal society, but one that is very fulfilling for those within it. Chaos has some of the most typically 'evil' traits, including omnicidal maniacs, hedonistic pleasure seekers, and other nasties, but is one of the few truly individual societies in 40k. The Imperium is full of xenophobia and contempt for human life, but many of their methods could be justified by the nature of their enemies, and the faith of their society can be a powerful force, one that is proven to work.

The beauty of many of these races is the complexity that keeps them from being easily labelled. This is what makes it better than say, Star Wars, where the sides can easily be grouped into a completely positive and negative side without much complexity, (Though there is media that changes this, I like KOTOR 2's take on the light and dark sides). Things aren't simple in the 40k universe, and that's what makes us love it.


----------



## ThatOtherGuy (Apr 13, 2010)

What is considered evil in a non-relativism view? From thinking this over since this thread, I have concluded what is considered evil outside of basic animal instincts.

First off, I would like to point out that the Tyranid pawns (not the big mastermind), are not evil. One, the are driven by instinct and two, they are controlled by a bigger mind, whether it be a general creation of their collective existence or under some giant organism. Orks are not technically evil as well. Though they have reasoning to stave off consistent attacks on anything, they are however engineered to be super soldiers that live off of war and carnage, thus akin to something like a wrecking ball on steroids gone mad. It is their nature along with the Tyranids.

Now what is evil you may ask? Well evil is in a general sense is the absolute negative out come to both society and life by personal intent and knowing what you are doing has a negative total out come.

Example: If someone murders a person, knowing the negative consequences, deliberatly for their own gain or for personal entertainment, then it is evil. For their actions not only provide a negative out come to the sentient society, but on a natural level cause destruction in life general, thus creating a negative progression of life.

If some one causes pain, such as rape, and enjoys it while still knowing the consequences but cares not for them and knows it caused someone else pain, then that is evil.

Now how does this play into 40k? Well first lets look at a more obvious faction: the Necrons. They cause nothing but grand destruction not only to sentient life, but to all organic life as well. And this destruction and motive is not an natural instinct, but a personal choice, meaning they are fully aware of their motives and out comes. But yet they do not care, for they are selfish, thus it is evil.

Chaos is argued that it is total freedom, that there it is not inherently good or evil. But yet the people who practice the chaos at the extreme preforms acts of genocide and pain. They are fully aware of their actions and fully aware of their outcomes, but yet they continue to do it for their own personal gains and entertainment. In other words, it creates a negative out come to life itself. Thus it is not really Chaos itself that is evil, but their practictioners and their deamon allies to an extent.

Dark Eldar? The practice torture, rape and cause negative outcomes to life itself. They are selfish, and while they do not seek the destruction of life in general, they do however cause a negative outcome towards sentient life. Slavery, malice, pain. Are those attributes help create a progression in life? No.

The Eldar and the Imperium are not inherently evil. They are two civilizations that are besieged by forces that want nothing but their utter destruction. While their methods of trying to preserve their race are completely insane at times, they are doing what is best to insure their survival.

Tau? Fuck them.

Theres my two cents. Its not necessarily the kind of evil that is usually defined by man, but the kind of evil that is defined by nature.

I am done here.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

I dispute that the followers of Chaos are fully aware of their actions. The power of the Warp is a twisting force that changes their minds, and leads to very distorted views. The Dark Gods are easily capable of tricking otherwise 'good' people to do things they would view as abhorrent. Slaanesh is particularly good at this, it's one of the Dark Prince's favorite things to do!


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Yeah, there's definitely something to be said about the corrupting influence Chaos has on mortals. Conversely, however, there is something to be said about the Daemons themselves... and the fact that they are corrupting influences themselves.


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

Another aspect is that each of the Chaos Gods has a virtue associated with them that they can corrupt. Khorne has martial honor, Tzeentch has hope, Nurgle has endurance, Slaanesh has love. Any of these can be corrupted.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Masked Jackal said:


> I dispute that the followers of Chaos are fully aware of their actions. The power of the Warp is a twisting force that changes their minds, and leads to very distorted views. The Dark Gods are easily capable of tricking otherwise 'good' people to do things they would view as abhorrent. Slaanesh is particularly good at this, it's one of the Dark Prince's favorite things to do!


I would argue that Chaos followers are aware and unaware at the same time.

Chaos usually works by not giving you the whole story, remember that 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions'. Nobody starts out 'evil', they simply end up going down a path that leads to 'evil'.

Remember that *we *know how things work in 40k, whereas those within the 40k universe only see what is visible to them at a specific time.They don't know the whole story and are often ignorant or kept in the dark about most things.

So if you got down on your knees and prayed to the Emperor and then watched as your family got killed, then did the same thing, only to Nurgle this time, and then watched your family come back to life; who would you follow?


1. *Orks* - Aren't evil, they are engineered to act how they do.

2. *The Imperium* - is neither evil NOR good, they simply are. They exterminate Xeno's and others in the name of their dogma, but they aren't inherently evil, just out for themselves.

3. *Both Eldars* - Aren't evil, even though the 'Dark' variety might seem to us more evil, both are exactly the same on the scale of evil, they just have different ways of dealing with a very traumatic event in their races' history.

4. *Tyranids* - They aren't evil as they are living and acting according to their animal, genetically encoded insticts, of which the 'Hive Mind' is simply the prime example of.

5. *Chaos* - Isn't evil, in fact, Chaos Astartes have alot to be upset about and in many cases are actually victims, rather than perpetrators of their fates. As for raw Chaos, that's just emotional extremes, born within mortals themselves. Its not evil, it simply is what it is.

6. *The Tau *- Suprisingly seem rather good, as they are more accepting than many of the other races in 40k. But then again, there has been hinted to be some shady goings on with the Etheral Caste and their intentions.

7. *Necrons* - To me these guys seem like the most deserving of the lable 'evil'. But as I mentioned earlier I don't know that much about their fluff. Purging the galaxy of all life to feed 'star-Gods', and then enslaving a few survivors, seems like the most 'evil' scenario of all the races of 40k.


But like I said earlier, 'evil' as a concept is entirely dependant on the time and space in which the word is given meaning. 

What is evil to the Imperium, is perhaps not as evil to the Eldar, Orks, Tau etc etc.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

D-A-C said:


> 1. *Orks* - Aren't evil, they are engineered to act how they do.


Agreed.



> 2. *The Imperium* - is neither evil NOR good, they simply are. They exterminate Xeno's and others in the name of their dogma, but they aren't inherently evil, just out for themselves.


The Imperium does evil things ostensibly for the good of the species. I don't think you can condemn the institution as a whole, but I think many of the top echelons, especially those who perpetuate the Imperium's particular ideology, could be described as evil.



> 3. *Both Eldars* - Aren't evil, even though the 'Dark' variety might seem to us more evil, both are exactly the same on the scale of evil, they just have different ways of dealing with a very traumatic event in their races' history.


Disagree. I think said event was "traumatic" to the Dark Eldar only in the sense that they suddenly found themselves out of galactic power and facing the consequences of actions and modes they reveled in. By contrast, it wasn't just the Fall that was traumatic to the Craftworld and Exodite factions - it was also the conditions that led to it, which demonstrates the very real moral difference between them and their Dark cousins. The Dark Eldar aren't "dealing" with the consequence of the Fall. They have found a way to co-opt their pre-exisiting evil, hedonistic ways to forestall their destruction. The fact that the Craftworld and Exodite Eldar have proven you don't have to engage in their cousins' activities indicates that the Dark Eldar stance is a self-serving sham.



> 4. *Tyranids* - They aren't evil as they are living and acting according to their animal, genetically encoded insticts, of which the 'Hive Mind' is simply the prime example of.


I have a nagging suspicion that makes me want to disagree here. Absent mitigating circumstances (e.g., dinosaurs, meet meteors), pure animal organisms tend to balance out and act in ways that ensure long-term survival.

The Tyrannids don't. They consume everything, everywhere. This leads me to believe that the Hive Minds are not just the mental drive behind mere apex predators, but indicative of something far more sinister.



> 5. *Chaos* - Isn't evil, in fact, Chaos Astartes have alot to be upset about and in many cases are actually victims, rather than perpetrators of their fates. As for raw Chaos, that's just emotional extremes, born within mortals themselves. Its not evil, it simply is what it is.


The entities of Chaos are definitely evil. They are, in fact, the manifestations of evil impulses, acts, and concepts. The fact that they originate from our own negative psychic echoes and in turn inflict themselves upon us only makes them scarier.

Traitor Astartes vary in their motivations and modus operandi, just like humans do. Some may very well have been tricked (subtle psychic effects and all that). Others may very well have been products of environments that led them to morally reprehensible acts they nonetheless deemed honorable (I'm looking at you, Talos). And others were just total scheming, evil assholes you saw power in morass of evil, corruption, and degradation that were the Ruinous Powers.



> 6. *The Tau *- Suprisingly seem rather good, as they are more accepting than many of the other races in 40k. But then again, there has been hinted to be some shady goings on with the Etheral Caste and their intentions.


Yup. I don't see the Tau as any worse than any 19th century imperialistic power from real Earth. Shaken and stirred with an ideological drive, but whatever.



> 7. *Necrons* - To me these guys seem like the most deserving of the lable 'evil'. But as I mentioned earlier I don't know that much about their fluff. Purging the galaxy of all life to feed 'star-Gods', and then enslaving a few survivors, seems like the most 'evil' scenario of all the races of 40k.


I put them up there with Chaos (the Powers and the Daemons) and what I fear the Tyranids may be. The Dark Eldar are a step below these two (or three) simply because they are more petty in their monstrousness.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Edit: adding Phoebus's posts into this discussion



ThatOtherGuy said:


> Dark Eldar? The practice torture, rape and cause negative outcomes to life itself. They are selfish, and while they do not seek the destruction of life in general, they do however cause a negative outcome towards sentient life. Slavery, malice, pain. Are those attributes help create a progression in life? No.





Phoebus said:


> The Dark Eldar aren't "dealing" with the consequence of the Fall. They have found a way to co-opt their pre-exisiting evil, hedonistic ways to forestall their destruction. The fact that the Craftworld and Exodite Eldar have proven you don't have to engage in their cousins' activities indicates that the Dark Eldar stance is a self-serving sham.


Their cousins seem to be doing just fine with the spirit stone technology they've got going so I don't see why the Dark Eldar can't follow suit. 

With this, there must be a reason other than because they enjoy torturing slaves, that they can't borrow or steal the spirit stone tech.

Because surely securing slaves is getting harder every time they raid an Imperium world only to come back a few years later to see it better defended or when they barter with someone for a ship full of slaves in exchange for valuable commodities that I'm sure are harder to come by every day. 

Why not take the easier route? 

In conclusion, I'm going to have to say that until there is real evidence that the Dark Eldar do what they do because they enjoy it, rather than out of necessity, that they are not _evil_



Phoebus said:


> The Tyrannids don't. They consume everything, everywhere. This leads me to believe that the Hive Minds are not just the mental drive behind mere apex predators, but indicative of something far more sinister.


As I mentioned earlier, I agree with you in that the Tyranids are simply peons being controlled by a greater intelligence. But the Hive Mind probably has a reason for its drive to consume everything. We simply don't know yet, perhaps their intentions are not sinister at all and like the other races do what they do to survive. 



ThatOtherGuy said:


> Now how does this play into 40k? Well first lets look at a more obvious faction: the Necrons. They cause nothing but grand destruction not only to sentient life, but to all organic life as well. And this destruction and motive is not an natural instinct, but a personal choice, meaning they are fully aware of their motives and out comes. But yet they do not care, for they are selfish, thus it is evil.


The Necrons are enslaved to the unworldly beings known only as the C'tan. The C'tan were perfectly capable of surviving off the energy of stars but once they learned about the mortal races, decided that they tasted better. They had/have no reason for feeding off of mortal races and ultimately had no reason for enslaving/misleading the Necrons into their current state. Presumably, they can even switch to going back to feeding on stars but choose not to.

So with this, I don't see how the Necrons can be deemed evil when their actions are not theirs to control anymore. They were blinded by their eagerness to exact revenge on the Old Ones and misled by the promises of exacting vengeance by the C'tan.



ThatOtherGuy said:


> Chaos is argued that it is total freedom, that there it is not inherently good or evil. But yet the people who practice the chaos at the extreme preforms acts of genocide and pain. They are fully aware of their actions and fully aware of their outcomes, but yet they continue to do it for their own personal gains and entertainment. In other words, it creates a negative out come to life itself. Thus it is not really Chaos itself that is evil, but their practictioners and their deamon allies to an extent.





Masked Jackal said:


> I dispute that the followers of Chaos are fully aware of their actions. The power of the Warp is a twisting force that changes their minds, and leads to very distorted views.


I would say that once a follower of Chaos loses himself in its principles, then their actions too are not theirs anymore, excluding beings like Erebus and Kor Phaenon for example who are very high up in the echelons of Chaos ranks making them fully in control of their actions.

Basically what I am saying is that normal Chaos followers choose their path for whatever reason and once they do so, there is no turning back. But I argue that with people of a strong character, they are more likely to be fully aware of their actions and serve the Chaos powers willingly with every fiber of their being out of devotion or because they do not or ever will agree with those imposed by Imperial doctrine.



Phoebus said:


> The entities of Chaos are definitely evil. They are, in fact, the manifestations of evil impulses, acts, and concepts. The fact that they originate from our own negative psychic echoes and in turn inflict themselves upon us only makes them scarier.
> 
> Traitor Astartes vary in their motivations and modus operandi, just like humans do. Some may very well have been tricked (subtle psychic effects and all that). Others may very well have been products of environments that led them to morally reprehensible acts they nonetheless deemed honorable (I'm looking at you, Talos). And others were just total scheming, evil assholes you saw power in morass of evil, corruption, and degradation that were the Ruinous Powers.


The Chaos powers are what they are because of the mortal races. They are dark mirrors of our emotions amplified tenfold and they do what they do because it is as natural as breathing is to us. As CoTe put it, can emotion be held accountable or be blamed for its nature? 

Or should we blame those who created them, not intentionally and with the capability to choose their actions? 

I've argued in the past that the Chaos powers are more enslaved to mortals than mortals are to them simply because without the actions of humanity or varios xenos races, the Chaos powers will cease to exist or will be *forced* to adopt a new face. They can be easily molded into whatever shape or form the mortal races desire but that's the thing, they don't choose to do this for whatever reason.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> With this, there must be a reason other than because they enjoy torturing slaves, that they can't borrow or steal the spirit stone tech.
> ...
> Why not take the easier route?


Because people sometimes have flaws and deficiencies? The Dark Eldar are defined by their decadence. They're not apologetic about their part in the Fall. They and their ancestors lived their lives the way they did with a sense of entitlement.

The Craftworld Eldar live an existence that is defined at every turn by discipline. They didn't just come up with this after waking up one day and deciding orgies and mass murder were losing their appeal. They were the parts of Eldar society that had not degraded and increasingly isolated themselves. The Path-style society developed from that realization.

The Dark Eldar, on the other hand, are a direct reflection of a society that was so decadent, hedonistic, and degraded that it gave birth to a Ruinous Power. We're talking about a mentality that is orders beyond yours and mine. You're asking why they can't come up with a different means to the same end as the other Eldar; I'm offering that, for the Dark Eldar, torturing and killing WERE an end unto themselves for their society, and that now that they can also serve as means to another end as well (survival) the idea of abandoning them would appear ludicrous. That is, they enjoyed doing such things to begin with... and now those activities also keep them alive. Ergo...



> We simply don't know yet, perhaps their intentions are not sinister at all and like the other races do what they do to survive.


Like I said, absent direct evidence, I have only my suspicions. On the other hand, again, it seems a great stretch that here you have this one animal organism that exists thanks to the destruction of *everything else*. All living matter. And, with this again just being my suspicion/admittedly unfounded opinion, I find this too dire to be simply a case of unchecked development.



> The Chaos powers are what they are because of the mortal races. They are dark mirrors of our emotions amplified tenfold and they do what they do because it is as natural as breathing is to us. As CoTe put it, can emotion be held accountable or be blamed for its nature?


It's not just emotion, though. Daemons become sentient beings. They exhibit an understanding of the concepts of right and wrong as espoused by the beings whose emotions they were formed from. That is how they are able to act as corrupting influences to begin with.

Don't think of "evil" just as a condemning label in this case. I'm not calling Daemons "evil" like you or I might address another human being. It's not a judgmental statement, nor is it meant to assign blame. It's an indication of the intents and activities these particular creatures hold and engage in: to maliciously harm another with the willful intent to violate moral standards.

Where the Ruinous Powers themselves are concerned, I suspect this debate ultimately goes beyond a reachable consensus for us. I further suspect the answer we're looking for would have to do with the degree of sentience and choice behind the Powers themselves--a "chicken or the egg" type of scenario.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Phoebus said:


> Because people sometimes have flaws and deficiencies? The Dark Eldar are defined by their decadence. They're not apologetic about their part in the Fall. They and their ancestors lived their lives the way they did with a sense of entitlement.


The Eldar are possibly the proudest race in the WH40k universe, do you really think they as a race minus a few wise Farseers, would admit to being wrong?



Phoebus said:


> The Craftworld Eldar live an existence that is defined at every turn by discipline. They didn't just come up with this after waking up one day and deciding orgies and mass murder were losing their appeal. They were the parts of Eldar society that had not degraded and increasingly isolated themselves. The Path-style society developed from that realization.


But in a way, the Craftworld Eldar's obsession with discipline is just another form of extremism. They are obsessed with keeping their race alive and do anything to achieve this goal be it the extermination of billions of humans to save a handful of Eldar, etc. 

What I'm trying to get at is that the Eldar and their dark cousins still follow their old ways in one sense, only slightly altered due to circumstance. The Eldar will always be an extremist society.



Phoebus said:


> You're asking why they can't come up with a different means to the same end as the other Eldar; I'm offering that, for the Dark Eldar, torturing and killing WERE an end unto themselves for their society, and that now that they can also serve as means to another end as well (survival) the idea of abandoning them would appear ludicrous. That is, they enjoyed doing such things to begin with... and now those activities also keep them alive. Ergo...


I don't disagree with this but you haven't addressed my question in regards to the fact that securing slaves is becoming harder day by day and the Dark Eldar's enemies only grow stronger.

And going back to the beginning, before whats-his-name found out that torturing slaves magically warded off Slaanesh's grip on their souls, what do you think stopped them from acquiring the spirit-stone tech? 

Before the discovery of torturing slaves = younger/healthier, what do you suppose the Dark Eldar had in mind in regards to their fate or what they were doing in the mean time to stave off Slaanesh's vampiric effect on their souls?



Phoebus said:


> Like I said, absent direct evidence, I have only my suspicions. On the other hand, again, it seems a great stretch that here you have this one animal organism that exists thanks to the destruction of *everything else*. All living matter. And, with this again just being my suspicion/admittedly unfounded opinion, I find this too dire to be simply a case of unchecked development.


The Orks are almost like the Tyranids only they seek a psychological need to fight rather than a biological need to devour. And yet the Orks are not considered evil by most of the people posting here.

Also technically humans/viruses/etc. survive by the destruction of other living things as well, no? Are these things I've mentioned evil as a result?



Phoebus said:


> It's not just emotion, though. Daemons become sentient beings. They exhibit an understanding of the concepts of right and wrong as espoused by the beings whose emotions they were formed from. That is how they are able to act as corrupting influences to begin with.


Daemons are sentient beings true but they are shackled to their respective chaos master who in turn are truly imprisoned to their role as whatever emotion they represent. 

A sentient daemon can't question its existence and decide upon realizing that it's having a negative effect on mortals to suddenly pack up and call it quits.

And do they really know the difference between right and wrong? If that were the case and assuming they do have some semblance of free will, do you think they could change their ways?


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> The Eldar are possibly the proudest race in the WH40k universe, do you really think they as a race minus a few wise Farseers, would admit to being wrong?


Exactly. This mentality is precisely why I don't think the Dark Eldar would just switch to soul-stones. They don't see the point.



> But in a way, the Craftworld Eldar's obsession with discipline is just another form of extremism. They are obsessed with keeping their race alive and do anything to achieve this goal be it the extermination of billions of humans to save a handful of Eldar, etc.


The two are not equivalent.

While the sacrifice of a even billions of (presumably innocent) civilians (and that's not an extermination, as callous as that sounds, anymore than annihilating all of, say, New York, would entail "exterminating" the United States) is reprehensible, the fact of the matter is that, in the examples given thus far, the Farseers have acted with immediate self-preservation and a third party/enemy that cannot otherwise be thwarted in mind. Furthermore, they have done so while acting against an entity (the Imperium) that has a stated policy of making war on any and all xenos.

The kind of sadism the Dark Eldar exhibit doesn't even enter into the equation.

Do the Craftworld Eldar engage in a form of extremism? Sure. Any lifestyle wherein an individual devotes him or herself to one occupation or skill-set for years, decades, or even centuries at a time to the extent that he or she risks being trapped forever in that course can be described as extreme. Conversely, though, the entire process is aimed at curbing extremes in behavior, emotion, etc.



> I don't disagree with this but you haven't addressed my question in regards to the fact that securing slaves is becoming harder day by day and the Dark Eldar's enemies only grow stronger.


No one ever accused any number of civilizations of making the right calls in the face of challenges. That holds true even more for societies plagued by hubris. Did Rome stop to think what the disappearance of the middle class of land-owning citizen-soldier Plebes that made the Republic possible to begin with would mean for their growing empire? America is over fourteen trillion dollars in debt, and we're still debating the merits of operating with ridiculous deficits.

And then you have the Dark Eldar: a race of hedonistic, sadistic, predatory, martial aliens with a superiority complex and a disdain for the value of alien life (or life period, really), who used to rule the galaxy. Of course it's going to be difficult for them to change their habits. What the Craftworld Eldar do - especially when it comes to denial of pleasure - is probably to them what a proposal to solve fiscal inequality by total wealth re-distribution would be to the average Wall Street stock-broker.



> And going back to the beginning, before whats-his-name found out that torturing slaves magically warded off Slaanesh's grip on their souls, what do you think stopped them from acquiring the spirit-stone tech?


That's not a bad question. Absent any qualifying information in the official fluff, here's my take:

1. I think that as the time of the Fall approached, there was a significant divergence in terms of technological development. The Craftworld Eldar needed to develop along certain lines due to necessity. These developments included the Craftworlds themselves, the Path - which is more a socio-cultural construct, but whatever - and the Soulstones.

Though both factions are ultimately Eldar, this doesn't mean there is cooperation and common knowledge. The Craftworld Eldar fled their Empire while it was still together out of disdain, disgust, and fear of what their cousins were getting into. Why would they share space or company with them now? And thus much of what the exiles have come up with might not even be available (or fully understood) by the Dark Ones.

2. Much of the Craftworld technology may very well be useless to the Dark Eldar. Think about it: what does a Soulstone do for a Craftworld Eldar? It keeps their soul intact and out of the clutches of Slaneesh. But that is only possible to begin with because the Craftworld Eldar maintain societies where they actually CARE about the well-being of their neighbors, comrades, and family members.

By contrast, the Dark Eldar constantly scheme and fight against one another. Let's say they DID have access to said technology. Great, you died, your soul is in a Soul-stone. And your guarantee that your evil cousin won't just suck it down like a smoothie is? And your guarantee that the rival Kabal, upon raiding your storehouses, won't piss on your stone and feed it to their attack dogs is?...

The technology is only half the trick. It's absolutely reliant on a community where members are committed to the well-being of one another and their ancestors as well for it to actually work. Absent this, there's no real motivation to use it.



> Before the discovery of torturing slaves = younger/healthier, what do you suppose the Dark Eldar had in mind in regards to their fate or what they were doing in the mean time to stave off Slaanesh's vampiric effect on their souls?


I don't think they had a plan. I think they were probably in a very "Oh, shit!" phase. I think they were totally thrilled when they found out that the same mentality that had gotten them into so much trouble - the same mentality they loved - would also keep them out of the ultimate frying pan. It would totally have appealed to their selfish, self-gratifying sides.



> The Orks are almost like the Tyranids only they seek a psychological need to fight rather than a biological need to devour. And yet the Orks are not considered evil by most of the people posting here.


Orks were engineered by a sentient race to be a weapon. Given my stated suspicions, I wouldn't be surprised to find out in some future fluff that the Tyranids were a weapon gone terribly wrong.



> Also technically humans/viruses/etc. survive by the destruction of other living things as well, no? Are these things I've mentioned evil as a result?


It comes down to relative scale, intent, etc. It's meant to be tragic when you hear about the Imperium exploiting a planet down to a dead husk. And, obviously, if it ends up being that the Tyranid Hive Minds are just _stupid,_ then of course they won't be "evil" in the same sense as entities and organizations that willfully wipe out all life in their path. 



> Daemons are sentient beings true but they are shackled to their respective chaos master who in turn are truly imprisoned to their role as whatever emotion they represent.
> 
> A sentient daemon can't question its existence and decide upon realizing that it's having a negative effect on mortals to suddenly pack up and call it quits.


Again, you seem to be basing your answers on the idea that calling something evil is always a judgmental statement. See more below.



> And do they really know the difference between right and wrong? If that were the case and assuming they do have some semblance of free will, do you think they could change their ways?


That doesn't stop them from personifying evil and acting along evil lines. They do recognize the difference between right and wrong, as shown in a myriad of codices and novels. Again, Daemons are able to act as a corrupting influence precisely because they recognize the morality-based boundaries that societies set up, and are able to get their followers to break them.

They may not have a choice over what they are, but there's no denying that (A) they know what they are doing, (B) they are aware of the consequences of their actions, and (C) they take pleasure out of said actions.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Phoebus said:


> Exactly. This mentality is precisely why I don't think the Dark Eldar would just switch to soul-stones. They don't see the point.


What I meant was that the Dark Eldar don't view their actions which ultimately culminated in the downfall of their race/birth of Slaanesh as being their fault or I would imagine so. An unfounded opinion I suppose.



Phoebus said:


> The two are not equivalent.
> 
> While the sacrifice of a even billions of (presumably innocent) civilians (and that's not an extermination, as callous as that sounds, anymore than annihilating all of, say, New York, would entail "exterminating" the United States) is reprehensible, the fact of the matter is that, in the examples given thus far, the Farseers have acted with immediate self-preservation and a third party/enemy that cannot otherwise be thwarted in mind. Furthermore, they have done so while acting against an entity (the Imperium) that has a stated policy of making war on any and all xenos.


I didn't mean they aim at eradicating humanity, rather they will and have taken out planets full of humans for reasons never explained or to save just a handful of their own.

And as much as they are enemies to one another, they have allied together in the face of greater threats so I wouldn't classify them as really being enemies.

Their willingness to do so, coupled with their zeal to protect their remaining numbers and their somewhat contradictory way of combating hedonism are all forms of extremism that can be seen as being similar to their darker cousins more pleasure oriented activities.



Phoebus said:


> The kind of sadism the Dark Eldar exhibit doesn't even enter into the equation.
> 
> Do the Craftworld Eldar engage in a form of extremism? Sure. Any lifestyle wherein an individual devotes him or herself to one occupation or skill-set for years, decades, or even centuries at a time to the extent that he or she risks being trapped forever in that course can be described as extreme. Conversely, though, the entire process is aimed at curbing extremes in behavior, emotion, etc.


True that is the purpose but they've merely substituted their ability to indulge in their senses fully for another extremism being to snuff it out to the highest degree.

The Dark Eldar are the exact opposite, restraint being a form of extremism they want no part in.

Both are extremists. In my opinion, the best way for the Eldar to avoid the clutches of Slaanesh (seeing as how he/she is all about extremism) or repeating the Fall is to adopt a path of moderation but again, just an opinion.



Phoebus said:


> No one ever accused any number of civilizations of making the right calls in the face of challenges. That holds true even more for societies plagued by hubris. Did Rome stop to think what the disappearance of the middle class of land-owning citizen-soldier Plebes that made the Republic possible to begin with would mean for their growing empire? America is over fourteen trillion dollars in debt, and we're still debating the merits of operating with ridiculous deficits.
> 
> And then you have the Dark Eldar: a race of hedonistic, sadistic, predatory, martial aliens with a superiority complex and a disdain for the value of alien life (or life period, really), who used to rule the galaxy. Of course it's going to be difficult for them to change their habits. What the Craftworld Eldar do - especially when it comes to denial of pleasure - is probably to them what a proposal to solve fiscal inequality by total wealth re-distribution would be to the average Wall Street stock-broker.


I don't like comparing the real world to WH40k because while there are things in the lore that draw from reality, at the same time those very similarities can be shot down with a hundred different factors.



Phoebus said:


> 2. Much of the Craftworld technology may very well be useless to the Dark Eldar. Think about it: what does a Soulstone do for a Craftworld Eldar? It keeps their soul intact and out of the clutches of Slaneesh. But that is only possible to begin with because the Craftworld Eldar maintain societies where they actually CARE about the well-being of their neighbors, comrades, and family members.
> 
> By contrast, the Dark Eldar constantly scheme and fight against one another. Let's say they DID have access to said technology. Great, you died, your soul is in a Soul-stone. And your guarantee that your evil cousin won't just suck it down like a smoothie is? And your guarantee that the rival Kabal, upon raiding your storehouses, won't piss on your stone and feed it to their attack dogs is?..
> 
> The technology is only half the trick. It's absolutely reliant on a community where members are committed to the well-being of one another and their ancestors as well for it to actually work. Absent this, there's no real motivation to use it.


I just remembered that a Dark Eldar equivalent of the spirit stone tech is the Haemonculi who can revive an Eldar just using a finger or another physical equivalent.

So it can be argued that the Dark Eldar too have a system similar to that of their cousins in that the Haemonculi look over their physical remnants and upon their death revive them all for a cost of course. 

And I don't think the Haemonculi tend to double-cross their patients (or at least all that oftne) since the Dark Eldar take pacts made with Kabals and all that very seriously. 

So with that, I think even the Dark Eldar are capable of having a caretaker system without too much mishap. 

I guess we're back to the Dark Eldar having another reason for not switching to spirit-stone tech (assuming they can obtain it) given how it gets harder to obtain slaves daily. And you would think that such a hedonistic offshoot of the Eldar would grow tired of experiencing or doing the same thing over and over. 

Good points overall.


----------



## JAMOB (Dec 30, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> The Eldar will always be an extremist society.





Malus Darkblade said:


> Both are extremists.


Of course they are. Thats how they are made. Their senses are so sharp that everything is stronger for them. For example, bad smells smell worse but good ones smell better too.


Eldar Codex p. 3 said:


> To an Eldar, all of life's experiences are available to a heightened degree: the... potential for joy is paralleled by an equal capacity to fell despair, anger and even hatred.


The difference is one took the way of joy and discipline the other took the path of "despair, anger and even hatred". There is no way to excuse what the Dark Eldar do because they could just do what the other eldar do, with the spirite stones and stuff. I suppose you could say that it was the only way to survive, but remember the DE are the ones who stayed until the fall happened but survived while the rest of the Eldar who survived left earlier, disgusted by what was occuring.

Other than the eldar,
-Orks are like little kids, they fight because its fun.
-Nids are for the most part animals, except for the hive mind who definitely has dark intentions.
-Necrons are not so much evil, they have no capacity for free will. They were imprisoned against their will by the C'tan, and have no control. They should still die though, they are a danger.
-The Tau are too young to tell, but I predict they will become like Communist China under Mao. And die the same way.
-The Imperium as a whole is not evil, it does what it must. But, those in high power are often "evil", or at least corrupt. Many space marines are very heroic, and sacrifice themselves for lesser beings. Most though are in the middle, and try to be good but often fail.
-Chaos must be divided
-Gods: no free control, they are the essence of corruption. They cant be what they are not, for example a mouse cant just decide to be a horse or something.
-Demons: pure evil, they do serve the gods but they do so by choice often, and the rest of the time they are still evil. Purely. They corrupt individuals with false promises and destroy for the sake of destruction.
-Converts: also evil, because they join the cult of free will. They commit the acts of atrocity of free will. Yes there is the one post with the emperor doing nothing and nurgle reviving the family or something, but how does he do that? Doesnt seem bloody likely. Hes the god of disease, why would he raise someone to life?

I dont think I missed anyone... if i did please tell me.

But the thing is, evil then is different from evil now. And there is also something called necessary evil. Thats really all...

-JAMOB :biggrin:


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Nihilism for the absolute truth. :victory:


----------



## the_man_with_plan (May 3, 2011)

Masked Jackal said:


> Evil is a human-made concept. An abstract one. There can be things that are considered evil, but there is no actual quality of evil. If you're going to label one evil, you'll have to label all of them evil, including the xenophobic Imperium, the genocidal Tau, and the other nasties in the 40k universe.


If we define evil as: that which 90% of humanity agree's is such, then we can still ask this same question.


----------

