Jash

I ship Raboniel and Navani, is that weird? Although I am fine with it just being friendship, and I like Dalinar and Navani, I just saw potential there. Cute potential. Honestly, I wanted Kaladin to end up with someone militaristic, which Lynn fit the bill, so I have no ship for him now. Hmm, maybe Eshonai? But she dead, so I don’t know lol.

I erased deranged, sorry about that. I am trying to be civil as well. I find it frustrating when you keep moving the goal posts. As to dolphins, yes they do. There are actual studies on this. We have proved that dolphins do have a concept of right and wrong and can act on it (by we, I mean scientists). Links below, but also you can just type it into google. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342352188_The_Moral_Duties_of_Dolphins https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286043210_In_Defense_of_Dolphins_The_New_Moral_Frontier https://animallawconference.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Humans-Dolphins-and-Moral-Inclusivity.pdf “They have no concept of doing what’s right because it’s right. They do it because of some reason that I don’t know but prove to me they do have morals” - They do if for the same reason people do. We are not better than them. We are not morally superior to them. In fact, there is evidence that they may even have similar emotional intelligence to humans (meaning things like having empathy). https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2006.1997 The above article is great general study on dolphin intelligence, and what I love about it, is you could do the exact same study on human beings. It explains why social relationships are important to dolphin intelligence (which includes what we call empathy and morals) and could just as easily be a study of human beings’ evolution. Honestly, you can research this yourself. There is ample scientific evidence and studies about why human beings need to say, not steal. We evolved to not steal from people within our in group. Any study on human brain development, emotional intelligence evolution, or social group evolution could be used as evidence against the idea of religion, and not biology, as the source of our morals. The fact that you out of turn dismiss dolphins of having moral thought, kind of shows where you stand. They do have morals, and I absolutely believe from my moral perspective, that we should ethically treat them that way. And I think, it is on fact religion blocking us, in many cases, from treating non-human animals better. Now of course not all religions, but especially the major monotheistic religions that posit humans and superior to animals. Many other religions do not elevate humans above other animals or nature, again an example of how religion is not a monolith (for those thinking it is). If only one of those religions had risen to prominence in our world, we would probably live in a better world. You are right about one thing : Religion often shapes individuals ideas about morals, unfortunately with many religions making people actively worse people in the modern world. Excusing the excesses of capitalism, denying scientific consensus, and being an excuse for (what I believe are extremely non ethical beliefs of) homophobia and racism. By giving religion authority to shape morals, we allow excuses for those in power (large corporations mostly) to get away with obviously non-ethical actions (to anyone who thinks about even for a short amount of time).

Welp, I finished the book. To start, if you want to simply write, “I hate Moash because he killed Teft” I reluctantly have to agree. I may have thrown my book across the room and stalked around my house while my partner asked what was wrong yesterday. However… After taking some time, I still hope Moash makes the turn to the side of good. If Kaladin forgave Moash for killing Teft, can you imagine how powerful that would be? Anyways, I still saw moments. As soon as Navani + the Sibling filled the tower with their light, Moash starts regretting stuff. He is controlled y’all, at least to an extent. That doesn’t free him of guilt. He would have to do some major work, and would need to start actively resisting Odium’s control to deserve redemption. I feel saddened still by Moash’s story. I think he still deserves pity, but I do understand the hate a bit more now. Next up, we started discussing Taragavian so lets include that. He became Odium and y’all read…that book, and still…understand him. Really? Seriously? How? Again, he is worse than Moash. Like…so much worse. He ended the book by already thinking about cleansing worlds. He is straight up, the closest thing to actual evil in these books. I seriously can’t understand how y’all can look at an ordinary broken man who has made the wrong choices and hate him more than…like the closest manifestation to the devil in our story. Am I missing something? A note : Dalinar is right. Taragavian is wrong. Taragavian is a monster. An actual monster. Oh and to those of you who think it, Taragavian had choices. He isn’t all knowing. He is arrogant and petty, he reminds me of Light in Death Note if anyone had read/watched that. When I see people say Taragavian did his best or that he had to do what he did, that frightens me. He didn’t y’all. He is wrong. His way is wrong. The deaths he caused were not unavoidable. He caused them. He has in fact now been proven wrong. Dalinar was on his way to defeating Rayse EVEN WITH Taragavian helping Rayse. Taragavian’s betrayal only caused more death and prevented nothing. He is responsible for MORE DEATH not less. Just real quick, a note in support of my theory that Moash at some point will turn good : 1. Venli. She went as about dark as one can go in our storyline, betraying her own people and giving into Odium. She was just so selfish. Yet, she started making the right decisions and was able to return to the side of good. 2. Lady Leshwi. An actual immortal fused was able to change sides. Again, lends credence to the potential for Moash’s turn. 3. Rabonial. She was so close. So very close to also making the turn. You know, a side note, I wanted her to bond the Sibling WITH Navani. I thought that was a possibility of where the story might go, her death was still beautiful…but I think it could have been more beautiful if Navani and her had formed a more permanent bond toward a compromise and peace. I know the series is 10 books long, and I am not sure that ending would have worked…but…it was so close. I believe, by the way, that no one is beyond redemption. Even Taragavian, who I hate. An arrogant man, who has somehow apparantly convinced a bunch of people that being a brutal tyrant is the only way to succeed. It’s not. Your wrong. He’s wrong. Sorry, I won’t budge on this one moderators. It’s against my absolute moral compass. Killing and causing wars because you think you are helping is just an excuse tyrants and monsters use. It wasn’t his only choice. He even midly realized on his “stupid” days he was able to think morally. Taragavian on his smart days, was essentially without empathy or morals, and that is wrong. Absolutely and completely wrong.

First, I think this is another misinterpretation you have, I think humans made up religion to explain things they couldn’t understand and create a cohesive set of moral standards for their society, so yes most primitive society have religion, but that doesn’t prove anything to me. I think we made it up. Second of all, depends whom I’m stealing from. I believe the rich are already stealing from us, so I in fact think it would be morally right to say steal even a billion dollars from Jeff Bezos and then I don’t know create a charity, where that money gets spread around. If anything, being religious taught me being rich was bad, it started me down this road to having morals that obviously conflict with yours. Although if I was to highlight this again, individuals develope their morals from what surrounds them. If you raised a society in a non-religious vacuum, people would still develop morals. I’ll be quite honest, I think the idea that morals come from religion and a higher power something we shouldn’t believe in our modern scientific times, Like, it is just obviously something religions made up, as they want to be authorities in morals. You are acting like the burden of proof is on me. Prove that religion created morals and not people created morals and religion. (a note : you can’t, just as I can’t prove that all human society doesn’t trace some religion to its morals, it’s a pointless and fruitless question meant to put the burden of proof on one side while taking none of that burden yourself). Again - respond to what I said about dolphins. Where does a dolphin’s sense of morals come from. He/She lives in a society, but they do not (as far as we know) have religion.

I read this again, because I needed to understand it. Okay, I get it. You couldn't live if you didn't believe that our morals come from a higher power. I could. In fact, I live easier knowing that my goodness comes from within me and not from an external source. I believe that human beings are basically good, unlike many religions (with concepts like original sin), and I live much better with that belief system. "And the only basis for any moral judgement is that more people agree with you" - Sadly, this is in fact, how many people think. Not me though, not sure how you read that from me. Read some of the other stuff I wrote again, I'm not going to repeat things I've already said. A note on other people though : I knew many people who thought it was morally acceptable to be homophobic in the year 1998. In the year 2021, they no longer do. Guess what changed? Hint : It wasn't their religion. How do you live without thinking a higher power has endowed us with morals? Lol, I can't believe someone couldn't imagine this. Even when I was religious (surprise, I used to be religious), I never thought atheists were immoral or couldn't have concepts of morals. In fact, the church I belonged too pretty strongly believed humans could be good without religion. Legitimate Question : Do you think there is 0 chance that human beings created morals themselves, that our morals come from a combination of evolving to be a group animal and society? like seriously no chance? Just to be a Jasnah Kholin here...I very much do think it is possible that a higher power exists (in fact I'm Deist/Agnostic, not Athiest)...I simply believe that morals come from within us. Another legitimate question, I believe dolphins, great apes, corvid birds, and other animals can also a sense of morals/ethics, so...how would you explain a dolphin helping a person or porpoise or something? Like, where does that dolphin's sense of morals come from? I don't believe we have any scientific evidence of religion among dolphins (not that 100% disproves they could have it), however, they do 100% have societies.

I'm pretty sure I said that religions wasn't homogenous. That was my whole point. Based purely on this, you seem to agree with me, so I'm not sure why you are disagreeing with me. I am not trying to disprove religion, I'm trying to disprove Frustration that he thinks religion is the core of human morality, because...it's not.

You believe the same thing, you just apply something else out of your control than I do. I offer "society" as the thing that is the main source of human morals. You posit "religion". Both require one to participate in it, and is a place from which an individual would be receiving their morals. I actually believe morals come within individuals, as what is a society, if not a group of individuals. You however are positing that morals exist beyond the human conscious, which, no I don't believe. If that was the case, morals would be identical across every society, throughout time...but they aren't. Yes, there are some basic things...but then, I would say the most basic morals come from how we evolved. We evolved completely as a social creature. Humans without society essentially aren't human (A note : I think some people are mistaking "agricultural society" for "society". Hunters and gathers are a society. Society pre-dates homo sapiens, we have been living in groups since we were Australopithecuses. In fact, you know there is actual studies of this. If a human grows up outside of society...like somehow survives to adulthood..they won't really ever develop completely. We require human society to exist.) So things like "Don't murder", "Be empathetic", "Don't steal", etc. are morals that make sense for the survival of our species as a group. Here, though, to show how much I think morals come from society, I think one prime tenant of US society is that "working hard always and being competitive to succeed" is the core of human nature, and I actually think mutualism, support for fellow people, and love/compassion are the core of human nature...however our society has gone away from those things. So, to summarize, I believe morals come from A. Society, and B. Evolved traits to survive as a cooperative species. This, by the way, does not mean religion is not important. If you choose to get your morals from your religion that is perfect, completely and perfectly okay. My dad is a Christian Minister. I love him with all my heart, and respect his religion completely. However, my loving and amazing partner is ALSO an amazing person. She was raised by two atheists in a society with little visual signs of religion. She learned her morals from her parents and her society, and for her, I would guess social justice plays a strong role in how she developed her set of morals. Anyways, the point is....she is okay too. I am not suggesting you should not be religious, but...stop telling other people their morals exist because of your religion. They don't. And by the way, another core of US culture is freedom of religion, so please stop pressing your ideas on others here.

1. No. Sorry, I am a history major. No one believes the things they believed 3000 years ago. Also, they don’t even believe what they believed 200 years ago. Religion is constantly evolving and changing. It is not stagnant. 2. “Each religion staying mostly the same” - That is the most provably false statement I’ve read in awhile. Go take a basic history of religion class. No. False. 3. Again, yes there have been. East Asians do not have, and never have had dogmatic religious beliefs. In the past, it was common to pick and choose different aspects of different religions. Again, most East Asian countries are majority non-religious right now. And the reason for the non-violence is 1. Community based society stemming from Confucianism (not a religion). 2. Highly educated populace, stemming from hard work/competitive culture - Again, that is a legacy of Confucianism as well as I suppose a general idea that scholarship is good that goes back pretty far in East Asian culture. 3. I can’t speak for all of East Asia, but my experiences in Japan and Korea suggest that they simply hate interpersonal conflict. It’s a society built on avoiding it at all cost, which…crime would of course cause a lot of. “Don’t stir the pot” is something almost every Korean I’ve met seems to believe. Anyways this is an aspect of culture and not any religion. 4. At best you could call this a chicken and egg situation. Which came first : moral thought or religion. I believe strongly it was moral thought and ethics, and not religion. To be quite honest, I think it is just religious dogma to believe otherwise. 5. Explain why no one worships Norse or Greek gods anymore (i could do more, but explain why those religions are now accepted as fantasy by most humans today.

Honorless already answered this, but…Culture. It’s based on culture, just like religious dogma is. Religion does not exist in a vacuum, it has changed over time despite how religious people view it. It is a representation of its cultural’s morals. I in fact, think religion depends on culture and not the other way around, however in more deeply religious society they can directly influence each other. Every culture, whether religious or not, has morals. Two of the most deeply non-violent countries, and with some of the lowest crime rates in the world are Japan and South Korea. So, Frustration, why are they seemingly more morally pure (by measurable rates) despite being both more than 50% non-religious? This is historical, too, by the way. East Asia views religion differently than the West. (A note : I don’t actually think SK and Japan are more morally pure, I used that to point out that morals are subjective and cultural, not because I think any culture is actually morally superior to any other, the same for religions by the way)

Moash also claims his motivation is to get rid of a tyrant who is hurting his citizens. His motivation is to help people, according to his own words. So, again, like I don’t think this concept is hard to understand, but I’ll say it again. You accept and believe Taravangian’s reasonings and justifications for why he is doing horrible things. You don’t accept of believe Moash’s reasonings and justifications for doing horrible things. Not complex. You believe Taravangian’s horse rust. Because he is an awful person. I want to make that clear. He is murderous despot. He is a monster. I believe Moash’s horseshit. I think Moash actually thinks he was doing what was best. You can think Moash is full of rust. I can think Taravangian is full of rust. But a note : Number of wars started by Moash : 0; Number of wars started by Taravangian : 1. Number of people murdered by Moash : 1. Number of people murdered by Taravangian : Countless. Just so many. The fact that y’all have more excuses and understanding for an actual tyrant than like an ordinary dude disturbs me to no end.

I mean, but...no it doesn't. At least not in the way we are talking about. Like let's say this. I'm now a part of the 17th Shard fandom right? Now let's pretend, that I make a deal with some weird criminal group that wants to corrupt and delete all other fandoms. Every single one. Except 17th Shard. And I give them information and help set up all the other fandoms so they will be destroyed by the virus. Yes, that would be selfish. You are not understanding that he betrayed the entire human race. If you choose nationalism and screw over other humans beings, that is selfish. Loving 17th Shard doesn't make me selfish. Being complicit and in fact, being a main factor in destroying all other fandoms so I can still be on 17th Shard (actually I guess I die, but 17th shard still exists) is selfish. Man I could make multiple examples like this. Like, I like the NBA. I cheer for the Toronto Raptors. Being a Toronto Raptors fan is not selfish. Now let's say I cheer for other players on other teams being injured, if only so it benefits the Raptors. Now I'm a bad fan. I'm selfish. Or I pay the refs so that the Raptors can win and the other teams lose. Again. this is selfish. Being a Raptors fan doesn't make me selfish, but actively hurting the other teams in the NBA so the Raptors can benefit would make me selfish. Are you getting it yet? Like I got examples a plenty. Patriotism isn't selfish. Nationalism is selfish. Nationalism by it's very nature prioritizes your people's wants and needs over other people's wants and needs. Having pride in your country and being patriotic is another thing entirely. An example. A patriotic person might celebrate the mixing of cultures in their country, their diversity could be part of what makes their country great. A nationalistic country often attempts to separate people based on race or ethnicity, they often seek to distance themselves from other peoples. Thinking your people are superior and deserve more than other people is how you get ideologies like Nazism. Honestly, I don't want this to get more heated, so this is the last I will respond to you on this, but I think Taravangian is selfish, and I think you just believe the bullcrap he spews (he believes it too, his purpose in the narrative is to be believed, so that isn't on you). Again, Moash has reasons for being selfish. Taravangian has reasons for being selfish. You like/respect Taravangian's reasons, and don't like/respect Moash's reasons. That's fine, but I do not agree he is selfless at all. Egotistical and selfish (even if, it is in your opinion for an honorable reason).

I think I failed to make this more clear. I think trying to save your own people while betraying the rest of humanity is selfish. Nationalism is selfish. People who say, will defend a random neighbor from attack, but will turn a blind eye if the neighbor is a different skin color than them, are selfish (also hypocrites if they claim to always defend people). Your assumption is that nationalism can be selfless. I don’t think it can be. If there was say an alien invasion of Earth, and let’s say…Taiwan made a deal with the aliens that they could kill and occupy every area of Earth and gave them inside secrets to help them do it in order to save Taiwan, I know…every other human nation would think Taiwan was selfish. I think the problem here is, for whatever reason, people imagine themselves in a position of power like Taravangian. Y’all probably have more in common with Moash though. Powerless. You would end up as the pawn Taravangian sacrificed “selflessly” not the random, comparatively tiny, percent of pepppe he saved. And trust me as you died, knowing it was Taravangian’s fault, you wouldn't think he was selfless.

I don't think he is selfless at all. I think he is, in fact, 100x more selfish than Moash. Everything Moash has done (thus far) is on a very small scale. Taravangian literally caused a war which led to widespread death in huge numbers. Much like Tywin Lannister in ASOIAF, he acts like he is doing "What is best for his people" when in reality he is an egomaniac despot that led to thousands, if not even millions, of deaths (what is the population of Roshar like?) I think both characters acted selfishly, but thus far only one has led to widespread destruction and death. I find it weird when people just take someone's own logic as fact. It reminds me of something I saw David Tennant (the actor) say in an interview once. No one thinks they are the bad guy. They always have reasons and excuses for what they do. They always paint themselves as the hero. However, I can't say either that I completely hate him. He did after all, presumably curse himself to not feel compassion when he is smart, which led...to all these problems of "logically" causing widespread death. I don't know, I certainly feel more compassion for Moash than him though. Most of Moash's sufferings was brought on by external factors (say like a leader who decides he is the judge, jury, and executioner and making excuses for why war is necessary, for example). Most of Taravangian's suffering is brought on by his own flawed decision making and arrogance. (or should I say other people's suffering, because mostly he causes other people to suffer, not himself or his people). You know, one could claim that Mao was "doing what he thought was right" or Stallin or other despots who led to mass death. My opinion, Moash was trying to do what he thought was best...but he is also broken by the end of Oathbringer...so at that point maybe just trying to do whatever gave him the least amount of pain. However, earlier, I think he was trying to do what was right/best. You are merely more convinced by Taravangian's reasonings than Moash's. They both acted selfishlessly. They both had excuses for why they were really doing what was right. You chose to believe one character and not the other. I think they are both kind of selfish, and I think they both believe their own crem dung.

I think this topic has probably died, but I was wondering : How do all of the people here that hate/dislike Moash feel about Taravangian. Something tells me he has less haters, and I am intrigued to hear your answers if you like him and not Moash. So if you dislike Moash and like Taravangian, why? Let me know if you can.

Trigger Warning : If you are triggered while discussing addiction, please do not read the below. Okay, I mentioned this in another thread, but if I'm going to be part of this community, this is absolutely the part of the books I feel the most impact from. Dalinar's addiction to the Thrill hit at home for me. As I mentioned in my other post, I feel something I could call, "The Confidence" while drinking alcohol. Especially when I was in my early and mid 20's, this wasn't much of an issue. I could get the confidence, be drunk, but never go too far. But eventually, like all addictions, I needed it more, and more, and more, and more. There are so many scenes that for me that were hard to read especially in Oathbringer. However, how Dalinar defeats the Thrill, and what he says (calling it old friend, thanking it) has actually inspired me. I feel that I have a better handle of my addiction after reading his parts. It was so nice to read someone experiencing the hardships I had faced, and also that his addiction was to more of an emotion than the substance itself (as it was for me, it's not like I love alcohol or even that I get withdrawal symptoms, it's that I love, love that feeling of confidence), and then it was nice how he said goodbye to the thrill. For me, the confidence led to many successes (I met practically everyone I ever dated while under its effects, including my amazing partner) and I met many friends with it as well. I felt like a king, like I controlled the room while under its influence. However, eventually much like Dalinar experienced post-war (in my case I was in long term relationships and was working on deeper non-drinking friendships, haha, I guess you could see it as the equivalent of no more war lolololol) it became a detriment. I began to black out, I began not know when to stop, and even when I set limits, I would end up going beyond those limits once I was in "the confidence" because I didn't want it to leave. Eventually this damaged friendships, and my final relationship before I met my partner (don't worry, I never physically hurt anyone, I'm a very non-violent person...emotional hurt, emotional hurt). After meeting my partner, I knew I needed a change, I realized finally I was addicted to it. However, I even at this time could never quite get what I was addicted to, I thought it was just alcohol, so I was stricter about how often I could go drinking, and how many drinks I could have while drinking. This helped immensely. My partner in our 7 years of a relationship, has only seen me "trashed" twice, and once nothing bad happened, I was just...messy. After the second time, where we had a fight and I yelled at her, ....I even more knew that I had to change. I couldn't lose another relationship because of this addiction. The whole point of "the confidence" was to gain relationships, not lose them. This, which happened around 2 years ago, is when I finally realized what I was actually addicted to. I realized it was that feeling, and not alcohol itself. This led to better ways of controlling my addiction. Even before reading the book, I had figured out that I couldn't follow that feeling, and surprisingly just the knowledge, "Hey, it's the feeling you like" was enough that I stopped drinking as much. I did continue my lose drink maximum, but I ..basically never reach it anymore. I also spend time with people who understand I have this addiction, and will watch me, but...again, I've never needed it. The confidence does still come, although never like before. And that is okay. It served me and helped me, but now I don't need it. Anways, Dalinar's story helped me summarize it even better, and has helped me even more to understand my addiction and what sets it off. Avoiding triggers, understanding I don't need it anymore, all of this is important. My point of making this topic was to let people know you can move past your addiction. You can find ways to control it, and to manage it, and I think that Dalinar's storyline is one that not only helped me, but..actually I wish I had read earlier, back when I didn't understand my addiction as well. I was wondering if anyone was helped by these books looks into mental health care. I know my friend who actually recommended the books related to Kaladin a ton, and his depression; and so his entire reason for recommending the books were very similar to me...so I am guessing there most be others like us out there. Anyways, share your stories, or don't. I pretty much revealed myself here lol. I hope others read these books and enjoy them like I do though^^.

This is definatily how I imagine Kaladin looking (but with an Epicanthic fold), so I vote for this guy to play Kaladin. I'll be honest, since I live in Korea, and I just think there are so many good actors who play some of the other characters, most of the rest of my picks are Korean. My pick for Dalinar. His name is Park Hae-joon. I've seen him play both a nice guy and a total douche, I think he could pull off both the past version of Dalinar and the present version. For Jasnah, I'm going with Seo Ye-ji. I know, her skin is too light, but she has so much authority in her parts. I think she could pull off, I'm a bad ass while wearing a havah. Plus she has the black hair at least. And heck, other people are choosing white people, so I'm closer to how they look in the story dang it lol. By the way, she's 31, and I checked, Jasnah is suppossed to be about 35, so it works. For Shallan, Han So-hee, yeah I even found a pic where she has red hair, lol. I think she has the fair skin described for Shallan, also...is decent at playing a troubled person, truthfully I've only seen her in one show, so not sure if she could pull of the split personalities, but this is essentially exactly how I imagine Shallan lol, so for looks, spot on (except with light eyes). My pick for Moash, Hwang Hee. Could definitely play the role if it's going evil (his role in the above show is....such an awful person), but...I think there is potential for him pulling off a more complex character as well. Gonna require a lot of make up or CGI, but Gemma Chan for Venli. Venli is always walking around exuding confidence, and I think Gemma Chan could pull that off. Cho Jin-woong as Sadeas. He is one of the actors I like more in Korea, and I was looking for a part for him. I think he could pull off both the look and personality of Sadaes. Gang Dong-won as Lopen. In the above movie, he was pretty funny, think he could play the role. Trying to find an Adolin was hard. So I just found the prettiest freaking man I could find : Jung Jaewon. His acting was not great in the show above lol, but....I imagine as Adolin vaguely like this, extremely pretty..but shorter hair than this, and of course with lots of blond mixed in. Another heavy make up needed, Dichen Lachman as Lady Leshwi, or hell, any Singer/Listener/Fused lol. She has such interesting features, good in actions scenes in shows I've watched, also plays a good in between character (so would work well playing a gray character). Okay, I've ran out of people to name. I was looking for someone for Navani, but couldn't find anyone who met my image of her. They are either too old looking or too young looking lol. Also, she is meant to have some weight to her, and Korean actresses are so thin, even in their 50s/60s. Renarin was another hard one...I kept imagining him as an anime character lol, think Kabuto in Naruto. So that's it Kabuto in Naruto, somebody find me a real actor for that lol. like And yes, I know there are other actors in the world, but...I've mostly been exposed to Western and Korean media, so...those are my main choices of which to choose actors/actresses.

This is a pretty bold assumption. Why do you assume it? I know lots of broken people. Suicide rates are high in many advanced countries because of the concept that they should just suck it up (when they can't). I live in Korea, it has one of the highest rates of suicide in the world, and one of the main reasons for that is a lack to mental health care, and a general societal assumption that everyone should just suck it up and deal with it. I'm sorry, but I disagree with you strongly, I don't think "most" people would be able to do that. In fact, I think there is ample statistical evidence that is not the case. I'm glad for you if you have had a hard time, and been able to "suck it up" without having help. Many people need help. And that doesn't make them worse people. I myself, have seen a therapist, and they helped me immensely to get over issues that I had had for years, and were blocking me from enjoying my life/getting on with my life. "As far as telling kaladin to suck it up I totally agree he should." - another quote from you (I accidentally pushed enter when I wasn't done responding to you. I wasn't suggesting he should. I don't think he should. I think he needs help. I think the reason he continues to break farther and farther is ...because he sucked it up and didn't deal with it. I just think, I don't know, rather I'm shocked, someone would read this series and not realize the auther (in my opinion) is very strongly against the old notion of "sucking it up". I would go ahead and guess that Brandon Sanderson values mental health care a lot and probably supports its expansion. Thought it was clear from his writing that he probably feels that way. Again, I will say this again, as this is important : If you are capable of sucking it up, that is...good for you, great for you even if you really can. I feel envious of you in fact if that is the case, but...many people can't. So many people aren't able to suck it up, and I think that is good to have stories with characters like Shallan and Kaladin who people can relate to. Actually for me, I related to Dalinar the most. I was an alcoholic, and I was addicted to something I will call "the confidence" (yes i made it up). When I was drunk, I could access this state where I was supremely confident, this led to me abusing alcohol. As I assume everyone here has read the end of OB, the part where Dalinar walked into the Thrill, was basically a sea of tears from. First, when he calls it "old friend" and then when he thanks it for what it gave to him. It was far too much for me. Dalinar's struggle with addiction was so painfully spot on relatable to me, even if I myself, am not that much like Dalinar in my day to day life. In the end, it inspired me to deal with my addiction even more than I already have, I have....avoided it, and put been good, but I think accepting the good things..the things I liked that it gave me, might be important to finally coming to peace with it, and controlling it. I am really glad that Brandon Sanderson is willing to talk about these things.

.....everything you said about "sucking it up" could be said about Kaladin, Dalinar, ...and frankly, every character in the story. The story is obviously heavily focused on...and perhaps even just talking about, mental health and how important it is. She was basically tortured as a child, did you read the back story sections of Shallan's story? She was heavily abused, to the point that her mind was already fractured from a young age, where she has been trying to forget things that happened from even before her background PoV. Also, while as I don't love every aspect of Shallan's personality, I found her endlessly fascinating personally. I've always kind of summarized our three main characters as basically representing three major mental disorders/psychiatrics conditions : Depression (Kaladin); Addiction (Dalinar); and finally Childhood Trauma (Shallan). If you think any of these are easy to move past, I suggest...trying empathy. Trust me, moving past childhood trauma, no matter the circumstances, is not that easy. Shallan has also saved the day multiple times....so...I'm not sure even what you are talking about there. Shallan is broken. Kaladin is broken. Dalinar ...was broken (he seems to have...mostly solved his issues by the end of Oathbringer). Like, that's the way the books were written, choosing one character and telling them to "suck it up" seems needlessly cruel. Ask yourself this, say when Kaladin's mind breaks and he is unable to fight at several points in the books, would you think it appropriate to tell him to suck it up? And if you wouldn't say it to Kaladin, ask yourself why you are instead saying it to only Shallan.

This is kind of that “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” I see a lot of people say to struggling people attitude. I think it is a flawed logic, and even if you yourself have managed to pull yourself up by your bootstraps, that doesn’t mean everyone else can. Some people just can’t. Some people have no family members, no friends, and no mental health care (In case no one has noticed, Moash literally is alone. Yes, he had bridge 4. But he is lien that person who pushes away those who care for him most. And notice how much most bridge 4 members hate him now. Not one of them tries to reach out to him. Anyways, he is alone besides I guess…Khen? And he is no longer in a sane or logical state of mind. He is lost) At no point in this did I say …Moash is perfect, or that even I would do what he did (in fact I believe I explicitly said that I would not do what Moash did), but rather I think we…who have not been slaves or had our grandparents killed by the state, have no right to judge how others who have, react. Moash is a broken man. There is no questioning that. By the end of OB, he looks like a shell of what he once was (and I have no idea how he’ll look after RoW). The thing about the murder of Elhokar, is maybe….from Moash’s perspective, it could be his only avenue of justice. Keep in mind, from his perspective, Elhokar will CONTINUE to do what he did to his grandparents. We know as readers that that is not true. But Moash doesn’t. Could you claim that killing Hitler would be a start toward justice? Putting someone like Dalinar in charge could lead to even more justice. I believe strongly on social justice, that the only way toward real justice is to make society benefit as many people as possible, and to get rid of injustices within that society (such as in our book, light eyes being treated better than dark eyes). Saying it is petty to take out an unjust King, is…reductive at best. Killing Hitler would not be petty. Killing Stallin would not be petty. Like horribly unjust dictators quite frankly, should be taken out if you ever want any hope of justice. Again, we know that Elhokar is not like those people, but was Gavilar? Maybe. Is that how Moash sees Elhokar? Probably. See, by the way, this is something the fans are skirting around. Kaladin gets his revenge on Amaran. What if Amaran had really regretted killing Kaladin’s squad? Would you all have forgiven him as easily as you forgave Elhokar? I doubt it. Authors conveniently often give heroes excuses to get their revenge. This is common in American media. They often take the choice to give leniency away from the hero. Kaladin can’t let Amaran go because he is controlled by…something, trying to kill him. It’s so easy to speak of forgiveness when we know a character is changing. What of Amaran? What of Sadeas? Where was their forgiveness? I don’t see fans lining up to call Adolin selfish. (I like Adolin, a note) And by the way, I agree with what you said about personal healing. However, that doesn’t always mean offering forgiveness to those we hate. I will never forgive the woman who raped me when I was young and naive and far too drunk, however that does not mean Iet that hold me back. I forgave myself for being naive. I forgave myself for not knowing or understanding. I healed my scars and my wounds and trauma. But I still didn’t and never will, forgive her. Granted I don’t need a revenge on her. I just don’t care about her. If you watchrd Avatar, remember when Katara didn’t forgive her mother’s killer, but also didn’t kill him. That is how I feel about this woman. I agree with you partially, but also not completely. And I still, STILL, think Moash may get his redemption and change himself. We’ll see. I think Moash has acted wrong. I still like him. I want the best version of Moash to exist and I want him to realize that Kaladin’s methods, and not his own, are the the true way toward self healing. But he has to decide that on his own. I think that one of the problems in this thread is the assumption that because we don’t hate Moash, we approve of his actions. Yet, I don’t think I’ve seen anyone doing that. We understand him, we don’t approve his actions. Just like y’all understand Elhokar or Dalinar or any other flawed character in these great books.

That makes sense. I suppose when I finish the next book, I'm going to have to return to this sight, and re-write the topic in the non-row section haha. Is there a way I can like tag everyone over there and you can all tell me your real reasons hahaha.

Exactly!!! I completely agree with this. If you watch the Walking Dead, I constantly didn't know who was dead or not dead after one particular fake out where a character was like literally being eaten, and then surprise : Not dead! In movies or tv shows, it forced the directors to have to kill the characters in extremely gruesome ways so we know they are dead. In books, it means any death where the character doesn't like check their pulse and also prod them for several days after the death, we assume is still alive. I do think one thing, if you do want to fake out death, you should present that possibility beforehand. For example, in Jasnah's case if we knew someone could completely repair their body from a stab wound, than even if Shallan takes that death on face value, we could question it. But we didn't know that until AFTER Jasnah was stabbed. So, as you said, it leads to constantly not being sure if someone is dead or not. The only semi fake out death I liked was Skar and Drehy, because it wasn't really clear if they were dead or not, so I thought we would get either dramatic confirmation or their death, or great feelings of them still being alive.

I like these two. I would like more ecology, perhaps in Shallan's PoV. She just randomly draws stuff more often? The fake out deaths kind of annoy me in all media. I do think at times they can be powerful I guess (there are certain shows of books I can think of), but mostly they seem like..added drama for no reason. Did we have to think Jasnah was dead? Coudln't she have just been separated from Shallan without being perceived dead? I'm not sure that it was more powerful by having her be fake dead, Shallan could have ASSUMED she was dead, without a need for her actual body being stabbed. I don't know, anyways, I agree with you that fake out deaths are...frustrating.

You may be surprised by this, but I actually agree with you. I don't think we should kill those we have personal vendettas against. I actually think regicide could be justified, say..killiing Hitler. Killing Hitler seems like a moral good to me personally, however, I do think Moash should have listened to Kaladin and given other avenues a chance. I think I've been forced in this feed to defend actions I don't actually agree with personally, if only because my point here is that I understand Moash. I like to believe that if I had a friend like Kaladin (actually I do), that I would listen to him (I do. He is great at giving advice) and not go through with such a plan. I personally just think Graves (that was his name right) is not someone I would wnt to associate with. I personally would also realize I now had power, and try to change things from within. Talk to Dalinar, try to find ways I could help change the lighteye, darkeye structure of the society. My arguments have always been more like : I get Moash. I understand Moash, not that I am Moash and would do the same things that he did. I think there is a third question which you missed though : How does oppression shape the actions of individuals in a society? I think this is why I feel for and udnerstand Moash. Without that context, I guess I would hate him too. If Moash was born as 4th dahn, I don't think I would...understand him at all. I'd think he was petty and vindictive, and I'd find his betrayal of Kaladin (who in theis case is still a dark eyes) as impossible to understand. However, that isn't how Moash was born. His family was killed, and he was made a slave and left to die. I don't think I can read Moash's character wihtou keeping in mind how oppressive his society was and how unfair the things that happened to him were. Anways, one more thin. I also disagree. I think Moash does care about politics, he just doesn't know how to do anything about it. And of course, this is just my opinion, we don't get Moash's PoV tell AFTER the attempted regicide, so we don't really know what he was thinking. I think it is fine if you think that way, I just simply disagree.

I am going to make a reply to no one in particular. I see a lot of people in this post claiming Moash’s actions were purely selfish and not an act at any societal upheaval. Maybe you are right, but I want to makethis clear. I disagree with you. I think he did want to change Alethi society and it wasn’t just revenge. How he acts toward the end of Oathbringer, only to me, seems to amplify that. Like, he acts like someone who has failed in a major way, depressed, giving up on humans completely. But at this point, he has killed Elhokar already. If he only did it to be selfish, why is he so depressed? Why does he feel so bad about himself? Why before was he still giving humans and Alethi society a chance and now he has given up? I think it was because he wrongly assumed, if he took out Elhokar and Dalinar was in charge, everything would magically get better. But it didn’t. And I also think he feels jealous of Kaladin. Part of him wants to be like Kaladin, but the other part thinks Kaladin is wrong for “forgiving light eyes”. Moash also does not have real power in Alethi society, or at leasthe doesn’t realize he does. He wante revenge, not just on Elhokar, but all light eyes. He, both from our PoV and from others, makes no attempts to make changes from within, probably because he doesn’t know he can. He isn’t a political genius. He is a caravan guard who found himself in over his head. And listen, I could be completely wrong, but this is my opinion. Those who think my opinion is wrong, feel free to disagree, but please use words like I did here : think, my opinion. You aren’t right about this anymore than I am right about it. We are simply interpreting the material in our own way. And lets be honest, as someone who lives in a society that is unjust, and a society I hate, I understand Moash. I also want to tear it all down. And perhaps I am just wrong, Moash just had a personal vendetta, and the reason he became darker after inacting it is because he has lost Bridge 4, who were the only people in the world who loved him, and he doesn’t know what else to do. All I know is no one is just “evil”, everyone is trying to do something that is right, from their own perspective. And I do believe Brandon Sanderson thinks tbatway too. I dont know where he will take the character, to darker places or lighter pnes, redemptive or destructive, but I do assumed at the least, the character will be nuanced and not just a heartless villain. Because no mattwr what, Moash cares about Kaladin and Bridge 4 (some part of him), he cared for the Singers he helped train in spears, he cared for his granparents. He may be blinded by rage, and revenge, but he isn’t a mindless robot, he is ultimately human. My final note, I doubt many of you have watched many Korean shows, however there is one I watched (and to give away no spoilers, I wont say its name here). In it there is a truly horrible dude who kills children. I vehemently hated him. He eventually dies in an awful way. After his death, his brother asks another character to have a funeral for him, and despite that other character hating the dead brother, she agrees. There was a deep nuance go this scene I often find missing from American media. The point I think was, although we shouldn’t have to love this awful child killer, someone did love him. Someone was disappointed in him. Someone wanted better for him. Someone cried when he died. We shouldn’t jsut hate him, we should also pity him. He was shaped by his society, trained to do awful things from a young age. Yes, he eventually made bad decisions, but he was set up to make them. East Asian media has a lot of this sort of nuance, the idea that most people aren’t tryly bad or evil. but misled by society, products of that society. Moash was stripped of literally everything. He was a slave. His family were all killed. He had nothing. You all say “Moash had power when he tried to kill Elhokar”, but the wounds of slavery and killing of your family members don’t just leave you. They will always stick with you. Moash, and the other members of Bridge 4, will always have issues from being left in Bridge 4 to die. It won’t go away. Moash may have had power, but he didn’t act like one who did. He didn’t know he did. So if you hate Moash, that is okay, but I ask one thing : Pity him too.

I think it was pretty obvious Dalinar did want to change things. He talks to Kaladin, and perhaps other members of Bridge 4, about that. He has, in our books, changed things, in fact. Even in his decision to make Moash a bodyguard to him or a King, that is a major upheaval of Alethi societal norms.