Ivory and Morality

[Oudeis]

My friend and I were discussing Jasnah, Ivory, and the scene with the Muggers. We had a few thoughts, and I was wondering what anyone else thought, too.

 

How does Ivory feel about Jasnah's actions that night? What type of spren is he, which attributes is he attracted to? Was it like Syl at the Tower, where she felt pain at the deaths Kaladin caused, but understood it was necessary? Was it like Kaladin's decision to give the assassins a chance, where her Nahel bond was in serious jeopardy and she ended up having to make amends with him (maybe even say another Ideal)? Was it like a highspren whose Skybreaker executed a murderer following his trial, where he was simply perfectly okay with it?

 

I actually have an additional thing to insert. Remember, consider what we've learned since from sentient spren, Syl is shockingly human. Pattern thinks that eating is "terrible destruction". Even Wyndle, who acts pretty human, asks Lift in genuine confusion, "Why do you care about some random guy?" Spren aren't human. They're pretty alien. There's not a lot of reason to assume their views will be human viewpoints.

 

With that in mind, I wonder if Ivory really even thinks of what Jasnah did as murder. He grants the Surge of Transformation. We've seen Pattern speak of Lightweavings as shaping lies and making truths; these things mean a lot to him, he sees them as more integral to himself and less tacked-on superpowers than we humans see them. Would Ivory see what Jasnah did as ending a life? Or simply transforming a person? Would he look at the quartz statue and think, "this is a man who was killed in a terrifyingly mystical way," or would he simply think, "What's the big deal? He was flesh, now he's quartz. It happens." "Sure, this man turned into fire and then the fire went out. That's what fire DOES."

[Moogle]

Ivory was apparently willing to kill Jasnah as a test for her (assuming he was the one she saw in Shadesmar, which seems a safe bet). He sort of just threw her into the deep end of the pool and waited to see if she could swim. In his two appearances, he's been seen as a knight and as a gentleman in a suit. He doesn't seem to be very innocent or soft-hearted in the sense that Syl is. I doubt he had issues with Jasnah killing people - though, if you're looking for evidence that Jasnah's actions harmed her bond, Jasnah didn't Soulcast in Shallan's presence for quite some time following the deaths of the muggers. This is countered by the fact that when Kaladin did something counter to Syl (attacking Adolin), she immediately cut off his Stormlight (or perhaps he did it to himself?), and Jasnah was still capable of infusing while killing the muggers.

 

Other things to note: the Elsecallers have the attributes of "Wisdom/Caution". Caution seems to match up well with Ivory, as he seems to be very shy (disappears the moment Shallan sees him, as if he were running, and doesn't want Jasnah to reveal anything about him). As well, given the closeness of Elsecallers and Lightweavers, it might be that Ivory will have views similar to Pattern's. Each Order is pretty different, though, so that's probably a poor way to examine Ivory.
 

Edited November 14, 2014 by Moogle

[Oudeis]

As well, given the closeness of Elsecallers and Lightweavers, it might be that Ivory will have views similar to Pattern's. Each Order is pretty different, though, so that's probably a poor way to examine Ivory.

 

 

You made some good points here, I'm going to address this one... Syl makes a slightly dismissive comment about Highspren once, and expressly stating that her views on things are different from them, despite closeness of orders. I almost wonder if spren near each other would be LESS likely to get along? Like, Syl cares about protecting things. Glys seems to care about observing. Those are almost too unrelated for it to be a sticking point. Like if I'm a basketball fan, and you're a hockey fan. Well, why don't you tell me about your team, because while we both like sports, I have no strong feelings about any of the teams you care about? Versus, we both like football, and you're a Jets fan, and I'm a Giants fan. Same sport, same state even, except now I will not talk to you.

 

Just a thought.

 

Maybe this is for another thread, but I sorta wanna speculate on the raison d'etre of each order... what do they think is important, and how do they go about it? Sorta inspired by the fact that, from what little we know, Elsecallers, Lightweavers, Truthwatchers and Edgedancers all seem to be about collecting knowledge, but they all seem to go about it in very different ways (and I personally believe the Willshapers also fall into this category, but I admit this is based on very, very little evidence). If we knew the answer, rather than just guessed, it might shed some light on how the different spren view issues.

 

Personally, since Jasnah seems to be the consummate scholar, and Ivory is her spren, I assume his focus is that he just doesn't care about things like morality. Like how Syl cares deeply about morality, but couldn't give two hoots about things written in books. Ivory might care deeply about thoughts, and consideration, and the gathering of data, and might not have strong opinions one way or another on how the conclusions end up being applied.

 

Or, alternately, I'm completely wrong. That's always an option. ^^;;;

 

EDIT: Additional thought. Was she in danger of being killed? Her cognitive aspect was sinking in the thoughts of other things... can the thought of you suffocate in the thought of other things? That wasn't her physical body, yes? Did it need air, or did she just "think" she needed air? What would actually happen to a person who "drowned" in Shadesmar? We know she believed she was in danger, and we know she and Shallan believed Shallan was in danger. Were they right?

 

ONE LAST THING: Did Ivory choose that? Was it part of his transition? Remember, Syl flopped into our world and rode the winds for how long before finding Kaladin. Pattern... well we don't know what it was like the first time, but the second time he had to be drawn into existence. Do we know Ivory wanted to 'test' Jasnah like that, or was it simple necessity? Or, remember, he might be alien, which doesn't mean "he has human emotions but feels them weird," he might 'feel' things very differently from how humans do, so perhaps he never saw Jasnah as being in any real danger, even if we would. Maybe in his culture, being killed during a test to see if you're a Surgebinder is a great honor.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Outis

[11thorderknight]

 

 

With that in mind, I wonder if Ivory really even thinks of what Jasnah did as murder.

 

For what it's worth, I personally don't think of what Jasnah did as murder. And there's not a single legal system IRL that would consider it murder, either. She engaged in the perfectly legal activity of walking down a public street, and then defended herself from people clearly intent on killing her. (You could split hairs about the last two, who she transformed into smoke as they were running away, if you want to get really legalistic...)

 

Most people on this forum tend to take Shallan's point of view on that night - that there's something ineffably icky about what Jasnah did. And I think that's Brandon's point. I would bet that he personally would not agree with what she did, but we know he takes great care in writing Jasnah's character, precisely because she's so different from himself. He didn't just throw that scene in there to make her look bad. He's using it to highlight the fact that there isn't really a single version of "honor" or "honorable". That's why there are ten different orders, not one, and that's why the ten don't always get along all that well. 

 

I'm sure Ivory didn't have a second thought about the whole thing, other than maybe thinking she didn't cover her tracks well enough (the crystal statue left behind wasn't very subtle).

Edited November 16, 2014 by 11thorderknight

[Fallen Rope]

If Ivory doesn't care about killing I would like to see a scene with Syl, Ivory and Nightblood. One is against killing, another loves it and one doesn't care.

Nightblood "lets kill that guy, he looks evil, he might do something"

Syl "You can't go around killing people, that is evil, it is right to protect"

Ivory "I do not see the point of the conversation, just hurry up and decide kill him or leave him"

 

And about how spren get along, maybe the lines on the radiant eye shows which spren hate each other. Honor spren are connected to cryptics and high spren?.

Edited November 16, 2014 by Fallen Rope

[Oudeis]

For what it's worth, I personally don't think of what Jasnah did as murder. And there's not a single legal system IRL that would consider it murder, either.

 

This is not an accurate statement, I don't think?

 

In most states in America, at least (let's just leave Florida alone for now) "self defense" is not a blanket pardon for killing someone. If someone comes at me with a knife and I empty a clip into his head, that is considered escalation and excessive force, and most states consider it murder. Not to mention entrapment (or enticement as I believe it's called in England).

 

Regardless, only the first guy was self-defense, as he was the only person who carried through on an attempt to harm her. The second guy fell over as he attempted to abort his attack; whether he was still a danger to her is questionable. And it's not splitting hairs to point out that the two fleeing guys were clearly disengaging. At that point, killing them was in no way self-defense.

 

None of which matters to the central point, since whatever Ivory's morality is, it's unlikely to be "whatever criminal justice on Earth says it is".

[Patrick Star]

Well, Ivory's basically Slenderman (Teleporting guy in a suit), so it's really not a surprise that he has a lack of morals, compared to some of the other characters.

[taveren]

legal, just, and moral are very different. i would say her actions you probably  legal definitely just and not moral. each order cares more about one of the then the others sly doesn't care whats legal or just but what is morally right. the skybreakers are concerned with absolute justice but we don't know enough about the elsecallers to know for sure what ivory cares for

[Oudeis]

Well, Ivory's basically Slenderman (Teleporting guy in a suit), so it's really not a surprise that he has a lack of morals, compared to some of the other characters.

 

You're judging him by human standards (or, I guess, by the standards of Slenderman based on a superficial resemblance to an internet meme/urban legend which... um, is specious). Ivory might very well have strict morals; most Nahel-bonding spren seem to. They simply aren't human-typical.

[KevinTheHerdazian]

This is not an accurate statement, I don't think?

In most states in America, at least (let's just leave Florida alone for now) "self defense" is not a blanket pardon for killing someone. If someone comes at me with a knife and I empty a clip into his head, that is considered escalation and excessive force, and most states consider it murder. Not to mention entrapment (or enticement as I believe it's called in England).

Regardless, only the first guy was self-defense, as he was the only person who carried through on an attempt to harm her. The second guy fell over as he attempted to abort his attack; whether he was still a danger to her is questionable. And it's not splitting hairs to point out that the two fleeing guys were clearly disengaging. At that point, killing them was in no way self-defense.

None of which matters to the central point, since whatever Ivory's morality is, it's unlikely to be "whatever criminal justice on Earth says it is".

you beat me to it! Nice job lol! Edited January 3, 2015 by KevinTheHerdazian

[SmurfAquamarineBodies]

About the being able to kill in self defense in NZ if someone attacks you and you kill them its manslaughter. A punishable offense. 

 

Glys may not agree with her actions but he might agree with the reason behind it.

[dvoraen]

Just a random comment on Ivory, but:

 

If Pattern, as a Cryptic, is considered a rough equivalent to a lighteyes in the Cognitive Realm, who is to say that Ivory isn't the same, if not equivalent to the spren form of royalty, or heavily involved with the "great ones of the spren" (diplomat, knight, attache, what have you)?

 

Either way, without knowing what Jasnah's Ideals are as an Elsecaller, the most we can really say is that they're allowed to take lives without severing a bond, if they're in a dangerous situation.  (Note that I'm not saying "self defense" here; we covered that. )

[Twenty@20]

Why are we assuming Ivory was OK with Jasnah killing the thugs in the street? Didn't Shallan say that she didn't see Jasnah soulcasting after she stole the fake Soulcasters- recall that before that evening Shallan used to see Jasnah soulcasting her notes into fire, water into crystal and other what nots. Couldn't it be that Ivory had indeed punished Jasnah like Syl punished Kaladin- that explains why Shallan didn't see Jasnah soulcasting after the alley incident. Then presumably Ivory forgave Jasnah before the hospital scene.

Also it is possible that Jasnah had discussed the situation with Ivory and necessity of action earlier in the evening. While Ivory would probably be okay with killing the first assailant, it is entirely possible he didn't approve of the subsequent killings. However no spren will willingly put their Knight in danger by turning off their powers in a hostile environment. So Ivory let Jasnah kill the other assailants too and later punished her.

[SmurfAquamarineBodies]

The Spren are a mixture of Honor and Cultivation. I'd say that all Spren dislike killing to some extent, but they are able to understand why humans kill each other ( or better yet, know when it is and when it isn't a necessary action. ).

unless Cultivation's Intent involves killing things, this statement may get shot down by a WoB. So fire away I like getting to read new WoB.

 

Just because Jasnah lays off the Soulcasting for a couple days after the event doesn't really mean anything. We know she is being chased by several interested parties she may have just been trying to lay low or she might have not wanted to arouse suspicion, her constant Soulcasting and lack of stone features would be a sure give away that something was different about her.

[Twenty@20]

Just because Jasnah lays off the Soulcasting for a couple days after the event doesn't really mean anything. We know she is being chased by several interested parties she may have just been trying to lay low or she might have not wanted to arouse suspicion, her constant Soulcasting and lack of stone features would be a sure give away that something was different about her.

It wasn't a couple of days- rather something like 3 weeks. Agreed it might be a plot device to create suspense for the reader but on second thought, we never get an explanation why Jasnah didnot do any soulcasting in that time between the alley scene and hospital scene. I also find it improbable that Jasnah just decided to "lay off" because 1) she is not the type of person to just lay off doing something and  2) she was being chased by several parties for a long time and that didn't stop her from soulcasting openly earlier.

Edited January 3, 2015 by Twenty@20

[Oudeis]

Keep in mind, Jasnah was always reasonably private about her Soulcasting. She only started doing it when she grew used to Shallan's presence, so it's not like she does it all willy-nilly. Also keep in mind, immediately following the incident, Shallan was tasked to research the philosophy of the actions, meaning the time when she "didn't see Jasnah Soulcast" was a period of time when she didn't necessarily see much of Jasnah at all.

 

I'm basically on the fence. There might well be a reason Jasnah couldn't Soulcast until Kabsal's attempted poisoning. Or it might be that she could all along, and by a small stretch of coincidence Shallan never saw. I would accept either.

 

While I'm obviously in favor of the more interesting turn of events, not every point in the plot can be top-full of meaning. This is a minor enough thing that I find myself hoping he doesn't turn it into a big deal and crowd out something else that would be even more interesting.

[Patrick Star]

You're judging him by human standards (or, I guess, by the standards of Slenderman based on a superficial resemblance to an internet meme/urban legend which... um, is specious). Ivory might very well have strict morals; most Nahel-bonding spren seem to. They simply aren't human-typical.

 

Hey!  It's not JUST Slenderman (or Slenderspren.  Or Sprenderman).  Guys in suits are trouble!

 

Mister Burke, Alfred Tenpenny, The Penguin, Aldrich Killian, Obadiah Stane, the original (comics) Men in Black, Alexander Pierce, Lex Luthor, Agent 47, every British villain in the history of ever, bankers, investors, and politicians prove this!

[11thorderknight]

This is not an accurate statement, I don't think?

 

In most states in America, at least (let's just leave Florida alone for now) "self defense" is not a blanket pardon for killing someone. If someone comes at me with a knife and I empty a clip into his head, that is considered escalation and excessive force, and most states consider it murder. Not to mention entrapment (or enticement as I believe it's called in England).

 

 

Wrong. If someone comes at you with a knife, in any state, you're legally justified in emptying a clip into their head. The only difference between Florida (and a lot of other states with identical laws) and some others is whether you have to prove they were coming at you with the knife. Not that it matters really for this discussion, but I'm not a fan of inaccuracy. 

 

Incidentally (or not so incidentally, really...) when Shallan researches philosophy and law after that incident, she also finds that every school of thought justifies Jasnah's actions. So really, she's the one that's at odds with common thinking, at least on Roshar.

 

Once again, I believe the purpose of this scene was to highlight that an honorable character like Jasnah can have a very different standard of honor than what a stereotypically "good" character should. 

[11thorderknight]

Not to mention entrapment (or enticement as I believe it's called in England).

 

 

"Entrapment" or "enticement" is a very specific issue. You are correct, it could be argued that what Jasnah did constitutes entrapment, which is when a law enforcement official entices a criminal to commit a crime, then arrests them for that crime. However, entrapment is a complex legal issue, and in many instances is legitimately used by police to catch criminals. So the entrapment theory does not automatically put Jasnah out of bounds of IRL legal thinking.

[Oudeis]

First: You can edit a post so you don't have to double-post.

 

Second: I'm going to look into this, because I've discussed self-defense with lawyers before when we were doing a story on Florida's law about home invasion. I don't know what your credentials are, but I know that I've talked about this issue with actual criminal defense lawyers. The laws regulating murder are different from state to state just within the united states, and I have even less idea what they are elsewhere in the world. It has admittedly been years since I had this talk, so I might be getting the details fuzzy, but I'd be surprised if I were misremembering such a crucial detail so completely.

 

As far as the internet can be believed...

 

Choice quotes:

 

"the use of reasonable force"

"cannot be an excuse to continue the attack or use excessive force"

 

Soulcasting two to three fleeing men is both excessive, and a continuation of the attack. I know you've said that the fact that at least two, possibly all three men were fleeing is "splitting hairs" but... well, it simply isn't. It's written directly into the law that if your assailant is fleeing, you've immediately lost all justification in continuing your attack. End of story.

 

Also, a few philosophical texts hardly constitutes "common thinking". The majority of Rosharan population are peasants, or at best lower-class workers in a city. A few ivory tower philosophers considering objective morality as an intellectual exercise are unlikely to encapsulate "common thinking." A minor point, but I'm not a fan of inaccuracy.

[Battah'elin]

Keep in mind, Jasnah was always reasonably private about her Soulcasting. She only started doing it when she grew used to Shallan's presence, so it's not like she does it all willy-nilly. Also keep in mind, immediately following the incident, Shallan was tasked to research the philosophy of the actions, meaning the time when she "didn't see Jasnah Soulcast" was a period of time when she didn't necessarily see much of Jasnah at all.

 

I'm basically on the fence. There might well be a reason Jasnah couldn't Soulcast until Kabsal's attempted poisoning. Or it might be that she could all along, and by a small stretch of coincidence Shallan never saw. I would accept either.

 

While I'm obviously in favor of the more interesting turn of events, not every point in the plot can be top-full of meaning. This is a minor enough thing that I find myself hoping he doesn't turn it into a big deal and crowd out something else that would be even more interesting.I

I always thought that her not Soulcasting was just because she didn't want to remind Shallan; she knew Shallan was in turmoil over the murder and so she just didn't do it in front of her for a while, because Shallan couldn't analyze her actions if she was paralyzed by the sight of Soulcasting. She probably also felt bad.

[Oudeis]

She probably also felt bad.

 

...Are we talking about the same Jasnah? I realize that deep down she's just an old softy, but... it's pretty deep. Deeper than "sense that someone is emotionally distressed by me" in the middle of the most important, all-consuming research anyone has done, ever.

[Patrick Star]

She probably also felt bad.

 

No, she didn't.

[11thorderknight]

First: You can edit a post so you don't have to double-post.

 

Second: I'm going to look into this, because I've discussed self-defense with lawyers before when we were doing a story on Florida's law about home invasion. I don't know what your credentials are, but I know that I've talked about this issue with actual criminal defense lawyers. The laws regulating murder are different from state to state just within the united states, and I have even less idea what they are elsewhere in the world. It has admittedly been years since I had this talk, so I might be getting the details fuzzy, but I'd be surprised if I were misremembering such a crucial detail so completely.

 

As far as the internet can be believed...

 

Choice quotes:

 

"the use of reasonable force"

"cannot be an excuse to continue the attack or use excessive force"

 

Soulcasting two to three fleeing men is both excessive, and a continuation of the attack. I know you've said that the fact that at least two, possibly all three men were fleeing is "splitting hairs" but... well, it simply isn't. It's written directly into the law that if your assailant is fleeing, you've immediately lost all justification in continuing your attack. End of story.

 

Also, a few philosophical texts hardly constitutes "common thinking". The majority of Rosharan population are peasants, or at best lower-class workers in a city. A few ivory tower philosophers considering objective morality as an intellectual exercise are unlikely to encapsulate "common thinking." A minor point, but I'm not a fan of inaccuracy.

 

Regarding the "excessive force" issue: that's something that's defined differently in every jurisdiction, but is usually determined on a case-by-case basis, often by a jury. However, in any jurisdiction in the US, you would be within your rights to use deadly force (aka a gun) against an assailant coming at you in close quarters with a knife.

 

Regarding the issue of Jasnah Soulcasting the fleeing assailants: you are correct, that is generally considered illegal under modern US law. However, that is a relatively recent development, and at odds with historical common law. Up until the 1970s it was legal for law enforcement to shoot a suspect fleeing arrest, even if they were not considered dangerous. 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner

 

Even this case, which banned this practice, allows police to use deadly force against a fleeing suspect if they believe themselves or others to be in physical danger. 

 

Also keep in mind that every common-law jurisdiction, and many others, have the concept of "citizen's arrest", meaning that anyone, not just police, has the right to arrest someone they see committing a crime. Add these two together, and one could very well argue that Jasnah was legally justified in killing the fleeing muggers because by doing so she was preventing harm to their future victims. 

 

Once again...the point here is that Jasnah did something that is controversial, not something that is universally acknowledged to be wrong. A lot of people seem to be missing this point.

[Arondell]

I think that to actually use modern(i.e. 20th century) standards of law to judge Jasnah's actions is a bit anachronistic. At least from a legal perspective. While it is hard to peg it to a specific time period most of Roshare seems to be something I would expect to see around the late middle ages to late renaissance. If anyone knows how most legal systems of those time periods would handle this it would probably be more relevant.

I suspect that legally by the standards of Kharbranth Jasnah would be totally in the clear. Especially since from out knowledge of the situation the local law enforcement might well have been bribed to ignore the situation and said law enforcement wouldn't want that coming out.

That being said I would be fascinated to hear the answer if anyone were to ask Mr. Sanderson how a Skybreaker would have dealt with the situation.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Arondell