The symmetry of the Ideals

[Ripheus23]

So, I have a theory that each Order fits into a ten-place spectrum with endpoints of maximal Honor and maximal Cultivation, which goes with a maximum for means-justifying-ends and ends-justifying-means. My first guess is:

Honor Windrunners - Stonewards - Bondsmiths - Lightweavers - Skybreakers | Edgedancers - Willshapers - Truthwatchers - Elsecallers - Dustbringers Cultivation

Windrunners would look at Skybreakers as "heretics" instead of "pagans," so to speak, as being on "the same side" but at the farthest remove from the Honor-point. Or, subconsciously, there would be such tension between Windrunners and Skybreakers. But altogether it would be Dustbringers, as the closest to the Voidbringers so to speak, who would be the "absolute" opposite of the Windrunners.

I've tried to put the more Foresight-y of the Orders (as well as I can remember examples of them) on the Cultivation side. I think Honor would have been obsessed with free will and so that's the source of the prohibition on trying to see the future (since knowing the future would conflict with free will). Cultivation, though, would correspond to the ends of her representatives' means, thus making them future-oriented.

Edited December 25, 2018 by Ripheus23

[Calderis he/him]

If it follows the Surgebinding chart (the double eye), and it should, then it would be a circular gradiant, with the upper most and lower most (or central depending on the depiction) orders in those roles. 

Bondsmiths closest to Honor, with stonewards and Windrunners a step below, then Skybreakers and Willshapers. 

The Cultivation side has Truthwatchers central, with Edgedancers and Lightweavers a step out followed by Elsecallers and Dustbringer. 

As to the rest... I don't think the oaths will fall on a neat spectrum the way you wish. Lightweavers as an example, are definitely on the Cultivation side. And their freedom from any real proscribed code of conduct allows them to fit in any philosophical paradigm they wish, so long as they're honest with themselves. 

[Ripheus23]

Yeah, I wasn't sure about the side I put the Lightweavers on... I was going off an intuition that their honesty protocol sounded more Honor-y than Cultivation-y, although if Honor was free will-y then Willshapers sounded like they went with his side more.

It was a toss-up whether Bondsmiths or Windrunners would be the most Honor-y. I went with Windrunners due to their spren being honorspren specifically, though of course bonding the Stormfather himself... Well...

In any event, I think the general idea helps explain how Malata can swear the same First Ideal as Kaladin but seem diametrically opposite in mindset. Actually, this also plays into a wild 'ship/theory about Kalalata  or a theory that Malata might end up as Odium's champion. Odium being "God's own divine hatred" and hatred being the emotional motive of punishment, and Spark wanting to punish humanity for the Recreance, is my evidence/indicator for this championship option. (I also have a Moalata/Maloash 'ship in mind, here )

[Calderis he/him]

The first oath is so vague to be almost meaningless. You can make those words mean whatever you want them to. We're given an interpretation in book precisely to make things like Malata seem impossible. But the Skybreakers as a whole don't follow that interpretation. 

Life before Death: enjoy life because you're going to die? Preserve life cause death is inevitable? Harvest life to serve death? 

Strength before weakness: Be strong for others? Be strong at all costs? 

Journey before Destination: the journey is more important? The journey most be suffered through to get where you're going? 

You can make the first oath mean damnation near anything you want it to. The words may be the same, but they are not the same oath. 

[Mailnaise she/her]

Yeah I mean, if you're going to have an ideal be the same for all of the orders, it would have to be pretty vague. There are some huge differences between each of the orders.

[Ripheus23]

11 hours ago, Calderis said:

The first oath is so vague to be almost meaningless.

I don't think that could be so. Even if their content is open-ended, their form is not, and I think it helps structure the next 4 Ideals. Namely, the middle 3 of the 5 correspond one by one (with Order-derivative differences) to the three parts of the First, and then the Fifth sums them up. Besides which, they have elementary philosophical interpretations that pair nicely with the distinction and marriage of Honor and Cultivation, which Sanderson is not likely to be unaware of.

Edited December 26, 2018 by Ripheus23

[Calderis he/him]

The Malata and the Diagram, and the Skybreakers, law at any cost and to serve any ends, makes absolutely no sense. 

All journeys are a journey, regardless of goal or means. The words spoken have the meaning that the oathtaker ascribes to them. 

The alternative is that somehow a Machiavellian legal fanatic, and a sadistic anarchist can somehow operate under the exact same first oath meaning, philosophically, as a Windrunner... Which makes no sense whatsoever. 

Edited December 26, 2018 by Calderis

[Ripheus23]

I think that Elsecallers could be Machiavellian (as per a WoB) in that they fall closer to the ends-over-means end of the spectrum. Machiavellians couldn't be Windrunners, though. The overall symmetry is just the order of the two concepts of means and ends, which Honor being means-prioritized and Cultivation being ends-prioritized. It all fits together into one magic system on account of Tanavast and [Larsta?] being married and the mathematical symmetry of Rosharan magic in general. (It's not because of a hypothetical 5-centric Nalthianism that there are five Ideals per Order (Edglian interference), but due to the symmetrical splitting of Roshar's 10-centrism as 5 * 2.) If the system were purely Honor-based, then the First Ideal would admit of only a means-over-ends application; but t'isn't so. (I rather wonder whether Sanderson is proposing the so-called "intuitionist" solution to deontology versus utilitarianism, where the principle of utility is balanced against a rights-preserving principle, neither being the final absolute. According to A Theory of Justice this "intuitionism" is a common-sense reaction to the strictures of either pure utility or pure rights, and Shallan's moral analysis of Jasnah's execution of the brigands in the City of Bells, testifies to Sanderson being aware of these kinds of philosophical nuances/suggestions/etc.)

[Stormfather-in-Law]

13 hours ago, Ripheus23 said:

I don't think that could be so. Even if their content is open-ended, their form is not, and I think it helps structure the next 4 Ideals. Namely, the middle 3 of the 5 correspond one by one (with Order-derivative differences) to the three parts of the First, and then the Fifth sums them up. Besides which, they have elementary philosophical interpretations that pair nicely with the distinction and marriage of Honor and Cultivation, which Sanderson is not likely to be unaware of.

I think it's important to note that while the first oath might be 'meaningless' to us as readers looking at the whole spectrum of orders, to each individual person making the oath, it means something specific and meaningful. So it's not an open-ended oath to those taking it, only to those of us looking at the system as a whole.

[Calderis he/him]

@Ripheus23, Skybreakers are on the Honor half of the double eye, and they are perfectly willing to accept a Machiavellian so long as they operate within the law.

This line of "means over ends" equates the shard of Honor with a moral guide. While there may be something to that with Tanavast, ahonor the shard is not good or Evil. Honor stripped of morality is merely abiding by the rules laid out. In that, the Skybreakers are straightforward Honor all the way. It's why Szeth was chosen for them. He held to his code at all costs. 

And for Cultivation, just look at what happened with Dalinar. Her boon was all about the journey, while the Destination was uncertain. 

I don't think this line of reasoning is going to beat fruit. Both types of reason can be utilized under both Shards.

[Ripheus23]

8 hours ago, Calderis said:

This line of "means over ends" equates the shard of Honor with a moral guide.

Only if we're talking about deontological instead of teleological morality, which is what Honor sounds like it's about. By contrast, Cultivation sounds teleological, as morality as rational justification using ends over means (since, as noted, there is a very easy-to-see rational justification in using inference to derive means-imperatives from ends-imperatives---inferential reasoning is reasoning, hence rational). And as I said, the Skybreakers are near enough to the switching point on the spectrum, and are the internal opposite of the Windrunners, so they are the "heretics" on the Honor side of the spectrum. They also have a second-dimensional symmetry with the Dustbringers (as at the first fifth remove from the Honor-point, with the Dustbringers at the second fifth remove). As per a WoB:

Quote

Questioner [PENDING REVIEW]

Do the Dustbringers have a propensity toward evilness?

Brandon Sanderson [PENDING REVIEW]

I would not call them evil, but certain members of the Knights Radiant would say they're on the edge, and did not get along with them. Let's just  say Skybreakers have not gotten along with Dustbringers, even though they are very near each other in a lot of ways.

source

I wouldn't suspect the Orders of having all these complex symmetries applying to them, if symmetry were not an important Rosharan principle, and if mathematics were not so surface-important to Rosharan principles, and if philosophical reflection on moral theory were not such a prominent theme in the SA. But since symmetry, abstract mathematics, and moral philosophy are clear themes of this story, it stands to reason that Sanderson would meld them all in the philosophy of the Orders.

[Calderis he/him]

And I'll just sit here and continue to think that even within an order, the oaths are variable enough for purely philosophical disagreements about the oaths. 

Personal interpretation by both the Radiant and the spren trump the "order"

Edit: I think personal morality and responsibility/accountability are much more dominant themes in this regard. 

Edited December 27, 2018 by Calderis

[Ripheus23]

7 minutes ago, Calderis said:

And I'll just sit here and continue to think that even within an order, the oaths are variable enough for purely philosophical disagreements about the oaths. 

If Szeth and Nale are any indication, this is true. But it seems pointless to claim that an Order is a distinct set if it could be infinitely malleable as to its members' mindsets, so there should at least be tendencies for the members, and if Honor and Cultivation Invested in Roshar such as to allow the Orders to arise, the principles of that Investment (e.g. symmetry) will be reflected in those tendencies. I mean the Orders depend on specific spren, and spren are born from concepts, and while concepts are open to divergent analysis and expression (especially philosophically), still, there are limits. Language wouldn't work if any symbol could mean anything at any given time.

If I were gonna try to get a prediction out of all this, it would be that Kaladin and Sylphrena's, "How do we really know right from wrong?" discourse will be resolved via a fusion of Honor and Cultivation's symmetrical moral natures. I see Kaladin becoming involved with Venli, romantically, as a very viable possibility, and Timbre and Sylphrena together would be amusing (although we haven't seen whether spren romantically bond parallel to those they're bonded to; the similarities between the daemons from His Dark Materials and the Nahel spren, call the image to mind but we will see...). So we'd at least have a Windrunner-Willshaper bridge, to explore the issue with, if things went in that direction.

EDIT:

I guess a way to look at membership in an Order, per an Oath, would be like having a certain "moral alignment" in an RPG. In D&D there used to be (or are, depending on the ruleset) 9 of these. IDK how many there are in Magic: The Gathering but at any rate, you can "deviate" to some degree from a strict alignment regimen, without losing your membership in that alignment. But too many deviations and...

Edited December 27, 2018 by Ripheus23

[Calderis he/him]

Of course there's going to be a general theme to an order, because there's a general mindset to the type of Spren. 

But Ivory and Syl are both examples that even spren vary. The other Inkspren wanted to kill Jasnah, and Ivory is viewed as a traitor. Syl ran away and broke and was the only Honorspren to bond. 

There is variability. And two members of the same order can disagree on what am oath means and if an action would break it. 

Quote

Questioner

It was mentioned that there are 16 gods in your Cosmere.

Brandon Sanderson

Depends on your definition of god.

Questioner

Shards. Are the ten orders of the Knight Radiants related to specific gods? Because Honor, child of Honor-Kaladin

Brandon Sanderson

So all the magic on Roshar, all the surgebinding on Roshar, is going to have its roots in Honor and Cultivation. Um... There is some Odium influence too, but that’s mostly voidbinding, which is the map in the back of the first book.

Questioner

I was wondering how much-

Brandon Sanderson

But, but even the powers, it’s, it’s really this sort of thing. What’s going in Stormlight is that people are accessing fundamental forces of creation and laws of the universe. They’re accessing them through the filter of Cultivation and Honor. So, that’s not to say, on another world you couldn’t have someone influence gravity. Honor doesn’t belong to gravity. But bonds, and how to deal with bonds, and things like this, is an Honor thing. So the way Honor accesses gravity is, you make a bond between yourself and either a thing or a direction or things like that and you go. So it’s filtered through Honor’s visual, and some of the magics lean more Honor and some them lean more Cultivation, as you can obviously see, in the way that they take place.

Questioner

The question kind of rooted because, Wyndle in the short story is always saying that he’s a cultivationspren, he doesn’t like [...]. I kind of got the idea that each order had a different Shard.

Brandon Sanderson

That is a good thing to think, but that is not how it is. Some of them self-identify more in certain ways. Syl is an honorspren, that’s what they call a honorspren, they self-identify as the closest to Honor. Is that true? Well, I don’t know. For instance, you might talk to different spren, who are like, no, highspren are like “We’re the ones most like Honor. We are the ones that keep oaths the best. Those honorspren will let their people break their oaths if they think it’s for a good cause. That’s not Honor-like.” There would be disagreement.

Questioner

Are you saying that the spren’s view of themself influences how they work?

Brandon Sanderson

Oh yeah, and humans’ view of them because spren are pieces of Investiture who have gained sapience, or sentience for the smaller spren, through human perception of those forces. For instance, whether or not Kaladin is keeping an oath is up to what Syl and Kaladin think is keeping that oath. It is not related to capital-T Truth, what is actually keeping the oath. Two windrunners can disagree on whether an oath has been kept or not.

source

 

[Ripheus23]

Maybe the Orders of the KR are like the Orders of the Catholic Church. Off the top of my head, I think the Benedictine Order is monastic-themed, the Dominicans are intellect-themed, and the Franciscans are compassion-themed (and I know little to nothing about other Orders, e.g. Cistercian or Carmelite, or even whether those are on the same level as the others or what). But John D. Scotus was a Franciscan intellectual, who "proved" an important theorem of the Church; so although being in an ecclesial order atmospherizes(?) the membership, it doesn't determine the mentality of its members. Or something along those lines.

As for whether the honorspren are the most "of Honor," while there might be some in-world disagreement about that, I think the relationship between Tanavast, the Stormfather, and the honorspren, testifies to which side of that disagreement is right. Tanavast's Cognitive Shadow was infused into the Stormfather, who created [some] honorspren, so, yeah.

As for what, "Journey before destination," really means, on my reread of WOK I am on chapter 58, which covers Nohadon to some extent.

Quote

"'And so, does the destination matter? Or is it the path we take? I declare that no accomplishment has substance nearly as great as the road used to achieve it. We are not creatures of destinations. [...] I must proclaim that no good can be achieved of false means. For the substance of our existence is not in the achievement, but in the method [...] [we] must not become so focused on what [we] wish[] to accomplish that [we] divert [our] gaze from the path [we] must take to arrive there.'" [pg. 818, hardcover ed.]

In the quantum-spren interlude, there's an emphasis that the subjective determination requires that the measurements of the spren are both actually carried out, as well as written down. Erasing the recording unbinds the spren. So, Nohadon possibly preceded the Orders of the KR, meaning The Way of Kings was written before the Orders came to be, possibly. I think Nohadon's book, especially given its historical influence, would have affected the Stormfather and the honorspren like the measurement of the flamespren affected those. That is, means-before-ends is what, "Journey before destination," is supposed to mean. But, since the real magic system is grounded not only in Honor but also Cultivation, and those two were married, when, "Journey before destination," was coupled to Surgebinding as part of an Oath, it also got coupled to Cultivation's power, so it was reinterpreted symmetrically.

EDIT:

So my model has it that the Windrunners are 99.9999%-90% of Honor, infinitesimally diverging from any Cultivation. By the time we get to the Skybreakers, those are 50+% of Honor, and that +% is an asymptotic convergence towards an infinitesimal abundance of Honor over Cultivation. (I don't actually know calculus so forgive me if I'm mutilating the ideas of it ) So the Skybreakers are asymptotic/infinitesimal mirror-images of the Edgedancers on a purely geometrical level, but they also are exactly parallel to the Dustbringers in a different sense. Like:

 

WR SW BS WS SB | ED LW TW EC DB [horizon-mirroring]

______________________________

WR - ED

SW - LW

BS - TW

WS - EC

SB - DB [column-mirroring]

Whether this matters almost at all, IDK  The diagrams for the KR Orders semi-remind me of https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/llull/#Ars, specifically 

So they're either mystical geometry hocus-pocus hogwash, or they're deep intimations of socioethical mathematics, or what.

Edited December 27, 2018 by Ripheus23