bo.montier

Um... I understand this, but I am not sure I agree... I guess, ultimately, I don't care about the objective right or wrong, I care FAR more about moral culpability. We can all agree Slavery is wrong, and that the way parshmen were treated is wrong, but what we don't all agree on (evidently from earlier in this thread) is "were the humans aware they were keeping slaves when they kept the parshmen, and are they guilty of being slavers in regards to the parshmen?" And I think the answer to both is NO. I also believe it is a far more important than the question of "was it wrong to keep the parshmen as slaves?" Edit: Every single time I see your signature I laugh.

Whew, getting deep. I feel this responsibility for 2 reasons: 1) I believe there is a moral obligation to work to push back against what is dark in the world, and there is darkness in the disparities I see. I believe this is a responsibility shared by ALL people in ALL civilizations and circumstances. Some just have more they are able to contribute. (2 things here. I acknowledge that America has made great strides in these areas and is much better than both most countries through the whole of history and most modern countries. I am also NOT saying that America is Mostly or wholly dark in these areas...) 2) I have benefitted from the circumstance I find myself in, and I want to "make up for" that. I want to give to others as much of the "privilege" I have been given. I believe the first reason is FAR, FAR more important than the second. Ok, on to the next. Humans go with the best option, Parshmen want reparations. Man, that is murky. I think it makes sense, from a moral perspective, to pay certain reparations, and then be willing to trade with the Parshmen. I don't think it would be appropriate for the humans to be forced out of all their homes, or give up everything they have. But, even then, giving the parshmen money when they don't know how to farm...The parshmen have to be willing to trade, and thus interact. The Humans can try, but if it's not received then there isn't anything they can do. If a true effort is given to make things right, and to help the Parshmen, but the Parshmen want unreasonable demands, or just refuse to work with their former captors, and push war, then the moral option for the humans is to defend themselves. Like, if Sah attacks Kaladin simply because he is human, Kaladin has the right to defend himself, using whatever force is necessary to stop the threat. If humans try to re-enslave the Parshmen, the Parshmen have the moral right to defend themselves from said slavery using whatever force is necessary to stop the threat. I DON'T think it would be moral for the Parshmen to ATTACK humans if basic humanitarian aid is given (i.e. they aren't starving because they're being provided with food). Wow, this whole thread got deep.

Ok, This is getting into really complicated real-life territory. I'm a WASP (White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant) American. Neither I, nor anyone in my ancestry, as far as we can trace it, owned slaves. In fact, my family did not get to America until the 1900s, decades after slavery was eliminated. Now, There are no longer slaves in America, but there is still a LOT of disparity between blacks and whites in terms of health outcomes, income, standard of living, etc. I believe that I have benefitted from the status quo, through no fault of my own. It's not my fault I was born into this country to my parents at this time. It is not my fault that all of these sub-conscious societal things work in my favor. MY MORALITY (to be clear, mine, I make no claims on anyone else with this) demands that I work for social justice and equality. That looks a certain way for me, though I accept that it can look different for others with the same basic beliefs as me. It's not my fault it happened, but I believe I have a responsibility to help fix it. I believe this for 2 reasons, I benefit from the situation that was created by other people. In my mind, looking at the suddenly healed parshmen, I believe the humans have some decisions. The MINIMUM moral option is to leave them alone and let them be. The Best option would be to try to help them, as Kaladin is doing, and apologize for what the humans unknowingly did. The Worst option is to try to re-enslave them. The humans have benefitted from what "Brian" did, at the expense of the parshmen. The least they can do is stop doing the bad thing they didn't know they were doing.

Ok, we're on the same page now. I didn't realize you were separating those concepts.

Oh, I believe you, it wasn't clear to me in Yata's post if he was speculating. Thank you for the clarification.

What I'm asking is are you SURE about that, and where does the info come from? I have not come across that information before, but then, I'm new to the forum and all the research people here have done, all the WoBs that have been compiled.

Ok, I'm trying to understand what you're saying. You are separating the action from the intention. Saying that an act can be viewed as right or wrong, without taking intent into the equation. And then the intent, on top of the action, determines moral culpability? If I'm understanding you correctly then I think we just have different views of what makes up morality. For instance, I think it is morally right to attack and kill a person who is raping my wife (you may not agree that lethal force is moral in this instance, but bear with me). Now, Let's say I walk in, and I think she is being raped, and I kill the man she is with. Only later do I find out that she was actually having an affair. My killing was justified and moral with the information I had at the time. (Most states in the US also allow for this type of killing as being legal. Mistaken self-defense is the legal definition) Now, if I come in, realize she's having an affair, and kill the man, I have just become culpable morally, because I did it KNOWING she was not in danger, not being raped. It is the same action in both cases, I killed my wife's lover, but in one I am morally innocent, and in the other I am morally guilty. From what I understand, you're saying the action itself was wrong in both cases, but I am only morally culpable in the second?

Different species can definitely reproduce irl, like donkeys and horses. Most of the time the hybrid is sterile, again like mules, which are the offspring of donkeys and horses. I think it's pretty clear the listeners are a different species, but the more important difference is probably seen in their spirit web. They bond with Spren in a way humans cannot. I wonder what a first generation human/parshendi child would have access to investiture wise.

Is that something so far back that the Humans don't even know? I dont' remember that being mentioned In-World, only as a WoB or something.

You're looking at this from the outside, knowing that the parshmen are people capable of thought and emotional intelligence. The Alethi literally could not know that the parshmen were more than vaguely human shaped beasts of burden until they met the parshendi. Even then, there was a lot of doubt about whether or not the parshmen and parshendi were related. They had no idea that they could form emotional bonds such as husband and wife. WE have definitive proof that the way the parshmen were treated was scarring, but only now, after Kaladin has interacted with them. Prior to that we didn't know if they were, at any level, conscious or even capable of actual consciousness during their captivity. We're not saying that the humans were right to do as they did, we're saying they couldn't have know they were wrong. They didn't have the requisite facts. I mean, if we, as humans on Earth, found out tomorrow Cows are completely sentient beings of equal intelligence as us, we would be guilty ONLY IF we continued treating them as we do now. Right now we know they are herd beasts that taste good. We have a certain moral obligation to prevent cruelty, but it is entirely appropriate to use them as workers and to eat them. That would change in an instant if we discovered they were intelligent. What's more, we would look back on our previous actions with horror. BUT we couldn't have known differently at the time. The Humans of the first 2 books simply could not have known the Parshmen were not animals with a vaguely human shape. Edit: I agree with others who have said something to the effect: "If the humans had ANY INKLING that the parshmen were intelligent, sentient beings, rather than bipedal animals and treated them as slaves, they were entirely wrong" I also wouldn't be surprised by that, since the humans keep ACTUAL slaves, but I don't think it's the case with reference to the Parshmen.

But the visions are maintained by the Stormfather, somehow. I imagine that the influence of honor left behind in the SF would protect the visions from tampering. He is PART of Honor, unlike words written down on Scadrial. From watching Kaladin, it seems like abandoning the oaths is what kills the spren. If that is the case then why would we think they had a choice of abandoning the oaths without leaving their shards behind? Fully aware I may be missing some vital WoB or other information.

Could be, I seem to remember Eshonai saying that they, at one point, only knew dullform and mateform, and that eventually research led them to...I think Workform was the first one they found. The Five were first dullform then workform, I think (I don't have the physical book and kindle is hard for me to search through, which is why I'm not going and looking this up and am just going off of memory). It would, then, go like this. They maintain dullform to avoid being killed, eventually it becomes habit. After a LONG period of time, someone wonders why there aren't more forms available and begins the laborious efforts to discover the new ones. So the question, put another way, why would they adopt dullform at all if their un-bonded self is smarter than dullform. Why would they go through the first transformation if it only led to dullform? Is that what you're getting at? (by the way, mateform intrigues me. It seems like the Parshmen didn't need mateform to continue their line, why, then, does it exist?)

I guess I figured that was what Dullform was. It just doesn't seem to have a reason to exist otherwise.

Yeah, I may be reading more than what's there. Has their new form been defined? Is it Warform or workform? It certainly seems more intelligent than dullform, comparing those we've seen with Rlain while he was in dullform.

My reading is that after the everstorm returned a variety of forms to the parshmen, which would mean they had bonded different types of spren. There were reports of glowing red eyes in some towns Kaladin had been through, yes? I don't think the Highstorm is required for that first transformation during the everstorm, but if they want to change AGAIN they'll have to do it the old fashioned way. Speculation in this next part: Of course, maybe the everstorm FORCES additional changes each time it passes. I mean, imagine that it forces the change from parshman to "random other form." For most this first form seems to be relatively innocuous, like warform or work form, but for some it is stormform. The next time around it forces a new change, and then again, bringing more and more voidforms as it goes until all that is left of the parshmen is voidbringers of one flavor or another....

This seems spot on in reference to Dalinar. Remember when Dalinar was first trying to get the highprinces to go on joint-plateau runs and the highprince (I think Aladar) questions the assurances that Aladar would not be taken advantage of? Dalinar says his honor was what he would reassure Aladar with and aladar says "Well, no one can doubt that..." It seems that Dalinar's transformation took place far enough in the past, and was significant enough, that people have come to see him in a new light. I think it started at the death of Gavilar, from what we've read so far. As to the topic at hand: You have to separate the pieces of this, and therefore the culpability. 1st: Odium influences the Listeners and they become voidbringers. 2nd: Eventually the Humans (we presume) figure out a way to turn the voidbringers into parshmen/slaveforms 3rd: Humanity puts them to use 4th: Humanity uses them as slaves for millenia 4th: they gain their forms back...What does humanity do next? In the 1st case, Odium is the most clearly at fault, though maybe there were listeners like Venli who welcomed his influence. The Listeners as a race, so far, don't sound like this is their character overall. In the 2nd case, the humans did what they did in self defence. The individual who caused the transformation was the individual who caused the war, Odium, and those listeners who gleefully accepted his influence. This was a moral act brought on by the actions of the aggressor (I'm super into Just war as a thing. Defending yourself and your people justifies MOST (not all) actions taken against them, so long as you truly are the defender, not the aggressor) In the 3rd case, this seems to have been the only way to keep the parshmen alive. In the 4th case, the humans enslaved the Parshendi for thousands of years. My question, though, is this really slavery? Modern humans did not know that Parshmen could think. They were not much smarter than a chull, from what we've read. Maybe I should say they did not display intelligence much more than a chull. They couldn't demonstrate that they could think. This was so pervasive that people stopped thinking of them as intelligent creatures. They were certainly treated better than human slaves, really they were treated like cattle. Finally we're brought to the 5th case, We don't know what happens next. Can I understand why they were angry? Yes, absolutely! They were intelligent but the damage done to them thousands of years ago kept them from displaying this. But, if we were to exclude Odium's influence (more on this in a moment) what happens next shows how moral humanity and the listeners as peoples are. Kaladin's efforts are laudable, but how will the rest of humanity act? Will they forcibly retake their slaves, or will they, like Gavilar and the Alethi when they first encountered the parshendi, try to negotiate with them as a people group. War is NOT inevitable, assuming good-will prevails on both sides. When you bring Odium's influence back in, of course many of the listeners will bond with voidspren, and many more will probably join the voidbringers in warform. But again, that's Odium's fault, not the listeners. Anyways, that's my way more than 2 cents worth.

Yeah, the different cognitive abilities are pretty clear, otherwise the parshendi could never have developed past a group of dullforms. It makes sense to me that a complete spiritweb would be required for thought. Hmmm, I wonder if that means someone with a severely damaged spirit web, i.e. someone like Kaladin, Shallan, Dalinar, other candidates for investiture have inherently flawed thought patterns, at least until they are made whole by investiture...Maybe damaged spiritweb is distinct from incomplete...

So what's the difference between slave-form and dull-form? There clearly is, it was dull-forms that discovered the first form, where the slaveform couldn't imagine it or work towards it. Does dullform have increased abilities simply due to that portion of their spiritweb being intact? Final question: What if Eshonai was not saying that those are the two options, but to signify that there was an element of pure chance to it, so you could come out with any of the known forms? My primary objection to this question would be that if the change had a, let's say 1% chance of coming out with a different form than you intended why weren't other forms regularly discovered...Ok, never mind. I think you're right on that point.

Thank you for the WoB to clear that up.

"My brother deserved to die because he joined the wrong side..." maybe? But that isn't a truth about her.

You may be right, but it seems to me that you're reading too much into things, wanting something to be there that isn't. If you recall, Shallan couldn't draw the shattered plains until she saw enough of them. She thinks she hasn't seen enough of the city to draw it yet; makes sense to me. Not saying I don't think there's anything wrong in Urithiru, obviously there is something weird going on. I just think you're reading more into some of these contents than is there. Then again, as I've said elsewhere, I frequently miss these types of clues, so I'll keep an open mind.

If they don't know where the city is, how can they know it has a pattern? Jasnah was being acerbic towards someone, not speaking as an all-knowing individual; she could not know whether or not there was a pattern, since she did not know the city's construction.

At this point we don't know that the unmade can bond, and if they can, what those bonds will do, correct? If they do bond, would it be similar to the nahel bond, or would it be the same as other sprend bond with the listeners, creating a form?

On the one hand, you're using Navani as a source, who says that it has been "centuries" since the city fell, and on the other you're saying that it fell 4.5 millennia ago. I'm a little confused as to where you're getting your time-lines. If Navani is wrong about how long it was ago, I don't know how we can trust her being correct that the city fell in aharietiam. I 100% acknowledge that I may not know the details and you could be dead on, but I always got the sense that the recreance happened shortly after the heralds left, not some 2500 years later. If there were no more desolations, I don't know why the KR would hang around. Edit: I really mean I just don't know what's going on here. I am only recently really digging deeper into this stuff and am just ignorant of where you got that timeline from. I don't mean to be argumentative :-)