Post by Jarkoopi, Kepesk Altiui on Oct 24, 2016 5:43:03 GMT -8
I've found a fairly simple chart to define or describe a government's (or group's) ethos. Allow me to show it and describe it:
I'll start withe the first horizontal line and rotate counter clockwise.
The collectivist - individualist (collectivists on left, individual on right.) dichotomy looks at the worth of an individual.
Collectivists consider that an individual should cooperate with the rest of the society in order to benefit society as a whole. In contrast, individualists believe that an individual should be the master of their own destiny and pursue their own goals, dreams, and ambitions.
Collectivists focus on pursuing one common goal while the individualists focus on attempting to coexist while each pursuing their own. As such, even though collectivists empathise "the need of many" they do not deal well with democracy and lean towards autocracy (aren't self-centred enough to reject autocracy, aren't chaotic enough to deal with democracy). Meanwhile, even though individualists empathise the "radiant genius of individuals", they don't deal well with autocracy and instead lean towards democracy (aren't driven enough to reject democracy, aren't compliant enough to to deal with autocracy).
In mechanical terms, Collectivists tolerate the idea of slavery, while Individualists do not.
The xenophobe - xenophile (xenophobe top right, xenophile bottom left) dichotomy looks at the acceptance of foreign species.
Xenophobes consider that different species would introduce foreign ideas and thoughts that could destabilise and, in the end, destroy the empire or, at the very least, its cultural and genetic identity. In contrast, Xenophiles believe that society would grow stagnant without different concepts and moralities and are thus considered staunch believers in unity by diversity. Xenophobes are particularly keen on enslaving other species, though will never accept them as equals while Xenophiles prefer making alliances viewing all organics as equal.
The militarist - pacifist (militarist top, pacifists bottom) dichotomy looks at the merit of war.
Militarists consider aggression as the only needed form of diplomacy required and wars are thus viewed as a tradition. In contrast, pacifists believe that violence breeds even more hatred and that friendly cooperation between different empires brings forth more long-term benefit than undignified bloodshed.
The materialist - spiritualist (materialist bottom right, spiritualist top left) dichotomy looks at the nature of the being and reality in general.
Materialists disregard superstition, considering that life has no intrinsic meaning outside their own reality and that the only true purpose is what they make of it. In contrast, spiritualists believe that consciousness surpasses materiality and that their temporary, mortal bodies, subjected to the vicissitudes of the universe, are only means towards a greater end: to improve themselves spiritually in anticipation of their future ascension to higher planes of existence.
(The orange symbols are just "fanatic" versions of the normal ones, simply meaning they fanatically believe in these ethos.)
Now, you might be asking: Why'd you post this? Etc.
Well, since the current events ICly display some... conflict of ideals and such, I thought this would be a fairly cool thing to share.
You could list your own group or government's ethos from this chart and see how it compares to others.
It also is a good tool for looking forward to possible IC relations, seeing how a "first contact" might result.
I'll admit, much like D&D's alignment chart, this does have some missing minor ethos and might not cover enough smaller reasonings for ethos.
Here's an example:
Isra - Fanatic Individualists, and Xenophiles.
Goraia - Militarist, Collectivists, and Materialists.
(These are all my opinions, however.)
Now you try, classify your own group/government!
Try to stick with 3 "points" for best representation, the blue cost one, while orange are two, and make sure they do not conflict, EX: spiritualist AND materialist.
(Credit to the game Stellaris and it's wiki for the idea and original chart.)
I'll start withe the first horizontal line and rotate counter clockwise.
The collectivist - individualist (collectivists on left, individual on right.) dichotomy looks at the worth of an individual.
Collectivists consider that an individual should cooperate with the rest of the society in order to benefit society as a whole. In contrast, individualists believe that an individual should be the master of their own destiny and pursue their own goals, dreams, and ambitions.
Collectivists focus on pursuing one common goal while the individualists focus on attempting to coexist while each pursuing their own. As such, even though collectivists empathise "the need of many" they do not deal well with democracy and lean towards autocracy (aren't self-centred enough to reject autocracy, aren't chaotic enough to deal with democracy). Meanwhile, even though individualists empathise the "radiant genius of individuals", they don't deal well with autocracy and instead lean towards democracy (aren't driven enough to reject democracy, aren't compliant enough to to deal with autocracy).
In mechanical terms, Collectivists tolerate the idea of slavery, while Individualists do not.
The xenophobe - xenophile (xenophobe top right, xenophile bottom left) dichotomy looks at the acceptance of foreign species.
Xenophobes consider that different species would introduce foreign ideas and thoughts that could destabilise and, in the end, destroy the empire or, at the very least, its cultural and genetic identity. In contrast, Xenophiles believe that society would grow stagnant without different concepts and moralities and are thus considered staunch believers in unity by diversity. Xenophobes are particularly keen on enslaving other species, though will never accept them as equals while Xenophiles prefer making alliances viewing all organics as equal.
The militarist - pacifist (militarist top, pacifists bottom) dichotomy looks at the merit of war.
Militarists consider aggression as the only needed form of diplomacy required and wars are thus viewed as a tradition. In contrast, pacifists believe that violence breeds even more hatred and that friendly cooperation between different empires brings forth more long-term benefit than undignified bloodshed.
The materialist - spiritualist (materialist bottom right, spiritualist top left) dichotomy looks at the nature of the being and reality in general.
Materialists disregard superstition, considering that life has no intrinsic meaning outside their own reality and that the only true purpose is what they make of it. In contrast, spiritualists believe that consciousness surpasses materiality and that their temporary, mortal bodies, subjected to the vicissitudes of the universe, are only means towards a greater end: to improve themselves spiritually in anticipation of their future ascension to higher planes of existence.
(The orange symbols are just "fanatic" versions of the normal ones, simply meaning they fanatically believe in these ethos.)
Now, you might be asking: Why'd you post this? Etc.
Well, since the current events ICly display some... conflict of ideals and such, I thought this would be a fairly cool thing to share.
You could list your own group or government's ethos from this chart and see how it compares to others.
It also is a good tool for looking forward to possible IC relations, seeing how a "first contact" might result.
I'll admit, much like D&D's alignment chart, this does have some missing minor ethos and might not cover enough smaller reasonings for ethos.
Here's an example:
Isra - Fanatic Individualists, and Xenophiles.
Goraia - Militarist, Collectivists, and Materialists.
(These are all my opinions, however.)
Now you try, classify your own group/government!
Try to stick with 3 "points" for best representation, the blue cost one, while orange are two, and make sure they do not conflict, EX: spiritualist AND materialist.
(Credit to the game Stellaris and it's wiki for the idea and original chart.)
