What on Roshar was Adolin trying to say about promises and oaths?

[Vin(Diesel)]

Adolin decided that oaths can be broken, but not promises. I don't get what he means. If he just meant that a promise is a vow you deeply believe in, then I have two problems with that: one, don't make promises you don't believe in. Two, what are people supposed to do when you make them a vow? Should they ask, "And do you believe in that? How much?" I accept that terrible actions don't become good just because you made an oath to do them, but Adolin's musings still seem like a bit of a mess. Maybe they're meant to. Adolin is a good dude, but not the infallible voice of wisdom.

What do you think?

[earthexile]

I think it's about the level of expectation and externality of a promise, versus what Adolin thinks of as an oath. Oaths are a thing of formality, law, religion, cultural tradition, etc. They're meant to be binding and permanent, and upheld by outside forces like those laws, traditions, and supernatural forces like spren and Shards. 

A promise is something from one person, on behalf of himself, and he decides how much it means.

And I can see how he could get to seeing that as a more meaningful version of the same general idea. There's a way to interpret some of Kaladin's character arc where a lot of his development and choices were made either as intentional trades for the power he needed to survive a moment, or as needing not to kill his spren. It got him to good places but it didn't have to. Adolin's a real authentic guy, and he doesn't like crem dung and manipulation, and part of him has to be looking at all these people "getting better" and being handed power in exchange for pledging themselves to supernatural forces and ideologies, and wondering how real any of these changes are, if they're all just trying to level up for the war.

So he doesn't want that for himself or with Maya, he doesn't want to make an arcane pact with her. He wants to be a real dude, a real friend, himself no matter what. Within the structure of Oaths, that's a lot harder. A promise is different.

[Philomath she/her]

I think to some degree it is just semantics. But looking at the actual world of Roshar where Adolin is from I can see them differently. When you have the literal shard of Honor invested on your planet interpreting oaths as immutable never to be broken things, you run into the exact problem that many characters wrestled with throughout the series. That of the fact that mortal, fallible beings are inconsistent and will absolutely break oaths. And there are major consequences for that without a lot of nuance seen by the shard. I think Adolin sees oaths as problematic because they feel like a trap to him, whereas he sees a promise as not immutable, but as a direction to be going. A goal to be moving toward, even if you can’t ever reach the ideal. (Honestly he seems a lot more cultivation aligned.) One reason he can reconcile his feelings about Dalinar in the end is that he agrees with the premise that a hypocrite is a man in the process of changing. He believes a promise is more along the lines of “I want to do right by people. I will fail along the way, but overall I want to be a person who does right by others.”

[Sophrosyne He/any]

he was foreshadowing Honor, becoming Promise, at the end of SA. likely also setting up for him to take it up.

But also, he's just talking vibes right? A promise FEELS less 'ride or die' / 'all n' then a oath to him. Something that you don't have to fefill to a t to keep. Justtry your hardest and don't back you without good reason.

[Treamayne]

5 hours ago, Vin(Diesel) said:

Adolin decided that oaths can be broken, but not promises. I don't get what he means. If he just meant that a promise is a vow you deeply believe in, then I have two problems with that: one, don't make promises you don't believe in. Two, what are people supposed to do when you make them a vow? Should they ask, "And do you believe in that? How much?" I accept that terrible actions don't become good just because you made an oath to do them, but Adolin's musings still seem like a bit of a mess. Maybe they're meant to. Adolin is a good dude, but not the infallible voice of wisdom.

What do you think?

The impression I had from Adolin's PoV (not necessarily my definitions, but the definitions I felt Adolin was trying to express):

- An Oath was something generic and broad-based (e.g. I will protect those who cannot protect themselves)
- A Promise was something very personal (He promised to help Yawnagawn learn to at least understand the militry side of Leadership - even if he may never fight on the front lines )

The Broad focus of the former sometimes means people get caught up in semantics and ideological conundrums (Kaladin still viewing Brige Four as a group he had to "protect" years after he had already helped them survive the situation that brought them together) often means there is no "resolution" to an "Oath"

However the specific purpose of a Promise makes it both more personal, more deeply felt by the entities involved, while still having a very specific purpose and resolution.

TL;DR: One is "I help people" while the other is "I will help you."

Edited December 22, 2024 by Treamayne
SPAG

[Ripheus23]

For what it's worth, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on promises includes a subsection about vows and oaths compared to promises.

[Darvys]

I felt it was silly, especially when juxtaposed to Radiant oaths, which in the end of the day are rightly named Ideals which the knight promises to do his best to live up to.

"I will protect those who can't protect themselves", no Windrunner who ever lived has kept this oath, as no mortal ever could, yet neither Honor nor his spren mind this, failure is accepted, it is betrayal that is not.

Instead of complaining about men keeping stupid oaths, Adolin should complain about them making them, playing on semantics and calling them promises instead just seems childish and frankly meaningless, Honor doesn't distinguish, Tanavast didn't swear a formal oath to make peace with Mishram, he told her he would, a promise to an individual, the millennia of war that followed didn't break it, the years between Aharietiam and the false desolation where no pact was sealed didn't break it, it was acting against the intent, that singular betrayal that did, as it should. 

Honor has plenty of issues, but not understanding promises, isn't one of them. I don't know where Brandon wants to go with this, because I just don't see the point of any of it, maybe he needed to give his unoathed a reason to exist, but this one just seems stupid to me.

[MagicMaggot]

Adolin is not a philosopher. He isn't even supposed to be especially clever. And he himself isn't sure if his terminology makes sense. So of course he isn't giving us a well-formed argument here, he is expressing his emotions. 

He noticed that he doesn't respect oath-keeping for the oath's sake. 
He is now close to someone who was basically made a zombie for 1000s of years, because people broke oaths they probably had good reasons to break. 
He noticed that he was personally uncomfortable with making radiant oaths, though pretty much everyone around him did so without a second thought.
And he was trying to define the difference between his approach and that nof his father, who was all about oaths and uncompromising rules being a necessary restriction to keep men from becoming animals (like he was).

But he still believes in trying to do one's best, being honest in your intentions and trying to be a good person.

This isn't about Honor the power. This isn't about the formation of the Unoathed. And this isn't about disliking the kinds of oaths the radiants make. This is about rationalizing his own feelings and decisions, and trying to find the right words for it. And what he came up with is a distinction between oaths and promises, with promises being a declaration of genuine intent, and oaths being a binding you impose on yourself. He approves of the intent, but not of having an enforcement mechanism that is ultimately unable to keep up with changing circumstances and personal growth. And he thinks that this helps him to understand himself a little better.

And we, the readers, don't really have to agree with any of that to enjoy these thoughts as a relevant part the character's current understanding of the world. And as far as I'm concerened the whole thing was very Adolin, and I loved it for that alone. 

Edited December 22, 2024 by MagicMaggot

[Treamayne]

On 12/22/2024 at 5:57 AM, Darvys said:

Instead of complaining about men keeping stupid oaths, Adolin should complain about them making them, playing on semantics and calling them promises instead just seems childish and frankly meaningless, Honor doesn't distinguish, Tanavast didn't swear a formal oath to make peace with Mishram, he told her he would, a promise to an individual, the millennia of war that followed didn't break it, the years between Aharietiam and the false desolation where no pact was sealed didn't break it, it was acting against the intent, that singular betrayal that did, as it should. 

Honor has plenty of issues, but not understanding promises, isn't one of them.

I actually think that was the point. The Knights that broke thier Oaths to make the deadeyes are gone. They cannot re-swear the broken Oaths (as Shallan is doing with Testament) - but Adolin is swearing a Promise; not an Ideal held by both Spren and Knight, but a personal oath that is still recognized by the Shard's power to reinforce the Connection and help Maya reclaim her Identity.

Semantics, yes. In a way. But in this case it is not "distinction without a difference" because the Knights Ideals are too rigid about Oaths, and Adolin is basically giving that whole process the Heisman and going around it - because he does not want a Nahel Bond with Surges, he just wants to help Maya (and others) to recover what they lost. It's a Nahel bond, but not a Radiant Bond - and that may be why it works when just trying to swear Edgedancer Ideal would not have worked.

WoB:

Spoiler

Quote

Questioner

With Syl being able to be revived, is Adolin ever going to be able to revive his own blade, or--

Brandon Sanderson

Ah, that would be very difficult, because the original-- in most cases, the original person who broke the oath would have to be the one.

Firefight San Francisco signing (Jan. 17, 2015)

Quote

Kaladin al'Thor

I noticed my last time reading Words of Radiance that there were several times-- vines that were on Adolin's shardblade as he summoned it. So I was wondering if maybe the Radiant who used it had was an Edgedancer?

Brandon Sanderson

You are right.

Kaladin al'Thor

You mentioned before that it would be possible to revive a dead shard[blade], but it would be very difficult--

Brandon Sanderson

Very difficult.

Kaladin al'Thor

Like I think what you said is that it would have to be the same person that broke the bond?

Brandon Sanderson

That would be the-- Yeah.

Kaladin al'Thor

So if it was an Edgedancer's blade if he made those same oaths could potentially he…

Brandon Sanderson

That would most likely not be enough. Something else would have to happen. Good guess though.

Firefight release party (Jan. 5, 2015)

It may or may not matter that it was Maya in RoW who swore the First Radiant Oath, not Adolin (though he helped her)

RoW Ch 94:

Quote

Maya finally let go of Adolin’s arm. She seemed stronger than before, though her eyes were still scratched out. He could feel her curiosity, her … awareness. She looked up at him and nodded.

He nodded back. “Thank you.”

“Stren…” she whispered. “Stren. Be…”

“Strength before weakness.”

She nodded again, then turned her scratched-out gaze toward the ground, exhausted.

 

Again, I am not trying to change your opinion. I'm still unsure of my own feelings about this story arc - but I am hoping to clarify how I preceived the Unoathed arc in the hopes that maybe, together, we can better understand why Sanderson wrote what he wrote. I would much rather form an opinion based on an understanding (or perceived understanding) of the topic, than just blindly like or dislike the sub plot. But, that too is just a personal quirk - YMMV.

Edited May 2, 2025 by Treamayne
SPAG

[Darvys]

17 minutes ago, MagicMaggot said:

And we, the readers, don't really have to agree with any of that to enjoy these thoughts as a relevant part the character's current understanding of the world. And as far as I'm concerened the whole thing was very Adolin, and I loved it for that alone. 

 

16 minutes ago, Treamayne said:

Again, I am not trying to change your opinion. I'm still unsure of my own feelings about this story arc - but I am hoping to clarify how I preceived the Unoathed arc in the hopes that maybe, together, we can better understand why Sanderson wrote what he wrote. I would much rather form an opinion based on an understanding (or perceived understanding) of the topic, than just blindly like or dislike the sub plot. But, that too is just a personal quirk - YMMV.

I should clarify that I don't mind this nascent concept being confined to Adolin's character growth and story arc, but in discussions around the book it is often expected to be a theme expanded to the whole story and the evolution of Honor's shardic intent, which is what I dislike and argue against. This "revelation" was presented in a way that hints to future relevance, and I personally don't see any room for it outside of Adolin's own flawed pov.

[Treamayne]

35 minutes ago, Darvys said:

I should clarify that I don't mind this nascent concept being confined to Adolin's character growth and story arc, but in discussions around the book it is often expected to be a theme expanded to the whole story and the evolution of Honor's shardic intent, which is what I dislike and argue against. This "revelation" was presented in a way that hints to future relevance, and I personally don't see any room for it outside of Adolin's own flawed pov.

That sounds like a valid opinion.

I, personally, don't see it as a change to Honor at all - to me it did not seem that the power of Honor cared one way or another (Promise is just a different type of Oath) - but the perception of the Unoathed and the Deadeye they are weilding (bonding to) means subtle differences to them.

At least that was my understanding based on what little information we had in-world. WoBs may clarify - when those start rolling in post WaT.

Edited December 22, 2024 by Treamayne
SPAG

[MagicMaggot]

15 minutes ago, Darvys said:

This "revelation" was presented in a way that hints to future relevance, and I personally don't see any room for it outside of Adolin's own flawed pov.

Well, it obviously will have future relevance in as far as it will inform Adolin's character from now on. But as it is, the argument is barely half formed, because it wasn't supposed to be an argument. We only have a vague distinction between two kinds of promises that makes sense for Adolin. If that was explored and better defined, could it come down to some serious criticism of the concept of Honor as a moral force? I'd say that depends wholly on said explorations and definitions.

Something like "The reflexively honorable person  (or god) is likely to uphold and enforce oaths, even if with passing time and changing circumstances, the oath is directly working against the reason why it was sworn. To avoid that problem, a new definition of oath is needed, that always checks the validity of the oath against the intenion with which it was made. Let's call that a 'Promise'.", for example, doesn't sound particularly stupid to me, even if I can see obvious challenges from the "who judges that?"-camp.

So I'd say it it too soon to judge the long-term impact of Adolin's personal revelation, either to confirm or deny it.