Nathrangking Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 2 minutes ago, HSuperLee said: Objection! Based on the ruling by Adonalsium that a non-cosmere character can not be a witness for this trial, Brandon Sanderson cannot be tried for crimes within the Cosmere, as he is not a Cosmere character. Therefore this must be declared a mistrial. [Adonalsium] Overruled. This rule applies only to character witnesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShardShaper Posted April 25, 2019 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 1 minute ago, HSuperLee said: And yet, he has a right to a trial by his peers. If a non-cosmere character cannot be considered a peer so as to stand witness, how can you argue that any of this trial qualifies as such to him? Are you a cosmere character? no? So he gets a trial by his peers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathrangking Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 7 minutes ago, HSuperLee said: Objection! Based on the ruling by Adonalsium that a non-cosmere character can not be a witness for this trial, Brandon Sanderson cannot be tried for crimes within the Cosmere, as he is not a Cosmere character. Therefore this must be declared a mistrial. [Adonalsium] Overruled. This rule applies only to character witnesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigmikey357 Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 As Brandon is creator of several dissimilar universes, he is the only common element among them. Therefore I propose a motion that David of the Reckoners Universe and his testimony be admissible. Has he not been brutalized by the same creator? By the same token if Spensa, Alcatraz, or Joel wish to speak either for the prosecution or defense, they should be allowed to do so. To refuse them is to cast aspersions upon the entire process and thus should be deemed as a mistrial. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathrangking Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 4 minutes ago, Bigmikey357 said: As Brandon is creator of several dissimilar universes, he is the only common element among them. Therefore I propose a motion that David of the Reckoners Universe and his testimony be admissible. Has he not been brutalized by the same creator? By the same token if Spensa, Alcatraz, or Joel wish to speak either for the prosecution or defense, they should be allowed to do so. To refuse them is to cast aspersions upon the entire process and thus should be deemed as a mistrial. [Adonalsium] The court shall take this under advisement. Call your witness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I think I am here. Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 The prosecution calls Taln to the stage! Oh, Taln, you poor you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karger Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 (edited) The defense must point out that all trails Taln endured were at his insistence. Quote Besides how could we know how BA humans can be without him? Edited April 25, 2019 by Karger 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epicnolife Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Karger said: Um? Isn't this kind of like putting God on trail? Sanderson does the best he can. Interesting concept. If were talking Christian God, then what's on trial here is God's choice to allow Sanderson freewill. In this case free will is being used as a weapon to brutalize. Is freewill actually a concept of good or evil? God gave Sanderson the ability to brutalize, God made that choice knowing the consequences. He then enabled brutality. Is God then guilty of evil? If not then you must ask the question is anything truly good or evil? Or is it only perspective really? If it is; does it even matter then, to do good or evil? Is there truly a difference? If everything is good and evil then nothing is. Is God Nothing, Anything or Everything? What is nothing, what is anything and what is everything? If anything includes everything and everything includes nothing, Is nothing anything? Is anything Everything? Everything by definition is nothing and anything... so what does that mean? It means Sanderson is definitely guilty. It means Sanderson is definitely not guilty. Does that mean anything, nothing? Or everything? Edited April 25, 2019 by Epicnolife Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karger Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 Quote I must also point out that Sanderson has created several positive deities who currently aid millions of individuals (Harmony) and destroyed great evil (Ruin). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chromium Compounder Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 1 hour ago, Epicnolife said: Interesting concept. If were talking Christian God, then what's on trial here is God's choice to allow Sanderson freewill. In this case free will is being used as a weapon to brutalize. Is freewill actually a concept of good or evil. God gave Sanderson the ability to brutalize, God made that choice knowing the consequences. He then enabled brutality. Is God then guilty of evil? If not then you must ask the question is anything truly good or evil? Or is it only perspective really? If it is; does it even matter then, to do good or evil? Is there truly a difference? If everything is good and evil then nothing is. Is God Nothing, Anything or Everything? Is anything everything? Everything by definition is nothing and anything... so what does that mean? I think this is off topic, but interesting in its own right. For starters, Brandon’s creations are fictional, so brutality against them is fictional as well. That doesn’t make it completely fake, but certainly less real than brutality against real people. It’s similar to how Christ said that a man who lusts after a woman is guilty of committing adultery in his heart. So he could in theory be held accountable for this, but seeing as his books promote thought about moral and philosophical issues which can lead to real people choosing to improve their choices, this can be weighed in his favor. Plus his books don’t glorify the evils and brutality (unlike some other books that are popular right now), but rather show how bad they are and how important it is for the heroes to fight against them, which is also more likely to lead to kindness in the hearts of his readers. Again a point in his favor. Secondly, what you were saying about God giving Brandon the ability to brutalize makes God accountable. This is a fallacy. As a way of explaining, let’s look at Odium and Dalinar. Dalinar did terrible things, almost to a Hitler level of evil. Yes, Odium was pushing him all along, but Dalinar took responsibility for what he’d done, refusing to give his guilt to Odium. And just as Dalinar was responsible for his actions and chose to accept that responsibility, we are responsible for our actions despite the temptations we face from the devil and our own weaknesses. God is not responsible for our choices even if He could predict them, particularly when He believes so strongly in the sanctity of human agency (I’m a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, just like Brandon, and this is one of the things we believe). The shard which is the closest parallel to God as we believe Him to be (personality wise) is Harmony. In Wax’s near death scene with Harmony he tries to blame him for all the bad things in the world, but Harmony very clearly and effectively explains that if he were to do more then he would be taking away the choices of people, and that from his perspective he can see the need for things like death, disease, and suffering. Similarly our perspective is very different from God’s. We see suffering in the world and it’s easy to either blame God, viewing him as cruel, or insist that he must not exist, but both of these options leave out the possibility that maybe He’s not only real but that He loves us so much that He lets us make our own mistakes and learn to deal with them. He does nudge things here and there, especially when asked, and for those who are willing to listen He does more personally in their lives, but He really does try to bless everyone as much as we will allow Him to. Anyway, sorry to take things even further off topic, but you brought up interesting points and I wanted to give my perspective. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigmikey357 Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 We went from a courtroom through the philosophy department and landed straight into the theology classroom. Pretty awesome to argue the efficacy of fictional brutality and whether the person we know is responsible for it is actually guilty. I would argue that the brutal treatment gives context to the triumps our favorite characters experience, that without the brutality their eventual victories would have no meaning. One must acknowledge that suffering promotes growth in the best of characters and though some of them will inevitably break that suffering is by no means pointless. So what weighs more in the eyes of the prosecution, the journey or the destination? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Oltux72 Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 10 hours ago, ShardShaper said: [Kaladin] Tukks. Dead. Nelda. Dead. Goshel. Dead. Dallet: Dead. Cenn, Maps, Dunny: All Dead. Moash-Living... STORMS, WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO KILL THAT SON OF A KOLOSS!!! After glueing hundreds of offended, attacking Koloss to the ceiling, the court room collapses and Kaladin is torn limb from limb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toaster Retribution Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 I would like to point out that none of these killings were done by Brandon, but rather by Ruin, Sadeas, the Koloss, Amaram, the Ghostbloods, Vin, Kelsier, Straff Venture, Moash, Rock, Bridge 4, Dalinar, Adolin, Renarin, Odium and a ton of other people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShardShaper Posted April 25, 2019 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 Under orders from brandon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSuperLee Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 Just now, ShardShaper said: Under orders from brandon Is there evidence of that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truthless of Shinovar Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 Brandon Sanderson: *kills off all of the accusers. writes story about Hoid since he never killed anyone* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Investor Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 I would be very very surprised if Hoid has never killed anyone at some point or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathrangking Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 1 hour ago, Wandering Investor said: I would be very very surprised if Hoid has never killed anyone at some point or another. As far as we know he cannot harm anyone. 10 hours ago, Epicnolife said: Interesting concept. If were talking Christian God, then what's on trial here is God's choice to allow Sanderson freewill. In this case free will is being used as a weapon to brutalize. Is freewill actually a concept of good or evil? God gave Sanderson the ability to brutalize, God made that choice knowing the consequences. He then enabled brutality. Is God then guilty of evil? If not then you must ask the question is anything truly good or evil? Or is it only perspective really? If it is; does it even matter then, to do good or evil? Is there truly a difference? If everything is good and evil then nothing is. Is God Nothing, Anything or Everything? What is nothing, what is anything and what is everything? If anything includes everything and everything includes nothing, Is nothing anything? Is anything Everything? Everything by definition is nothing and anything... so what does that mean? It means Sanderson is definitely guilty. It means Sanderson is definitely not guilty. Does that mean anything, nothing? Or everything? Before resuming the case I feel the need to just take a moment to examine this question.While Sanderson does follow a christian framework judeo influences do exist in his writings. Based on this consideration he can in fact be held responsible for his actions. He has the ability to choose otherwise what would be the point of existence? Robots serve no purpose. They cannot grow or in any way use the abilities that they have been given in a truly creative way. G-d allows people to do what they wish because life is only meaningful when choice exists. It says nothing about approving of or disproving of people's actions rather it merely speaks to a desire for growth, development, and accountability. Sanderson cannot blame his constructs for brutality because ultimately someone who makes someone to act improperly is to blame when the actions of those who are coerced result in terrible events taking place. [Adonalsium] Does the prosecution have any other witnesses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Ark1002 Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 I WOULD LIKE TO PUT FORWARD ANOTHER CRIME OF BRANDON SANDERSON! Moash is still alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epicnolife Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 11 hours ago, Chromium Compounder said: I think this is off topic, but interesting in its own right. For starters, Brandon’s creations are fictional, so brutality against them is fictional as well. That doesn’t make it completely fake, but certainly less real than brutality against real people. It’s similar to how Christ said that a man who lusts after a woman is guilty of committing adultery in his heart. So he could in theory be held accountable for this, but seeing as his books promote thought about moral and philosophical issues which can lead to real people choosing to improve their choices, this can be weighed in his favor. Plus his books don’t glorify the evils and brutality (unlike some other books that are popular right now), but rather show how bad they are and how important it is for the heroes to fight against them, which is also more likely to lead to kindness in the hearts of his readers. Again a point in his favor. Secondly, what you were saying about God giving Brandon the ability to brutalize makes God accountable. This is a fallacy. As a way of explaining, let’s look at Odium and Dalinar. Dalinar did terrible things, almost to a Hitler level of evil. Yes, Odium was pushing him all along, but Dalinar took responsibility for what he’d done, refusing to give his guilt to Odium. And just as Dalinar was responsible for his actions and chose to accept that responsibility, we are responsible for our actions despite the temptations we face from the devil and our own weaknesses. God is not responsible for our choices even if He could predict them, particularly when He believes so strongly in the sanctity of human agency (I’m a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, just like Brandon, and this is one of the things we believe). The shard which is the closest parallel to God as we believe Him to be (personality wise) is Harmony. In Wax’s near death scene with Harmony he tries to blame him for all the bad things in the world, but Harmony very clearly and effectively explains that if he were to do more then he would be taking away the choices of people, and that from his perspective he can see the need for things like death, disease, and suffering. Similarly our perspective is very different from God’s. We see suffering in the world and it’s easy to either blame God, viewing him as cruel, or insist that he must not exist, but both of these options leave out the possibility that maybe He’s not only real but that He loves us so much that He lets us make our own mistakes and learn to deal with them. He does nudge things here and there, especially when asked, and for those who are willing to listen He does more personally in their lives, but He really does try to bless everyone as much as we will allow Him to. Anyway, sorry to take things even further off topic, but you brought up interesting points and I wanted to give my perspective. No need to apologize, i sincerely appreciate and enjoyed your response. Im going to think more, before replying. Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigmikey357 Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 Dalinar Kholin, or Unity as he'd like to be called, would be the star witness for the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epicnolife Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 (edited) . Edited April 26, 2019 by Epicnolife Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epicnolife Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 (edited) If God can be defined then God is defined as origin and end. It is the foundation of the entire concept. God is God because everything comes from him and will end with him. The assumption of freewill is that as humans we would be less without the negative to give meaning to the positive. I maintain free will could exist at a greater state with only positive options available to power free will. God himself represents Infinite positive. That means we could be positive only forever and never run out. If God choose. This places Sanderson in a position of guilt and innocence perspectively as I touched on previously. To hold Sanderson accountable for the bruality of his creations, instead of the creations themselves, u must first acknowledge brutatily as a creation of the creations, then acknowledge Sanderson himself is a creation of God. With out evidence of the existance of Gods God, due to the fact that's impossible as God by definition is origin and end. The concept to hold one accountable for one's actions and not hold the actions themselves accountable is grounded on the existance of freewill. The ability to choose which action. The freewill of the creations enabling brutality and the free will of Sandersons enabling his creations to enable bruality ultimately originate's with God as origin. thus I maintain Sanderson is definitely guilty. Sanderson is definitely innocent. Good and bad, guilt and innocence It is perspective. God is origin and end, which means God is an impossibility as the existance of the circle defies his existance. For a circle has no beginning and no end. Edited April 25, 2019 by Epicnolife Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShardGuard Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 21 hours ago, Bigmikey357 said: As Brandon is creator of several dissimilar universes, he is the only common element among them. Therefore I propose a motion that David of the Reckoners Universe and his testimony be admissible. Has he not been brutalized by the same creator? By the same token if Spensa, Alcatraz, or Joel wish to speak either for the prosecution or defense, they should be allowed to do so. To refuse them is to cast aspersions upon the entire process and thus should be deemed as a mistrial. [David] Yes! I like this plan! In case this helps at all, everyone knows that I killed Steelheart, right? You know... Steelheart? That's like opening the jar of peanut butter and leaving none for anyone else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chromium Compounder Posted April 25, 2019 Report Share Posted April 25, 2019 David, will you please explain your simile? You are notoriously bad at them, yes, but they do always make sense to you, so please explain this one to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts