aemetha

Probably a Truthwatcher. I like research and evidence based conclusions that most people don't have the time or inclination to find.

I interpreted it much the same way, up until he snapped. After he snapped I revised my opinion. I could previously have seen him punching him, because, well, Sadeas deserved it, and it wasn't particularly world changing, though perhaps politically inconvenient. After he snapped and murdered Sadeas though, I can't help but wonder, had there not been others there to stop him, would he have stopped at a punch? Not at all. Jasnah's act was similarly immoral, though it was legal by a technicality. It comes down to selfishness versus selflessness. If he had rationally thought it through and selflessly killed Sadeas for the purpose of the safety and well being of those he cared about, I would be okay with that being considered a moral act, if an illegal one. What was described in the book however was a selfish act of killing him in order to satisfy his hatred for the man, and therefore an immoral act. Immorality being the harm of another in order for personal gain. It's not a case for me of not being able to assign the justifications you have given to the act, they are perfectly valid justifications. I would even be okay with him feeling okay on-balance with the act. What I have difficulty accepting in terms of contrition is his not considering that the circumstances of the act were not benevolent. Perhaps he shouldn't regret the killing of Sadeas, but he should regret the way he killed Sadeas and its immediate motivations. I wouldn't hang him for it in any case. I don't hate Adolin, but I do dislike that I personally don't believe he has been honest with himself about it. I think he has unaddressed impulse control problems, because he often makes snap judgements without considering the implications. I dislike the suggestion that he is portrayed as perfect, I don't think his background or disposition justifies that. I've never glorified what Shallan did with her father. I will however state that Shallan's father was a more clear and present danger to her and her brothers than Sadeas was to Adolin, at those specific times. Sadeas by all evidence would have gone off and plotted for some time, Shallan's father would have tried to murder someone as soon as he was physically capable of doing so, based on what we've seen of both of them. even so, what Shallan did was still wrong. I don't see this as a scale with right on one side and wrong on the other. If anything, a killing begins with wrong on one side and neither wrong nor right on the other. There is no "good and moral" killing, it's always a tragedy. I just want to see the character reflect on the incident and regret the killing of Sadeas, if not the death of Sadeas? Does that make sense? I'm sorry if I am coming across as argumentative, I don't intend to be. It's just that you've engaged in the debate with me for quite some time, and I'm happy to debate these issues until the seas dry up. I doubt we will arrive at a conclusion we both agree on, and that's fine, we've both had people agree with our interpretations, and we agreed with theirs. I don't want you to think any of it is antagonistic though, it genuinely is a fun debate, and the only time I became even a little frustrated was when I felt I was being misrepresented.

I'm pretty sure the ghostbloods are the neutral people who sometimes do good things by bad means. That's pretty much what Kelsier was, and Brandon has said he would join and lead the ghostbloods. They are pretty much assuming the antihero role.

This is generally true, however if you compare the average heights of humans just a few thousand (or even hundred) years ago with the average heights of humans now, the difference in height is not explainable purely in terms of nutritional differences. Some examples from those times involved subjects who appear with the (admittedly limited) evidence we have to go on to have been in quite good health, with adequate nutrition. Anyway, all I meant to suggest is that the physiological response to a lesser amount of compression via gravity on the human body is not the only explanation that might be attributed to differences in height. As you note. I think we are in agreement on that? Yeah, this bothers me a bit too. I can't help but think it isn't nearly as neat as the histories tell us, because they are, as you say, a mess. I think it far more likely that there was a lot of factionalism both within and between races encouraged by Odium, and that it eventually coalesced into a largely racial conflict. If the modern example is at all analogous to what happened historically, we have humans and listeners on both sides.

Right, there would have actually been two separate things that occurred though. You'd have the physiological response to the different environmental pressures that would have been apparent very quickly. There would also be the continuation of natural selection through random mutation, with adaptive mutations flourishing, which could also contribute to differences in height. What is adaptive to 1.0 gravity not necessarily being adaptive to 0.7 gravity. I think the language differences, the absence of the epicanthic fold, the height differences and the fact that one entire (and quite divergent from the other cultures of Roshar) culture remained true to those rules is very suggestive of the shin being a separate wave of immigration to Roshar.

Xetamang tili du xeta. Welwala! It's not really a problem, it's just that any human who has lived in a low gravity environment for multiple generations will appear stretched like in the image I posted. Wherever they came from immediately before Roshar doesn't really matter so much as humans are designed for 1.0 gravity and so 0.7 gravity necessitates changes.

Yeah, the main problem with that is that dreams are transitory, and Brandon has said transitory things don't really have the cognitive presence necessary for spren. I kind of feel like I am abusing my Arcanum privileges by searching for "poop" but here you go: https://wob.coppermind.net/events/186-general-reddit-2013/#e4135

I think an example is in order. From mistborn era 2:

I think I may have truncated that thought a bit. What I was trying, in the roundabout way my brain works, to say, is that I would prefer Shallan was older because she would likely have had time to experience more relationships (romantic or otherwise) and I could reconcile the stability of the current relationship in that way. I feel like I've been pushed a little in this series to believe that she is capable of having stable relationships because she thought a lot about it. That isn't consistent with my observations or studies. It is necessary to experience things in order to develop the understanding to properly think on them and reach stable conclusions. Of course, she could always get divorced from Adolin 10 words into book 4 and completely throw out my impression of how this has gone.

I think it's important to separate different uses of the word dream here. Dream is used as a metaphor for ambitions, not as a synonym. Dream also describes a cognitive experience while sleeping, which is hypothesised to be a metaphorical interpretation of the waking concerns of an individual along associative rather than rational and logical lines. I think rather than a spren of dreams, the Nightwatcher is more likely a spren of fate or destiny as cognitive ideas. I doubt the concept of dreams has a large cognitive presence, because like the poop discussed by BS dreams are transitory in nature. Ambition, fate and destiny are more permanent concepts that likely have a greater cognitive presence.

Crackpot theory: The Sons of Honor ARE the Ghostbloods, at least at the upper most levels. What better way to conceal your motives than to play both sides. I admit though, it is a bit crackpot. Afterall, it's not like you could have MI5 working for the KGB is it?

I think this specific incident raises a larger philosophical question. Is the killing of an immoral person a moral act solely because it reduces the quantifiable immorality of the world? In other words, do we measure the immorality of an act by the motives and circumstances directly involved in the act, or by the larger implications of the act. My own view is that we measure it by the motives and circumstances of the act, because to consider the larger implications moves us from fact into inference. Justice is evidence based. On the romance angle. I'm really not sold on any of the romances of the story. In many cases they come across to me as superficial, lacking the nuance of real relationships. As far as having an expectation of where Shallan would go, well, frankly I would have expected her to sleep with both of them, and then get upset that neither called her back. She's a teenage girl with even greater self-identity and self-worth problems than the norm. Sorry if that seems like a generalisation to anyone, I'm not saying it flippantly, but that particular generalisation of teen behaviour is based on reality. I can't really say I would want any of the pairings so much as all of the pairings. I don't think marrying at this age is helpful to them. I think having failed relationships is a prerequisite to having a stable relationship that isn't maintained solely by obligation. Adolin is probably reasonably well adjusted (probably a step too far actually) in this regard, but Shallan has only had one failed relationship, and one party was never committed to that relationship to begin with. In other words, I'd be okay with them hooking up with each other interchangeably, not because I voyeuristic-ally enjoy the idea of casual relationships, but because that's how people learn to have committed relationships - by learning from mistakes made in casual relationships. I would actually prefer that Shallan was older than she is. I think the depiction of her is more consistent with a slightly more mature, but in some respects developmentally stunted young woman.

Fabrial Radiant in full Frabrialplate armour. Someone should make a movie of this .

Which mistborn? Stormlight over mistborn era 1 for me certainly. I'm on the fence between mistborn era 2 and stormlight, I enjoy the characters in both those series more than mistborn era 1. I would very much like to see Lift, The Lopen, and Wayne playing cards together, reminiscing about how all the time spent wearing the right hats during a meal while stuck to the ceiling helped them single handedly save the cosmere.

Yes, sorry, I misspoke. I meant Alethi. I don't know if we have enough information on other ethnicity to determine where Shin height sits in that regard.

Shin would also have some of this going on: They are shorter than normal Rosharans, and that provides additional evidence that they arrived on Roshar later than other waves of immigration. Roshar has low gravity (70% of Scadrial) which causes some odd things to happen to the human body, like the joints separating slightly. This image is of a belter from The Expanse being subjected to gravity torture. Belters live in low gravity environments, and by suspending him this way in a normal gravity environment it is excruciating for him. This image is closer to what you'd expect from an Alethi, but Shin aren't described as having difficulty in the environment which suggests some adaptation also in them.

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/36-arcanum-unbounded-chicago-signing/#e1525 If it moves, it can't be based anywhere in particular. Sorry, it was well thought out anyway.

In a battle to the death, Kaladin would win... Kelsier is already dead!

I read those scenes quite differently. What I saw was Dalinar trying to find a legal way to deal with Sadeas, and Adolin (barely) doing what Dalinar told him to do. Adolin himself had to be constrained on several occasions to prevent him from murdering Sadeas very publicly. Except this thought process never happened. The scene where Adolin kills Sadeas is one of the few POV scenes we have of him, and it is clearly described as a moment of rage in which the future consequences, good and bad, are not considered. He killed him because he was angry, and he enjoyed inflicting pain on him at the time. Those other characters reacted to an immediate threat (Shallan), or were conducting the business of war in which killing is a requirement (Kaladin), or were similarly vilified (Dalinar). Adolin is held to the standard he is being held to because intent matters. It matters not just that he killed a person, but why he killed a person. All of those things you said about Sadeas threatening his family, and never stopping are all completely accurate. The thing is though, those things didn't result in him making a calm analysis and rationally weighing the options and coming to the conclusion that he had to kill him because there were no other options. Instead what happened is Adolin hated Sadeas from the beginning of the series, and those things inflamed his hatred, and we see in the text that he acted out of hatred, not out of self-defence. Adolin is not held to a different standard here, any character that kills out of hatred will be (by me at least) held to that same standard. It's well established in the moral standards of our world and implied if not outright stated in the world described that hatred is not a mitigating factor in a case of murder, it is an aggravating factor. Taking a life because the person is a dangerous threat (a thought process not described) is a relatively selfless act, while taking a life because the person is deeply hated by you (a thought process that is described) is a selfish act.

Okay, so here's my theory of the unmade, and I'll follow up at the end with whether Sja-anat should be trusted. Spren are made of three things: A chunk of investiture from a shard, an idea compatible with that shard and with enough cognitive presence, and an identity to make it an entity. Brandon has confirmed all of those things as part of a spren variously in WoB's. So how do you unmake a thing? You take away something that is involved in making it. You can't take its investiture or it ceases to exist. You can't take its identity or it ceases to be able to act. The only thing you can take is its idea, because the idea is necessary for it to form, not for it to exist. I think of the investiture as the body, the identity as the mind and the idea as the purpose. What happens if you take somethings purpose? It desperately tries to find purpose. I think this is what we see the unmade doing. Moelach - Deathspren perhaps originally. Instatiably whispers to the dying, far more prolifically than we see with a normal deathspren. Re-Shephir - Creationspren perhaps originally. Copies things insatiably in a parody of creation. Nergaoul - Not sure what spren. Spreads frenzy insatiably, but without malice. Searching for the battle discipline it lost. I really don't know about Yelig-nar so I won't even try. More information is required. Which brings us to the conclusion of the post: Sja-anat - Probably a cryptic. Driven insatiably to intrigue. Insatiably looks for secret, and betrayals. Not to be trusted, it will betray again, and again and again. It is an entity driven to intrigue, but no longer understanding the context of it. Odium is the god of the void, and he took the idea from these spren and placed it in the void. At least, that's my theory.

Shallan reconciles her issues and is on the verge of progressing her truths, only for Adolin to die in the final scene through some fault she sees as hers, plunging her back into crisis.

Okay, so here we have evidence that there was absolutely no altruistic motivation for the murder. He acted out of rage, and what thought he did have of it was of enjoyment. So it should be clear that Adolin should feel remorse for the act. If he doesn't feel remorse due to motivations he later ascribes to the act, he is engaging in revisionism of the act, self-delusion. Whatever justifications he later uses as justification are factually incorrect. His motivation was rage, and sadism (he enjoyed the suffering of Sadeas). Now, I am not saying here that he is a sadist as a pattern of behaviour, nor a walking talking ball of rage as a pattern of behaviour, but in that moment, he was. Regarding the authors intent for the character, I have to disagree with you. The author has been very clear that there should be consequences, including psychological ones for any killing. I would argue the self-deceit he is engaging in around the issue is a part of the scarring. He does have a good moral compass, which is why he is engaging in revisionism, because he doesn't want to face that what he did was completely and utterly immoral by the standards of his society and the standards of himself. Sadeas deserved to die, that isn't in doubt. It's how his death happened that is the issue. If Adolin had judged the circumstances using the later justifications prior to killing him, and regretted the necessity of it, that would be a completely different matter. Justice is dispassionate. Adolin never once tried to find a legal and moral way to have Sadeas account for his crimes.

I don't know what the ramifications of Moelach's influence are, but I think we should consider that future sight is considered bad in Alethi society not because Odium is good at it, but because Honor is bad at it. Future sight is related to the intent of the shard, which we know from WoB's. My personal belief is that it is related to the temporal directionality of the shard. Honor looks back towards sworn oaths and established codes. He doesn't look forward so he can't see the future well. Cultivation looks forwards, growing a subject towards an ideal end point. She is good at future sight according to Honor. Odium looks forwards towards a malevolent end. He inflames passions and/or hatred toward his desired goal. He is good at future sight. Preservation looks forwards seeking to indefinitely maintain the status quo. He is good at future sight. Ruin looks at the present, seeking an end to all. He is bad at future sight. So seeing the future isn't of Odium at all, it's simply not of Honor. Moelach by many theories might be one of the mindless spren, and the visions he grants for the death rattles nothing more than a harbinger of the desolation, spreading fear through truth.

Curious. If it is canon does that mean we can talk about it as it relates to the topic here, but without giving away plot spoilers from Liar? Confusing. I'm just going to post a single line in a spoiler here only addressing the issue as it pertains to the topic with no plot spoilers. If anyone wants to look at it they can. I'll report my post so a moderator can decide if it crosses any lines regarding spoilers from non-published works.

There is some reason to suspect Aimians may not be native to Roshar. https://wob.coppermind.net/events/160-words-of-radiance-dayton-signing/#e2881 Of course, there are two very different races of Aimians so it could be that one race came from off world and one race didn't. Refugee could just be a reference to the scouring. Cosmere significance is also very vague. I certainly wouldn't discount the possibility of them coming from off-world.