The Pattern of Radiant Oaths Theory(also a list of the 9 theories I made from it)

[Karger]

A while ago I made my Pattern of Radiant ideals theory.  It may have come from a WoB or just from me thinking about the meaning of the oaths in general but at any rate it inspired me to start my series on Radiant oaths which some people seemed to like(you can find them in the spoiler tab if interested).  However when I asked for advice a lot of people told me that my pattern of oaths was the least well explained part of the theory.  So I have decided to explain my reasoning behind it.  I hope you enjoy.

For the record I am not just imagining things.  A pattern exists and is intentional.

Quote

#11 Share Copy

 

Play/PaQuestioner

I noticed that the Third Ideals have a similar theme to them. Is that intentional?

Brandon Sanderson

They do, that is is intentional. They won't all exactly go along those lines, but I'm trying to theme them, as best I can, in groups. So all the First ones, all the Second ones, particularly a lot of the Third ones have a similar--

Questioner

"Those I hate," or "Even those I'd rather not listen to"?

Brandon Sanderson

Watch for more of that, how about that.

 

The first ideal of all 10 radiant orders is "Life before death, strength before weakness, journey before destination."  This ideal has many different interpretations across both orders and individuals.  However because it applies equally to all ten orders I did not need to do any speculation.  This was not true for all of the second ideals.

We have a number of second ideals.  These include the Windrunners "I will protect those who cannot protect themselves."  The Edgedancers "I will remember those who have been forgotten." The Bondsmiths "I will unite instead of divide. I will bring men together."  And lastly the Skybreakers "I swear to seek justice, to let it guide me, until I find a more perfect Ideal.” 

These are not oaths from particularly similar orders.  In personality, profession, ideology, and spren orientation(Cultivation or Honor) these are all very different.  Still I find a commonality between them.  They are all about service.  "I will do X" although the for or why is not explicitly stated the lack of immediate rewards in the words indicates that selflessness is important here.  At first I considered them just service to others however @Oltux72 pointed out that this presupposes utilitarianism and while this may be a popular form of ethics especially in the west it is far from the only one and no one can prove one to be more valid then any other.  However they are still all about service.  If not to another person then at least to an ideal.  They are all about putting someone or something before yourself.  This indicated a potential pattern across 9 of the ten orders(we Lightweavers are an odd bunch and don't exactly swear ideals) and it helped me make up several other potential ideals for order's whose words we don't know yet.

Assuming then that second ideals share a central theme even if they are about different things then we can keep up this pattern for the next group of oaths oath three.  We have less of these but I still am relatively confident of my conclusions.

We have two alternate wordings from the Windrunners "I will protect even those I hate, so long as it is right." and "I will protect even those I hate, even if the one I hate most is myself."  We have one from the Bondsmiths I will take responsibility for what I have done. If I must fall, I will rise each time a better man, one from the Edgedancers "I will listen to those who have been ignored," and the Skybreakers oath of dedication in which they choose a code to follow. 

The commonality between these oaths seems to be fairness or at least suspending your bias/judgement.  An interesting quantity in many humans that I think Brandon has nailed in his writing is that people who tend to judge others too harshly may not hold themselves to reasonable standards but the inverse is also quite true.  People who are more excepting of others tend to deal overly harshly with themselves.  One of the anciant duties of all Radiants was to be "the light of all nations."  I think this sort of explains why.  Perhaps more then any other group of people on Roshar they were dedicated to looking outside themselves past bias, or personal preferences to see what was needed.

The forth ideal is where things get kind of complicated.  We know that Skybreakers swear an ideal of crusade and carry it out to achieve this one but we have never seen it happen on screen so it is not like we have a lot to go on here.  However the thing that stuck out the most to me was that the Skybreaker does not know the ultimate result of the crusade until after they are completing it.  I started to see it as a leap of faith.   To this I added what we know about the forth ideal for the Windrunnerrs.  Many people think that oath four involves letting go but with the exception of Kaladin I do not see this as a major problem with leaders.  It also strikes me as rather negative and I think it feeds to much into the paradim that causes Kaladin so much agony during WoKs.  "Overcome your guilt,Kaladin. Care, but not too much. Take responsibility, but don’t blame yourself.’ Protect, save, help—but know when to give up. They’re such precarious ledges to walk. How do I do it?”  It also does not really seem to fit into Brandon's idea's of leadership which we know from Mistborn, Skyward, and White Sand Prose(spoilers for each respectively).

Spoiler

In Mistborn Tindwyl teaches Elend about several things relating to being a monarch.  Some are about power but another is responsibility.  Everything even natural disasters are the leader's fault.  He must learn how to deal with them.  I leader's basic responsibility is to protect.  Another is about confidence.  A leader must be able to make moral judgements and be confident they are correct.  However the thing that Elend teaches Tindwyl is that it is important to trust your subordinates and those around you when they tell you that you are wrong.  It is this change that makes Elend different from TLR during the events of HoA.

Spoiler

In Skyward the leader is Jerkface.  Jerkface does immediate understand his responsibilities as a leader.  I feel confident saying that he is automatically a 3rd level Windrunner as soon as he starts letting go of his arrogance.  However it is only when he starts to Trust Spensa that he really takes off and starts to distinguish himself. 

Spoiler

I said this before during my Windrunner Oaths but it is also good here.  In the prose Baon gives Khriss her last lesson in leadership.  Khriss can't do somthing herself but all she has are two professors who have no idea how to gather information Baon tells her this.  “Doesn’t matter,” Baon said with a shake of his head. “They’re all you have. Delegation is one of the most difficult parts of leadership, duchess. The simple fact is, most people aren’t going to be as competent as you would like. Some of them will be complete idiots. Your job is to find a place for them to be productive, even if just a little bit. A little bit, plus what you’re doing, will always be more than you working by yourself.”

As such I think that the 4th ideal will relate to trust and that the leap of faith will apply to all orders of radiants.  This would also fit in well with Dalinar's arc(In WoKs Wit tells Dalinar that he has trouble letting go of power and we see time and again that Dalinar is not partially keen on people who are not members of his own family making important decisions).  Part of his arc could involve Dalinar learning to put trust in the people his appoints to important positions.

The 5th ideal was the hardest since we have basically nothing on it.  The only thing we know at all is that the Skybreakers consider it next to impossible to swear it and that upon swearing it the Skybreaker "becomes law."  The only possibility that really made any sense to me in this situations is an admittedly utilitarian one but keep with me.  The utilitarian purpose of law is to allow humans to live together peaceably.  No other animal can support social arrangements as complex because they did not create objective codes of laws that most if not all people can agree are important enough to follow even when they do not make immediate sense.  As such I thought that at the 5th oath a Skybreaker would realize that it is acceptable to make moral judgements in the name of preserving peace or social unity even if it is not directly precedented in the formal law code.  Assuming that this pattern remains constant.  Then each other Radiant order will also have to do the same and the firth ideal will also be about the ultimate goal.

Thanks for reading.  Below are all my theories for specific radiant orders.

Spoiler

 

RoW updated version here.

 

Edited December 18, 2020 by Karger

[+Oltux72]

6 hours ago, Karger said:

We have two alternate wordings from the Windrunners "I will protect even those I hate, so long as it is right." and "I will protect even those I hate, even if the one I hate most is myself."  We have one from the Bondsmiths I will take responsibility for what I have done. If I must fall, I will rise each time a better man, one from the Edgedancers "I will listen to those who have been ignored," and the Skybreakers oath of dedication in which they choose a code to follow. 

These three have something in common. They deal with internal contradictions and clash with other goals of the first oath.

• Skybreakers - what if the law books contradict each other?
• Windrunners - what if they are not worth protecting?
• Bondsmiths - what if unity were best achieved surpressing the truth?

The third ideal of the Windrunners made that clear. Protection is more important than justice.
The Edgedancers don't fit. I must admit that.

The Skybreakers faced the issue that judges and executioners alone cannot make justice. You need people who decide what needs to be done. The Windrunners have a further problem, which Kaladin faced in Kholinar, what happens if people need to be protected from each other?

[Karger]

6 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

The Edgedancers don't fit. I must admit that.

Yes.  Also it could be argued that SKybreakers, Windrunners, and Bondsmiths are quite similar in certain respects.

6 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

The third ideal of the Windrunners made that clear. Protection is more important than justice.

That is one interpretation.  Another is that you have to be prepared to forgive and another is that you must care more about the sanctity of life and living your life well then holding on to your anger.

6 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

The Skybreakers faced the issue that judges and executioners alone cannot make justice. You need people who decide what needs to be done. The Windrunners have a further problem, which Kaladin faced in Kholinar, what happens if people need to be protected from each other?

I am not sure what you mean.  Can you elaborate?

[+Oltux72]

31 minutes ago, Karger said:

That is one interpretation.  Another is that you have to be prepared to forgive

Well, I have to say it outright. Forgiveness is injustice. It means that who deserves to be punished, isn't punished.

31 minutes ago, Karger said:

and another is that you must care more about the sanctity of life and living your life well then holding on to your anger.

But he doesn't. Kaladin does harm to the kingdom by protecting Elhokar. His own mother, uncle and sister considered him incompetent. By pure utilarianism Kaladin would step aside and let him be killed. No, he values a concrete duty of protection more.

31 minutes ago, Karger said:

I am not sure what you mean.  Can you elaborate?

The Skybreakers cannot really go into the streets and punish people for traffic violations and littering. They need a way to set priorities. Hence the ideal of crusade.
The Windrunners have a different issue. Suppose the need to protect A and B. A and B want to kill each other. The Windrunner is given an impossible task.

[Karger]

2 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

Well, I have to say it outright. Forgiveness is injustice. It means that who deserves to be punished, isn't punished.

Again.  That really depends on who you ask.  In my book forgiveness is an attempt to put away something that no longer serves a purpose or that is no longer worth the cost.  Many institutions and judges therefore have the power to pardon or commute sentences that are perfectly legal and in line with justice.

2 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

But he doesn't. Kaladin does harm to the kingdom by protecting Elhokar

Kaladin killing Elhokar would be murder by deliberate negligence.  He may possibly harm someone in the future but saying that not killing him necessarily leads to harm is binary theory and a logical fallacy. 

2 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

His own mother, uncle and sister considered him incompetent. By pure utilarianism Kaladin would step aside and let him be killed. No, he values a concrete duty of protection more.

This does not mean his successor will be better.  Out of the frying pan and into the fire.

2 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

The Skybreakers cannot really go into the streets and punish people for traffic violations and littering. They need a way to set priorities. Hence the ideal of crusade.

An interesting theory but we saw at least a second ideal skybreaker do just that.  Also a crusade ends.  Are they supposed to go back to punishing people for traffic violations and littering once they are done?  Are they supposed to keep finding new crusades?  Also isn't that taken care of by the third ideal?  They follow the laws that they are given which also comes with a roll.  If appointed as officer of the watch then that is exactly what they do and to the best of their ability.

2 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

The Windrunners have a different issue. Suppose the need to protect A and B. A and B want to kill each other. The Windrunner is given an impossible task.

  Why do they need to protect both A and B?

[Steel Inquisitive]

1 hour ago, Karger said:

Again.  That really depends on who you ask.  In my book forgiveness is an attempt to put away something that no longer serves a purpose or that is no longer worth the cost.  Many institutions and judges therefore have the power to pardon or commute sentences that are perfectly legal and in line with justice.

Just want to pop in to say: a pardon and forgiveness are to very different things. A pardon is saying you won't be punished for your crime. Forgiveness is saying your crime is forgotten. One's an issue of legality while the other is an issue of morality.

1 hour ago, Karger said:

 Why do they need to protect both A and B?

Why does Kaladin feel the need to protect both parshendi and humans? Maybe because he realized they're all people? Only he can say for sure though.

[Karger]

28 minutes ago, Steel Inquisitive said:

Just want to pop in to say: a pardon and forgiveness are to very different things. A pardon is saying you won't be punished for your crime. Forgiveness is saying your crime is forgotten. One's an issue of legality while the other is an issue of morality.

True.  And you can personally forgive someone without changing there legal status at all.

29 minutes ago, Steel Inquisitive said:

Why does Kaladin feel the need to protect both parshendi and humans? Maybe because he realized they're all people? Only he can say for sure though.

OK then fine.  In that scenario oath four would tell him to trust that the enemy commanders are also going to act with the purpose of protecting there own troops and that the troops themselves either want to be there or have no better option.

[Steel Inquisitive]

5 minutes ago, Karger said:

True.  And you can personally forgive someone without changing there legal status at all.

100% agreement:-)

6 minutes ago, Karger said:

OK then fine.  In that scenario oath four would tell him to trust that the enemy commanders are also going to act with the purpose of protecting there own troops and that the troops themselves either want to be there or have no better option.

I guess that works. *shrugs* 

[Bigmikey357]

@Karger

The OP's Oath pattern theory jives well with my own interpretation, for I have thought about this as well. Haven't had time to look over the individual Order predictions yet though it looks really interesting. Anyway,  maybe my theory will strengthen or help define yours better.  

1st Ideal: Knight Radiant mission statement 

2nd Ideal: Order mission statement

3rd Ideal: Refining/ Individualized mission statement 

4th Ideal: Testing Ideal 

5th Ideal: Embodiment of Order

Whaddya think? 

[Karger]

42 minutes ago, Bigmikey357 said:

The OP's Oath pattern theory jives well with my own interpretation

Good, it makes me happy that I am not shooting wildly in the dark at nothing.

43 minutes ago, Bigmikey357 said:

1st Ideal: Knight Radiant mission statement 

2nd Ideal: Order mission statement

3rd Ideal: Refining/ Individualized mission statement 

4th Ideal: Testing Ideal 

5th Ideal: Embodiment of Order

Whaddya think? 

Somewhat similar

1. 100% agree on the first.  Not much to discuss here.

2. I had it as the service the individual order provides either to an ideal or to people in general but yours definitely works as well.  It might actually be better as it is a simpler concept.

3. This is the one where we disagree(which is fine obviously).  I had it as fairness/judgement and what you choose to rely on when making decisions. 

4. I call it (at least mentally) the leap of faith and I see it as more testing yourself.

5. I am having some trouble with this one.  We don't have any solid lintel on it.  What I offered was basically a shot in the dark.

Read the ones that interest you I can always use the feedback.

[Bigmikey357]

@Karger

So we conflict on 3 and 5, 3 because of a different interpretation and 5 due to lack of information. The 4th is the same. A test, a crusade,  a crucible,  you take what you've learned about yourself through the first 3 Oaths out into the world and find a way to accommodate your world view.  There will inevitably be those who can't and don't progress.  Btw, I got the 5th Oath from the Skybreakers and extrapolated it out from there. It ties into what I believe happens when someone reaches Oath 5, a complete man spren merger.  We could both be right or neither,  or only be right about certain Orders and not other's.  Either way it's fun to speculate. And I will read the individual ones when I get the chance. 

[Karger]

5 hours ago, Bigmikey357 said:

Btw, I got the 5th Oath from the Skybreakers and extrapolated it out from there

So did I but we have different understandings about what it means.

5 hours ago, Bigmikey357 said:

We could both be right or neither,  or only be right about certain Orders and not other's.  Either way it's fun to speculate

Agreed.

5 hours ago, Bigmikey357 said:

And I will read the individual ones when I get the chance. 

Thanks.  I will look forward to it.

[agrabes]

On 2/5/2020 at 2:02 AM, Oltux72 said:

These three have something in common. They deal with internal contradictions and clash with other goals of the first oath.

• Skybreakers - what if the law books contradict each other?
• Windrunners - what if they are not worth protecting?
• Bondsmiths - what if unity were best achieved surpressing the truth?

The third ideal of the Windrunners made that clear. Protection is more important than justice.
The Edgedancers don't fit. I must admit that.

The Skybreakers faced the issue that judges and executioners alone cannot make justice. You need people who decide what needs to be done. The Windrunners have a further problem, which Kaladin faced in Kholinar, what happens if people need to be protected from each other?

I think you are onto something with the 3rd and 4th ideals, if they really are all following the same form.  The 3rd Ideal seems to be about a recognition that wrong and right don't necessarily follow popular opinion or "common sense."  The Windrunners 3rd oath seems to be about protecting people even if everyone else thinks they shouldn't be protected.  The Edgedancers 3rd Oath is about listening to people that everyone thinks should be ignored.  The Bondsmith is about having faith in yourself and sticking to your convictions even if society says you are wrong or leading people down the wrong path.  The Skybreaker oath is about recognizing that there are many different sets of societal expectations about justice and the law and that you can't please everyone so you have to pick one set of laws to follow.

Ideals 1-3 are about learning and adopting basic moral truths that are widely accepted.  For the fourth ideal, I think it's about learning to interpret and apply existing moral codes for yourself.  So, for the Skybreakers - they choose to undertake a "Crusade" to act out the moral or legal code they chose in the 3rd Ideal.  For the Windrunners, it's about understanding how and when to protect and what makes it "right" to protect one person over another.  We know that Kaladin was not in violation of his 3rd Oath when he couldn't choose between saving Moash or Elhokar, because there was no harm done to his bond with Syl.  He did what was expected of someone who's only reached the 3rd Ideal in that situation.  But we also have to assume the 4th Ideal would show him how to resolve the situation.  For the Edgedancers, it's probably something like knowing which set of downtrodden people to help when helping one means hurting the other.  For the Bondsmiths I think it has to be something like "I will learn that I cannot accept everyone as part of the union."  The idea being that the first 3 Ideals teach them to unite and lead others and the 4th teaches them that they have to know that sometimes people will oppose unity no matter what and how to recognize that those people cannot be part of your organization.

The 5th Ideal, I think personally is about gaining a moral understanding/enlightenment so great that you no longer have to follow "rules."  The Skybreakers "I am the Law" if you interpret it in the positive way means that the 5th Ideal Skybreaker has such a firm grasp on the law and justice that they know all their actions are lawful.  They no longer have to interpret and rationalize their actions using existing moral rules.  To make a decision, a 4th Ideal Skybreaker might think "In Country A, X is legal but in Country B it's illegal.  In Country C it's legal in Y situations but not in Z situations, so if I apply the logic of Country C's laws in countries A and B I can decide what I should do to respond to someone who does X in those countries."  The 5th Ideal Skybreaker would think "I think that X should be legal in Y situations and illegal in Z situations and I'll act accordingly."  The Windrunner equivalent would be something like "I am a Protector."  No longer do you have to think in terms of a moral code about what is right and wrong and who to protect when, you just instinctively know.

Who knows though, this stuff is just fun to think about.

 

[Karger]

6 minutes ago, agrabes said:

The Skybreaker oath is about recognizing that there are many different sets of societal expectations about justice and the law and that you can't please everyone so you have to pick one set of laws to follow.

"Scribbles down notes."  Excellent!  Now it will be an entire coincidence if I ever revisit the topic and use considerably better wording and logic.

8 minutes ago, agrabes said:

We know that Kaladin was not in violation of his 3rd Oath when he couldn't choose between saving Moash or Elhokar

He saved them both though so I am not sure that is really a test.

8 minutes ago, agrabes said:

The 5th Ideal, I think personally is about gaining a moral understanding/enlightenment so great that you no longer have to follow "rules."

A very dangerous concept.  Radiant oaths do not prevent megalomania. 

9 minutes ago, agrabes said:

Who knows though, this stuff is just fun to think about.

Agreed!

[Gilphon]

Have you thought about how to fit Lightweavers into this paradigm? Like I understand that the whole Truths rather than Oaths things means they're gonna be a bit different, but the idea of them just randomly being an exception to this framework is unsatisfying to me. Like surely there should still be some kind of pattern to what kinds of truths they say at which point in their progression, right?

[Karger]

5 minutes ago, Gilphon said:

Have you thought about how to fit Lightweavers into this paradigm? Like I understand that the whole Truths rather than Oaths things means they're gonna be a bit different, but the idea of them just randomly being an exception to this framework is unsatisfying to me. Like surely there should still be some kind of pattern to what kinds of truths they say at which point in their progression, right?

I think Lightweavers generally go faults, then incapabilities, then kindness, and then limits but we won't know until we get info from Shallan's progression.  The truths have to be individual because that is what makes them true so I do not think you are going to hit anything that makes them follow the general order's pattern.

[Bigmikey357]

I don't know if Lightweaver has a pattern per se, more a direction toward complete self awareness,  one so great that they're incapable of lying to themselves.  Coincidentally I believe all Orders do this in their pursuit of their final ideals yet the majority of people must function within a structure in order to keep from being lost. Artists generally speaking don't do well with structure and hierarchy, therefore forcing those types into that type of organization means that not many would ever join up, much less progress. 

[agrabes]

14 hours ago, Karger said:

"Scribbles down notes."  Excellent!  Now it will be an entire coincidence if I ever revisit the topic and use considerably better wording and logic.

He saved them both though so I am not sure that is really a test.

A very dangerous concept.  Radiant oaths do not prevent megalomania. 

Agreed!

Ha, no copyrights claimed here.  I'm sure anything I've said on this board has already been said by someone else at some point!

Maybe we're thinking of different scenes on the Moash/Elhokar scene.  I'm talking about the scene where Moash kills Elhokar.  Kaladin thinks he should save Elhokar, but to save him he would have to kill his friends in Moash and the parsh, people he has also sworn to protect.  So, as a 3rd Ideal Windrunner he can't decide who to protect because he equally feels he must protect both.  And my point in the previous post was that this conflicted situation was expected and not a violation of his oaths up to that point.

I do agree that my concept of the 5th Ideal is dangerous.  But, I think it's already been shown the 5th Ideal is dangerous.  There is a WoB out there that a 5th Ideal Skybreaker would be equally fulfilling his Oath of "I am the Law" to take the "I am the pure embodiment of Justice" good cop route and the "Judge Dred, what I say goes!" bad cop route.  The evidence is there with Nale and what he's been doing, though you could argue he's somewhere in between those two extremes.  He's still a 5th Order Skybreaker.  I have to imagine that the other Orders would have a similar possibility.

[Karger]

41 minutes ago, agrabes said:

Maybe we're thinking of different scenes on the Moash/Elhokar scene.  I'm talking about the scene where Moash kills Elhokar.  Kaladin thinks he should save Elhokar, but to save him he would have to kill his friends in Moash and the parsh, people he has also sworn to protect

Oh sorry.  Wrong scene.  I would say no harm was done because he locked up.  If the bond was broken by moments of temporary weakness humans would not be able to form it.  Becoming shell shocked in what looks like an unwinnable situation is a completely normal physiological reaction.  No actual decision was being made.

45 minutes ago, agrabes said:

I do agree that my concept of the 5th Ideal is dangerous.  But, I think it's already been shown the 5th Ideal is dangerous.  There is a WoB out there that a 5th Ideal Skybreaker would be equally fulfilling his Oath of "I am the Law" to take the "I am the pure embodiment of Justice" good cop route and the "Judge Dred, what I say goes!" bad cop route

Yeah but there should be some accompanying principle behind both paths otherwise everyone would just swear it as soon as they go there.

[Bigmikey357]

The 5th Ideal would probably be dangerous in any Order, not just Skybreakers.  That's probably why they save it for last, after the Radiant has gone through the trials initiated through he swearing of the other 4.

[agrabes]

27 minutes ago, Karger said:

Oh sorry.  Wrong scene.  I would say no harm was done because he locked up.  If the bond was broken by moments of temporary weakness humans would not be able to form it.  Becoming shell shocked in what looks like an unwinnable situation is a completely normal physiological reaction.  No actual decision was being made.

Yeah but there should be some accompanying principle behind both paths otherwise everyone would just swear it as soon as they go there.

For the moments of weakness thing - I don't think we have enough information to really say for sure (and I'm also not sure if it's important even if we did) but I generally disagree with what you're saying.  Look at how Kaladin caused Syl's "death" in WoR.  Each time he had a moment of weakness in not living up to his 2nd Ideal, she was affected until eventually the bond totally broke.  One moment of weakness, by itself, causes an impact to the bond but it is recoverable.  I think if he was violating his 3rd Oath in OB, we would have seen a temporary impact on Syl.

I don't think there's an accompanying principle to the 5th Ideal - in the sense that you don't have to adopt a certain moral rule or value to be able to attain the 5th Ideal.  I think it's a level of understanding and "enlightenment" that allows you to reach the 5th Ideal.  I believe the core concept behind reaching all the ideals is increasing your understanding of morality and philosophy about how you should live your life.

1st Ideal - Understand that the ends don't justify the means and that even if life has you down you should try your best to enjoy the good with the bad.  

2nd Ideal - Learn that there is a certain kind of moral activity that motivates you personally. (Windrunners - protection, Bondsmiths - political unification, Skybreakers - rule of law, etc)

3rd Ideal - Further refine your understanding of what your motivating moral theory is and commit to following it even when it's hard for you personally.

4th Ideal - Learn how to apply your moral values when they conflict themselves, greatly increasing your understanding of how to implement your moral values.

5th Ideal - Acknowledge that you now have a perfect understanding of your personal moral theory and that you no longer need external rules to tell you how to live morally.

 

I think the reason you don't just immediately swear the 4th and 5th back to back is because it really does require a complete knowledge and understanding.  I think there are hints in the books that you can swear Ideals that you aren't really ready for and that it can have serious negative consequences.  I think Shallan's latest Truth in WoR followed by her downward spiral in OB is an example of this.  The old Radiants would have known this.  There are also definite hints in the books that the old Radiants generally knew what all the ideals were and even Kaladin seems to imply he knows what his 4th Oath should be, but they know that they can't actually live up to those oaths yet.  It's not just a matter of academic knowledge of the oaths, it's a willingness and ability to fully incorporate them into your way of life.  I think with the 5th Oath, for most Radiants they also get a little bit of "impostor syndrome" - that even though they may have a very strong understanding of their order and their moral system they don't feel they deserve to be a 5th Ideal Radiant.  They may also not feel they're up to the task of representing a perfect example of a knight of their order.

 

I don't think there can be a moral principal behind a statement like "I am the Law" in the context that we know it can be interpreted in vastly different ways.  It would be one thing if we knew that "I am the Law" always meant nearly the same thing - then you could say that it must be based on some kind of objective moral theory.  But it's really (imo) a situation where art imitates life.  Sanderson is drawing from real philosophy and real world attitudes to come up with these ideals.  I think his attitude to all this is that he doesn't want to say that one type of real world philosophical thought is right and another is wrong.  He's not going to incorporate something into his books, for example, that indicates that Thomas Hobbes' theory of Natural Law is the correct way of establishing law.  There are a lot of sincerely held beliefs about the best systems of justice or any kind of morality that are vastly different and I think we'll see this reflected in the books.

[Karger]

34 minutes ago, agrabes said:

For the moments of weakness thing - I don't think we have enough information to really say for sure (and I'm also not sure if it's important even if we did) but I generally disagree with what you're saying.  Look at how Kaladin caused Syl's "death" in WoR.  Each time he had a moment of weakness in not living up to his 2nd Ideal

But that was moral weakness caused by lack of conviction and a general attitude of anger at Elohkar.  He made a choice to help Moash after thinking about it for several days.  That is very different from just having a moment of panic.

34 minutes ago, agrabes said:

5th Ideal - Acknowledge that you now have a perfect understanding of your personal moral theory and that you no longer need external rules to tell you how to live morally.

I don't believe in perfect understanding.  The world's greatest experts on morality still learn new things or how to consider new situations.  As such I do not think anyone would actually achieve the 5th ideal if that was true.

Edited February 7, 2020 by Karger

[agrabes]

2 hours ago, Karger said:

But that was moral weakness caused by lack of conviction and a general attitude of anger at Elohkar.  He made a choice to help Moash after thinking about it for several days.  That is very different from just having a moment of panic.

I don't believe in perfect understanding.  The world's greatest experts on morality still learn new things or how to consider new situations.  As such I do not think anyone would actually achieve the 5th ideal if that was true.

Right, in terms of Syl's death.  But it wasn't like Syl went from 100% normal to 100% dead when Kaladin made that choice.  She slowly lost connection with Kaladin over time as he continued to make bad choices, with noticeable dips when he did specific things that were against his oaths.  But, really there's probably no "official" answer on this.  That's just the way I saw it when I read it.

I think "perfect understanding" is an imperfect term.  What I meant by it is not "perfect" in the strict sense of the word - knowing and understanding all possible information that ever existed or ever will exist in the future.  I meant knowing everything there is to know at the current time and possessing the ability to adapt and change based on new information.  But I do see your point.

Another formation of the idea would be something more like becoming a thought leader in the topic, maybe even introducing an important new idea or something.  For example, if you became the Immanuel Kant of Windrunner Ideals, then you can reach the 5th Ideal.  Kant wasn't infallible and didn't have perfect knowledge, but he was the head of his branch of moral philosophy.  If you were to challenge his ideas of how to derive morality, even if you brought a new question to him that he had never heard before, he is still the foremost expert on the topic.  This would explain why there can only be one or two 5th Ideal radiants per order in a generation.

[Karger]

1 minute ago, agrabes said:

knowing everything there is to know at the current time

OK but even such a paragon is going to have problems with new information.

2 minutes ago, agrabes said:

This would explain why there can only be one or two 5th Ideal radiants per order in a generation.

But we have seen no indication of that yet.

[agrabes]

23 minutes ago, Karger said:

But we have seen no indication of that yet.

Well, only for the Skybreakers and even them not definitively.  I'm just building from what Szeth learns in OB about 5th Order Skybreakers.  The impression I got was that it's very rare for Skybreakers at least to attain the 5th Order.  There has to be some reason for that.  It could be this is only a problem with the modern day Skybreakers.  But I'm going to assume that since it's the only data we have right now that it is true for all orders in all times.

Logically if it's very rare for radiants to reach the 5th Order, then there's probably a reason why.  The most likely reason might be that it's just hard to do and takes more dedication than most people want to give.  But, since we're just guessing on this for the most part anyway, I think a cool idea would be that the gate to become a 5th Ideal radiant is to be someone with an exceptional understanding and contribution to the moral/philosophical thought behind each order.  That would give you the qualification to say something like "I am the Law" and like in real life in most times there are only one or two great thinkers in a given topic per generation.  I can't imagine there being a dozen people running around who all say things like "I am the Law".  Then again, it's all speculation so who knows.