Seloun

Members
  • Content count

    521
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Seloun last won the day on March 17 2014

Seloun had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,129 Scadrian Waffle Cook

About Seloun

  1. Short answer: Yes, I'd love to see a Moash redemption arc, as much as I'd like to see the redemption arc of any character. Longer answer: I think the moment one decides someone is beyond redeeming, one decides that person is no longer worth considering as person (i.e., they are no longer worthy of being allowed to make choices). There are a couple of ways to arrive at this conclusion; the first and probably more basic argument is the sunk costs: no matter what the person may have done in the past, it doesn't negate the potential good they can do in the future. Ultimately, from a utilitarian perspective, it comes down to whether or not one thinks the person will do good in the future; their past actions merely to serve as evidence whether that is likely. It's worth noting that a 'redemption arc' doesn't mean good things happen to Moash (quite the inverse, actually, it would be Moash making good things happen to other people). Instead, it should involve him somehow accepting the consequences for his actions and acting to redeem or mitigate their effects. It doesn't even have to be very long - Moash realizing at the last moment how really harmful his actions were (and that they were his decisions) and stepping off Urithiru to prevent Odium's victory would certainly qualify (if somewhat trite). I think that forgiveness is independent to redemption. It's not necessary to forgive Moash's actions to want him to find redemption; this is I think actually the strongest form of redemption stories (a variation of 'what are you in the dark?' in that the person chooses to atone despite no expectations of forgiveness - instead, they choose because it's the right thing). And if someone wants to argue that Moash's actions aren't forgiveable, I wouldn't contest it - but that is not the same as not wanting to see him find redemption. Yes, the dichotomy can be mentally uncomfortable - wanting to kill bad!Moash while cheering for good!Moash - but the way to think about it is probably to accept they are literally different people, though linked together in a specific intimate way; good!Moash still inherits the consequences of the decisions made by bad!Moash (think inheritance, or as a guardian assumes responsibility for a ward's actions). But good!Moash chooses differently than bad!Moash going forward. Of course good/bad is an oversimplification; the devil lies in the details. But the point is that being a person means that they can choose to be better in the future (I consider this to be part of the definition of being a person, so I mean this exactly), and I like seeing believable examples that allow me to stretch the boundaries of what I'm willing to accept as a person.
  2. Well, it's a pretty classic example of an ad hominem attack to imply your opponent is lacking logic or is too emotional (or otherwise belittle the person making the argument rather than the argument itself). It just stands out because this is perhaps the most common fallacy in debate and I wouldn't have expected Jasnah to have made such a mistake. If she had said his argument was lacking in logic or was stupid dumb poo (slightly more defensible) I think it wouldn't have been so jarring. Basically what I didn't like about it wasn't that she was insulting someone (or Kaladin specifically) but that she was using that as part of an argument during a discussion, which felt very out of character. I think that Jasnah's example of vindictiveness is mostly confined to the Ruthar scene, which I do find harder to defend - it's effective, both in the short term (removing Ruthar) and long term (outlawing duelling), but the sheer callous calculatedness hurts her cause in other ways, I think. Dalinar remarks on it too: I wouldn't necessarily call this petty (it's pretty serious stuff) but spiteful is not a bad way to describe it; the main redeeming factor is that it was not merely for the sake of spite. So it's definitely in the text, though I think this is actually the only real example of it in RoW. Her discussions with Dalinar all seem pretty respectful.
  3. I kind of understand what you mean here about Jasnah coming off as being a bit of a jerk, but I think the reading might be slightly off. The main things to note here: 1) Jasnah is the one who asks Dalinar and Navani for their opinions (it's not Dalinar who brings it up to her): Jasnah solicits Dalinar's opinion - it's not Dalinar bringing up an objection and her simply rejecting it out of hand. Also, it's pretty clear Dalinar hasn't really thought about the issue besides, well, dismiss it out of hand as a viable opinion: So Dalinar brings up two objections here (really one objection stated twice). This leads to: 2) Jasnah does specifically respond to Dalinar's points: She acknowledges that Dalinar is likely correct that this proposal will cause significant upheaval in society. Her counterargument is that society is already going to be significantly impacted anyway due to other events (making this a good time to push through other changes which are minor by comparison). Her statement also implies she's done extensive research about historical precedent for changes like this. 3) She's not dismissive of the concerns Dalinar (and Navani) bring up; however, she's already considered most of what they mention: I don't know how she could have handled this better. Jasnah actively looks for counterarguments to her proposal. She responds to every objection brought up, and (implied) has data/research to back up her assertions. She acknowledges the potential problems with her proposal, but notes that the circumstances make it a good time for it and the alternatives are likely to be worse. She also leaves her plan to be criticized further. Really, this is exactly how a good executive should act; as she notes, Jasnah is not asking for permission here, but she is genuinely open to objections she might not have considered. Dalinar doesn't provide anything she hasn't already considered (and it really seems implied that he hasn't spent a lot of time thinking or researching this) but she's willing to keep listening. She's decided on the goal (get rid of slavery) but is willing to accept help with/refine further the implementation ('figure out how to respond to such challenges'). I won't defend the Rushar scene here (I don't think her position there is nearly as solid, anyway), but I do want to clarify the point about Jasnah's argument (and it's an argument, not a discussion) with Kaladin in Oathbringer. I don't disagree with her position necessarily (or find it morally indefensible); the issue I have is that she makes a personal attack on Kaladin rather than the merits of the argument: The main redeeming thing is that I think Jasnah would probably agree that it was out of line: (for context, this is immediately after her encounter with Amaram) Nevertheless, it's not a great look to be insulting your debate partner (even if it is in addition to addressing the point). It stood out to me because it seemed very out of character for Jasnah, although with RoW it might just be that Jasnah is actually much more emotional than she presents.
  4. I would have to argue against Jasnah not expressing any uncertainty in RoW. I'm guessing that lot of this is influenced by her first major scene (where she 'kills' Ruthar), but I think it's not really representative of her throughout the book. I also don't think that it's accurate that she confides solely in Wit (though he does appear to be her main confidant at this point) - we see a couple of scenes where she does or is implied to have discussed matters with especially Dalinar (e.g. Ch. 17, 'A Proposal'); Dalinar's possession and building off of the contract for the duel of champions written by Wit/Jasnah seems to suggest he's familiar with (and presumably agrees with) the contents. Also, her internal perspectives certainly express uncertainty or realization of error; the most significant or notable is the section immediately following her battle experience: The other thing to note is that when Jasnah is expressing certainty during debates, it's likely a rhetorical device: It's common in debate to present a particular position as firmly as possible (regardless of how much one personally agrees with the premise) to give the argument a fair shake. Being half-hearted about it may mean that the position was sound, but the debater was not, which makes it difficult to have confidence about the merits of the argument itself (as opposed to the person doing the arguing). I actually thought Oathbringer was worse for how it presented Jasnah (e.g. kill all the parshmen/Heralds argument with Kaladin).
  5. I'll make the observation that the reason I like Jasnah is unrelated to her being female; it has to do with her being a rational person. She's an excellent counterexample to the straw atheist caricature, and a positive example of smart, logical morality. Contrast with e.g. 'smart' (and that really does deserve to be in quotes) Taravangian, who is the very essence 'unfeeling rational robot' trope. It's surprisingly difficult to find examples of intelligent people succeeding and acting morally because of their intelligence, rather than despite it, especially in fantasy. That's why I like her/empathize with her, because I think morality should derived rationally rather than axiomatic, and her position is not shown to be immediately ridiculous. It also touches on conflict with religion for that reason, and overall it's a much more nuanced approach to it than I've seen pretty much anywhere else (often, it's one side or the other rather than examining the conflict itself). The reason I like her is that if I were in a similar situation, I would like to think I could deal with it in a similar fashion. It's heartening to see an intellectual dissident not reach an ignoble end, but instead prove valuable specifically for their intelligence.
  6. I wrote a couple of posts about this possibility: More specific to Maya/Adolin Somewhat more general version of the theory The basic gist is that I don't think Maya and Adolin yet have a reversed bond; I think Renarin does, and that'll be the key to reviving the deadeyes.
  7. theory

    I think Voidbinding is essentially an inverted Nahel bond. Specifically, it's where the human provides Investure to the spren rather than the reverse. I think that Renarin is an example of this: Glys is the one that captures the vision (similar wording as Shallan's Memories) and Glys is the one that creates the images. My theory is that the 'corrupting' that Sja-anat allows Radiant spren to invert the Nahel bond. This was rare before the Recreance since spren couldn't really be broken in the same way people could to allow Investure to enter: also Whatever happened to BAM during the Recreance appears to have made the spren vulnerable in this regard (or, say, more human-like - shades of Ishar's experimentation here). But if spren can break like humans, then perhaps they can also be repaired in the same way: So I think the Voidbinders (remember, humans are Voidbringers) will be Renarin, Rlain, anyone else binding a Sja-anat spren, and anyone reverse-binding a deadeye (i.e. Adolin), though the latter may require Sja-anat's assistance. Or more accurately, the spren are the Void(human)binders.
  8. This feels highly reminiscent of the scene in WoR: I think that these scenes are parallels of each other, except the role of the donor/recipient (or spren/Radiant) are essentially inverted. The way the nahel bond and Investure in general appears to work is that it fills the broken gaps in the person (and this is why people have to be 'broken' to be able to bond); normally, spren are unbreakable in this regard, but something changed in the Recreance that allow spren (at least Radiant spren) to themselves also 'crack'. Some references: This is Syl's understanding, and for pretty much all of history, this has been accurate. But something changed during the Recreance that let spren die/break like humans: Regarding the needing to be 'broken': So the Maya and the deadeyes are all 'broken' in a way spren couldn't break before the Recreance, because of something a Bondsmith (who are implied to be able to change fundamental laws of the world) changed by (or during) capturing BAM. What I believe is that the deadeyes require a reverse Nahel bond so someone else can repair their broken souls, in the same way the Nahel bond can 'repair' Radiants: The problem I think is that the Nahel bond isn't intended to flow in the other direction. This is I think the problem with Adolin trying to 'power' Maya - the connection just isn't efficient. The solution, I think, is Renarin: I believe that the corrupted Nahel bond does run the opposite direction: Note that it's Glys that captured the vision, and Glys is the one that is implied to have created the images using Stormlight. Note that Renarin can't create illusions like other Truthwatchers: So I believe when Sja-anat corrupts Radiant spren, she makes them able to invert the bond so that Investure flows from the human to the spren. I think this is what will happen to Maya and Adolin - Sja-anat will be able to change the bond so that Adolin can 'power' Maya much as with Renarin and Glys, becoming an example of a Voidbound Radiant.
  9. Colonel Mustard, in the kitchen, with... the lead pipe? According to the Stormfather, Honor was going crazy before his death: If a mad Bondsmith is scary, how much more so an out-of-control Shard? It's not completely clear if what caused his death was the reason for Honor going nuts (or if something had caused him to go mad first, e.g. Oathpact breaking) but it's not unreasonable that he might have been mercy killed (or just to save Roshar) without positing a malicious intent. Hypothetical timeline - Odium wounds Honor severely somehow due to Honor being vulnerable due to the violation of the Oathpact (might e.g. constitute Honor breaking his word), Honor starts to lose it (maybe during short periods of lucidity, he records the Stormfather visions), and Miss Scarlet Cultivation Splinters him before he can destroy Roshar.
  10. There are 16C2 combinations of 2 shards out of a pool of 16 => 16 * 15 / 2 (16 shards to pick for the first, 15 other shards to pick from the second, but since e.g. Honor-Odium is the same as Odium-Honor, need to account for the double counting) = 120. There are 2^16 - 1 (65535) combinations of 1 or more shards given the pool of 16 (for each shard, we can decide whether or not to add it to the pool, or 2 choices per shard, so 2 * 2 * ... * 2 16 times, minus the 1 'empty' choice where we don't add any shard). It's unclear if there's a direct relationship between Allomantic metals and the shards, besides the number.
  11. Honor + Cultivation = Science And yes, I think the implication here is that someone who had both would be Science (or something along that line).
  12. There's likely a literally magical reason why Kaladin wins all of his fights. And based on what Moash has said, and what Kaladin has noted in the past, his survival (and inability to die) is probably not just a coincidence (think mark of Cain). It's been foreshadowed from the very beginning: It's not really accurate that Kaladin succeeds at everything he tries to do. Instead, he's (likely supernaturally) successful at two things: not dying, and combat. While we don't know the specific mechanism of either, the former seems to be a real thing; though Moash may be crazy, he might be onto something. With respect to Kaladin's ability in combat, Honor + Odium is War. Kaladin show supernatural attunement with combat, more than anyone else in the series: There are multiple passages like this one, where combat just seems to click for Kaladin. It's more than 'he's just really naturally good'. Given what we know from RoW, he appears to somehow be linked/bonded to the rhythm of War. So yes, Kaladin's successes are unrealistic - but that's almost certainly the point; he has external help that has been hinted at but hasn't been fully revealed to this point. WRT Raboniel: Keep in mind that Raboniel is stalling throughout the book because she's looking for a way to permanently kill her daughter (and ultimately, end the war). The reason she proposed converting the Sibling is because she thought Stormlight could be the anti-Voidlight and thus be used to kill her daughter if she figured out how to combine it in the proper manner; once Navani showed her she was wrong about that, converting the Sibling becomes much less of a priority for her. Having Kaladin around to slow things down doesn't really impact her plan, and arguably benefits her overall. Likewise, Leshwi clearly doesn't care to be killing Windrunners; the Fused aren't of one mind with Odium or even each other.
  13. I think Kaladin is more suited/more valuable as a symbol than a leader, per se. Think Mockingjay. In that sense, I think Kaladin is actually more effective not being involved in the day-to-day running of things. Getting involved in politics and making compromises to get things done wouldn't work for him. Also, not being the underdog in a resistance doesn't seem to suit him very well; he's like how Taln is described - getting into hopeless fights and somehow winning - except that he never dies. For the actual task of leading the Radiants, Jasnah seems to be the best choice. She's the best example of the enlightened philosopher-king ruler/benevolent dictator, and one who is self-aware enough to build in restrictions in her office for the future: So I think the short-term answer is that Jasnah is the best choice, who would transition the Radiants into a more parlimentary system (Radiants being divided the way they are already fits this rather nicely), governed by multiple representatives. Presumably this wouldn't just be the Radiants, either, but something more akin to the Silver Kingdoms era.
  14. It's not a Radiant oath, but I believe you're referring to this: Chapter 43 ('Men and Monsters')
  15. So flipping it reverse the action of the dagger. This seems to suggest the housing of the gem really isn't that important (or at least isn't the reason why the gem attracts Light). There doesn't seem to be any indication that Raboniel did anything else with the dagger (e.g. somehow inverted the gem housing) though it's possible Navani didn't see everything. It also seems to suggest the middle section isn't just a piece of raysium, but something that has asymmetry in composition or perhaps a composite piece. That said, a 'silver-nickle alloy' seems like a really weird choice if the metal doesn't really matter; why not use something a lot more common? Unless she's being pedantic and the metal doesn't affect the dagger's (i.e. investure draining) function, but does affect the gem's function (perhaps making it less lossy?).