Honor or Law: Which is Better?

[Mattel]

 

So, I'm curious what the Shard community thinks: Which is better? to follow your own code of Honor, or to adhere to the Law? So essentially Honorspren or Highspren. 

[Use the Falchion]

I honestly don't know. Adhering to Honor allows those who would escape punishment due to a legal system, or those who would not usually be protected again due to a legal system, to be punished or protected. However, honor itself is a very malleable thing, and just going with honor allows for a lot more vigilante justice than needed. On the flip side, just going with the Law without understanding the reasons and implications behind it isn't right either. You're absolving yourself of guilt or blame when (not if - WHEN) things go bad because it's the law, not you. You may not be helping those who need to be helped because of what the law says. Or you may be letting known criminals walk away because it's the law. 

I don't think there's a right answer, and I think we as individuals find ourselves sliding to either side more prevalently when it benefits us, or our worldviews. At least, I do. 

[Trusk'our he/him]

17 minutes ago, Use the Falchion said:

I honestly don't know. Adhering to Honor allows those who would escape punishment due to a legal system, or those who would not usually be protected again due to a legal system, to be punished or protected. However, honor itself is a very malleable thing, and just going with honor allows for a lot more vigilante justice than needed. On the flip side, just going with the Law without understanding the reasons and implications behind it isn't right either. You're absolving yourself of guilt or blame when (not if - WHEN) things go bad because it's the law, not you. You may not be helping those who need to be helped because of what the law says. Or you may be letting known criminals walk away because it's the law. 

Excellent insights. 

The old Skybreakers seemed to be more merciful, seeing the law as something to strive for instead of being a perfect ideal itself. 

Coppermind:

Quote

The individuals who join the Skybreakers generally believe in following a strong moral code.^[7] They wish to prevent both anarchy and tyranny. To do so, they enforce the law on everyone. They particularly want to make sure the other orders of Radiants do not use their powers to break the law and become tyrants.^[8] They used moral codes and legal structures to fight for justice and causes they believed in.^[7]

Before the Recreance, the Skybreakers were merciful and understood that the law is not perfect. They viewed the law as an ideal to strive towards.^[7]

If the Skybreakers allowed measures of mercy and adaptability, I might actually align with them more, as founding and updating laws to fit the needs of a community will be more likely to bring about safety and an overall improvement of life to everyone than becoming Batman.

[Mattel]

Yeah, I think that there isn't a complete black and white answer, Use the Falchion. I agree that both aren't perfect, one you go based off of what feels right, which is an ever changing web inside us. But then if you follow the law, the temptation there is to become like Nale, dolling out death to people for breaking something written down on paper. I will say, that I find Honor inside both Sky breakers and Windrunners, both modern day and Ancient. I believe it is honorable, if not always right, to try to follow something else because you don't trust yourself. Like in Javert, from Les Mis. I see honor in his actions, even if I do not believe they were right. I find respect in me towards those who try their best to do what they believe is best. It is also honorable to try and follow your own personal moral code, something that hopefully most people should have a good form of. 

I think that Honor spren and Windrunners actually have it harder. They have nothing to reference when it comes to their decisions and actions, they simply just have to have good discernment and try to sleep at night. Sky breakers have something tangible and understandable to follow, but it is not always right. 

[Returned he/him]

I've been wondering how the later SA books will address the division between honor and law because they aren't really that different. As written they're more like perspectives or angles on the same idea than they are distinct things and neither is really about morality. In the books honor is about following through with a commitment that you make (even if you've committed to something "bad") and the law is about following rules that the community around you has made (even if those laws require you to do something "bad").

I think that readers tend to think of honor as "protect the weak", etc., because that's what we see Kaladin and the Windrunners focus on, but all of the Radiant orders are associated with Honor in the same ways and so I don't think that the Skybreakers are less honorable than the Windrunners. There is way too much flexibility and overlap between the two categories: for example, Kaladin's views on whom it is appropriate/necessary to kill change over time which feels more fluid than Nale's obsessive focus on following local laws. But Nale himself chooses which laws are relevant when he sides with the Fused over the rest of Roshar, and what "the law" dictates he must do was very different the day before he made that decision than it was the day after.

If you were all-in on following your own personal code of honor, would you say that your code is different from a set of laws defining what you must or may not do? If a law is written down but requires interpretation in what it means or how and when it should be applied, would you not be using your own ideas about what is right to do when you make that interpretation?

Neither concept has an obvious moral inflection to it (as presented in the books, at least), and neither seems to me to be inherently or reliably better or worse than the other. Either can and will produce a horrible outcome, at some point, and neither really protects you from error.

[ConfusedCow]

It comes down to who do you trust more, yourself or the people making the laws.  I know my answer.

[Sophrosyne he/him]

Personally, i think a toolbox is always preferable to any one tool. Hammers are great until you're faced with screws or glass. ducktape fixes most things, that aren't wet, or need to be seen through, or flexible... but if you get one tool. Pick the thing with the most uses. Law is great but I find people adhere to it even when it simply doesn't make sense. HONOUR is what matters. It's why jury's here in the states can't be held responsible for a 'wrong' decision.