Szeth-son-son-Vallano

[BrindIf]

I think Szeth is a religious fanatic.

He has abdicated his freedom of thought to the Shaman, letting them decide for him what is true or false, what is right or wrong, even if he doesn't feel the same way.

 

The passage Hoser is referencing is:

 

Dangerous thoughts. His way of life was all that remained to him. If he questioned Stone Shamanism, would he then question his nature as Truthless? Dangerous, dangerous. Though his murders and sins would damnation him, at least his soul would be given to the stones upon his death. He would continue to exist. Punished, in agony, but not exiled to nothingness.

 

So yeah, him following the rules of his religion is a kind of cowardice. Even if it also ask for a lot of courage.

[kari-no-sugata]

I've got a quick idea about Szeth but don't have time to post it up / research it properly. So I'm just going to toss out my idea:

 

• We know the Shin have been secretly keeping all the Honorblades they have. I think they've also been maintaining active knowledge in Surgebinding as well - probably part of their religion.
• The way their maintain knowledge is to allow people to use them, probably one person per Honorblade at a time.
• These people would obviously be specially selected. To protect against improper use there would also be extremely harsh penalties - which is what I suspect all Truthless are.
• So I think Szeth was one of these specially selected people and had knowledge and experience of the Honorblade he had before he ever became Truthless
• Szeth knows he will face Honorblade wielding Shin if he returns because there already are people experienced with them
• I don't think the general Shin population knows all the details and their idea of a Truthless might be more like "priest who has committed a crime"

I don't have time right now to check all these ideas but I think it fits well from what I remember. I suspect there's been some similar theories to this too...

 

[Pathfinder]

@kari-no-sugata, i understand you still need to verify those ideas, and I look forward to seeing your research, but I did just want to point out one thing. The shin view warriors as the lowest of the low. Almost like slaves has more standing in their minds than warriors do. Truthless are even worse. I am not saying they wouldn't have people training with the honor blades, and have a certain group made specifically for that. It does make sense to a degree. What I disagree with is the sense of being a priest. In most religions such a title is one viewed with respect, while what little we know Shin society, such a group would be viewed more as lepers I think. People with the "disease" of combat. Best to stay away from lest one learn such unholy actions. 

 

edit: that just made me realize something! I think we have been looking at things the wrong way. Those supporting the oath as honorable have been saying keeping the oath despite the pain he is in is honorable. Those against the oath have been saying by keeping to the oath despite the pain of knowing what he is doing is wrong, is cowardly. I think there is one problem with both interpretations, we are assuming WHY he is in "pain"

 

Killing and combat being wrong is one of the central tenants of his religion. He believes he is in pain for killing people because he was taught he should be. In my mind the equivalency would be the order of monks who would whip/flog themselves for having impure lust filled thoughts. Some would see that as altruistic, so faithful in bringing themselves closer to their god that they would deny themselves certain thoughts and even physically harm themselves to prevent it. Others would see it as cowardly. That instead of facing these emotions, accepting them and living with them, instead this group brutally denies it through masochistic zeal and claims holy doctrine. So I posit the question, does Szeth truly feel remorse, or does he because his SOCIETY tells him he should?

Edited April 30, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[Necromancer he/him]

I believe all warriors from that land have oath stones, but I digress.

Off topic, but remember Kaladin's brother finding stones with faces in WoK? I think those may have been old or discarded oath stones.

[Bloodfalcon he/him]

Would they have been discarded to the other side of the continent? Maybe via Highstorm, I guess....

[Pathfinder]

Highstorms don't occur in Shin. Or more accurately they can't reach that location. So the next supposition would be could shin warriors have traveled outside shin, died and lost the oath stones and THEN the highstorms carry it. This is possible but I feel unlikely. My theory is that tien is part shin, given his youthful look, and that he is a stone shaman which is why he sees the faces. Whether it is because kals parents adopted him, or through extra marital affairs though I can't say

[Bloodfalcon he/him]

Highstorms don't occur in Shin. Or more accurately they can't reach that location. So the next supposition would be could shin warriors have traveled outside shin, died and lost the oath stones and THEN the highstorms carry it. This is possible but I feel unlikely. My theory is that tien is part shin, given his youthful look, and that he is a stone shaman which is why he sees the faces. Whether it is because kals parents adopted him, or through extra marital affairs though I can't say

Wow, there's one I haven't heard.

[Moogle]

IMO it's sort of opposite.

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). 

 

Perhaps in a sense, but I've never got the sense that Szeth was doing what he was to 'save' his immortal soul.

 

 

Dangerous thoughts. His way of life was all that remained to him. If he questioned Stone Shamanism, would he then question his nature as Truthless? Dangerous, dangerous. Though his murders and sins would damnation him, at least his soul would be given to the stones upon his death. He would continue to exist. Punished, in agony, but not exiled to nothingness.

 

This is the only time he ever brings it up, and he seems to be using it as a way to convince himself to keep doing what he's doing. I'd also question just how many people would take eternal torture over oblivion.

[Pathfinder]

Perhaps in a sense, but I've never got the sense that Szeth was doing what he was to 'save' his immortal soul.

 

 

This is the only time he ever brings it up, and he seems to be using it as a way to convince himself to keep doing what he's doing. I'd also question just how many people would take eternal torture over oblivion.

Every member of 90 percent of religions currently existing when they argue with atheists over the existence of an afterlife. I forgot how the quote goes, but a priest once told a native tribesman that he must know god and accept him otherwise he would go to hell. The tribesman asked if he had not known god existed, and continued as he did would he have gone to hell? the priest replied no because he would have been ignorant of what he was doing was wrong. the tribesman then asked "then why did you tell me?"

 

edit: @Bloodfalcon, thanks, do you think I should post that theory as its own thread?

Edited April 30, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[Shaggai]

Every member of 90 percent of religions currently existing when they argue with atheists over the existence of an afterlife. I forgot how the quote goes, but a priest once told a native tribesman that he must know god and accept him otherwise he would go to hell. The tribesman asked if he had not known god existed, and continued as he did would he have gone to hell? the priest replied no because he would have been ignorant of what he was doing was wrong. the tribesman then asked "then why did you tell me?"

 

edit: @Bloodfalcon, thanks, do you think I should post that theory as its own thread?

Yeah, but how many of those people think they're going to go to hell?

[Aether he/him]

It perplexes me how so many can take the threat of eternal punishment from their respective religion so seriously, yet disregard all other similar claims from other religions as laughable.

[Shaggai]

It perplexes me how so many can take the threat of eternal punishment from their respective religion so seriously, yet disregard all other similar claims from other religions as laughable.

They believe their religion is the only true one. I don't care who says that there's a monster under my bed. I'm not going to be afraid. Presumably, other hells are viewed similarly.

[Pathfinder]

That is kind of a strawman argument. Baring me actually enacting a poll or census where I interview people of faith, I cannot conclusively prove there would be a significant number of individuals that believe based on their religious beliefs that they are going to hell (even assuming they answer honestly). What I can do however is point out given the population of the planet, we can safely assume by probability there is a significant enough that are members of a faith (whatever faith that may be), and of that number there is a significant probability that there is a significant number that DO in fact believe they are going to hell. Regardless whether they will admit it to others or not. 

Edited April 30, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[Shaggai]

That is kind of a strawman argument. Baring me actually enacting a poll or census where I interview people of faith, I cannot conclusively prove there would be a significant number of individuals that believe based on their religious beliefs that they are going to hell (even assuming they answer honestly). What I can do however is point out given the population of the planet, we can safely assume by probability there is a significant enough that are members of a faith (whatever faith that may be), and of that number there is a significant probability that there is a significant number that DO in fact believe they are going to hell. Regardless whether they will admit it to others or not.

It was a rhetorical question. The point is that anyone who believes a specific religion is vastly likely to believe that they're doing the will of their deity/ies. A poll asking people what they thought God wanted and what they wanted showed that the two were almost identical. People don't want to believe that they're going to hell. And one of the central tenets of most religions is that what God wants is right, no matter what you think. Certainly, there are those who are willing to go to hell for their beliefs (I believe Desmond Tutu is one, although mostly hypothetically), but they're rare.

[Aether he/him]

That is kind of a strawman argument. Baring me actually enacting a poll or census where I interview people of faith, I cannot conclusively prove there would be a significant number of individuals that believe based on their religious beliefs that they are going to hell (even assuming they answer honestly).

It is a bit of a Strawman argument, true, at least in the way I formulated it. I Have had, though, many conversations with people who are completely baffled that I do not take the threat of Hell seriously, so while that might not be the primary reason people adhere to a religion, one would assume that it is at least part of the equation.

 

But I feel like we are digressing from the original topic, and I am not sure the is the right forum for this type of discussion. I am way to fond of discussing religion for my own good, and while I don't think the subject should not be given a special protection against criticism as we would never give other topics, this is hardly the avenue for it.

 

 

Just to get back on track, Szeth is Shin, and it is clear that his people have some deep-seated beliefs and values that other people would find strange at best, positively despicable at worst. But this is how he was raised, and convictions can be very hard to let go of. If he was taught that non-existence is a worse hell than eternal torture, then I do not have any difficulties believing why he would act and think as he does.

[Pathfinder]

@Aether I do agree this has gone off the beaten path quite a bit lol. However I will point out by the last sentence you state, you prove Bloodfalcon's point (I THINK that is who stated it). Your qoute: "if he was taught that non-existence is a worse hell than eternal torture, than I do not have any difficulties believing why he would act and think as he does."

 

Bloodfalcon stated earlier the fact that he continued to kill and obey was a self delusion to protect himself from the possibility of not finding himself in the shin afterlife. That the fear of non-existence was enough that he would continue to sacrifice others in the pursuit of an ideal he himself doubted after fighting kaladin. He would rather kill people as ordered, ensuring him a place in damnation, than stop and be cast to non-existence. Self preservation over innocent life. Cowardice. 

[Aether he/him]

@Aether I do agree this has gone off the beaten path quite a bit lol. However I will point out by the last sentence you state, you prove Bloodfalcon's point (I THINK that is who stated it). Your qoute: "if he was taught that non-existence is a worse hell than eternal torture, than I do not have any difficulties believing why he would act and think as he does."

 

Bloodfalcon stated earlier the fact that he continued to kill and obey was a self delusion to protect himself from the possibility of not finding himself in the shin afterlife. That the fear of non-existence was enough that he would continue to sacrifice others in the pursuit of an ideal he himself doubted after fighting kaladin. He would rather kill people as ordered, ensuring him a place in damnation, than stop and be cast to non-existence. Self preservation over innocent life. Cowardice. 

The difference might be slight, but I was specifically talking about people with knowledge of threats of eternal punishment from alternative religions. Szeth isn't presented with an alternative world-view, and thought Taravangians arguments were weak, they were logical, and Szeth was pretty much insane at this point. Szeth was fanatically following the tenants of his society, but I submit that he might not have taken Taravangians word for it quite as easily if he hadn't been as unbalanced, which would again force him to really reconsider his faith in the Shamanate.

[Moogle]

Bloodfalcon stated earlier the fact that he continued to kill and obey was a self delusion to protect himself from the possibility of not finding himself in the shin afterlife. That the fear of non-existence was enough that he would continue to sacrifice others in the pursuit of an ideal he himself doubted after fighting kaladin. He would rather kill people as ordered, ensuring him a place in damnation, than stop and be cast to non-existence. Self preservation over innocent life. Cowardice. 

 

It remains to be proven that this is one of the main reasons that Szeth acts the way he does. Whenever he kills people, we don't hear him repeating a mantra in his head like "torture over non-existence". He throws out that particular tenet of Shin faith off-handedly once in two books and doesn't dwell on it. I certainly agree that it may be one (small) reason that he does what he does, but I don't think he's staying as a Truthless just because he fears non-existence.

 

If he felt this way, I suspect Nalan would not have found him very interesting.

Edited April 30, 2014 by Moogle

[Pathfinder]

@Aether could you explain your first sentence a bit more? I honestly am a bit confused and would like to understand. Other than that, from Taravangian on I am with you and agree with your assessment. 

 

@Moogle Ok so first time I read what you wrote I was going to make the following arguments off the bat. Having re-read it a few times, I realize you may have misunderstood my point and by extension Bloodfalcon's (this is stated with much reservation as this is my interpretation and bloodfalcon has not rung in yet to speak for him or herself, so I do not want to misrepresent him or her). I never said it was the SOLE reason he did as he did, nor do I feel it has to be the SOLE reason for him to be considered a coward. Now this leads to a point I state with trepidation because I do not want to sound offensive, but if we are going to nitpick as to how much he did something for some reason vs another to be whether or not he is cowardly, then please define what percentage is required for him to chose a reason to do as he does, in order for it to be valid to determine his honor or cowardice? And please after you define the percentage, please also define the requirement to determine the percentage? Is it how many times it comes up in the book? Or how angsty he acts when he does? How much he cries? By saying saying that reason doesn't apply because you think it is a small reason is purely subjective unless you can site a gauge to determine it by. Otherwise I would posit the fact that it IS a reason when placed next to his action of MURDERING people, makes it valid regardless the frequency it is stated in the book.

 

Now all of this is tempered by I most definitely agree with you, if that was the ONLY reason why he did what he did, Nale would not have given him a second glance. Further, the simple fact that a herald who is supposedly supposed to be the embodiment of an aspect of honor choosing Szeth himself to join, proves on some level at least someone thinks Szeth's actions are a valid expression of honor. All this really means in the end, is I would end up in the windrunner camp of this debate and you would end up in the skybreakers (i personally fancy myself an elsecaller, I am merely equating this with their moral divide in orders which I think resulted in the very formation of their orders being diametrically opposed). Also, though it can be said Nale is corrupted as others in this forum have expressed, I do not believe he is. I do not have the resources/knowledge to prove this, but in my gut i believe this is true.

[Shaggai]

@Aether could you explain your first sentence a bit more? I honestly am a bit confused and would like to understand. Other than that, from Taravangian on I am with you and agree with your assessment. 

 

@Moogle Ok so first time I read what you wrote I was going to make the following arguments off the bat. Having re-read it a few times, I realize you may have misunderstood my point and by extension Bloodfalcon's (this is stated with much reservation as this is my interpretation and bloodfalcon has not rung in yet to speak for him or herself, so I do not want to misrepresent him or her). I never said it was the SOLE reason he did as he did, nor do I feel it has to be the SOLE reason for him to be considered a coward. Now this leads to a point I state with trepidation because I do not want to sound offensive, but if we are going to nitpick as to how much he did something for some reason vs another to be whether or not he is cowardly, then please define what percentage is required for him to chose a reason to do as he does, in order for it to be valid to determine his honor or cowardice? And please after you define the percentage, please also define the requirement to determine the percentage? Is it how many times it comes up in the book? Or how angsty he acts when he does? How much he cries? By saying saying that reason doesn't apply because you think it is a small reason is purely subjective unless you can site a gauge to determine it by. Otherwise I would posit the fact that it IS a reason when placed next to his action of MURDERING people, makes it valid regardless the frequency it is stated in the book.

 

Now all of this is tempered by I most definitely agree with you, if that was the ONLY reason why he did what he did, Nale would not have given him a second glance. Further, the simple fact that a herald who is supposedly supposed to be the embodiment of an aspect of honor choosing Szeth himself to join, proves on some level at least someone thinks Szeth's actions are a valid expression of honor. All this really means in the end, is I would end up in the windrunner camp of this debate and you would end up in the skybreakers (i personally fancy myself an elsecaller, I am merely equating this with their moral divide in orders which I think resulted in the very formation of their orders being diametrically opposed). Also, though it can be said Nale is corrupted as others in this forum have expressed, I do not believe he is. I do not have the resources/knowledge to prove this, but in my gut i believe this is true.

 

Nale may no longer follow his original purpose, but he still follows order, even if he does it in a malevolent way. He finds Szeth's actions beautiful because Szeth sacrificed everything - his sanity, his life, even his soul - in order to follow order and the code of his people.

[Aether he/him]

@Aether could you explain your first sentence a bit more? I honestly am a bit confused and would like to understand. Other than that, from Taravangian on I am with you and agree with your assessment. 

I have ended up staying up way longer than I intended, so pardon me if I have trouble expressing myself properly.

 

My initial statement about Hell was to be taken in the context of comparative views of Hell and damnation. What I meant is that I fail to understand how, let's say a Christian, can be baffled my my apparent unconcern for the threat of eternal punishment of their religion, when they are just as unconcerned as I am about the Muslim threat of hell and similar claims that they know about from other religions. Point being that they claim inability to comprehend a specific lack of belief while maintaining that same lack of belief towards similar claims.

 

Szeth, on the other hand, is never confronted with an alternative world-view, or an alternative threat of eternal suffering. He is specifically confronted with information that might directly invalidate his beliefs and tenants - something I think we can agree is hard to acknowledge (especially if you're barking mad).

[Pathfinder]

Ah, now I understand what you are saying and agree with the first part. It is a form of hypocritical narcissism for such an individual to assume they have the monopoly on truth regarding the afterlife that they never experienced themselves.

 

Now regarding Szeth never confronting an alternative world view? That I disagree with. He is CONTINUALLY surrounded by alternative world views. In fact I would hazard he was from the moment he left Shinovar. You mean he had to sit down and have a debate over tea with someone who held an opposing view to constitute confronting a different world view? lol. You don't have to wax poetic about morals to see how people live differently, and in Szeth's case, he clearly sees people who fear different things and fight for different causes. Just seeing how the Alethi hold warriors in high esteem from the clothing they wear vs the shin warriors shows an alternative world view. If your response will be that this doesn't tie directly to damnation i again disagree. If his society views all warriors as the lowest of the low, and they must follow the orders of anyone with an oath stone, and then he sees other warriors treated with respect and lauded for their skills, could that not cause a crisis of faith? Like Lirin and Kaladin. Lirin feels you cannot protect someone with violence, Kal does. I think this would especially apply to a legal society that is so rigid. A legal structure that cannot bend will break. It is why case law enacted by judges try to be as broad as possible. Because where lawyers get you is in the details. When "the" is the second word in a sentence instead of the fourth. So if you deal in absolutes, and you disprove one, it calls them ALL into question. 

Edited May 1, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[Bloodfalcon he/him]

It remains to be proven that this is one of the main reasons that Szeth acts the way he does. Whenever he kills people, we don't hear him repeating a mantra in his head like "torture over non-existence". He throws out that particular tenet of Shin faith off-handedly once in two books and doesn't dwell on it. I certainly agree that it may be one (small) reason that he does what he does, but I don't think he's staying as a Truthless just because he fears non-existence.

 

If he felt this way, I suspect Nalan would not have found him very interesting.

 

@Moogle Ok so first time I read what you wrote I was going to make the following arguments off the bat. Having re-read it a few times, I realize you may have misunderstood my point and by extension Bloodfalcon's (this is stated with much reservation as this is my interpretation and bloodfalcon has not rung in yet to speak for him or herself, so I do not want to misrepresent him or her). 

 

P4thf1nd3r, I intentionally strayed from this conversation for a while, but only because I've had it plenty of times before, with several of the same people. You weren't misrepresenting me though. That leads me to

Moogle: It is clearly very significant to him. His thoughts are at least partially on whether or not he will "return to the stone" or whatever after he is dead. He is trying to avoid an end to his existence. I'd say you have one or two too many modifiers in that sentence to the point that you are underestimating how much it means to him. He does clearly have a lot more than just that going on in his head though...

...his cowardly head.

[Moogle]

Now this leads to a point I state with trepidation because I do not want to sound offensive, but if we are going to nitpick as to how much he did something for some reason vs another to be whether or not he is cowardly, then please define what percentage is required for him to chose a reason to do as he does, in order for it to be valid to determine his honor or cowardice?

 

We have a WoB that essentially says that Dalinar was fully aware that his forces were depleted and that by giving up his Shardblade, he knew that a huge benefit was going to be replenishing his forces (because he'd get the bridgemen). Now, if that was the only reason Dalinar gave up his Shardblade, I think we'd both agree he was not being selfless, and was in fact being a little selfish.

 

How much this benefit played in Dalinar's decision to give up his Shardblade is the percentage I'd like to use for Szeth. Unless you'd like to call Dalinar selfish for giving up his Shardblade, I guess? (Sorry, this sentence is super awkward and I've rewritten it like fifty times. Hopefully my meaning is clear.)

 

We can also use whatever methodology you used to determine Dalinar's percentage for Szeth.

 

And please after you define the percentage, please also define the requirement to determine the percentage? Is it how many times it comes up in the book? Or how angsty he acts when he does? How much he cries? By saying saying that reason doesn't apply because you think it is a small reason is purely subjective unless you can site a gauge to determine it by. Otherwise I would posit the fact that it IS a reason when placed next to his action of MURDERING people, makes it valid regardless the frequency it is stated in the book.

 

It is a reason. I think it is a fairly minor one. I previously said that I think there is a little bit of cowardice in Szeth. However, calling him a coward is to make it a defining trait of Szeth. I don't think it is.

 

Just because I go on to assassinate someone on orders after I stub my toe does not suddenly mean my stubbed toe played a huge role in the assassination. I don't understand why Szeth's off-handed comment about his afterlife should suddenly matter more just because he's murdering people.

 

All this really means in the end, is I would end up in the windrunner camp of this debate and you would end up in the skybreakers (i personally fancy myself an elsecaller, I am merely equating this with their moral divide in orders which I think resulted in the very formation of their orders being diametrically opposed).

 

I think you're equating 'honorable' and 'good', here. Entirely different things. As I've said, I find Szeth a terrible human being who just happens to be honorable. I am pretty much entirely opposed to the Skybreakers. The Skybreakers are my favorite Order for the moment for these reasons:

1. Nalan's fashion sense is through the roof.
2. Their oaths are not ridiculously subjective.
3. Their spren are likely cute little comets.
4. They can fly.

If I ever met a Skybreaker, I'd likely hate them. I find what they stand for to be mostly ridiculous.

 

Moogle: It is clearly very significant to him. His thoughts are at least partially on whether or not he will "return to the stone" or whatever after he is dead. He is trying to avoid an end to his existence. I'd say you have one or two too many modifiers in that sentence to the point that you are underestimating how much it means to him.

 

I feel like you're overestimating how much it means to him. Not to be a broken record, but he always talks about his honor, and how he's Truthless and that everything he is doing is his punishment. He mentioned this non-existence thing off-handedly, and I highly doubt it acts as a huge motivation for what he does.

 

Do you think that Szeth would have continued murdering people if Stone Shamanism had nothing to say on the matter of the afterlife? I think he would have. If you don't, then I think we have entirely different views on the character.

 

In my mind, he is someone who holds on to his own personal code with the passion of a dying man. It's all he has. I feel he is following his culture/religion because he feels he should, and the 'reward' of his afterlife is only a small motivation for what he does in the grand scheme of things.

Edited May 1, 2014 by Moogle

[Bloodfalcon he/him]

Do you think that Szeth would have continued murdering people if Stone Shamanism had nothing to say on the matter of the afterlife? I think he would have. If you don't, then I think we have entirely different views on the character.

And so we arrive at our conclusion again!!! Hahahaha!

Yes, I think his actions would be very different if his afterlife situation was different. I don't think he would have found himself in that position to begin with. To be frank, the nature of many religious "afterlife" scenarios is that the best possible outcome is held over your head unless you do ________. Stone mysticism is a fundamental part of what makes his culture/religion so important to him, and the afterlife is a part of it, not something separate. It's precisely the same reason that Szeth obsesses over walking on stone and all of that throughout both books. The mysticism behind the stone is fundamental, and the afterlife scenario is tied into it directly. I don't think Szeth has a single other motivation other than a general dedication to his people. So if you are looking for frequency, consider every time he mentions stone throughout both books. He's making the same point from a different angle.