[OB] Oathbringer chapters 28-30

[Calderis]

5 minutes ago, Blightsong said:

@Steeldancer and @Islington, if you can imagine yourself without your belief, does that version of you still believe in absolute morality? Why?

And I have the opposite questions for you, @Calderis

It's hard for me to imagine the scenario without being a totally different person. 

I was raised essentially Christian. I came to Amy beliefs (or lack thereof) over time, in large part due to the discussion we're having. 

So I can't say that I think the belief itself would change the way I see morality. My sense of morality already altered my beliefs. 

[Marethyu316]

3 minutes ago, Calderis said:

Because with a divine dictate to set morality, where does it come from? 

Morality is, in my view, a construct that is absolutely necessary for society to exist, but it's still a construct. 

An absolute morality requires an external force to decide what is right and what is wrong. I reject that idea. That doesn't mean that I think it's alright to go out and kill people wantonly or steal, or abuse. 

There will always be repercussions to actions, and even the best case scenario is never going to be the optimal outcome for everyone. 

The very idea of a morality that would find someone at fault for actions that, in context, are the best possible thing you could do, seems absurd to me. 

If killing is an absolute wrong, morally, then that should apply across the board, even in religions though, this doesn't hold. Wars happen that people blessed by God kill their enemies and it is condoned. 

Something is an absolute or it isn't. I believe that it isn't. 

Of course, a socially constructed morality also requires someone to decide what is right and wrong. Someone will stand in the place of God or the State or whatever and decide what is moral and what is not, and whether you're an Athiest or a Christian that person will at some point do so without all the necessary knowledge to abide by that moral standard. Actually, that will be the case almost all the time.

 

Re: absolute vs relative morality

As a guide for our actions, neither of these terms is very helpful. There maybe a God whose moral requirements we are responsible to follow (I believe so), but we have no chance of meeting those standards all the time, if we can even agree on what those are. Relative morality is sometimes used to say that each person's individual moral code is equally valid and beyond reproach, but no one actually operates that way in real life. We make judgments all the time and if we didn't we'd be taken advantage of by unscrupulous people and apparently have to be okay with that. I don't think most people actually believe in moral relativism in that sense.

However, morality is subjective, meaning it is context specific and people dependent. This doesn't mean that there is no truth, only that we can't know truth apart from being ourselves and we can't act morally apart from interacting with another person who sees the world from a different perspective than us. I don't think this means that there are no standards of right and wrong, but it does mean that there isn't some simple formula to solve the complex moral problems and dilemmas. 

My fellow Christians, if appealing to absolute morality was effective, then the law would have been enough. In one sense it was enough to condemn us, but not enough to save. That took the incarnation, which is the ultimate example of the absolute and eternal, coming subjectively as a human being and seeking out relationship with individuals. 

[Calderis]

1 minute ago, Marethyu316 said:

Of course, a socially constructed morality also requires someone to decide what is right and wrong. Someone will stand in the place of God or the State or whatever and decide what is moral and what is not, and whether you're an Athiest or a Christian that person will at some point do so without all the necessary knowledge to abide by that moral standard. Actually, that will be the case almost all the time.

Not someone, all of us. Morality is a social construct. "The herd instinct in the individual." 

What is acceptable behavior evolves over time as we, as a species, change. This is why Morality varies culturally.

An individual is too variable, whether it be from mental illness or just poor choices, to decide morality. A society as a whole enacts the repercussions of its morality on those who break with what is acceptable.

You can watch the effects of this over time. Things that were normal and right and the way of the world 15, 50, 100 or 1000 years ago, no longer are. And things that were considered agregious sins in the past, despite harming no one, are acceptable now. 

Governments are forced to change because of the ways that their people feel about issues. No single entity decides what is right and what is wrong. It's the collective viewpoint of a society that does so, whether it's intended or not. 

[Islington]

5 minutes ago, Marethyu316 said:

Of course, a socially constructed morality also requires someone to decide what is right and wrong. Someone will stand in the place of God or the State or whatever and decide what is moral and what is not, and whether you're an Athiest or a Christian that person will at some point do so without all the necessary knowledge to abide by that moral standard. Actually, that will be the case almost all the time.

 

Re: absolute vs relative morality

As a guide for our actions, neither of these terms is very helpful. There maybe a God whose moral requirements we are responsible to follow (I believe so), but we have no chance of meeting those standards all the time, if we can even agree on what those are. Relative morality is sometimes used to say that each person's individual moral code is equally valid and beyond reproach, but no one actually operates that way in real life. We make judgments all the time and if we didn't we'd be taken advantage of by unscrupulous people and apparently have to be okay with that. I don't think most people actually believe in moral relativism in that sense.

However, morality is subjective, meaning it is context specific and people dependent. This doesn't mean that there is no truth, only that we can't know truth apart from being ourselves and we can't act morally apart from interacting with another person who sees the world from a different perspective than us. I don't think this means that there are no standards of right and wrong, but it does mean that there isn't some simple formula to solve the complex moral problems and dilemmas. 

My fellow Christians, if appealing to absolute morality was effective, then the law would have been enough. In one sense it was enough to condemn us, but not enough to save. That took the incarnation, which is the ultimate example of the absolute and eternal, coming subjectively as a human being and seeking out relationship with individuals. 

I actually agree with this. I believe in an absolute morality, but I think people goof up all the time, myself included. We need subjectivity in a way to make the best of the mess. 

On the topic of the...thread? before we derailed it a bit, I apply a starker judgement of fictional characters than I ever would in real life because we see all their thoughts through their eyes. And also, they're fictional, so it's not a real circumstance and it's not a real situation. Like, no one can or did get actually hurt, no one's feelings are involved, etc. 

[StormingTexan]

I’m not touching the morality debate with a 10 foot stick but I did want to applaud all of those debating it in such a respectful manner. 

[Solant]

I don't know if this was mentioned yet, so forgive me if I am repeating someone else, but did the heralds have spren? I realize it wouldn't be required since the honor blades granted surges so spren wouldn't be needed. I was thinking the unmade could be the corrupted, or "unmade" spren of the heralds after they had been broken 1 by 1 at the beginning of each desolation. This would explain the theory of each unmade corresponding to an order of radiants.

[Marethyu316]

10 minutes ago, Calderis said:

Not someone, all of us. Morality is a social construct. "The herd instinct in the individual." 

What is acceptable behavior evolves over time as we, as a species, change. This is why Morality varies culturally.

An individual is too variable, whether it be from mental illness or just poor choices, to decide morality. A society as a whole enacts the repercussions of its morality on those who break with what is acceptable.

You can watch the effects of this over time. Things that were normal and right and the way of the world 15, 50, 100 or 1000 years ago, no longer are. And things that were considered agregious sins in the past, despite harming no one, are acceptable now. 

Governments are forced to change because of the ways that their people feel about issues. No single entity decides what is right and what is wrong. It's the collective viewpoint of a society that does so, whether it's intended or not. 

I don't think that I disagree with you. From a sociological perspective, that is a good description of how morality shifts and is culturally situated.

When I said "someone", I guess I was thinking of the person or people who have to take up the active enforcement of that morality, but you're right that each person plays a role in that enforcement as a part of the culture, even if they do so by not acting or just by tacit agreement. 

That doesn't mean that I don't believe that there is a standard beyond the ones that are culturally prescripted, but it is impossible for me (edit: by my own strength and understanding) to interact with those outside of the culture that I live in and that frames my way of thinking.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Marethyu316
qualified one of my statements

[maxal]

7 hours ago, Pattern said:

Thanks for writing that. Now I don't have to.

Re-Shephir is the Unmade who spawns midnight essences. I guess you want to see the other Unmade. As do I. And I am curious whether the old Lightweaver trapped Re-Shephir in a sphere glowing with black light.

Glad to be useful 

2 hours ago, mariapapadia said:

...

Realistically speaking, Dalinar succeeding upon his first trial is not entirely plausible. He was a warlord and he did built himself a name by slaughtering people: having the world readily join forces with him wouldn't have made for great story telling. So it isn't so much I want Dalinar to fail, it is more he needs to fail. He needs to make amends for the man he once was and in this optic it was great to read Amaram calling Dalinar out for being a hypocrite because he is one. How can he demand Amaram is to be trialed for crimes he is guilty of having committed himself? How does he justify himself getting away from it? 

I say Dalinar has put himself into quite a moral dilemma and his growth will require him to address his past.

4 hours ago, Mestiv said:

No, you're not. Now we just wait for them to find some strange eggs in a room next to the pillar... 

I was almost expecting them to find eggs... 

[Marethyu316]

In a society of people with different religions, no religion, and especially in a fantasy world, I think it is important to draw more charitably the "acceptable" morality, because none of us are omniscient or without our own hypocrisies. I guess that's why I have a little more empathy for what Taravangian is doing, though I think he is wrong and his efforts will end up failing, unless he adjust his course.

[Marethyu316]

17 minutes ago, StormingTexan said:

I’m not touching the morality debate with a 10 foot stick but I did want to applaud all of those debating it in such a respectful manner. 

I agree! I appreciate all of you who were part of this discussion. It's been enjoyable for me, so much so that I actually slightly burned my dinner, because I was too focused on reading all of your responses and writing my own. 

[Scriptorian]

1 hour ago, Marethyu316 said:

I don't think that I disagree with you. From a sociological perspective, that is a good description of how morality shifts and is culturally situated.

When I said "someone", I guess I was thinking of the person or people who have to take up the active enforcement of that morality, but you're right that each person plays a role in that enforcement as a part of the culture, even if they do so by not acting or just by tacit agreement. 

That doesn't mean that I don't believe that there is a standard beyond the ones that are culturally prescripted, but it is impossible for me to interact with those outside of the culture that I live in and that frames my way of thinking.

You've basically just said what I've spent the last 20 minutes trying to compose. So...thanks?

In a weird way, I agree with @Calderis in that morality is byproduct of the natural consequences of actions. I just also believe there are meta-physical consequences to our actions that aren't readily visible to our limited human perception. I guess when I say "absolute morality", that's really all I mean. I'm also arrogant (errorgant?) enough to think my religion teaches those consequences properly when most others get it wrong .

I also second the love for the engaging and civil discussion. Calderis, you're extra-awesome for having to defend your position against the rest of us. Those who come by their beliefs (or lack thereof) honestly are always better than blind zealots, by my reckoning.

Also, sweet Harmony, it takes me forever to write posts, which is part of why I rarely jump into active discussions. 

Edit: it just occurred to me that comparing people to "blind zealots" isn't a very high bar, but hopefully ya'll get what I mean. Self-examination is good. Moving on now...

Edited November 2, 2017 by Scriptorian

[Shadow Guardian]

To bring up an earlier theory again, I actually kind of like the idea that there is an unmade per herald who broke under torture. 

Now, I think that the idea of there only having been 9 desolations so far is ridiculous, but if my memory serves, we have WoB that a desolation begins when a herald breaks under torture, then they all are sent to Roshar, desolation begins, etc. So let's say there have been 50ish desolations so far (the exact count doesn't matter). 1st herald breaks, we also get the 1st unmade, and the 1st desolation (I somehow doubt it would have actually been the 1st, but whatever). 2nd desolation, a different herald breaks first, we get a 2nd unmade. 3rd desolation, same herald breaks again, no new unmade, since that herald was already checked off the list as it were. Spread this out over 20, 40, 70, or whatever number of desolations that have happened, and eventually we have 9 unmade, 1 for each of the heralds that has broken first that particular time around. 

Given that Taln was somehow able to hold it solo for 4500 years, I could see him never having been the first one to break before now, hence only 9 unmade so far. Though this could mean a 10th is or will be added to the list soon enough. 

I think Odium's champion having 9 shadows and there being 9 unmade so far are both pretty big counters to the entire idea of 1 unmade per herald (or surge for that matter), since, despite the importance of the number 10 on Roshar, these theories currently require a lot of leaps in logic though some very specific hoops, but nonetheless, I think there's some merit, and we do have a penchant for crackpot theories that occasionally turn out to be true.

My much simpler theory for why there are 9 unmade instead of 10 is that sometime in the past, one of them was actually destroyed permanently somehow.

[Gigalemesh]

4 hours ago, Solant said:

I don't know if this was mentioned yet, so forgive me if I am repeating someone else, but did the heralds have spren? I realize it wouldn't be required since the honor blades granted surges so spren wouldn't be needed. I was thinking the unmade could be the corrupted, or "unmade" spren of the heralds after they had been broken 1 by 1 at the beginning of each desolation. This would explain the theory of each unmade corresponding to an order of radiants.

As far as we are aware no, the Heralds didn't each have a spren, we are told that their bond was directly with Honour through the honourblades and he provided them their powers. Thinking about it though I'd say it's not impossible that their bonds with Honour took on a life of their own over time and became a special spren. I don't think that's the case personally but who knows. Also I'm no expert on all the WoBs and popular theories so I don't know either if this has been talked about before.

[Guest]

On 1.11.2017 at 3:27 AM, Kingsdaughter613 said:

Am I the only one who reacted to Shallan’s covering Veil’s face with ‘Shallan’s’ by thinking ‘so you finally acknowledge that ‘Shallan’ is another mask.’ Which I actually think could be a good thing for her to admit...

I finally have sometime to respond to this.

Shallan shows definite symptoms of a dissociative identity disorder.

In DIDs there are generally two types of personalities: the host personality, which is the most prominent one in the system of personalities, and alters, which are the less prominent ones.

Now, I believe, that Shallan always had some kind of disturbed sense of self-identity and vulnerability to personality disorders due to her traumatic childhood, but coped through the repression of her memories. If I look back to the first flashback chapter in WoR "Red Carpet, Once White", she calls herself a monster, not worthy of the affection Lin gives her, but that changes in the following times, while she represses the memories of her mother. In the next flashback, she begins to think about her mother and suddenly the thoughts are snuffed out like a candle, like she can't access those memories anymore, suggesting psychogenic amnesia, which is defined as memory loss without any organic cause, like brain damage.

During that time, she had no reason to create alters and thus remained Shallan, her host personality. This is important. She is Shallan. Sure, Shallan is broken, Shallan is traumatized, but Shallan also is strong, Shallan is determined. Shallan was shaped through the events in her life. Shallan is not just another mask. Shallan is not an alter.

But then Pattern confronted her with with her past and the floodgates were open. She begins to create an alter to cope with the psychological pain to hold Patternblade - Radiant. Veil starts out as a disguise, but Shallan soon decides to push Shallan even farther into the background, because she has this skewed sense of self-identity, that she is too weak to handle the stuff Veil handles. Thus Veil becomes another alter. She begins to constantly slide between those alters (this is called "switching" by psychologists), which indicates a more severe DID, than before.

Note: creation of alters to cope with stressful situations, the host retreating in favor of alters, which are perceived as more capable and the phenomenon of "switching" are all deemed to be symptoms of DID by the scientific community.

The problem I have with Shallan seeing Shallan as "another mask" is, that she begins to forget the important distinction between her host personality (Shallan) and the alters (Radiant and Veil). In therapy for DID, therapists often deal with the host personality and one of the first goals is that the host personality identifies the alters and distinguishes her own from them. Shallan is taking a step into the completely different direction, if she continues on this course.

[Samaldin]

About the numer of Desolations: We know it has been 6000ish years between the Shattering and the Breaking of the Oathpact. Odium needed some time to search, find an kill other Shards, so let´s say about 500-1000 years for that. Now we have 5500 to 5000 years for desolations. We know the 4500 years since the last Desolations was much longer then there ever was between Desolations and after a Desolation we (at least sometimes) are looking at 90% of humanity gone. Humanity needs some time to repopulate, or there would simply not be enough humans for the species to survive, if the Desolations come too soon after each other. Humanity also managed to get their technology level back up (i believe they managed stone-age to bronze-age sometimes?) after a Desolation. Taken together i would say we´re looking on average 500-1000 years between Desolations, possibly a bit lower. If my estimations are correct that would put the maximum number of Desolations about 11 and the minimum about 5. Of course Brandon could decide there was more time between the Shattering and the Breaking of the Oathpact so there could be more Desolations, but even with that we would be looking at maybe 15-20 Desolations maximum. If we assume that in the beginning the Heralds managed to hold on longer (because thousands of years of torture will probably slowly break your resolve) i don´think the notion of only 9 Desolations is unrealistic.

[Rasha]

Well, I slept through the whole morality debate, but that may be a good thing, given that Calderis advanced similar views in a fashion that is far more tactful than I managed to be on the same subject in the past. 

 

@Scriptorianthe blind zealot accusation, as harsh as it is, is a valid criticism in this case. Accepting one's morality as unquestionable is a slippery slope that leads to unquestionable actions. On the other hand, one needs to hold himself to a moral code that is a minimum static. If your (general you, not you personally)  moral code changes every two weeks, it is not a moral code anymore, but a paved road to hypocrisy to justify your actions.

That's why I think a lot of the religious people on the thread have a issue with our moral relativism. But accepting that morality is a product of our time and society doesn't mean that we are ready to change our morality to suit our actions. It just mean that if someone commit an act that is anathema to what we perceive as moral, we may (not every one does it) take the time to judge him by taking into account the circumstances and pressures that led him to act. It is the principle of saying that murder is not always wrong, for example when it is committed according to the principles of self defense (which include the necessity of a proportional response: you don't shoot someone with a gun because he threatened you with a stick, it's not proportional). Absolute rules avail us nothing, which is why when you are judged by a tribunal, the judges will examinate the circumstances of your actions, instead of automatically applying a sentence to a crime. 

I think that the most important thing to keep in mind is to value compassion above all in our relationship with others.  Because compassion is independent of the moral compass of a society or an individual. Reading fiction or fantasy is a wonderful thing to develop empathy and compassion. It takes us to unfamiliar settings, in the head of people that act strangely according to a bizarre and unknown moral compass. And somewhere along the way, we say to ourselves "hey, maybe they have a point there, maybe I should do things differently. Maybe spiking someone in a Dark Alley is acceptable. Well, tomorrow I will change." 

Edited November 2, 2017 by Rasha

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Rasha said:

Reading fiction or fantasy is a wonderful thing to develop empathy and compassion. It takes us to unfamiliar settings, in the head of people that act strangely according to a bizarre and unknown moral compass. And somewhere along the way, we say to ourselves "hey, maybe they have a point there, maybe I should do things differently. Maybe spiking someone in a dark alley is acceptable. Well, tomorrow I will change." 

Well, I highly doubt, that reading fantasy will sway me in my belief, that murder is never acceptable, though I do agree with the general sentiment to keep an open mind.

[Link123]

I think it is interesting that Shallan did the Storm Light archive equivalent of opening her shirt and pressing her breast against the unmade when she took her glove off and touched it.

[Steeldancer]

1 hour ago, Samaldin said:

About the numer of Desolations: We know it has been 6000ish years between the Shattering and the Breaking of the Oathpact. Odium needed some time to search, find an kill other Shards, so let´s say about 500-1000 years for that. Now we have 5500 to 5000 years for desolations. We know the 4500 years since the last Desolations was much longer then there ever was between Desolations and after a Desolation we (at least sometimes) are looking at 90% of humanity gone. Humanity needs some time to repopulate, or there would simply not be enough humans for the species to survive, if the Desolations come too soon after each other. Humanity also managed to get their technology level back up (i believe they managed stone-age to bronze-age sometimes?) after a Desolation. Taken together i would say we´re looking on average 500-1000 years between Desolations, possibly a bit lower. If my estimations are correct that would put the maximum number of Desolations about 11 and the minimum about 5. Of course Brandon could decide there was more time between the Shattering and the Breaking of the Oathpact so there could be more Desolations, but even with that we would be looking at maybe 15-20 Desolations maximum. If we assume that in the beginning the Heralds managed to hold on longer (because thousands of years of torture will probably slowly break your resolve) i don´think the notion of only 9 Desolations is unrealistic.

I gotta agree here. My own theory is no longer dependent on there only being 9 desolations, but I don't think there are that many more than 9. Maybe max 12 or 13?

[Blacksmithki]

1 hour ago, SLNC said:

Well, I highly doubt, that reading fantasy will sway me in my belief, that murder is never acceptable, though I do agree with the general sentiment to keep an open mind.

While I understand completely your point of view, I do have one thing to add, (you are Christian if I remember the discussion right) there are many many cases of God committing what is in essence mass murder with the flood, the city of something (the guy that died for looking back) and while revelations is not exact, we can assume that a lot of people would die.

So I understand your view on murder = wrong, but I would like to hear your opinion on those events (assuming I'm not missremembering you saying you were Christian...), personally I believe more that within the complete context of a situation there is an absolute morality (sort of a middle ground I guess that agrees with tarvagian, saving humanity at great cost)

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Blacksmithki said:

you are Christian if I remember the discussion right

I tend to identify as agnostic I'm neither part of a Christian community nor do I believe in God, but only because I see no rational grounds on which a supernatural entity like God could exist.

 

Edited November 2, 2017 by SLNC

[kari-no-sugata]

Some thoughts on Shallan's possible overall arc for the book:

Given that Shallan already faced Re-Shepnir in Part 1 and that it now "knows" Shallan I think there's a very good chance that Shallan will face it again by the end of the book. To beat it again I'm sure she'll need her last Truth/Ideal. But she would also be likely to need time to recover from speaking it. So maybe if Shallan speaks that Truth at the end of Part 3 she'll need Part 4 to recover before facing it again in Part 5? This is all purely speculation of course.

In the latest chapters Shallan has been under all sorts of stress/pressure the last few days, moonlighting as Veil while doing her normal "day job" as well. The presence of Re-Shepnir didn't help either, particularly since it was focusing on Shallan. Those sources of stress should now be removed, so hopefully Shallan will be able to trust herself more and also be able to relax and perhaps pull herself together, as it were. It's good for her that she drove off Re-Shepnir as Shallan rather than Veil or Radiant - it's her victory.

btw, it's indirectly indicated that Shallan has been doing a lot of drawing recently, in particular, lots of drawings of herself - different ages, different scenarios, different lifetimes. I think this is Shallan being self-reflective and thinking about herself - she does generally find drawing to be both relaxing and stimulating. It seems to be working, since she could wield Pattern as a weapon as herself for the first time since the end of WoR, though it's not all progress.

Part 2 looks like it's going to focus more on Dalinar's story of trying to unite the world, and I suspect we'll see Shallan being able to visit some new places and sketch them (and in future parts as well), which I'm sure she should enjoy. Overall I suspect she'll be relatively low-key here though I wonder if her recent success will raise her profile or otherwise change how people see her. I don't know if Mraize will talk to her about Helaran at the end of Part 1 or early in Part 2 and I have no idea how that will affect things. We'll probably also see her return to trying to figure out who actually killed Sadeas now that her side-quest is finished.

For the book overall, it'll be interesting to see what she does with her men. Will she help train them so that they can do what Bridge 4 did? Will she reveal Veil to them? Will she recruit Ishnah or accept her if she asks again? Will she start participating in the big important meetings (possibly as Radiant) or will she try to stay out of the spotlight?

 

PS I was going through my old posts the other day and had remembered I had theorised that Shallan's excellent memory can be both a boon and a curse/bane. It's useful in many ways but also makes it harder to recover from trauma. So I'm slightly kicking myself for not suspecting that Shallan's Truth/Ideal at the end of WoR could cause her problems.

[Blacksmithki]

36 minutes ago, SLNC said:

I tend to identify as agnostic I'm neither part of a Christian community nor do I believe in God, but only because I see no rational grounds on which a supernatural entity like God could exist.

 

Oh... Sorry I must have miss remembered. I probably should have checked what you said but it's hard to on mobile...

[Guest]

Just now, Blacksmithki said:

Oh... Sorry I must have miss remembered. I probably should have checked what you said but it's hard to on mobile...

No worries.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, kari-no-sugata said:

btw, it's indirectly indicated that Shallan has been doing a lot of drawing recently, in particular, lots of drawings of herself - different ages, different scenarios, different lifetimes. I think this is Shallan being self-reflective and thinking about herself - she does generally find drawing to be both relaxing and stimulating. It seems to be working, since she could wield Pattern as a weapon as herself for the first time since the end of WoR, though it's not all progress.

I do agree with your observation, that drawing relaxes Shallan and she might even use it as a therapeutic factor, but... I tend to blame her ability to wield Patternblade as Shallan to the high adrenaline situation she was in - survival insticts kicking in. Nonetheless, I see it as a step in the right direction as I believe that confrontation is key to overcome mental blocks.

The rest of your post I pretty much agree though.