[OB] SO GLAD HE'S DEAD

[WhiteLeeopard]

I think we already have a protagonist clash with a character that he hates and will likely have to learn to work with him: Dalinar and Szeth. Adding another would be too repetitive. As to how Kaladin deals with someone that hurt him deeply in the past, we may see it soon with Roshone. Amaram seems pointed to either take over Sadeas princedom, or be representative of SoH.

[Calderis]

Adolin's actions and Moash's are not the same at all. 

Moash has never spoken to Elhokar. He knows what he was told about his grandparents and blames Elhokar and decided what he wanted to happen before he was ever in his presence. 

This continues after he meets Elhokar, sees him as the whiny childish failure of king that he is, and decides that his earlier opinions were correct without ever trying to figure out what really happened and plots a way to kill him without being given punished. 

Adolin saw Sadeas in action. He had conversations with him about what Sadeas was going to do, and during one of those conversations Adolin snapped. There was no pre-planning. There was no consideration of committing the act in a way to escape punishment. There was no forethought whatsoever. 

These are not the same actions at all. 

As to Amaram... The main is self deluded. The guilt and shame he shows in his reaction to Kaladin's words during the murder and branding shows that he recognizes the truth in those words. He believes what he is doing is wrong, and lies to himself to do it anyway. 

I personally don't believe anyone can attract a spren while they are contradicting their own believed code. Amaram's outward mask of honor exists for a reason, that is what he believes is right and what he wants the world to see. If he were doing the exact same actions, and truly believed in the rightness of them, I think would be fine to attract a spren, because Honor isn't about good or evil, it's about staying true to a code. 

He intentionally breaks the code he believes in and his sense of guilt shows that.

[Amanuensis]

2 minutes ago, Calderis said:

 

As to Amaram... The main is self deluded. The guilt and shame he shows in his reaction to Kaladin's words during the murder and branding shows that he recognizes the truth in those words. He believes what he is doing is wrong, and lies to himself to do it anyway. 

I personally don't believe anyone can attract a spren while they are contradicting their own believed code. Amaram's outward mask of honor exists for a reason, that is what he believes is right and what he wants the world to see. If he were doing the exact same actions, and truly believed in the rightness of them, I think would be fine to attract a spren, because Honor isn't about good or evil, it's about staying true to a code. 

He intentionally breaks the code he believes in and his sense of guilt shows that.

I definitely agree, which is why he's not a Radiant yet. But I won't rule out his capacity to learn from his mistakes, or Kaladin specifically. Then again, Leeo brings up a fair point. Having both Szeth and Amaram go through too similar character progressions is unlikely. Think we'll just have to see.

[+eveorjoy]

I am not saying Amaram could never be a Radiant. What I am saying is Amaram is a long way from being one and simply regretting killing innocent people is not enough. He would have to make a complete fundamental change in character to become a Radiant and this goes beyond good and evil. Killing innocent soldiers, even regretfully, is against the ideals of the Knights Radiant.

TWoK from the chapter 59 "An Honor" Page 593. Bold again added by me.

Quote

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.

Amaram would need to accept the oath of "Journey before destination." He would have to see why killing people for what he believed was the great good was wrong. Finding out Kaladin was a Radiant all along would not be enough. In fact, Amaram already knew that Kaladin was the reason Adolin could walk after being tricked into fighting four shard-bearers. Kaladin already proved useful Radiant or not. Kaladin's usefulness is not important. Killing four innocent spearmen to save thousand more is against the first ideal of the Knights Radiant.

Now back to Adolin. Adolin's act was an act of revenge. It is the same as Moash's, however, Adolin may be redeemed where Moash may not. I am not going to go over every instance in the book where Adolin is angry with Sadeas, but if you compare his words and actions to how Moash talks of Elhokar and Kaladin of Amaram you will see the similarities. Revenge is often prompted by what appears to be justified. Yes, Sadeas threatened to continue to cause problems for the Kholin family, but Adolin did not logically think, I'm going to take this matter into my own hands. He was furious and Sadeas had finally pushed him too far. Adolin's actions were a crime of passion. In anger Adolin took revenge for the death of his men and the acts against him and his father. It might look like justice because we hated Sadeas. Attacking Elhokar may look like revenge because we like him but the acts and motives are the same. The system will not deal with this person so I must. In truth both Adolin and Moash are wrong. In fact, Adolin has less justification than Moash. Roshone has already been punished for the death of Moash's parents. The system did fail him. Adolin however, could have kept his temper and told his father what Sadeas intended. They then could have worked together to find a way to deal with it. Heck Elhokar could have brought Sadeas up on charges for numerous reasons. Elhokar even suggested as much at the end of TWoKs. Killing Sadeas wasn't the only way to deal with him it was just the easiest way. 

  

[Calderis]

4 minutes ago, eveorjoy said:

TWoK from the chapter 59 "An Honor" Page 593. Bold again added by me.

This is a single interpretation of what that means. Gavilar as a proto bondsmiths shows that that is not necessarily the only interpretation. We also know that a machiavellian "ends just the means" mentality would be accepted in both the Skybreakers and Elsecallers. 

He would just need to believe he was right, not that it was morally correct.

Edit: Rather than search out supporting WoBs, here's a thread that lists a good chunk of them right at the start

 

Edited August 31, 2017 by Calderis

[+eveorjoy]

3 minutes ago, Calderis said:

This is a single interpretation of what that means. Gavilar as a proto bondsmiths shows that that is not necessarily the only interpretation. We also know that a machiavellian "ends just the means" mentality would be accepted in both the Skybreakers and Elsecallers. 

He would just need to believe he was right, not that it was morally correct. 

I think we will need to agree to disagree. However, the Skybreakers would not justify murder for a shardblade. Amaram's  act of killing and stealing the shardblade was against the law and therefore unjust. As for the Elsecallers, what evidence do you have that they believe the ends justifies the means. If it is Jasnah killing those men who were about to steal from and kill her you need to read over those chapters again. Shallan and Jasnah determined her actions were unethical, not unjustified nor amoral. 

[Andy92]

12 minutes ago, eveorjoy said:

However, the Skybreakers would not justify murder for a shardblade.

Edgedancer Spoilers:

Spoiler

Well, Nale did see killing proto-Radiants as a justification for preventing the return of the Voidbringers/Desolations. He seems sorrowful for what he's done at the end of Edgedancer, but before that, he was definitely using murder as an end to his means. 

I think these conversations are definitely more gray and less black and white. 

 

Edited August 31, 2017 by Andy92

[Calderis]

15 minutes ago, eveorjoy said:

I think we will need to agree to disagree. However, the Skybreakers would not justify murder for a shardblade. Amaram's  act of killing and stealing the shardblade was against the law and therefore unjust. As for the Elsecallers, what evidence do you have that they believe the ends justifies the means. If it is Jasnah killing those men who were about to steal from and kill her you need to read over those chapters again. Shallan and Jasnah determined her actions were unethical, not unjustified nor amoral. 

This WoB is the basis

http://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=1181#26

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.

The Skybreakers would not condone murder, obviously. It is illegal. If they found a way to kill the Shardbearer legally then there would be no issue. The Skybreakers hold law above all else, and the actions we've seen in book show that manipulation of the law, and use of loopholes is perfectly valid. All that matters is that it is legal. 

Similarly, the Inkspren hold logic above all else. Jasnah's hiring of assassins and willingness to consider killing Elhokar' s wife, Aesudan, was not a deterant to attracting Ivory. 

Radiant does not mean "good guy" 

Edited August 31, 2017 by Calderis

[Crucible of Shards]

22 hours ago, 1stBondsmith said:

Didn't any of you notice the part where Sadeas asked Dalinar "Not again. Who did you promise this time?" Dalinar has stopped the spoiling and slaving before. Looks to me like he uses these promises as an excuse to stop the practice more than once. He proposed the terms to the archer, and enforced them quickly without the archer's approval.

I think he had just learned what works for controlling people and getting what he wants. I doubt he used the archer as an excuse to save the villagers. He had already killed the heir which was his prime bargaining chip, so he settled for the next best option. If the heir had been alive, I doubt things would have fared well for the village.

Edited August 31, 2017 by Crucible of Shards
Verb tense

[+eveorjoy]

33 minutes ago, Andy92 said:

Edgedancer Spoilers:

  Reveal hidden contents

Well, Nale did see killing proto-Radiants as a justification for preventing the return of the Voidbringers/Desolations. He seems sorrowful for what he's done at the end of Edgedancer, but before that, he was definitely using murder as an end to his means. 

I think these conversations are definitely more gray and less black and white. 

 

I agree to a point. It is a gray area, but the Skybreakers and Nale always needed a legal reason to kill someone and the legal authority to do so. Look at what Nale says to his people in both WoR and Edgedancer. Nale always acted within the law. Amaram did not. 

30 minutes ago, Calderis said:

This WoB is the basis

http://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=1181#26

The Skybreakers would not condone murder, obviously. It is illegal. If they found a way to kill the Shardbearer legally then there would be no issue. The Skybreakers hold law above all else, and the actions we've seen in book show that manipulation of the law, and use of loopholes is perfectly valid. All that matters is that it is legal. 

Similarly, the Inkspren hold logic above all else. Jasnah's hiring of assassins and willingness to consider killing Elhokar' s wife, Aesudan, was not a deterant to attracting Ivory. 

Radiant does not mean "good guy" 

I never said that it did mean good guy. Furthermore, I said Amaram could become a radiant, but I think he has a long way to go. However, if anything goes and there is nothing that disqualifies one from being a radiant, then Adolin was very wrong in killing Sadeas. Sadeas could have been a great Elsecaller or even Skybreaker by your interpretation. Dalinar was right. Killing Sadeas removed a great resource. 

[Calderis]

3 minutes ago, eveorjoy said:

However, if anything goes and there is nothing that disqualifies one from being a radiant, then Adolin was very wrong in killing Sadeas. Sadeas could have been a great Elsecaller or even Skybreaker by your interpretation. Dalinar was right. Killing Sadeas removed a great resource. 

Still requires a code of some sort. What code did Sadeas follow? 

I think the only restriction to becoming a Radiant is the need for a code to follow. True opportunists like Sadeas don't have that. 

Edited August 31, 2017 by Calderis

[+eveorjoy]

Just now, Calderis said:

Still requires a code of some sort. What code did Sadeas follow? 

I think the only restriction to becoming a Radiant is the need for a code to follow. True opportunists like Sadeas don't have that. 

Sadeas had a code. He believed the tenants of Vornism. Soldiers needed to be trained for the war in heaven. Sadeas may have eventually come around to wanting to fight for the world. He did so for Galivar in the past. Amaram follows a code as much as Sadeas did. 

[Calderis]

And I will continue to respectfully disagree. 

[+eveorjoy]

2 minutes ago, Calderis said:

And I will continue to respectfully disagree. 

Nothing wrong with that. 

[Andy92]

3 hours ago, eveorjoy said:

I agree to a point. It is a gray area, but the Skybreakers and Nale always needed a legal reason to kill someone and the legal authority to do so. Look at what Nale says to his people in both WoR and Edgedancer. Nale always acted within the law. Amaram did not. 

I know what you're saying, but if there's a way to use existing laws to justify murder the way Nale was doing so...then there's an issue with the laws themselves. Hence the gray areas. We're getting into legality vs. morality with a lot of this.

Amaram might've done something against the law whereas Nale didn't, but neither were performing morally correct actions. I would expect the KR order that promotes justice to actually be just, not simply use the law as a tool to do what they wanted. 

[+eveorjoy]

7 minutes ago, Andy92 said:

I know what you're saying, but if there's a way to use existing laws to justify murder the way Nale was doing so...then there's an issue with the laws themselves. Hence the gray areas. We're getting into legality vs. morality with a lot of this.

Amaram might've done something against the law whereas Nale didn't, but neither were performing morally correct actions. I would expect the KR order that promotes justice to actually be just, not simply use the law as a tool to do what they wanted. 

I didn't say Nale was moral.  My point was Amaram would not be accepted as a Skybreaker because he broke the law. Nale doesn't care about morality, but he does care about legality. If Amaram were to change and be willing to follow Dalinar and the oaths of a spren he would more likely be an Elsecaller. I still think he has a long way to go. 

Also Jasnah doesn't like him very much so she might be annoyed they are in the same order. 

[Storyspren]

22 hours ago, KidWayne said:

I'm uncomfortable with all the praise of murder-as-an-act-of-righteousness I see on this thread. The right thing to do would have been to charge Sadeas with the crimes of treason and sedition and then bring him to justice in a court of law. That's legitimate authority properly exercised. Sadeas' influence would have waned quickly after it became general knowledge that Stormlight healed Lopen's amputated arm. His efforts to re-start the back-biting and political strife would have come to an abrupt end on their own without murder.

Assassination & murder are wrong not because they cause death, but because they elevate one person's (or one group's) proclamation of justice above the law and above the recognized authorities. It's a self-righteous act; it's also indefensible when challenged. At the end of the day, murder flows from hatred. When that hatred is directed at appropriate targets, we can call it justice (as many are apparently doing with Adolin's murder of Sadeas). However, what is or is not an appropriate target - as well as who can be trusted to carry out such justice - is a super slippery slope. Adolin is not a capital "G" god. I wouldn't trust anyone other than God (or some other being with omniscience & an unshakable commitment to morality/justice) to unilaterally exercise that kind of authority.

How about some sympathy for Adolin?

Forced to work with Sadeas who literally tried to kill him? With Sadeas, who unmines Adolin and his family at every possible opportunity like a gaslighting abusive spouse?

Temporarily Adolin last his damnation mind. I wouldn't call it murder, more like an act of nature. There's no therapy on Roshar, alas.

 

[1stBondsmith]

Not all killings are murder. Some are self defense, some to protect others. Nobody accused Kaladin of murdering parshmen or Murdering the lighteyes back home, or other deaths in the story. Protection is protection, not murder. By calling it murder, you are changing motive and circumstances and attaching your morals to a killing. Adonlin KILLED Sadeas. -He needed killing.

[Calderis]

12 minutes ago, Andy92 said:

I know what you're saying, but if there's a way to use existing laws to justify murder the way Nale was doing so...then there's an issue with the laws themselves. Hence the gray areas. We're getting into legality vs. morality with a lot of this.

Amaram might've done something against the law whereas Nale didn't, but neither were performing morally correct actions. I would expect the KR order that promotes justice to actually be just, not simply use the law as a tool to do what they wanted. 

And this is the main issue with Roshar and people's interpretation of good and evil. 

Spoilered for length and Mistborn references. 

Spoiler

http://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=944#8

Quote

AUTARCHK (MARCH 2013)

If I can ask a question, I just read the Mistborn trilogy and, were Preservation and Ruin two different shards or a single one with their power split somehow? If they were two shards, does that mean a single person can hold more than one, since Harmony apparently holds both now?

BRANDON SANDERSON

They were two shards.

Yes, one entity can hold more than one. Remember that holding a shard changes you, over time. Rayse knows this, and prefers to leave behind destroyed rivals as opposed to taking their power and potentially being overwhelmed by it.

NEPENE

I have a question, if you are willing. Would Ruin be more compatible with Rayse, would he pick up that shard had he visited Scadrial and shattered him? All the shards we have seen that he has shattered seem rather different in intent than him—Honor, Cultivation, Love, Dominion. But Ruin seems more in line with Odium. Rayse has ruined the days of quite a few people.

BRANDON SANDERSON

Technically, Ruin would be most compatible with Cultivation. Ruin's 'theme' so to speak is that all things must age and pass. An embodiment of entropy. That power, separated from the whole and being held by a person who did not have the willpower to resist its transformation of him, led to something very dangerous. But it was not evil. None of the sixteen technically are, though you may have read that Hoid has specific beef with Rayse. Whether you think of Odium as evil depends upon how much you agree with Hoid's particular view.

That said, Ruin would have been one of the 'safer' of the sixteen for Rayse to take, if he'd been about that. Odium is by its nature selfish, however, and the combination of it and Rayse makes for an entity that fears an additional power would destroy it and make it into something else.

 

So by that WoB, none of the Shards are good or evil. Just as Odium is Adonalsium's sense of righteous anger, separated from the attributes that gave it context, Honor is Adonalsium's sense of order and structure with the context with which to applied it. 

It's all about defined rules and following them. Which is why Szeth is the mist "Honorable" character in the series. He followed a code he believed was right, even when what was "right" was horribly wrong. He hated it, and he still stood by it. 

There's no morality to honor, so why would the Orders require it? 

[+eveorjoy]

4 minutes ago, Storyspren said:

How about some sympathy for Adolin?

Forced to work with Sadeas who literally tried to kill him? With Sadeas, who unmines Adolin and his family at every possible opportunity like a gaslighting abusive spouse?

Temporarily Adolin last his damnation mind. I wouldn't call it murder, more like an act of nature. There's no therapy on Roshar, alas.

 

You can have sympathy for someone but still call their act for what it is. Temporary insanity fine, Adolin can have that. That does not make his act less wrong, it just makes him less culpable. 

[+eveorjoy]

7 minutes ago, 1stBondsmith said:

Not all killings are murder. Some are self defense, some to protect others. Nobody accused Kaladin of murdering parshmen or Murdering the lighteyes back home, or other deaths in the story. Protection is protection, not murder. By calling it murder, you are changing motive and circumstances and attaching your morals to a killing. Adonlin KILLED Sadeas. -He needed killing.

Kaladin was killing to protect at that moment. Had the Parshendi or the Lighteyes not been attacking his men then Kaladin would not have killed them. Had Sadeas attacked first then it would not have been murder. But Adolin attacked first with the intent to kill. The person being murdered does not make the act anyless murder. I love Adolin and I don't think he is a cold-blooded killer. This is a crime of passion or Adolin went temporarily crazy. It is still murder. And if that murder is justified, Syl should have had no problem with Kaladin marching up to Amaram and stabbing him in the gut. There were other ways to deal with Sadeas. 

[1stBondsmith]

Removing a known threat is not wrong. I chop the head off snakes in my yard BEFORE they bite the kids. I don't wait till it does and then remove the snake, or chop off its head. Sadeas killed many of Kholin's men through planned betrayal and said as much to Adolin, sent assassins to kill them, and threatened to do so again straight in Adolin's face. What more could be done to deserve killing? What court or trial could provide more justice? What circumstance needed to occur before a SHARDBEARER was stopped (no court or prison, only death as an option). The threat was neutralized. "One less problem" was a very solid understatement. I don't understand all the nambi-pambi attitudes about killing to protect, when most of the books have been about that theme. It is needed when threats arise. Be strong enough to see it for what it is, and brave enough to risk what is needed to neutralize the threat. How hard do you get to poke the bear before it is justified in squashing you?

Edited August 31, 2017 by 1stBondsmith
grammar

[+eveorjoy]

Alright, then why was it wrong to kill Elhokar, an awful king who has led to the death of many?  Or Amaram who killed and stole for the power of a Shardblade?  In fact, Dalinar you will soon see was often as bad as Sadeas. Maybe Sadeas was right to remove him thinking he would save the kingdom and Elhokar by getting Dalinar out of the way. He wasn’t lying. In TWoKs his goals were the preservation of Alethkar. That changed in WoR because he thought Elhokar was a lost cause and Alethkar would be better off with a strong man at its head, just as Galivar had been before the visions. 

I think it funny how people on here say calling Adolin act a gray area that we should ignore good and evil and yet are quick to think of Sadeas as an evil snake. Sadeas was no more evil than Amaram, young Dalinar, or young Galivar. 

Calling Adolin's act for what it is does not make him evil. But we can't just think of it as something like killing Parshendi on the battlefield. The act will break Adolin and that will lead him to become an KR eventually. If it was just another killing then it would not affect him anymore than those Adolin killed on the battlefield. 

[1stBondsmith]

Elhokar- incompetent, but did not order death on anyone we know. A kid on a skateboard can cause a deadly car wreck, but is not guilty of attempted murder.

Young Dalinar and Sadeas- sounds like both of them would agree that they deserved to die back then; but who would enforce that?

Amaram- Ordered people murdered. In our army, they would be executed or jailed for life. Take him out if you can.

The whole series has been using these judgements as a basis for our intrigue, with Brandon trying to show progress that changes our opinion. Except with Sadeas. He has made him loathesome all along. "The ends don't justifiy the means" is under contest the whole story from the Radiants' first oath to the individual paths to save Roshar. I expect an opinion to be shown before the end, but the division among us shows that Brandon is wise to use it to keep our interest.

Edited August 31, 2017 by 1stBondsmith
typos

[+eveorjoy]

3 minutes ago, 1stBondsmith said:

Elhokar- incompetent, but did not order death on anyone we know. A kid on a skateboard can cause a deadly car wreck, but is not guilty of attempted murder.

Young Dalinar and Sadeas- sounds like both of them would agree that they deserved to die back then; but who would enforce that?

Amaram- Ordered people murdered. In our army, they would be executed or jailed for life. Take him out if you can.

The whole series has been using these judgements as a basis for our intrigue, with Brandon trying to show progress that changes our opinion. Except with Sareas. He has made him loathesome all along. "The ends don't justifiy the means" is under contest the whole story from the Radiants' first oath to the individual paths to save Roshar. I expect an opinion to be shown before the end, but the division among us shows that Brandon is wise to use it to keep our interest.

Elhokar is criminally incompetent and he did order the death of someone we know for a petty reason.

WoR chapter 58 "Never Again," page 676. Elhokar is talking about what Kaladin's punishment should be for insulting Amaram and ruining their chance at Sadeas.

Quote

 

The king folded his arms. "Execution."

 

 

Kaladin wasn't put on the chopping block or in the noose because Dalinar intervened. You think that was the only time Elhokar sentenced someone to death because he was bitter?

I'm glad we agree about the rest. However, how did Dalinar deal with Amaram? He intends to put him on trial if the world ever calms down enough. 

Sadeas could have been put on trial. It would have been hard, but Elhokar was in his rights to do so. They didn't because they had no Highprinces on their side. Well in Urithru they likely would have had more Highprinces. If Sadeas had tried to pull anything, time for trial. Or maybe just charge him for abandoning Dalinar at the tower. That is treason. They had enough Highprinces to support such an action now. That would have legally solved the problem. It would have been harder, but then Sadeas death would not have been murder. Most murderers are not psychopaths. Murder is often done because a person is in the way somehow in the murderer's mind. 

Here is the biggest test. Both Kaladin and Adolin killed have killed many times in the first two books. In the situations where Kaladin killed, if you replace the person who died at Kaladin's hand in those circumstances would it change the act into murder? Kaladin is on the battlefield rushing to rescue Dalinar from an army of Herdasians or Horneaters instead of Parshendi. Does this change make Kaladin's actions no longer killing to save someone but in fact murder? In fact, we will need to consider this question as soon as Shallan realizes Kalladin killed her brother, but I digress.

Now let's look at the scene in the hall with Adolin and Sadeas. Adolin killed Sadeas because he did not like what he heard Sadeas say. It pushed him over the edge. Okay, change Sadeas to Renarin. Same event. Renarin says something that pushes Adolin over the edge and Adolin kills him. With just that one change does that make Adolin's actions murder?

It is not who died that matters. It is the action and the motivations behind the action that is important.

Yay! Sadeas is gone. Be happy, but be aware he was still murdered.