Auri Garvel Xel'iathi

Members
  • Content count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Awakened Object

About Auri Garvel Xel'iathi

  • Rank
    All is Vain.
  • Birthday 08/14/1986

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    GW2 :)

Recent Profile Visitors

1,297 profile views
  1. Filipino (from the Philippines) living in New Zealand. I speak Filipino and English fluently and mangle Japanese on a regular basis.
  2. I don't know if it's just me but I don't see how the badge is a representation of someone pushing a bridge over a chasm. Would anyone be able to clarify it for me, please?
  3. She could always have just asked her mum.
  4. Omg, that is gorgeous! As if I didn't have enough reasons to buy the hardcover!
  5. I've bolded some statements that I feel weakens your arguments. First, it is simply not a 'fact of the world' but a perspective and therefore opinion. When you say "take a set of measures" you have effectively decided based on your opinion. This is what I'm trying to make clear, someone has to decide and I'd rather not die just because someone's opinion calls for my death. Secondly, even if we're not clear on what is "good" or "right" as subjective, I'm sure we can at least agree that if you're in a hospital you're not there to be killed? Even if we only base things on the Golden Rule as a baseline, Mr. T still fails the moral compass test as he offers no real alternative for his victims except, as evidenced by that dying man, to hold their silence and express their contempt. Your second case is actually three assumptions none of which are guaranteed which leads me to my third point. That no matter how much we know, fantasy world or not, we can predict but we can't guarantee. We don't even know for sure whether Voidbringers are really there to destroy the world and kill everybody. We don't even know if the death chants are what they seem to be, we don't know if anything we've been told is real at all. So, Mr. T just killed a lot of people he wasn't meant to be killing on the off-chance that he's right. Fourthly, you speak as if these dying people are the only source of knowledge on Roshar. Reckon Mr. T tried to look for Envisagers? Or talked to the Worldsingers? Or maybe to Rock's people as they see spren? The spren seem to know a lot more of those times and what to expect than any dying human does as evidenced by the Lift Interlude. And finally, if you were an ardent working for Mr. T and I a vagrant who "found my way" into your hospital, tell me again how I won't be doing any dying soon.
  6. Perhaps, you misunderstand the notion of 'greater good'? The words themselves explicitly state there is a comparison being made where one has "greater" good than another. And, tell me, who decides who benefits? Surely not the victim? There is a difference between doing acts that are wrong for the 'greater good' and doing the right thing because it is good. If the latter was followed and not the former there'd be less death in the name of God and salvation. There is no free lunch but that does not mean there can be no exchange of value for value. The significant factor here is choice. If you choose to dedicate your life to helping others yourself you are usually lauded, applauded and recognized for it (i.e. Mother Teresa). But when you decide for others, and make them bend to your will or break them in the process, then you are a tyrant. You speak of tradeoffs, but tell me, how much choice did Kaladin have when Amaram took the shards? If information was that crucial to Mr. T, then perhaps he should've bent his massive intellect to getting people to provide that information voluntarily? If they're going to die, might as well die for a good cause? Do you see the dissonance here? The difference between killing someone and letting someone die is largely dependent on the context but the way I see it, whether you acted or not is your choice. Your reasons might be your own but it still remains your choice -- even choosing not to act is a choice. The main difference is the intent, and this is something that the law the whole world over recognizes as very, very significant. This is the difference between murder and manslaughter. Amaram chose to kill. This is a fact. So did Taravangian. If anything, I'd side more with Dalinar as a warlord as it is his function and role to kill whereas Taravangian would like to bring peace and ease the suffering of people but instead kills. It is a massive distortion of function. Additionally, Dalinar's track record is such that I'd trust him to spend my life, if needed, into what he believes is the best way possible. This is what it means to lead men, this is what it takes to earn true loyalty. Neither through trickery, nor through deceit nor from cruelty, fear or coercion. Mr. T and Dalinar is the difference between saying "the world is ending, I require your death to lessen that chance but regardless of what you say I'll kill you anyway", and, "The world might end, your death might lessen that chance, will you help?"
  7. Just a few points, there will always be a greater good. An argument can be made that Hitler was working for the greater good. It just so happens that he was doing it for the greater good of the Aryan Race which he believed superior. Mao worked for the greater good, of the communist party and his supporters. Julius Caesar worked for the good of Rome when he refused to relinquish rule. But the common thread in all this is that the common good is being done to the detriment of other people. It's all good until you feel the boots on your back walking all over you. To be a great leader a certain ruthlessness is required but it must be done with the right intent and the right reasons. And genius doesn't always count into it either because for all the collective intelligence the modern world has today and throughout history, we still haven't fixed bureaucracy.
  8. Just as a sidenote, being a genius doesn't guarantee that you won't mess up the small stuff because it's easy.It helps, sure. But actually, because you move on to solving bigger and harder probems it does mean that your mistakes, when they happen, will consequently be bigger and harder to fix as well.
  9. That runaway train argument is flawed as a comparison, you're being forced to choose between people who are already going to die in a slice of time that leaves very few options, one of the more attractive of which is the reduction of fatalities whereas in Amaram's case it's premeditated. He had time to think about what he could and should do. He had options. Arguing in light of the Immortal words, what Amaram did runs counter to choosing Life before death in that he killed where killing was not needed. He failed Strength before Weakness by giving in to fear instead of banking on integrity. And he most obviously failed Journey before Destination by trying to justify the means with the ends. As Alaxel posted before on a differebt thread, the philosophy applied by the Knights are very Kantian. I think that this is one case Sanderson is arguing for, our ends should not justify our means.
  10. As a commander or even just someone who has to manage people on a daily basis, if something feels off, or something is making the people who work for me uncomfortable or twitchy I'd like to know what it is. I wouldn't care if it was trivial or significant, I'd rather be the judge of that and keep everybody working on the same page than to let things fester and blow out of proportion. I feep I'm being biased about this but if somebody came up to me and said that something was stolen from them and my role was affected by said theft, then I don't care if you're a prince or a pauper, I'm going to find out exactly what went down and make my decision based on fact and not hearsay. In fact, the more serious the allegation, the more inclined I'd be to sort it out before it becomes a massive mess.
  11. The way I see it, Amaram acted out of fear and distrust. His chosen path of action, to claim he defeated the shardbearer, has the massive weakness of being compromised by multiple eyewitness accounts. As such, any original intent he had to do good with the shards is tainted by his intent to commit what is, even to Amaram, evil deeds. Imo, he should've just cut a deal to have Kaladin give it to him in public. Y'know, just be a bit more honest and open about intentions. Kal's a nice guy, he'd do it for the proper reasons. We miss the point of the thread though. I think Kaladin will tell Dalinar if only because that's what a good subordinate should do in a war footing.
  12. @junior Sorry, I can't quote very well when replying on my phone. I think that what Amaram might've done with the shards, good or otherwise, is being used by Sanderson as a contrast to Kaladin's choices. I.e. journey before destination, choosing to do right because it is right as opposed to committing a wrong in the hopes that you can do more right. As such, I believe there will be a sparks simply because their methods are so so fundamentally different even whilst they are attempting to reach the same ends. And, because Dalinar isbelieved to be a candidate for the Knights Radiant, I can see him learning from the examples of both Amaram and Kaladin and seeing that Kaladin is closer to his preferred way of doing things.
  13. Correct me if I'm wrong but can't you still get the hardbound book signed form the Brandon Sanderson store though?edit: I completely misunderstood your point. Ignore this post.
  14. Dream big! We don't know the future but it doesn't hurt to try to stack it in our favor by thinking positive.
  15. A warm welcome from a fellow noobie to the forums! You've got a great dream, and it's great that you're already working towards it. Maybe someday we'll be writing on forums dedicated to your work?