Will Dalinar learn how Kaladin became a slave, in WOR?

[Looter]

Look, I'm just going to point a few facts out here. REGARDLESS of wether Amaran' s actions were right wrong or in the middle; the OP is about whether Dalinar will find out.

Kaladin is a racist. He hates or at the very minimum has an incredible mistrust of any Lighteyes for no other reason than physical traits.

This was caused by TWO people. But only one of them did he grant any (large) measure of belief in.

That person is about to join Dalinars current nemesis.

If you think our budding KR is going to keep quiet or only grumble to Bridge 4, you need to reread WoK.

You know that kaladin and lighteyes are of the same race right? Using completely false comments like that make me think you are trolling.

Now as far as Amaram goes he is evil in just about every way. It is just that due to selfishselfish reasons that he resorts to being evil not just a maniacal version of mustaches twirling evil.

Look at his motivations. It wasn't enough that a shardbearer had been killed in an assassination attempt on him and left his position considerably better off at the expense of his enemies he felt a need to falsify a level of prowess, steal items from and enslave a man whom could have been a tremendous ally, murder his own soldiers who were loyal enough warriors that they came to his rescue when all others ran. All to steal something another man was willing to give away.

His actions could have had multiple positive outcomes with substantially greater gains had he followed a higher path. He instead chose the path of least resistance and callously murdered to hide as much evidence of his crimes as possible.

The only outcome I hope for him is the one he has earned, a cowardly painful death alone and unmourned.

 

Edited because my phone sucks and I missed something small and irritatingly stupid.  Sorry

Edited January 8, 2014 by Looter

[Colby Jack]

You know that kaladin and lighteyes are of the same race right? Using completely false comments like that make me think you are trolling.

I don't think Doc is a troll.  Kaladin does have an extreme prejudice against any lighteye he comes across.

Think back to his first encounter with Adolin. He just watched a lighteye selflessly acted with honor, but he quickly passed it off as a fluke or tried to undervalue a good deed with pettiness and rationalization. Then, when Adolin paid him for a service, Kaladin refused to do what he was asked to do and pockets the money. He did this because Adolin is a lighteye and he is assumed to have plenty of spheres. Even if the last fact is true, it's also true that this act made him no better than a common thief.

Justify or color it in any way you want, but Kaladin had acted dishonorably towards Adolin just because he so happened to be born with bright colored eyes. But I doubt he would steal from a fellow with hazel eyes. This borderlines racism... but I think his problem lies with the system of nobility and authority. In this case, rather than blue blood, he associates his hatred with blue eyes. He just doesn't know it yet.

It's very similar to the divide between French nobility and the common population prior to the revolution... or Nazi Germany and the dark-haired population in WW2. Hitler didn't just persecuted Jews, you know. In fact, there are similiarities between the Alethi and the Nazis. In Hitler's mind, people with blond hair and blue eyes meant superiority and dominance. If Kaladin does not fix up his act soon, I'm afraid he will be our fallen hero of the series. Only instead of Jews, Kaladin will persecute lighteyes.

Edited December 24, 2013 by mrwerd

[Moogle]

Now as far as Amaram goes he is evil in just about every way. It is just that due to selfishselfish reasons that he resorts to being evil not just a maniacal version of mustaches twirling evil.

Look at his motivations. It wasn't enough that a shardbearer had been killed in an assassination attempt on him and left his position considerably better off at the expense of his enemies he felt a need to falsify a level of prowess, steal items from and enslaveenslave a man whom could have been a tremendous ally, murder his own soldiers and brave warriors that came to his rescue when all others ran. All to steal something another man was willing to give away.

 

Selfish? You think Amaram is selfish?

 

 

Amaram stepped forward, expression grim. He went down on one knee before Kaladin. “I’m sorry.”

...

“I couldn’t risk them telling what they saw. This is what must be, soldier. It’s for the good of the army. They’re going to be told that your squad helped the Shardbearer. You see, the men must believe that I killed him.”

“You’re taking the Shards for yourself!”

“I am trained in the sword,” Amaram said, “and am accustomed to plate. It will serve Alethkar best if I bear the Shards.”

...

"...It took hours to decide, but Restares is right—this is what must be done. For the good of Alethkar.”

“It’s not about Alethkar! It’s about you! Storm it, you’re supposed to be better than the others!” Tears dripped from Kaladin’s chin. Amaram looked guilty suddenly, as if he knew what Kaladin had said was true.

...

“It’s all an act?” Kaladin asked. “The honorable brightlord who cares about his men? Lies? All of it?”

“This is for my men,” Amaram said. He took the Shardblade from the cloth, holding it in his hand. The gemstone at its pommel let out a flash of white light. “You can’t begin to understand the weights I carry, spearman.” Amaram’s voice lost some of its calm tone of reason. He sounded defensive. “I can’t worry about the lives of a few darkeyed spearmen when thousands of people may be saved by my decision.”

 

Where in here is Amaram being selfish? He took hours to decide to take the Shards, with Restares trying to convince him to when he didn't want to. He's guilty about the whole thing. He believes he can save thousands of people. There's a whole lot of information we're missing here. When he says "you can't being to understand the weights I carry", I think there's a very big clue that we're missing something.

 

His actions could have had multiple positive outcomes with substantially greater gains had he followed a higher path. He instead chose the path of least resistance and callously murdered to hide as much evidence of his crimes as possible.

The only outcome I hope for him is the one he has earned, a cowardly painful death death alone and unmourned.

 

Had he not taken the Shards, here's what would have happened:

• One of Kaladin's remaining soldiers would have taken them.
• He would have went to the Shattered Plains, fought for Sadeas, and killed a lot of Parshendi.
• The end.

With Amaram, we know that he spent years avoiding the Shattered Plains, and that he's potentially saved thousands of lives. Giving Kaladin's Shards to his men was incredibly stupid.

 

Kaladin, ultimately, is not a useful ally. He's one darkeyed spearman who's decent with a spear. Amaram has no way of knowing that he's a Surgebinder.

 

Kaladin was giving away the Shards, but no one would believe that. If Amaram ended up with them while Kaladin was alive and there to tell the story with his men, that would have ruined Amaram as people thought he was a thief.

 

I am not trying to say that I think Amaram was in the right, but I think his actions were potentially very justified and I am waiting on a lot of information yet. Amaram and Dalinar are allied and good friends (apparently) so I do not think Amaram is 'selfish' or 'evil', particularly based on what's in the text.

 

The only mistake I see Amaram having made was not killing Kaladin, and instead selling him into slavery. But then, he was trying to avoid killing his savior, so I'll give him a pass there.

[+eveorjoy]

I don't think Doc is a troll.  Kaladin does have an extreme prejudice against any lighteye he comes across.

Think back to his first encounter with Adolin. He just watched a lighteye selflessly acted with honor, but he quickly passed it off as a fluke or tried to undervalue a good deed with pettiness and rationalization. Then, when Adolin paid him for a service, Kaladin refused to do what he was asked to do and pockets the money. He did this because Adolin is a lighteye and he is assumed to have plenty of spheres. Even if the last fact is true, it's also true that this act made him no better than a common thief.

Justify or color it in any way you want, but Kaladin had acted dishonorably towards Adolin just because he so happened to be born with bright colored eyes. But I doubt he would steal from a fellow with hazel eyes. This borderlines racism... but I think his problem lies with the system of nobility and authority. In this case, rather than blue blood, he associates his hatred with blue eyes. He just doesn't know it yet.

It's very similar to the divide between French nobility and the common population prior to the revolution... or Nazi Germany and the dark-haired population in WW2. Hitler didn't just persecuted Jews, you know. In fact, there are similiarities between the Alethi and the Nazis. In Hitler's mind, people with blond hair and blue eyes meant superiority and dominance. If Kaladin does not fix up his act soon, I'm afraid he will be our fallen hero of the series. Only instead of Jews, Kaladin will persecute lighteyes.

 

Kaladin could go down that path, but I don't think he will.

 

At the end of the battle of the Tower, most of the dark-eyed soldiers were across the bridge when he chose to still try to save Adolin and Dalinar. He doesn't like lighteyed people, but he will still save them.

 

Also Adolin was a bit rude to Kaladin when he tossed Kaladin the sphere, assuming Kaladin would just jump because a sphere was tossed his way. Kaladin taking the sphere wasn't honorable either, but I can understand why he acted as he did.

 

Kaladin is very damaged and has a lot to work through, which is why I doubt he would tell Dalinar what happened with Amaram, at least not in WOR.

Edited December 25, 2013 by eveorjoy

[DocHoliday]

You know that kaladin and lighteyes are of the same race right? Using completely false comments like that make me think you are trolling.

Now as far as Amaram goes he is evil in just about every way. It is just that due to selfishselfish reasons that he resorts to being evil not just a maniacal version of mustaches twirling evil.

Look at his motivations. It wasn't enough that a shardbearer had been killed in an assassination attempt on him and left his position considerably better off at the expense of his enemies he felt a need to falsify a level of prowess, steal items from and enslaveenslave a man whom could have been a tremendous ally, murder his own soldiers and brave warriors that came to his rescue when all others ran. All to steal something another man was willing to give away.

His actions could have had multiple positive outcomes with substantially greater gains had he followed a higher path. He instead chose the path of least resistance and callously murdered to hide as much evidence of his crimes as possible.

The only outcome I hope for him is the one he has earned, a cowardly painful death death alone and unmourned.

Thanks for calling me a troll. You can disagree with my opinion, but that really wasn't fair.

IRL you do realize that African Americans are the same species as Japanese or the French. The only difference between them are margins marginal physical traits.

People still pick on those physical traits and disregard an entire culture for no better reason than their SKIN color. We name them racist.

Kaladin picks out a physical trait and assumes everyone who has it is morally inferior to himself. For no better reason than EYE color. I call that racist.

Hope that clears up some confusion.

 

@Eveorjoy (Holocaust): That is a very interesting point you brought up. I'm not saying that Kaladin or the Jews don't have good reason to feel how they do. But if you look at their actions, it really is a form of racism. You didn't mention a specifically why the Jews would be, but in the years  immediately after WW II, I can definitely imagine a deep mistrust of anyone German. But it is still racist IMO.

[+eveorjoy]

@Eveorjoy (Holocaust): That is a very interesting point you brought up. I'm not saying that Kaladin or the Jews don't have good reason to feel how they do. But if you look at their actions, it really is a form of racism. You didn't mention a specifically why the Jews would be, but in the years  immediately after WW II, I can definitely imagine a deep mistrust of anyone German. But it is still racist IMO.

 

Perhaps, but at least it is caused by experience and not ignorance which is the root of most racism. I think as Kaladin is exposed to men like Dalinar more, his opinion will change.

[DocHoliday]

I think it's inevitable that Kaladin will completely release his hatred for Light eyes by the time he's a full KR

[Looter]

Thanks for calling me a troll. You can disagree with my opinion, but that really wasn't fair.

IRL you do realize that African Americans are the same species as Japanese or the French. The only difference between them are margins marginal physical traits.

 

Actually I now know it wasn't trolling but a general lack of information on what generally constitutes Racism, since you apparently believe that people are racist towards the french(Which is a country not a race), Japanese(which actually is a race and a country but usually not differentiated between the greater Asian race), and African Americans which are a racial segment of African heritage that happen to live in the United States. 

 

I didn't say Species you did, just now.  I said Race, and Kaladin and every lighteyes he has met are Racially the same.  Adolin may be the farthest it gets due to his mother being from somewhere else so he may be a half mix.  But the point is he is not Racist because he in not differentiating the races, Rock, and Skar may want to have a word with you on the matter. 

 

Kaladin is actually differentiating essentially between the ruling class and and the common people.  This is going to become more note worthy as he starts to meet light eyes that he may actually out rank in some ways.  I think Kaladin will have to grow to come to work better with lighteyes.  It will probably be most of what he does in this next book just because all throughout the last one he was abused by those that ruled over him.  A good plot line by the way

 

Selfish? You think Amaram is selfish?

 

 

Where in here is Amaram being selfish? He took hours to decide to take the Shards, with Restares trying to convince him to when he didn't want to. He's guilty about the whole thing. He believes he can save thousands of people. There's a whole lot of information we're missing here. When he says "you can't being to understand the weights I carry", I think there's a very big clue that we're missing something.

 

 

Had he not taken the Shards, here's what would have happened:

• One of Kaladin's remaining soldiers would have taken them.
• He would have went to the Shattered Plains, fought for Sadeas, and killed a lot of Parshendi.
• The end.

With Amaram, we know that he spent years avoiding the Shattered Plains, and that he's potentially saved thousands of lives. Giving Kaladin's Shards to his men was incredibly stupid.

 

Kaladin, ultimately, is not a useful ally. He's one darkeyed spearman who's decent with a spear. Amaram has no way of knowing that he's a Surgebinder.

 

Kaladin was giving away the Shards, but no one would believe that. If Amaram ended up with them while Kaladin was alive and there to tell the story with his men, that would have ruined Amaram as people thought he was a thief.

 

I am not trying to say that I think Amaram was in the right, but I think his actions were potentially very justified and I am waiting on a lot of information yet. Amaram and Dalinar are allied and good friends (apparently) so I do not think Amaram is 'selfish' or 'evil', particularly based on what's in the text.

 

The only mistake I see Amaram having made was not killing Kaladin, and instead selling him into slavery. But then, he was trying to avoid killing his savior, so I'll give him a pass there.

 

So because it took him hours to come to the decision that it was worth murdering the men that saved him and tainting their names after killing them so nobody would believe that what had happened was different from what he said it was it wasn't selfish?  Really?  He wasn't selfish because he was talked into it?  That is a way to avoid being selfish? 

 

Do you think that somebody saying, "Well my friend talked me into killing my roommate whom just bailed me out of getting kicked out by paying my way, but he wanted to spend the million dollars he just won on himself so because I was going to spend them on some charities and let everybody know that I was doing it just because I am that great of a guy.  So because of all that I was doing the right thing."  Yeah no.

 

Amaram had many options; He could have elevated them to an inner circle status and had them be his personal guards, you know the kind of guard that actually guards you instead of murdering your soldiers at your whim.  He could have talked Kaladin into giving him the shards for a couple of hours instead of talking to someone who talked him into murder and Theft.  He could have done a dozen things.  But his greed and selfishness got in the way.  The only one he saw was himself in those shards and if this is an effect of what shards do to people then Syl is right to hate them.  If it requires someone to have a moral responsibility to be near them and not be corrupted then that one aspect may be why there are Knights Radiant at all.

 

So yes I think that Amaram was selfish, I think he is like most serial killers and think that it is OK because he has a reason.  I hope he at least takes a spear to the gut, but I don't think he will because this is Brandon Sanderson.  So we will see what happens.

[Crisapx]

I agree with looter.

The code itself condones Amaram for what he did, and if Dalinar finds out, he'll be in trouble.

 

I just don't know which way Amaram is gonna go, he's at a crossway, where he can go hero or villain, depending on with whom he'll interact...

[Moogle]

So because it took him hours to come to the decision that it was worth murdering the men that saved him and tainting their names after killing them so nobody would believe that what had happened was different from what he said it was it wasn't selfish?  Really?  He wasn't selfish because he was talked into it?  That is a way to avoid being selfish?

 

Er, yes? Usually when you're selfish, you try to do what's best for you. In particular, part of being selfish is not caring about others. Amaram very clearly feels guilty over what he's doing, and wasn't going to do it on his own until he spent hours talking to Restares. Amaram doesn't seem to have spent his time with the Shards looking for glory or trying to gain fame and fortune, which is what I would think a selfish person would do.

 

I am not trying to say what he did wasn't disgusting. I felt sorry for Kaladin. Amaram still might have made the right choice. I am waiting to see what he's done in the past 2 years before I decide that.

 

 

 

Do you think that somebody saying, "Well my friend talked me into killing my roommate whom just bailed me out of getting kicked out by paying my way, but he wanted to spend the million dollars he just won on himself so because I was going to spend them on some charities and let everybody know that I was doing it just because I am that great of a guy.  So because of all that I was doing the right thing."  Yeah no.

 

According to GiveWell, you can save a life for approximately $2000 (though apparently it's possible to do better). The million dollars that guy won in this example could have saved 500 dead children. He was going to waste it. I think that speaks well of the murderer's intentions, if he planned on saving that many lives. That said, in your example, he was a moron. There are a billion better ways to get some guy's million dollars than murdering him. If nothing else, threaten him with a wrench until he gives it up. Now you're up 501 lives rather than 500.

 

Amaram had many options; He could have elevated them to an inner circle status and had them be his personal guards, you know the kind of guard that actually guards you instead of murdering your soldiers at your whim.  He could have talked Kaladin into giving him the shards for a couple of hours instead of talking to someone who talked him into murder and Theft.  He could have done a dozen things.  But his greed and selfishness got in the way.  The only one he saw was himself in those shards and if this is an effect of what shards do to people then Syl is right to hate them.  If it requires someone to have a moral responsibility to be near them and not be corrupted then that one aspect may be why there are Knights Radiant at all.

 

You do make a good point. There were other ways for Amaram to have gotten the Shards and not sold Kaladin into slavery. I'm not sure why his go-to response was murder, and I won't justify it until we get more information.

 

All I can say is this: Amaram doesn't seem to be that bad of a guy. He's even friends with Dalinar. If he felt that it was better to kill the soldiers rather than elevate them into his inner circle, then I strongly suspect he had a good reason for it. Perhaps we'll find out in WoR. As it is, I understand Kaladin's hatred for him, and I understand why most people dislike him and want him to suffer physical injury. I don't share the hate. I just hope Amaram managed to do some good with the Shards after what he did to acquire them.

[Auri Garvel Xel'iathi]

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.

[+eveorjoy]

Er, yes? Usually when you're selfish, you try to do what's best for you. In particular, part of being selfish is not caring about others. Amaram very clearly feels guilty over what he's doing, and wasn't going to do it on his own until he spent hours talking to Restares.

 

By that logic it isn't selfish for me to eat all the cookies in the cookie jar because I thought it over for a long time, felt bad about doing it and was talked into it by a friend.

 

Amaram doesn't seem to have spent his time with the Shards looking for glory or trying to gain fame and fortune, which is what I would think a selfish person would do.

 

Actually, we really don't know what he has been doing with the shards. Amaram was famous before he stole the shards and we are only getting Kaladin's POV. I'm not saying he is selfish. We have no proof of that one way or the other. He is a criminal however.

 

I am not trying to say what he did wasn't disgusting. I felt sorry for Kaladin. Amaram still might have made the right choice. I am waiting to see what he's done in the past 2 years before I decide that.

 

Murdering others for gain is never the right thing. I can understand the pragmatic justifications he used for killing his loyal men who hours before saved his life, but I don't agree with them. No he isn't completely evil, but he is at the least criminal. Criminals can be redeemed, but being a murderer is almost an irredeemable act.

 

According to GiveWell, you can save a life for approximately $2000 (though apparently it's possible to do better). The million dollars that guy won in this example could have saved 500 dead children. He was going to waste it. I think that speaks well of the murderer's intentions, if he planned on saving that many lives.

 

Hmm, then Hitler was right. His argument for killing people in the concentration camps was that they were wasting money through various means. I never knew Hitler was such a hero.

 

Seriously though, killing someone and then giving all of their money to the poor is wrong. What gives anyone the right to do that?

 

You do make a good point. There were other ways for Amaram to have gotten the Shards and not sold Kaladin into slavery.

 

Which is the reason there will never be any justification for what he did. There were other options. He just felt he was of more worth than Kaladin and his men, and therefore took what he wanted. Maybe not selfish, but at least arrogant and classist.

 

All I can say is this: Amaram doesn't seem to be that bad of a guy. He's even friends with Dalinar. If he felt that it was better to kill the soldiers rather than elevate them into his inner circle, then I strongly suspect he had a good reason for it. Perhaps we'll find out in WoR. As it is, I understand Kaladin's hatred for him, and I understand why most people dislike him and want him to suffer physical injury. I don't share the hate. I just hope Amaram managed to do some good with the Shards after what he did to acquire them.

 

I'm sure he thought he had a good reason and I agree that the Amaram hate is to overt without more information. Still, no matter what good he does with those shards, all of it will be stained with the blood of those whose lives were stolen from them. I think the shards are corrupted anyway, but that is a discussion for another thread.

 

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.

 

Yes, but what if the first time Kaladin sees Amaram is when Amaram is being all buddy buddy with Dalinar? Kaladin is only beginning to trust Dalinar and he still has a general mistrust for people in power. Kaladin also has no proof that Amaram stole his shards and murdered Kaladin's men. He might say he isn't comfortable around Amaram, but I doubt he would say much more. What good would it do to appear to be making up a vicious lie about the man who made you a slave?

Edited December 25, 2013 by eveorjoy

[Auri Garvel Xel'iathi]

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.

[+eveorjoy]

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.

 

True, but it all depends on several factors.

 

I agree that Dalinar could demand from Kaladin an explanation for his issues with Amaram. Now if Kaladin has grown to trust Dalinar as much as he trusts Teft or Rock, I could see him telling the whole story to Dalinar.

 

If Kaladin only trusts Dalinar as much as he did at the end of WOK, I wouldn't expect him to say more than, "Amaram made me a slave claiming I was a deserter. I'm not, but I have no proof." Why would he only say that, because he can't prove anything else and if Dalinar goes searching for the truth, as far as Kaladin knows, the only story Dalinar will hear will be the official one. Accusing someone of high rank of such an awful crime with no proof could cause problems for Kaladin. As it is now, I doubt Kaladin thinks anyone, even Bridge Four, would believe him.

 

Now Dalinar could react to Kaladin telling the official story two ways. He could accept it and ask Kaladin to have other men guard him when Amaram visits. Or he could ask for a full explanation. I don't believe Kaladin would lie and yes I do think Dalinar would believe him. In fact, I would love to read such a scene, because I think it would go a long way in healing Kaladin's trauma. 

 

However, I don't think my dream scene is inevitable and it is likely Dalinar won't ask unless Kaladin acts really upset around Amaram. Kaladin was just as angry at Sadeas and he was able to bow politely to him as needed. I also don't think Kaladin would just tell Dalinar, unless he felt he couldn't keep his cool or that Amaram was some greater danger to Dalinar than any other lighteyed leader in the camp.   

Edited December 26, 2013 by eveorjoy

[Moogle]

 

By that logic it isn't selfish for me to eat all the cookies in the cookie jar because I thought it over for a long time, felt bad about doing it and was talked into it by a friend.

 

I think we have a different definition of selfish. I see someone selfish like this: a kid is walking along, and sees an elderly woman with a pie cooling on her window sill. He's not hungry, but he likes pie. He steals the pie, goes off in an alley, and then eats it alone.

 

In contrast, we have Amaram: a kid is walking along, sees an elderly woman with a pie cooling on her window sill. He knows there's a lot of hungry homeless people, so he agonizes about it, phones up his older brother, and after feeling guilty about it, steals the pie to give it to other people.

 

I am not justifying this, I am just trying to say that I don't think 'selfish' is the right word for Amaram.

 

 

Actually, we really don't know what he has been doing with the shards. Amaram was famous before he stole the shards and we are only getting Kaladin's POV. I'm not saying he is selfish. We have no proof of that one way or the other. He is a criminal however

 

Okay, so far we agree. Amaram did in fact break the law, therefore he's a criminal.

 

 

Murdering others for gain is never the right thing. I can understand the pragmatic justifications he used for killing his loyal men who hours before saved his life, but I don't agree with them. No he isn't completely evil, but he is at the least criminal. Criminals can be redeemed, but being a murderer is almost an irredeemable act.

 

I think you'll have to expand on what you mean by the 'right thing'. I think you're trying to say that murder always makes you uncomfortable and that you want no one to have to murder anyone. I'm the same, but I think there are a lot of situations where murder might be the best option available. Perhaps you're familiar with the trolley problem?

 

A runaway trolley is coming down the track. It is headed towards five people who cannot get out of its way. A Passerby realizes that he can save the five by throwing a switch and diverting the trolley down a siding, but he also realizes that if he does so, the trolley will kill a Lone Man standing on the siding.

 

Do you flip the switch?

 

 

 

Hmm, then Hitler was right. His argument for killing people in the concentration camps was that they were wasting money through various means. I never knew Hitler was such a hero.

 

Seriously though, killing someone and then giving all of their money to the poor is wrong. What gives anyone the right to do that?

 

Huh, this is my first time actually seeing Godwin's Law in action. As to Hitler: Hitler rounded up the Jews and put them in the concentration camps in the first place. Gassing them to 'save money' was him trying to fix a problem he himself created. Hitler was also not donating all of the 'saved money' to charity, unlike the person in your example. I think the two situations (murdering a millionaire to give money to charity vs Hitler attempting genocide) are not comparable.

 

Killing someone and giving all of their money to the poor is certainly a weird situation. I don't think anyone would do it, to be honest. It seems to me that if you're going in that direction, you can just rob the guy after tying him up. I'm not really sure where this talk of rights came from.

 

 

Which is the reason there will never be any justification for what he did. There were other options. He just felt he was of more worth than Kaladin and his men, and therefore took what he wanted. Maybe not selfish, but at least arrogant and classist.

 

If Amaram literally spent his off-time in the past two years single-handedly slaying Odium with his Shards and preventing the Desolation, you'd say there was no 'justification' for what he did? (I'm not claiming he did, I'm just taking note that you said there will never be any justification.)

 

 

I'm sure he thought he had a good reason and I agree that the Amaram hate is to overt without more information. Still, no matter what good he does with those shards, all of it will be stained with the blood of those whose lives were stolen from them. I think the shards are corrupted anyway, but that is a discussion for another thread.

 

I agree with everything in this paragraph, though I think we differ on our reactions to the Shards being stained with blood. I think it's sad, but doesn't mean Amaram shouldn't have done it.

 

 

 

Yes, but what if the first time Kaladin sees Amaram is when Amaram is being all buddy buddy with Dalinar? Kaladin is only beginning to trust Dalinar and he still has a general mistrust for people in power. Kaladin also has no proof that Amaram stole his shards and murdered Kaladin's men. He might say he isn't comfortable around Amaram, but I doubt he would say much more. What good would it do to appear to be making up a vicious lie about the man who made you a slave?

 

Oh, now that would just be cruel. I hope Brandon doesn't pull that one on Kaladin.

[+eveorjoy]

I think we have a different definition of selfish. I see someone selfish like this: a kid is walking along, and sees an elderly woman with a pie cooling on her window sill. He's not hungry, but he likes pie. He steals the pie, goes off in an alley, and then eats it alone.

 

In contrast, we have Amaram: a kid is walking along, sees an elderly woman with a pie cooling on her window sill. He knows there's a lot of hungry homeless people, so he agonizes about it, phones up his older brother, and after feeling guilty about it, steals the pie to give it to other people.

 

I am not justifying this, I am just trying to say that I don't think 'selfish' is the right word for Amaram.

 

You're assuming that Amaram really has used those shard selflessly. I'll admit he may not have been selfish, and maybe arrogant is better word. Still we really don't know what he has been doing with those shards. Maybe he did want them for glory and justified it with pragmatic reasoning. Or maybe he is killing Odium with those shards like you said. We really don't know. March 4th can't come soon enough.

 

 

I think you'll have to expand on what you mean by the 'right thing'. I think you're trying to say that murder always makes you uncomfortable and that you want no one to have to murder anyone. I'm the same, but I think there are a lot of situations where murder might be the best option available. Perhaps you're familiar with the trolley problem?

 

A runaway trolley is coming down the track. It is headed towards five people who cannot get out of its way. A Passerby realizes that he can save the five by throwing a switch and diverting the trolley down a siding, but he also realizes that if he does so, the trolley will kill a Lone Man standing on the siding.

 

Do you flip the switch?

 

Yes I've heard that one. Did you ever here about the expanded version of it. There is a link to a video about it. But in a nutshell, those that can kill easily with their bare hands for the greater good are psychopaths.

 

There are situations where you have to kill. I think were our confusion is the definition of murder. If you take a life on the field of battle under a commander's direction, that is not murder. If you kill someone that is trying to kill you, that is not murder. If you kill someone who is trying to kill someone else, that is not murder. If you kill someone accidentally through your actions, that is not murder. If someone dies because you did not save them, even if you could have saved them, that is still not murder, (I think the trolley switch example falls under this. Your choice really is save five or save one. You aren't holding the lone man on the track nor did you put him there.) No, it is only murder if you tell someone to kill someone, or you kill them yourself, and they weren't trying to kill you or anyone else. I can't think of an example of where my definition of murder is justified.

 

 

 

If Amaram literally spent his off-time in the past two years single-handedly slaying Odium with his Shards and preventing the Desolation, you'd say there was no 'justification' for what he did? (I'm not claiming he did, I'm just taking note that you said there will never be any justification.)

 

Interesting, slaying hate (Odium) by nurturing hate in Kaladin. I'm not sure if that would work. Even still, that would not justify it because there are better ways to get shards and there are better ways he could have gotten those shards. Someone else on the site said he could have had Kaladin announce to everyone he was giving the shards to Amaram and even had an official ceremony to legalize it. If Dalinar cannot demand his shardblade back after a fair trade, then Kaladin could have been given something in trade and then the shards would have legally been Amaram's, So Amaram could restore Honor to life the with blade and it still would not justify the theft, enslavement, and murder he did to get those shards.

 

I agree, Amaram may still be redeemed, but he has a lot to account for.

 

 

Oh, now that would just be cruel. I hope Brandon doesn't pull that one on Kaladin.

 

Have you read about the post on Reddit where Amaram calls Dalinar his friend and advises him what to do about Sadeas? This thread talks about it. After reading the opening to Steelheart, and the crem Brandon had already put Kaladin through, oh yes he could be that brilliantly cruel.

Edited December 26, 2013 by eveorjoy

[Auri Garvel Xel'iathi]

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.

[Sleigh]

I don't know if Kaladin would ever tell Dalinar, but I suspect Dalinar would give some credence to Kaladin's story for a couple of reasons. One, he knows from personal experience that Kal is not only willing to take on a shard bearer but has also had some success at it. And, if I recall correctly, Kaladin told Dalinar that Bridge Four was about to escape before deciding to come back for Dalinar. That says a lot about Kaladin's honesty. So Dalinar knows not only does Kaladin have the skills but he told Dalonar the truth when it might have been more beneficial to lie.

[Moogle]

Yes I've heard that one. Did you ever here about the expanded version of it. There is a link to a video about it. But in a nutshell, those that can kill easily with their bare hands for the greater good are psychopaths.

 

Yes, but I don't think Amaram did it easily. If he's to be believed, it took hours of him being persuaded by Restares. And that's quite beside the point: just because someone is a psychopath doesn't make the things they do 'wrong'. It's a good sign that perhaps they are, but I'm quite willing to consider that there are different ways of thinking/feeling (what we might consider mental illnesses) that lead to better worlds. I don't know of any, and most psychopaths are certainly not what I am thinking of, but I think in principle it's possible to have there be a sort of mind or mode of thinking that I would find better.

 

 

 

There are situations where you have to kill. I think were our confusion is the definition of murder. If you take a life on the field of battle under a commander's direction, that is not murder. If you kill someone that is trying to kill you, that is not murder. If you kill someone who is trying to kill someone else, that is not murder. If you kill someone accidentally through your actions, that is not murder. If someone dies because you did not save them, even if you could have saved them, that is still not murder, (I think the trolley switch example falls under this. Your choice really is save five or save one. You aren't holding the lone man on the track nor did you put him there.) No, it is only murder if you tell someone to kill someone, or you kill them yourself, and they weren't trying to kill you or anyone else. I can't think of an example of where my definition of murder is justified.

 

I don't understand the distinction between a person killing someone accidentally vs. deliberately you're putting forward. Perhaps another question: would you prefer it if a serial killer, trying to murder someone, ended up accidentally defusing a bomb that would destroy a city (perhaps when he was stabbing someone he cut a wire; the specifics don't matter), or would you prefer for a man, who was trying to save a terribly injured man's life, ended up setting off a bomb strapped to him that destroyed an entire city? A ridiculous situation, but perhaps it would make clear the distinction you're trying to make.

 

 

 

Interesting, slaying hate (Odium) by nurturing hate in Kaladin. I'm not sure if that would work. Even still, that would not justify it because there are better ways to get shards and there are better ways he could have gotten those shards. Someone else on the site said he could have had Kaladin announce to everyone he was giving the shards to Amaram and even had an official ceremony to legalize it. If Dalinar cannot demand his shardblade back after a fair trade, then Kaladin could have been given something in trade and then the shards would have legally been Amaram's, So Amaram could restore Honor to life the with blade and it still would not justify the theft, enslavement, and murder he did to get those shards.

 

I read an article on a blog somewhere that essentially had this advice for getting to the bottom of these sorts of things: imagine the least convenient world for your position. Don't try to find alternates. Imagine, here, that Amaram literally had to kill Kaladin's men and sell him into slavery, or else he couldn't get the Shards and kill Odium. What then? Should he have not done it, and let Odium do whatever? I think we might just have different definitions of what 'justified' means.

 

 

Have you read about the post on Reddit where Amaram calls Dalinar his friend and advises him what to do about Sadeas? This thread talks about it. After reading the opening to Steelheart, and the crem Brandon had already put Kaladin through, oh yes he could be that brilliantly cruel.

 

I have seen that, but I thought it might take time and it wouldn't be the first thing Kaladin sees with Amaram. Oh, poor Kaladin...

[Natans]

Ok, I have to say such nice discussion about Amaram X Kaladin are making hungry for the release of  WOR to see if Amaram are a Anti-hero or a Egoist Killer.

 

I personally don't see Amaram with good eyes but, after soo much discussion I think that I will wait and see if there is something that I'm missing in this whole situation. I don't buy that Amaram was right in kill Kaladin's man and make him a slave, but If there are people defended Amaram is such vigor maybe a missed something vital here =)

 

Just saying, don't mind me guys keep going =)

[+eveorjoy]

I don't understand the distinction between a person killing someone accidentally vs. deliberately you're putting forward. Perhaps another question: would you prefer it if a serial killer, trying to murder someone, ended up accidentally defusing a bomb that would destroy a city (perhaps when he was stabbing someone he cut a wire; the specifics don't matter), or would you prefer for a man, who was trying to save a terribly injured man's life, ended up setting off a bomb strapped to him that destroyed an entire city? A ridiculous situation, but perhaps it would make clear the distinction you're trying to make.

 

The distinction lies in intent. As I see it, killing is only murder if the victim is innocent and the action was deliberate. But considering you hate war, you might see all killing as murder.

 

As for your question, I'm not sure the two scenarios are comparable. 

 

In scenario one someone accidentally saves a lot of people while trying to kill someone. That doesn't make him a hero or any less of a murderer.

 

In scenario two, someone accidentally killed a lot of people while trying to save someone. Well, he didn't intend to kill anyone so he isn't a murderer. He isn't really a hero either, because I assume the person he tried to save also died.

 

Which would I prefer? Neither. 

 

 

I read an article on a blog somewhere that essentially had this advice for getting to the bottom of these sorts of things: imagine the least convenient world for your position. Don't try to find alternates. Imagine, here, that Amaram literally had to kill Kaladin's men and sell him into slavery, or else he couldn't get the Shards and kill Odium. What then? Should he have not done it, and let Odium do whatever? I think we might just have different definitions of what 'justified' means.

 

But alternatives exist in the text. Kaladin said he would have given the shards to Amaram and we know he was telling the truth.

 

If Amaram really had no other choices, and the only way to save Roshar from the everstorm was for Amaram to have those specific shards, then yes maybe I could consider it justified. I think even Kaladin would agree to that. However, that is not the case. Amaram is not the savior of Roshar. There are other ways he could have gotten a set of shards and there are other ways he could have legally gotten Kaladin's specific shards. These facts are supported by the text. When I say there is no way Amaram can justify what he did I say that because of what is in the text. If you want to make up a situation not supported by the text that justifies Amaram then of course you can justify Amaram.

[+eveorjoy]

Ok, I have to say such nice discussion about Amaram X Kaladin are making hungry for the release of  WOR to see if Amaram are a Anti-hero or a Egoist Killer.

 

I personally don't see Amaram with good eyes but, after soo much discussion I think that I will wait and see if there is something that I'm missing in this whole situation. I don't buy that Amaram was right in kill Kaladin's man and make him a slave, but If there are people defended Amaram is such vigor maybe a missed something vital here =)

 

Just saying, don't mind me guys keep going =)

 

It is clear by the text, Amaram doesn't like what he is doing and sees no other way. He is wrong, but his mistake is human. I don't think he is an anti-hero, but WOR could change things. Currently, I think he is shaping up to be a sympathetic villain.

 

I wonder if Brandon is going to give us any villains we love to hate.

 

Edit: Sorry for the double post. It won't happen again.

Edited December 27, 2013 by eveorjoy

[Moogle]

The distinction lies in intent. As I see it, killing is only murder if the victim is innocent and the action was deliberate. But considering you hate war, you might see all killing as murder.

 

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I agree it's possible to define murder as intentionally killing someone for non-self defensive reasons. I just don't think it matters if someone did something accidentally or intentionally (except in judging whether it was justified), only that they did something. If I had to choose between someone killing one person intentionally and and someone killing two people unintentionally, I would choose the first option. I want to minimize death and maximize happiness. All other things are secondary.

 

 

But alternatives exist in the text. Kaladin said he would have given the shards to Amaram and we know he was telling the truth.

 

But, as Amaram says, people wouldn't believe that Kaladin did it willingly. People would have thought Amaram tortured Kaladin into doing it. I think this could lead to issues, like Amaram being investigated and other things that might have gotten in the way of his goals.

 

 

If Amaram really had no other choices, and the only way to save Roshar from the everstorm was for Amaram to have those specific shards, then yes maybe I could consider it justified. I think even Kaladin would agree to that. However, that is not the case. Amaram is not the savior of Roshar. There are other ways he could have gotten a set of shards and there are other ways he could have legally gotten Kaladin's specific shards. These facts are supported by the text. When I say there is no way Amaram can justify what he did I say that because of what is in the text. If you want to make up a situation not supported by the text that justifies Amaram then of course you can justify Amaram.

 

The text has nothing to say on the idea that Amaram had to kill Kaladin's men or else he couldn't kill Odium. Maybe there was a prophecy. We don't know that Odium is still alive at the end of TWOK! We don't know what Amaram has been doing with the Shards. It's incredibly super duper unlikely, but it is theoretically possible. That was all I was trying to bring up when you said there would 'never' be a justification. It seems that there is a possible justification, and you agree, so I think we've come to an understanding on that: it all depends on what Amaram has been doing, which is all I have been trying to say in this thread.

Edited December 27, 2013 by Moogle

[+eveorjoy]

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I agree it's possible to define murder as intentionally killing someone for non-self defensive reasons. I just don't think it matters if someone did something accidentally or intentionally (except in judging whether it was justified), only that they did something. If I had to choose between someone killing one person intentionally and and someone killing two people unintentionally, I would choose the first option. I want to minimize death and maximize happiness. All other things are secondary.

 

I think we are just going to need to agree to disagree. My thoughts on murder are based on how I see life. Not better or worse than you do, but clearly differently.

 

Let me ask you this. A serial killer intentionally kills someone and he is sentenced to life in prison. Another man accidentally runs over two people, and is sentenced to 32 months in prison. Should the second man be sentenced to life as well? Was the serial killer's sentence too heavy?

 

 

But, as Amaram says, people wouldn't believe that Kaladin did it willingly. People would have thought Amaram tortured Kaladin into doing it. I think this could lead to issues, like Amaram being investigated and other things that might have gotten in the way of his goals.

 

 

I disagree. Amaram has a reputation of being honorable. People might think Kaladin was foolish for giving up the shards, but they would believe he gave them up willingly. If Amaram had been investigated, Kaladin and his men would have said, "Yes, Kaladin gave the shards to Amaram. He considered giving the shards to one of us, but Amaram explained why giving them to him was the best choice. Kaladin didn't want them and now they are with an honorable man who knows how to use them."

 

I think in the end we will have to agree to disagree here too. Though I there are examples in the text that prove possible alternatives, digging too deep leads to speculation.

 

 

The text has nothing to say on the idea that Amaram had to kill Kaladin's men or else he couldn't kill Odium. Maybe there was a prophecy. We don't know that Odium is still alive at the end of TWOK! We don't know what Amaram has been doing with the Shards. It's incredibly super duper unlikely, but it is theoretically possible. That was all I was trying to bring up when you said there would 'never' be a justification. It seems that there is a possible justification, and you agree, so I think we've come to an understanding on that: it all depends on what Amaram has been doing, which is all I have been trying to say in this thread.

 

I find it interesting how much you claim to dislike a pathos or emotionally based argument and yet your attempt to make up impossible scenarios of Amaram saving the world with the stolen shards drips of pathos.

 

I think we both agree that Amaram is not as bad as Kaladin thinks he is. And if Amaram is a good as you assume, maybe he will try to compensate Kaladin for his suffering. Or maybe he will threaten Kaladin. Anything is possible. We will just need to wait for WOR to see.

Edited December 27, 2013 by eveorjoy

[Moogle]

Let me ask you this. A serial killer intentionally kills someone and he is sentenced to life in prison. Another man accidentally runs over two people, and is sentenced to 32 months in prison. Should the second man be sentenced to life as well? Was the serial killer's sentence too heavy?

 

Jail exists for three important reasons, in my mind:

1. Prevent people who do things detrimental to me (murderers, rapists) from continuing to do these things.
2. Make people who do these detrimental things into people who will not do these things (reform them).
3. Serve as a deterrent to other people who would consider doing these things, but who now won't because of threat of punishment.

A serial killer is hugely unlikely to be reformed, so I think life in prison is too weak, if anything. I would support infinite jail time, or execution if it can be proven that he was responsible (and if it's economically feasible; death row quite often costs more than just sticking someone in prison for life). Evidence I've seen says that over 5% of death row are in fact innocent of the crimes they were accused of. Biased, but take a look at the Innocence Project. Other studies I've found says that capital punishment does not deter more crime than life in jail. I'll cite them if you want.  So with that in mind, I don't think the serial killer's sentence was harsh enough. If by some chance the serial killer is reformed, he can be released whenever after an appropriate amount of time is spent to serve as a deterrent.

 

This has other issues. If the punishment is too severe, whenever a serial killer is caught by the cops, he has no reason to hold back and will stop at nothing to escape. I'd need more statistics on whether or not infinite jail time is likely to cause this before setting this in stone, and how many cops are to be killed in comparison to how many people would be killed if the serial killer was given a shorter sentence and let out to murder more, but such are my thoughts on the serial killer.

 

In order to deter people with poor driving skills from driving, the second man would probably be put in jail under a system I create. He's unlikely to continue harming people, so I'd argue that he should be let out at some point. And probably have his license revoked. He's likely to be a bad driver. If he's not, then don't take his license. (There's no need to waste money caring for him in jail.) 32 months seems like a fair amount, though I'd need a long list of crimes and lengths of incarceration time for them before I could pin it down as a nice amount of time with respect to other crimes.

 

Now, if there was a way to 'pretend' put people in jail (where the public is told they're in jail, but they're really not), that would be good for the accidental driver killer. No need to waste money on prisons. Unfortunately, the fact that this is happening is likely going to leak, so it's not really feasible. Something for a superintelligent AI to consider in the future, though. (Not that a superintelligent AI would need to bother with prison...)

 

 

I find it interesting how much you claim to dislike a pathos or emotionally based argument and yet your attempt to make up impossible scenarios of Amaram saving the world with the stolen shards drips of pathos.

 

I was using it for the purpose of finding a situation where you might agree that Amaram stealing his shards was 'justified'. I wasn't trying to convince you that I was right through an emotional appeal, just trying to get you to say that it would be justified in a situation that was so blatantly beneficial (Odium dead) for Amaram to take the Shards through murder. In any case, I don't really like convincing people through emotion, I prefer logic. If I can use emotion to lead someone to logic, well, that's good enough for me. It falls apart when people try to do it to me and I find there is no logic, just emotion.

 

Thank you for the discussion. Apologies for superlong posts.