The Judging Eye VIII (spoilers)

[Rhadamanth]

What, you guys don't think the world doesn't have voice? Then you are all just deaf to the truth.

Edit: Fanayal probably has surviving Cishaurim.

[Kalbear]

My suspicion is that the inchies knew fuck all about damnation or really much of anything because they're basically complete morons. They were able to figure out that hey - no souls means no damnation - but that was after Shae came there and was all 'dude, didn't you even READ this?' and they were all whuh?

[Curethan]

I can agree to disagree here.

In my interpretation, upbringing, history, culture etc are all objective manifestations of subjective experience. I see them as the very fabric of outside (subjective) reality written across the onta. Men's souls stand astride the boundary of the subjective and objective, and their boundary is the skin - wherein the soul dwells, therefore they are the fulcrum through which these outside powers operate. They do so through belief (the darkness), the efficiacy of which is underwritten by piety.

This is my pet theory of Earwa, certainly, but I'm sticking with it until I get refuted by something other than 'not necessarily' ;)

I'll offer one last thing for you to think on though, aimless. For me, Cnaiur presents strong evidence in insanity allowing the hundred gods/social contructs/viramsata to muck about in your head. There is no reason for him to regularly channel Gilgaol's aspect in his personal history, yet he does so on at least 2 occasions when his demeanor reflects the god's historical and appetitive aspect. This suggests that madness might open an individual to influences that are not supported by their own belief and conditioning.

edit: lots of ninja posts whilst i was writing this :D

[Madness]

Thanks, Razor. I thought I was alone with that for a second.

As I've written, Triskele, I always wonder what happened to Moenghus' network and such. Clearly by the exchange at the end of TWP between Kellhus and the Cishaurim, I'd hazard that Moenghus' had a pretty beefy organization going on within Fanimry. He was teaching them to live by principles of the logos. I would also say that Fanayal likely has Cishaurim with him.

[Shryke]

Re: lies in fiction. I think fiction authors are somewhat obligated to avoid bald faced lies, unless they are using the 'unreliable narrator method'. Consistency is key to maintaining the reader's suspension of disbelief, and contradictions result in retcons, rocket-jumping sharks and other such wall-banger inducing inconsistencies. A large part of the attraction of RSB's work (for me) is the intricate work that has gone into establishing the metaphysics, history and plotting. Therefore, I agree with Nerdandel's intuition that the WHCB section would engage in perpetuating misdirecting hints rather than lies.

None of this means the writer can't deceive the reader though. Shit, it happens all the damn time in books. It's a standard literary technique to misdirect the reader. There's is nothing special or unique or strange about it.

Ultimately, there is no reason to assume that the rehash at the front of TJE is accurate in a meta sense. It's only required to be an accurate summation of what the typical reader would know after having read the first 3 books.

[Curethan]

No, it's the other way around. Every agency (human, non-man, "outside-entity") is owned by circumstance. The Dunyain think they can think their way out of this "slavery," but they're wrong.

The Dunyain seem to embrace "science" and "reason," but their ultimate goal is fundamentally religious. Their desire to escape the darkness that comes before is absurd on the face of it. In fact, it's self-contradicting. Which isn't to say that it isn't interesting. They're a bunch of weirdo monks with a handful of science and an impossible desire, and impossible desires produce interesting results.

Circumstance. There is no master-puppeteer pulling all the strings (other then Bakker himself). I wonder if the "god of gods" reference in the glossary mentioned by someone upthread isn't a misdirection. Yes, there are people in Earwa who believe in an agency who is the "god of gods" but perhaps the true "god of gods" isn't an entity but something like "fate" or "luck" or "circumstance."

No, it isn't. Circumstance yeilds to desire in the outside. Men are the conduit to conditioning circumstance in Earwa. Their beliefs are the handles for any puppetmaster to grip.

The dunyain hold truth as holy.

No master pupeteer, but Earwa is filled with puppets.

@ Shryke:

You're not wrong, but I think this sort of deception (if intentional) would amount to cheating the reader (as in, breaking the implicit contract of suspension of disbelief) in a way not consistent with Bakker's skills as an author. Definatly possible if it was written by an editor or somesuch.

[aimlessgun]

In my interpretation, upbringing, history, culture etc are all objective manifestations of subjective experience. I see them as the very fabric of outside (subjective) reality written across the onta. Men's souls stand astride the boundary of the subjective and objective, and their boundary is the skin - wherein the soul dwells, therefore they are the fulcrum through which these outside powers operate. They do so through belief (the darkness), the efficiacy of which is underwritten by piety.

Hrm. I can't say I totally understand this, with regards to the outside as a 'subjective reality written across the onta'. Unless you are suggesting that the outside is illusionary and not physical in nature, much like the illusionary and totally subjective nature of human consciousness? (which is something seemingly incompatible with summoning ciphrangs into the objective world, unless somehow that process is a concretization of an idea, which I suppose is possible)

This is my pet theory of Earwa, certainly, but I'm sticking with it until I get refuted by something other than 'not necessarily' ;)

It feels that to divorce the outside from the laws of causality would be a betrayal of what he's been saying so far. But we shall see.

I'll offer one last thing for you to think on though, aimless. For me, Cnaiur presents strong evidence in insanity allowing the hundred gods/social contructs/viramsata to muck about in your head. There is no reason for him to regularly channel Gilgaol's aspect in his personal history, yet he does so on at least 2 occasions when his demeanor reflects the god's historical and appetitive aspect. This suggests that madness might open an individual to influences that are not supported by their own belief and conditioning.

edit: lots of ninja posts whilst i was writing this :D

I don't have the Cnauir passages in front of me but I assumed that the aspects of Gilgaol were part of the general human condition, even if Cnauir didn't grow up associating them with Gilgaol.

And yes, ninja posts while making one of your own are the worst :tantrum:

[aimlessgun]

No, it isn't. Circumstance yeilds to desire in the outside. Men are the conduit to conditioning circumstance in Earwa. Their beliefs are the handles for any puppetmaster to grip.

The dunyain hold truth as holy.

No master pupeteer, but Earwa is filled with puppets.

Agh ninja post! I'll put this into a separate reply to avoid a ninja edit.

I think one of the fundamental points me and Finn are trying to make is that the puppetmaster is in turn affected by the puppets. Causality works in all directions, and nothing can escape it.

[Curethan]

Perhaps the confusion comes from the interplay between objective reality (the onta) and subjective reality (I have to go clean the temple to avoid damnation).

Sorcery demonstrates that balancing objective meaning against subjective interpretation can yeild results that manifest in both realms (i.e. wards, distance communication, explosions -objective results; deepening of the mark, belief in your ultimate damnation - subjective results).

To what extent the relationship between gods and men is two way is undetermined, and I haven't found much to support the idea in the text.

I can offer an anology that may be of some use if you do subscribe to this two-way causality; imagine each soul as a drip tracking its way down a stalegtite. The stalegtite represents the belief system the drip was born onto by circumstance. Thereafter, the course the drip takes down the stalegtite is determined by the stalegtite's shape, but in the course of it's passing it deposits minerals that changes the shape of said stalegtite, however incrementally.

Now, is the stalegtite a god, or is that god the source of the water and minerals? How does the objective shape of the stalegtite relate to the subjective experience of the water droplets that trace its form?

[Nerdanel]

None of this means the writer can't deceive the reader though. Shit, it happens all the damn time in books. It's a standard literary technique to misdirect the reader. There's is nothing special or unique or strange about it.

Ultimately, there is no reason to assume that the rehash at the front of TJE is accurate in a meta sense. It's only required to be an accurate summation of what the typical reader would know after having read the first 3 books.

Outright lies are a subset of the various means of deception, and I think we can rule out that subset from What Has Gone Before. The nifty thing with that is that it allows us to examine statements in a deceitful text and come up with statements that must be true since they cannot be interpreted to mean something else.

Example 1:

Q: What is your name?

A: My name is Jack Smith.

Example 2:

Q: What is your name?

A: Call me Jack Smith.

The answerer in Example 1 must be Joe Smith or else he is lying. The real name of the answerer in Example 2 can be anything without him lying, as the answerer doesn't actually address the question even though it is easy for the other person to think that he does. The "Call me" line is never a lie because it is not a statement of fact but rather a suggestion for the other person.

[aimlessgun]

Perhaps the confusion comes from the interplay between objective reality (the onta) and subjective reality (I have to go clean the temple to avoid damnation).

Sorcery demonstrates that balancing objective meaning against subjective interpretation can yeild results that manifest in both realms (i.e. wards, distance communication, explosions -objective results; deepening of the mark, belief in your ultimate damnation - subjective results).

I like your example in the first paragraph. But I guess I get lost after that. I also might buy much of your sorcery idea, except that the deepening of the mark is an objective result, through and through. It is only the interpretation that the mark as morally repugnant that is subjective. The mark leading to eternal torment is possibly objective. The mark leading to 'damnation' is subjective.

ETA: realizing what I'm saying here is slightly out of tune with what I say below. :laugh:

To what extent the relationship between gods and men is two way is undetermined, and I haven't found much to support the idea in the text.

I can offer an anology that may be of some use if you do subscribe to this two-way causality; imagine each soul as a drip tracking its way down a stalegtite. The stalegtite represents the belief system the drip was born onto by circumstance. Thereafter, the course the drip takes down the stalegtite is determined by the stalegtite's shape, but in the course of it's passing it deposits minerals that changes the shape of said stalegtite, however incrementally.

Now, is the stalegtite a god, or is that god the source of the water and minerals? How does the objective shape of the stalegtite relate to the subjective experience of the water droplets that trace its form?

Argh analogies are hard, and this one breaks down for me in a few ways, though I think the premise is very intriguing.

Firstly, the characterization of the stalagmite as 'objective'. Thinking about this, the interaction between subjective and objective and what the hell those words mean really is confusing.

Alright I have to abandon the analogy :crying: Maybe what I'm trying to say about the preeminence of causality and the relationship of the objective and subjective is this:

The objective is the universe, which runs according to natural laws and is subject to cause and effect. The universe is by definition everything. The Outside, despite the misnomer the self-deceiving men of Earwa have given it, is part of the universe.

The subjective, or this illusion of consciousness we have according to Bakker, is merely a byproduct of all the interactions of the objective. You are completely determined by what has come before, and though an illusion of consciousness and free will is created along the way, it is merely a reflection and not something 'outside' that can act on the objective.

Achamian is not choosing to work sorcery by his own free will, and his impression of making a conscious decision is an illusion of his brain. Particles interact in his brain according to cause and effect and then affect other things in the universe to produce whatever 'magical' effects there are, and also generate his illusion-consciousness that sees the effects of the magic as something caused by his volition.

The relationship between 'gods' and men is not two-way, it is infinite-way, where they are all part of the system and all subject to the same rules. The consciousness of gods is as much an illusion as that of men. Nothing can be outside the universe. The God, capital G, is the universe, and in your stalagmite analogy He is the source of water and minerals.

As for textual support: this is an outside worldview that I am overlaying on Earwa based on extrapolating Bakker's blog posts w/ regards to the illusion of consciousness, and the way he presents the darkness that comes before, with a healthy dose of personal bias. This is long enough already though.

[Kalbear]

The dunyain hold truth as holy.

FYI, this is absolutely demonstrably false. The first thing they do in the story is obliterate the history of the world, especially anything to do with sorcery. At the time they knew sorcery was real and could affect the world. 2000 years later and they think it a myth and a fantasy held by weak-minded people. That's demonstrably wrong.

The Dunyain are as deluded as anyone. Much like Bakker is deluded as anyone. Everyone thinks that they know the Truth with a T, but the best you can get is slightly closer to a real truth. The Dunyain are no different; they felt that they could get closest to the Truth if they eliminated all variables that they couldn't easily control, like the Outside or magic. They did this by...ignoring them. And that's it.

They're no more wedded to the truth than anyone. Moe, Kellhus, all of them are guided by strings they could not understand and ultimately did not understand. They mastered their circumstance better than before, but that doesn't mean that it's perfect. And because of their ego and superiority they believe that they do think it's perfection. When it's really just a good attempt.

[Shryke]

The Dunyain don't believe they have mastered all circumstance though. They still haven't achieved their goal. They just see themselves as closer to it then normal men.

What they believe is that they've found the method to do that eventually.

[Finn]

No, it isn't. Circumstance yeilds to desire in the outside. Men are the conduit to conditioning circumstance in Earwa. Their beliefs are the handles for any puppetmaster to grip.

Circumstance *yields* to desire everywhere: the Outside, Earwa, the real world. I can make all kinds of things happen in my little world. I can overcome circumstance in all kinds of ways, but within certain limits. In the Outside circumstance yields to desire to a greater extent but there are still limits. If I'm Gilgaol or whatever I can wish for 70 vestal virgins or something and there they are. I can't wish the other "outside-entities" to disappear or (presumably) wish myself into some other existence other than Gilgaol. There are limits. These agencies are not completely autonomous.

There is no "true" Outside. Aimlessgun put this well. One can't get outside the system. There is no transcendent position from which one could master all circumstance (although the Dunyain are looking for it.)

ETA: This sounds more declamatory than I wanted it to. So far we haven't *seen* anything to suggest a transcendent position or the possibility of true transcendence. (My read of the "Outside" is essentially Moe's: it's just more world to conquer, but with somewhat different rules and personnel.)

Bakker could certainly go in that direction, however. He'd have to go vague/paradoxical/etc to do describe whatever transcendence he wanted to describe, but it's certainly possible. Doesn't feel very Bakkery to me, but who knows.

The dunyain hold truth as holy.

Razorbeef answered this well.

No master pupeteer, but Earwa is filled with puppets.

This I can agree with, and is kind of what I was saying.

[Curethan]

@ aimless gun: yeh, the analogy is designed to spark thought rather than supply answers ;) It suggests something of dimensional perceptions and relationships.

Subjective and objective relate to the perception versus the underlying reality. The mark may seem to be an objective reality, but it has no physical existence - it can only be described in subjective terms, and more, only the few (and the judging eye, i guess) can see it - it doesn't have any pure real world (objective) manifestion.

@ Razor: the dunyain may be wrong, but they do hold truth as holy. Evidence of hypocrisy is not a contradiction.

Nothing is more unjust, however common, than to charge with hypocrisy him that expresses zeal for those virtues which he neglects to practice; since he may be sincerely convinced of the advantages of conquering his passions, without having yet obtained the victory, as a man may be confident of the advantages of a voyage, or a journey, without having courage or industry to undertake it, and may honestly recommend to others, those attempts which he neglects himself.

eta.

@ Finn: Well. I'm basing off Ajencis' bits. I tend to believe that the pre-chapter quotes and appendix are where RSB most honestly describes his metaphysical framework, so thats what I go with.

[aimlessgun]

Subjective and objective relate to the perception versus the underlying reality. The mark may seem to be an objective reality, but it has no physical existence - it can only be described in subjective terms, and more, only the few (and the judging eye, i guess) can see it - it doesn't have any real world (objective) manifestion.

Just because most people don't see the mark doesn't mean it doesn't have an objective reality. Humans don't perceive radio waves...but they're still there :P

I would argue that the perception of the mark is a product of information received from a marked person interacting with the brain of the observer. That information is transmitted to the observer because of a certain physical state in the observed: the objective state of being marked. The few are the only ones who can produce this physical state, and also the only ones with the proper organs to receive such information.

I think we can conclude that sorcerers don't just make the mark up: there is no prejudgement of people when they see it that would lead to pre-existing bias 'tricking' them into experiencing the mark. Further, I assume that sorcerers all see the same thing: if someone has the mark every sorcerer sees it. They see it where it exists.

Aaaanyways, not sure why I keep badgering you, we've definitely concluded that our viewpoints are both unproven and incompatible :D

[Cantabile]

I had a dream last night about playing a Prince of Nothing RPG on a PS3, and it was pretty damned awesome.

Mandate Schoolman as a character class? :wub:

[Kalbear]

Razor: the dunyain may be wrong, but they do hold truth as holy. Evidence of hypocrisy is not a contradiction.

Okay, fine. They lie all the time.

So clearly truth isn't that special to them.

Kellhus continuously lies. His whole world is based on lies. His rule is based on lies. To him the truth is simply a way to manipulate. Moe was the same way with a similar outcome. They use the truth the way we use pronouns.

The truth isn't holy to them any more than words are holy. It's something to be understood, to be considered, and to be used as needed. The phrase 'there is no crime when men are not deceived' doesn't mean what you think it means. It doesn't mean that crime goes away; it means that when people aren't deceived, the notion of someone punishing you for your actions is removed. There's no 'better than' or 'worse than' action, no reason to be punished. Punishment doesn't matter at that point. Rape isn't a crime if you understand why you're raping - and why you're being raped.

But truth? Truth isn't holy. Nothing is holy. The concept of something being more important than something else to the Dunyain without actually judging it first is insanity to them. That is accepting the value of what comes before unquestioningly. Nothing has value except what you give it - including the truth. Hell, to them they removed a lot of truth that was hard to deal with just so they could concentrate on the truths that were more convenient or easier to handle. Point of fact, Kellhus is insane (by Dunyain standards) BECAUSE he values one thing over another without a particular reason. He decides humanity is to be saved just because. He doesn't understand why, and he doesn't care. He rationalizes it as him being a prophet and accepts that as the truth - even though it's clear that it's not.

The Dunyain are a race of professional liars. They are taught from an early age to attempt to deceive and to attempt to detect deception. Truth isn't holy to that any more than food is holy to professional chefs.

[unJon]

Aimlessgun,

I agree with Shryke that it's far more likely to be a slip of what Bakker thought most people would believe. If someone starts saying they're a god and sees halos, there's a good chance you're going to declare them mad, and the main thing protecting him from this assumption is existing in a genre where such a thing has precedent.

This makes sense only if Bakker lives in a dark room without internet access. However, from experience, we know he reads forums about his book. And without a doubt, the vast majority of people that have expressed opinions on the subject do NOT think Kel is mad. There are very few of us in the minority that think Kel really did crack.

ETA: just think of the reaction of everyone when they read this part of the what had come before. Uniformly, people were jarred that it contained this information.

Shryke,

No, it doesn't. What it has to state is what the reader would believe/know at the time. It's sole purpose is to remind you what happened in the last book. And if the last book lied to you, so will the rehash.

The TJE what has come before section goes well beyond the prior trilogy. It goes all the way back to the Inchies crash landing, and explicitly states that they knew about damnation and were going to try to get out of it way back in the beginning. That is just gratuitous lying if it turns out Bakker was just messing with us and the Inchies had know idea about closing the world until thousands of years later when Shae explains it all to them. :rolleyes:

Aimless,

Whoa, whoa. I think madness is a state wholly within the self. If you're introducing outside powers, that's compulsion or possession. I don't see any reason to believe that is what is going on.

This idea comes from what someone in the book says about madness (Akka I think). That madness is when the Outside leaks into someone. Whether it is true or not, I dunno, but it is distinct from the Dunyain concept of "the darkness that comes before." Everyone is subject to the Darkness, the sane and the mad.

Kal,

My suspicion is that the inchies knew fuck all about damnation or really much of anything because they're basically complete morons. They were able to figure out that hey - no souls means no damnation - but that was after Shae came there and was all 'dude, didn't you even READ this?' and they were all whuh?

I don't buy it. Shae doesn't know about it until he goes and meets the Inchies and comes back. Why think that the Inchies had all the pieces to realize that they can close the world, but it took Shae to put the puzzle together? We have good evidence that they had already put the puzzle together with the attempted genocide of non-men.

[Finn]

@ Finn: Well. I'm basing off Ajencis' bits. I tend to believe that the pre-chapter quotes and appendix are where RSB most honestly describes his metaphysical framework, so thats what I go with.

Here's the quote (from upthread):

"The World, he argues, is simply the point of maximal objectivity, the plane where the desires of individual souls are helpless before circumstance, because it is fixed by the desire of the God of Gods. The many regions of the Outside then represent diminishing levels of objectivity, where circumstances yield more and more to desire......the more powerful entities of the Outside dwell in "sub-realities" that conform to their desires."

First, Ajencis pretty clearly seems to be describing a spectrum. The spectrum ranges from humans -- who are relatively helpless before circumstance -- at one end to the more powerful entities of the Outside -- who dwell in "sub-realities" that conform to their desires -- at the other end. But these "sub-realities" are contained within that larger reality. As much as subjective desire reigns in that sub-reality, both these entities and these sub-realities are still hemmed in by other entities with their own domains and ultimately bound by that larger reality.

Also, and I feel I always have to ask this, how would Ajencis know anyway?