Does Kaladin have a choice to do the wrong thing?

[moptop]

Hi all!

I have two questions about the Radiants, specifically Kaladin's order.

 

First, why does he lose his abilities after deciding to kill Elkohar? He is obviously not breaking the second Ideal, as Elkohar can protect himself easily (he is both a king AND a shardbearer!). So he must be breaking the first Ideal. However, which part is he breaking? According to Kaladin, Elkohar is not innocent, and killing him will save the lives of countless others! So what is he doing wrong here?

 

Answering that the fact is that simply doing the wrong thing kills his spren, and his interpretation of his actions vis-à-vis the Ideals has no bearing whatsoever, would lead me to my next question. Once someone becomes a Knight Radiant (which automatically means that he is a good person), and then understands this fact (that doing the wrong thing kills his/her spren), then where is the challenge to do the right thing? If one notices his spren dying, then what he is doing is obviously wrong, and he needs to change! It just seems to me that surgebinders, specifically Windrunners, have no choice to do the wrong thing, ever, or they will lose their abilities, not to mention killing their best friend.

 

Or am I wrong? Do I just simply not understand how the Ideals work? 

 

Thanks in advance, guys!

[DreamEternal]

The only misunderstandings you had were that Elhokar was guilty and that he could protect himself.

Elhokar can protect himself in a duel or in the battlefield, not against assassins in his own guard, and he is innocent, at least as far as the oaths are concerned, because one doens't deserve to die for incompetence, especialy when he is trying to become more competent. Plus, I doubt Dalinar would make a good king, he is too forceful, I think, he would break the kingdom apart trying to force everyone to have honor.

But yes, radiants have no choice of being wrong without terrible personal consequences, but if they start believing the ends justify the means and want to break the oaths to save people, it would be storming hypocrisy to don't do it because one of the people who is going to die is their friend.

Edited June 28, 2015 by CognitivePulsePattern

[moptop]

Your first point does answer my question, so thank you for that.

 

I don't understand your second point, though. They know they are doing the wrong thing, because they are losing their abilities. Therefore even if they start believing that the ends justify the means, they will be disillusioned of it very quickly. So where is the challenge, the need to make the right choice and to agonize over the difficult decisions, that make us human? All a surgebinder has to do is check if his abilities are getting weaker, and he simply knows he is doing the wrong thing!

 

Yes, it might still be hard to do the right thing, but it is made easier by the fact that he gets to keep his awesome abilities,and by the fact that he 100% knows he has made the correct choice!

[Oudeis he/him]

I disagree with Pulse. What follows is my personal interpretation of the book, which I believe is as valid.

 

Every Order is different. Syl was damaged not because Kaladin disobeyed an Ideal. She is Honorspren. In hers and Kaladin's specific code of honor, once you give your word you cannot break it. Kaladin was Elhokar's bodyguard, and gave his word to do everything in his power to protect the King. Being complicit in his murder broke that word.

 

What is interesting about the situation is that he trapped himself in a catch 22. Syl was being hurt and regressing from the moment he agreed to the plan, because now he'd given his word. Kaladin learned that honor can require you to actually think sometimes, and not just run off and do whatever seems "right" at the time. A lot of people who claim to have honor find themselves in similar circumstances, where they promise two things that are entirely contradictory. He promised Dalinar that he would protect the King's life. Then he promised Moash that he would allow the King's murder. It was like jumping off a the empire state building (for someone who isn't a Windrunner). You aren't technically dead yet, but you've put yourself in a position where death is inevitable.

 

Contrast with Pattern. A somewhat similar thing happened to him with Shallan, yet she certainly broke no oath. She killed only in clear and present self-defense, which we've seen is entirely possible for a Radiant. And she did nothing to make her a "bad person". Hoid himself points out that she's being a pretty amazing person.

 

But as Sylphrena lives or dies by honor, Pattern lives or dies by an understanding of the subjective nature of truth. When Shallan grew incapable of accepting the truth of her life, when she trapped herself within a lie, Pattern broke and all but disappeared for years.

 

Lastly, neither Surgebinders nor Radiants have to be good people. As Nohadon says, not all spren are as discerning as Honorspren. Nothing in any Ideal says "also don't be a jerk." There was a large thread somewhere, where a few people got frighteningly insistent that all Radiants have to be paragons of virtue, and if any of them show up I am backing away rather than face their irrational ire again.

 

EDIT: Also, moptop, welcome to the Forums! Hope you enjoy your time with us! Good first post.

Edited June 28, 2015 by Oudeis

[maxal she/her]

Come on Oudeis, you really had to say the last line? Are you really this spite full? How many times are you going to bring forward that thread where you consider everyone else but yourself were irrational monkeys?

 

As fort the topic at hand, I actually tend to agree with you. Syl was hurt because Kaladin broke his promise to Dalinar by agreeing to assassinate Elhokar. He acted dishonorably. However, I also believe he cannot kill Elhokar on the fact he may cause more deaths by being incompetent. He is not protecting anyone: he is merely acting on what he perceives may someday be a future thread to unknown individuals. I do not believe this is how his oaths work and it does highlight how Kaladin cannot kill to protect, not in this way at least. It also stands for the same reason as to why Kaladin cannot kill Amaram nor Sadeas, not unless they actively engage themselves against those weaker than him, those Kaladin and Syl would identify as individuals to be protected. All in all, Kaladin said he would protect Elhokar and he backed on his word. In doing so, he broke his oaths.

 

Nobody never said the knights had to be the paragon of all virtues, but many said they have to be the paragon of ONE virtue, that of their order. Kaladin's virtues are protecting, leading and honor. Apart from that, he can be anything else, as long as he maintains these. For instance, he sure is allowed to be a jerk towards Adolin without impacting his oaths.

[DreamEternal]

Moptop, I think you didn't understand my point: Kaladin can't act wrongly according to the Windrunner understanding of Honor, else his bond weakens, so he knows when he is OK according to the Windrunner vision or not, but what if he decides that the windrunner Ideals are wrong, simplistic or incomplete? Then he could kill Syl and still think he has done the right thing. The doubt is not whatever he is following his ideals or not, but whatever they are worthy following or not.

[Edgedancer he/him]

Nobody never said the knights had to be the paragon of all virtues, but many said they have to be the paragon of ONE virtue, that of their order. Kaladin's virtues are protecting, leading and honor. Apart from that, he can be anything else, as long as he maintains these. For instance, he sure is allowed to be a jerk towards Adolin without impacting his oaths.

Except that one time he tried to attack Adolin, clearly a violation of protecting him, so being a jerk is only okay as long as it doesn't contradict with his virtues, it seems.

 

Moptop, I think you didn't understand my point: Kaladin can't act wrongly according to the Windrunner understanding of Honor, else his bond weakens, so he knows when he is OK according to the Windrunner vision or not, but what if he decides that the windrunner Ideals are wrong, simplistic or incomplete? Then he could kill Syl and still think he has done the right thing. The doubt is not whatever he is following his ideals or not, but whatever they are worthy following or not.

Given how the Nahel bond seems to work I'm also not sure if the attitude of "I'll do whatever I want and if my power weakens I'll fix my behaviour" instead of actually doing the thing your order would consider right because you agree with them is an acceptable attitude for a Knight Radiant, given how much they are based on said ideals. Plus, by the time the signs show you may already be too deep in to simply stop doing whatever the problem is.

[hoser he/him]

In addition to the excellent thoughts offered above, there seems to be more to this magic system than adherence to the oaths.  Consider the data: 

1. Kaladin loses his powers when scrimmaging at the lighteyes training grounds (pre-conflicting promises)
2. Kaladin's bond weakens after he makes the conflicting promises
3. After the bond weakens, he can still infuse, but only when Syl is very near
4. At a time when he is acting in a way that is fully windrunner compliant, Syl kills herself by forcing the power of the bond over too great a distance

This leads me to the following conclusions:

• Kaladin does not have his powers when he is not acting to protect, but that does not weaken the bond. 
• Conflicting promises weakens the bond, independent of the oaths.  This makes sense to me when we think of how Syl describes herself in tWoK:  "I am Honorspren, Spirit of Oaths.  Of promises. And of Nobility."
• The power of the bond is affected by proximity.
• The spren can hurt themselves by "pushing" the bond past the normal power. 

All of these are aspects of the bond separate from adherence to the Oaths. 

 

As for free will, I would add to the above as follows.  One can choose to not be as powerful.  We all face situations every day where lying, cheating or stealing could gain us advantages.  That does not compel us to lie, cheat or steal.  We still can choose to act in ways that don't benefit us optimally.  It is the same with the Knights and proto-Knights when they don't act in accordance with their oaths. 

In addition, there is the aspect of learning.  Until Kaladin is faced with having to save Elhokar from Moash, he does not understand the issue that stands in the way of his advancement.  So we see that Knights' development can stagnate because they lack understanding of what holds them back. 

Edited June 28, 2015 by hoser

[maxal she/her]

Except that one time he tried to attack Adolin, clearly a violation of protecting him, so being a jerk is only okay as long as it doesn't contradict with his virtues, it seems.

 

I meant how he was able to state: "I will respond to reasonable requests but if you ask me to fetch you a cup of tea, ask someone else." when Adolin had said nothing reprehensible or how he was able to call him not unobnoxious....

 

Kaladin is able to be a jerk to Adolin by verbally insulting him and degrading him, but you are right in stating the fact he is not allowed to beat him up with his surgebinding simply because he has a dislike for the guy.

[Guest]

Haven't read any of the responses yet, but I'd say that the Recreance pretty much proves that Kaladin can break his Oaths if he wants/needs to.

[maxal she/her]

Haven't read any of the responses yet, but I'd say that the Recreance pretty much proves that Kaladin can break his Oaths if he wants/needs to.

 

He can, but the result is Syl dying. I think the idea is he can't break his oaths while maintaining his bound to Syl. Also, the way Syl's come-back was written, it left me to believe she could have refused.

[Moogle]

So where is the challenge, the need to make the right choice and to agonize over the difficult decisions, that make us human? All a surgebinder has to do is check if his abilities are getting weaker, and he simply knows he is doing the wrong thing!

 

Yes, it might still be hard to do the right thing, but it is made easier by the fact that he gets to keep his awesome abilities,and by the fact that he 100% knows he has made the correct choice!

 

The correct choice by the understanding of, as Kaladin basically puts it, a morally-simplistic alien being. Syl's morals are not entirely Kaladin's. Just because the bond doesn't break doesn't mean Kaladin isn't going to struggle with a lot of choices. He's also free to struggle with non-protection-related things. If, for example, Kaladin was feeling all conflicted in a love triangle, Syl probably won't care (in the sense of the bond breaking), no matter the result.

 

If, for example, Kaladin saw a defenseless person being killed, his oaths require him to step in and defend them, even if it's obviously suicidal - for example, there are twenty Szeths killing the person. In that case, you could imagine a Windrunner might break their oaths. (Kaladin probably would not, but a general Windrunner maybe.)

 

The Recreance happened, so we can safely say that humans do not agree with the morality of spren all the time.

[Oudeis he/him]

Keep in mind also that as I pointed out, Kaladin's Bond was doomed. This is alluded to in the book itself at one point. He gave his word to protect Elhokar. He gave his word that he would allow Elhokar's death. At that point, he could not simply have turned in the conspirators, recovered Syl and been fine. He put himself in a position where he HAD to break his word to someone; this, not a reduction in his protection, is what hurt his bond.

 

Also, my personal understanding of the Ideals is not in line with what I mostly see represented on the fora. Dalinar and Adolin talk about this in Way of Kings. Dalinar at first doesn't want to force people to obey the Codes. Similarly, just trying to obey the letter of the law of the Ideals is not going to make you a Knight Radiant (Well, except maybe for a Skybreaker). WoB (I believe, I cannot seem to find it) is that for several orders, the different Ideals weren't codified; for the Lightweavers, for example, they speak specific Truths, unique to each Radiant.

 

If you go into it thinking, "Okay, here's what the rules are. I will make sure that the actions I take are in keeping with these rules, and then a spren will give me magic powers," I do not believe you will ever attract a spren (unless there's an Order whose nature fits that; maybe Dustbringers?). As Dalinar eventually realizes, forcing people to behave in a certain way is, at best, a step on the path to getting them to actually internalize the ideas of them. A true, fully-realized Windrunner, therefore, will not be someone who thinks, "What are the strictures by which I must act in order to get/maintain my powers?" She will be someone who doesn't think about it, whose underlying premise behind every thought and impulse will be the urge to protect people. It will be someone who sees powers as a valuable tool to protect people, not someone who sees protecting people as the price you must pay in order to get power.

 

Just my thought; something of a minority opinion.

[soulcastJam he/him]

Interestingly, I believe Moash had the power to release Kaladin from his obligation to be complicit in the murder of the king and thus could have saved Syl. Kaladin kind of tried to back out but didn't explain (even when he understood) the true consequences of Moash's holding him to his agreement. Perhaps things would have changed if he had.

[kaellok he/him]

Every Order is different. Syl was damaged not because Kaladin disobeyed an Ideal. She is Honorspren. In hers and Kaladin's specific code of honor, once you give your word you cannot break it. Kaladin was Elhokar's bodyguard, and gave his word to do everything in his power to protect the King. Being complicit in his murder broke that word....

 

 

...Lastly, neither Surgebinders nor Radiants have to be good people. As Nohadon says, not all spren are as discerning as Honorspren. Nothing in any Ideal says "also don't be a jerk." 

Snipped out the bit between ...'s.  

 

I agree completely with what you have said here.  Also mostly agree with your second post.

 

In my mind, what truly affected the Bond that Kaladin had with Syl, though, wasn't that he had sworn two conflicting oaths (to both protect Elhokar and help see him killed), but that he knowingly acted in a wrong way for one of those promises.  He knew that assassinating Elhokar was the wrong thing to do; that's why he was so broody and angsty over it, why so much time was spent wrestling with the decision, so much time spent trying to rationalize and justify it.  In matters of right and wrong, when you're spending that much time trying to convince yourself that something is right, then it's obviously wrong.

 

Syl herself said that she was only as dead "as your oaths were."  When he stood up to protect Elhokar, she came back.  He wasn't suddenly fulfilling both of his promises, only the one that was the right thing to do.

 

 

Once someone becomes a Knight Radiant (which automatically means that he is a good person), and then understands this fact (that doing the wrong thing kills his/her spren), then where is the challenge to do the right thing? If one notices his spren dying, then what he is doing is obviously wrong, and he needs to change! It just seems to me that surgebinders, specifically Windrunners, have no choice to do the wrong thing, ever, or they will lose their abilities, not to mention killing their best friend.

 

 

Therefore even if they start believing that the ends justify the means, they will be disillusioned of it very quickly. So where is the challenge, the need to make the right choice and to agonize over the difficult decisions, that make us human? All a surgebinder has to do is check if his abilities are getting weaker, and he simply knows he is doing the wrong thing!

 

Yes, it might still be hard to do the right thing, but it is made easier by the fact that he gets to keep his awesome abilities,and by the fact that he 100% knows he has made the correct choice!

 

 

First, Radiants are not good people by definition.  They are all Honorable, with different focus on what that actually means, but honorable has never meant 'good' as we understand it today.  Second, it's possible to agonize over decisions, that you know are right, just because they're hard.  I imagine that putting yourself directly in harm's way, with a strong chance of getting killed, just to protect some cremling who wants nothing more than to see you die would get pretty old.  

 

Also, we only know that the Bond slippage/breakage works that specific way for Windrunners.  How would the situation be different for Lightweavers, that rely upon spoken truths, rather than promises made?  So, your focus is upon the Order that is known for having the most discerning of spren in regards to the character of humans that they Bond with--meaning that Windrunners are already the least likely to act in the ways that you describe.

[Oudeis he/him]

Syl herself said that she was only as dead "as your oaths were."  When he stood up to protect Elhokar, she came back.  He wasn't suddenly fulfilling both of his promises, only the one that was the right thing to do.

 

I've been wrestling with how to address this. The idea makes sense in my own head, and I try to clothe that idea with words that will deliver the same idea into the heads of others.

 

Basically... I don't think he ever "fixed" the situation. I think he straight-up did break one of his promises, and that this is part of what killed Sylphrena. I think the recovery was almost unrelated.

 

I also think something else you said was right: If Kaladin had sworn he would pick up some milk on the way home, but then had to go out of his way to kill some Voidbringers and didn't, that would bother, perhaps even hurt Syl, but it wouldn't kill her or end the bond. I believe you're right, it was the breaking of an oath combined with the abandonment of an Ideal.

 

So. Here's the analogy. Let's say Kaladin was fighting stormform Eshonai without any spheres or Stormlight and she breaks his leg with a kick. His leg is now broken. Boo-hoo.

 

But what's that? A gemheart! Filled with Stormlight. Kaladin sucks it all in. Now, his leg heals itself and he's stronger and faster, to boot.

 

I see this as the analogy. Stormlight healing doesn't do time-travel, it doesn't make it so that your leg hadn't been broken in the first place, it just fixes what was broken. I don't think Syl came back because Kaladin found a way to unbreak his word. I think the damage from that had been done, but his deepening of his power as a Radiant and his acceptance of a fundamental Ideal of being a Windrunner was a powerful agent able to heal the damage he'd done to his Bond.

 

Admittedly, this is wholly my own interpretation of events. I think that what happens in the books is nebulous and not-spelled-out enough that we may not know for some time, if ever, what truly and exactly happened. However, this is just my idea.

 

I am against the idea that honor means, "I will fulfill only the things I swear I will do, if I later decide they were also the right thing to do." That's a loophole I could ride a chull through. Breaking your word is breaking your word, and the lesson we should take from Kaladin's example is, be much more careful when you give your word in the first place. You don't get to just take it back later when you decide the thing you promised to do wasn't right.

 

Also I love your example of how a good person can still agonize over doing what is right but hard. At the risk of opening a can of worms, consider Jesus Christ. Putting all the religion aside for a moment, whether or not one happens to agree with Christian mythology, taken as a pure work of (possibly fictional) literature most people acknowledge that, as a protagonist, Jesus is a relatively good man. He still agonized over the fact that he'd have to die and suffer literal damnation in order to save the world. (Remind you of any Heralds we know?) it was absolutely the right thing to do, he knew it well, beyond a doubt. And he still begged to God that a way could be found to avoid his fate, despite knowing there wasn't. Again, whether or not this is your particular religion or you believe in any religion, taken purely as a story, most people would accept the general premise of the situation as plausible.

 

Good people can absolutely agonize over clear-cut, right-or-wrong decisions. And that's even assuming that you'll only ever be presented with the opportunity to decide right from wrong; what about the times when you just have two or more kinds of wrong to pick from?

[ParadoxicalZen he/him]

As mentioned above, Honourspren are quite discerning, especially in regards to the potential of proto-radiants (and i think how many oaths they might swear. I don't think it has been said that a radiant has to swear all 5 oaths, just that they're a kind of progression bar of sorts) so the likelihood of them bonding someone completely inappropriate for Windrunner Radiancy is unlikely. In regards to the rigidity of Windrunner oaths especially, i believe it is more the spren's perception of the matter that factors most into it, (i think a ratio of about 60/40 to spren/radiant) given Syl was, for lack of a better word, offering advice/guidance/insight every time Moash and Kaladin were having their i-hate-lighteyes talks or was acting in some way opposed to Windrunner standards. She was being the moral conscience guide for Kaladin even just before Kaladin made that promise to Moash, which i believe he knew deep down.

 

In terms of the 2nd and 3rd oaths, didn't one of Kaladin's CO's even tell him that you can't save everyone and that, as a leader you had to accept that fact, because i seem to recall when Teft was explaining about the first oath with Life Before Death that Radiant shouldn't throw their life away frivolously. I like that a lot of Stormlight Archive stuff is based around perspective/interpretation, especially when it is reflected in the Radiant orders and their interpretations of Honour reflected through the words they must speak and the personalities of their associate spren, which i think was Brandon's goal perhaps. In regards the second question and in relation to why i think certain spren pick candidates (in my opinion anyway), i don't think it is a fact of whether the person is 'good' or not, but more if the Order's relative Ideals come more naturally to the candidate (and/or a greatly capable of embodying these Ideals) then a bond more likely will form and I feel the bond's purpose (aside from desolations and stuff) helps bring those Ideals out more/refines the person into something more clear-cut. There is just so many ways to look at the situation so I expect we'll see a bit more clarity of the whole situation once there are more members of each order about, if not a little before  

Edited June 28, 2015 by ParadoxSpren

[moptop]

Thanks for all the responses. I really like what Oudeis's explanation, and especially that his theory has very clear evidence from Shallan.

 

I also want to respond to this post:

 

Good people can absolutely agonize over clear-cut, right-or-wrong decisions. And that's even assuming that you'll only ever be presented with the opportunity to decide right from wrong; what about the times when you just have two or more kinds of wrong to pick from?

 

Yes, of course good people can dread decisions even that they know are right. My problem was (according to initial understanding of this episode), that a Windrunner will always know if he had made the right decision. And by agonizing I didn't mean agonizing once one had made the choice - I meant agonizing while making the choice.

[DreamEternal]

A windrunner won't know he made the right choice, because as both me and Moogle pointed out, just because the Windrunner sense of honor dictates something as right doens't mean one can't disagree with it. Hell, many orders probably have mutualy exclusive moralities, and there are the people who believe the ends justify the means too, and people who disagree about wich those "ends" should be, and infinite equaly valid moralities out there. If Kaladin decides he must prevent something horrible from happening, something he wants to stop for the good of the world, not selfishness or personal gain, but his oaths stand on the way, he will have to decide if he would rather betray his ideals and kill Syl or let it happen without moving a finger.

[maxal she/her]

A windrunner won't know he made the right choice, because as both me and Moogle pointed out, just because the Windrunner sense of honor dictates something as right doens't mean one can't disagree with it. Hell, many orders probably have mutualy exclusive moralities, and there are the people who believe the ends justify the means too, and people who disagree about wich those "ends" should be, and infinite equaly valid moralities out there. If Kaladin decides he must prevent something horrible from happening, something he wants to stop for the good of the world, not selfishness or personal gain, but his oaths stand on the way, he will have to decide if he would rather betray his ideals and kill Syl or let it happen without moving a finger.

 

I believe you are underlining why there were 10 orders and not one. Windrunners alone would not be able to save the world, no matter how honorable they are because the "right thing" often conflicts with their oaths. 

 

As for the Elhokar incident, I do agree with the previous commentary stating Kaladin broke his words which had caused Syl's death. However, I also believe Kaladin could not have carried on with the assassination of Elhokar without harming Syl. It was not up to Kaladin to decide if Elhokar deserved death, a fact underlined earlier by Syl herself when Kaladin thinks on killing Amaram. He is no judge. He is a protector, so whether he embraces his role or he stops being a Radiant. As for the sprens, they take huge risks in granting the Nahel bond: I'd wager they try to chose good prospects. 

 

I also agree with the statement Radiants need to follow their philosophy because they believe it and not because it gives them access to powers. That being said, Kaladin was ill-at-ease with his decision to murder Elhokar. He ponder long and hard and never truly was convinced it was the right course of action, thus highlighting he is a true Windrunners. In the end, he could not do it. He did not stop because he made conflicting promises, he stop himself because it was wrong for him to behave this way.

[Numuhuku he/him]

 

According to Kaladin, Elkohar is not innocent, and killing him will save the lives of countless others! So what is he doing wrong here?=

You do realize that's the exact same logic Taravangian used to justify setting up an assembly line murder clinic, and to have Szeth go around the world slaughtering kings and nobility? It all does make sense to him. If he can get enough death rattles, and if he can destabilize things enough to take control, then maybe he can save more people than he killed.  Remember. Plenty of people have acknowledged that Elothkar's main flaw is being greatly inadequate* for his job, and not being innately viscous or cruel. It's not THAT great of a leap to go to get from Elothkar to what Taravangian was doing.

 

An..."understandable" course of action, but is it one that you can see the Knights Radiants condoning? 

 

Journey Before Destination, after-all.

 

*It probably also worth pointing out that on his strong days, Taravangian came up with the "brilliant" idea  of all the inadequate people in the city euthanizing themselves. 

Edited June 29, 2015 by Numuhuku

[Edgedancer he/him]

You do realize that's the exact same logic Taravangian used to justify setting up an assembly line murder clinic, and to have Szeth go around the world slaughtering kings and nobility? It all does make sense to him. If he can get enough death rattles, and if he can destabilize things enough to take control, then maybe he can save more people than he killed.  Remember. Plenty of people have acknowledged that Elothkar's main flaw is being greatly inadequate* for his job, and not being innately viscous or cruel. It's not THAT great of a leap to go to get from Elothkar to what Taravangian was doing.

 

An..."understandable" course of action, but is it one that you can see the Knights Radiants condoning? 

 

Journey Before Destination, after-all.

 

*It probably also worth pointing out that on his strong days, Taravangian came up with the "brilliant" idea  of all the inadequate people in the city euthanizing themselves. 

Funny that you make this comparision given that the dear "patriot" Graves that hatched the whole assassination plot was a follower of the Diagram, even though from what he said he was acting on his own time and not there on order of Taravagian.

[DreamEternal]

I believe you are underlining why there were 10 orders and not one. Windrunners alone would not be able to save the world, no matter how honorable they are because the "right thing" often conflicts with their oaths.

Partialy, but in truth I was underlining that it is possible to break one's oaths and think it was the right choice: what if a member of one order has to do something against his oaths to save the world? Generaly the orders complement one another, but imagine if that wasn't possible, if the fates of many rested in the shoulders of one Radiant. Then it would be a truly hard choice, don't you think?

Edited June 30, 2015 by CognitivePulsePattern

[The Sovereign]

Once someone becomes a Knight Radiant (which automatically means that he is a good person), and then understands this fact (that doing the wrong thing kills his/her spren), then where is the challenge to do the right thing? If one notices his spren dying, then what he is doing is obviously wrong, and he needs to change! It just seems to me that surgebinders, specifically Windrunners, have no choice to do the wrong thing, ever, or they will lose their abilities, not to mention killing their best friend.

 

Or am I wrong? Do I just simply not understand how the Ideals work? 

 

Thanks in advance, guys!

 

Oudeis did an exceptional job answering your question but I just want to touch on this point a little more. Like so many things in the Cosmere self image and perspective play a large part in this. I wouldn't agree with the idea that being a Knight automatically makes you a good person, simply that you were a broken person who met with the ideals of an order. Lets use the Skybreakers as an example. By their ideals the best thing you can do is be in absolute correspondence with the law regardless of "morality". By their own perspective this may be fulfilling the ideal of being a "good person" but it certainly would not fall in line with other people's definition.

[AerionBFII he/him]

I swear the fact that Kal had two conflicting oaths bothered Syl more than the fact Kal was considering treason and murder.