Skybreakers can be a little valid, as a treat.

[Nellac]

2 hours ago, kaellok said:

 

When Kaladin acts in ways which cause conflict with his moral code, he ceases to be Radiant.  That's his basic arc in WoR.  This is why Honorspren like Syl and Phendorana spend time forcing their Radiants to build strong, cohesive moral systems.  We see Pattern engaging with Shallan and Timbre with Venli along similar paths, implying that regular engagement with spren about right and wrong is common across most Orders.  We specifically do not see this with Szeth and his unnamed spren, learning instead that they have spoken only a handful of times across more than a year.  Szeth's internal moral code is, therefore, not forced to grow or change, and is instead allowed to be as simple as "They have my rock; I must obey them" or "I will do literally anything Dalinar says".  Perhaps as a Skybreaker approaches the 4th Ideal, the spren will engage more with them, but we know for a fact that this does not occur before then.

The Law may have a consistent words used to describe an action as legal or illegal, but the application and interpretation of that law is subject to personal opinion.  We see it every single day in real life, and we see a multitude of examples of this in the narrative.  For good and ill, selectively deciding which laws are enforced is up to the individual enforcing them. 

Skybreakers claim that they are the most consistent Order because they rely upon the Law, but they still must make choices about which laws they enforce.  This means that there will by necessity be some laws that are enforced more than others, and it will be left up to the moral judgment of the individual Skybreakers on how they do so.  Which, once again, tears them away from their stated strength. 

Using Szeth as an example is terrible because he has his connection with nightblood which makes his bond with his spren very different from others of the same order.

I'm curious what you mean by they will by necessity enforce some laws more than others. Are you saying that since they only have so much time they can only enforce some laws? While that's true, it applies to every order. Windrunners can only protect so many people. Edgedancers can only help so many people. Just because they are unable to enforce every law doesn't make them inconsistent. In many legal systems there are even different levels of crimes. In the U.S. for example there are misdemeanors and there are felonies. A skybreaker who swore to the U.S. legal system would simply enforce the greatest infraction. For example if a Skybreaker was chasing down a thief and they witnessed a murder happen they would turn to capturing the murderer instead of the thief. While you could say this is inconsistent because they are only enforcing some of the laws, there is a logical reason within the legal system to do this. 

I'm not saying that Skybreakers are going to be completely consistent. Yes there will come a time where they will have to make a judgement call on what to do. For example if two crimes of equal level in the law they would have to pick which criminal to chase. Again, is that any different from a Windrunner having to choose between saving two people in a battle? The consistency comes in other situations. For example, if a windrunner came across a family member or friend in the middle of a crime they would have a hard time stopping them and turning them in. If they came across a random person committing the same crime they would have no problem stopping them. A Skybreaker in the same situation would treat both the friend and the random person the same. In this particular situation they are more consistentant. 

While a Skybreaker may need to make moral choices some of the time, they don't need to make them in every situation. This is why they are more consistent. Where other radiants have to make a moral decision in every single choice that they make, a Skybreaker only has moral dilemmas in the rare circumstances that their code doesn't give them the answer. This means the chancers for inconsistency for Skybreakers are a lot fewer and further between then other orders.

[kaellok]

15 hours ago, Nellac said:

Using Szeth as an example is terrible because he has his connection with nightblood which makes his bond with his spren very different from others of the same order.

We have to make certain assumptions when we're speaking about how the Skybreakers could be, since the narrative gives us very few clues.  However, from the brief scenes of Skybreakers training in Oathbringer, as well as the pair in Edgedancer, it's pretty clear that Highspren simply do not interact with their Radiants that often.  There's not any clues that I can recall seeing anywhere that would indicate that a Bond with Nightblood would affect a Nahel bond with a spren.

16 hours ago, Nellac said:

I'm curious what you mean by they will by necessity enforce some laws more than others.

Given the absolute most forgiving best-case scenario, time is the primary limitation, as I've mentioned previously.  If they are tracking one crime/criminal, and see another taking place, they have to decide which one is more important.  Likewise if they see evidence of such. 

16 hours ago, Nellac said:

While that's true, it applies to every order.

Literally one of my two points in virtually every post I've made.  So many people in this thread keeps speaking about how Skybreakers are better/more consistent than other Orders.  They aren't.

16 hours ago, Nellac said:

A skybreaker who swore to the U.S. legal system would simply enforce the greatest infraction.

Why?  There is no requirement for that in our legal system.  The U.S. legal system does not make it mandatory to go after the greatest infractions.  Instead, police officers are given great leeway in when/how/where/why to arrest alleged criminals.  This is true for pretty much every legal system that I'm familiar with, that there are few (if any) actions that require law enforcement to act.  If the Skybreaker hated lighteyes and was chasing a lighteyes thief, and they saw a darkeyes commit a murder, there is nothing that we are textually aware of that would require them to then pursue the murderer--unless the law or code or person they swore to follow has such a clause built in.

This is my second point.  Unless the outside code requires action, the Skybreaker chooses to act or not act.  This leads to greater consistency only if the only Skybreakers chosen are those that will (almost always) choose to act.  If the spren were more involved, then they could help challenge and guide their Radiants to a better understanding of when/where/why/how to do so, but (as I've mentioned in previous posts) there's zero evidence that this happens to those that are not approaching the Fourth Ideal.

16 hours ago, Nellac said:

For example, if a windrunner came across a family member or friend in the middle of a crime they would have a hard time stopping them and turning them in. If they came across a random person committing the same crime they would have no problem stopping them.

A Windrunner (Kaladin) who did this ceases to be a Windrunner.  See: Kaladin ceasing to be a Windrunner when he decided to allow his friend to assassinate the king.  A Skybreaker who does this remains a Skybreaker.

16 hours ago, Nellac said:

While a Skybreaker may need to make moral choices some of the time, they don't need to make them in every situation. This is why they are more consistent. Where other radiants have to make a moral decision in every single choice that they make, a Skybreaker only has moral dilemmas in the rare circumstances that their code doesn't give them the answer. This means the chancers for inconsistency for Skybreakers are a lot fewer and further between then other orders.

A Skybreaker is making a moral choice every single time they choose to act or not act unless there is a codified reason for it (and modern nations in Roshar have few reasons to have done so).  Yet they are not required to develop a strong, consistent moral code to base those actions off of, which means they are less likely to even notice when there is a moral dilemma, let alone handle it well.  People learn to make moral choices by intentionally making moral choices, not by pretending that their actions weren't a choice dependent upon their morality.

The entire argument for consistency for the vast majority of Skybreakers (those of the First thru Third Ideals) requires a specific code of conduct for them to follow along with the law or person.  Without this, the way that they interact with the law is up to the individual Skybreaker.  You may get consistency within individuals that way (eg, I will always pursue the lighteye criminals over darkeyes), but not across the Order as a whole.  And so, in the end, you end up with an Order that is no more consistent than any of the others.

[Nellac]

28 minutes ago, kaellok said:

We have to make certain assumptions when we're speaking about how the Skybreakers could be, since the narrative gives us very few clues.  However, from the brief scenes of Skybreakers training in Oathbringer, as well as the pair in Edgedancer, it's pretty clear that Highspren simply do not interact with their Radiants that often.  There's not any clues that I can recall seeing anywhere that would indicate that a Bond with Nightblood would affect a Nahel bond with a spren.

Given the absolute most forgiving best-case scenario, time is the primary limitation, as I've mentioned previously.  If they are tracking one crime/criminal, and see another taking place, they have to decide which one is more important.  Likewise if they see evidence of such. 

Literally one of my two points in virtually every post I've made.  So many people in this thread keeps speaking about how Skybreakers are better/more consistent than other Orders.  They aren't.

Why?  There is no requirement for that in our legal system.  The U.S. legal system does not make it mandatory to go after the greatest infractions.  Instead, police officers are given great leeway in when/how/where/why to arrest alleged criminals.  This is true for pretty much every legal system that I'm familiar with, that there are few (if any) actions that require law enforcement to act.  If the Skybreaker hated lighteyes and was chasing a lighteyes thief, and they saw a darkeyes commit a murder, there is nothing that we are textually aware of that would require them to then pursue the murderer--unless the law or code or person they swore to follow has such a clause built in.

This is my second point.  Unless the outside code requires action, the Skybreaker chooses to act or not act.  This leads to greater consistency only if the only Skybreakers chosen are those that will (almost always) choose to act.  If the spren were more involved, then they could help challenge and guide their Radiants to a better understanding of when/where/why/how to do so, but (as I've mentioned in previous posts) there's zero evidence that this happens to those that are not approaching the Fourth Ideal.

A Windrunner (Kaladin) who did this ceases to be a Windrunner.  See: Kaladin ceasing to be a Windrunner when he decided to allow his friend to assassinate the king.  A Skybreaker who does this remains a Skybreaker.

A Skybreaker is making a moral choice every single time they choose to act or not act unless there is a codified reason for it (and modern nations in Roshar have few reasons to have done so).  Yet they are not required to develop a strong, consistent moral code to base those actions off of, which means they are less likely to even notice when there is a moral dilemma, let alone handle it well.  People learn to make moral choices by intentionally making moral choices, not by pretending that their actions weren't a choice dependent upon their morality.

The entire argument for consistency for the vast majority of Skybreakers (those of the First thru Third Ideals) requires a specific code of conduct for them to follow along with the law or person.  Without this, the way that they interact with the law is up to the individual Skybreaker.  You may get consistency within individuals that way (eg, I will always pursue the lighteye criminals over darkeyes), but not across the Order as a whole.  And so, in the end, you end up with an Order that is no more consistent than any of the others.

Yes a Skybreaker would have to make a choice on which laws to enforce if given the choice between two, but I don't think they could witness a crime happen and not enforce the law without shattering their oaths. They must catch the criminal if that is within their abilities. If they didn't it would be just like Kaladin letting the king die. You are right though that in the situation of choosing between two crimes they make a moral judgement. My question is how often is this realistically going to happen? How often would a Skybreaker have to choose? If they make less moral choices than the chance for inconstancy decreases. I'm not going to say a ton more on this because it feels like we're going in circles. We might just need to agree to disagree here.

On the Spren thing though I think there is more that needs to be said. Just because we never see Skybreakers interact with their spren doesn't mean that they don't. If we look at the other Radiants they mainly speak to their spren, especially about personal morality, when know one else is around. I don't know of a single instance where Jasnah has had a conversation with Ivory where other people were around. Shallan usually steps away from the group to speak to Pattern. Syl seems to appear and talk a lot more, but the conversations she has with Kaladin about morality are mostly done in private. The only other windrunner we've seen talk to their spren in public is Lopen. I'm not saying that there's no way the Highspren don't talk to their radiants often, I just find it highly unlikely. I don't think the Skybreakers are that different from the other orders. Also I'm pretty sure the Skybreakers in Edgedancer are all squires, besides Nale. Most of the ones in Oathbringer are as well.

Now I don't have any evidence that the Nightblood connection would get in the way of a spren bond, but it makes more sense from a writing perspective. It works better for Szeth to be having his dialogue with just Nightblood than to have three way conversations. Again, I know I don't have evidence, But Szeth's case just seems so different than other radiants. We have powers from another shard involved and that will always create something unusual.

[ftl]

9 hours ago, Nellac said:

Yes a Skybreaker would have to make a choice on which laws to enforce if given the choice between two, but I don't think they could witness a crime happen and not enforce the law without shattering their oaths. They must catch the criminal if that is within their abilities.

Best way to disable a skybreaker forever IRL - invite them to a college campus! They will literally never be able to leave, since it will take all the time in their life to deal with the underage drinking and copyright infringement/filesharing!

A skybreaker in the USA would never be able to pass by a freeway without causing the world's largest traffic jam (because, see, literally everybody is speeding.)

Or maybe it goes the other way around, Skybreakers in the USA would ignore all US laws, because, see, the laws of the Native American tribes that actually have legal jurisdiction over this area are long lost to history, so maybe the entire US legal code is an irrelevant fiction as far as a Skybreaker is concerned?

(We kind of see something along that vein with Nale's skybreakers. Where they decide that since the Singers were here first their law rules, and since they don't have any actual written laws from that time then whatever Odium says is the law, and now the skybreakers in RoW are just another military force that kill whoever their commander tells them to, except with the retroactive justification that oh, it's all just law enforcement, not military action.)

Edited December 3, 2020 by ftl

[Nellac]

8 hours ago, ftl said:

Or maybe it goes the other way around, Skybreakers in the USA would ignore all US laws, because, see, the laws of the Native American tribes that actually have legal jurisdiction over this area are long lost to history, so maybe the entire US legal code is an irrelevant fiction as far as a Skybreaker is concerned?

See, this would be assuming they swore to follow the Law of whatever land they were in. If they swore to a specific country's laws or a moral code this wouldn't be a problem

 

8 hours ago, ftl said:

Best way to disable a skybreaker forever IRL - invite them to a college campus! They will literally never be able to leave, since it will take all the time in their life to deal with the underage drinking and copyright infringement/filesharing!

A skybreaker in the USA would never be able to pass by a freeway without causing the world's largest traffic jam (because, see, literally everybody is speeding.)

Your have a good point here, I'm not sure how a Skybreaker would deal with that. Maybe they do make more choices than I thought.

[jamesbondsmith]

I can't help but notice there aren't many satisfactory rebuttals to my comment on the Skybreakers (and by extension law enforcement in general) that they are only as just as what they swear to follow.

Also, Nale all but explicitly states that being of the 5th Ideal lets you selectively enforce whichever laws you like, with the actual penalties for crimes being irrelevant (if his murder of every Radiant he can find for whichever crimes he can pin on them is any indication). Sure, he's absolutely nuts, but this is still something that his spren is completely fine with and has been for centuries.

Chapter 106 of Oathbringer he all but states that he can do that once he's reached the final ideal. Yeah, I'm slow to read, but spoiler tags on ROW content would be appreciated.

[Nellac]

40 minutes ago, jamesbondsmith said:

I can't help but notice there aren't many satisfactory rebuttals to my comment on the Skybreakers (and by extension law enforcement in general) that they are only as just as what they swear to follow.

I don't know how many people actually disagree with you here. I actually think the Skybreakers are very interesting and try to defend them. That being said, this is their greatest limitation and danger. In my opinion they can be either really good or really evil depending on what they swear to. This is why I actually think the best Skybreakers are the ones that swear to a moral code. They swear to a code that isn't going to change, unlike laws. A Skybreaker who swore to follow the laws of whatever country they were in would be unable to stop injustices, like slavery, if they were legal in that country. If a Skybreaker swore to a moral code they would be able to intervene and stop these injustices. This might also be possible if they swore to the laws of a single country where slavery is illegal.

[Could Be Fire]

50 minutes ago, jamesbondsmith said:

I can't help but notice there aren't many satisfactory rebuttals to my comment on the Skybreakers (and by extension law enforcement in general) that they are only as just as what they swear to follow.

 

I mean...valid. That is the major weakness of the sky breaker order and the cause of their current problems. They're all sworn to (and therefore as only just as) Nale.

However, at least what I believe is that this weakness extends to the other orders as well. Windrunner's are only as honorable as their own moral code on who should be protected. Yes, the second ideal forces them to go beyond personal feelings but it doesn't force them to change their perception of what is honorable. Honorspren, or at least Syl, seems to have way better taste than the Highspren, but there are lots of real-world examples of people with a very twisted sense of what honor and protection mean.

Also, Windrunner's are also 'choosing' a code to follow just like Skybreakers. It's just their own moral code as opposed to an external one. Honor isn't universal just like the law isn't. There can be massive differences in what people think is morally right/wrong to protect (see any intro to ethics case study like abortion, right to die, etc). Two Windrunners could end up on opposing sides of those issues. 

1 hour ago, jamesbondsmith said:

his spren is completely fine with and has been for centuries.

Spren, at least true Nahal bonding spren, aren't any more moral than people are. I'm only up through OB as well, but Malata explicitly says her spren is fine with what the Diagram is doing (Chp 107) which includes murdering people in an underground hospital. Even Honorspren aren't perfect, Ivory says that they're disliked within the Shadesmar because of their attempts at conquering everyone (OB Chp. 47). Nale's spren is bonded to Nale's soul it's probably as crazy as he is.

Also totally off topic, but do we know when Nale became a KR? Is there some 5000+ year old highspren floating around with him?

[jamesbondsmith]

Just now, Could Be Fire said:

I mean...valid. That is the major weakness of the sky breaker order and the cause of their current problems. They're all sworn to (and therefore as only just as) Nale.

However, at least what I believe is that this weakness extends to the other orders as well. Windrunner's are only as honorable as their own moral code on who should be protected. Yes, the second ideal forces them to go beyond personal feelings but it doesn't force them to change their perception of what is honorable. Honorspren, or at least Syl, seems to have way better taste than the Highspren, but there are lots of real-world examples of people with a very twisted sense of what honor and protection mean.

Also, Windrunner's are also 'choosing' a code to follow just like Skybreakers. It's just their own moral code as opposed to an external one. Honor isn't universal just like the law isn't. There can be massive differences in what people think is morally right/wrong to protect (see any intro to ethics case study like abortion, right to die, etc). Two Windrunners could end up on opposing sides of those issues. 

Spren, at least true Nahal bonding spren, aren't any more moral than people are. I'm only up through OB as well, but Malata explicitly says her spren is fine with what the Diagram is doing (Chp 107) which includes murdering people in an underground hospital. Even Honorspren aren't perfect, Ivory says that they're disliked within the Shadesmar because of their attempts at conquering everyone (OB Chp. 47). Nale's spren is bonded to Nale's soul it's probably as crazy as he is.

Also totally off topic, but do we know when Nale became a KR? Is there some 5000+ year old highspren floating around with him?

I'm getting the 'centuries' part from the book (pg 866 of my copy, which judging by the debates on the covers is the UK version), where they say how long it's been since someone has sworn the 5th ideal.

Many of the other orders seem to base their bond on a consensus, but the highspren to an extent abdicate that responsibility to something external (albeit a consensus interpretation of that external code, which many comments have pointed out). I guess I feel uncomfortable with people defending the Skybreakers as if they are better than the other orders (e.g. the Windrunners, as some comments in this thread state).

Also btw, I always interpreted the Windrunners as protecting individuals, not concepts. To use your example, a 'pro life' 3rd ideal Windrunner would protect a woman from people who would harm her for making that choice (this is just an example, please don't blow this thread to smithereens).

[Could Be Fire]

39 minutes ago, jamesbondsmith said:

I'm getting the 'centuries' part from the book (pg 866 of my copy, which judging by the debates on the covers is the UK version), where they say how long it's been since someone has sworn the 5th ideal.

Many of the other orders seem to base their bond on a consensus, but the highspren to an extent abdicate that responsibility to something external (albeit a consensus interpretation of that external code, which many comments have pointed out). I guess I feel uncomfortable with people defending the Skybreakers as if they are better than the other orders (e.g. the Windrunners, as some comments in this thread state).

Also btw, I always interpreted the Windrunners as protecting individuals, not concepts. To use your example, a 'pro life' 3rd ideal Windrunner would protect a woman from people who would harm her for making that choice (this is just an example, please don't blow this thread to smithereens).

Thanks! Centuries is super interesting, I've started to become curious how Nale bonding ties in timeline wise with his breaking, Honor dying, recovering his honorblade, etc.

Sorry if I'm coming across as too aggressive. Honestly, I think Windrunners are tied with Edgedancers as the best order as far as being a positive force in the world / doing pure good. 

Your last point is totally right. It's part of the reason that Windrunner's are so good (at least to me) is that they embody the idea of "let's stop people from dying first before we try to untangle what's right". I just wanted to highlight that internal morality is also a subjective code, but I'm not sure if that came across. 

I'm not Skybreaker stan (they can be a little valid, not a lot lol). I started this because I'd seen comments that suggested there was no way Skybreakers could be good or that following an external code of laws was objectively bad and I was trying to conceptualize for myself was a true 'lawful good' order would be like.  I'm excited to see it's as interesting a topic to everyone else. 

[Nellac]

4 hours ago, jamesbondsmith said:

Many of the other orders seem to base their bond on a consensus, but the highspren to an extent abdicate that responsibility to something external (albeit a consensus interpretation of that external code, which many comments have pointed out). I guess I feel uncomfortable with people defending the Skybreakers as if they are better than the other orders (e.g. the Windrunners, as some comments in this thread state).

I'm sorry if any of my comments came off this way. I don't think the Skybreakers are any better than the other orders. I mainly stand up for them because it seems that they are hated on much more than the other orders, and I think they are equally valid. My main point is that I think Skybreakers are more consistent in their moral decisions than other orders. As has been noted, how good or bad they are can vary a lot from one to another. So basically whether they are good or bad, they are consistent about it.

See, I think far too often we look at each individual order and judge their merits and faults. In the end there are things each order is good at and there are things they struggle with. I think the reason the ancient Radiants were viewed with such regard is because they balanced each other out. For example, Windrunners are really good at protecting the people around them when there is an active threat, like an army. Other times though they don't really think about many people other than their close friends and family. The Edgedancers pick up the slack here and make sure those who need it are cared for. The Edgedancers can take this too far though and might try to protect an urchin who has stolen something. While this seems okay at first, we need to think about the person they stole from and how unfair it is to them. This is where skybreakers step in to set up a system of law and order. But, as we've seen with the current iterations, Skybreakers can be harsh and brutal. Windrunners and Edgedancers would be able to help balance this out and advocate for mercy. Willshapers would also be there to push back against the Skybreakers if their rules became unreasonable and started taking away people's freedoms. The Bondsmiths are there to work out the differences between the orders and keep balance. I think this is the way the Radiants were made to work. Each order needs some sort of limitation that the other orders can provide. I think this is part of why the modern Skybreakers have become so merciless. Nale doesn't have the other Heralds to limit him and the other Skybreakers don't have any radiants to do likewise. 

(As a side note I don't know enough about Stonewards or Dustbringers to try and work them into my analogy. I also had no idea where Elsecallers, Truthwatchers, or Lightweavers would fit in so if anyone has ideas let me know.)

[Chiberty]

One thing that I will point out that I think is often overlooked is the fact that justice is not the primary goal of the Skybreakers. Skybreakers are not to justice as Windrunners are to protection. In fact, based on the ideals, 3rd ideal Skybreakers don't need to "seek justice" at all. Szeth swore to seek justice until he swore a higher ideal. Justice is certainly a theme due to the 2nd ideal, but consistency is much more representative of the Skybreakers. While, of course, an individual Skybreaker can be super erratic, having a set code and a set goal given by the 3rd and 4th ideals certainly gives a trend towards consistency.

[ftl]

16 hours ago, Chiberty said:

One thing that I will point out that I think is often overlooked is the fact that justice is not the primary goal of the Skybreakers. Skybreakers are not to justice as Windrunners are to protection. In fact, based on the ideals, 3rd ideal Skybreakers don't need to "seek justice" at all. Szeth swore to seek justice until he swore a higher ideal. Justice is certainly a theme due to the 2nd ideal, but consistency is much more representative of the Skybreakers. While, of course, an individual Skybreaker can be super erratic, having a set code and a set goal given by the 3rd and 4th ideals certainly gives a trend towards consistency.

Interestingly, now that I think about it, it's a bit circular!

They're consistent because they follow a code of laws. But are we assuming that those laws are "consistent", whatever that means? How can we tell if the laws a Skybreaker has chosen to follow is more or less consistent than, say, a particular Windrunner's internal moral code?

[Chiberty]

41 minutes ago, ftl said:

Interestingly, now that I think about it, it's a bit circular!

They're consistent because they follow a code of laws. But are we assuming that those laws are "consistent", whatever that means? How can we tell if the laws a Skybreaker has chosen to follow is more or less consistent than, say, a particular Windrunner's internal moral code?

There's no guarantee that the chosen code is anymore consistent than someone's morals. Consistency needs a reference frame to judge by, so the Skybreakers choose an external code. To tell if a Windrunner's moral is consistent, it also needs to be judged from some frame of reference. If you judge from the Windrunner's frame of reference, they are consistent, since they always act in accordance with themselves. Skybreakers try to be consistent from an additional frame of reference, which is why the code needs to be external.

[AonEne]

Quote

They were the ones who believed that nobody, not even a Radiant, should be above being questioned. They were the ones that did the sometimes tough job of making certain that the Orders didn’t abuse their power to become tyrants, as the Skybreakers saw that those with powers could easily oppress those who had none.

I also believe the above is relevant to this thread's discussions. This seems to indicate that they were well aware of biases and the possibility for inequality in how things were enforced, and kept it in mind.

On 12/4/2020 at 11:02 PM, Chiberty said:

One thing that I will point out that I think is often overlooked is the fact that justice is not the primary goal of the Skybreakers. Skybreakers are not to justice as Windrunners are to protection. In fact, based on the ideals, 3rd ideal Skybreakers don't need to "seek justice" at all.

I think Brandon disagrees with you.

Oh, and by the way, I've removed some RoW spoilers here. They aren't allowed outside of the spoiler subforums, no exceptions.

[Chiberty]

3 hours ago, Ookla the Intimidating said:

I also believe the above is relevant to this thread's discussions. This seems to indicate that they were well aware of biases and the possibility for inequality in how things were enforced, and kept it in mind.

I think Brandon disagrees with you.

Oh, and by the way, I've removed some RoW spoilers here. They aren't allowed outside of the spoiler subforums, no exceptions.

*shrug* We were told those headers are based on the second ideals, and the description below that mentions justice, then talks about boundaries, causes, and structures, so that doesn't go against me saying justice becomes less of a thing beyond the second ideal.

[AonEne]

23 minutes ago, Chiberty said:

*shrug* We were told those headers are based on the second ideals

...wait, when we were told that? I wasn't aware of this. And was it specifically mentioned that that means only the Second Ideal, none past it?

[Chiberty]

18 minutes ago, Ookla the Intimidating said:

...wait, when we were told that? I wasn't aware of this. And was it specifically mentioned that that means only the Second Ideal, none past it?

Right after I posted that, I did some searching to see if I could find the WoB to add to it, but I couldn't find it. I have a very distinct memory of this being said by someone on Dragonsteel, although it might not have been Brandon. It may have been on a video, or... that memory could be nothing, I guess. I'll do some more searching.

Edit: Still can't find anything, but my memory of it is distinct enough that this seems really strange to me, so I'll have to search for it more later.

For now, the second ideals we do know fit, so it's a reasonable assumption, even if I can't find where I remember hearing confirmation from. And regardless of what Brandon says outside of the books, Szeth's "until I find a more perfect Ideal" line is in-book evidence for seeking justice not necessarily carrying past the second ideal.

Edited December 9, 2020 by Chiberty

[Raven Wilder]

Most systems of law have selective enforcement of the law as an explicit part of how they work.

We saw an example of this right in the books, where Lift was spared from Nale because the head of the Azish government decided to pardon her. And in most judicidial systems, the judge and/or jury are given a great deal of latitude in deciding how or even if someone will be punished. There's also the concept of jury nullification, which says a jury can declare a defendant not guilty, regardless of evidence; even if jurors know for a fact that the defendant is guilty, they can still vote to declare them not guilty, and that act is completely legal and legally binding.

Now, you could argue that all that stuff is decided by the courts and the higher echelons, and the Skybreakers would (if they're sworn to those particular legal systems) have an obligation to arrest any lawbreakers and see that they reached the court system. But even law enforcement officers are given some authority in that matter. In the United States, how to handle traffic violations is left to a police officer's discretion: they can ignore the violation, they can pull the driver over and give them a warning, pull the driver over and give them a ticket, or pull the driver over and arrest them. The law doesn't require any particular course of action; it provides them with a range of options for how severely to punish this criminal act, if they even want to punish it at all.

Lawmakers usually realize that enforcing the law mechanically, without allowing human judgement into the mix, is utterly unworkable in a real world context. So any well-written code of laws is going to allow people latitude for how and when they enforce the law; that's not a violation of the law, that's the law being deliberately flexible.

[StanLemon]

My personal biggest issue with the modern Skybreakers is that they seem to be shifting responsibility from themselves. Nale abusing the law to kill Radiants is a perfect example of this and he even admits to the hypocrisy. Following and enforcing the law don't equate to justice.

[Nellac]

38 minutes ago, StanLemon said:

My personal biggest issue with the modern Skybreakers is that they seem to be shifting responsibility from themselves. Nale abusing the law to kill Radiants is a perfect example of this and he even admits to the hypocrisy. Following and enforcing the law don't equate to justice.

I don't think anybody is arguing that the modern Skybreakers are good. The point is that Skybreakers CAN be good.

[Chiberty]

On 12/8/2020 at 11:57 PM, AonEne said:

...wait, when we were told that? I wasn't aware of this. And was it specifically mentioned that that means only the Second Ideal, none past it?

I finally found it. I just realized today where I remembered seeing that.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/dragonsteel/the-way-of-kings-10th-anniversary-leatherbound-edition/posts/2890102/comments

Edited January 30, 2021 by Chiberty
(Yes this is really late, but my questionable memory of this kept coming up to bug me)

[KSub]

I mean the Skybreakers are an order of the Knights Radiant. By all reason they should be good.

Unfortunately, their leader happens to be Nale who has lost his mind.

[AonEne]

On 1/29/2021 at 7:19 PM, Chiberty said:

"the quote listed here is the primary idea behind the second ideal, and in many ways the theme behind the order's ideals as a whole."

No worries about the lateness!

I agree with you that "I will seek justice" is a match for the Second Ideal of the Skybreakers, but Michael went on to say that it also can be a theme for the rest of the Ideals. I don't see any evidence that suggests they would change suit after the second, especially considering we have their Ideals in the book, and they seem to fit all the way through; but it's as valid an interpretation as any, I suppose, until we get Szeth's book.