[Poll] [Discuss] Did Jasnah do the right thing?

[Szeth Pancakes he/they]

I'm in the "can't decide" camp myself. It's a complicated issue.

Edited December 13, 2021 by Ookla the Confused

[Frustration]

If someone tries to kill you unprovoked they have lost all protections, while the situation lasts.

[HSuperLee]

I find the phrasing of this question very important. The question isn't "was it justified to kill the men" or "was it wrong for her to kill the men" or even, "was it ethical to kill the men?"

The question we are given is, "should she have killed the men" which is the question I answered.

No, she should have not killed them. While the external ethics of the situation would lead me to say Jasnah had every right to kill them, and I think she was completely justified in doing so, I also believe in the eternality of personhood, and assume that to be the case in the Cosmere. In other words, every decision you make impacts both the world around you and yourself. Every decision you make shapes you in one way or another and influences the decisions you will make in the future. And when I look at the internal consequences of what Jasnah did, of treating life so coldly as to throw it away to make a point, then i fear for what that says about the decisions she's made so far, and how that decision will impact her person in the future. I believe that the act itself is not the only importance, but motivation and reaction to an action taken do matter. So, to defend my point a bit, I don't think there should be any legal or moral external consequences for what Jasnah did. Because what she did wasn't externally wrong. But I do believe she should not have done it, or if she did, she shouldn't have done it with the intent (lowercase "I", though with the potentially to be uppercase) that she did.

I do recognize though that it is a complex question, and that I may be incorrect on this issue if I'm not fully understanding Jasnah's thinking at this point.

 

Edit:
It occurs to me that while the poll question is "Should Jasnah have killed the men in the alleyway in Kharbranth?" the actual name of this discussion is, "Did Jasnah do the right thing?" So to complicate my answer: Yes, she did the right thing. No, she should not have done it.

Edited December 4, 2021 by HSuperLee

[StanLemon]

I often disagree with how ruthless Jasnah can be, for example I'm hard against her original stated desire to commit speciecide in Oathbrinder, I do side with her in this situation. Even if not for the same reasons precisely she did it. She was aware of a problem that (as far as she was aware) her host would have wanted taken care of for the safety of his people but the authorities refused to do anything about. Women were being raped and murdered. She had the power to stop it and all she did before was put herself into a situation where they might try to threaten her. They chose to, so she 'solved' the problem. 

Did she handle it in the best way, most certainly not because despite her power she did put her ward in danger without making her aware of that. And it shows how Jasnah is in my opinion just a bit too quick to kill when she doesn't have to.

[Letryx13]

This is the scene that made me worry about the kind of person Jasnah would ultimately end up being. My biggest issue is that I suspect Jasnah was capable of stopping them without killing them. She could have soulcast the stone out from underneath them and made a pit, dropping them enough to break their legs or something. If you can stop a criminal like that without killing them, I can’t think that it’s right to kill them. 

[Tglassy]

it's not an easy question to answer, though if recent trials are an indication than legally she acted in self defense, and therefore is not guilty of 'murder', in the legal sense.  

But is it right for an individual to cross into another's territory, where they hold no jurisdiction, holding a powerful weapon, knowing they will be targeted and attacked, and then kill those attackers with said weapon?  On the one hand, the attackers were going to harm people, and the government wasn't doing anything about it.  On the other hand, what right does this individual have to take the law into their own hands?  On the first hand, if the Law isn't going to do anything, then does a person have a moral obligation to step in and do it themselves?  On the second hand, where do you draw that line?  

A victim is never guilty of being assaulted.  Never.  But a prey animal is not guilty of being nabbed by a predator, either.  It still isn't smart for a prey animal to go prancing in front of the predator and tempt them into having a snack.  Can one be both not guilty but be responsible for their situation at the same time?  Jasnah had a right to be in that alley, and those men had no right to accost her.  But she did purposefully taunt them into acting.  She had no legal authority to punish those men.  But at the same time, the Law wasn't doing anything...

It's circular.  There really isn't an answer, I don't think.  Personally, I think it was wrong, because in the end, those men are dead.  It is a fallacy to assume that a man will always act the same way and is therefore incapable of being reformed.  Any of those men could have had families.  People who loved them.  Perhaps one of them was on the verge of becoming something better, and just hadn't reached that point yet.  Dalinar did worse, letting his men rape and pillage across Alethkar during the war.  He'd only stop them when he found a new Elite to add to his collection and needed a bargaining chip.  Shouldn't Jasnah give him the same treatment?  He burned down an entire city, for crying out loud, with every man, woman and child burning alive inside.   If Dalinar can become better, than the thug on the street can become better.  

[Honorless he/him]

I don't know. Would those thugs have cared that they could just steal stuff from them without shanking them? All they'd have had to do was cover their faces so their potential victims couldn't identify them. But apparently they were gang thugs or something like that and had been doing their business in that area for a while. It's a bit "hmm" inducing to be told that someone should value the life of someone who was about to kill them and had very likely already killed several people.

On the other hand, that was pretty much pre-meditated murder there. And Jasnah was a Knight Radiant and and Alethi Princess, she did have the power to stop them. Though she did argue that the thugs had some connections and would've gotten away without having faced any sort of justice or consequences for their actions. But she planned to kill them from the beginning. And she brought someone else along, putting them in danger and most definitely traumatising them although I'm sure she would call it a reality of life that Shallan would've had to learn eventually anyway and what was it she called it? "applied ethics"? And she did all that to make a point. That kind of thinking is kinda disgusting.

It's a visceral reaction. Logically, legally, morally I think you can probably make arguments for both sides. Personally, that was a d-move and if I were Shallan, I'd have chosen to steal her Soulcaster too, even if I hadn't come to steal it in the first place.

And then there's the fact that it's not just a scene in a book, it has baggage, it's representative of a lot of things to the readers. You know what? I'll change my mind regarding this stuff as represented by this author, when Kal and Moash and the darkeyes crew get to lay it down to the Lighteyes. Until then, ta-ta!

Edited January 27, 2022 by Honorless
word repetitions

[Szeth Pancakes he/they]

I don't think you can justify this being okay using the argument "it was self-defense." It was a premeditated murder (well, three), and you really can't justify that with "well, they attacked her first." Jasnah was thinking about attacking them before they even knew she existed. However, I do think you can make a different argument in Jasnah's case - that she saved more lives than she took. Those men were going to attack more women, and nothing was going to happen that stopped them from doing that. Shallan's life, as well as Jasnah's own, don't count because Jasnah knew she was putting both of them in danger. But I don't find it hard to believe that those men would have murdered more than four others if Jasnah hadn't done anything about it.

I don't know, though. It's a complicated issue.

[LuckyJim]

I don't think Jasnah's thoughts going into this really matter. She didn't do anything to provoke those men aside from walking down an alleyway, and she's right, a woman should be able to do that without fearing for her life.

That's not to say I agree with her actions though. For one, after the second guy was killed the others started running away. At that point it's no longer self defense.

More importantly though, it's simply not an effective means to stop crime. In general, people don't resort to robbery for fun, they do it because they need money. You can kill a few bandits, but if the conditions that created those bandits still exist then it's not going to actually solve the problem.

[Vin(Diesel)]

No.

Yes, you can go into a dangerous area wearing expensive jewelry. No you cannot go into a dangerous area wearing expensive jewelry in order to get a chance to kill people. It's not right. 

[Frustration]

Addressing a few points here, it cannot be murder, as that requires the ones killed to be guiltless.

Second she did not come to kill any specific individuals, only the people who tried to kill her, if they hadn't attacked her they would still be alive.

And finally she did not endanger Shallan she was more than capable of saving them both, though Shallan had no way to know that.

[Tglassy]

8 hours ago, Honorless said:

I don't know. Would those thugs have cared that they could just steal stuff from them without shanking them? All they'd have had to do was cover their faces so their potential victims couldn't identify them. But apparently they were gang thugs or something like that apparently, and had been doing their business in that area for a while. It's a bit "hmm..."-inducing to be told that someone should value the life of someone who was about to kill them and had very likely already killed several people.

I'm not going to discuss real world religion, but to give a little context, I am a Christian, and one of Jesus' commands was to love those who persecute you.  

I am all for protecting one's self and preventing more crime from happening.  But it is interesting that when you really know someone, down to their base motivations and completely understand the events that led them to where they are in life, it becomes hard not to care about them.  It's easy to dismiss someone as deserving of death when you don't know their life, their struggles, their pains.  We are not JUST a product of our environment, but our environment does help to shape us.  It can make it difficult to choose the right way.  Most people don't wake up and think "I'm going to become a murderer today".  It's a slow fade, giving yourself away one choice at a time.  I'm desperate, I need money to stay alive, I think I'll steal some bread.  Once that's desensitized, maybe you rob someone with a club.  You fall in with a group of people who accept you, who give you a place, and who encourage you to continue robbing people, maybe hurting them.  They deserve it, after all.  They're part of the problem.  They stoke your rage.  Then there's that first murder.  Once the first one happens, the second one is easier.  Until you've completely desensitized yourself to the lives of other people.  It's just easier to let your rage out on them, take what you want, and then go drink your guilt away, until you've grown callouses around your heart so you don't feel the guilt anymore, if that ever happens.

Of course, environment only plays a part.  It's the external force trying to shape you.  There is also the internal force.  Your own choices.  In the above example, nobody forced you to start stealing, to start robbing, to join those men, to start killing.  You made those choices.  Perhaps they were the options of least resistance at the time, but that's on you.  You can't really BLAME the environment for MAKING you do anything.  Yes, it gave you an easy road to follow, but you still chose to follow it.  

But understanding how someone became what they became does, at least in part, encourage one to have empathy.  To understand, and to feel pain at the choices they'd made, wishing they'd made others.  Not that the punishment isn't deserved.  But the desire that the punishment hadn't been needed.  The men in the book deserved their fate, hands down.  But then again, their 'sins' were on public display, whereas most people's are hidden. 

How many Darkeyes had the Lighteyes killed, robbed from, extorted?  But Jasnah doesn't seem to care much about that. Sure, she goes on to free the slaves later, but she doesn't extract revenge on Lighteyes who throw their darkeyed rivals in prison and get them killed.  She attacks the Darkeyes who are raping and murdering Lighteyed women.  Jasnah's Ethics are rather circumspect, considering she had multiple assassins in her employ to protect her family, who were not the most moral of people.  Her uncle murdered an entire city, and her father used that to secure his own power.

Personally, I don't think this scene was about stopping crime.  It wasn't about keeping these men from committing further atrocities.  I think Jasnah was raped when she was younger.  Possibly by Amaram, though maybe not.  I think that broke her, and made her hate all men.  So when she heard of these men, she wanted them dead.  But that's just my opinion.  

[Inquisitor #5]

As someone who does not believe the death penalty to be justified, she should not have killed them.

She's also not justified in killing them in self-defence, as they were no threat to her and she had non-lethal options.

In addition, she has no formal authority in Kharbrant, she's acting outside the law. Even if the men would have been sentenced to death in court, she does not have the right to kill them.

She deliberately provoked the men to attack her, similar to how IRL police have at times provoked crimes to arrest people. This is not justifiable.

Can I suggest a workable alternative to the particular situation laid out here, no. The men had already been let off by corrupt watchmen, so there was obviously no workable way to bring them to justice within the system as it stood.

Quote

"The city watch," Jasnah said, "has done nothing. Taravangian has sent them several pointed reprimands, but the captain of the watch is cousin to a very powerful lighteyes in the city, and Taravangian is not a terribly powerful king. Some suspect that there is more going on, that the footpads might be bribing the watch. The politics of it are irrelevant at the moment for, as you can see, no members of the watch are guarding the place, despite its reputation."

-WoK, chapter 36

9 hours ago, LuckyJim said:

I don't think Jasnah's thoughts going into this really matter.

Hard disagree, the intent behind your actions matters.

Quote

"Regardless," Jasnah continued, "tonight's actions came about because I chose this path, not because of anything I felt you needed to see."

-WoK, chapter 36

Quote

"You could have let the other three get away," Shallan said, walking back toward Jasnah, who had sat down to brush her hair. "You only needed to kill one of them."

"No, I didn't," Jasnah said.

"Why? They would have been too frightened to do something like that again."

"You don't know that. I sincerely wanted those men gone. A careless barmaid walking home the wrong way cannot protect herself, but I can. And I will."

-WoK, chapter 36

She went into the city intending to kill them. She didn't happen to be attacked, she deliberately went to a part of town with a known criminal problem, fully intent on removing said criminals by killing them.

9 hours ago, LuckyJim said:

She didn't do anything to provoke those men aside from walking down an alleyway

She did this while flaunting her wealth, when she expected robbers and murderers to be around. She's not at fault for their choice of action in response to this, but she certainly meant to provoke them.

9 hours ago, LuckyJim said:

a woman should be able to do that without fearing for her life.

Yes, that I agree with fully. Anyone should be able to feel safe in whatever place they find themselves.

9 hours ago, LuckyJim said:

For one, after the second guy was killed the others started running away. At that point it's no longer self defense.

I would say, given that she went out with the full intent to kill them, it was never self-defence.

Also, depending on how far along her oaths she was at the time, they posed somewhere between a minuscule to zero threat to her.

9 hours ago, LuckyJim said:

More importantly though, it's simply not an effective means to stop crime. In general, people don't resort to robbery for fun, they do it because they need money. You can kill a few bandits, but if the conditions that created those bandits still exist then it's not going to actually solve the problem.

Good point.

2 hours ago, Ookla the Frustrated said:

it cannot be murder, as that requires the ones killed to be guiltless.

What?

No seriously, what?

If I kill someone, regardless of what they are guilty of, it's still murder. Or manslaughter, if my intent wasn't to kill.

2 hours ago, Ookla the Frustrated said:

she did not come to kill any specific individuals, only the people who tried to kill her, if they hadn't attacked her they would still be alive.

Oh, no, she specifically went after the group that had killed theatergoers along this street, the same ones who are suspected of bribing the watch.

She very definitely intended to kill these exact people. Though I suppose she didn't intend to kill these exact individuals, rather the individuals that made up this particular group.

2 hours ago, Ookla the Frustrated said:

she did not endanger Shallan she was more than capable of saving them both

Capable, sure. Able, maybe.

Had there been more men, or had they been positioned differently, Shallan could have been stabbed by someone Jasnah hadn't been focusing on.

So I wouldn't say that she definitely didn't endanger Shallan, even if the outcome was that she sustained no physical trauma.

She was also perfectly willing to subject Shallan to the psychological trauma of seeing people killed.

 

14 hours ago, StanLemon said:

for example I'm hard against her original stated desire to commit speciecide in Oathbrinder

Small sidenote, she actually isn't a proponent of singer genocide.

Quote

"The Stormfather said their pact was weakened, but did not say it was destroyed," Jasnah said. "I suggest that we at least see if one of them is willing to return to Damnation. Perhaps they can still prevent the spirits of the enemy from being reborn. It's either that, or we completely exterminate the parshmen so that the enemy has no hosts." She met Kaladin's eyes. "In the face of such an atrocity, I would consider the sacrifice of one or more Heralds to be a small price."

-Oathbringer, chapter 39

She is justifying sending the Heralds back to Braize to Kaladin, basically saying "we can try this thing that you find distasteful, or we can try this thing that's far more distasteful, if you like."

 

 

¤_¤

[Frustration]

7 hours ago, Inquisitor #5 said:

What?

No seriously, what?

If I kill someone, regardless of what they are guilty of, it's still murder. Or manslaughter, if my intent wasn't to kill.

If someone attacks you and you kill them it is not murder, they started the confrontation you bare no responsibility. 

7 hours ago, Inquisitor #5 said:

She very definitely intended to kill these exact people. Though I suppose she didn't intend to kill these exact individuals, rather the individuals that made up this particular group.

And if no one attacked what would she do?

7 hours ago, Inquisitor #5 said:

In addition, she has no formal authority in Kharbrant, she's acting outside the law. Even if the men would have been sentenced to death in court, she does not have the right to kill them.

Depending on treaties, as princess anywhere she stands is considered Alethi soil.

[NameIess]

18 minutes ago, Ookla the Frustrated said:

If someone attacks you and you kill them it is not murder, they started the confrontation you bare no responsibility. 

And if no one attacked what would she do?

Depending on treaties, as princess anywhere she stands is considered Alethi soil.

I feel like the fact that she manipulated the situation in order to kill those men as a philosophy lesson to her ward says something about the morals behind killing them. Not that she was wrong to kill the men, but she could have killed them or gotten them executed in a more moral way.

[Frustration]

1 hour ago, Ookla the unintelligible said:

I feel like the fact that she manipulated the situation in order to kill those men as a philosophy lesson to her ward says something about the morals behind killing them. Not that she was wrong to kill the men, but she could have killed them or gotten them executed in a more moral way.

I'm not sure that makes a difference to me.

[NameIess]

Just now, Ookla the Frustrated said:

I'm not sure that makes a difference to me.

I'm not trying to change your mind, I'm just pointing out that while yes, Jasnah was justified in killing those men when she did it, she could have done a better job.

[Frustration]

1 minute ago, Ookla the unintelligible said:

I'm not trying to change your mind, I'm just pointing out that while yes, Jasnah was justified in killing those men when she did it, she could have done a better job.

My bad, what I ment was: I'm not sure I feel there is any difference on a moral level why she was there.

[NameIess]

Just now, Ookla the Frustrated said:

My bad, what I ment was: I'm not sure I feel there is any difference on a moral level why she was there.

I think there is. She was justified in killing those men, almost regardless of how she got there, but she could have not gotten there, or gotten there in a way that wouldn't potentially traumatize her sheltered ward.

[#1 Taln Fan he/him]

Killing them should’ve been the last solution, not the first. She could’ve just seriously wounded them and turned them into the authorities, and it would’ve been better. There’s also the fact that she sought them out just to make a point, so she’s not exactly an innocent victim defending herself.

[Letryx13]

18 hours ago, Vin(Diesel) said:

No.

Yes, you can go into a dangerous area wearing expensive jewelry. No you cannot go into a dangerous area wearing expensive jewelry in order to get a chance to kill people. It's not right. 

Agreed. If someone wore strips of meat around their neck in an area where wild animals are known to prowl, then shoots one when it attacks them, that person is hunting.

Edited December 6, 2021 by Letryx13
Misspelling

[Frustration]

6 hours ago, Letryx13 said:

Agreed. If someone wore strips of meat around their neck in an area where wild animals are known to prowl, then shoots one when it attacks them, that person is hunting.

I'm going to have to disagree with this, first off verry few predators would attack a human reguardless of whether they had meat on them or not, and the ones that do will kill you if you don't kill them first.

[Letryx13]

1 hour ago, Ookla the Frustrated said:

I'm going to have to disagree with this, first off verry few predators would attack a human reguardless of whether they had meat on them or not, and the ones that do will kill you if you don't kill them first.

My point is that baiting someone into attacking is the action of a hunter.

[Inquisitor #5]

On 2021-12-06 at 0:03 AM, Ookla the Frustrated said:

If someone attacks you and you kill them it is not murder, they started the confrontation you bare no responsibility. 

Now, this might be different between legal systems, but my understanding is that if you kill someone in self-defence it's manslaughter, and if you kill someone after they're no longer a threat, it's murder. 

Using force beyond what's necessary to defend yourself and others isn't self-defence, and Jasnah could reasonably have neutralised the attackers non-lethaly.

Hmm, looking it up it seems the distinctions in English are first degree murder, second degree murder (or voluntary manslaughter) and involuntary manslaughter.

The first is premeditated killing, the second killing in the moment (intending to kill) and the last killing without meaning to.

Under such a system, Jasnah is definitely guilty of first degree murder, as she planned to kill.

On 2021-12-06 at 0:03 AM, Ookla the Frustrated said:

And if no one attacked what would she do?

I don't know. It didn't happen that way, and I can't say how she would have acted in that situation.

Which doesn't change that she went out with the intent to kill.

On 2021-12-06 at 0:03 AM, Ookla the Frustrated said:

Depending on treaties, as princess anywhere she stands is considered Alethi soil.

Possible, but we have no reason to assume that to be the case.

Actually, given this exchange:

Quote

"You have no authority to do so, not in someone else's city."

"True," Jasnah said. "Another point to consider, I suppose."

-WoK, chapter 36

We can assume this not to be the case.

On 2021-12-06 at 0:03 AM, Ookla the Frustrated said:

soil

Outside Shinovar? 

On 2021-12-06 at 10:17 AM, Ookla the Frustrated said:

I'm going to have to disagree with this, first off verry few predators would attack a human reguardless of whether they had meat on them or not, and the ones that do will kill you if you don't kill them first.

Say that you know there's a neighborhood with a crime problem, and you put a valuable item in said neighborhood seemingly unguarded, but you actually have someone watching it at all times.

If someone takes the item, and you arrest them for the crime they commited, is that moral?

They have definitely broken the law, but if you set this up specifically with the intent to provoke a crime so that you could arrest someone, you have at least acted immorally.

You are guilty of entrapment. As is Jasnah, she deliberately provoked a crime.

On 2021-12-06 at 1:42 AM, Ookla the unintelligible said:

She was justified in killing those men, almost regardless of how she got there

I find myself disagreeing with this, I don't think the killings were justified.

She can't claim self-defence, they were not a realistic threat to her.

She had non-lethal options, she could have Soulcast their clothes into stone or metal or she could have sliced their legs with her Blade.

This also lets me adress why I don't think the whole "shouldn't a woman be able to walk the streets?"-thing holds water.

I wholeheartedly agree that everybody should be able to walk the streets unmolested. 

However, I don't think it flies as a justification for vigilantism.

If she had been innocently strolling the city and gone down this street unknowingly, I would accept her reasoning far more readily.

If it was genuine self-defence, if she was attacked unprovoked, her reasoning holds and the killings are far more justified.

But as it stands she uses the reasoning as an excuse to provoke the criminals, painting a thin veneer of self-defence on her actions.

But what she does is carry out vigilante justice.

 

Heh, working through it, I think the killings aren't just, moral or ethical. They are possibly correct, however.

I feel a lot like I feel about Adolin killing Sadeas here. I was in the camp that was basically screaming "Adolin, no!" I basically feel that while Sadeas had to be dealt with, that was the wrong way to go about it.

In both cases, there's no other workable recourse, but that doesn't make it right.

 

¤_¤

[Frustration]

On 12/6/2021 at 3:54 AM, Letryx13 said:

My point is that baiting someone into attacking is the action of a hunter.

This is getting pretty close to blaming a girl for, eh certain crimes by saying she shouldn't have been wearing a particular kind of dress.

1 hour ago, Inquisitor #5 said:

Now, this might be different between legal systems, but my understanding is that if you kill someone in self-defence it's manslaughter, and if you kill someone after they're no longer a threat, it's murder.

In the US under self defense you have committed no crime.

1 hour ago, Inquisitor #5 said:

Using force beyond what's necessary to defend yourself and others isn't self-defence, and Jasnah could reasonably have neutralised the attackers non-lethaly.

That is true, and legally one might look at that, however morally I think it was still within her right.

1 hour ago, Inquisitor #5 said:

The first is premeditated killing, the second killing in the moment (intending to kill) and the last killing without meaning to.

Under such a system, Jasnah is definitely guilty of first degree murder, as she planned to kill.

Someone with better knowledge may correct me, but I'm pretty sure First degree murder requires that you plan to kill the specific individual that you did.

1 hour ago, Inquisitor #5 said:

I don't know. It didn't happen that way, and I can't say how she would have acted in that situation.

I think it's pretty clear that no one would have died, as the Philosophy lesson could not have taken place 

1 hour ago, Inquisitor #5 said:

Actually, given this exchange:

-WoK, chapter 36

We can assume this not to be the case.

Outside Shinovar? 

I will concede that point.

1 hour ago, Inquisitor #5 said:

Say that you know there's a neighborhood with a crime problem, and you put a valuable item in said neighborhood seemingly unguarded, but you actually have someone watching it at all times.

If someone takes the item, and you arrest them for the crime they commited, is that moral?

They have definitely broken the law, but if you set this up specifically with the intent to provoke a crime so that you could arrest someone, you have at least acted immorally.

You are guilty of entrapment. As is Jasnah, she deliberately provoked a crime.

Well first off yes you are completely moral, you have no responsibility to add precautions against a crime happening, if a crime is committed in this situation guilt lies solely with the one who committed it.

I will have to look into this "entrapment" you speak of, I have never heard that term before.

MB era 2

Spoiler

So, is Wax also guilty, he hid himself inside a train car, knowing it would be stolen. Specifically so he could catch criminals.

 

Also I would like to point out the mercy Jasnah showed, she could have trapped them, given them to Taravangian, and convinced him to leave them out in the Highstorm as an example.

She could have tortured them, or killed them slowly, instead she gave each one an instant and painless death.