Do Soothing and Rioting work on animals?

[Necessary Eagle]

I have this whole detailed fantasy about being able to take my cats on the plane without it being A Whole Production involving pills, tears, and puncture wounds. I just need to know: would I be able to Soothe them? (Assuming that I had the proper Allomantic abilities).

[alder24]

22 minutes ago, Necessary Eagle said:

I have this whole detailed fantasy about being able to take my cats on the plane without it being A Whole Production involving pills, tears, and puncture wounds. I just need to know: would I be able to Soothe them? (Assuming that I had the proper Allomantic abilities).

Not likely, emotional Allomancy requires certain level of sapience

Spoiler

Commicommand

Does emotional Allomancy work on animals?

Brandon Sanderson

Emotional Allomancy requires a certain level of sapience.

Phantine

So dolphins, oragutans, mistwraiths and parrots might work?

Brandon Sanderson

I was intentionally vague.

A_Shadow

Huh, so that would mean that divine Breath (or just regular Breath?) works in a completely different underlying mechanism than emotional Allomancy in providing that calming effect for animals and children. I had previously thought it was just an overlap in abilities.

Brandon Sanderson

There is an overlap. But it involves playing with Spiritwebs and/or the Cognitive Realm.

General Reddit 2016 (Sept. 9, 2016)

 

Spoiler

Questioner

Can emotional Allomancy or Feruchemy affect animals, or not-humans? Is it only if they're spiked?

Brandon Sanderson

So, emotional Allomancy requries a certain level of <Investiturance>. So, the closer to being sapient something is, the more that emotional Allomancy could have an effect on it.

Arcanum Unbounded release party (Nov. 22, 2016)

 

Spoiler

Questioner

Because of connection and the fact that we attribute emotions to animals, can you use emotional Allomancy on animals?

Brandon Sanderson

Depends on the animal and the situation, but generally, no.

Skyward Houston signing (Nov. 19, 2018)

 

[Koloss17]

1 hour ago, alder24 said:

Not likely, emotional Allomancy requires certain level of sapience

  Hide contents

Commicommand

Does emotional Allomancy work on animals?

Brandon Sanderson

Emotional Allomancy requires a certain level of sapience.

Phantine

So dolphins, oragutans, mistwraiths and parrots might work?

Brandon Sanderson

I was intentionally vague.

A_Shadow

Huh, so that would mean that divine Breath (or just regular Breath?) works in a completely different underlying mechanism than emotional Allomancy in providing that calming effect for animals and children. I had previously thought it was just an overlap in abilities.

Brandon Sanderson

There is an overlap. But it involves playing with Spiritwebs and/or the Cognitive Realm.

General Reddit 2016 (Sept. 9, 2016)

 

  Hide contents

Questioner

Can emotional Allomancy or Feruchemy affect animals, or not-humans? Is it only if they're spiked?

Brandon Sanderson

So, emotional Allomancy requries a certain level of <Investiturance>. So, the closer to being sapient something is, the more that emotional Allomancy could have an effect on it.

Arcanum Unbounded release party (Nov. 22, 2016)

 

  Hide contents

Questioner

Because of connection and the fact that we attribute emotions to animals, can you use emotional Allomancy on animals?

Brandon Sanderson

Depends on the animal and the situation, but generally, no.

Skyward Houston signing (Nov. 19, 2018)

 

Well, without getting into the whole emotional capacity of animals and do they have souls debate, I will point out that cats have near-human sapience, with the only real difference being that we were trained from birth to severely expand our capacity for understanding of each other and the outside world.

[alder24]

13 minutes ago, Koloss17 said:

Well, without getting into the whole emotional capacity of animals and do they have souls debate, I will point out that cats have near-human sapience, with the only real difference being that we were trained from birth to severely expand our capacity for understanding of each other and the outside world.

Near-human sapience? No. They are sentient, very sentient, no doubt here, they can feel a lot of emotions. But they are far away from human sapience. They are smart for an animal, but not smart like humans are. From a quick google search: https://www.academypet.com/dog-neuron-count-2/

Quote

The study found that dogs have about 530 million cortical neurons, while cats have about 250 million. In comparison, humans have as many as 16 billion neurons in our cerebral cortexes, by far the highest number of any terrestrial animal. Among our closest cousins, orangutans and gorillas have about 8 to 9 billion neurons, while chimpanzees have about 6 to 7 billion neurons. [...]

One of the most intelligent nonprimate animals the research team has studied is the elephant, which has 5.6 billion neurons.

Also cats have never passed the mirror test, which suggests (not proves) self-awareness. There are fishes which passed the test. Dogs have never passed it either.

[Koloss17]

1 hour ago, alder24 said:

Near-human sapience? No. They are sentient, very sentient, no doubt here, they can feel a lot of emotions. But they are far away from human sapience. They are smart for an animal, but not smart like humans are. From a quick google search: https://www.academypet.com/dog-neuron-count-2/

Also cats have never passed the mirror test, which suggests (not proves) self-awareness. There are fishes which passed the test. Dogs have never passed it either.

So here’s the question: since this is about emotional manipulation through use of Allomancy, is it the intelligence or emotional capacity of the being that defines whether or not it affects them?

[alder24]

Just now, Koloss17 said:

So here’s the question: since this is about emotional manipulation through use of Allomancy, is it the intelligence or emotional capacity of the being that defines whether or not it affects them?

In 2 of 3 WoBs I posted above, Brandon is saying "sapience is needed", and sapience is intelligence - that means you need your target to be intelligent, as close to a person as possible, for emotional Allomancy to work on them. A person is all sapient form of life in this context: Sho Del, spren, dragons, Singers etc.

[Koloss17]

9 minutes ago, alder24 said:

In 2 of 3 WoBs I posted above, Brandon is saying "sapience is needed", and sapience is intelligence - that means you need your target to be intelligent, as close to a person as possible, for emotional Allomancy to work on them. A person is all sapient form of life in this context: Sho Del, spren, dragons, Singers etc.

That makes me wonder…are babies, potentially even toddlers, immune to emotional allomancy?

[alder24]

2 minutes ago, Koloss17 said:

That makes me wonder…are babies, potentially even toddlers, immune to emotional allomancy?

Well, cats and dogs are as smart as a 2 year old baby, therefore I say yes. Which would be very irritating for a soother/rioter parent. Poor Breeze and Allrianne, they couldn't make their kids stop crying with emotional Allomancy, that had to be shocking for them! 

[Quantus]

1 hour ago, alder24 said:

Well, cats and dogs are as smart as a 2 year old baby, therefore I say yes. Which would be very irritating for a soother/rioter parent. Poor Breeze and Allrianne, they couldn't make their kids stop crying with emotional Allomancy, that had to be shocking for them! 

Ooh, that's glorious! Of all things that that they cant Sooth, and it's a baby!

1 hour ago, Koloss17 said:

So here’s the question: since this is about emotional manipulation through use of Allomancy, is it the intelligence or emotional capacity of the being that defines whether or not it affects them?

1 hour ago, alder24 said:

In 2 of 3 WoBs I posted above, Brandon is saying "sapience is needed", and sapience is intelligence - that means you need your target to be intelligent, as close to a person as possible, for emotional Allomancy to work on them. A person is all sapient form of life in this context: Sho Del, spren, dragons, Singers etc.

Per this WOB, it's effecting a person sort of like silent/spiritual Music.  So I think it's Intelligence in the context of Intellectual and Emotional Complexity, enough to be affected by things like Art or sensory Beauty.  

 

Quote

 

[Snip for length]

Brandon Sanderson

He'd have to get him inside a living one.

It does work on most magics, though the interactions can be odd unless you know a lot about the workings. Emotional Allomancy, for example, works by lapping against the outsides of someone's cognitive self, influencing you the way music might stir your soul. So being inside a living body wouldn't necessarily stop it--you'd just have more interference. Kind of like how you can still hear music outside if it's loud enough.

Actual mind control in the cosmere requires you to get INSIDE the soul, which you've seen happen frequently enough. There has to be a gap or an opening.

Or, conversely, you just have to be so powerful that you can push through the interference.

/r/books AMA 2015 (July 14, 2015)

 

 

[Necessary Eagle]

Phooey.

[Underwater_Worldhopper]

2 hours ago, alder24 said:

In 2 of 3 WoBs I posted above, Brandon is saying "sapience is needed", and sapience is intelligence - that means you need your target to be intelligent, as close to a person as possible, for emotional Allomancy to work on them. A person is all sapient form of life in this context: Sho Del, spren, dragons, Singers etc.

Quick question. Spren are Investiture, which repels other Investure. Is Soothing/Rioting a Spren possible??

[alder24]

31 minutes ago, Underwater_Worldhopper said:

Quick question. Spren are Investiture, which repels other Investure. Is Soothing/Rioting a Spren possible??

Rafo

Spoiler

AllomancerSam

Can spren be affected by emotional Allomancy?

Brandon Sanderson

RAFO.

Arcanum Unbounded release party (Nov. 22, 2016)

 

[Trusk'our]

1 hour ago, Underwater_Worldhopper said:

Quick question. Spren are Investiture, which repels other Investure. Is Soothing/Rioting a Spren possible??

An interesting question. It's worth noting that they (Radiant Spren, at least) are quite Invested, which should make them particularly resistant to Emotional Allomancy even if we discount their incorporeal biology.

Quote

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/367/#e11830

Questioner

God-King versus God-King. Susebron versus Rashek, who comes out on top?

Brandon Sanderson

Rashek, probably.

Questioner

By a lot or a little?

Brandon Sanderson

Well, here's the thing. I think Susebron is at the disadvantage in almost every situation.

Questioner

Okay. How so?

Brandon Sanderson

Rashek has been alive longer. Rashek knows what he's doing. Rashek has martial training. Rashek has killed a lot of people, Susebron never has. Fewer scruples. His magic is way more combat-oriented. He can get out of range a lot easier. He has power emotional Allomancy, which Susebron would *inaudible*.

Granted, he's got so much investiture, he may be able to shrug that off. But still, I would put Rashek at the advantage.

 

[Jn819]

On 5/17/2023 at 4:58 PM, Quantus said:

Ooh, that's glorious! Of all things that that they cant Sooth, and it's a baby!

Per this WOB, it's effecting a person sort of like silent/spiritual Music.  So I think it's Intelligence in the context of Intellectual and Emotional Complexity, enough to be affected by things like Art or sensory Beauty.  

Bears seem to have somewhat of a sense of (visual) beauty. I wonder if that's enough. https://earthlymission.com/bears-have-sense-of-beauty-aesthetic-ability-admire-beautiful-vistas/

[alder24]

I don't think it's just about a sense of beauty (no @Koloss17 that's not a storable sense  ), many different animals have it. Birds attracts partners by colorful feathers or mating dances, color is also important in many fishes when mating. Penguins are giving pebbles to females during mating season and are building nests out of them. Taste, color and smell are also used by plants to attract insects and animals to spread their seeds. Of course those examples do not compare to human's sense of beauty, nor do animals create art for the same of art so it could be how emotional Allomancy works.

[Jn819]

1 hour ago, alder24 said:

Of course those examples do not compare to human's sense of beauty, nor do animals create art for the same of art so it could be how emotional Allomancy works.

One doesn't have to be an artist to appreciate art. IDK, I think there might be some animals who could be soothed. Not ones who simply respond to visual stimuli as part of mating or eating. More like that article I linked about bears, where they just like to sit and look at sunsets and such. It's not part of any mating behavior or eating behavior. They just like the view.

Seriously though, there are people who have made music specifically for cats and tamarin monkeys. What if you just have to adapt your allomantic pulses for the species in question?

[Underwater_Worldhopper]

I think the difference lies in the Cognitive Aspect of the target. The WoB above says that it works by lapping at the edges of your Cogitive Aspect, so the target has to be cognizant enough to have a Cognitive Aspect substantial enough to be affected by the Allomancy.

Think of it this way. Let's say that the more sapient you are, the more you get the inherent ability to understand sign language. If you're not sapient, you can't understand any of it. If you're only a little sapient (which is what most mammals and big animals probably fall), you might be able to get vague impressions from it. If you're partly sapient or still developing sapience, like a child, you can understand anywhere between some of what's trying to be communicated up to the majority of it. And once you're fully sapient, you can understand it fully, including all of its intricacies.

In the same way, the more sapient you are, the greater your Cognitive Aspect will be, and the more you'll be affected by Allomancy.

[Koloss17]

On 5/21/2023 at 3:28 PM, Underwater_Worldhopper said:

I think the difference lies in the Cognitive Aspect of the target. The WoB above says that it works by lapping at the edges of your Cogitive Aspect, so the target has to be cognizant enough to have a Cognitive Aspect substantial enough to be affected by the Allomancy.

Think of it this way. Let's say that the more sapient you are, the more you get the inherent ability to understand sign language. If you're not sapient, you can't understand any of it. If you're only a little sapient (which is what most mammals and big animals probably fall), you might be able to get vague impressions from it. If you're partly sapient or still developing sapience, like a child, you can understand anywhere between some of what's trying to be communicated up to the majority of it. And once you're fully sapient, you can understand it fully, including all of its intricacies.

In the same way, the more sapient you are, the greater your Cognitive Aspect will be, and the more you'll be affected by Allomancy.

No, your idea of the Cognitive aspect needing to be present is a really good one. Just how Kelsier can “see” other people’s cognitive aspects in the form of Investiture, cognition and Invested-ness seems to be linked. Also the CR really only exists when there is sapient life present around it, so you probably can only soothe or riot those that are present in the Cognitive Realm. 
 

Actually, what does that mean for a puppy/baby going into the Cognitive Realm via perpendicularity?

[alder24]

On 21.05.2023 at 3:13 PM, Jn819 said:

One doesn't have to be an artist to appreciate art. IDK, I think there might be some animals who could be soothed. Not ones who simply respond to visual stimuli as part of mating or eating. More like that article I linked about bears, where they just like to sit and look at sunsets and such. It's not part of any mating behavior or eating behavior. They just like the view.

That's what I meant. We humans look at the art just for pleasure. It isn't a part of any mating or feeding ritual, unlike in animals that I've listed. Yes, they see the beauty, they have to to determine which mate is better, which flower is healthier etc, but most animals just don't look at beautiful things as we look at them. That was my point. There are animals that can be soothed/rioted per WoB.

On 21.05.2023 at 9:28 PM, Underwater_Worldhopper said:

I think the difference lies in the Cognitive Aspect of the target. The WoB above says that it works by lapping at the edges of your Cogitive Aspect, so the target has to be cognizant enough to have a Cognitive Aspect substantial enough to be affected by the Allomancy.

Think of it this way. Let's say that the more sapient you are, the more you get the inherent ability to understand sign language. If you're not sapient, you can't understand any of it. If you're only a little sapient (which is what most mammals and big animals probably fall), you might be able to get vague impressions from it. If you're partly sapient or still developing sapience, like a child, you can understand anywhere between some of what's trying to be communicated up to the majority of it. And once you're fully sapient, you can understand it fully, including all of its intricacies.

In the same way, the more sapient you are, the greater your Cognitive Aspect will be, and the more you'll be affected by Allomancy.

Yes, that's a very good explanation. But the same question still remains - when will animals have enough cognitive presence to be affected by Allomancy? How sapient do they need to be?

10 hours ago, Koloss17 said:

Actually, what does that mean for a puppy/baby going into the Cognitive Realm via perpendicularity?

Yyy, nothing special? Just like taking anything with you, like taking horses with you (you know which one), or objects. They would just be there. Being physically in CR doesn't change their level of sapiency.

[Underwater_Worldhopper]

36 minutes ago, alder24 said:

Yes, that's a very good explanation. But the same question still remains - when will animals have enough cognitive presence to be affected by Allomancy? How sapient do they need to be?

Mammal level sentience should be enough to implant at least vague impressions, and being fully susceptible probably falls to the sapience of an adolescent. There's not much to go off of in this case, so we really have to make do with 'probable' upper and lower bounds

Edit: How sapient do you think the Ryshadium are, compared to humans? How effective would EA be on them?

Edited May 23, 2023 by Underwater_Worldhopper

[Koloss17]

1 hour ago, alder24 said:

 

Yyy, nothing special? Just like taking anything with you, like taking horses with you (you know which one), or objects. They would just be there. Being physically in CR doesn't change their level of sapiency.

My main wondering is because they wouldn’t have a cognitive aspect.

[alder24]

27 minutes ago, Koloss17 said:

My main wondering is because they wouldn’t have a cognitive aspect.

Everything has a cognitive aspect. But by the Underwater_Worldhopper's logic, the cognitive aspect of a baby/animal develops during their lifetime. There is no problem with that. If the Stick can have a cognitive aspect, a baby would have no problem with traveling into CR.

1 hour ago, Underwater_Worldhopper said:

Mammal level sentience should be enough to implant at least vague impressions, and being fully susceptible probably falls to the sapience of an adolescent. There's not much to go off of in this case, so we really have to make do with 'probable' upper and lower bounds

I do agree that most mammals should be influenced by emotional allomancy, at least to a slight degree. Personally I've always imagined TLR arriving at the square, where Kelsier killed the Inquisitor, in a carriage without a driver, just by using very powerful emotional Allomancy on horses alone. That looks just so cool in my mind.

1 hour ago, Underwater_Worldhopper said:

Edit: How sapient do you think the Ryshadium are, compared to humans? How effective would EA be on them?

SA slight spoilers:

Spoiler

Normal horses are very smart and sapient, I think Ryshadium more sapient than normal horses, on a level somewhat comparable to humans - mainly because they might have their mind enhanced by a bond with spren. Emotional Allomancy should affect them almost the same way as humans.

 

[Jn819]

1 hour ago, alder24 said:

Everything has a cognitive aspect. But by the Underwater_Worldhopper's logic, the cognitive aspect of a baby/animal develops during their lifetime. There is no problem with that. If the Stick can have a cognitive aspect, a baby would have no problem with traveling into CR.

I do agree that most mammals should be influenced by emotional allomancy, at least to a slight degree. Personally I've always imagined TLR arriving at the square, where Kelsier killed the Inquisitor, in a carriage without a driver, just by using very powerful emotional Allomancy on horses alone. That looks just so cool in my mind.

SA slight spoilers:

  Reveal hidden contents

Normal horses are very smart and sapient, I think Ryshadium more sapient than normal horses, on a level somewhat comparable to humans - mainly because they might have their mind enhanced by a bond with spren. Emotional Allomancy should affect them almost the same way as humans.

 

I agree about Rhyshadium, and would go further. RoW Ch. 35 page 446:

Spoiler

With that, he leaped off the outcropping. His boots slapped stone below—storms, he did remember he wasn’t in Shardplate, didn’t he? Adolin took off running toward the distant Tukari caravan, hand on the sheathed sword at his belt, holding it in place.

Radiant stood stunned. Was Adolin going to walk all the way to—

The sound of cracking stone thundered from behind. Radiant jumped, searching the nearby formations for some kind of avalanche. Only then did she realize it was the sound of hooves striking obsidian at high speed as Gallant galloped past. A panicked Maya clung to his mane with a two-fisted grip—but his supplies appeared to have been unloaded.

Barely breaking stride, Adolin grabbed the dangling reins as Gallant pulled up beside him. Adolin did an odd running hop, then hoisted himself into the saddle behind Maya, a maneuver that a part of Radiant’s brain refused to believe was possible.

“Rusts,” Felt said, lowering his spyglass. “How did the beast know? Did anyone hear Highprince Adolin whistle for it?”

The other soldiers shook their heads.

This, along with other mentions, makes me think

Spoiler

Rhyshadium are sapient enough to form something much like a Nahel bond. Adolin summoned him the same way a Radiant summons their Blade. Rhyshadium are the "third shard" after all: Blade, Plate, and Mount. There's also an instance of Gallant seeming to understand Dalinar speaking Alethi, I think right after the disaster of a chasmfiend hunt where Elhokar's saddle girth strap snapped.

That also makes me wonder. It's mentioned earlier how rare it is for Rhyshadium to allow two riders. Could a Radiant spren bond two different knights?

 

[alder24]

4 minutes ago, Jn819 said:

I agree about Rhyshadium, and would go further. RoW Ch. 35 page 446:

  Hide contents

With that, he leaped off the outcropping. His boots slapped stone below—storms, he did remember he wasn’t in Shardplate, didn’t he? Adolin took off running toward the distant Tukari caravan, hand on the sheathed sword at his belt, holding it in place.

Radiant stood stunned. Was Adolin going to walk all the way to—

The sound of cracking stone thundered from behind. Radiant jumped, searching the nearby formations for some kind of avalanche. Only then did she realize it was the sound of hooves striking obsidian at high speed as Gallant galloped past. A panicked Maya clung to his mane with a two-fisted grip—but his supplies appeared to have been unloaded.

Barely breaking stride, Adolin grabbed the dangling reins as Gallant pulled up beside him. Adolin did an odd running hop, then hoisted himself into the saddle behind Maya, a maneuver that a part of Radiant’s brain refused to believe was possible.

“Rusts,” Felt said, lowering his spyglass. “How did the beast know? Did anyone hear Highprince Adolin whistle for it?”

The other soldiers shook their heads.

This, along with other mentions, makes me think

  Hide contents

Rhyshadium are sapient enough to form something much like a Nahel bond. Adolin summoned him the same way a Radiant summons their Blade. Rhyshadium are the "third shard" after all: Blade, Plate, and Mount. There's also an instance of Gallant seeming to understand Dalinar speaking Alethi, I think right after the disaster of a chasmfiend hunt where Elhokar's saddle girth strap snapped.

That also makes me wonder. It's mentioned earlier how rare it is for Rhyshadium to allow two riders. Could a Radiant spren bond two different knights?

 

SA spoilers:

Spoiler

I wouldn't say that Adolin summoned Gallant, rather that they have formed a strong bond and Gallant is able to understand Adolin through that bond, in that moment Gallant just felt what Adolin wants and acted on it. There is a bond between them, not Nahel Bond, but some different kind of connection. This isn't always the case, despite this bond, there are times when a rider must convince his Ryshadium for a long time to carry somebody else.

I doubt one spren could bond two people, as Nahel Bond is merging souls of spren and knight, a spren can't be split between two persons in that way, but a person can have 2 spren filling cracks in their soul. The only known exception is BAM, who bonded all Singers granting them forms of power.

I think the biggest argument for Ryshadium being affected with emotional Allomancy is that they go to the Beyond after death.

Spoiler

Questioner

Would a macaw be able to become a Radiant? Or do you need sentience?

Brandon Sanderson

You need sapience. A macaw could not become a Knight Radiant. A macaw could, theoretically, enter a symbiotic spren bond, which would have different effects. Like, Ryshadium or even most of the larger greatshells don't have sapience. But a lot of creatures on Roshar do have what I would term an in-between step between human-level intelligence and animal-level intelligence on Earth. Ryshadium are in this; chasmfiends, as well, are smarter than an animal can get on Earth.

Tor Instagram Livestream (Nov. 25, 2020)

 

Spoiler

Questioner

We see, in Secret History, all the people going Beyond after they die. Do all the victims go there? Or just people? Just sentients? Would a Ryshadium go the Beyond, if it died.

Brandon Sanderson

Um-- Yes.

Questioner

What about, like, a rockbud, or a chasmfiend?

Brandon Sanderson

Um, that, you're gonna have to ask the philosophers about. Because, if it happens, it happens really fast, so they have trouble spotting it.

Oathbringer release party (Nov. 13, 2017)

 

 

[Jn819]

Spoiler

14 minutes ago, alder24 said:

 

  Hide contents

I wouldn't say that Adolin summoned Gallant, rather that they have formed a strong bond and Gallant is able to understand Adolin through that bond, in that moment Gallant just felt what Adolin wants and acted on it. There is a bond between them, not Nahel Bond, but some different kind of connection. This isn't always the case, despite this bond, there are times when a rider must convince his Ryshadium for a long time to carry somebody else.

 

Kaladin and Syl also have their disagreements. Pattern lies to Shallan. Wyndle often complains when Lift wants him to do something. I feel like all of that is similar to the convincing it took to get Gallant to let Adolin ride him the first time he went to meet Eshonai. I don't see this as a meaningful difference from a Nahel bond, especially since from the description of the scene I quoted, Gallant couldn't see Adolin charging the Tashiqqi group; there was a hill in the way.

24 minutes ago, alder24 said:

SA spoilers:

  Hide contents

I doubt one spren could bond two people, as Nahel Bond is merging souls of spren and knight, a spren can't be split between two persons in that way, but a person can have 2 spren filling cracks in their soul. The only known exception is BAM, who bonded all Singers granting them forms of power.

 

Well even if the Rhyshadium comparison is valid, perhaps it's more like the Passing of a Seon, where a Knight might be able to convince their spren that someone else needs that bond more.