AeonaRin

Oh, I didn't think of Chaos as Cultivation's antagonit. I feel stupid now. It makes sense, only then I think I don't know which quadrant to put Ambition in. Because temporal and physical wpuld be fully occupied and it's not very cognitive, leaving only spiritual, which in my humble opinion is also occupied. So I don't know. I fell quite strongly about Indifference though. There's no more godly attribute than that.

Was she? WoB?

I also like Edowment the most, she's sweet. Another favourite of mine is Cultivation especially if she'll really be revealed to be Nightwatcher, because boon/curse system is soo cool.

I am fairly certain he said they are opposites but not all of them are perfect. Wisdom could be a substitute for Enlightenment, but I think the latter makes a better shard. It's also much easier to fit an opposite - even a vague one. I quite strongly believe trust and honor are not very similar. Trust as in believing, which people before me proposed. I just think trust/evaluation is more god-like, because God of the biblical stories tests men if they trust him. By ingenuity I mean creativity. Feeling. Vs. sensing of Enlightenment. I almost called this pair Sense and Sensibility xD (this pun would work in Alcatraz though!) Odium means many things and Brandon said specifically that it could be an opppsite for several shards. "Dishonor" is actually along with "hatered" among the most common synonyms. But even as just hatered I don't think it's a antagonist for Devotion, as devotion means to be loyal or to sacrifice, more than anything else. Divestiture means practically the same thing as bereavement, so whatevs the point is, it's the shard of taking, or taking back. Ad. Ambition - I did eventually agree that Ambition can be interpreted this way and can be paired with cultivation. I am hesitant, because I think Odium was chasing Ambition first, because it was a threat to him, and self-improvement isn't exactly dangerous. But it is plausible and it did let me avoid the questionable pairing of cultivation I came up with originally, so you can consider me converted.

Hello. I want to propose my take on the subject. There was a whole process going on. 1. I believe that Shards are godly traits, as they exist as a part of a godly creature. So. First I defined which are and which are not godly traits. There are lots of traits that could describe a god, there’s a reason some religions had whole pantheons. But in case of one deity there are some rules: God is omnipotent à therefore God cannot be unable to do something, so there’s probably no Shard of Impotency God is omniscient à therefore God cannot be ignorant, so there’s probably no Shard of Oblivion 2. Then I analyzed what could be intents of known Shards (and let’s ignore Preservation and Ruin as we already know it’s a pair) and their potential opposites, having in mind that these too need to be godly traits. Even with malicious traits: God gives and takes, forgives and rebounds, preserves and ruins. Honor – to act with integrity and virtue, to be noble, merciful, to keep promises, have morals à Antagonist’s intent: to be selfish, ruthless and cruel, to be execrable, to break promises. Devotion – to be loyal, loving, to care, to sacrifice à Antagonist’s intent: to be selfish, uncaring; to be neutral, to believe in non-intervention politics. Cultivation – to aim for progress, to tame the wilderness, to produce à Antagonist’s intent: to leave alone or neglect; to leave something raw and natural. Dominion – to rule, to govern, to seek power à Antagonist’s intent: to value independence, to be insubordinate or riot. Odium – to hate, to discredit virtue, to act with disgrace, to be execrable, ruthless, cruel à Antagonist’s intent: to love, to be kind, to be noble. Ambition – to have aspirations, to be eager, to hunger for accomplishments à Antagonist’s intent: to be satisfied with what one has, to be humble Autonomy – to be independent, self-sufficient, insubordinate, to value freedom, to riot à Antagonist’s intent: to suppress, to govern, to overpower. Endowment – to give, to grant, to aid à Antagonist’s intent: to take, to divest, to bereave I coloured some traits that make pairs. In case of Odium, it is a potential antagonist of either Honor or Devotion. I decided though, that Honor’s antagonist and Odium have more in common that Devotion’s antagonist and Odium. I thought Indifference (as an opposite of Devotion) is a better fit for a godly trait than Disgrace (as an opposite of Honor), so I settled for following pairs: Preservation Ruin Honor Odium/ Dominion Autonomy Devotion Indifference Cultivation Stagnation/Seclusion/Solitude/Serenity Ambition Humility Endowment Divestiture/Bereavement This way I was left with 14 Shards. Only one pair to go! As you can probably see I had a problem to come up with a good name for Cultivation’s antagonist. I thought that intent of literally leaving things wild and undomesticated is a bit too similar to Indifference which I already choose for Devotion’s antagonist. So I tried to have a little more abstract take on it. Solitude or Seclusion on the other hand seemed to be too similar to Autonomy. Therefore Serenity is quite a loose idea, but the best I had. 3. Next step was to analyze other characteristics commonly recognized as godly. Here are some popular choices and why I find them unlikely: Love – I think it’s too broad of a term, while shards we already know are usually quite easy to define. What is more, we Already have Devotion and Endowment, that together could be fused into love. Mercy – I believe we already have that in Honor. Wisdom – there can be no good opposite of that for a god-like creature. Purity – Again, we have that in Honor, and a bit in Endowment, etc. And here are some I find plausible: Certitude/Trust Evaluation Ingenuity Enlightenment Patience Impetuosity Trust/Evaluation – God sometimes puts humans to test, human is expected to trust Ingenuity/Enlightenment – quite popular choices, God needs both. Patience/Impetuosity – God exhibits both. 4. Then I confronted my theory with past disputes. In this thread Extesian proposed a neat system with Shards grouped in fours, like Allomantic metals. I disagree with some propositions, but I liked the system and considered an alternate pairing – Cultivation (as in working on other things) vs Ambition (as in working on yourself) – that made sense. It eliminates the unfortunate Serenity, but I do think Humility could be a good Shard. This system also eliminates the dilemma of Cultivation/Preservation/Ruin triangle. Therefore my alternative pairings Preservation Ruin Honor Odium/ Dominion Autonomy Cultivation Ambition Devotion Indifference Endowment Divestiture/Bereavement Became groups of four: Cognitive Enlightenment – to seek understanding Ingenuity – to seek innovation Trust – to believe Evaluation – to test Spiritual/emotional Devotion – to engage Indifference – to stay neutral Honor – to have morals Odium – To discredit morals Physical Endowment – to give something to others Bereavement – to take something from others Autonomy – to have control of yourself Dominion – to have control of others Temporal Cultivation – to work on something Ambition – to work on yourself Preservation – to never change Ruin – to break things down 5. The last thing was to ask myself, which of these could be the survival shard? I think Indifference would make a pretty good one. And so I accepted the list in this form. What do you think?

I find Mistborn first era the least enjoyable among Brandon's works, and I agree that Well of Accession was the worst. I too was annoyed by Zane plot and I am too damnation old for Vin's teenage dilemmas and found her annoying as well. That being said, although it was the first series of Brandon that I've read, I loved it enough to take the monstrosity of a novel that is the Way of Kings next, and for that I am thankful, because it's a masterpiece.

I dye my hair with henna and the colour is kinda unpredictable, and this time I got my hair so flaming ginger I am ridiculously proud of myself

I think tracking RAFOs is useful not for guessing, and I don't like when people do this, it hurts my logical feels, but - It's useful to know what questions we need to ask in other way to kinda circle around the subject

There is no shard on Threnody, only Ambition was there for a short while. The shades are the effect of the fight he and Odium had nearby (we wre not told that directly, but Khriss writes in essay that this fight had a serious aftermath on the planet, and we know of tho weird things happening: shades that have been there forever, as people of Homeland were calling the other continent Forests of Hell since always; and the Evil which is quite new thing, obly a generation old - logic indicates that the aftermath recalled is the older one - but it can also be something that is the source of both phenomena.). Also what Pattern said, godmetals are not existing metals. Most probably silver is magically inert in some way, like aluminum is. There's even a theory that threnodite silver os aactually aluminum but I doubt that, as aluminium doesn't make good knives.

I asked wether cognitive shadows outside Threnody have to avoid silver and got a RAFO. P.S. this thread is a good idea.

Yes, but Skybreaker skills are. My thinking of Windrunners what? I didn't say surgebinders can't use shardplate. I'm saying someone with ability to use surges (in combat, yes) would not choose to wear a shardplate that blocks their abilities. Most probably.

Also, if he was w surgebinder, killing Amaram would me MUCH easier using surges. But he did not. And he was wearing a dead shardplate which a surgebinder wouldn't probably do. He might have been looking for Skybreakers. All in all he was a member of some secret society that, probably like the others we know of, was concerned with Radiants.

I seriously ship Adoladin they are better suited than either of them with Shallan! But I'm unfortunately fairly sure Kaladin is straight

Oh gawd. Hawkido. I'm not saying you didn't put a lot of effort in your research. I am saying that because of your methods, your conclusion is unlikely. From statistic point of view. And you're taking it as an axiom, even though there's plenty contradictory arguments presented by others. Pointing logical errors is not rude, I'm not attacking YOU. Pointing errors is a part of discussion. The proper way to react to that would be to try to avoid them in the future. That being said, I will no longer replay to this thread, I got too tired with it. Good luck.

Yeah, that might have worked have I been on a computer, but the mobile version od the forum sometimes doesn't listen to me thanks anyways!

Also this ^ Sorry for double post, I do not know how to put another quote in an edit?

1. Word search is not any kind of evidence, but wishful thinking. Laws of probability indicate it's most likely a chance. Conjunction fallacy. 2. The fact that there is a WoB saying there's a shard in space, does not mean Ambition is not, the more that it is on Sel, on which we know were 2 shards. This is exactly the kind of logical errors I'm talking about. A is not B B is C Therefore A is not C. cats are not dogs dogs are mammals therefore cats are not mammals Association fallacy. 3. "Wild guesses" refered to Kel taking up Autonomy and Devotion wich was based on no evidence on your side. 4. How is pointing someones errors hateful? You made several fallacies, you can't argue if your logic is lacking. I see no point in discussion if the proposition is flawed. You ignored Dominion completely, you jumped to conclusions multiple times. I have nothing against you personally, man, I don't know you. I have a lot against your arguments because some of them are invalid.

Hawkido, I wanted to analyze your logical and rethorical errors, but you're making too many. So forgive me for not elaborating, but I'll just post a list of formal and informal fallacies you're guilty of. Appeal to probability, conjunction fallacy, fallacy of the converse, existential fallacy, fallacy of exclusive premises, fallacy of undistributed middle, argumentum ad ignorantiam, argumentum from silence, circular reasoning, confusing correlation with causation, casual oversimplification, moving the goalposts, post hoc fallacy, proof by assertion, referential fallacy, cherry picking, and above all, the slippery slope. Sorry, but you're jumping to conclusions with FTL speed.

I would not call that evidence, but a guess. Can you link me to that WoB? Now these are just even wilder guesses. Especially with Devotion. And I certainly hope you're wrong because I'd personally hate Kel to be op.

I'm not saying that he wouldn't be a good fit for Ambition. He totally would. It's just a long way from where he is the last time we see him to taking up the actual shard, and this theory is just a bit far-fetched. He'd have to: 1. Bind himself to a new body. We assume he did that. 2. It's not said if his new body would immediately allow him to leave Scadial, just like Oversleep said, we don't actually know if the returned have troubles worldhopping. 3. Learn about Ambition. 4. Be bothered. Not sure if he would. 5. Find out where the splinters are, and there is possibility that no one in cosmere currently knows that. 6. Learn how to un-splinter a shard, and for what I understand there is a in-world debate wether it is possible or not, so he would have to find a way himself (not a scholar) or out-smart someone that did (more likely, but still he'd need to find the right person) 7. And then he could actually take up the shard. So, like I said in a first comment, it's not impossible but it is unlikely. I would like it though, because Shard of Ambition could be a potential villain, and I see villain material in Kelsier.

Even if he got a new body and would be able to leave Scadrial, I still doubt he would find Ambition splinters and un-splinter it. I mean, someone might do that, but I don't get why Kelsier is your choice.

Considering he would have troubles even leaving Scadrial because of his connection to it and that he would have to figure out how to mend pieces of a splintered Shard back together, I'd say it's unlikely.

You know, @rockobar, you can be rude using polite words. Some people do it on purpose, others just can't place themselves in someone else's shoes. But it happens. I will not judge whether you meant this letter to be rude or not, but it just was. That's what made people universally mad at you. I, personally, also cringed af reading the detailed description of Blushweaver/Lightsong cell floor sex you imagined would be great. It was so ridiculous to me I could not contain myself. Still have my eyebrow rised. Sorry for the ad personam though, not proud of that. Anyways, it's nice you responded to everyone. Hope we can all get along.