The [assumed] philosophy behind Jasnah's [assumed] reverse assassination of Kabsal

[Fifth of Daybreak]

Important edit: This thread is a thought experiment. The entire premise is based on the hypothetical situation that Jasnah did intentionally kill Kabsal. This is not a thread to discuss whether or not that theory is correct. Please see my other thread if that's the discussion you wish to have.

 

In my other thread I laid out the evidence I had gathered to show that Jasnah intentionally soulcast away the antidote in order to reverse assassinate Kabsal, and that this would cause future friction between Shallan and Jasnah. I laid out the logical proof that her actions would be inconsistent with any intention to either save Shallan from poison or to have the soulcast jam have any personal effect on herself. 

The largest argument against the theory seemed to be that it was out of character for Jasnah and that she wouldn't risk Shallan like this, as it wouldn't fit in with Jasnah's morality. I disagree, and I think it fits exactly with what we know about Jasnah, and is a close parallel to her killing of the thugs in the theater district with the soulcaster. In order to demonstrate this, I'm going to do Shallan's homework for that night, but based on the premise that Jasnah had figured out Kabsal's plan and worked to counter him by removing the antidote, letting him kill himself through his own actions. All passages are from Way of Kings 39 Burned Into Her unless otherwise cited.

Quote

Logic did not condemn Jasnah. Yes, the princess had gone willingly into danger, but that didn’t remove responsibility from those who had chosen to hurt her. The men’s actions were reprehensible.

Logic here stipulates very similar conditions. Yes, Jasnah willingly placed Shallan in danger by possibly removing the antidote, but the sole responsibility still lies with Kabsal who first brought the poison and chose to put Shallan, a person he cared about, in harm's way to achieve his goals. Jasnah had the ability to save her with her Soulcasting, and the help of hospital staff should poison be present. Logic dictates that she is not responsible for the poisoning since she is not the one who made it available, presented it to Shallan, or encouraged anyone to eat it. She's been completely removed from the bread and jam the whole time before this, it is not her responsibility, whether she removes the antidote or not. 

Quote

Kill or be killed. That was the Philosophy of Starkness. It exonerated Jasnah.

This is straightforward. Kabsal wants to kill Jasnah, Jasnah needs to remove him first. Jasnah's actions are justified. 

Quote

Actions are not evil. Intent is evil, and Jasnah’s intent had been to stop men from harming others. That was the Philosophy of Purpose. It lauded Jasnah.

Jasnah's intent here is to stop an assassin who is trying to stop her from discovering how to stop the desolation. Her intent is to ultimately save humanity from the desolations by preserving herself and her research, which is ultimately more important than a nobody lighteyed Veden girl who she has a strong chance of saving. This also exonerates her. 

Quote

The Philosophy of Ideals. It claimed that removing evil was ultimately moral, and so in destroying evil men, Jasnah was justified.

Again, here, Jasnah is justified in removing an assassin who is trying to start a desolation. 

Quote

Objective must be weighed against methods. If the goal is worthy, then the steps taken are worthwhile, even if some of them—on their own—are reprehensible. The Philosophy of Aspiration. It, more than any, called Jasnah’s actions ethical.

Her objective, preventing a desolation, is a worthy goal, and the reprehensible action of putting Shallan at risk to take out an assassin who could prevent that goal, is worthwhile. 

We can also infer from her view of morality that she sees no issue with the idea of preemptive strike, so her actions here are not out of character insofar as moving to remove Kabsal first as an issue of morality. 

Quote

“Morality applies to your intent and the greater context of the situation. Seeking out men to kill is an immoral act, Jasnah, regardless of the eventual outcome.”

...

“You think I’m wrong, I assume?” “You are,” Jasnah said. “But I accept that you believe what you are saying and have put rational thought behind it....''

...

“That is enough.” Jasnah narrowed her eyes slightly, a consoling smile appearing on her lips. “If it helps you wrestle with your feelings, child, understand that I was trying to do good. I sometimes wonder if I should accomplish more with my Soulcaster.”

Way of Kings Chapter 42 Beggars and Barmaids

So in conclusion, I get the feeling that a lot of people felt like I was attacking Jasnah and saying that she was recklessly playing with Shallan's life, and while I was painting that picture for the sake of illustrating how it will create a fissure between Jasnah and Shallan, I thought it prudent to make this thread to show I don't think it actually changed my assessment of Jasnah's character, and I'm actually not convinced it was the wrong move in this case, especially with hindsight showing that she was able to save Shallan.

Edited November 5, 2017 by Fifth of Daybreak

[Head Crabs]

I think there's one fundamental flaw here. I'm fairly certain that we know Jasnah was attempting to soulcast away the poison and not the antidote. She thought that the poison would be in the jam so before tasting it made a quick change and turned it into that inedible mush. 

 

And regardless of the order of events that took place in the hospital room, shallan knows that kabsal poisoned all three of them and jasnah saved her life. I very much doubt that this will be a cause of friction between them. (Im sure that we will see some other actions/behaviors that cause tension between master and pupil later on when they re-unite)

 

The theory seems to pivot on that single point for me. This axehound just wont hunt. 

[Fifth of Daybreak]

26 minutes ago, Head Crabs said:

I'm fairly certain that we know Jasnah was attempting to soulcast away the poison and not the antidote. She thought that the poison would be in the jam so before tasting it made a quick change and turned it into that inedible mush. 

If you'd like to discuss whether or not she knew it was the poison, please take it to this thread. Already in that post you make an error and say that Jasnah tasted it, which she did not. If you want to debate on this point, read my arguments and post on that thread.

I've laid out my evidence there with supporting text from the books. If you have a quote from Jasnah where she says as much, you can provide it there, but I have laid a solid argument using information Shallan didn't have at the time for why her supposition is wrong. For this thread, I'm specifically looking for discussion on the specific topic I've presented with the assumption that she knew she was Soulcasting antidote, and I'd prefer not to get sidetracked on a discussion that's playing out on another thread. Thanks for understanding.

 

Edited November 5, 2017 by Fifth of Daybreak

[Calderis]

The Ghostbloods seek to take advantage of the coming desolation, not cause it. That's the pursuit of the Sons of Honor. 

[Fifth of Daybreak]

26 minutes ago, Calderis said:

The Ghostbloods seek to take advantage of the coming desolation, not cause it. That's the pursuit of the Sons of Honor. 

We may know that, Jasnah assumes as I have said. For the purposes of this discussion we can ignore that meta knowledge and place ourselves inside of Jasnah's mindset. 

Quote

“No. We need to get to the center of it all.” She looked at Shallan. “We’re going to the Shattered Plains. We need to find out if the Parshendi were ever ordinary parshmen, and if so, what set them off. Perhaps I am wrong about this, but if I am right, then the Parshendi could hold the key to turning ordinary parshmen into soldiers.”Then, grimly, she continued. “And we need to do it before someone else does, then uses it against us.”

“Someone else?” Shallan asked, feeling a sharp stab of panic. “There are others looking for this?”

“Of course there are. Who do you think went to so much trouble trying to have me assassinated?” She reached into a stack of papers on her desk. “I don’t know much about them. For all I know, there are many groups searching for these secrets. I know of one for certain, however. They call themselves the Ghostbloods.” She pulled out a sheet. “Your friend Kabsal was one. We found their symbol tattooed on the inside of his arm.”

WoK 74 Ghostblood

 

[Calderis]

I don't remember her ever stating they wish to start a desolation. Use the knowledge for personal gain yes, but that could mean a wide variety of things 

[Fifth of Daybreak]

6 minutes ago, Calderis said:

I don't remember her ever stating they wish to start a desolation. Use the knowledge for personal gain yes, but that could mean a wide variety of things 

Jasnah defines the Parshmen transforming and the desolations as the same thing. I don't understand what the quibble is here, in order to take advantage of it, it would have to be caused first. It seems like you're arguing six of one while I'm arguing half dozen of the other.

Quote

“Yet one group turned suddenly from peaceful friends to ferocious warriors. Something set them off. Just as it did hundreds of years ago, during the days known as the Heraldic Epochs. There would be a period of peace, followed by an invasion of parshmen who—for reasons nobody understood—had suddenly gone mad with rage. This was what was behind mankind’s fight to keep from being ‘banished to Damnation.’ This was what nearly ended our civilization. These were the terrible, repeated cataclysms that were so frightening men began to speak of them as Desolations."

If she says they want to find the knowledge first and use it against them, and defines that knowledge as what causes desolations, I just don't understand how that's much of a difference, plus this is extremely off topic. 

[Calderis]

@Fifth of Daybreak knowledge does not have to be utilized to be used for gain. 

[Fifth of Daybreak]

2 hours ago, Calderis said:

@Fifth of Daybreak knowledge does not have to be utilized to be used for gain. 

Can you clarify for me if you're arguing from a point of meta knowledge or if you're arguing from Jasnah's perspective? 

Jasnah's specific words are that they need to get the knowledge before someone else does and uses it against them, not uses it for personal gain. Jasnah does not know the Ghostblood's want to use the desolations for personal gain. 

It would help move the conversation forward if you would move from generalizations to specifics. I don't disagree that it's possible to gain from knowledge without using it, but in this situation, can you present a scenario where that is possible without triggering a desolation, specifically while using the knowledge against Jasnah?

[IllNsickly]

I feel like this is DEAD wrong. 

Jasnah soulcast her bite of the bread because that is all she had contact with. The whole jar of jam was soulcast because there was no way for her to specify a particular portion.

Given Jasnahs propensity for declining wards, I simply cannot belive that she would offer the one she did accept as fodder, in an attempt to catch an assasin.

There is evidence, from Mraize's conversations, that she has killed other assassins. She had no need of Shallan to fill the 'Bait' role in order to catch another one.

Absolutely not, Says I.

[Calderis]

@Fifth of Daybreak I'm intentionally avoiding specifics because Jasnah does not have them. 

Jasnah knows that the Ghostbloods seek the same knowledge as her only because they've attempted to keep it from her. She's not ever said what they intend to use it for, just that they intend to use it. Which could mean anything. 

[Fifth of Daybreak]

19 minutes ago, IllNsickly said:

I feel like this is DEAD wrong. 

Jasnah soulcast her bite of the bread because that is all she had contact with. The whole jar of jam was soulcast because there was no way for her to specify a particular portion.

Given Jasnahs propensity for declining wards, I simply cannot belive that she would offer the one she did accept as fodder, in an attempt to catch an assasin.

There is evidence, from Mraize's conversations, that she has killed other assassins. She had no need of Shallan to fill the 'Bait' role in order to catch another one.

Absolutely not, Says I.

As I said before, if you want to argue about that theory argue in the other thread and cite my specific arguments please, this thread is not the place for it. This thread is specifically predicated on the assumption that she was acting under those conditions. If you are unable or do not want to discuss under those conditions, this thread is not for you.

 

17 minutes ago, Calderis said:

@Fifth of Daybreak I'm intentionally avoiding specifics because Jasnah does not have them. 

Jasnah knows that the Ghostbloods seek the same knowledge as her only because they've attempted to keep it from her. She's not ever said what they intend to use it for, just that they intend to use it. Which could mean anything. 

Forgive my frustration then but why are you in this thread? You have not participated in the topic as I presented, but attempted to correct me on something. When I replied that I intentionally put it in there because that's Jasnah's interpretation, you replied, without citing evidence, that she does not believe that. I provided book evidence and an argument showing the my reason for interpreting the scene in that way. You replied with a generilization about the nature of knowledge.

You are playing both sides of the argument and providing satisfactory responses to neither, acting as though you do not have access to meta knowledge on the one hand, yet rebuking me for not accurately utilizing all meta knowledge available in setting up the scenario. This is unfair to me and gives the appearance that you are not attempting to engage with me in good faith but just trying to be obstinate. 

Where does Jasnah say that she thinks the Ghostblood's want to use the knowledge for personal gain? You say in the latest post that she doesn't know what their intentions are, but that contradicts your earlier posts! I've specifically cited a passage that says she suspects they intend to use it against them, which shows that Jasnah suspects how they intend to use it. 

 

Frankly, if you're going to just say generalizations and refuse to try to back them up with hypotheticals because you don't want to engage in behavior that you've been displaying the whole time, all while ignoring the actual topic this thread is about I'd personally prefer you abstain from this thread. I'm sorry if this comes across as harsh, but I'm growing increasingly frustrated as you refuse to address the things I say.

Edited November 5, 2017 by Fifth of Daybreak

[Calderis]

@Fifth of Daybreak I'm sorry that you're frustrated with me. It's not my intention. My whole point was that the "use the knowledge against us line" does not have to mean utilizing that knowledge to create Voidbringers. Which I saw as a flaw in the reasoning on which you based the post, since you included that reasoning in the OP. 

have a good day. 

 

[Fifth of Daybreak]

1 minute ago, Calderis said:

My whole point was that the "use the knowledge against us line" does not have to mean utilizing that knowledge to create Voidbringers

And I'm just asking for you to present a scenario where that is possible, as I see none. I'm still willing to have a conversation, but please meet me halfway. 

[IllNsickly]

2 minutes ago, Calderis said:

Which I saw as a flaw in the reasoning on which you based the post, since you included that reasoning in the OP. 

have a good day. 

 

Exactly what Calderis said.

Buenos Dias.

[Stormfather-in-Law]

You may be correct about Jasnah's intentions, but you may not be. Nobody can disprove your point, but neither can you prove it. There's just...no smoking gun here, nor in the other thread.

[Fifth of Daybreak]

13 minutes ago, IllNsickly said:

Exactly what Calderis said.

Buenos Dias.

Calderis, while he has frustrated me in this specific instance, was in the other thread acknowledging my arguments. I have a lot of respect for him, and I do not feel as though he has disrespected me now, or at any other time. Our point of contention in this thread, in my opinion, will not have any bearing on the future of our mutual respect.

From your comments here, it is obvious you have not taken the time to go to the other thread, and you are not willing to respect my wishes. That is very disrespectful. I'm going to ask one more time, if you want to discuss my arguments, they are in the other thread, and I'm more than happy to discuss them with you. Please do not disrespect me by ignoring that thread, the point of this one, and then acting as though you have a fully nuanced understanding of my argument. I will not disrespect you in that way, please afford me the same.

9 minutes ago, Stormfather-in-Law said:

You may be correct about Jasnah's intentions, but you may not be. Nobody can disprove your point, but neither can you prove it. There's just...no smoking gun here, nor in the other thread.

I'm not looking for a smoking gun, I'm looking for discussion on whether or not people are agreeing with my read on the morality/philosophy of the situation as well as Jasnah's character given the assumption that Jasnah did in fact reverse assassinate Kabsal. 

 

It's a thought experiment. Pretend this is true, work through the implications, discuss.

Edited November 5, 2017 by Fifth of Daybreak

[Stormfather-in-Law]

Forgive me, but it seems like you're leaping past any counter-arguments made elsewhere, assuming that your idea is correct, then asking what everyone thinks of all the moral/philosophical conclusions you've drawn from that idea being true. I think you're skipping a step and making conclusions based on a very shaky supporting structure.

[Fifth of Daybreak]

2 hours ago, Stormfather-in-Law said:

Forgive me, but it seems like you're leaping past any counter-arguments made elsewhere, assuming that your idea is correct, then asking what everyone thinks of all the moral/philosophical conclusions you've drawn from that idea being true. I think you're skipping a step and making conclusions based on a very shaky supporting structure.

Yes, that is exactly what a thought experiment is. 

If you believe this to be the case ,that my original conclusion from my original thread is based on shaky supporting structure then I highly encourage you to take those counter arguments that you don't think I have fully accounted for, bring them to the other thread where they will be relevant, and I will address them there.

 

The entire point of a thought experiment is that you assume the premise to be true and work from there. That's the whole reason I put parentheticals in the title.

 

Is there any good reason I cannot create a specific thread for the discussion of whether or not Jasnah's character would allow this action and specifically shape the discussion as I have - that we have to assume she has done it and use the philosophies presented in Way of Kings? What exactly is my sin here?

Edited November 6, 2017 by Fifth of Daybreak