Follow TV Tropes
This page quote is a really baffling run-on sentence full of double negatives and split clauses.
I don't have a suggested replacement on hand, but there has got to be a better example than this.
Take it to the Trope Description Improvement Drive?
The article has attracted lots of Natter and incorrect sorting of examples.
This was in Real Life with two or three bullets. It should be moved to Literature or Mythology — and written properly, without Word Cruft and Thread Mode.
I think it might be time for Portal entry pimps to stop acting like Valve invented the blue orange color scheme. We have a trope that explains why blue and orange are used together and that trope influenced Portal and others who use it. Following this logic, I might conclude that Valve was paying homage to the University of Florida Gators who have been using that color scheme for decades.
This trope is about systems of morality that are beyond human understanding. None of these examples represent that. The first looks like inconsistent writing. The second is just an example of an Anti-Hero. The third is Bad is Good and Good is Bad, a different trope.
I removed this wick.
Jane is a young woman based on Jane Eyre. She's very moral and very human, compassionate... This must be shoehorning or not understanding the trope at all.
The wick on the show's page is about Grace Poole, and also incorrect.
Grace Poole is obsessed with gluten and she is a Granola Girl, but that hardly means she has foreign and incomprehensible system of moral values.
Pretty much everything in the Real Life section is just Values Dissonance and not this trope at all.
It could be argued that Values Dissonance and this trope are not mutually exclusive, or this trope is simply an extreme form of the other.
"The Martians in Mars Attacks! declare war, apparently, because they see a bird, laugh, cry and get angry for reasons incomprehensible to humans, cut off someone's head and keep it alive for no apparent reason, put another person's head on a chihuahua's body, again for no apparent reason and their entire language consists of the word "Ack!""
And the Martians originally approached the US, which have a bird on the State Seal -but one is later seen spazzing out when eavesdropping on a Presidential statement/broadcast when the Seal comes up. (???)
About the only thing consistent with the guys is that they reallllllly hate birds. One gave up a perfect hostage situation to shoot a caged bird!
Chopped this from World of Warcraft on General Principle:
Attempted to tidy the Dragon Age examples: There's some good info in there, but it's mixed up and in Thread Form, rather than seperate point. Someone who knows the series might do better.
Kimblee from Fullmetal Alchemist (at least his manga/Brotherhood adaptation) seems to me like more of an odd variant of Lawful Neutral. Granted, it's his ethics that fall under this trope, but they basically boil down to the idea that a person's state in life dictates that they adhere to the "rules"/expectations that come with it. ie: Being critical of soldiers not killing innocent civilians, but commending the Rockbells for treating the same civilians (soldiers are killers, doctors are healers). Or better yet, if you're an Artificial Human by the name of Pride, then trying to pull a Grand Theft Me on a "lower being" is going against your own principals.
Could the characters of Seinfeld be considered practitioners of Blue and Orange Morality? Not just the four main characters, but just about any character on the show. At the least they're very quirky, and at the most they might as well be aliens from another planet.
Ultimately Black and White morality are defined in the eye of the beholder. Blue and Orange is simply a set of moral values that isn't understood, on an emotional level, by the viewer. Everyone who isn't you has a shade of blue and orange, all it takes is they do something that you would find offensive, or they don't understand why you care about something that is good/evil.
Just do a survey of opinions on animal testing and you will find a lot of disagreement.
In short, create a list of everything that people should do, and another list of things they shouldn't. The more someone (or something) disagrees with that list, they more shades of orange and blue they have.
I think that Blue and Orange is more like a set of morality at a higher level of complexity.
Blue and Orange Morality is morality that comes from a basis that is entirely different from a human one. If one person has a morality set that values obedience, and another that values independent thinking, each would be Blue and Orange to the other.
It could also be a basis which is simply unconventional- hence the bacon/necktie example. The dichotomy between enjoying your food vs. dressing for dinner is no big deal for most people- but to some eccentric out there it could be a huge deal. (Bacon being someone who enjoys consuming food, but can't be bothered with dressing up; necktie those who dress up and consider dinner more a social occasion but aren't foodies or into gluttony.)
Just a suggestion: couldn't this be considered a subtrope of "Values Dissonance" in the same way "And I Must Scream" is a subtrope of "Fate Worse than Death"?
Reasoning: Assuming I'm not misinterpreting one or both tropes, Blue & Orange Morality would be the most extreme version of Values Dissonance, where the sets of values presented are not only different from the "standard" set, but are incomprehensible. More than likely, the two sets are mutually incomprehensible.
Just a thought.
That does sound logical...
I think we do need to determine where to draw the line. First, determine whether we have Blue and Orange Morality compared to people who were grown-ups in The '50s. If we don't, then we had better trim the Real Life section again. If we do, then things will get very interesting....
Removed this from the Perdido Street Station example:
This doesn't seem to be an example. The Garuda might have slightly different values, but they make sense to humans and coincide with basic human morals. Rape is considered a horrible action and the victim clearly suffered emotional damage. Just because a morality and judicial system are different and phrased a different way doesn't make it this trope.
Also, a lot of people (myself included) don't consider selling drugs immoral. Actually, isn't this philosophy basically the philosophy of the Libertarian Party?
What is the Trope Namer for this trope?
It's a (decent) snowclone to the common, pre-existing Black and White Morality-type terms.
EDIT: Never mind.
Removed the example about the Jedi from the Prequel Trilogy. They may fit under Values Dissonance or Protagonist-Centered Morality, or we might just say that they're written inconsistently but they do stand for some kind of discernible good. Its clear that George Lucas meant for them to be good guys being manipulated by bad guys into making some bad decisions. He just handled it poorly.
Inconsistently written morality is not the same as Blue And Orange.
There is way too much Natter in the Religion section, especially from apologists trying to pretend the scriptures don't say what they say. I've removed much of it, although it's so bad I'd have left it alone but for the "wives and progenie" statement (he never lost his wife, that's a common misconception for some reason).
Okay, I've made an overhaul, since it was just getting ridiculous.
Could/Should we add Loki in here somewhere? Under religion I guess?
(And I'm talking about the Nordic Loki - not the one reimagined for Christian purposes. And, obviously, not the Marvel one since he was based off of the reimagined Christian one.)
The problem is that that doesn't really exist. The Norse gods aren't like the Greek gods, for whom we have loads of documents by worshippers; pretty much all we have are various Christian reimaginings, and it's hard to sort out tradition from fancy.
Wouldn't the Bilical examples be better off put in either Values Dissonance and/or Protagonist-Centered Morality?
The Affront in Iain M Banks' Culture series?
Are this many redirects necessary? No offense if they're genuine. but I'm reminded of ED's trolling suggestions regarding possible redirects to Blue Eyes. I haven't even come across people using most of them.
At least over on the Order of the Stick forums (the unofficial TV Tropes discussion board), I've seen people using "Blue and Orange Morality" to indicate a system in which there are two moral poles which have contents and rules different from the contemporary American/European black and white. By this definition, for example, a Proud Warrior Race Guy would be Blue and Orange, because he doesn't believe that killing is always wrong.
This gives the trope a definition which a human being is capable of interacting with, while also setting up a clear contrast with Values Dissonance — where both parties agree on what's right and wrong in general, but disagree on the particulars. Would it be possible to redefine the trope to mean this?
I don't see the point. The trope is fine the way it is.
Could Narcissists, Sociopaths, and Pyschopaths fall under this category or maybe be humans who are the closest to falling under this category?
Sure, Why Not?.
Should the Real Life section even exist? I mean, this seems like one of those tropes that cannot exist in Real Life.
The Real Life section can exist insofar as it is listing entities that are non-human in essence — bonobos, corporations, or 4chan, to name a few. (I tend to follow the Steinbeck theory of corporations — corporation nature will lead a corporation to do things no individual humans working for it would dare do on their own. No human at the bank enjoys kicking people out of their homes by foreclosing the housing, but the bank can't let those home loans go unpaid forever.)
Anything suggesting that a human being or a country has Blue and Orange Morality, however, has gotta go.
Left the historical example; cut the others. Yes, I know the Jack Chick variety of Christian (he's not that unique in his beliefs) may look like they have Blue and Orange Morality — but since they believe they have Black and White Morality, listing them is risky...
Blue and Orange Morality is tricky. If it's really Blue and Orange Morality, then normal people won't be able to comprehend it; and if normal people can't comprehend it, then they'll have trouble writing it.
A little off topic, but this was my biggest stumbling block writing the original article. I had to keep reminding myself that I can't understand Blue And Orange morality so that I wouldn't flanderize it into Values Dissonance. Real B&O morality can only be recognized as a concept, not understood. I'm still kind of iffy on listing the Nietzchean superman as B&O, because of the potential for him having plain old Values Dissonance.
It could theoretically exist in real life if there were another sapient species which we never manage to understand. But there aren't... which may be a good thing.
I'm not sure that this whole trope really makes sense outside of fiction, and even there can't stand up to Fridge Logic. Any system of morality will have things to avoid - evil by another name - and things to strive towards - good by another name. That's the whole point of moral systems. An Eldritch Abomination that feeds on people simply doesn't consider that act to be evil; that's an example of Values Dissonance.
There's also the question of whether simply not caring about your actions being horrible makes you any less evil. In fact, it can be argued that the very definition of evil is not caring how your actions affect others. Simply because you claim to be following The Path of Orange shouldn't be a "Get out of Jail Free" Card.
So no, I think that this can't exist in real life; all such cases are simply Values Dissonance.
I have a question about this statement of yours, Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan:
"Anything suggesting that a human being or a country has Blue And Orange Morality, however, has gotta go."
What if a person is completely human but is mentally insane so that he/she has some very unconventional beliefs? 'Normal' people would find this person's mindset to be alien-like.
As an Aspie, I can attest that to some people my mores are blue and orange. To describe them would be counterproductive though.
Blue and Orange Morality is when two morality systems are different, not only in general, but in the very method of determining what is right or wrong. For example, capitalism and communism. One values freedom above all else, while the other values equality above all else. This is Blue and Orange Morality.
I don't dare to touch or even look too closely at the Ender's Game examples, but it seems to me they should mostly be removed in light of the considerations raised by the definition of the trope which I just made a note of in the main text. (Summary: misunderstanding the implications of your actions doesn't mean you're acting by alien moral rules.)
I came here to say the same thing. I suspect it's a question of the community just sighing and admitting that you'd have to camp out 24/7 to stop people posting it. The only semi-solution I can see is to make it even more explicit at the top - "This means the Buggers don't fit this trope, do not post" - but people would still do it.
This page needs a lot of cleanup. Half of the examples don't fit, although it's hard to wrap one's mind around examples of morality that go beyond human comprehension.
There's a lot of examples of "Cultural/Biological differences inform morality differences" on the page. The Ender's Game ones just seemed the most obvious.
Example of a blue/orange morality that ARE understandable by us are ones in which some quantifiable concept is held as the good/evil axis, by definition a concept we consider arbitrary, insignificant, or without morality. Some common examples are aesthetics, sensation, the color red, or height. You can grasp how the morality might work, even if you can't put yourself in the mindset. With the Ender's Game example, you CAN put yourself in the mindset, so it's not blue/orange.
I have to agree with Zabeus, alot of the examples on this trope fail to work.
Community Showcase More