Szeth-son-son-Vallano

[Bloodfalcon he/him]

Szeth believed in the ideals of the Shin and held to them even despite terrible pain. Certainly he is somewhat cowardly in refusing to accept things when fighting Kaladin the first time (though I'd argue he was insane at the time so he gets some slack), but I find it difficult to say he is not one of the most honorable people in the series. He held to the laws of his people despite how much pain it caused him. In a way, he's the most self-sacrificing character in Stormlight.

 

Certainly I find him to be a disgusting person with values fundamentally different than mine, but he does have his virtues. He'll make a great Skybreaker as he searches for some sort of redemption, I'm sure.

Self-sacrifice would be him going against his beliefs and resisting when he is ordered to kill people. He'd be sacrificing the things that he cares about in that scenario - himself and his future. Instead, he preserves himself according to his beliefs and kills tons of people, sacrificing them instead. In a sense he sacrifices his soul for his beliefs, but the actual action occurring is him sacrificing those people for his beliefs. It's delusion to put those men, women, and children outside of the situation and only consider your own conflict of the heart as though there is no value to their lives. In that way, he is the least self-sacrificing character in SA.

...but we know where this road leads...

[Aether he/him]

I think we're more or less touching on the philosophical definition of Honour here. Is it honourable to be moral? Is it honourable to follow ones vows and beliefs no matter the cost? Is it honourable to break ones vow if that promise would have you kill an innocent third party?

 

I think it is mostly a matter of perspective, and that it is possible to be honourable and still do the "wrong" thing. And as Moogle, it is possible to be honourable and a despicable bastard at the same time. That also seems to be the direction Brandon is going, considering Kaladin's musings upon the subject with Syl.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Aether

[Pathfinder]

@Aether LOL, yeah that might be a bit awwwwkkkkwwwwaaaarrrddddd

 

@Moogle No worries, I do tend to go on long pedantic rambles that blur my point at times lol. I understand where you are coming from but I still believe my earlier post addresses this, as shown below:

 

"It doesn't matter whether he wants to or not. If a bully intimidates kidA to beat up kidB, is it honorable because deep down kidA doesn't want to? What matters is he does it anyway. He can feel horrible, and think in his head "well the teacher is going to catch me and stop me from hurting him too badly, and I am going to get detention, so I will get what I deserve" doesn't change that he still gave up his own will to someone else's authority. That he didn't challenge that authority that he inherently knew was wrong, and took the cowards way out. He did it cause he was "told to"."

 

Also I do not consider him fighting face to face people who he stated himself on numerious occasions in his internal monologues people who possessed no where near his power. If he instead eshewed his shardblade and abilities when fighting those without either that would be different. Yes there are moments where he does not use his full abilities, but again it is stated from his very internal monologue lips that he does so when he doesn't need to to accomplish his goals. The moment he needs to, he uses them fully. 

 

edit @ Aether All excellent points and I whole heartily agree that Brandon probably did this all on purpose. It has been said afterall, though I forget where that the Skybreakers and the Windrunners didn't like each other. It could be for this exact reason.

 

edit2: oh oh! to take this further and apply dungeons and dragons alignment, I would say Szeth is Lawful Neutral, while Kaladin is Neutral Good. Thoughts? 

Edited April 29, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[hoser he/him]

When did Szeth ever think that the Stone Shamans were wrong? ...

In the first fight, he fled because Kaladin's healing his Shard-severed limb, infusing (which allowed surviving the fall) and words convinced him that he was wrong.  Otherwise, he would have finished the job, perhaps killing Kaladin in the process. 

 

He then falls to Urithiru and contemplates (I-10):

"What does it mean if the Shamanate are wrong?  What does it mean if they banished me in error?"

It meant the End of All Things. The end of truth. It would mean that nothing made sense, and that his oath was meaningless.

It would mean that he had killed for no reason.

 

He decides to look for more evidence, so he is not sure, but he definitely thinks about the Shamans being wrong and he ignored the orders of his oathstone holder until he accepted the story about the stolen Honorblade. 

Edited April 29, 2014 by hoser

[Aether he/him]

edit2: oh oh! to take this further and apply dungeons and dragons alignment, I would say Szeth is Lawful Neutral, while Kaladin is Neutral Good. Thoughts? 

I never really had the time to get into Dungeons and Dragons. Could you please explain the system?

[Moogle]

Self-sacrifice would be him going against his beliefs and resisting when he is ordered to kill people. He'd be sacrificing the things that he cares about in that scenario - himself and his future. Instead, he preserves himself according to his beliefs and kills tons of people, sacrificing them instead. In a sense he sacrifices his soul for his beliefs, but the actual action occurring is him sacrificing those people for his beliefs. It's delusion to put those men, women, and children outside of the situation and only consider your own conflict of the heart as though there is no value to their lives. In that way, he is the least self-sacrificing character in SA.

 

I don't disagree, not exactly. There's different ways to look at him, particularly with a word like "self-sacrificing".

 

I think Szeth would have liked to stop the murders, personally, and that in doing so he would have felt less pained at his decision. It would have put his mind at ease and he could have been 'happy' with his decision, in whatever way Szeth could be happy as an exile. This is the easy decision for Szeth. It's not terribly hard, and wouldn't involve torturing himself daily. It's the choice Kaladin took. I consider Szeth choosing the opposite path to require extreme self-discipline and thus it can be considered 'self-sacrificing'.

 

Your interpretation is a good way to look at Szeth as well... but I don't really agree that Szeth was killing people to preserve himself, though it may have contributed to why he acted the way he did. Szeth was the lowest of the low, and he had no chance of ever becoming anything but Truthless. His punishment was for life. He says that by following the path he is on, he will be tortured for eternity. 'Preserving' himself in this situation is not something most people would willingly do, I think.

 

@Pathfinder:

I don't believe that situation corresponds to Szeth's at all, and I'm not sure what part of it is supposed to be honorable in kidA's head. Did he swear an oath to obey the bully in everything? If so, there's a good argument that he's being honorable. Lawful evil does tend to be honorable.

 

If Szeth gave up his powers when fighting people, he would be committing suicide and betraying the tenets of Stone Shamanism and denying his punishment. He would, essentially, be a criminal that decided to escape prison. That strikes me as dishonorable in the extreme.

 

@Hoser:

Yes, there was that, but he doesn't believe the Stone Shamans were wrong there. He considers the possibility, and is convinced otherwise by Taravangian. He might have been looking for an excuse to not be shown he was Truthless (hence why I think he could be seen as a coward), but I was challenging the assertion that Szeth acted as Truthless while thinking the Stone Shamans were wrong. The instant he thought they might be wrong, he stopped the murderers and fled back to Taravangian. And, to give him a little slack, he was insane at the time.

 

edit2: oh oh! to take this further and apply dungeons and dragons alignment, I would say Szeth is Lawful Neutral, while Kaladin is Neutral Good. Thoughts? 

 

Szeth would be Lawful Neutral for sure, and Kaladin is Lawful Good (Windrunners are very hierarchical and focused on organization and there being order, Syl hates Kaladin lying, etc.) with a slight leaning towards Neutral Good (since he'd break the law if he had to).

 

I never really had the time to get into Dungeons and Dragons. Could you please explain the system?

 

Here's a quick overview, though it's generally difficult to impossible to shoehorn most characters into D&D alignments, and most people don't agree on the alignments. It's made more difficult because sometimes Lawful Good is played as Lawful Stupid, which has its own TVTropes article. Playing paladins can suck in D&D.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Moogle

[WeiryWriter he/him]

I never really had the time to get into Dungeons and Dragons. Could you please explain the system?

The D&D allignment system is based off of two axes, Good/Evil (i.e. Morality) and Lawful/Chaotic (i.e. Ethics).

 

Here's a chart of the nine possible allignments and characters that embody them:

For more information, Wikipedia actually has a decent article on it.

[Bloodfalcon he/him]

I don't disagree, not exactly. There's different ways to look at him, particularly with a word like "self-sacrificing".

 

I think Szeth would have liked to stop the murders, personally, and that in doing so he would have felt less pained at his decision. It would have put his mind at ease and he could have been 'happy' with his decision, in whatever way Szeth could be happy as an exile. This is the easy decision for Szeth. It's not terribly hard, and wouldn't involve torturing himself daily. It's the choice Kaladin took. I consider Szeth choosing the opposite path to require extreme self-discipline and thus it can be considered 'self-sacrificing'.

 

Your interpretation is a good way to look at Szeth as well... but I don't really agree that Szeth was killing people to preserve himself, though it may have contributed to why he acted the way he did. Szeth was the lowest of the low, and he had no chance of ever becoming anything but Truthless. His punishment was for life. He says that by following the path he is on, he will be tortured for eternity. 'Preserving' himself in this situation is not something most people would willingly do, I think.

 

@Pathfinder:

I don't believe that situation corresponds to Szeth's at all, and I'm not sure what part of it is supposed to be honorable in kidA's head. Did he swear an oath to obey the bully in everything? If so, there's a good argument that he's being honorable. Lawful evil does tend to be honorable.

 

If Szeth gave up his powers when fighting people, he would be committing suicide and betraying the tenets of Stone Shamanism and denying his punishment. He would, essentially, be a criminal that decided to escape prison. That strikes me as dishonorable in the extreme.

 

@Hoser:

Yes, there was that, but he doesn't believe the Stone Shamans were wrong there. He considers the possibility, and is convinced otherwise by Taravangian. He might have been looking for an excuse to not be shown he was Truthless (hence why I think he could be seen as a coward), but I was challenging the assertion that Szeth acted as Truthless while thinking the Stone Shamans were wrong. The instant he thought they might be wrong, he stopped the murderers and fled back to Taravangian. And, to give him a little slack, he was insane at the time.

 

 

Szeth would be Lawful Neutral for sure, and Kaladin is Lawful Good (Windrunners are very hierarchical and focused on organization and there being order, Syl hates Kaladin lying, etc.) with a slight leaning towards Neutral Good (since he'd break the law if he had to).

 

 

Here's a quick overview, though it's generally difficult to impossible to shoehorn most characters into D&D alignments, and most people don't agree on the alignments. It's made more difficult because sometimes Lawful Good is played as Lawful Stupid, which has its own TVTropes article. Playing paladins can suck in D&D.

2 Things:

1) Spot on, except eventually Szeth starts killing because he wants to. He decides a couple times that "it's not a command this time, I just want to." I think that was either Kaladin or Adolin. I forget.

2) I'm pretty sure Szeth mentions at one point that there is a possible end to his Truthless title. I'll try to find it. Perhaps he was referencing death, but I could swear....

Looks like I have some research to do, but I would like to find those.

[Moogle]

1) Spot on, except eventually Szeth starts killing because he wants to. He decides a couple times that "it's not a command this time, I just want to." I think that was either Kaladin or Adolin. I forget.

 

Szeth never actually killed anyone, but you're right. It was Adolin, after Adolin kept trying to attack him after Szeth was walking away. It's not quite like Szeth was deciding to kill people just for funzies, but it was still a pretty big turning point. Szeth was pretty certifiably insane at this point and at the breaking point of his honor. I suspect that if Kaladin never came, and Szeth killed Adolin, that Szeth would have gone back and murdered Taravangian and given up on his oaths. Szeth literally had Odium monitoring him (as shown in Kaladin's storm vision).

 

 

2) I'm pretty sure Szeth mentions at one point that there is a possible end to his Truthless title. I'll try to find it. Perhaps he was referencing death, but I could swear....

 

I am not sure, but I'm pretty confident it's only the case if it turns out the Stone Shamans were wrong and Szeth was right all along (because then he never would have been Truthless). I feel reasonably confident that Szeth believed he would always be Truthless.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Moogle

[Pathfinder]

Oh boy, Got a lot to catch up on and its only been a few minutes lol.

 

@Aether, the posts of Moogle and WeiryWriter hit the nail on the head. There are a lot of debates on the meaning of the alignments, but since we all are discussing what we think honor is, I thought it would be fun to see how we would see it applied to that system. 

 

@Moogle:

That is my point, I am equating his obsessive hold to a law as a state of unchanging "truth" as the same as a bully intimidating KidA. I don't see either action as honorable, merely one authority forced onto another. Hopefully I did not write that in such a way to insult your belief in it. You make very cogent points and I do see where you are coming from, I just disagree. 

 

I do not see giving up the shardblade and abilities as suicidal. I understood based on the example you gave, my interpretation would be, Szeth meets a person with a normal sword and no magic. Szeth then honorably levels the playing field by picking up a normal sword, and does not use his magic. If I look you in the face and you (unarmed or with just a sword) see me as I unload an AK47 at you, is that more honorable than doing it with your back turned? I am still using something that gives you a VERY negligible chance of survival. That does not strike me as honorable. 

 

Now sorry to split a already split hair, but you stated when did Szeth THINK the stone shamans were wrong. You never stated he has to believe it for certain. Hoser did prove rather succinctly that he at least briefly thought the stone shamans could be wrong. As you say yourself, It takes Taravangian to assure him otherwise. 

 

I do lean towards neutral good for Kal, cause like you said, when he feels a law is unjust, he will disobey it to protect someone. Szeth pretty much exemplifies someone who would hold the literal word of the law above all else no matter what. 

[Pathfinder]

Szeth never actually killed anyone, but you're right. It was Adolin, after Adolin kept trying to attack him after Szeth was walking away. It's not quite like Szeth was deciding to kill people just for funzies, but it was still a pretty big turning point. Szeth was pretty certifiably insane at this point and at the breaking point of his honor. I suspect that if Kaladin never came, and Szeth killed Adolin, that Szeth would have gone back and murdered Taravangian and given up on his oaths. Szeth literally had Odium monitoring him (as shown in Kaladin's storm vision).

Sorry to double post, but I just had to point out when Szeth fought Adolin and Dalinar, he sent another highprice hiiiiiiigh into the skyyyyyy till he dropped and went CRUNCH. Also a lot of bridgemen went after him and he killed them. Unless I am misunderstanding the time line you are referencing. 

 

edit: if instead of referencing the climatic battle, you instead are referencing the assassination attempt on Elhokar, Szeth did kill one of the two bridgemen guarding him. 

Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 387973120 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 442083632 bytes) in Unknown on line 0

Edited April 29, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[Moogle]

I do not see giving up the shardblade and abilities as suicidal. I understood based on the example you gave, my interpretation would be, Szeth meets a person with a normal sword and no magic. Szeth then honorably levels the playing field by picking up a normal sword, and does not use his magic. If I look you in the face and you (unarmed or with just a sword) see me as I unload an AK47 at you, is that more honorable than doing it with your back turned? I am still using something that gives you a VERY negligible chance of survival. That does not strike me as honorable. 

 

I don't disagree with this idea of honor in combat, but I would argue you can be honorable without following it.

 

That said: when did Szeth grossly ignore these standards?

 

Szeth never really fought a person one on one with just a sword. The closest person he did that with is Dalinar in the Everstorm, but Dalinar was inhaling Stormlight and had his own Shardblade at the time.

 

We could consider him attacking Dalinar during the highstorm in the middle of WoR, but he was facing three people at the time (one of which had a Shardblade) so it would be 'honorable' to use Stormlight and a Shardblade to even the odds.

 

We could think about Gavilar, but Gavilar had Plate, which protects from Shardblades and also grants strength similar to holding Stormlight. They were reasonably even in that fight.

 

Closest thing I can think of is the assassination of Gavilar, when Szeth attacks two guards, but he was outnumbered and the guards had allies coming. There were also no convenient spears around for him to use to fight fairly.

 

I'd still consider Szeth not using his arsenal to its full potential an attempt at suicide, much like I would consider someone trying to bypass a restriction on not taking their own life by driving on dangerous mountain roads with a crappy car to be committing suicide. If Szeth were to fight 'honorably' by using a stick against someone in Shardplate, I think he would be attempting to break the oath he swore to obey his master.

 

Sorry to double post, but I just had to point out when Szeth fought Adolin and Dalinar, he sent another highprice hiiiiiiigh into the skyyyyyy till he dropped and went CRUNCH. Also a lot of bridgemen went after him and he killed them. Unless I am misunderstanding the time line you are referencing. 

 

I meant that Szeth never killed anyone on his own who wasn't actively defending his assassination target or attempting to kill him. The highprince in question that Szeth sent into the sky was attacking him and defending Dalinar. Sorry for being unclear.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Moogle

[Pathfinder]

I think we are getting confused here. My example was in response to your comment shown below, emphasis mine

Okay, I misinterpreted you before. We're in agreement: Szeth is a horrible person.

 

How does this mean he's not honorable? He swore to obey the commands of whoever held his oathstone, and he did that despite all the pain it caused him. Most times he killed, he did it in a fair fight after giving warning he was coming through his white clothing. All this sets off alarm bells in my head signifying he's honorable.

My point is as long as he holds a honorblade and those he fight hold no magic, it is NOT a fair fight and by your own statement NOT honorable. When he went up against Dalinar who was almost a radiant by that point, that is ALMOST a fair fight. When he went up against Kaladin THAT is a fair fight. They both held radiant powers. They didn't even have to hold the SAME radiant powers, but Kaladin would have a fighting chance. There are numerous times Szeth says to himself how those he fights have NO CHANCE of beating him because of his blade and what he can do. I was just pointing out that by your own logic, if a fair fight constitutes being honorable, then Szeth is NOT honorable because he has rarely been in a fair fight throughout the books. 

 

Please clarify what time frame we are talking regarding him not killing anyone who wasn't actively defending themselves. There were numerous assassinations where his targets fled, and I don't believe defending oneself from getting killed nullifies his intention to now kill cause he wants to. Not sure I understand your rationale in that. 

[hoser he/him]

This is the biggest reason I can't take Szeth seriously as a character.  I accept that he advances the story Brandon wants to tell. The inconsistencies I perceive undermine his story. 

I ...

 

@Hoser:

Yes, there was that, but he doesn't believe the Stone Shamans were wrong there. He considers the possibility, and is convinced otherwise by Taravangian. He might have been looking for an excuse to not be shown he was Truthless (hence why I think he could be seen as a coward), but I was challenging the assertion that Szeth acted as Truthless while thinking the Stone Shamans were wrong. The instant he thought they might be wrong, he stopped the murderers and fled back to Taravangian. And, to give him a little slack, he was insane at the time.

He knew the Stone Shaman were wrong from the beginning.  That is what they punished him for.  He was so convinced that the Shamanate was wrong that he risked being judged Truthless.  Then he accepts their authority.  It makes no sense.  If he accepted their authority, he would never have challenged them in the first place.  He would have just convinced himself he was wrong to begin with. 

 

He knew that Kaladin was a proto-Radiant.  He knows that Mr. T is using him to commit assassinations based on his Truthlessness, which he knows is false.  He is a smart man.  Why would he go to Mr. T, who would have every reason to lie to him, and accept his cock and bull story without any evidence? 

 

If he doubted his Truthlessness, he should check out Kaladin some more, or find out whether an Honorblade is indeed missing.  His accepting Mr. T's lies without verifying them makes no sense.  He knows that Mr. T will stop at nothing to get what he wants.  Even the Parshendi can see that Kaladin doesn't have an Honorblade because he has no sword at all.  Further, Kaladin claims to be a Windrunner.  If Kaladin had a different Honorblade, Szeth knows that Kaladin would not be a Windrunner. 

[Moogle]

My point is as long as he holds a honorblade and those he fight hold no magic, it is NOT a fair fight and by your own statement NOT honorable.

 

I said you can be honorable without fighting fair, just that fighting fair tends to signify honor. I find Szeth holding to his own code to be honorable, and I think that by trying to fight fair he would be attempting suicide and thus betraying his code.

 

Please clarify what time frame we are talking regarding him not killing anyone who wasn't actively defending themselves. There were numerous assassinations where his targets fled, and I don't believe defending oneself from getting killed nullifies his intention to now kill cause he wants to. Not sure I understand your rationale in that. 

 

To clarify, I mean that Szeth has never killed anyone he has not been ordered to kill unless they were actively defending targets he was ordered to kill. Where possible, he attempts to minimize the death. The only time he really went against that with Adolin during the Everstorm, but Adolin was sort of trying to kill him at the time.

 

He knew the Stone Shaman were wrong from the beginning.  That is what they punished him for.  He was so convinced that the Shamanate was wrong that he risked being judged Truthless.  Then he accepts their authority.  It makes no sense.  If he accepted their authority, he would never have challenged them in the first place.  He would have just convinced himself he was wrong to begin with. 

 

I don't think he knew the Stone Shamans were wrong. He thought he was right that the Voidbringers were returning, but then was smacked down and told he was wrong. He accepted the Stone Shaman's authority, and when they told him he was wrong and a liar, he accepted that he was wrong. Maybe he has ridiculous self confidence issues? Hopefully his book illuminates things.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Moogle

[Pathfinder]

I said you can be honorable without fighting fair, just that fighting fair tends to signify honor. I find Szeth holding to his own code to be honorable, and I think that by trying to fight fair he would be attempting suicide and thus betraying his code.

 

 

To clarify, I mean that Szeth has never killed anyone he has not been ordered to kill unless they were actively defending targets he was ordered to kill. Where possible, he attempts to minimize the death. The only time he really went against that with Adolin during the Everstorm, but Adolin was sort of trying to kill him at the time..

 

Oooooooooh, ok then that just means it comes down to a differing of opinion/perspective. From what I understand of what you say, being honorable is rigidly holding to a code, I disagree because just codes enacted by man are by definition fallible and as shown can be wrong. Based on our views (as Aether did point out earlier), neither is exactly wrong, we just see honor differently. 

 

Same deal here too, horribly maiming someone instead of killing them still doesn't change he is bringing harm to people holding to their own beliefs. I mean he has no verifiable proof that his oath holds any greater precedent of law than the people who he kills, and in fact because it is in error, it shows how problematic it is.  

 

edit: because literally it is shown what he did was wrong, that everything he based his oath on was a lie, and he killed all those people for no reason. that his oath was meaningless and he made the world worse by following it. he was literally the case that disproved the rule. 

Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 387973120 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 486439216 bytes) in Unknown on line 0

Edited April 29, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[Moogle]

Same deal here too, horribly maiming someone instead of killing them still doesn't change he is bringing harm to people holding to their own beliefs. I mean he has no verifiable proof that his oath holds any greater precedent of law than the people who he kills, and in fact because it is in error, it shows how problematic it is. 

 

Yeah, I think we just have differing ideas on what honor is. I find Kaladin, Dalinar, and Szeth all honorable (in slightly differing ways). We both agree with Szeth is a terrible person, we're just using different words to describe why.

 

I don't see why Szeth would need a "greater precedent of law". He's following Shin law: he has to obey the orders of his master because he's Truthless. Why would he ever have to consider the laws of anyone but the Shin in his own personal code? I myself have no issues with women wearing any clothing they want (not that I am a terribly lawful person - I'd make a horrible Skybreaker ), but other countries have laws against that.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Moogle

[Bloodfalcon he/him]

For any interested, chapter 86 covers Szeth's reaction to Kaladin's powers. I suppose it is his third reaction to them, but it is when he accepts what he sees.

[Pathfinder]

So out of curiosity given this discussion, I typed honor into google to see what would come up. Reading the descriptions, it is almost like Brandon Sanderson did the same thing, and applied each definition to each order. (a stretch I know, but it was fun linking some up lol) See below:

 

hon·or

ˈänər/

noun

noun: honour; noun: honor

1. 1.

   high respect; esteem. (Windrunners)

   "his portrait hangs in the place of honor"

   synonyms: distinction, recognition, privilege, glory, kudos, cachet, prestige, merit,credit; More

    

    

    

   antonyms: disgrace

   • a person or thing that brings credit.

     "you are an honor to our profession"
   • adherence to what is right or to a conventional standard of conduct. (Skybreakers)

     plural noun: honours; plural noun: honors

     "I must as a matter of honor avoid any taint of dishonesty"

     synonyms: integrity, honesty, uprightness, ethics, morals, morality, principles,high principles, righteousness, high-mindedness; More

      

      

     antonyms: unscrupulousness, dishonor
2. 2.

   a privilege.

   "the great poet of whom it is my honor to speak tonight"

   synonyms: privilege, pleasure, pride, joy; More

    

    

   antonyms: shame

   • a thing conferred as a distinction, especially an official award for bravery or achievement. (Dustbringers)

     "the highest military honors"

     synonyms: accolade, award, reward, prize, decoration, distinction, medal, ribbon,star, laurel More

      
   • a special distinction for proficiency in an examination. (Elsecaller)

     plural noun: honours; plural noun: honors

     "she passed with honors"
   • a class or course of degree studies more specialized than that of the ordinary level.

     plural noun: honors

     "an honors degree in mathematics"
   • a title of respect given to or used in addressing a judge or a mayor. (Bondsmith)

     noun: His Honour; noun: His Honor; noun: Her Honour; noun: Her Honor; noun:Your Honour; noun: Your Honor; adjective: His
   • GOLF

     the right of teeing off first, having won the previous hole.
3. 3.

   dated

   a woman's chastity or her reputation for this.

   "she died defending her honor"

   synonyms: chastity, virginity, maidenhead, purity, innocence, modesty; More

    

    
4. 4.

   BRIDGE

   an ace, king, queen, or jack.

   • possession in one's hand of at least four of the ace, king, queen, and jack of trumps, or of all four aces in no trumps, for which a bonus is scored.

     plural noun: honors
   • (in whist) an ace, king, queen, or jack of trumps.

verb

verb: honour; 3rd person present: honours; past tense: honoured; past participle:honoured; gerund or present participle: honouring; verb: honor; 3rd person present:honors; past tense: honored; past participle: honored; gerund or present participle:honoring

1. 1.

   regard with great respect.

   "Joyce has now learned to honor her father's memory"

   synonyms: esteem, respect, admire, defer to, look up to; More

    

    

    

    

   antonyms: disrespect

   • pay public respect to.

     "talented writers were honored at a special ceremony"

     synonyms: applaud, acclaim, praise, salute, recognize, celebrate, commemorate,commend, hail, lionize, exalt, eulogize, pay homage to, pay tribute to,sing the praises of; More

      

      

     antonyms: disgrace, criticize
2. 2.

   fulfill (an obligation) or keep (an agreement).

   "make sure the franchisees honor the terms of the contract"

   synonyms: fulfill, observe, keep, obey, heed, follow, carry out, discharge,implement, execute, effect; More

    

    

   antonyms: disobey

   • accept (a bill) or pay (a check) when due.

     "the bank informed him that the check would not be honored"

Edited April 29, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[Matrim Bloody Cauthon he/him]

upvote for you edgedancer.

 

 

Is Szeth a coward? Absolutely.

 

First he refuses to stand up for his convictions that the voidbringers have returned. Then add doing things he knows to be wrong as a form of punishment, because you know, others should pay for his mistakes. People may call that honor but it is also cowardice when you use it as a shield to hide behind doing things you absolutely know to be wrong.

 

Tack on blaming his victims for not being able to kill him so he can justify murdering them to himself. Whats that the mark of? A coward.

 

When he knew that the Radiants had returned he let Taravangian talk him out of it. Why? He said it himself, "It would mean he had killed for no reason." (~page 709)

 

false.

A. he did stick to his convictions about the voidbringers. why do you think that he was named truthless?

B. he didn't tack the blame on the victims except for king hanavanar of jah keved. he does that not because they couldn't kill him but because they set a trap for him during a feast. that meant that he had to kill more people.

C. he gets talked out of believing that the radiants had returned because at that point he has been broken at this point. his soul is wracked with pain everyday for what he has done. wouldn't you want to believe you hadn't been named truthless for nothing. his sense of honor wont let him stop even though he wants to. is your sense of honor that strong?

 

[Shaggai]

No, I wouldn't consider him cowardly. He's willing to literally sacrifice his soul in order to follow the code of his people. How many people would be strong enough to do that?

[Pathfinder]

upvote for you edgedancer.

 

 

 

false.

A. he did stick to his convictions about the voidbringers. why do you think that he was named truthless?

B. he didn't tack the blame on the victims except for king hanavanar of jah keved. he does that not because they couldn't kill him but because they set a trap for him during a feast. that meant that he had to kill more people.

C. he gets talked out of believing that the radiants had returned because at that point he has been broken at this point. his soul is wracked with pain everyday for what he has done. wouldn't you want to believe you hadn't been named truthless for nothing. his sense of honor wont let him stop even though he wants to. is your sense of honor that strong?

 

 

double false lol

 

A. He stuck to his convictions long enough to be told he was wrong and cast out. Then when shown he was actually right, he chose to continue to believe a comforting lie than a harsh truth

 

B. You are neglecting the order of his thoughts, I have provided the quotes below:

"And....and the king. Szeth spun on the man. Irrationally, his confused, broken mind blamed this man. Why had he called a feast on this night? Why couldn't he have retired early? Why had he invited so many people?"

So right there, blamed the king, he said himself irrationally. Blamed the king for living his life. It was the kings fault for holding his court with so many people. The king's fault for not hiding alone, to ease SZETH'S conscious so he wouldn't "have" to kill more people. Only AFTER it dawns on him about the trap, does he thank the king for setting a trap so he can blame him for the deaths, which shows him shoving blame off to others. and btw, him "having" to kill people? same chapter, few paragraphs earlier:

"He cut through a man who was drawing his sword-but also sliced through three women who wanted only to escape" So I assume to stop a lone man with a sword, after that wholesale slaughter, he HAD to slice through those women as well? He couldn't have dodged back? Or killed him any of the countless other ways he employed? No, that action showed a level of carelessness. He just....didn't.....care. Which shows how all this "pain" and "anguish" he goes through when he kills people is just a lie he tells himself

 

C. Still Szeth isn't stupid, why would you ask for confirmation from the very person who is ordering you to do horendous stuff? He he trully wanted to hold to his oaths, he would have tried every avenue to verify they were right, INCLUDING finding Kaladin and confronting him first before he did ANYTHING else.

[Shaggai]

double false lol

 

A. He stuck to his convictions long enough to be told he was wrong and cast out. Then when shown he was actually right, he chose to continue to believe a comforting lie than a harsh truth

 

B. You are neglecting the order of his thoughts, I have provided the quotes below:

"And....and the king. Szeth spun on the man. Irrationally, his confused, broken mind blamed this man. Why had he called a feast on this night? Why couldn't he have retired early? Why had he invited so many people?"

So right there, blamed the king, he said himself irrationally. Blamed the king for living his life. It was the kings fault for holding his court with so many people. The king's fault for not hiding alone, to ease SZETH'S conscious so he wouldn't "have" to kill more people. Only AFTER it dawns on him about the trap, does he thank the king for setting a trap so he can blame him for the deaths, which shows him shoving blame off to others. and btw, him "having" to kill people? same chapter, few paragraphs earlier:

"He cut through a man who was drawing his sword-but also sliced through three women who wanted only to escape" So I assume to stop a lone man with a sword, after that wholesale slaughter, he HAD to slice through those women as well? He couldn't have dodged back? Or killed him any of the countless other ways he employed? No, that action showed a level of carelessness. He just....didn't.....care. Which shows how all this "pain" and "anguish" he goes through when he kills people is just a lie he tells himself

 

C. Still Szeth isn't stupid, why would you ask for confirmation from the very person who is ordering you to do horendous stuff? He he trully wanted to hold to his oaths, he would have tried every avenue to verify they were right, INCLUDING finding Kaladin and confronting him first before he did ANYTHING else.

 

Szeth was ordered to kill as many people as possible and only leave a few survivors at that dinner. He was, in effect, ordered to kill those women.

[Pathfinder]

 

Szeth was ordered to kill as many people as possible and only leave a few survivors at that dinner. He was, in effect, ordered to kill those women.

Good point, I did forget about that. Though that still doesn't change my point about him assigning blame. If the trap had been sprung AND THEN he blamed the king, then the chain of logic would be he realized all those people were there cause of the king, and they would have been saved had he not planned the trap. instead, in his mind at the time, he was blaming the people for going about their lives which caused them to end up in his blades path. "oh poor me, i am so horrible because you all had to be in front of me, so i have to kill you. it is so so terrible, that i must kill you, because you chose to be here on this day and thereby are in my way and must die". THEN the king springs the trap, and Szeth then feels some relief cause he can blame the king for the increased deaths easier than on the innocents

Edited April 30, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[hoser he/him]

IMO it's sort of opposite.

No, I wouldn't consider him cowardly. He's willing to literally sacrifice his soul in order to follow the code of his people. How many people would be strong enough to do that?

According to his beliefs, if he follows the terms of his punishment, then his soul experiences torment in the (holy) stone.  If he doesn't, he thinks his soul will be annihilated (quote from tWoK available upon request).  In a sense, he is selfish, sacrificing countless lives to retain his post-death existence (according to a belief system that he arguably knows is wrong).