The interpretation of the Oaths

[Calderis]

This has come up a lot lately, so rather than continue hijacking other threads, I'll just start a new thread and be the guy who says we're all wrong about the Radiants. 

To start here are the WoBs that @Extesian was kind enough to dig up for me in another thread. 

Quote

Q: If Gavilar was still alive, would he most likely have aligned himself to or taken actions most similar to Dalinar, Amaram or Taravangian? In other words, which of the three is best acting out his will? 
 
A: I can say he would align with one of them most certainly, but I want to RAFO this for now. (Though I might have made it clear elsewhere and not be remembering.)

Quote

Q: The visions Dalinar gets in WoK always struck me as odd - you don't just look at the past, you are able to act within this experience. Now we know that Gavilar was also on the way to being a Bondsmith - was he acting in a different way? Were the visions only basically the same but different in the end depending on the personal reactions? Is this something like a test?
A: He did see the same visions. They were the same thing. But... I will say that his reaction to them were very different from Dalinar's reactions to them. Anyway it was difficult for the Stormfather without a bond to determine/to tell the difference between very easily. When Spren are bonded, they gain a lot more ability to understand the world around then, so you'll find out soon more stuff about this in the third book.

Quote

Q: The question kind of rooted because, Wyndle in the short story is always saying that he’s a cultivationspren, he doesn’t like [...]. I kind of got the idea that each order had a different Shard.
A: That is a good thing to think, but that is not how it is. Some of them self-identify more in certain ways. Syl is an honorspren, that’s what they call a honorspren, they self-identify as the closest to Honor. Is that true? Well, I don’t know. For instance, you might talk to different spren, who are like, no, highspren are like “We’re the ones most like Honor. We are the ones that keep oaths the best. Those honorspren will let their people break their oaths if they think it’s for a good cause. That’s not Honor-like.” There would be disagreement.
Q: Are you saying that the spren’s view of themself influences how they work?
A: Oh yeah, and humans’ view of them because spren are pieces of Investiture who have gained sapience, or sentience for the smaller spren, through human perception of those forces. For instance, whether or not Kaladin is keeping an oath is up to what Syl and Kaladin think is keeping that oath. It is not related to capital-T Truth, what is actually keeping the oath. Two windrunners can disagree on whether an oath has been kept or not.

Quote

ANDREWHB

Is Niccolo Machiavelli's political theory, the ends justify the means, incompatible with the Knights Radiants' First Oath?

BRANDON SANDERSON

No. Although many of the Orders of KRs would find Machiavelli's theory that the ends justify the means incompatible with additional Oaths and/or values of that Order, there are some Orders who could accept a Machiavellian. Brandon said that the Skybreakers where a Machiavellian could find a home.

QUESTION

As Brandon was signing my books, I asked if the Elsecallers would also accept a Machiavellian.

BRANDON SANDERSON

Yes.

So the primary argument we always hear for why someone can't be a Radiant, is that their actions conflict with the first ideal as presented to us as readers by Teft. The idea that killing should be a last resort, the weak must be protected, and the ends never justify the means. 

This is used to argue why Taravangian/Amaram/(insert character you don't like here) can't become a Radiant. 

That last WoB though, disproves the core principle of that argument. If a person followed the real world (satirical) teachings of Machiavelli, they would essentially be Taravangian. No matter how despicable or disreputable the action, the ends justify the means. And that would be allowable with the Skybreakers. Which means that according to the Skybreakers, as long as you obey the law, your actions are immaterial. 

So the core argument for the first ideal barring those we consider dishonorable from becoming Radiants is invalid.

 

Taking this into account. The other WoBs show that all of the Oaths are open to interpretation, not only to the Radiants but to the Spren, and that those interpretations are not consistent within a single order. Two members of a single order can disagree on Whether an oath has been kept or broken. 

I believe that this means that the general consensus on what it means to be a Radiant is flawed. The Radiants are of Honor. We have assumed that Honorable and moral are the same thing and this is the root of the problem. 

Honor in this instance seems only to require that the Radiant follows a code, any code, of conduct, and does not stray from it. This is why Nale considers Szeth ideal for the Skybreakers. It does not matter that the things Szeth did are horrific. He did them by following a chosen code of conduct perfectly, even to the detriment of himself and the world. 

By this measure anyone who believes that what they are doing is the correct course, no matter how heinous, could become a Radiant. As long as they have chosen a path, and can delude themselves into thinking it is right, or necessary, or inevitable, and they do not stray from that path, they can become a Radiant if the order they join has oaths that can be twisted to fit their belief. 

In short, our assumptions that Radiants are inherently good is wrong.

Edit: additional WoBs. 

Quote

RICK

1.Are there any other sentient spren like Syl, if not are there any Spren capable of becoming sentient or is she purposefully unique?

2.If so, what are the conditions that must be met for a spren to become sentient?

BRANDON SANDERSON

Ok Cool.

1. There are other sentient spren.

2. There are many more who could become sentient, there were choices that were made that we will get into that were made by some spren that, that involved-

There were certain choices that were made that influenced this, so yes, that was a very detailed and specific question, you did a good job and so I will give you your answer that there are others like Syl that could become and there are some that are sentient already

RICK

Would that also mean that certain spren had an alignment or would some spren be catered toward good or evil or not?

BRANDON SANDERSON

They're creatures of nature and so good and evil aren't as, as big a deal to them. There are some that may be put in that sort of alignments, certainly honorspren are going to be of a certain type, but there are many spren of many different temperaments and they are kind of aligned to their temperament, having to do with who they are and what they are.

Quote

Can Honor spren, or any other type of Knight Radiant spren, be evil?

BRANDON SANDERSON

Yes, because I don't call the shards good and evil. There are no good and evil shards in my opinion, like and so, what evil and what's not evil can totally have spren of honor that you would consider evil. They have free will, but they are much more limited. It is very hard, or impossible, for them to lie but they can be cruel.

 

Edited September 20, 2017 by Calderis

[+Extesian]

Good summary. I’ve always believed the first ideal is purely an ideal, while the others are actually oaths. And that there is no consequence to ‘breaking’ the first ideal, because it’s aspirational rather than binding. I’ve also always been baffled that people talk about Honor as though that’s synonymous with good. All Honor means is that you have a belief system that regulates your behaviour and you stick to it (e.g. you don’t have to make any promises, but if you do, you’d better stormin’ keep them). I’ve had a going-nowhere-battle when people have talked about whether a person is ‘right’ to be a Radiant, to convince them that there is no right person to be a Radiant, only a right person to belong to a particular order. So hopefully this nice little summary will kick off some good comments J

[Calderis]

2 minutes ago, Extesian said:

Good summary. I’ve always believed the first ideal is purely an ideal, while the others are actually oaths. And that there is no consequence to ‘breaking’ the first ideal, because it’s aspirational rather than binding. I’ve also always been baffled that people talk about Honor as though that’s synonymous with good. All Honor means is that you have a belief system that regulates your behaviour and you stick to it (e.g. you don’t have to make any promises, but if you do, you’d better stormin’ keep them). I’ve had a going-nowhere-battle when people have talked about whether a person is ‘right’ to be a Radiant, to convince them that there is no right person to be a Radiant, only a right person to belong to a particular order. So hopefully this nice little summary will kick off some good comments J

I really hope so, to relate it in D&D terms, you can be perfectly honorable and be lawful evil. 

I'm tired of people conflating honor and good. They aren't the same thing in our world, so why would they be the same in the Cosmere, where Honor, like Odium, is separated from the other intents that gave it context? 

[Megasif]

Thanks for that. It does make some things more clear. We do know that not all the orders got along with each other very well. Perhaps, each of them were doing things they thought were 'right', but another order disagreed with them. And both would have been 'right' according to their interpretation. If this is true, then I can't help but think about the leadership. Do we know if there was a single leader figure for the radiants? Each order had a Herald overlooking them, of course. How far did  order and rank go with the radiants in that case. Were they obliged to obey their herald no matter what? Were the bondsmiths then in charge of them? Since they were based in Urithiru, was there like a Council which made decisions.

I mean, it's obvious that there was definitely some sort of order in the radiants in previous desolations. Otherwise, orders with differing opinions would be in conflict with each other often. And more importantly, they would not be able to defeat the voidbringers if there wasn't some sort of organisation. I know there's Honor, but we don't know when he was killed by Odium. Or if there even was direct communication from Honor to Heralds after the initial Oathpact. I hope I'm not sidetracking too much here 

Edited July 6, 2017 by Megasif

[Toaster Retribution]

First off, good summary, nice job! You would get an upvote if I hadn't run out of them. 

I dont think people use the ideals as a means for arguing against characters specifically because they dislike them though. I made the ends justify the means argument against Amaram and Mr. T a couple of days ago, but I actually like both Amaram and Mr. T. 

But whatever, now we cant really use that argument anymore, and it certainly opensnew possibilities when it comes to speculation on who the new Radiants will be.

Edited July 6, 2017 by Toaster Retribution

[ParadoxicalZen]

This reminds me of a quote/topic where the reasoning for why there is more than one order was discussed a long time ago (or something similar to that extent, it may have been just a few WoBs I recall seeing) and it mainly falls back to the Journey before Destination section about what it means to actually be Honourable in this case (hooray for Brandon for subverting the fantasy genre). There's always more than one way to resolve a situation, hence why each Order focuses on different things.

[kari-no-sugata]

6 hours ago, Calderis said:

By this measure anyone who believes that what they are doing is the correct course, no matter how heinous, could become a Radiant. As long as they have chosen a path, and can delude themselves into thinking it is right, or necessary, or inevitable, and they do not stray from that path, they can become a Radiant if the order they join has oaths that can be twisted to fit their belief. 

It is not correct that it only matters what the person / Radiant thinks. Going back to a WoB that you quoted:

Quote

A: Oh yeah, and humans’ view of them because spren are pieces of Investiture who have gained sapience, or sentience for the smaller spren, through human perception of those forces. For instance, whether or not Kaladin is keeping an oath is up to what Syl and Kaladin think is keeping that oath. It is not related to capital-T Truth, what is actually keeping the oath. Two windrunners can disagree on whether an oath has been kept or not.

Both the person and the spren have to believe that the Oaths are being kept. In WoR, Kaladin believed he was justified in doing certain things (even while having reservations) but Syl disagreed which is what weakened the bond.

This is not to say that there aren't loopholes. It's also worth remembering that the Radiants (or rather spren based Surgebinders) are pretty much an accident. There's no reason to believe it could or should be perfect. The way I see it, what is now considered to be the common first Oath was established quite late and is part of what made them the "Knights Radiant" (an organisation with a common code of conduct/ethics for all Surgebinders) rather than merely a bunch of Surgebinders. I don't know how that first Oath was added but I suspect it had to be something that all Orders could agree to and since there were big differences between the Orders that meant it had to meaningful enough to be useful and vague enough that all could agree upon it.

[Calderis]

1 hour ago, kari-no-sugata said:

Both the person and the spren have to believe that the Oaths are being kept. In WoR, Kaladin believed he was justified in doing certain things (even while having reservations) but Syl disagreed which is what weakened the bond.

You're totally right and I mentioned the Spren interpretation matters directly after the WoBs. The reason I said things the way that I did is that I really think it has a lot more to do with the person than the Spren. 

In the Kaladin example, Syl wasn't upset that Kaladin was going to play a part in Elhokars death. She was upset that he'd created a situation that made it impossible for him to keep his promises. If he hadn't promised to protect Dalinar's family, Elhokar included, and he believed that Elhokar's death would protect people, I don't think Syl would have had a problem with it. 

Syl states in tWoK that all Spren are basically the same individual. So variations between different spren of the same type have to come from the person they are bonded too. Their souls are intermingled, and the sentience of the Spren is gained from that. It has to have an effect on their thought process. That's why I think as long as the person fulfills their oaths and truly believes it,  the Spren will agree. 

[kari-no-sugata]

See the end of chapter 18 in WoR where Syl asks Kaladin "Who were you protecting?" after he felt the Stormlight drain from him.

[Calderis]

2 minutes ago, kari-no-sugata said:

See the end of chapter 18 in WoR where Syl asks Kaladin "Who were you protecting?" after he felt the Stormlight drain from him.

And as I said, if he believed honestly that Elhokars death would protect innocents like Moash's grandparents, and didn't have a conflicting promise, it wouldn't have been an issue. 

[The One Who Connects]

8 hours ago, Megasif said:

Perhaps, each of them were doing things they thought were 'right', but another order disagreed with them. And both would have been 'right' according to their interpretation. If this is true, then I can't help but think about the leadership. Do we know if there was a single leader figure for the Radiants?

Somewhat. Keeping unity is the responsibility of exactly who you'd expect.

Quote

I got a hint in my signed book from Sanderson. He welcomed me to the Knight's radiant order of Bondsmiths and assigned me to "keep the peace for All". And then he said, "That should be a big enough assignment for you!" From that I glean that Bondsmiths are charged in some way with keeping the peace among the Radiants.

---

8 hours ago, Megasif said:

I know there's Honor, but we don't know when he was killed by Odium.

He survived at least up to the Recreance.

[Toaster Retribution]

If I understand @Calderis correctly, then the spren are basically a second conscience, with the ability to speak. The thing the human thinks is right is what they think is right as well, but if the human feel that they are doing wrong, even if they dont want to admit it, the spren will tell them so. Does this in any way have something to do with human perception, since they are cognitive beings, or is it just because of Connection?

[Calderis]

12 minutes ago, Toaster Retribution said:

If I understand @Calderis correctly, then the spren are basically a second conscience, with the ability to speak. The thing the human thinks is right is what they think is right as well, but if the human feel that they are doing wrong, even if they dont want to admit it, the spren will tell them so. Does this in any way have something to do with human perception, since they are cognitive beings, or is it just because of Connection?

I'll try to dig up the WoB that makes me think this (it's not actually addressing the Oaths, but the shape-shifting weapons. It talks about how the Spren can't really read the Radiants mind, but because they are linked through the cracks in the Radiants soul, the Spren can intuitively become what the Radiant wants/needs). 

Basically though, I think that in the Cognitive Realm the Nahel spren are essentially, like most other spren, multiple copies of the same individual. The sentience and individuality that a spren gains in the Physical Realm is a product of the mixing of souls that occurs. This makes the Spren, while still being it's own type and subject to the rules that drew it to the Radiant in the first place, far more likely to interpret the Oaths in the same was as the person they are bonded to.

So yes, they act as an external conscience, helping to guide the Radiant down the path of their particular oaths, and forcing them to recognize conflicts they may have overlooked (like Kaladin's conflicting promises). Their judgment of things that are not an arbitrary rule though I think will be skewed due to their essence being mixed with the soul of the person they're bonded to. 

Does that make sense? 

Edited July 6, 2017 by Calderis

[+Extesian]

Its bedtime so I'll think on this but

Quote

YULERULE

I also asked about the connection between the spren and surgebinder, such that the spren turns into what the surgebinder wants, like In Edgedancer, Lift turns into a bar of metal and into a shardfork. Wyndle himself isn't "in tune" with Lift, so his turning into something that she needs with no prior warning ...

BRANDON SANDERSON

Since the spren fill in the soul, they're connected on that level, so like their minds are separated, but since the souls are melded/connected/same that the spren can turn into stuff the Surgebinder wants. This is heavily paraphrased.

Source

 

[Calderis]

6 minutes ago, Extesian said:

Its bedtime so I'll think on this but

 

You're an informationspren and I love you. 

[DocHoliday]

17 minutes ago, Calderis said:

I'll try to dig up the WoB that makes me think this (it's not actually addressing the Oaths, but the shape-shifting weapons. It talks about how the Spren can't really read the Radiants mind, but because they are linked through the cracks in the Radiants soul, the Spren can intuitively become what the Radiant wants/needs). 

Basically though, I think that in the Cognitive Realm the Nahel spren are essentially, like most other spren, multiple copies of the same individual. The sentience and individuality that a spren gains in the Physical Realm is a product of the mixing of souls that occurs. This makes the Spren, while still being it's own type and subject to the rules that drew it to the Radiant in the first place, far more likely to interpret the Oaths in the same was as the person they are bonded to.

So yes, they act as an external conscience, helping to guide the Radiant down the path of their particular oaths, and forcing them to recognize conflicts they may have overlooked (like Kaladin's conflicting promises). Their judgment of things that are not an arbitrary rule though I think will be skewed due to their essence being mixed with the soul of the person they're bonded to. 

Does that make sense? 

I followed your thought process. Something like a second-self or consciousness in  your mind. Or perhaps a better example would be: Yourself looking back at your memories, perhaps when you failed to be true to yourself. Essentially, you're the same person now as you were then; but your different to, and have a different perspective of the events going on. I mean, how many times have we looked back at the past, and wish we'd seen things differently so we could do  things differently?

I'm having difficulty putting it into words lol

Edited July 6, 2017 by DocHoliday

[gbazz4]

Life before death

The Radiant seeks to defend life, always. He never kills unnecessarily, and never risks his own life for frivolous reasons. Living is harder than dying. The Radiant's duty is to live.

Strength before weakness

All men are weak at some time in their lives. The Radiant protects those who are weak, and uses his strength for others. Strength does not make one capable of rule; it makes one capable of service.

Journey before destination

There are always several ways to achieve a goal. Failure is preferable to winning through unjust means. Protecting ten innocents is not worth killing one. In the end, all men die. How you lived will be far more important to the Almighty than what you accomplished.

I feel like i needed to add this to the discussion of the oaths for the sake of completeness. This is the description of the 1st ideal and what it means that Teft gives to Kaladin.

I think this largely is where we get the debate from. Though i have seen great points about this in this thread and the other about this being the interpretation of the 1st ideal by the Envisagers and so there could be more flexibility. Plus the words of Brandon give a lot to think about in how flexible the oaths are. Thanks to @Extesian and @Calderis for their contributions to the thread and the discussion on this issue. 

[Ammanas]

Sorry if this has been discussed before, but can a Radiant be faithfull to the first oath as long as they do not try to commit suicide  (life before death) and always try to become stronger, faster, better etc. (Strength before weakness)? We always try to ascribe one set of interpretation to something, but that is the same trap Dalinor fell into (remember "unite them" and how the visions "told" him to trust Sadeas) It's been mentioned before that one can be honorable only as long as they do not break their own interpretation of the ideals.

Edited July 6, 2017 by Ammanas

[Calderis]

9 minutes ago, Ammanas said:

Sorry if this has been discussed before, but can a Radiant be faithfull to the first oath as long as they do not try to commit suicide  (life before death) and always try to become stronger, faster, better etc. (Strength before weakness)? We always try to ascribe one set of interpretation to something, but that is the same trap Dalinor fell into (remember "unite them" and how the visions "told" him to trust Sadeas) It's been mentioned before that one can be honorable only as long as they do not break their own interpretation of the ideals.

I don't know how flexible the Oaths are, and I think that the hard limits are going to be attributed to the Spren themselves. 

I think in any interpretation, suicide is going to be a violation, self sacrifice on the other hand... 

Gaining power, whether literal or figurative I think could definitely be contained in the second line.

And the last line, Journey before destination, is in my opinion, the most vague of the three. 

Until we've seen the way all 10 spren types function, I don't think we can rule anything out completely. 

[Pagerunner]

I think Teft's understanding of the First Oath is very flawed. Like what happens in many religious instances today, I think the Envisagers assigned new meaning to the particular phrases, which actually have nothing to do with the original meaning of the Oath when it was spoken by the Radiants.

The First Oath applies to all Radiants, the only one that does so. But they are not united in action; the epigraphs in WoR imply conflict among the Orders, specifically Windrunners and Skybreakers. The Radiants are united in mission, in the fight against Odium, so I think the First Oath has more to do with their grand purpose than their behavior.

I've been struck by a similarity between the First Oath and wedding vows. Specifically, the whole "in sickness and in health" bit, where it's a commitment to both situations. I think it's notable that the First Oath isn't "life until death" or "journey until destination," but that Radiants may be committing themselves to the defeat of Odium even in their afterlives. Whether it's their Journey of Strength during their Life (a.k.a. being a Radiant on Roshar) or their Destination of Weakness after their Death (if their Cognitive Shadows help the Heralds in some fashion), Radiants promise their very souls to the fight.

So, that's my interpretation, that the First Oath binds a Radiant's Cognitive Shadow. Modern understandings of the First Oath have made it into guidelines for daily life, but I don't think that's what the Oath originally meant. (That's also what I think the secret was that broke the Radiants in the first place; they didn't know what they were actually signing up for until after they were dead.)

[Calderis]

Digging through WoBs I discovered this gem. I'll include the whole thing for completeness but it's the second half that I want to comment on. 

http://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=755#14

Spoilered for length

Spoiler

RICK

1.Are there any other sentient spren like Syl, if not are there any Spren capable of becoming sentient or is she purposefully unique?

2.If so, what are the conditions that must be met for a spren to become sentient?

BRANDON SANDERSON

Ok Cool.

1. There are other sentient spren.

2. There are many more who could become sentient, there were choices that were made that we will get into that were made by some spren that, that involved-

There were certain choices that were made that influenced this, so yes, that was a very detailed and specific question, you did a good job and so I will give you your answer that there are others like Syl that could become and there are some that are sentient already

RICK

Would that also mean that certain spren had an alignment or would some spren be catered toward good or evil or not?

BRANDON SANDERSON

They're creatures of nature and so good and evil aren't as, as big a deal to them. There are some that may be put in that sort of alignments, certainly honorspren are going to be of a certain type, but there are many spren of many different temperaments and they are kind of aligned to their temperament, having to do with who they are and what they are.

TAGS

intelligence ,  spren ,  nahel bond ,  stormlight archive ,  syl

So if they are aligned more with a temperament than a morality, I think that opens up the Oaths interpretation quite a bit. 

[Calderis]

Here's another good one. 

http://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=1158#31

Quote

Can Honor spren, or any other type of Knight Radiant spren, be evil?

BRANDON SANDERSON

Yes, because I don't call the shards good and evil. There are no good and evil shards in my opinion, like and so, what evil and what's not evil can totally have spren of honor that you would consider evil. They have free will, but they are much more limited. It is very hard, or impossible, for them to lie but they can be cruel.

 

[FrogKnight]

On 7/5/2017 at 10:01 PM, Calderis said:

This is used to argue why Taravangian/Amaram/(insert character you don't like here) can't become a Radiant.

I kind of agree and disagree. In all honesty, I do not believe Taravangian can become a Radiant because he knows what made all the Knights break their oaths. That knowledge is what will keep him from becoming a Radiant (if he didn't have that information, I would agree that there could be a small possibility for this).

Amaram on the other hand seems deluded. From all the orders we have seen so far, all of the knights have been pretty self aware. Only way I can see Amaram possibly becoming a Knight is if he realizes that his actions so far (not the betrayal of Kaladin, but the actions that brought the desolation) have been wrong.

So yes, I agree that anyone can still be a Radiant but Amaram and Taravangian will most likely never join the order.

Edited August 5, 2017 by FrogKnight

[Calderis]

@FrogKnight Unless that secret undermines his goals I don't see why that would matter. He already views everything he's doing as heinous and putting him beyond redemption. If he viewed becoming a Radiant as an advantage I don't think he'd hesitate. 

The secret, whatever it may be, stopped the Radiants presumably because they thought abandonment of the Oaths served the greater good. 

Taravangian's only goal is the survival of Roshar. The "greater good" is that and that alone. 

[Toaster Retribution]

2 hours ago, FrogKnight said:

Amaram on the other hand seems deluded. From all the orders we have seen so far, all of the knights have been pretty self aware. Only way I can see Amaram possibly becoming a Knight is if he realizes that his actions so far (not the betrayal of Kaladin, but the actions that brought the desolation) have been wrong.

Amaram does realize that his actions concerning Desolations are wrong, but he finds that the prize makes up for the cost. He mentions in his letter to Restares that he is bothered by the amount of people dying during the events to come.