A Memory of Light

[mtlhddoc2]

Morally, I do not feel that it is. Revenge is not a morally acceptable act, in my book. Killing or harming to protect from immenent harm, perceived or real, is acceptable in my book, however distasteful it might be. this does not mean that I have not WANTED to harm someone before, but wanting to do something and actually doing it arte not the same thing.

Broccoli on regular tomato sauce pizza sounds pretty gross though. Broccoli and tomatoes dont mix well in my taste book.

[fresh]

Hey, I know I'm a latecomer to this discussion but I enjoy this too much to sit out.  I grabbed a couple sentences from the last page, hopefully you don't look at them as taken out of context, the thought still seems well contained.

Right and wrong ARE subjective, even when there are certain truths which we hold self-evident. Such as murder, rape, slavery and the brutalizing of women, and even: forcing religion on someone, yet, that takes place every day in this country.

That comes off to me as a contradiction, here's why.  When I think subjective the phrase "true for you" comes to mind, for example, the sentence "broccoli tastes good on pizza" is subjective since it can be true for some people and false for others.  If issues of right and wrong (moral issues) are subjective then there cannot be self-evident truths.

To claim that there are any moral truths you are saying that morality is objective.  To claim that any of those moral truths are self-evident you are saying there is a single moral standard which all people have some knowledge of.

[mtlhddoc2]

That was my point.

[darxbane]

Wow, I didn't think I would set off such a spirited debate.  My point about Tuon was her hipocrisy; she has learned that she can, in fact, learn to channel, yet she still thinks she is better than those who actually channel because she doe not.  The problem is, she controls the channeler in the way a hunter controls a rifle.  Even if she couldn't learn to channel, the fact that the Damane are under complete control means those who control them have the same power as Aes Sedai, and that makes them no less dangerous.  Ironically, it is the Damane who allowed the Seanchan to maintain power in Seandar.  The only thing the Seanchan did right was to "unite" all the warring Aes Sedai factions by collaring all of them.     Also, we know Tuon is wrong because we have the benefit of knowing that her ancestors were tricked by Ishamael; their propehcy of the dragon is false.

As for her morality, she breaks the golden rule: Would I want that done to me? To those I love?   If the answer is no, then it shouldn't be OK for you to do it to someone else.  Otherwise, you are putting yourself above others.

[mtlhddoc2]

It is morality this speaks of: "As for her morality, she breaks the golden rule: Would I want that done to me? To those I love?   If the answer is no, then it shouldn't be OK for you to do it to someone else.  Otherwise, you are putting yourself above others."

But the difference is, she is abiding by law and by conditioning and the religion of the Empire (it is not a religion per se, but acts like one) - the religion does not allow for any contradiction, even when ones apply. She would be perfectly fine if someone she loved was collared because it is what is supposed to happen. She might even be fine with being collared herself, as long as the "religion" requires it.

Even in todays religions, for better or worse,  people to throw away their own children because they are gay, murder their daughters because they had sex and blow up buildings of people who believe differently. Yes, I am speaking of 9/11, but also of the abortion clinic bombings in Georgia and the Oklahoma City bombing. All of those involved were very religious people who thought they were doing the right thing. Religion, by doctrine, requires you to believe you are better than others who do not share your religion. Cathlics believe they are the only ones going to heaven, Born agains believe only those who have been "born again" are going to heaven. And all of you believe that because I do not believe in any god, I am most certainly the most heinous sinner of them all and am going stright to hell. Many of you probably even believe that because of my atheism, I couldnt possibly have a single moral fiber in my being.

I went a little afield, but mean no disrespect to anyone here. I was merely pointing out that what you say, does not always match up with how you act, this goes for individuals, governments, corporations and religions.

[happyman]

I would like to respectfully say that there is nothing gray in the examples you have given us. Suicide bombing is wrong. Marital abuse is wrong. People who's consciences have been so seared as to think they are in the right is terrible.
I understand that you are an atheist. However, I believe there is a difference between "God" and "Jupiter". We all know that the deity referenced on the dollar bill is the one that nearly all of the Founders believed in, but it does not specifically state the God of the Bible or "Jesus." I think there is a difference.

I agree with you on the first part. Of course it is wrong...  to those of us who have evolved. Go back barely over 60 years in this country and women were little more than property still. It was teh 2nd World War which changed teh male view when women worked in factories and such. the phrase "rule of thumb" comes from a British law which was only recently stricken from the books that you could not beat your wife with anything wider than your thumb. Right and wrong ARE subjective, even when there are certain truths which we hold self-evident. Such as murder, rape, slavery and the brutalizing of women, and even: forcing religion on someone, yet, that takes place every day in this country. Just the fact that it is God and not god is proof that it is indeed the Judeo-Christian god, or an offshoot (such as Islam) which is being referenced. the Greek and roman gods where referred to in the lower case, since each person worshipped a god of their choosing. The Hindi people also have multiple gods and therefore "god" would also be lower case. I am not here to belabor the point. It really is fact. If you are not a believer in god or God, you are considered less of a person in this country by most. People come right out and say, if you dont believe, then you have no morals, which is patently false. But that is what they believe, and they are in power, therefore they are "right" and I am "wrong" regardless of how I might feel about teh subject. Many of the Mormons on this board should be able to sympathize with me, if they could get past their prejudice. Mormonism has been considered a "cult" and "weird" by the majority for a long long time. Utah would not even be a state if Mormon church leaders had not been forced to give up polygamy. so to the majority, Mormons are no different than I am, even if they refuse to believe it.

PS: I like broccoli on pizza, a white pizza that is.

I'm afraid you've lost me with this one.  I think a little more history could put things in perspective, especially with regards to women.  For instance, the "rule of thumb" thing is quite the little modern feminist urban legend, and is absolutely false.  Wife-beating hasn't been acceptable in British (and thus American) law for at least 400 years, and "rule of thumb" never once referred to it while it was allowed.  The most common cause of tarring and feathering in early America was usually vigilante justice to punish a wife-beater.

Incidentally, if you are correct in your atheism, then I will say that you are right even if most people disagree with you.  If we take the long view, most humans have believed that the Earth is flat or some other geometry (the history is subtle, because educated people of all stripes have known better for ~2000 years.  But I suspect they were outnumbered by people who weren't educated and frankly didn't care.)  Does that make them right?  When it comes to decisions about sending satellites in orbit, which does NASA use, the flat Earth theory held by most cultures prior to ~1BC, or does it use the spherical earth with Newtonian gravity?  If I had gone back in time and been persecuted for thinking the Earth is spherical (much less likely than you probably think, but it's a common example...) would that have made me wrong, or incorrect?

All you are really saying is that opinions which you think are incorrect are held by the majority of the population, and that they treat you differently because of them.  Well, that doesn't make them false, it just makes them unpopular.  It's like saying that because every culture has a different form of government and different economic system, all forms of government and all economic systems are equal, and the ones that are most common are the best.  This is utter nonsense; some forms of government and some economic systems are demonstrably better than others in terms of results, and they are not the most common ones.  Being popular does not make something true; it just informs the social impact of the truths when they hit.

[Bookstore Guy]

Even in todays religions, for better or worse,  people to throw away their own children because they are gay, murder their daughters because they had sex and blow up buildings of people who believe differently. Yes, I am speaking of 9/11, but also of the abortion clinic bombings in Georgia and the Oklahoma City bombing. All of those involved were very religious people who thought they were doing the right thing. Religion, by doctrine, requires you to believe you are better than others who do not share your religion. Cathlics believe they are the only ones going to heaven, Born agains believe only those who have been "born again" are going to heaven. And all of you believe that because I do not believe in any god, I am most certainly the most heinous sinner of them all and am going stright to hell. Many of you probably even believe that because of my atheism, I couldnt possibly have a single moral fiber in my being.

I went a little afield, but mean no disrespect to anyone here. I was merely pointing out that what you say, does not always match up with how you act, this goes for individuals, governments, corporations and religions.

ok. i'll say this again. leave inflammatory comments like these out of forums. nobody has pointed fingers at you here on this thread and said you are "the most heinous sinner of them all and am going straight to hell." Please don't make these kind of accusations and assumptions. I don't care what religion you do or don't consider yourself a part of, there is no need to make these kind of statements and generalizations. they dont help the conversations, and they only serve to make people angry or hurt. Religion does NOT tell people to act better than everyone else. If a person in a religion acts that way, they are going against the principles of their religion. you say you dont mean any disrespect, but your comments show that very disrespect.

Once again, lets keep our comments on topic and without any religion or anti-religion bashing.  Topics can be discussed without spiraling into the same hopeless arguments and insults in every freaking thread.

[Bookstore Guy]

oh crap, i forgot to answer about Erikson. Sorry!!

start with Gardens of the Moon. It will feel like you are missing a books worth of info, but thats intentional. the learning curve is very steep and chaotic at the beginning, but the books become amazing as you read further on.

[mtlhddoc2]

Bookstore guy: Thanks for the Erikson tip, I will order him from my library today

As for inflammatory, I really was not being inflammatory. I have heard similar statements throughout my life, and even here on this board....  but again, religion, by nature, is "holier-than-thou" - it must be, if it was not, then it wouldnt be much of a religion. If you believe, as Christianity preaches, that the only way to salvation is through Jesus Christ, then thats it. Everyone else MUST be wrong. It is a de-facto requirement. The Bible preaches that non-believers are going straight to hell, do not pass Go, do not collect $100. If a religion taught that all other religions were equal, it wouldnt be a religion for very long, whhich is one of the main reasons that Wicca and the Greek/Roman gods either died out or do not do very well.  They do not preach superiority.

Direct from the King James Bible:
Timothy 5:8 "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

John 3:18: "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."


The Bible, in many points, specifically calls out those who do not believe in the Judeo-Christian God as less of a person, as one without moral, one with a heart of evil. I do not put these things form as disrespect, just to show the nature and necessity of this particular religion. Most other religions have similar phrases within their texts. How they are interpreted directly impacts how the followers are expected to act. Islam, becuas eit has no central authority, has widely divergent interpretations, which leads many to believe that the path to heaven is through killing non-believers and infidels. Fortunately for me, Christianity as a whole has evolved since the 16th Century, even if a very small number of its followers have not.

Even my religion-or-lack-thereof of atheism breeds a thought of superiority "I am right and you are wrong" which in turn is what led us to this discussion in the first place. Right vs wrong and all things in between.

[Reaves]

John 3:16 -- For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Not only people who don't believe in Jesus. Not only people who don't believe in any god at all. EVERYONE -- including every single christian ever to walk the face of the earth. Everyone naturally has a heart of evil.

As for your first statement; the truth is that some people are wrong. Two plus two does not equal three, the sky is NOT purple, and the moon is not made out of cheese, no matter how much your five-year old son may wish it was so. I can't prove to you that the words of the Bible are true. No human being can do that. Just please consider.

[Bookstore Guy]

religions also preach humility, and talk about the consequences of judging others (insert scriptures here). it is a balancing act. we can toss bible passages around all day to no conclusion. What I am tying to be clear on, is that any belief system will say "I'm in the right," but there are ways of expressing it without bordering on hostility. Please not im not just pointing at what i perceived as inflammatory comments in your previous post. I think my personal belief system should be shared with the hope that people will someday come to feel what I feel, just like I'm sure you hope that people will feel what you feel someday. It doesnt mean that everyone thinks im a terrible person because i believe how I do. It doesnt mean everyone thinks you are a terrible sinner because you believe the way you do. every person that points a finger has three pointing back at them. your posts just seem to have this odd tone to them like you feel the cards have been stacked against you. You shouldnt feel that way here - this is a forum to discuss the books Brandon Sanderson is working on.

i just think some of these arguments are getting much too far afield to have any good use on the discussion of AMoL. These types of arguments - the ones that come down to people arguing uselessly over opinions - tend to turn a high number of people away from the discussions, and 3 or4 people end up doing the only "conversing."

reign it in.

and lemme know what you think of Erikson - i might recommend you withhold judgment on it till the first 2 or even 3 books are read - you get a better feel for the style and story that way (i usually dont recommend that for novels, but erikson is an exception to every rule).

Reeves, what do you mean the moon is NOT made of cheese?

Back to AMoL, and what we hope to see from it. I need some character changes. Perrin is killing me. maybe i'll be proven wrong and he'll bite the dust with his annoying wife.

[darxbane]

Oh now you have just gone too far.  You can spew religious argument all you want, but I must take offense to your vitriole towards Perrin and Faille.  It has always amazed how many people just don't get their part of the story.  Faille is awesome!  I guess most people are nervous about the prospect of a woman who demands to be equal in every way, and not treated like some delicate flower to be  sheltered all the time.  I also can't understand why any man would not appreciate a woman who not only doesn't mind you looking at another woman, but requires you to do so.   I think the culture clash between the two is fantastic.  They are learning as they go.  When I hear the argument that Perrin is selfish in risking so much to pursue his wife, I remind them all that Perrin lost HIS ENTIRE FAMILY due to Padain Fain, and has barely had time to truly grieve.  Faille is literally all he has left, I defy any of you wouldn't do the same.  I also love the whole Wolfbrother concept.  You would think his ability to smell emotions would help, but often it makes him even more confused.  It's great! 

[Bookstore Guy]

Oh now you have just gone too far.  You can spew religious argument all you want, but I must take offense to your vitriole towards Perrin and Faille.  It has always amazed how many people just don't get their part of the story.  Faille is awesome!  I guess most people are nervous about the prospect of a woman who demands to be equal in every way, and not treated like some delicate flower to be  sheltered all the time.  I also can't understand why any man would not appreciate a woman who not only doesn't mind you looking at another woman, but requires you to do so.   I think the culture clash between the two is fantastic.  They are learning as they go.  When I hear the argument that Perrin is selfish in risking so much to pursue his wife, I remind them all that Perrin lost HIS ENTIRE FAMILY due to Padain Fain, and has barely had time to truly grieve.  Faille is literally all he has left, I defy any of you wouldn't do the same.  I also love the whole Wolfbrother concept.  You would think his ability to smell emotions would help, but often it makes him even more confused.  It's great! 

actually none of those are the reasons i dislike Perrin. the only thing keeping me going with him is the wolfbrother concept. and i get that he will risk everything for Faile - i would hope he would. i just find their plotting too straight forward and linear. his deal with Padan Fain was the peak of his story for me...and that was a while ago. that was when the most character growth happened for him. its been too stagnant for me since then. the thing with his family being killed is that it has been several books since it has made a difference - at the time it was huge, but now it feels like an afterthought. Faile is mostly just a personal dislike. she seems like a whiner, and she is the one I see as being on the bad side of selfishness (perrin's doesnt bother me. it's wolf-like).

[TMan]

I too find Perrin and Faile highly annoying. Perrin because he's just too dumb, why can't he get what his wife wants from him for hundreds of pages? It's in plain sight! Faile because she's got too much of "if you don't know what I'm talking about I'm not going to explain." It's just out of proportion.

[Bookstore Guy]

I too find Perrin and Faile highly annoying. Perrin because he's just too dumb, why can't he get what his wife wants from him for hundreds of pages? It's in plain sight! Faile because she's got too much of "if you don't know what I'm talking about I'm not going to explain." It's just out of proportion.

if he was dumb i could accept it. its more of the fact that he actually DOES get it, he just chooses to let it be.  i think you have it right though - blown out of proportion. /highfive

i think we need several hundred pages of war, death, and destruction with Mat lucking out the whole way.