The Broken One: Brandon’s Take on the Causes of Conflict

[Confused]

Quote

As I fear not the child with a weapon he cannot lift, I will never fear the mind of a man who does not think.

—From The Way of Kings, fourth parable

WaT Chapter 30 Epigraph

To those of you who live in America, Happy Thanksgiving! On this day of reflection and thanks, I thought I’d write about Brandon’s thoughts on conflict. I both agree and disagree with his conclusions.

Brandon names a Shard “Odium” and has him cause war. Brandon’s take on the causes of conflict seems obvious: Hatred causes war. But that may be too simple a conclusion...

Brandon designed a Shard that can think and feel but never at the same time. Odium exhibits Unthinking Passion or Unfeeling Intellect. Unthinking Passion enflames a person to rage, lust, and hatred. Unfeeling Intellect allows a person to efficiently murder millions and then have their evening tea.

Nohadon (or whomever) addresses both Unthinking Passion and Unfeeling Intellect in the quoted epigraph. He says he “will never fear the mind of a man who does not think.” He analogizes the unthinking man’s mind to a useless weapon. In any conflict, a thinking man like Nohadon can easily defeat an unthinking man. Fair enough. But implicit in Nohadon’s statement is the fact of conflict – a conflict that the unthinking man probably caused. Like a rabid dog, the unthinking man is unpredictable. He acts on impulse rather than his rational best interests. His passions are easily aroused. You cannot reason with an unthinking man.

Brandon’s belief that Unthinking Passion causes conflict holds true at the local level, particularly one-on-one conflicts. But he seems to cite Unthinking Passion – specifically hatred – as the cause of war. I disagree with the greatest vigor. I believe Unfeeling Intellect causes both local and large-scale conflicts including war.

All institutions from local school boards to world-spanning organizations and alliances suffer stresses and divisions. These institutions exist to mediate power and influence among the competing interests. Internal stresses in any group are always present. But they don’t always lead to conflict.

Conflict instead occurs mostly (IMO) when calculating, cynical people deliberately exploit these stresses to gain power. Such people hope the ensuing disorder results in a power realignment in their favor. If they can fracture their group, they will gain power from the chaos they create. I believe this happens at every level from local to geo-political. Unfeeling Intellect is far more dangerous than Unthinking Passion and causes far more conflicts.

That’s my version of the “How” of conflict. If you’ll bear with me, I’ll give you my opinion on the “Why”:

I think all humankind shares a common nature, just as each animal species does. That “human nature” consists of a finite set of traits. No individual possesses all these traits; hence, human behavioral diversity. These traits include ambition, greed, ruthlessness, aggression, jealousy, pettiness, pride, and all the underlying causes of conflict. But they also include the “better angels of our nature” and everything in between. “Culture,” in my opinion, is each society’s unique expression of this common “human nature.”

Spoiler

I use a “rock” metaphor to describe the “nature vs. nurture,” “heredity vs. environment” debate at the individual level. Some people are born like granite, a hard igneous rock. Experience barely changes them just as granite resists erosion. Other people are born like sandstone, an easily eroded sedimentary rock. Experience readily changes these people. Most lie elsewhere along the Mohs Scale and erode according to their natures. There is no “better or worse” type of person. Heredity and environment simply resolve themselves differently in each individual.

I believe human behavior distributes traits along a bell curve, with the most extreme traits occupying the fringes. Most people are not ruthless narcissistic sociopaths. But it only takes one of sufficient skill and charisma to upset the existing order. Conflict inevitably ensues.

Anyway, I wandered a bit off-topic there. Must be the turkey... Short answer: Unthinking Passion may cause small conflicts between individuals, but Unfeeling Intellect IMO is the true source of major conflict in the cosmere (think Gavilar and Taravangian) and IRL.

Edited November 28, 2024 by Confused

[eriwancoselyn]

 Just to add to your idea: we know that Odium's intent doesn't entirely encompass war. RoW showed that the true war intent is actually a mixture of odium and honor. I quite like that because it maps well onto the real world paradigm that you were drawing; war is an ordered expression of these unfeeling calculations and the visceral hatred. A lot of wars can be started or continued through the unwillingness to abandon a bond (be that land, pride, or simply group unity).

 BTW My personal hope for Wind and Truth would be for Dalinar to take both honor and odium, becoming War. He's perhaps the only character in the whole series who truly understands honor and hatred on a personal level, not to mention that his time as a general would make it feel really apt role for him to take. Ik it's not super likely, given that it would go against his arc away from being a warmonger, but we've had some warnings that taking honor could be the wrong decision so a man can hope.

also, what are the thoughts on discord? the dark side of harmony seems to be another shard of conflict. I'm interested if anyone has thoughts on how discord might mirror or differ from war's intent.

[+Oltux72 he/him]

Nalthis. The Dark side of Taldaine. Scadrial in the middle of an apocalypse. Gavilar's wars. The Shin conquests. The Lord Ruler's conquest of Northern Scadrial. The Fjordell invasion of Arelon.

These wars have diverse origins. In the case of Hallandren invading Idris, we are outright told that the cause is economics.