Futuresight in the Cosmere: What Is It?

[Returned he/him]

Futuresight is, by now, clearly an ongoing concern in the Cosmere. We don't have enough information to conclusively state what it is and how it works, but there seems to be a (loose) consensus on how it operates in practice: it allows the being using it to see possible futures, but nothing is certain.

I, personally, do not like this. You don't need magic to know what the future might be like, and so magic which accomplishes only this is pointless. It is a case (perhaps a special case) of the prophecy problem in fantasy literature. Prophecies are generally treated as definitive statements about events that will definitely take place in the future, except for when they don't, in which case they were... something else, usually not very clearly defined. The reason that I don't like this is because using the word "prophecy" indicates that the information so described is different from a guess, extrapolation, deduction, possibility, or hope. Calling something a prophecy, but then saying that it's nothing more than something that might happen, strips meaning from the concept of "prophecy" in the first place. It is then (usually) relegated to just being a plot device, something that motivates characters in various ways but does not actually constrain events at all.

This is where futuresight seems to be stuck, at least with what we know so far. I'd like input on how other people assess the ability. My current thinking is that "futuresight" (and all similar descriptions) is a fair name but used imprecisely in ways that overstate what's happening. There are two examples from the text that I think are illuminating:

1. Atium (the kind Vin used, not the real stuff): atium involves no guesswork and allows no mistakes. If you are burning atium, and no one else has access to information about the future, the atium shadows you see are exactly what will happen moments in the future. Not a guess, not just a possibility. It's only when someone else accesses information about the future that atium becomes unreliable, and even then the atium itself shows you that the future is no longer definite (or, maybe more precisely, it shows a recursive chain of things which will happen but are then overwritten by people using that information to make choices that will alter the future).
2. The Diagram: Rayse explicitly notes that what Taravangian did in creating the Diagram was done without access to Fortune and then displays how much greater his own ability is. It's not necessarily clear that Taravangian didn't have access to Fortune when creating the Diagram (Rayse could have been mistaken), nor that Rayse himself is using Fortune for his display (he may have had a better version of Taravangian's deductive reasoning skills thanks to holding a Shard), so we shouldn't overinterpret this. But the interaction strongly implies that there is a distinction between what Taravangian accomplished (incredibly accurate, far-reaching conclusions based on extrapolations from existing knowledge) and whatever mechanism Rayse used to assess the future.

Atium is the wrinkle, because it is so precise and accurate about the future it is hard to dispute that it really is giving exact information about something that will, for certain, happen. The only thing that can change that course of events is a person with specific foreknowledge actually drawn from the future in some way, who can then use that foreknowledge to do something they otherwise would not have done. Outside of this sort of change we have never seen atium be anything other than perfectly reliable, which strongly suggests that the future exists and already, to some degree, written (though not immutably).

From these two examples I have thought of a few possibilities regarding futuresight:

1. It exists and is accurate, but only possible across very short time scales. Maybe the future is deterministic but only in a rolling 5-second chunk, or something.
2. It exists and is accurate, but individuals may be variably capable of using it. The future is deterministic, and therefore can be known, but it's hard to tell how good one's own ability to look at and know that future is. Failures are in one's self, not in futuresight.
3. It exists and is accurate, but subject to interference. When knowledge of the future allows one to change it, more people having access to that knowledge means more potential for changes and more motivations for changing it. So the future is deterministic absent interference by people with knowledge of it, but there are people with that knowledge and so "the" future is always in flux. In this case futuresight exists and is accurate but not reliable, and the unreliability is hard to get around.
4. It doesn't exist but is instead a perspective-limited interpretation of having enough knowledge and intellectual capacity to deduce future events. The future isn't deterministic but is path-dependent on the present, and so one can predict what will happen given what has happened before and is happening now, but you are not in any sense drawing information from a time which has not yet come. Or, the future is deterministic but cannot be directly observed in advance. This is the text-as-presented explanation for the Diagram.
5. Futuresight as such doesn't exist, but a magical ability which gives information a person doesn't/can't personally know does exist. This information can then be used for deducing the future (if the future is deterministic) or estimating the likelihood of futures (if the future is not deterministic). This is the best representation I've thought of for the consensus opinion on these forums, assuming the latter item about estimating likely futures.
6. The future, in the sense of some time to come in which specific events or situations will occur/be present, does not exist and so it cannot be observed in any way. Extrapolations based on current events will, however, define the state of the world as time moves forward.

I'll give a more concrete example that may help delineate between some of these: you and I are playing Connect 4 correctly (we are following all of the rules). Because the number of allowed moves is limited by the game board, I necessarily know every possible move that you might make. This is not seeing the future, even though I "know" every possible future state. I don't have any idea which future state will actually happen.

If I calculate the contingent probabilities of me winning after making a specific move on my turn (or the inverse, selecting moves to prevent you from winning), and move accordingly I am affecting my chance of winning (or not losing) but still not seeing the future-- I'm aware of the the number of winning moves (or moves leading to a draw) based on the state of the game in the present and behaving according to that information. No information on events that haven't happened yet is involved.

If we have played many times, and I know that you are characteristically likely to make certain moves rather than others in different situations, I can influence what moves you make by using my own turns to prime those characteristic likelihoods. This is not knowing the future, but knowing the past, and I use that information to move towards a future state that I want.

If I know what move you will make on your next turn (which slot you'll put a token into), and you will in fact make that move, then I know the future but only a little ways out.

If I know every move that you will make after any of my turns, and you will make those moves, then I know "the future". I choose which future will come to pass by choosing my own moves, but I will never be surprised by any move you make.

If I know every move that you will make, and this cannot be altered, then I know the future but cannot make much use of that knowledge-- I will somehow be constrained from making choices which prohibit your fated moves, and nothing I do will alter anything. The future can be known, but the knowledge is mostly inert.

In conclusion, I think that what we see in the Cosmere is a combination of numbers 2 and 3 from my list. The future exists and includes outcomes that will happen, absent interference, but one's ability to perceive that future is imperfect to an unknowable degree and there are tons of people that are constantly interfering. So the future exists, and the ability to perceive it to in ways that could be used exists, but in practice seeing the future only serves to frustrate others' efforts to use futuresight. Futuresight is precise but not accurate and a very unreliable tool.

I'm interested in others' ideas on futuresight in the Cosmere. Do you think that it works differently from this? Are any of my points or critiques way off?

[Grubfriend He/Him]

4 hours ago, Returned said:

it allows the being using it to see possible futures,

This is how it works, and with other mentionable things.

Also, there are two kinds I think:Fortune and access to the SR, Shards for example.

4 hours ago, Returned said:

Atium is the wrinkle, because it is so precise and accurate about the future it is hard to dispute that it really is giving exact information about something that will, for certain, happen. The only thing that can change that course of events is a person with specific foreknowledge actually drawn from the future in some way, who can then use that foreknowledge to do something they otherwise would not have done. Outside of this sort of change we have never seen atium be anything other than perfectly reliable, which strongly suggests that the future exists and already, to some degree, written (though not immutably).

The thing with Futuresight, as described by Tanavast/Honor or Rays is that its like looking through a broken mirror. When its right in front of your face (the near future) its larger chunks or a whole mirror. The farther you look, the more the mirror breaks into pieces, as different stimuli or gut reactions you can't perceive or take into account/other people with Futuresight, so it changes. Atium works so well because the people don't know any other courses of action, so you see what WILL happen, very little interference. There is some when the other guy is burning atium or electrium, but again, broken mirror.

4 hours ago, Returned said:

I'll give a more concrete example that may help delineate between some of these: you and I are playing Connect 4 correctly (we are following all of the rules). Because the number of allowed moves is limited by the game board, I necessarily know every possible move that you might make. This is not seeing the future, even though I "know" every possible future state. I don't have any idea which future state will actually happen.

If I calculate the contingent probabilities of me winning after making a specific move on my turn (or the inverse, selecting moves to prevent you from winning), and move accordingly I am affecting my chance of winning (or not losing) but still not seeing the future-- I'm aware of the the number of winning moves (or moves leading to a draw) based on the state of the game in the present and behaving according to that information. No information on events that haven't happened yet is involved.

If we have played many times, and I know that you are characteristically likely to make certain moves rather than others in different situations, I can influence what moves you make by using my own turns to prime those characteristic likelihoods. This is not knowing the future, but knowing the past, and I use that information to move towards a future state that I want.

I think that this is what Taravangian did: extremely good guesswork, it could be SR, but I don't know for certain

 

4 hours ago, Returned said:

So the future exists, and the ability to perceive it to in ways that could be used exists, but in practice seeing the future only serves to frustrate others' efforts to use futuresight. Futuresight is precise but not accurate and a very unreliable tool.

Odium's plan would have worked, but he didn't know about Cultivation's influence. You can use it to frustrate other users, but if you are the only one using it *cough*mistborn*cough* then you are a force to be reckoned with.

Hope that helps.

[Trusk'our he/him]

13 minutes ago, Xiahida said:

I think that this is what Taravangian did: extremely good guesswork, it could be SR, but I don't know for certain

Didn't he use his secret hospitals to get info from the Death Rattles (provided by the Unmade Moelach), which come from the SR?

Basically accessing Futuresight from secondhand knowledge, like Vin tracking Zane's movements with Atium to predict the future. 

Edited October 17, 2024 by Trusk'our

[alder24]

14 hours ago, Returned said:

1. It exists and is accurate, but only possible across very short time scales. Maybe the future is deterministic but only in a rolling 5-second chunk, or something.

I believe this is the correct description. The future sight does exist, but the future isn't deterministic, it's probabilistic. On short enough timescales it just becomes deterministic (Atium). You always have to deal with probabilities when looking into the future, sometimes your ability might show you just one, most likely possibility, but it doesn't mean it will happen (Renarin). Cultivation saw a probability of Taravangian becoming Odium, she had no idea if this would happen, she only hoped that her gift would be enough to push Taravangian in this direction. 

On the other hand Taravangian created the Diagram using only his intelligence and logic - option 4. He created the Diagram without any access to the Spiritual Realm or Fortune, just his mind. 

9 hours ago, Trusk'our said:

Didn't he use his secret hospitals to get info from the Death Rattles (provided by the Unmade Moelach), which come from the SR?

Yes, but he didn't use that to create the Diagram, just to get some more information to interpret the Diagram correctly.

[Trusk'our he/him]

1 hour ago, alder24 said:

Yes, but he didn't use that to create the Diagram, just to get some more information to interpret the Diagram correctly.

Huh, it's been a while since I read WoK, apparently. 

[Returned he/him]

Thanks to everyone weighing in so far!

If people will indulge me, I have a couple of general clarifying questions:

1. Is seeing possible futures actually futuresight?

I don't think I did a good job of laying this out in my initial post, but it was already pretty long and dense. I don't need to see the future to imagine a possible outcome, after all, and a prediction that in five years some specific thing either will, won't, or will kind of happen isn't much of a prediction. If we're still going to call that "futuresight", what specifically does magic bring to the viewer?

I had intended item 5 on my list to represent this: you can see future outcomes without actually having the information that would allow you to conceive them. An example of this might be Cultivation's alleged plan, mentioned by @Xiahida: if she initiated this plan centuries before Taravangian was born, futuresight might be a good explanation of how and why she would do so: she knows that someone appropriately positioned to supplant Rayse as Taravangian did will (at least probably) exist within some window of time, and plans around that knowledge.

Conversely, if she intended to arrange events such that someone like Taravangian would be born and seek out the Old Magic with a request she could twist in order to supplant Rayse, then what value does futuresight really have for her? She could just work on accomplishing that, and knowledge that the outcome might happen, somehow, is kind of worthless. It's the "might" that's the issue, unless we are asserting that the outcome is unimaginable to the future-looker without observing a future in which it occurs. Is this what people think futuresight offers? If not, the Diagram example again becomes relevant. The expanded minds of Vessels when they hold their Shards should be at least on par with Taravangian-who-wrote-the-Diagram, and probably quite a bit beyond that as well. If the Diagram can be assembled via mundane means it's hard for me to see how much magical futuresight really offers, unless it's a shortcut which elides the need for that intelligence. But why would that matter to a Shard?

One final question under this item: we know from WoBs that Shards can be variably good at seeing the future. Preservation was quite good at it, while Ruin was not. But if all we are getting from futuresight is a set of outcomes that are not literally impossible, what does this mean in practice?

1a. An easy way to square the circle of (1) is to involve what we've heard about how Fortune works.

You could glean some supernatural sense of what actions will make your desired outcome more likely, and take them, thereby "causing" your outcome to occur. But I would argue that this isn't futuresight, it is future-guidance, and doesn't really require that you know the outcome you want to pursue (in the sense that such knowledge is irrelevant, in a practical way, to identifying the actions that you should take).

I think that this would be an interesting angle, but it seems to me that it would seriously degrade the "knowledge of future events" which is implied by terms like "futuresight". But at the same time, how can actions be identified as the "correct" ones without an end result in mind? Perhaps this is where the Intent aspect of Cosmere magic intersects with Fortune, but I still feel that "seeing the future" is not an element of what would make this work. So again, what does "seeing" "the" "future" actually offer someone?

2. Can we distinguish between being bad at futuresight, interference in futuresight, and futuresight not being possible/meaningful?

What I took from the Stormfather's analogy of looking into the future being like looking at a shattering window was that the future is more difficult to see farther out, not that the future is less fixed the farther it is from the present. This would allow for something like the differing abilities of Preservation and Ruin as well as the different results they got from their plans. It probably wouldn't matter for the narratives of the books, but does matter for describing the mechanisms at work and therefore for our theorizing about anything that touches on futuresight.

Renarin seems bad at futuresight: his prediction of how Jasnah would react towards him near the end of Oathbringer was wrong, but we have no evidence of any interference from any other future-viewer disrupting those events. He saw clearly and interpreted correctly, but his vision was simply wrong. Vin was amazing at futuresight: her conclusions about the future were always right (when using atium), and she understood enough about how it worked that she could use those conclusions while also making others' conclusions from their own atium unreliable even when lacking it herself. Rayse's and Ruin's futuresight seems meaningless: had they perceived even a small likelihood of their destruction, they would have avoided the situations in which the destruction occurred. And yet, they did not. We can claim interference (Renarin for sure, Rashek a bit less decisively), we can claim personal failings leading to irrational behaviors at key moments. But if we lay Rayse's demise at Cultivation's feet we are forced to ask about why she could see outcomes of Renarin's actions when Rayse was totally blind to them.

This is the biggest reason I struggle with futuresight in the novels. Thus far, when, whether, and how well it works seems to respond to whatever is needed to make the plot fit together, rather than the plot following from the ability's properties. Obviously there is a lot of content to come which might explain all of this in a highly satisfying way, but prophecies and time-bending knowledge are often not internally consistent in fiction. Given how tight Sanderson usually is with his magic systems, and how central futuresight seems to be to key events in the Cosmere, I would be very disappointed if this were the case here.

3. It seems as though respondents, so far, broadly agree that futuresight exists and reliably works (via whatever mechanism) except for interference from others who view the future. But there is a lot of interference going around, and someone doesn't necessarily need to oppose your goals for interference to jam you up. If this is so, futuresight is an incredibly unreliable tool if looking more than a few minutes ahead, and the Shards at least should surely know this. Why, then, do so many seem to rely on it?

The most obvious answer is that, futuresight aside, people strive towards their goals even without knowing that they will succeed. Futuresight may not be a guarantee any more than Kaladin can be certain his (non-Shard)spear won't break in a fight. If a tool fails, you'll just have to deal with it, and if it doesn't fail then you're probably better off for having had it in the first place. It's hard to tell how much the Shards are really relying on it, so maybe it's a reasonable amount. But if I were Renarin, after the end of Oathbringer I would be hard-pressed to trust any of my visions when planning for the future. At this point I imagine that that is exactly the lesson Renarin learned from that event, and we just haven't gotten access to his PoV yet to illuminate that.

 

So, as I've thought through your responses and organized my ideas I have reached a tentative conclusion: "futuresight" is too generous a name for the ability even while it's not inaccurate, and it is a terrible idea to rely on it. Accessing Fortune may or may not be more reliable, but is certainly the practical element that makes futuresight work.

[therunner he/him]

14 hours ago, Returned said:

1. Is seeing possible futures actually futuresight?

Yes it is.

Shards (and Atium/Electrum users) do genuinely see what are possible futures. It is not just calculated projection based on existing known variables, but something more fundamental based on Spiritual Realm.

I'll also note that we don't necessarily know that Diagram was created without access to Fortune, only that Rayse assumes so. Since it seemingly predicts events events even after Taravangian's Ascension, it is possibly it was sort of 'echo' of what he can do after Ascension.

14 hours ago, Returned said:

1a. An easy way to square the circle of (1) is to involve what we've heard about how Fortune works.

You could glean some supernatural sense of what actions will make your desired outcome more likely, and take them, thereby "causing" your outcome to occur. But I would argue that this isn't futuresight, it is future-guidance, and doesn't really require that you know the outcome you want to pursue (in the sense that such knowledge is irrelevant, in a practical way, to identifying the actions that you should take).

I think that this would be an interesting angle, but it seems to me that it would seriously degrade the "knowledge of future events" which is implied by terms like "futuresight". But at the same time, how can actions be identified as the "correct" ones without an end result in mind? Perhaps this is where the Intent aspect of Cosmere magic intersects with Fortune, but I still feel that "seeing the future" is not an element of what would make this work. So again, what does "seeing" "the" "future" actually offer someone?

I think Fortune is both futuresight and also subconcious sense that guides your decision towards favorouable outcomes. I.e. Feruchemist tapping fortune would just happen to make decision that are beneficial to him.

This would be in line with Hoid's use of Fortune to be where he is needed, though he does not necessarily know why he is there or what he should do.

So no, I don't think it is 'future-guidance'.

14 hours ago, Returned said:

2. Can we distinguish between being bad at futuresight, interference in futuresight, and futuresight not being possible/meaningful?

 

 

This is the biggest reason I struggle with futuresight in the novels. Thus far, when, whether, and how well it works seems to respond to whatever is needed to make the plot fit together, rather than the plot following from the ability's properties. Obviously there is a lot of content to come which might explain all of this in a highly satisfying way, but prophecies and time-bending knowledge are often not internally consistent in fiction. Given how tight Sanderson usually is with his magic systems, and how central futuresight seems to be to key events in the Cosmere, I would be very disappointed if this were the case here.

I would say yes.

• Good at future-sight = being able to see more options/farther into the future more accurately
  • Effectively having both more information, and also able to judge that information better (see Preservation and his plan)
  • Bad at future-sight than means both seeing fewer options, and quality of predictions degrading faster the further from present it is
• Interference in futuresight
  • Someone else is also seeing future and using it guide their decisions. This created feedback loop (as seen with Atium), which effectively exponentially increases the amount of futures available.
  • Someone who is good at futuresight will be less impacted than someone who is bad, but will still be impacted.
  • Severity of this impact depends on the specifis of interference (e.g. Atium does not pose problem on Shardic level, since it allows futuresight only 2-3 seconds into the future. Conversely, Renarin sees up-to hundreds of days into the future, as his prediction of Everstorm shows, which created much larger interference).
• Futuresight not being possible/meaningful
  • No such scenario exists as far as I know, it is always possible, though the information might not be parsable, and some people are effective blindspots due to their near continuous futuresight (Renarin being the primary example)

Quote

Renarin seems bad at futuresight: his prediction of how Jasnah would react towards him near the end of Oathbringer was wrong, but we have no evidence of any interference from any other future-viewer disrupting those events. He saw clearly and interpreted correctly, but his vision was simply wrong.

Renarin is very good at futuresight, he predicted Everstorm hundreds of days in advance, and hit it exactly to the day. Similarly, he predicted arrival of Teft and reinforcements onto the Thaylen field (though that was only few seconds off).

His two predictions that were wrong (Jasnah and Dalinar at the end of Oathbringer), both involved Radiant swearing additional Oath, i.e. undergoing personal realization/growth. Since even Shards cannot see hearts of men, that is something we cannot really hold against him. Jasnah wanted to kill him, and though she should, it was almost at the last second that she changed her mind (and in process likely swore her 4th Ideal).

In fact, Renarin is the second best non-Shard at futuresight, only beaten by Taravangian on his Diagram day.

Quote

Vin was amazing at futuresight: her conclusions about the future were always right (when using atium), and she understood enough about how it worked that she could use those conclusions while also making others' conclusions from their own atium unreliable even when lacking it herself.

Vin was in no way better than any other Mistborn, she burned Atium and saw few seconds ahead. She was able to exploit that knowledge, but fundamentally her ability was no better than any other Mistborn.

Her feat of splitting her Atium shadow had to do with her observational skills, where she reacted to what Zane did.

Quote

Rayse's and Ruin's futuresight seems meaningless: had they perceived even a small likelihood of their destruction, they would have avoided the situations in which the destruction occurred. And yet, they did not. We can claim interference (Renarin for sure, Rashek a bit less decisively), we can claim personal failings leading to irrational behaviors at key moments. But if we lay Rayse's demise at Cultivation's feet we are forced to ask about why she could see outcomes of Renarin's actions when Rayse was totally blind to them.

They were not meaningless, they simply saw less than their opponents. As such they ended up making mistakes (e.g. Ruin completely ignoring Sazed and misunderstanding Kandra, Rayse underestimating emotional Taravangian).

I don't think Cultivation saw Renarin, but she did see Nightblood being on Roshar, and prepared Taravangian to have anti-Diagram state (i.e. ultra-emotional) to prepare trap for Rayse. As Hoid notes, Rayse likes to gloat, and that is what he was effectively doing with emotional Taravangian.

Quote

This is the biggest reason I struggle with futuresight in the novels. Thus far, when, whether, and how well it works seems to respond to whatever is needed to make the plot fit together, rather than the plot following from the ability's properties. Obviously there is a lot of content to come which might explain all of this in a highly satisfying way, but prophecies and time-bending knowledge are often not internally consistent in fiction. Given how tight Sanderson usually is with his magic systems, and how central futuresight seems to be to key events in the Cosmere, I would be very disappointed if this were the case here.

I'd say so far he is relatively good about it, because he keeps free-will. Which means no prophecy or anything is air-tight, it always comes downs to decisions of people.
As an example, were it not for Marsh and his willpower, Ruin would win. Preservation knew how he behaved, and it was highly likely he would end up doing what he did, but it was not given.

Which is why Taravangian as Odium might end up biting Cultivation in the metaphorical butt, as he "wants to save them all".

14 hours ago, Returned said:

3. It seems as though respondents, so far, broadly agree that futuresight exists and reliably works (via whatever mechanism) except for interference from others who view the future. But there is a lot of interference going around, and someone doesn't necessarily need to oppose your goals for interference to jam you up. If this is so, futuresight is an incredibly unreliable tool if looking more than a few minutes ahead, and the Shards at least should surely know this. Why, then, do so many seem to rely on it?

Because interference is actually very rare, there is not a lot of it going around. Current relevant sources of interference on Shardic level are:

• Other Shards
• Renarin
• Maybe Rlain now

And that is it. So in fact, it is very reliable tool (as Rayse's death, and Sazed Ascension show), even for Renarin visions are reliable, having failed only twice.

Quote

But if I were Renarin, after the end of Oathbringer I would be hard-pressed to trust any of my visions when planning for the future. At this point I imagine that that is exactly the lesson Renarin learned from that event, and we just haven't gotten access to his PoV yet to illuminate that.

Again, so far the only two times his futuresight failed both included Radiant swearing an Oath.

The fact that Jasnah didn't kill him is a plot point, since as he says, up until that moment every single vision he had came true. So far his visions failed him only twice, and the outcomes were better than the alternative, so they are very reliable tool.

Quote

So, as I've thought through your responses and organized my ideas I have reached a tentative conclusion: "futuresight" is too generous a name for the ability even while it's not inaccurate, and it is a terrible idea to rely on it. Accessing Fortune may or may not be more reliable, but is certainly the practical element that makes futuresight work.

I disagree, name futuresight is fitting, since seeing possible futures is the only option in non-deterministic free-will universe.

Relying on it makes sense, since:
 

• If your are a Shard you have to use it, otherwise another Shard can blindside you. Effectively like Atium-duels on steroids, except some Shards are better than others.
• If you are Renarin, you have tool that failed you only twice, and in exceptional circumstances at that.
  
  Edit: I'll also note that both failures of his future vision somehow involved himself. It was his turning around and begging Jasnah to kill him that led to her changing her mind. And his influence on Dalinar is possibly what lead to his 3rd Oath as well. So it might be that Renarin is also a blindspot to himself as well, so predictions he can influence too much will be less accurate.

Edited October 18, 2024 by therunner

[AleStaar he/him]

I haven’t finished Warbreaker or read a word of Stormlight yet. I would love to discuss this once I’m caught up.