[OB] A framework for Shardic natures and their expression

[Jofwu]

On 3/6/2018 at 6:18 PM, Zellyia said:

So would an example of this be:  If a honorable Shardperson strongly believed that honor demanded strict vicious punishment for every minor mistake and subjugates thousands of people to this belief over time, is it still Honor or.... Cruelty? Discipline? ________?

I'm hesitant to speculate too wildly, as until now I've been assuming the intent fits pretty tightly into the nature. I'm still working out how I feel about how much room for interpretation there is.

That said, I can definitely see how a Shard whose nature is something along the lines of "Order" could be Honor in one case and Discipline in another. Discipline totally fits for me. 

Cruelty definitely sounds too far out there in my opinion, though maybe those with a more flexible view of Shardic natures think that's possible. Personally, it feels like the focus there goes too far beyond the concept of Order. You could certainly have a very cruel Order Shard. I'm just doubting such a Shard's intent could properly be referred to as Cruelty.

Now that I've typed this, I'm not sure you were going down the "Shard of Order" path though. And that said, maybe there is some nature which could contain the ideas of both Honor and Cruelty. If we're saying the Shard's nature is Honor, then I still wouldn't see how Cruelty can fit well inside of that.

Edit for more:

Two more changes I'm thinking about after some Discord talk.

It's come to my attention that pretty much everyone thinks my use of "nature" and "intent" are confusing. Most prefer to say those are synonyms and then use some other word for the middle box. I'm going to scrap "intent" in favor of (probably) "expression" or "the vessel's expression". The word Brandon seems to have used here is "filter". I'm going to avoid using "intent" and "filter" however because those terms carry some baggage into the conversation that I want to avoid. I think that "nature" and "expression" are descriptive and plain enough that they'll serve well in this regard.

I'm also thinking about scrapping the "vessel's will" box. The main thing that expresses is specific thoughts or actions of the vessel over time. I think these will tend to fall within a particular region, and intended the box to bound that region. But this feels lot less static to me than "nature" and "expression". So instead perhaps we can use specific points in space to represent specific thoughts/actions of the vessel, rather than capture those as a third box.

[Calderis]

@Jofwu I like the update quite a bit, and think the terminology will work well for discussion.

I personally, with the clarity of the update, am of the opinion that all shards are case 2, and that actions must fall as point (a) does. (you probably already picked up on this from the discord conversations) 

I believe that the names that we know for the Shards currently are the expressions of the Vessels and that while they must fit within the nature of the Shard, they are not the full breadth of that nature. 

Edit: excuse me, point (a) or (c). I think point (c) is inviolable. Point (a) is much more constraining, but also takes time to fully set in as the Vessel and the Power fully integrate.

Edited March 10, 2018 by Calderis

[+Hoiditthroughthegrapevine]

I like your revised formulation a lot @Jofwu and your use of diagrams is great, but I think the best part of your formulation is the clarification of terms. Nature is a much better term than intent for discussing the inherent quality of the power of each shard, but I think that I prefer "vessel's control of the shard" rather than "vessel's expression of the shard".

The whole reason that there is an intermediary between the world and the power of the shard is so that some type of change can be affected by the Vessel controlling the power. Sometimes a Vessel will be expressing the Nature of the shard, other times they will be trying to control the power of Shard in a way that is line with the Nature of the shard, other times they will be trying to repress the Nature of the Shard and still others they will be trying to do things outside the nature of the Shard.

I think that there is always a progression, after ascending a Vessel experiences the Case 2 application of power (where the power the Vessel has access to is a subset of the power of the Shard that they hold and because it's a subset of that power they are able to direct the power willfully) and during the process of holding the shard, the vessel is pushed ever closer to the Case 1 scenario (where the full nature of shard is being expressed as the Vessel is subsumed into the nature of the shard and the Vessel has limited or no agency). But I think that the process of being subsumed into the Nature of the shard happens at different time scales depending on how a Vessel approaches expressing the Nature of their shard.
 

I think we have really 3 cases for how a Vessel can control/alter the natural expression of a Shard:

1. Being a finite mind, the Vessel cannot comprehend the infinitude of the distributed power that is contained within the Nature of the Shard they possess, and therefore are limited in their control of the power of the shard because they can't perceive it's full effect. This is like trying to contain the whole ocean in a single bucket. Control is limited by the finitude of the vessel. But overtime, just like a balloon that is filled with air, the Vessel's consciousness expands, and thus their ability to apply more fully the full extent of their power, but along with this expansion comes a necessary merging of the Vessel's Consciousness into the Nature of their shard. And just like a balloon, the thin containing membrane of the Vessel will become attenuated and stretched, until the Barrier of the Vessel's will is so thin and insubstantial that it becomes functionally meaningless in effect. (I think this is the case with Bavadin, and this is one of the reason's she was able to recognize the concentration of Investiture on First of the Sun as being keyed to her particular investiture). A Vessel in this case, could call themselves something synonymous to the Nature of their shard, but it would only be a synonym derived from an incomplete understanding of the Nature of their Shard. (Like Bavadin could have called herself "Isolation" at first because she didn't quite fully grasp the concept of "Autonomy").
    
2. The Vessel attempts to express the Shard in a manner that limits or contains some aspect of the Nature of the Shard that they feel is detrimental (this case would be Ati, trying to contain the destructive powers of Ruin). This is a losing battle, the pent up force of denied Nature will probably always lead to a highly unstable Vessel. Queue, the imperial march, this is the road to hell paved with good intentions that will, given enough time, produce some of the best Cosmere villain shards. This is like a tempestuous sea being held back by a levy, and eventually the levy will break. A Vessel in this case could call themselves something synonymous with the Nature of their Shard through a willful attempt to suppress the negative aspects of the Nature of their Shard (Ati probably started out calling himself "Change").
    
3. The Vessel attempts to limit the expression of the shard through focusing on a subset of the full Nature or Powers of a Shard. While the first two cases will always end up with the full expression of the Shards nature by the Vessel, this case might have a chance of giving the Vessel agency for a greater period of time. The pent up pressure of the full Power and Nature of the Shard could in effect be concentrated by this limiting focus (like pressurized water forced out of a small aperture). Also, unlike the first 2 modes of Vessel expression, this mode is necessarily close-minded. The Vessel applying power is this manner might be content to use the power that is inline with their Will that is also part of the Nature of the shard, without ever trying to expand their reach for Power beyond their limited objective. This mode of Vessel expression fits Rayse, and might also explain why he didn't take up the powers of Devotion, Dominion and Ambition. He is not concerned with expanding his power, but rather using it in a way that he can maintain more willful control.  A Vessel in this case would willfully call themselves something that is only partially synonymous with the Nature of their Shard (like Rayse calling himself "Passion" because that is the particular aperture that he desires to unleash the pent up pressure of all "Hatred" through).

 

 

[Wandering Investor]

@hoiditthroughthegrapevine In this case the expression and the vessel's control are two different things. I don't think expression is the best term here, but I understand why Jofwu used it instead of filter or Intent. In this case, expression is the vessel's opinion of what the nature means. Ati sees Ruin as a force of destruction, Sazed sees it as... something gentler, something important, not to be rushed or denied. The vessel's ability to resist the mandate of the shard would then be the control.

[+Hoiditthroughthegrapevine]

@Wandering Investor, I realize the distinction that Jowfu was making in his OP, but the Vessel's expression of the Shard would only matter during the period of time that the Vessel's will and agency are separate and distinct from the Nature of the shard or in the case where a novel Shard is produced through synthesis (whether this is combining shards or splinters of different shards into a new Shard). The part that is more interesting to me at least is how a Vessel alters/controls the Power of their shard. It's pretty well established by WoBs that the inherent nature of each shard was set at the time of the shattering and if the Shard is whole then it's underlying Nature is also unchangeable. And that permanent change between a Vessel and a shard is unidirectional, only the Vessel can become more like the Nature of a Shard over time, which implies that the preponderance of the Vessel's agency lies in limiting the full expression of the Nature of the Shard. This lies in either misapprehending the true scope of the Shard's Nature (limitation of the Shard's Nature through ignorance), the intentional repression of negative aspects of the Nature the Shard (limitation by exclusion of part of the Shard's Nature), or the intentional focusing of particular aspects of the Shard's Nature (limitation by amplification of a partial aspect of the Shard's Nature).

Edited March 13, 2018 by hoiditthroughthegrapevine
typo, like usual

[Calderis]

@hoiditthroughthegrapevine I disagree. I am aware that my opinion is speculation here, and not popular speculation at that, but I think that the subconscious interpretation of the Vessel, the expression, is almost as binding and permanent for the vessel themselves as the nature of the Shard is.

Look at Ati's case, as I've said, I believe he was trying to contain what he saw as a monster, and he became that monster in the end. Not that Ruin was that monster in actuality, but because even after he had been completely subsumed within the Shard, it still required his mind to direct it and was therefore subject to his subconscious belief of what that power meant. 

Look at this WoB and I'll try to explain it the way that I see it. 

Quote

Necarion

Do Vessels have any flexibility in expressing the intent of a Shard, particularly if the intent is open to many interpretations?

Brandon Sanderson

Yes they do. So, the Vessel's mind and how they perceive is going to have a large influence on how things are expressed and I think all of them have some wiggle room. But there are some deterministic things that are also going to push them.  You know, holding Ruin, Harmony may not go down the same path that happened to Ati.

Necarion

So Sadeas would express Honor differently than Tanavast?

Brandon Sanderson

Yes he would.

source

So there are two parts of this WoB that influence my view. First is the part that he says that the Vessels mind and perception play a big role. Then he goes on to talk about Harmony, and yes he uses the name Harmony but I personally think he's just avoiding spoilers there, because he doesn't say that harmony will go down a different path with Ruin because of the other Shard he holds... In context he's saying he won't get down the same path as Ati because of the way in which he views the Shards nature. 

As to the "deterministic" things he mentions, I think that that is specifically due to the nature of a Shard, that regardless of their interpretation, a Vessel will never be able to use the power from something that is outside of the nature of the Shard. 

People love to use Vin as an example of how a Shard takes time to press its limitations on the Vessel. The way that she struck out and killed Ati was something that Leras could never have done. But if causing harm was something truly outside of the Shards nature, I don't think it could have been done. Period. 

Look at what The Lord Ruler tried to do to Kwaan. 

Quote

Tyran Amiros

What happened to Kwaan? I was half expecting to see him amongst the kandra First Generation.

Brandon Sanderson

Kwaan went into hiding, and he was eventually discovered and executed by Rashek. He wasn't among the First Generation, though he would have been if he hadn't turned against Rashek. Rashek kept the plate, however, just as he kept Alendi's logbook. Partially because even then, Rashek was going a little mad, but partially because of the reminders about his old life they contained.

Vegasdev

I'm assuming you meant Alendi hunted him down because he turned against Alendi. Or did Kwaan also turn against Rashek?

Brandon Sanderson

No, I meant that he turned against Rashek. Remember, the members of the First Generation were offered immortality in exchange for their Hemalurgy. They had to make this choice for all of the world's Feruchemists. Because his uncle had been the one who gave Rashek the chance to become the Lord Ruler in the first place, Rashek blessed him and included him in the decision. (Speaking directly into his mind along with the others during Rashek's moment of ascension.)

Kwaan was the only one who turned down this offer, calling it a betrayal of who they were as a people. Rashek could have just made him one anyway, but in a moment of anger, he tried to destroy Kwaan—which he couldn't do, not with Preservation's power. As the other Feruchemists changed, Kwaan remained the same. Rashek eventually hunted him down and killed him.

source

The power of Preservation could not be used to kill. Yet Vin did. I think the reason here is that Leras was still the mind in control of the Shard, and though Rashek was using a significant portion of that power, it was still subject to the current Vessels interpretation.

But a Vessel cannot have an actual effect on the shard itself. No matter their interpretation, or how tightly bound they are by that interpretation, the Shard that drops will be the same thing that they picked up. Not the way the Shard appeared while they held it. 

I think the fact that Vin used the power to kill shows that the nature of Preservation was not as limiting as Leras expression showed us, and that her interpretation would have been different. 

[Jofwu]

As Calderis says, this is a matter for debate.

Some will argue that the expression naturally grows to encompass the full nature of the Shard (after some time, perhaps). Others will argue that this doesn't happen at all, and that every Shard may look different (permanently so) from one vessel to the next.

I tend to think Ruin look like case 1. Everything he does and everything Brandon has said about him suggests to me that what we see of Ruin very closely fits the nature of the Shard, which is sort of an embodiment of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

But Honor and Odium are both making me wonder if their expressions are a subset of their Shards' full natures.

[+Hoiditthroughthegrapevine]

8 hours ago, Calderis said:

I think that the subconscious interpretation of the Vessel, the expression, is almost as binding and permanent for the vessel themselves as the nature of the Shard is.

Look at Ati's case, as I've said, I believe he was trying to contain what he saw as a monster, and he became that monster in the end. Not that Ruin was that monster in actuality, but because even after he had been completely subsumed within the Shard, it still required his mind to direct it and was therefore subject to his subconscious belief of what that power meant.

This is a very interesting point, very well formulated, but I think that it's working slightly differently. We know that Leras and Ati worked together to create Scadrial as a pure act of creation. We know that at the time of the creation of Scadrial Leras and Ati made a deal where Ati would eventually be able to destroy Scadrial. This implies a true understanding of the Nature of the shard of Ruin at the point of Ascension by Ati, that eventually the power that he held would need to be able to destroy in order to create. He tried to limit the Negative but functionally necessary Nature of his Shard's power by this agreement. But over time, the Nature of his Shard destroyed his mind, and the aspect of his Shard's nature that he tried to repress became more amplified. I think Ati's initial plan was a series of creations and destructions, a repeating cycle of creation, stasis and destruction, but Leras frustrated this plan, destroying the necessary outlet for Ruin's Nature, causing Ati to break under the pent up, unused power of Ruin's nature.

I personally think it's great that Leras did this, but I also think that it was the pressure of the unfufilled Nature of the Shard of Ruin that caused Ati to break and turn into the monster that he became, not a deep seated fundamental view of the power of his Shard. But like @Jofwu said, this topic is very much up for debate (and it's an incredibly interesting debate at that, thanks again for writing up such a great OP Jofwu!).

8 hours ago, Calderis said:

People love to use Vin as an example of how a Shard takes time to press its limitations on the Vessel. The way that she struck out and killed Ati was something that Leras could never have done. But if causing harm was something truly outside of the Shards nature, I don't think it could have been done. Period.

I think this is a case of doubly acting against the nature of her Shard, she fails to preserve herself in the act of destruction. This seems like doubling down on the antithetical nature of her expression of the Shard. But, in a wider context, this is a lot like Kaladin killing to protect. She realizes at the point of her Ascension that certain destructive actions will in fact serve Preservation more, the destruction of two lives will Preserve an entire planet.The fact that Ruin had been manipulating and guiding her gave her enough of a connection to Ruin that she was able to accomplish these two acts of destruction in service to the Greater Preservation.

8 hours ago, Calderis said:

Then he goes on to talk about Harmony, and yes he uses the name Harmony but I personally think he's just avoiding spoilers there, because he doesn't say that harmony will go down a different path with Ruin because of the other Shard he holds... In context he's saying he won't get down the same path as Ati because of the way in which he views the Shards nature.

I think the Harmony case is a special case. The two forces are diametrically opposed but not incompatible, like the Yin and Yang of Daoism. The reason they can exist as Harmony is that Sazed had an expansive mind that was able to see how these two opposing forces could be combined into a stable unitary whole. This doesn't diminish the nature of either Shard, in combination they are still separate antagonistic forces always fighting to be dominant, it is the enforcement of Balance by Sazed's unified view of the Shard (and careful action to limit ascendancy of any one particular aspect) that keeps them together as a Harmonious whole.

All the above aside, I can totally agree to disagree. As always, it's edifying to read your thoughts Calderis, and I can't wait until we get another Cosmere novel to see how these things play out.

Edited March 13, 2018 by hoiditthroughthegrapevine

[Wandering Investor]

3 hours ago, hoiditthroughthegrapevine said:

But, in a wider context, this is a lot like Kaladin killing to protect. She realizes at the point of her Ascension that certain destructive actions will in fact serve Preservation more

I think this is a good argument for the expression of the Vessel, and the power it has over the Shard's Intent. Some have mentioned that this is a case of Vin not being attuned to Preservation, which allowed her to attack. But as we see with Kelsier, not being attuned to Preservation would prevent the powers from obeying to attack. Instead, I think this is a case of the Vessel's perspective on what is preserving or not. This is Vin seeing this as an act of preservation. The follow up question is could Leras ever see it this way? Could Vin still do this after several thousand years of holding the power? That would answer the question of how just how great a difference vessel's can express the Shards, if at all.

 

I think the nature of the Shard is slightly different from the way its being used. I think its better to consider it a vague concept. Its not a universal truth, or a list of every possible definition of the concept. It only takes on concrete meaning when exposed to the Vessel, who then decides what the core concept actually means. 

[Calderis]

5 hours ago, Wandering Investor said:

I think the nature of the Shard is slightly different from the way its being used. I think its better to consider it a vague concept. Its not a universal truth, or a list of every possible definition of the concept. It only takes on concrete meaning when exposed to the Vessel, who then decides what the core concept actually means. 

I agree. I think that the names we've been told are not the nature's of the Shards. They are the expressions that the Vessels have made manifest. 

As most shards have only ever had one Vessel, there's no differentiating between the nature and the expression at this point in time. I'm dying to see a single Shard change hands for just this reason. 

I think that "Unity" is just the Shard of honor. Focus on binding things together and living under a set of guidelines. The main points of surgebinding that we see from Honor would still exist but be framed differently in context. The Oaths of the Knights Radiant would change from words spoken that must be kept, to Unifying ideals to guide the group. Nothing changes in the mechanics, but the mechanic fits in either context. 

This topic has made me change my stance on Rayse as well. I realized that as adamantly as I've been opposed to the "Passion" idea, it may be true and he isn't lying, but that would be the nature of the Shard and not the expression. I fully believe that whatever the Shards true nature is, the expression that Rayse has made manifest is Odium. So while he may be speaking something that is objectively true, in that that would be the Shard he holds, it is not the Shard he wields. 

[Jofwu]

27 minutes ago, Calderis said:

I think that "Unity" is just the Shard of honor. Focus on binding things together and living under a set of guidelines. The main points of surgebinding that we see from Honor would still exist but be framed differently in context.

For example...

"Honor" says "people must be honorable, by being bound to their oaths."

"Unity" says "people must be united, by being bound to each other."

Meanwhile the Shard's true nature is "the part of Adonalsium that liked order, kept promises, valued reliability, etc."

(just one concept)

[Zelly]

What if the nature of the shard is something innately deceptive?

Odium talks about passion, but somehow a lot of the people he influences end up with odd mental states:  refusal to accept blame or responsibility, narcissism and feelings of entitlement.  (Younger Dalinar, Amaram especially at end of OB, Queen Whatshername, all the people at the Revel).

If he picked up the nature of Denial..........would he even know it?  Or was that the very reason he liked it to begin with?

"Hey I'm not the crafty bad guy.  I'm just getting things done."

Edited March 14, 2018 by Zellyia

[Wandering Investor]

@Calderis That's one possibility. I lean towards Nature(vague word)->Filter(The vessel's understanding what the Nature, maybe Adon's and the cosmere as a whole as well) ->Expression/Intent (A paragraph defining what the Nature means, what actions are in line, out of line, or against). By this definition, the only way Passion would be the nature of the shard is if Rayse truly believed that hatred is the only true passion. But I doubt that is the case, as he was once friends with Hoid, so I doubt he is the type of person that had only hatred in their lives(not impossible though). I actually think the core concept is Conflict. This would explain why sensual acts would be included, but not love, because one could be considered a hunt and the other is something quite different, but I digress.

I also disagree with the Unity idea, but that's more do to a disagreement on what Honor means, which is the crux of the filter idea. I interpret Honor at is most base level to be the keeping of artificial/intelligent rules. I think Unity is a concept to far from Honor to work, as an honorable action may require you to go against others. But now that I think of it, this is an excellent example of the filter theory. The concept of Honor is a good example, because the concept of Honor is a rather fuzzy one that differs from person to person, and someone that believes any dividing action is unhonorable would express the shard different from a person that believed in standing up for an ideal even if it meant conflict with others. 

@Zellyia Feelings of doubt/guilt interfere with hatred/conflict, which would explain Odium's interest in inflicting those mental states on his followers.

Edited March 14, 2018 by Wandering Investor

[Calderis]

10 minutes ago, Zellyia said:

Odium talks about passion, but somehow a lot of the people he influences end up with odd mental states:  refusal to accept blame or responsibility, narcissism and feelings of entitlement.  (Younger Dalinar, Amaram especially at end of OB, Queen Whatshername, all the people at the Revel).

These are the reasons I was initially so adamantly opposed to the Shard being passion originally. 

Odium as we have seen it, consumed the feelings of his followers. He leaves them empty and hollow. He takes guilt and regret and pain... But he takes everything else too. 

Hatred consumes. It eats away at a person until there's nothing left but the shell of who they were and the object of their hatred. 

Passion in contrast, enlivens and grows. It can some all encompassing, but true passion makes people's lives more fulfilling, not hollow. 

I still don't believe that the Shard itself is Passion, but by my own model of the way that the Shard/Vessel relationship works, I realized that I can't discount it completely, as much as I'd like to. 

[Wandering Investor]

1 hour ago, Calderis said:

These are the reasons I was initially so adamantly opposed to the Shard being passion originally. 

Odium as we have seen it, consumed the feelings of his followers. He leaves them empty and hollow. He takes guilt and regret and pain... But he takes everything else too. 

Hatred consumes. It eats away at a person until there's nothing left but the shell of who they were and the object of their hatred. 

Passion in contrast, enlivens and grows. It can some all encompassing, but true passion makes people's lives more fulfilling, not hollow. 

I still don't believe that the Shard itself is Passion, but by my own model of the way that the Shard/Vessel relationship works, I realized that I can't discount it completely, as much as I'd like to. 

It could depend on how the mandate affects the Shards. Would a shard of passion want to inspire passion, or be passion. I don't think Odium is passion, but his actions could be him consuming their passion for his own. But I like that line about hatred consuming a person hallow.

[Shuffel]

I believe Sazed giving the chest to Wax, is an example of the Vessel using his THoughts and actions, but goes against the Shards nature.

[Wandering Investor]

55 minutes ago, Shuffel said:

I believe Sazed giving the chest to Wax, is an example of the Vessel using his THoughts and actions, but goes against the Shards nature.

Wax has taken down and potentially killed alot of people, but they're also bad guys so he's saving people as well. Harmony might view him as an agent of both Ruin and Preservation, allowing him to help Wax. Or he just likes Wax. Or both.

[+Hoiditthroughthegrapevine]

On 3/13/2018 at 11:17 AM, Wandering Investor said:

I think this is a good argument for the expression of the Vessel, and the power it has over the Shard's Intent. Some have mentioned that this is a case of Vin not being attuned to Preservation, which allowed her to attack. But as we see with Kelsier, not being attuned to Preservation would prevent the powers from obeying to attack. Instead, I think this is a case of the Vessel's perspective on what is preserving or not. This is Vin seeing this as an act of preservation. The follow up question is could Leras ever see it this way? Could Vin still do this after several thousand years of holding the power? That would answer the question of how just how great a difference vessel's can express the Shards, if at all.

I think this is a pretty good summation of what is happening (from the HoA Chapter 81 annotations, emphasis added):

Quote

Brandon Sanderson

Chapter Eighty-One - Part Four

Vin's Sacrifice

Killing Elend and leaving Vin alive would have been, in my opinion, more tragic than what happened. As I establish in a little bit, there is an afterlife in this cosmology. Better for them both to die and to be together.

There were only two ways that Ruin could have died in this book. The first would be to have him give up his life as Preservation did. I don't think that was very likely.

The second way is the one I've been subtly pushing the reader toward from the very beginning of the novel. Ruin and Preservation are opposites. Equal, particularly while Ruin doesn't have access to the chunk of his power trapped in the atium. The only way, then, for him to be killed would be for Preservation to smash his power against that of Ruin and destroy both of them. It's a form of balance. Either you block and stop each other, warding each other away, or you overlap and destroy one another.

This was the role Preservation chose Vin to play all those years ago. As she surmises, he needed someone to do what he could not. He had been too corrupted by his power, and could not destroy Ruin. If Vin had held the power for millennia as Preservation had before her, then she too would have lost the ability to destroy Ruin.

It needed to be someone fresh to the power, still separate enough from it to be able to kill Ruin. Preservation knew that if he did not sacrifice himself and let someone else take up the power, then Ruin would eventually win and the world would end. Imprisoning Ruin was always only intended to be a delaying tactic.

The delay was so that the power could find a new person to bear it. Someone who could do what Preservation could not.

source

Fundamentally, I think that we have to view the shards of adonalsium as separate aspects of the Power of Creation. Each is a subset of the total power and mind of Adonalsium. The expression of this power, call it the intent or the mandate, is visible as projected power to achieve a desired result (or an intended outcome). Therefore the expression of this power by the Vessel is likewise a projection of power to achieve a desired result. So in set theory, all powers used in the Cosmere would be subsets of the Universal Set, which is the Power of the whole and unshattered Adonalsium. There are an infinite variety of cases for how these subsets of power could be comprised of the Universal set, but here are some example cases:

In Case A, each of the 16 resultant shards receives a perfectly equal portion of the power of Adonalsium, and there is no leftover power unassociated with a particular shard.

In Case B, each shard receives a proportionally equal share of the power of Adonalsium, but there is power of Adonalsium that is unassociated with any of the given shard.

In Case C, each shard receives an unequal portion of the power of Adonalsium, and further there is left over power unassociated with any of the shards, and some of the individual powers of a given shard overlap the power of other shards.

I think Case C is the most compelling because it provides an avenue for a phenomena that we see in the cosmere, namely corrupted Investiture.

Those were the streamlined simple cases, probably closer to the actual is the following set of Cases:

Instead of being divided equally the powers were probably disproportionate with atypical and complex boundaries.

I think Cases D and F are the most likely.

So in examining what influence the Vessel has on using the power of their Shard, or to translate this into the terminology used in this thread, to examine how the Nature of the Shard relates to the Expression of the shard by the Vessel, here's a view of two separate Vessels with different Subjective Understandings (or different Expressions of the nature) of a single shard:

Here are the Subjective interpretations of the Nature of Shards held by the Vessels, superimposed over the Shard, which is in turn Superimposed over the Undivided Mind of Adonalsium, formulated as access to the Powers of Creation.

Overtime (as very clearly stated by the annotation from the HoA at the top of this post, and in quite a few WoBs) the Vessel's expression of the Shard (or the particulars of the the Vessel's application of the Power of their Shard) will be completely inline with the Nature of the Shard itself. It a bound set, that overtime reasserts it's absolute boundaries. As @Calderis mentioned above, the Powers of Adonalsium need to be directed by a Mind (this is simply that power needs to be directed by something in order to achieve a goal or an end). Before the Shattering, this mind was the complete and unbroken galactic intelligence of Adonalsium himself. After the Shattering, the separate powers of creation needed a Vessel to control and guide them, but overtime these vessels take on the nature and characteristics of the original portion of the Galactic mind that they represent (the strictures/bounds of the possible application of their particular subsets of power).

It might be possible use the Power of the Shard when the vessel first acquires it outside of the bounds (or set) of the Shard, but that power has to come from somewhere. I think the case with Vin is one of the clearest examples of this. Her subjective understanding of the nature of the Power of Preservation was not the actual nature of Preservation, but she was able to call somewhat on the Powers of Ruin to sacrifice herself in order to Preserve.

One last analogy. Take a flashlight, it was created for a very specific purpose, namely to be carried in your hand and provide illumination. It's nature is portable illumination. Through misapprehension of it's true nature, you could use it as a club. This is a possible use for the flashlight that is outside of the bounds of its intended use (or nature), but within the bounds of the possible because the flashlight also belongs to a larger set, namely of heavy rod shaped objects. But you'd meet with a great lack of success if you misapprehended the nature of the flashlight and tried to use it like a motorcycle. No matter how many cool engine noises you make deep in your throat while you straddle your flashlight, you're never going to be able to ride through town whistling past the graveyard. This is a subjective view of it's nature that is outside of the bounds of the possible (like Kelsier's struggle to use the power of Preservation to actively fight Ruin).

I think part of the difficulty of this discussion comes from the fact that infinite power has been subdivided into smaller pieces which are still infinitely powerfully, and then described by a single word, that is open to a fair degree of subjective interpretation (not just from the Vessels, but also from us readers). Describing the Ocean as Wet is apt, but also leaves out a lot by necessity, because a single word is incapable of holding an infinity.

Serious discussion on such a subjective topic, with only really good primary evidence for one Shardworld system is destined to veer from the scientific to the Poetic, in honor of that fact, here is one of the best couplets ever written, from William Blake's Auguries of Innocence:

Quote

To see a World in a Grain of Sand
     And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,

Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
     And Eternity in an hour.

 

Edited March 21, 2018 by hoiditthroughthegrapevine
typo, like usual

[Jofwu]

Bravo @hoiditthroughthegrapevine, good stuff.

I think there's also an argument to be made for a mix between A and C--the full nature of Adonalsium covered, but with overlap. My gut says case A. I disagree strongly with the notion that there is "leftover" bits of Adonalsium that aren't part of a Shard. I think there's lots of support for this from WoB. But I would also be comfortable with that A/C mix. Personally, I think it's more likely that we have case A, and then any perceived overlap is a matter of seeing "expressions" which extend beyond the bounds of the Shards' natures. 

I don't think there's a fundamental difference between the first three and the second three... almost. I mean, we're not assigning anything meaningful to what the 2D space represents, so I don't see a distinction between squares or weird shapes. Either is an abstraction. You could make the argument that they vary in "size", but that would suggest to me that they aren't all equal in power, and I'm very skeptical of that. 

2 hours ago, hoiditthroughthegrapevine said:

Overtime (as very clearly stated by the annotation from the HoA at the top of this post, and in quite a few WoBs) the Vessel's expression of the Shard (or the particulars of the the Vessel's application of the Power of their Shard) will be completely inline with the Nature of the Shard itself.

I tend to agree with this, though I think it's debatable.

Or rather, looking more closely, I do disagree that the expression always grows to fill the nature perfectly. I agree with the idea that an expression shrinks (in time) so that it doesn't extend outside of the Shard's nature. But I'm less convinced that it will be perfectly in line. That would mean two vessels who pick up a shard will eventually have identical expressions (matching the nature perfectly). I'm starting to like the idea that there's room for different expressions, just so long as they are within the bounds of the nature.

So in your example, the yellow and pink boxes would have to shrink in to fit inside the blue nature. But they don't both necessarily warp to fill up that nature's space perfectly. They can stay boxes for example. Just bounded by the nature.

[Calderis]

22 minutes ago, Jofwu said:

Personally, I think it's more likely that we have case A, and then any perceived overlap is a matter of seeing "expressions" which extend beyond the bounds of the Shards' natures.

Agreed. Between these two WoBs, I think that all shards are (originally) equal, and that all investiture is accounted for. 

Quote

Shardbound

Does each Shard have the same quantity or quality of Investiture?

Brandon Sanderson

Um, yes. They were equal proportions originally, how about that.

source

Quote

Overlord Jebus [PENDING REVIEW]

Is all Investiture in the cosmere associated with a Shard?

Brandon Sanderson [PENDING REVIEW]

Yes, well, okay. So this is a complicated one. *pauses* So, Investiture predates the Shattering of Adonalsium, all Investiture was from Adonalsium, all Investiture got assigned to one of the 16 Shards when Adonalsium was Shattered. Some of the Investiture was not on Yolen but location is irrelevant. So Investiture is related to Shards even on planets where none of the Shards are inhabiting. 

Overlord Jebus [PENDING REVIEW]

Are they aware of that Investiture?

Brandon Sanderson [PENDING REVIEW]

That's part of the whole seeing into the infinite, being beyond even the power of a Shard. So, technically you could make the argument that Harmony could feel the sense of Preservation on every world in the cosmere, right? Because the building blocks of all life and creation are these things.

Overlord Jebus [PENDING REVIEW]

So the Shard of Preservation embodies all preservation in the cosmere?

Brandon Sanderson [PENDING REVIEW]

Yes but he just can't do that, right? Like, he's not infinite. The Vessels are not, even if their minds are enormously expanded by holding a Shard, they are not infinite. The Connection is all there in the Spiritual Realm

source

 

[+Hoiditthroughthegrapevine]

@Jofwu and @Calderis, nice clarifications, pretty clear from those WoBs Calderis that the shards are equal in proportion and that there is no remaining unkeyed Adonalsium investiture.

Here's another possible way that Adonalsium could have shattered, where all shards are equal in proportion but which still maintains high degree of overlap between the individual shards:

Here's a diagram that illustrates how shards A and B outlined above overlap with each other, and shows the two different shard shapes with equal area that all of the remaining 14 shards are made from:

The interesting thing about this particular shattering case is that contiguous (or more similar in nature shards) share the greatest common area (overlap) but each shard would overlap with the four radially adjacent clockwise shards, with diminished shared area the further the shard is away in radial position. This has the benefit of preserving quartet groupings (like the divisions of the Metallic Arts in Mistborn) and also is just a pretty rad visualization.

Does this prove anything? No.

Is it kind of interesting and another possible way that the shattering could have occurred? Yes.

Do I like answering my own rhetorical questions? Undoubtedly.

[Raykoda]

A seems to be the correct answer due to this WoB.  The important part:

Spoiler

Overlord Jebus [PENDING REVIEW]

Is all Investiture in the cosmere associated with a Shard?

Brandon Sanderson [PENDING REVIEW]

Yes, well, okay. So this is a complicated one. *pauses* So, Investiture predates the Shattering of Adonalsium, all Investiture was from Adonalsium, all Investiture got assigned to one of the 16 Shards when Adonalsium was Shattered. Some of the Investiture was not on Yolen but location is irrelevant. So Investiture is related to Shards even on planets where none of the Shards are inhabiting. 

 So all Invesiture from Adonalsium got assigned to one of the 16 shards, and all Invesiture is from Adonalsium.  There's a bit of a snag here, in the transition from investiture of a shard to the shard's Intent, but if we prescribe to the "stained glass window" metaphor as I do, it seems reasonable to me.  

 

Honor and Unity being the same shard seems silly to me.  Honor, before and after he went crazy, is all about taking oaths, and keeping them, while Unity is about (I assume) bringing or keeping things together.  You can see the former from the Stormfather talking about how he cares not for the oaths, but just if they are kept.   Szeth's dissension from the rest of the Skybreakers is Honorable, but not very United, using those definitions.