Sanguine Cavalier

Is the matter and energy coming into being from nothing? No. Is the spark of life, and the individual consciousness coming into being from nothing? Yes. The analogy I would use to explain this, if you've read the Silmarillion (which I feel is a safer assumption here than most places ) is that of Aulë and the first Dwarves. He's able to create bodies which are seemingly able to simulate all the external signs of life, but they don't think or feel, or even have a sense of self, until Eru Iluvatar gets involved. So to translate that over to Cosmere terms, it's the Cognitive and Spiritual aspects of a being that are being created from nothing, not the Physical. (I agree that the Physical alone probably could be achieved by Change, rather than Creation) This is a valid point, but I think it comes down to word choice in English. I chose Be for simplicity, because "Become" is too ambiguous (could very easily mean change), and "Be Made" is rather clunky and odd in English- but it's much closer to what I'm thinking of. I'd use Latin "Factus Es" (which translates as either Become, Be Made or Be Done depending on the context) but a dead language isn't the best choice for trying to explain myself to others. That seems very plausible. I basically think of Preservation being 1/4 of the Intent used with the Command to Change something like this: it's performing much the same function as brakes in a car. The purpose of the car is still to take you from Point A to Point B, but you can actually achieve this faster with brakes than without them, as you don't have to either A: go very slowly to maintain control or B: crash. (Ambition is the steering wheel in this analogy) I'm not entirely sure I follow. Do the Commands produce the Intents? I don't think the Dawnshards created the Intents of the Shards directly, based on this from the novella: "To make such Commands, one must have the reasoning—the breadth of understanding—of a deity. And so, the Dawnshards. The four primal Commands that created all things." This implies that Adonalsium created the Dawnshards, right? And the Shards are part of Adonalsium. So whilst the act of using the Dawnshards may have helped to define different aspects of his Intent, making it easier for A to be Shattered, the Intent has to come into being prior to or alongside the Dawnshards for them to be useful. I like your last point in and of itself, but with only 4 Commands it seems... inefficient to need to use 2 of them for useful change.

Personally, I feel this overlaps a bit much with Change as well, but I can see why a lot of others disagree, I guess. I do feel Endowment doesn't quite fit in that category, if we do take it to exist, though, because the others are about things, well, being, while Endowment is more Change-y almost. Brings me to my next point: I agree that it's possible to view Change as entirely encompassing Creation, but the way I'm thinking of Creation is that it is the Command that creates life and consciousness from nothing, which is what Endowment and Autonomy are the Intent behind. Otherwise you'd just be changing Investiture into matter, not really creating anything, if it couldn't live or think. This is also why I don't think Preservation fits here; I'll go into more detail about why in the section on Change, but I just don't see any role for it in Creation. I agree that Pres makes for a nice balance with Ruin and Cultivation, but I don't really feel Pres belongs under Change. If you Command something to Change and become better, why would that result in something with the Intent of stasis? I think swapping Endowment to be under Change and Preservation to be under Be makes a bit more sense, but perhaps you're just viewing the Shards differently from how I do. Otherwise, those make sense, though I definitely don't agree with putting Wisdom and Prudence as two separate Shards (but I get your reasoning with "probably not the case but better than a blank spot"). So I don't think I'm necessarily viewing the Shards differently from how you are: I agree that Preservation on its own would not be a useful Intent to pair with a Command to "change". However, I believe the combination of Intents is key. Preservation as 1/4 of the Intent to Change, the way I view it, does not result in stasis: the other 3/4 of the Intent is for change to occur. Why include Preservation at all? In order to limit and control the change. Ruin and Cultivation without Preservation would probably end up with a dynamic equilibrium, but it would likely be a bit too dynamic. Useful, constructive change requires the ability to restrain both damage and growth, as well as some sort of goal, or at least a metric to judge progress. Hence, Preservation and Ambition making up a part of the Intent. In terms of the text: We do know that Preservation and Ruin together have been used by both Leras + Ati and Harmony's vessel to create, or change constructively. As for Wisdom and Prudence....yeah, I'm pretty much with you on that. I think it's possible they're both Shards, but not particularly likely. Do we have a next best guess?

So, first post here, but I just finished Dawnshard (bringing me up to date on all the published cosmere stuff), and I wanted to share my initial thoughts about what the Shard quartets relating to each Dawnshard might be. I'll explain what speculations I'm taking as axiomatic for this theory, before I get into the weeds: 1. The two unknown shards are pseudo-Wisdom and pseudo-Prudence, based off what I could see in a quick search of the WoBs. This is uncertain, particularly the latter, but these seem like our best current guesses, and I think it's better than treating them as total unknowns. 2. Taking Nikli at face value, the Dawnshards are the four primal commands used to create the Cosmere. Based on this I do not think there is a Dawnshard of "Destruction". It overlaps too much with Change, and I don't really see any need for it during the process of creation if you have Change as well. So with that out of the way, onto the 4 Shard Quartets: Dawnshard of Creation (Command: Be) Shards: Invention, Whimsy, Endowment, Autonomy. I think Invention and Whimsy both represent different approaches to creativity, whilst Autonomy allows for the creation of new, separate individuals, and Endowment allows for the gifting of life/investiture/probably other things. Dawnshard of Change (Command: Change/Improve/Progress) Shards: Ruin, Cultivation, Preservation, Ambition It always struck me in Mistborn Era 1 that Ruin and Preservation aren't really opposites. If one wants stasis and the other wants destruction then the outcome is, eventually, going to be destruction, if the contest is even. Ruin and Cultivation, however, are opposites, as well as being complementary. Cycle of life and death and all that. If you add in the influence of Preservation I think you end up with a dynamic equilibrium: things are changing constantly at the micro level but at the macro level things are actually very stable. So the fourth shard's Intent for this quartet needs to be Ambition in order to explain Rsyn's feeling that the Dawnshard of change is "the will of a god to remake things, to demand they be better". I considered Whimsy for this but decided that didn't fit as well with the "be better" aspect. Dawnshard of Personality (Command: Think and Feel) Shards: Honor, Wisdom, Odium, Mercy Less sure about the name/command for this Dawnshard, so feel free to suggest alternatives. The reasoning for this group of Shards by Intent was that they all symbolise internal qualities or principles rather than external ones. To put it another way, I think these are all explanations for why someone acts in a certain way, what motivates them and how they think, rather than simple descriptors of their actions, which I think is what separates them from the next group. Dawnshard of Behaviour(Command: Act) Shards: Valor, Prudence, Devotion, Dominion Again, unsure of what to call this Dawnshard, but I've grouped these intents together because I think these are all more external behaviours than internal mindsets/motivations. They prescribe specific actions (fight, hide/retreat, submit, conquer) regardless of circumstances. Retreating is always against valour even if it is the honourable thing to do in a situation. So, that's my current theory! Let me know what you guys think- am I missing something obvious? Is this already considered established? Do you mostly agree but think I've got one or more small details wrong?