Tab Content
More Activity

40 Visitor Messages

  1. I guess part of my criteria for determining "Good" in DnD Alignment is "Do you avoid doing actions that you think are "good" out of selfishness?" or "Do you try to do all good acts that you consider to be "good" according to definitions that you think are valid?". If you do acts that you think are "bad" by societal definitions, but you think that the societal definition is misguided (that it actually can't be considered "good"), I think that you can be classified as "Good" in the DnD alignment system.

    I also think that you can be considered "Good" in the DnD Alignment system even if you don't constantly take "good" acts. From what I've read, there are types of Neutral Good or Chaotic Good that do "good" acts when they feel like it (or when they think it's appropriate). In my opinion, the difference between "Good" and "Neutral" in the morality part of the alignment deals with how much you're willing to sacrifice your time and resources for others that aren't connected to you (outside of a set of laws or duty-based principles), and what your expectations are for society.

    I consider constantly helping others and trying to make them feel better an act of "good" to the extent that can be considered a "commitment" or a "sacrifice" of your time/resources. This is certainly something that I don't do.

    Edit (1/31/23, 10:30 am GMT): Some people might counter this by saying that the forum members that I typed in DnD Alignment have Fi in the Ego block according to Model A, and therefore would naturally be Good according to my definition (they can't be otherwise). My response to that is "consider Bill Gates". Based on what other forum members have said, Bill Gates is probably not Good in DnD Alignment (he regularly, and apparently comfortably, takes selfish actions). However, I don't know much about Bill Gates.

    Edit (1/31/23, 2:55 am GMT): I'd like to once again state that I believe "Good" refers to what you do for people who aren't connected to you. If you have a personal connection to someone and you help them, that's probably not relevant to "Good". It might be relevant to "Neutral" however (some definitions for "Evil" say that you only value your family for the benefit that they give you).

    The definitions that I said in the posts written today (GMT) aren't completely precise.
  2. I'm going to write another journal-type visitor message here despite it being a questionable idea according to logic and my understanding of forum culture. I'm doing this because I don't know of a thread where posting this would be appropriate.

    Based on the Adam Strange posts that I encountered during my research into his disappearance, I would type him as Neutral Good in the DnD alignment system. As far as I can tell, he isn't clearly ordered or order-seeking but also doesn't prefer chaos. A few of his posts also show that he doesn't seem to like authoritarian systems, which might be an indicator of a non-Lawful alignment. My second choice for him would probably be a Good alignment.

    For reference, I would type Adam Strange as the following according to his posts:
    -836. I agree with him on this one.
    -Sx/So or Sp/Sx Decadent.
    -xCxAI (appears SCxAI, the O/U is likely borderline).
    -2L in AP.

    Some of his posts imply that he cares about self-motivation and goal-setting, which would imply something other than 4V. However, I don't have confidence in this assessment.

    This part of this message was last edited on 1/31/23, 7:27 pm GMT.

    Edit (1/31/23, 9:47 am GMT): I haven't done enough research to determine what others' alignments would be. If I guessed End's alignment, it would probably be Lawful Good. Some definitions would call him Lawful Evil, but I think it makes more sense for a Lawful Evil to use law or order as an excuse to be evil (selfish) rather than legitimately believe that they're morally good. Segments of society would think that End is "evil" because of his morality system/life philosophy, but I personally think the intent is more important than the actual moral system (or life philosophy).

    You can easily see this by comparing End to a classically Lawful Evil character such as Darth Vader. Darth Vader's motivations in the Star Wars universe before he encounters his son are completely selfish. As far as I know, at no point does he ever really do anything for the benefit of others except to secure his own power. End, according to some people in society, isn't "good". However, as far as I know, he doesn't take actions out of pure selfishness.

    My second guess for him is probably Lawful Neutral (applies if he's sometimes selfish at the cost of others, or sometimes comfortably violates his understanding of "good"). The main reason why I would type him Lawful Good is because he has an expectation that others should be "good" according to his philosophy. It's possible that I'm misunderstanding the DnD alignment system.

    For reference, I don't like to violate my principles or my agreements, but I sometimes violate my understanding of "good" (which is internalized from society). However, I don't take that understanding completely seriously and I consider myself to be a "good" person (by common or societal definitions). I consider myself to be Lawful Neutral.
  3. I used this area as a personal journal while I was on the forums. I came back here and the posts were kind of embarrassing to me, so I decided to delete most of the journal. I might also delete some of my other forum posts.

    This message was last edited on 1/20/23, at 7:14 am GMT.
  4. being straightforward/blunt is good and needed more I think..
  5. No problem.
  6. still though, I'm sorry because I kind of ~forced you to be EII .. (when i'm not even 100% sure I am one myself tbh.)
  7. Lol. I mean we both have 5 So characteristics apparently. I also have w5. If I'm Sp/Sx and you're So/Sp, we're both contraflow.
  8. yes that could be it.. *sobs*/jk
  9. So welcome, I actually think we can't be identical. You seem to have a Si focus, and historically, I've just kind of ignored it for the most part. I'm the type of person who eats potato chips for breakfast sometimes. I used to stay up until 2 am on school nights.

    Maybe we both use the visitor messages as a diary because we have other similar characteristics somehow. It could either be that we look similar for some other reason, or maybe we have the same type in a different system.
  10. My sense of humor seems to use Ti, not Ni.
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 40
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
About Clarke

Basic Information

About Clarke
Justification for HN:
-I have some characteristics that match the Initiating Dichotomy. I have the Distancing Dichotomy.
-I have characteristics that match the characteristics Gulenko listed for Ti/Fi and Si/Ni enhancement.
-I have H and N characteristics according to their descriptions. Usually, I seem kind of unflappable (matches N), but I also value a level of harmony (I have an aversion to arguments, which matches H).
-I think I like people with D or C characteristics. This would imply that I'm the dual of a D or C.

My Likely Personality Types:
-Standard MBTI: INFP or ISTJ. Probably ISTJ by description. I don't seem to fit MBTI Ni (I don't like characteristics attached to MBTI Ni, such as an understanding of or affinity for metaphors).
-Beebe MBTI (Shadow Mode): IxTJ/INFP (unclear). I fit some descriptions for INFP shadow mode, but I have characteristics that match Ti Critical Parent and Fe Trickster according to other descriptions.
-Socionics: Type with Fi and Te, low Se.
-DCNH: Likely HN or NH.
-Enneagram: 6w5.
-Tritype: Likely 693. I don't identify with 2 or 4.
-Instinctual Stack: Sp/Sx or Sx/Sp wanderer (likely Sp/Sx).
-SLOAN: Probably RxOAI. I would classify as "not moody".
-4 Temperaments: Probably Phlegmatic-Melancholic.
-Attitudinal Psyche: FLEV.

My Likely DnD Alignment: Probably Lawful Neutral.

Notable Personality Characteristics:
-I would consider myself detail oriented. I usually like managing details.
-I prioritize logic and logical rationales over emotions or sometimes even ethics. Sometimes I even don't take my understanding of morals/ethics seriously unless I have a good rationale for it.
-I like stability.
-Things that are chaotic (like the generation of alot of random ideas) sometimes bother me.
-I'm extremely bad at acting in the physical realm. I wouldn't be good at sports.
-I have almost no interest in physical activities (such as sports). This extends to taking walks or exercising, which I'm not necessarily bad at.
-I'm the kind of person who will completely ignore reality in order to daydream about things that have unknown usefulness. These daydreams usually involve interactions between people. Because of this, I can sometimes wait for things to happen for hours. If someone asked me why I do this, I would probably say "for fun" or try to portray it as a useful activity.
-I don't usually like emotional expression.

Basic Information:
-Interests: Gaming, drawing, interesting plants/animals, interesting weather (such as rain), concepts associated with darkness or night, concepts associated with strength/willpower.
-Non-Interests: Sports, art history, strongly light or holy-oriented concepts.
On Semi-Hiatus.
Science, Art, Video Games, War.
Socionics black sheep.
6w5 ISTJ? Sp/Sx


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
Most Recent Message
01-31-2023 10:07 AM
General Information
Last Activity
Today 08:21 PM
Join Date

1 Friend

  1. welcometomania welcometomania is offline

    not fully certain of my sociotype

Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast






  • 11:28 PM - kuno clicked Likes for this post: -= Hidden Content =- by Clarke
  • 06:20 AM - Clarke clicked Likes for this post: -= Hidden Content =- by Coeruleum Blue




Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast







  • 02:23 PM - Hidden


  • 09:55 AM - Hidden









Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 35 1234511 ... LastLast




Page 1 of 35 1234511 ... LastLast