Autonomy is the wild card among shards

[animalia]

My theory is that Autonomy as shards go is a bit of a wild card. A lot of shards, in ISOLATION tend toward either bad or good, but I am thinking Autonomy DOES BOTH. Because this is how freedom works. What’s more just like Autonomy has presented herself with different faces. Freedom means different things to different people. Freedom can inspire people to revolt against tyrants, or on a smaller scale it can inspire people to correct the small injustices in the world. On the other hand we’ve seen people go to extremes to get it that would scare us. And often when they get it they aren’t ready for it. That’s because it is something that takes time to strive for.

 

Speaking of so far we’ve only se’ve the bad Autonomy has done. But I suspect that a lot of behind the scenes good work such as how Mare learned about flowers had to do with Autonomy as well.

 

This comes back to the original title of the thread. Autonomy is the wild card of the shards. I suspect for all the bad it does it does an equal amount of good.

[Fatikis]

2 hours ago, animalia said:

This comes back to the original title of the thread. Autonomy is the wild card of the shards. I suspect for all the bad it does it does an equal amount of good.

Shard are neither good or evil. Odium is an odd beast, but I hesitate to call the shard itself bad. It is a dangerous shard especially when wielded by Rayse. The attribute itself is not evil. Similar to Ruin, its potential to be considered evil in its distilled form is likely.

That said Autonomy is not evil. Autonomy will likely be a major antagonist. Really all shards are wild cards. Unchecked Preservation would be a major problem. 

Edited August 13, 2018 by Fatikis

[Calderis]

And Mare got her knowledge of flowers and the world before from Sazed. She converted to the Art religion that Sazed got Clubs with on the end. The Dadradah. 

[animalia]

50 minutes ago, Fatikis said:

Shard are neither good or evil. Odium is an odd beast, but I hesitate to call the shard itself bad. It is a dangerous shard especially when wielded by Rayse. The attribute itself is not evil. Similar to Ruin, its potential to be considered evil in its distilled form is likely.

That said Autonomy is not evil. Autonomy will likely be a major antagonist. Really all shards are wild cards. Unchecked Preservation would be a major problem. 

I meant more so then OTHER shards it's a wild card. If nothing else Brandon said that Bavadin is his favorite of the original shard holders. Though weather that's a good thing or a bad thing I do not know.

[Fanghur Rahl]

17 hours ago, Fatikis said:

Shard are neither good or evil. Odium is an odd beast, but I hesitate to call the shard itself bad. It is a dangerous shard especially when wielded by Rayse. The attribute itself is not evil. Similar to Ruin, its potential to be considered evil in its distilled form is likely. 

This is a point that I’ve argued against several times. If by ‘Shard’ you mean just the raw power and intent, then sure, since the Shard itself isn’t a person in any meaningful sense (although some people would consider things like disease, tornadoes, etc. to be ‘evil’, but let’s set that aside for now). If however you mean the that the Shard + Vessel are neither good or evil, then this is completely false, at least unless we render the very terms ‘good’ and ‘evil’ essentially meaningless. Rayse + Odium is clearly evil insofar as what any sane, moral human being means by that term. As was Ati + Ruin. Whereas based on what little we know of her, I think it’s fairly safe to assume that Aona + Devotion was probably a very benevolent being.

Edited August 14, 2018 by Fanghur Rahl

[Fatikis]

4 hours ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

This is a point that I’ve argued against several times. If by ‘Shard’ you mean just the raw power and intent, then sure, since the Shard itself isn’t a person in any meaningful sense (although some people would consider things like disease, tornadoes, etc. to be ‘evil’, but let’s set that aside for now). If however you mean the that the Shard + Vessel are neither good or evil, then this is completely false, at least unless we render the very terms ‘good’ and ‘evil’ essentially meaningless. Rayse + Odium is clearly evil insofar as what any sane, moral human being means by that term. As was Ati + Ruin. Whereas based on what little we know of her, I think it’s fairly safe to assume that Aona + Devotion was probably a very benevolent being.

I meant the shard. That is why I stated shard.

With that being said. After a time there is little to no distinction between shard and vessel. Good and evil are meaningless when discussing things like Preservation and Ruin. Both are necessary for life. Preservation which you'd label as good would see life put in stasis. Preservation was disappointed by the death of a ruthless, bloodthirsty, tyrant. Simply because the Lord Ruler was a constant. Devotion is not a benevolent force. I know this is overly used cliche but Hitler was devoted. His followers were devoted.

These are all raw forces divorced from the whole which gave them context. Good an evil are pointless arbitrary abstracts. Shards are raw forces that must obey their intent. Sure Rayse was a PoS to begin with. As we saw Ati it doesn't matter who you were to begin with. The intent in the end consume you. After a few thousand years it is pointless to even distinguish between shard and vessel. They are one and the same. 

[Fanghur Rahl]

12 minutes ago, Fatikis said:

I meant the shard. That is why I stated shard.

With that being said. After a time there is little to no distinction between shard and vessel. Good and evil are meaningless when discussing things like Preservation and Ruin. Both are necessary for life. Preservation which you'd label as good would see life put in stasis. Preservation was disappointed by the death of a ruthless, bloodthirsty, tyrant. Simply because the Lord Ruler was a constant. Devotion is not a benevolent force. I know this is overly used cliche but Hitler was devoted. His followers were devoted.

These are all raw forces divorced from the whole which gave them context. Good an evil are pointless arbitrary abstracts. Shards are raw forces that must obey their intent. Sure Rayse was a PoS to begin with. As we saw Ati it doesn't matter who you were to begin with. The intent in the end consume you. After a few thousand years it is pointless to even distinguish between shard and vessel. They are one and the same. 

Well then we shouldn’t ascribe them to human beings either. After all, if you refuse to describe a being who revels in the suffering of others and causes vast destruction and cruelty on a star cluster-scale as ‘evil’, then how could we ever possibly be internally consistent calling someone like Hitler or Stalin ‘evil’? They were saints compared to Rayse-Odium. If you don’t believe in using the terms at all, then that’s fine. But I’m just saying, you can’t have it both ways. When most people say that someone is ‘evil’, what they generally mean is that at the very least they have no qualms about causing others to suffer, and often take pleasure or satisfaction in doing it. Well, Odium does that and far more. As did Ruin before it became Harmony.

 

[Fatikis]

12 minutes ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

Well then we shouldn’t ascribe them to human beings either. After all, if you refuse to describe a being who revels in the suffering of others and causes vast destruction and cruelty on a star cluster-scale as ‘evil’, then how could we ever possibly be internally consistent calling someone like Hitler or Stalin ‘evil’? They were saints compared to Rayse-Odium. If you don’t believe in using the terms at all, then that’s fine. But I’m just saying, you can’t have it both ways. When most people say that someone is ‘evil’, what they generally mean is that at the very least they have no qualms about causing others to suffer, and often take pleasure or satisfaction in doing it. Well, Odium does that and far more. As did Ruin before it became Harmony.

I did not call Hitler evil. Hitler is however a whole human with the whole context of being. Using terms of good an evil here are far less complex. In the cosmere the shards are forces. They are bound to their intent. Calling Ruin evil is like calling entropy evil. 

Quote

Blightsong

Can honorspren, or any other type of Knight Radiant spren, be evil despite their relationship to Tanavast or Cultivation?

Brandon Sanderson

Yes, because I don't call the Shards good and evil. There are no good and evil Shards in my opinion, like and so, what's evil and what's not evil- you can totally have spren that are of Honor that you would consider evil. They have free will; they are much more strictly limited in that free will than we are, because of their nature as spren. It's very hard for most spren to ever break an oath or to lie. That's just like- as manifestations of laws of nature makes it very hard for that to happen, but they can be cruel.

source

Shards as forces are not good or evil. They are essentially raw power with a polarity. The vessels can be evil sure. Even with that the vessels are barely distinguishable after a time.

[Calderis]

8 minutes ago, Fatikis said:

Even with that the vessels are barely distinguishable after a time.

Until we see a single Shard change hands, I don't think that is actually known. We have various WoBs on the interpretation of the vessel effecting the way the Shard manifests. 

[Fanghur Rahl]

And if entropy really WAS all that Ati-Ruin was, I’d probably agree with you. However, that is blatantly untrue. That describes Death from Supernatural, not the sadistic psychopath that Ati turned into upon acquiring his Shard, taunting people over their dead loved ones, burning people alive, trying to destroy Scadrial a few hundred million years prior to the star going nova.

Regardless of what Ruin claimed, it should be obvious to you, me and blind Kremlings that Ruin was far more sinister than merely an embodiment of the natural process of entropy. Ruin was a kid with a magnifying glass and Scadrial was an anthill.

[Scion of the Mists]

1 hour ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

And if entropy really WAS all that Ati-Ruin was, I’d probably agree with you. However, that is blatantly untrue. That describes Death from Supernatural, not the sadistic psychopath that Ati turned into upon acquiring his Shard, taunting people over their dead loved ones, burning people alive, trying to destroy Scadrial a few hundred million years prior to the star going nova.

Regardless of what Ruin claimed, it should be obvious to you, me and blind Kremlings that Ruin was far more sinister than merely an embodiment of the natural process of entropy. Ruin was a kid with a magnifying glass and Scadrial was an anthill.

 

Brandon has said that he doesn't view Ruin as particularly evil.  Also, here is the WoB about Ati and entropy (plus, recall that Hoid describes him as once being a "kind and generous man").  

Quote

Alvaro Lopez

Why Odium is stronger and worst evil than Ruin?

Brandon Sanderson

One reason is that Ruin had a person in control of it who, for many years, fought against the impulse to destroy--and in the end, channeled it toward entropy and decay, necessary elements of the universe. Odium represents something else entirely.

source

[Fanghur Rahl]

I know, and quite frankly, it doesn’t come off even a tiny bit insofar as how Ruin is portrayed as acting in the books. It’s consistent with the way he speaks and describes himself, but is totally at odd with how he actually behaves. Like I said, what Brandon is describing is essentially Death from Supernatural, whereas Ruin is more akin to what we were expecting the Darkness to be prior to them completely retconning her into God’s sister. That is to say, wanton, senseless destruction. 

Edited August 14, 2018 by Fanghur Rahl

[Fatikis]

4 hours ago, Fanghur Rahl said:

And if entropy really WAS all that Ati-Ruin was, I’d probably agree with you. However, that is blatantly untrue. That describes Death from Supernatural, not the sadistic psychopath that Ati turned into upon acquiring his Shard, taunting people over their dead loved ones, burning people alive, trying to destroy Scadrial a few hundred million years prior to the star going nova.

Regardless of what Ruin claimed, it should be obvious to you, me and blind Kremlings that Ruin was far more sinister than merely an embodiment of the natural process of entropy. Ruin was a kid with a magnifying glass and Scadrial was an anthill.

And Ati was considered a good man. Which goes along with my point. The shards are not good or evil. They are forces divorced from context. There may be some leeway on the interpretation of the intent, but Ati was not evil. The shard of Ruin essentially overrode his personality. Ruin is not evil. It is a necessary fraction of a whole. Rather than describing them in terms of bad, I would categorize them by their level of danger to sapient life. Which you can break down into good and evil if you'd like.

Edited August 14, 2018 by Fatikis

[Fanghur Rahl]

You have to stop thinking of the Vessels and Shards as if they are ultimately separate though. Ati without the Shard is for all intents and purposes a completely different person than Ati with the Shard. Now it’s ultimately just semantics whether you want to say that Ruin was or was not still ‘Ati’, but regardless, it would be fallacious to assert that because Ati without the Shard wasn’t evil, therefore the new being that resulted from Ati acquiring the Shard also wasn’t evil; that simply does not logically follow anymore than it would to say that if a person wasn’t evil prior to brain damage turning them into a murdering sadist, they obviously aren’t afterward either.

I realize that we’re largely just arguing semantics here, but the double-standard people usually tend to employ with regards to Shards and their moral status has always been confusing to me.

[Calderis]

I suppose I have a somewhat unique view in this conversation. Ati was a good man, who viewed what Ruin represented as evil. As such the being that his interpretation created, the "mindless" monster, was very much evil. 

Either one, in isolation is not. Ati was good. Ruin is neither, but the melding of the two, what Ati feared the Shard would be, was very much evil. Because he believed it was. 

Edited August 15, 2018 by Calderis

[Fanghur Rahl]

I agree. Like I said before, the Shard itself is simply potential, and potential isn’t good or bad, at least in a moral sense. But once taken by a Vessel, the resulting person/being/whatever IS a moral agent in my opinion.