[DapperAnarchist]

Dark Eldar morality seems to be to be one where the only normative value judgements are those of pure self-interest - not even a speciesist theory, such as the Craftworld Eldar, but one closer to some sort of madman's interpretation of Machiavelli... While Regan and Singer would dismiss the Dark Kin as moral beings, they might be forced to admit that they are at least consistent on a level that the Craftworld Eldar, the Imperium, and our own society is not. We draw artifical distinctions of species, class, family, nation, and the like, and then say "THIS, on this side of the line, is valuable - THAT, over there, is not", no matter the relative merit of those individuals who fall on each side of the line (Regan and Singer being, really, atomists of ethics...). The Dark Eldar are also atomists, but consistent ones. The only line they draw is the one around themselves. They may even admit that someone else is better than them, for some ethical value. However, that then only makes them a risk or a target...

For information on the Dark Eldar, I suggest reading One More Hit, on the IC boards here, Dark Magenta, and of course the Codex. Xenology has a couple interesting bits - like that while the restrained and puritan Craftworld Eldar call Slaanesh "She Who Thirsts", the more emotive Dark Kin call her "The Thirsty Bitch".

[Inquisitor Sargoth]

For information on the Dark Eldar, I suggest reading One More Hit, on the IC boards here

That's some very, very nice praise, there.

[Brother_Brimstone]

While i would definitely agree with what you say i would hasten to add that it still confers no concept of 'good' on the Dark Eldar. To be good and to be consistent are two very different things (although i'm not implying you suggested otherwise). Someone who is inconsistently 'good' but always has 'good' intentions would be considered in almost all ethical systems better than someone who is consistently 'evil'.

Similarly, that the Dark Eldar are more consistant in their selfishness does not indicate that they are more morally acceptable. In fact some (especially act utilitarians) would claim that inconsistency is a key part of morality (the act utilitarian would claim that because every situation is different each has a different 'good' course of action - the only consistency in your actions must be that they maxmise utility, but if you're a utilitarian, you believe that 'maximises utility = good' so really that's a bit like saying 'the only consistency in doing the good thing is that it is always good' - it's a self-assuring truth).

Anyway, nothing i've said there contradicts anything you said, i'm just putting my own claims in terms of the framework your post provided, in order to show the justification behind my reasoning.

[Shannow]

For information on the Dark Eldar, I suggest reading One More Hit, on the IC boards here

That's some very, very nice praise, there.

I have just finished reading One More Hit, and I think it was absolutely fantastic, I meant to go to bed half an hour ago and could not stop reading. I also found it a great source of inspiration for how I want my Dark Eldar character to be. Many thanks for both the fantastic read and the excellent recommendation.