Thoughts on how Sanderson explores ethics, costs, and the problem of evil

[Ale the Metallic Conjurer he/him]

After watching Dune Part 2 yesterday, I'm starting to realize something that Sanderson might want to explore with Mistborn's storytelling. I would like to re-explore this once I start The Stormlight Archive.

Ignoring the presence of Shard's Intent... I think Sanderson wants us to question the ethics of people who hold knowledge of the past and future. When holding the Well's power Rashek learned about atium, Ruin's blindness to metal, and saw a glimpse of Preservation's Plan. If not, a glimpse of Preservation's future possibilities. I believe those revelations were partially why he created the brutal labor camp at the Pits of Hathsin, and turned the Feruchemists into kandra who could hide the atium.

On a grander scale, it seems that Preservation's Plan required Rashek to Ascend and be a tyrant for so long. Rashek's efforts put the Plan's final phases into motion, but now my eyebrow is raised towards this reprehensible step.

Sazed was facilitating plans to make Autonomy withdraw from Scadrial. Sazed holds infinitely more knowledge of the past, present, and future than Rashek ever did. And yet, Era 2 still left me questioning the the steps he takes to make his desired outcomes come true. Was it ethical for Sazed to put Wax through his pain? Is it necessary for Sazed to lie to Kelsier? Is it necessary or ethical for Sazed to hide the creation of lerasium and atium dust? Does he have a grand plan in motion for Kelsier and the Ghostbloods?

Heck, I believe this question extends to people who want to protect the world at any cost - i.e. Kelsier (and partially) Rashek. Rashek partially wanted to protect Scadrial from Ruin, so he created the world's most stable empire through brutal methods. But I don't think he needed a caste system to protect humanity from Ruin.

An epilogue brings up the difficult question of whether or not Kelsier would engage in eugenics, Hemalurgy, or hunts for lerasium. The story brings into scrutiny why the Ghostbloods hid info from Elendel, but it doesn't villainize them. Mistborn Era 2 does not box Kelsier or Sazed into good or evil. They're morally gray figures. The story questions the costs and morals of their plans, but never answers for the characters or readers.

The story also questions the problem of evil. Ruin is not truly evil, but why does Ruin need to exist? It questions why Sazed doesn't lean towards Preservation to stop all pain and harm. Discusses why leaning towards Preservation can be awful.

I really hope Sanderson expands upon this in Era 3. And keeps them ambiguous.

[+hwiles]

19 hours ago, Ale the Metallic Conjurer said:

After watching Dune Part 2 yesterday, I'm starting to realize something that Sanderson might want to explore with Mistborn's storytelling. I would like to re-explore this once I start The Stormlight Archive.

Ignoring the presence of Shard's Intent... I think Sanderson wants us to question the ethics of people who hold knowledge of the past and future. When holding the Well's power Rashek learned about atium, Ruin's blindness to metal, and saw a glimpse of Preservation's Plan. If not, a glimpse of Preservation's future possibilities. I believe those revelations were partially why he created the brutal labor camp at the Pits of Hathsin, and turned the Feruchemists into kandra who could hide the atium.

On a grander scale, it seems that Preservation's Plan required Rashek to Ascend and be a tyrant for so long. Rashek's efforts put the Plan's final phases into motion, but now my eyebrow is raised towards this reprehensible step.

Sazed was facilitating plans to make Autonomy withdraw from Scadrial. Sazed holds infinitely more knowledge of the past, present, and future than Rashek ever did. And yet, Era 2 still left me questioning the the steps he takes to make his desired outcomes come true. Was it ethical for Sazed to put Wax through his pain? Is it necessary for Sazed to lie to Kelsier? Is it necessary or ethical for Sazed to hide the creation of lerasium and atium dust? Does he have a grand plan in motion for Kelsier and the Ghostbloods?

Heck, I believe this question extends to people who want to protect the world at any cost - i.e. Kelsier (and partially) Rashek. Rashek partially wanted to protect Scadrial from Ruin, so he created the world's most stable empire through brutal methods. But I don't think he needed a caste system to protect humanity from Ruin.

An epilogue brings up the difficult question of whether or not Kelsier would engage in eugenics, Hemalurgy, or hunts for lerasium. The story brings into scrutiny why the Ghostbloods hid info from Elendel, but it doesn't villainize them. Mistborn Era 2 does not box Kelsier or Sazed into good or evil. They're morally gray figures. The story questions the costs and morals of their plans, but never answers for the characters or readers.

The story also questions the problem of evil. Ruin is not truly evil, but why does Ruin need to exist? It questions why Sazed doesn't lean towards Preservation to stop all pain and harm. Discusses why leaning towards Preservation can be awful.

I really hope Sanderson expands upon this in Era 3. And keeps them ambiguous.

Spoiler

I have long maintained that the shards are all functionally very evil in how they operate. Swearing undying loyalty and allegiance to one, finding a way to hide from their visibility, killing one and stealing its power, or being totally irrelevant seem to be the only ways to not endlessly get screwed with and experimented on by one or several of them...maybe sociopathic is a better description. The best of them lies with a straight face and killed half his planet out of ignorance.

I think it's absolutely reasonable to resent the Shards for their actions and behaviors, but I don't believe that it makes good sense to question them or their ethics. They've mostly all killed the innocent, lied shamelessly, preemptively harmed future criminals with no valid basis, and used their vast investiture reserves to empower primarily themselves. From a certain point of view, Odium is actually the most moral of all of them in the sense that, by killing them, at least they can't harm anyone anymore and civilization can be free of the arbitrary and capricious intents of people given far to much power with zero capacity for accountability or oversight except for murder. I find the shards extremely understandable. They legitimately do their best, but some of them totally do not care what anyone says or thinks, some of them enjoy smashing the lives of their subjects for no reason, and some of them enjoy hunting and killing other powerful creatures purely for sport. Because, they can.

 

Edited 14 hours ago by hwiles

[Ale the Metallic Conjurer he/him]

1 hour ago, hwiles said:

I have long maintained that the shards are all functionally very evil in how they operate. Swearing undying loyalty and allegiance to one, finding a way to hide from their visibility, killing one and stealing its power, or being totally irrelevant seem to be the only ways to not endlessly get screwed with and experimented on by one or several of them...maybe sociopathic is a better description. The best of them lies with a straight face and killed half his planet out of ignorance.

I think it's absolutely reasonable to resent the Shards for their actions and behaviors, but I don't believe that it makes good sense to question them or their ethics. They've mostly all killed the innocent, lied shamelessly, preemptively harmed future criminals with no valid basis, and used their vast investiture reserves to empower primarily themselves. From a certain point of view, Odium is actually the most moral of all of them in the sense that, by killing them, at least they can't harm anyone anymore and civilization can be free of the arbitrary and capricious intents of people given far to much power with zero capacity for accountability or oversight except for murder. I find the shards extremely understandable. They legitimately do their best, but some of them totally do not care what anyone says or thinks, some of them enjoy smashing the lives of their subjects for no reason, and some of them enjoy hunting and killing other powerful creatures purely for sport. Because, they can.

I feel like this sort of conversation requires Cosmere knowledge I don’t have yet. Especially since you mentioned Odium.

I will say that when it comes to Ruin or Autonomy, you’re completely right. But it’s more complicated for Preservation and Harmony. Preservation had a complex plan to permanently defeat Ruin, and it had steps ranging from questionable (Vin and Elend sacrificing themselves) to reprehensible (getting Lord Ruler to Ascend then use lerasium to form the Final Empire). So when it comes to Preservation I certainly wouldn’t put him in the same category of “very evil” as Ruin or Autonomy.

But I would certainly call Preservation a being of questionable morality. In his plan did he truly understand the importance of Ruin, or did the plan only exist because Ruin was around?

It’s even harder to categorize Harmony. He’s facing off against a Shard much more conniving, long-term, and precognitively able than Ruin. So I think it’s necessary to have a debate about Harmony’s actions instead of categorizing him as “functionally good” or “functionally evil.” 

If I had to choose between arranging for a person to be in the position of self-sacrifice that can save the whole world, or my world’s destruction, I’m choosing the former.

[+hwiles]

46 minutes ago, Ale the Metallic Conjurer said:

I feel like this sort of conversation requires Cosmere knowledge I don’t have yet. Especially since you mentioned Odium.

I will say that when it comes to Ruin or Autonomy, you’re completely right. But it’s more complicated for Preservation and Harmony. Preservation had a complex plan to permanently defeat Ruin, and it had steps ranging from questionable (Vin and Elend sacrificing themselves) to reprehensible (getting Lord Ruler to Ascend then use lerasium to form the Final Empire). So when it comes to Preservation I certainly wouldn’t put him in the same category of “very evil” as Ruin or Autonomy.

But I would certainly call Preservation a being of questionable morality. In his plan did he truly understand the importance of Ruin, or did the plan only exist because Ruin was around?

It’s even harder to categorize Harmony. He’s facing off against a Shard much more conniving, long-term, and precognitively able than Ruin. So I think it’s necessary to have a debate about Harmony’s actions instead of categorizing him as “functionally good” or “functionally evil.” 

If I had to choose between arranging for a person to be in the position of self-sacrifice that can save the whole world, or my world’s destruction, I’m choosing the former.

Ouch. Sorry about that, I've added a spoiler block, that's my bad.

 

Yeah, Harmony is definitely a good person in the traditional sense, he just isn't a very good God. I think the better question to explore here is: what actually would make a good Shard?

In my opinion, that's essentially what the 17th shard is: an aggregate entity which fosters goodwill, community development, knowledge sharing and documentation, and intervenes directly as little as possible in the affairs of mortals while accepting all new worldhoppers with open and loving arms. Does it harbor dark thoughts and intentions sometimes? Maybe, but good luck proving it. Definitely a million times nicer and less destructive than any of the other 16. If there is ever a last god standing in the cosmere, my money is all in on it being the 17th one, the one that doesn't exist as a single mind, but many working and playing together.

[Corgen]

52 minutes ago, Ale the Metallic Conjurer said:

If I had to choose between arranging for a person to be in the position of self-sacrifice that can save the whole world, or my world’s destruction, I’m choosing the former.

It's the same question as in the trolley problem: kill one to save five. Or, in our case — increase the chances of saving the world by using immoral actions, or hope that it can be done without them.

[Ale the Metallic Conjurer he/him]

1 hour ago, hwiles said:

Ouch. Sorry about that, I've added a spoiler block, that's my bad.

 

Yeah, Harmony is definitely a good person in the traditional sense, he just isn't a very good God. I think the better question to explore here is: what actually would make a good Shard?

In my opinion, that's essentially what the 17th shard is: an aggregate entity which fosters goodwill, community development, knowledge sharing and documentation, and intervenes directly as little as possible in the affairs of mortals while accepting all new worldhoppers with open and loving arms. Does it harbor dark thoughts and intentions sometimes? Maybe, but good luck proving it. Definitely a million times nicer and less destructive than any of the other 16. If there is ever a last god standing in the cosmere, my money is all in on it being the 17th one, the one that doesn't exist as a single mind, but many working and playing together.

To be completely fair. In our world where many people believe in an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God there are still many people with shaky faith or evil intentions. The problem of evil is a philosophical topic for a reason.

Shards are not the three Os on a cosmere-wide scale, only on a planetary scale (more or less). And you need to remember that Harmony’s role is not to remove all pain and harm. You could even argue that’s an essential role for a god or God. Removing pain/harm is Preservation’s role, and Preservation would be horrific in that instance.

[+hwiles]

21 minutes ago, Ale the Metallic Conjurer said:

To be completely fair. In our world where many people believe in an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God there are still many people with shaky faith or evil intentions. The problem of evil is a philosophical topic for a reason.

Shards are not the three Os on a cosmere-wide scale, only on a planetary scale (more or less). And you need to remember that Harmony’s role is not to remove all pain and harm. You could even argue that’s an essential role for a god or God. Removing pain/harm is Preservation’s role, and Preservation would be horrific in that instance.

To be completely fair, Harmony is objectively a manipulative liar who has knowingly harmed the innocent with intent to kill and driven many of his best agents to suicide after committing global genocide...

[Ale the Metallic Conjurer he/him]

1 hour ago, hwiles said:

To be completely fair, Harmony is objectively a manipulative liar who has knowingly harmed the innocent with intent to kill and driven many of his best agents to suicide after committing global genocide...

I feel like you’re taking Harmony’s actions out of proportion.

You’re going to need to define the parameters of “harmed the innocent,” “global genocide,” and “driven many of his best agents to suicide.”

I have ideas on what you mean. But even then, it feels like you’re trying too hard to paint Harmony as an evil manipulator. 

[+hwiles]

28 minutes ago, Ale the Metallic Conjurer said:

I feel like you’re taking Harmony’s actions out of proportion.

You’re going to need to define the parameters of “harmed the innocent,” “global genocide,” and “driven many of his best agents to suicide.”

I have ideas on what you mean. But even then, it feels like you’re trying too hard to paint Harmony as an evil manipulator. 

I'm not. By the definition of the words, Harmony killed innocent people on purpose, committed genocide against southern scadrians, and deliberately manipulated and ruined the lives of his declared swords and shields. It's in the books.

I have no hesitation in declaring that Sazed was a good man in a traditional sense of the word. A paragon of understanding, faith, fidelity, intercultural and cross-language communication and Harmonization, and justice in the truest sense of the word. The best and kindest and most well intentioned Shard by my opinion.

And also a totally incompetent God. i...feel like that should be self evident. If it isn't, then I agree to disagree.

[Ale the Metallic Conjurer he/him]

51 minutes ago, hwiles said:

I'm not. By the definition of the words, Harmony killed innocent people on purpose, committed genocide against southern scadrians, and deliberately manipulated and ruined the lives of his declared swords and shields. It's in the books.

I have no hesitation in declaring that Sazed was a good man in a traditional sense of the word. A paragon of understanding, faith, fidelity, intercultural and cross-language communication and Harmonization, and justice in the truest sense of the word. The best and kindest and most well intentioned Shard by my opinion.

And also a totally incompetent God. i...feel like that should be self evident. If it isn't, then I agree to disagree.

So I’m gonna make a list of what I assume your points

1. At any rate, he definitely knew about the Southerners. BUT it’s unconfirmed if Harmony intentionally left them or caused the Ice Death. Remember that the Catacendre is in line with Harmony’s Intent - Preserve life and the world, Ruin the old cities/societies and break some of the world. I’m not sure if the Ice Death would have some Ruin, considering there would be no Ashmounts to Ruin.

2. Remember that Harmony left harmonium and a perpendicularity to the Southerners. Then there’s the possibility he sent or nudged Kelsier to help them.

3. You really need to define who are the “innocent people.” Southern Scadrians, unconfirmed circumstances and he helped them anyways? Paalm… yeah he messed up there. But when she became insane, he saw in most future possibilities that Wax wouldn’t be willing to kill her. 

4. He manipulated his swords and shields. But he didn’t ruin their lives. He trusted Wax to bounce back from his pain and be the Sword who could lead Wayne to the Set’s bomb. He cultivated Wayne to be the hero to stop the bomb. Cultivated Marasi into being the socially conscious, trusting Governor of Elendel. 

 

You aren’t wrong to hate Harmony’s decisions. However, demanding that he solve everyone’s problems and put no one through pain ignores Era 2’s philosophical themes. It also ignores the fact he is NOT Preservation, but he’s also NOT Ruin. I don’t want to get into real world religious debate, but God in our world can be very questionable. Why should we assume Sazed to be any better?

Edited 9 hours ago by Ale the Metallic Conjurer

[+hwiles]

8 hours ago, Ale the Metallic Conjurer said:

...

You aren’t wrong to hate Harmony’s decisions. However, demanding that he solve everyone’s problems and put no one through pain ignores Era 2’s philosophical themes. It also ignores the fact he is NOT Preservation, but he’s also NOT Ruin. I don’t want to get into real world religious debate, but God in our world can be very questionable. Why should we assume Sazed to be any better?

Please do not assume my intent or pretend to put words in my mouth. I do not hate Harmony's decisions, I cannot. Like I said, he's the best of the best of the shards. However...he's still only a man with an insane amount of Investiture and only a couple rules that he must obey. That makes him flawed at his very core as a deity, like a diamond with hollow void or crack in its center.

 

Let's focus on Harmony's one most unforgivable transgression: he absolutely ruined the lives of every Sounthern-Scadrian and killed most of them, period full stop. Would they have died eventually no matter what he did? Of course! But he made their lives a frozen hell when he had the power to uplift and protect them...was there any malice in his actions? Almost certainly no. Was there the total ignorance of a billionaire exploiting resources to forcibly change things he doesn't understand and inadvertently triggering an uncontrollable genocide and subsequent civil war? Yeah...that's basically exactly what happened, yes.

 

From a philosophical perspective: Can a man trigger a genocide by accident and still be a good man? I would argue, "yes," on the basis that no one person can reasonably be expected to have the infinite futuresight required in order to predict all of the cascade consequences of their actions. Can the living embodiment of a God trigger a genocide on accident and still be a good God? No...it would mean that he/she/they is still only human. The most powerful, compassionate, and far-reaching human to ever live perhaps, but not a true God.

What do I believe the solution is? Better guarding against the Shards forcibly executing such ham-fisted and ghoulishly inept non-negotiable changes to other people's environments. Stepping down as Harmony would only leave scadrial crippled and weakened at this point, but that in no way means that Harmony's actions have not been partially selfish...he knows the Investiture keeps him alive when he should otherwise be dead, and he seems to draw legitimate peace, comfort, and satisfaction from being treated as a divine entity, which is sort of a peculiar reward considering how many people he brutally murdered in his incompetence and flailing when he first ascended and had to act while rushed after being given total unchecked power in a suddenly Godless world. The worst part is, there is no real solution, Harmony himself appears to recognize and be fully capable of articulating more or less this same philosophical decomposition himself, and what he has done is basically the best compromise that's possible without causing even greater harm now than he did during the first hour of his ascension. That's the rub though, playing God always causes men to die or kill others horribly. It's why humans throughout time and across every culture have always fixated and idealized about what a perfect and fair being would be and how it could be created and allowed to rule and protect people from the unjust actions of eachother.

How does one create a persistent and inexhaustible deus ex machina in, of, and for their world? Well...that's the ultimate question by my view.

Edited 1 hour ago by hwiles