Sorcery

  • 224 Replies
  • 92860 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Madness

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Conversational Batman
  • Posts: 5275
  • Strength on the Journey - Journey Well
    • View Profile
    • The Second Apocalypse
« Reply #60 on: November 14, 2013, 10:49:06 pm »
Quote from: TJE, p155
The Mark already blasts him, renders him ugly in the manner of things rent and abraded, as though his inner edges have been pinched and twisted, pinched and twisted, his very substance worried from the fabric of mundane things. But suddenly she sees more, the hue of judgement, as though blessing and condemnation have become a wash visible only in certain kinds of light. It hangs about him, bleeds from him, something palpable ... evil.

No. Not Evil. Damnation.

Mimara looking on Achamian with the Judging Eye.
The Existential Scream
Weaponizing the Warrior Pose - Declare War Inwardly
carnificibus: multus sanguis fluit
Die Better
The Theory-Killer

Cüréthañ

  • *
  • Moderator Extraordinaire
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Pendulous Fallacy
  • Posts: 772
  • Wizard IRL
    • View Profile
« Reply #61 on: November 14, 2013, 11:12:29 pm »
Bakker made a statement somewhere on 3c's (if I remember correctly) that Inrau died damned because of the fact that he used sorcery before attempting to fly.
If true, that is compelling evidence that using any sorcery crosses a line.  Damnation via sorcery does not involve compiling damnation points, it is on or off.
The Mark assuredly does not indicate damnation alone though, because it lingers on inanimate objects.

I differ only in that I feel the Mark results from the dissonance between the two inutterals.  Cish are altering the Onta and the mundane just as profoundly as other sorcerers.  The apparent difference, as I described above, is that they very likely do not use two inutterals because the focus only on the Onta. 

Fane developed the psukhe completely in the absence of knowledge of how anagogic and gnostic sorcery leverage changes to reality.  Note that both of those forms of sorcery use two inutterals, which makes sense as they pin two interpretations of meaning to two frames of perception.  By eliminating sight, Fane relied on one frame of perception (i.e. the onta) therefore one inutteral is enough to enforce sorcerous change.  As a side effect it eliminates 99% of the dissonance and also the visible Mark.

Using a third inutteral is only mentioned in the context of the cant of translocation, and this seems like an obvious method of referencing two physical places against the metaphysical reality of the sorcerer.  I believe its a question of leverage over power and that a third inutteral would serve no purpose in modifying most other cants.

This is not to suggest that Kellhus' deep understanding of metaphysics could not manifest in other applications of seemingly unrelated skills.
For example, he might teach Iyokus to shape his analogies using one inutteral and his feels like a cish and apply the psukhe's purity of meaning to the Daimos
Retracing his bloody footprints, the Wizard limped on.

locke

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 648
    • View Profile
« Reply #62 on: November 15, 2013, 01:19:10 am »
well remember, the mark is a shortened version of a longer cultural phrase, "the mark of the blood of the onta."

So that would imply the latter, how much and how long have you been practicing sorcery, the blood accumulates.   for the person who has harmed the onta, for the criminal, this is an inescapable weight, evidence of their guilt, a constant rebuke, a silent accusation... ;)

Wilshire

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Enshoiya
  • Posts: 5935
  • One of the other conditions of possibility
    • View Profile
« Reply #63 on: November 15, 2013, 01:27:02 am »
Quote from: TJE, p155
The Mark already blasts him, renders him ugly in the manner of things rent and abraded, as though his inner edges have been pinched and twisted, pinched and twisted, his very substance worried from the fabric of mundane things. But suddenly she sees more, the hue of judgement, as though blessing and condemnation have become a wash visible only in certain kinds of light. It hangs about him, bleeds from him, something palpable ... evil.

No. Not Evil. Damnation.

Mimara looking on Achamian with the Judging Eye.
This is the passage that absolutely makes me think that sorcerery and damnantion are not the same.
She clearly sees them differently, or at least I think so. The fact that schoolmen can see  the mark seems counter intuitive. Mimara is some kind of "holy" agent of some god and she sees true morality in people. Akka has killed/will kill many many people in cold blood. He is consumed by revenge and rage and care nothing for the people that get in his way. He is rightly damned without the use of sorcery, even though it was the sorcery that he used to kill people.
One of the other conditions of possibility.

Dûnyain novice

  • *
  • Emwama
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
« Reply #64 on: November 15, 2013, 10:39:46 am »
I think damnation points and Mark points are separate. Sorcery isn't the only way to be damned.

ETA: I believe that if you burn 7 tons of stone to cinders using the Fifth Quyan Whatnot, that could result in more Mark but fewer Damnation points than if you burn 3 tons of innocent people with the same Cant.

ETA2: Since the second option also involves murder of around 30-50 people, and I'm assuming murder gives Damnation point without affecting the Mark.

I totally agree with this theory. 



Fane developed the psukhe completely in the absence of knowledge of how anagogic and gnostic sorcery leverage changes to reality.  Note that both of those forms of sorcery use two inutterals, which makes sense as they pin two interpretations of meaning to two frames of perception.  By eliminating sight, Fane relied on one frame of perception (i.e. the onta) therefore one inutteral is enough to enforce sorcerous change.  As a side effect it eliminates 99% of the dissonance and also the visible Mark.

Using a third inutteral is only mentioned in the context of the cant of translocation, and this seems like an obvious method of referencing two physical places against the metaphysical reality of the sorcerer.  I believe its a question of leverage over power and that a third inutteral would serve no purpose in modifying most other cants.


From what I remember, during the scene where Akka teaches Kellhus, he explains that the Anagosis and Gnosis use 1 utteral string and 1 inutteral to better fix the meanings.
When Kellhus asks about adding a second inutteral Akka mentions this as the famed "Third Phase". Which would suggest that it's something kind of possible and not just a one-cant thing or a single incident.
Still, it's true that so far we know only one cant which actually uses a second inutteral! But that could very well be only because we see it in the last Kellhus POV.
Maybe in a future POV we'll see other MG Cants where it's specified that they all use 2 inutterals.

Also regarding the use of 2 inutterals in regular cants, from what I understand the second inutteral added by Kellhus helps him to obtain purer meanings. We know that in sorcery purer meanings usually equals stronger Cants so I recon Kellhus can theoretically turn any regular cant into a meta-gnostic one by adding a second inutteral or something close to this.

I like your theory about the Psukhe dissonance! Maybe they use 1 utteral and their emotions as "inutteral". This would explain why they're so powerful. Emotions would be more immediate and "pure" in meaning than another phrase.
 




Cüréthañ

  • *
  • Moderator Extraordinaire
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Pendulous Fallacy
  • Posts: 772
  • Wizard IRL
    • View Profile
« Reply #65 on: November 15, 2013, 11:19:59 am »
Yes, I think you are quite correct.  Utteral / inutteral.  The basic idea remains the same though ;)  Please go back and edit my posts for me, hehe.
Retracing his bloody footprints, the Wizard limped on.

Madness

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Conversational Batman
  • Posts: 5275
  • Strength on the Journey - Journey Well
    • View Profile
    • The Second Apocalypse
« Reply #66 on: November 15, 2013, 03:19:09 pm »
Bakker made a statement somewhere on 3c's (if I remember correctly) that Inrau died damned because of the fact that he used sorcery before attempting to fly.

Quote from: Cu'jara Cinmoi, March 2006
This question really morphed!

Yes, Inrau IS damned. And this is the basis of his conversion. There's always hope that the scriptures just overlooked some kind of loophole, or that by praying real hard...

Part of the problem is that we see Inrau primarily through Achamian, and if you think about it, Achamian tends not to go into the details of his damnation - or that of any of those he loves. For instance, why doesn't he ever wonder about Inrau's soul? This omission becomes more and more explicit the more implicated Achamian becomes in Kellhus's world. Think of TTT. I wanted this to be the one thing he cannot grasp without the protection of vague intellectual abstraction.
The Existential Scream
Weaponizing the Warrior Pose - Declare War Inwardly
carnificibus: multus sanguis fluit
Die Better
The Theory-Killer

Wilshire

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Enshoiya
  • Posts: 5935
  • One of the other conditions of possibility
    • View Profile
« Reply #67 on: November 15, 2013, 05:50:18 pm »
From what I remember, during the scene where Akka teaches Kellhus, he explains that the Anagosis and Gnosis use 1 utteral string and 1 inutteral to better fix the meanings.
When Kellhus asks about adding a second inutteral Akka mentions this as the famed "Third Phase". Which would suggest that it's something kind of possible and not just a one-cant thing or a single incident.
Still, it's true that so far we know only one cant which actually uses a second inutteral! But that could very well be only because we see it in the last Kellhus POV.
Maybe in a future POV we'll see other MG Cants where it's specified that they all use 2 inutterals.

Also regarding the use of 2 inutterals in regular cants, from what I understand the second inutteral added by Kellhus helps him to obtain purer meanings. We know that in sorcery purer meanings usually equals stronger Cants so I recon Kellhus can theoretically turn any regular cant into a meta-gnostic one by adding a second inutteral or something close to this. 

Just to clarify, Akka actually tells Kellhus that it's impossible to use a a 2nd inutteral. He then recalls, in his mind, a Mandate/Quya fable that there once was a schoolman/quya (can't remember which) who was said to use 2 inutterals. Though it doesn't really make much difference, since we know that Kellhus would have just "read" the truth from his face anyway.

If the Gnosis is some kind of logic based geometric sorcery:
Consider that within a 3 dimensional plane , you can only define a point with 1 coordinate. i.e (x). This is a 1d "object".
I think this is, more or less, what the anagogic schools use. They are limited to defining 1d sorcerery. If they want to "make" something, they can only specify 1 thing at a time. For example, something's length, or somethings height, but not both. This makes their "meaning"(purity) unclear.

With 2 points, you may define 2 points. (x, y). With this, you can now make your meaning much more clear. You can define something's length and width, or its height and length.
This is where the Gnosis is. The Mandati, and others, use the innuteral to clarify what they want more accuratly.

With an additional innuteral (the Meta-Gnosis) you can more fully describe what you want.


As a crude example: An anagogic schoolman, a gnostic schoolman, and a meta-gnostic schoolman want to summon a red cube that is 10meters long per side.
The anagogic schoolman simply says: Summon cube! He gets a transparent cube thats 1 meter long.
The Gnostic schoolman says: Summon cube, but thinks in his mind Red. He gets a red cube thats 20 meters long.
The meta-gnostic schoolman says: Summon cube, thinks Red and 10meters. He gets a red cube that is 10 meters long.

Sorry for the extraordinarily lame example, but its easier for me to think about than simply "and innuteral makes it more pure, and a 2nd makes it more purer ".

I feel like I'm mostly just rambling now so I'll shutup.
One of the other conditions of possibility.

Madness

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Conversational Batman
  • Posts: 5275
  • Strength on the Journey - Journey Well
    • View Profile
    • The Second Apocalypse
« Reply #68 on: November 15, 2013, 07:56:08 pm »
And a third makes it purerer ;)?
The Existential Scream
Weaponizing the Warrior Pose - Declare War Inwardly
carnificibus: multus sanguis fluit
Die Better
The Theory-Killer

Triskele

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Kijneta
  • *****
  • Condouchioned
  • Posts: 196
    • View Profile
« Reply #69 on: November 15, 2013, 10:14:28 pm »
Just to clarify, Akka actually tells Kellhus that it's impossible to use a a 2nd inutteral. He then recalls, in his mind, a Mandate/Quya fable that there once was a schoolman/quya (can't remember which) who was said to use 2 inutterals. Though it doesn't really make much difference, since we know that Kellhus would have just "read" the truth from his face anyway.

Yeah, he recalls the legend of Su'juroit (sp) the Nonman Witchking or something who had used the 2nd inutteral.

It's hilarious to think about how easily Kellhus must have seen through Akka's attempted deception.

Cüréthañ

  • *
  • Moderator Extraordinaire
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Pendulous Fallacy
  • Posts: 772
  • Wizard IRL
    • View Profile
« Reply #70 on: November 15, 2013, 11:03:28 pm »
I don't think a third makes it purer.

There is a good case that the Cish do not even need an inutteral in a second (dead) language, and their meanings are the purest of all.

The second inutteral is only used for trans-location, that we have seen.  If the meaning was pure, Serwe wouldn't be worried about detection.  If anything, uniting three meanings into reality is going to leave a bigger, dirtier stain.
Retracing his bloody footprints, the Wizard limped on.

Wilshire

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Enshoiya
  • Posts: 5935
  • One of the other conditions of possibility
    • View Profile
« Reply #71 on: November 16, 2013, 04:18:25 am »
Trisk, that is actually what I was thinking when I posted that

Curethan, what brings you to that conclusion?
I find it hard to justify the Cish's strength within the bounds of anagogic/gnostic/meta-g resoning, since it is supposedly somthing else entirely. I fail to see why emotions make for pure meaning. Emotions are poorly understood, and how often are emotions pure? In my experience emotions tend to be muddled with conflict.
Though, to be fair, extreme emotion can be very pure... But still emotions rarely come in one color at a time.
I guess I could see how extreme emotion may be as pure (as powerful) as a gnostic schoolman, and certainly more powerful than the poor anagogics, but I can't imagine an emotion so pure and untainted by other thoughts/feeling/emotions that it would be the purest of all magic.
One of the other conditions of possibility.

Cüréthañ

  • *
  • Moderator Extraordinaire
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Pendulous Fallacy
  • Posts: 772
  • Wizard IRL
    • View Profile
« Reply #72 on: November 16, 2013, 08:19:29 am »
That's just it, Wilshire.  It's the fact that the Psukhe is untainted by leveraged meaning.

Fane had no sorcerous training.  He had a spiritual shift of perspective and learned to perceive the onta although at the same time.  There was no arduous learning of methods to impose change on the physical by leveraging the meanings of the soul against metaphysical. 

Why would he even try speaking one thing and thinking another?  As a priest he still would have believed sorcery a sin.  No, his approach must have been to speak directly to the metaphysical reality as he learned to apprehend it without ever realizing that it was sorcery. 

The clarity is not important here.  In the case of anagogic magic they are using analogy - an imprecise means of description if ever there was one yet still effective.  They conjure dragon heads to start the mundane burning.  But they use two meanings angled against each other.  They emit excess 'soul power' from their eyes and mouth.  Think about why that is - the utteral depends on the soul's perception of sight (watcher) and the world's perception of speech (watched).

The Cish favour water based metaphors, as befits their cultural heritage as the water-bearers.  But they only seem to use an inutteral.  We see their soul power come from their 'third eye' and we know their power is based on how they feel the onta.  It doesn't imply emotive capacity to me, rather empathy and intuition.

For the Cish, their belief forms the bounds of their power instead of abstracted understanding.  A belief comprised of intuitive understanding.  Although their power comes from the same source, the way they wield it is what is different. 

Hmmm, a clunky analogy.  Imagine that regular sorcerers use tools and blueprints to make a bowl from shaped materials whereas a Cish forms it from clay.  The gnostic mage might form a perfectly constructed bowl, but it will always carry the mark of how it was made.  The Cish can form something equally useful that looks like it just grew from the earth.

*edited for a better analogy and addendum.

Perhaps it is better to consider how a blind person would describe a table compared to how a poet or mathematician would describe it.  The blind person would be more concerned where it is and what it feels like when you touch it or bump into it.  The poet might tell you a story about tables or compare it to other things you are familiar with.  The mathematician might use geometry or dimensions to elimate confusion.

Also, Bakker is very interested in how our perceptions clutter our understanding.  In his imagined world, where things have a presence beyond the physical, doesn't it make sense that those dislocated from the percieved world would understand true reality better.

« Last Edit: November 16, 2013, 09:19:13 am by Curethan »
Retracing his bloody footprints, the Wizard limped on.

Dûnyain novice

  • *
  • Emwama
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
« Reply #73 on: November 16, 2013, 12:00:21 pm »
If the Gnosis is some kind of logic based geometric sorcery:
Consider that within a 3 dimensional plane , you can only define a point with 1 coordinate. i.e (x). This is a 1d "object".
I think this is, more or less, what the anagogic schools use. They are limited to defining 1d sorcerery. If they want to "make" something, they can only specify 1 thing at a time. For example, something's length, or somethings height, but not both. This makes their "meaning"(purity) unclear.

With 2 points, you may define 2 points. (x, y). With this, you can now make your meaning much more clear. You can define something's length and width, or its height and length.
This is where the Gnosis is. The Mandati, and others, use the innuteral to clarify what they want more accuratly.

With an additional innuteral (the Meta-Gnosis) you can more fully describe what you want.


As a crude example: An anagogic schoolman, a gnostic schoolman, and a meta-gnostic schoolman want to summon a red cube that is 10meters long per side.
The anagogic schoolman simply says: Summon cube! He gets a transparent cube thats 1 meter long.
The Gnostic schoolman says: Summon cube, but thinks in his mind Red. He gets a red cube thats 20 meters long.
The meta-gnostic schoolman says: Summon cube, thinks Red and 10meters. He gets a red cube that is 10 meters long.

Sorry for the extraordinarily lame example, but its easier for me to think about than simply "and innuteral makes it more pure, and a 2nd makes it more purer ".

I feel like I'm mostly just rambling now so I'll shutup.


The example is fine, I think we actually agree on the "further inutterals = better specified meanings" theory regarding the Meta-Gnosis, but you put it in a clear way whereas I was constantly repeating "pure" and "purer" without making myself clear XD So I failed with my own purity of meanings right there XD

Your theory about the Anagosis though doesn't seem "right" to me...
When you say "The Mandati, and others, use the innuteral to clarify what they want more accuratly." I assume you mean the other Schools ( let's leave the Psukhe out of the equation for now ) Including the Scarlet Spires which we know for sure employ Anagogic sorcery.
Still from what I understood you theorize that the Anagosis does not use inutterals, and this is the main reason for the difference in power.
This thought never occurred to me. From the passage when Akka is teaching Kellhus:

"He explained the all-important relation between the two halves of every Cant: the inutterals, whichalways remained unspoken, and the utterals, which always were spoken."

And

"Kellhus nodded, utterly unconcerned. "And this is why the Anagogic Schools have never been able tosteal the Gnosis. Why simply reciting what they hear is useless.""There's the metaphysics to consider as well. But, yes, in all sorcery the inutterals are key."

Cit. The Thousandfold Thought by R.Scott Bakker

From this explanation I gathered that ALL "standard" sorcery ( and I mean the Schools) uses both utterals and inutterals.
And that the Gnosis is more powerful because it uses a more suitable language as well as a different phrasing of the meanings. ( plus the metaphysics part )

It's hilarious to think about how easily Kellhus must have seen through Akka's attempted deception.

Indeed XD He must have thought "Yeah, thanks for confirming my theory Akka"


The second inutteral is only used for trans-location, that we have seen.  If the meaning was pure, Serwe wouldn't be worried about detection.  If anything, uniting three meanings into reality is going to leave a bigger, dirtier stain.

When I said pure I didn't mean in a "holy" or "less blasphemous" way. What I meant was "more specific", "more detailed". Just as Wilshire explained.

I agree on the Meta-gnosis = bigger sorcery bruise though! If the bruise is associated with modifying the world with sorcery, it would make sense that using the MG and thus being able to modify the world even more deeply equals a bigger sorcery bruise.

Cüréthañ

  • *
  • Moderator Extraordinaire
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Pendulous Fallacy
  • Posts: 772
  • Wizard IRL
    • View Profile
« Reply #74 on: November 16, 2013, 12:37:08 pm »
I'm thinking of how Bakker describes the purity of Cish cants.  Why would the metaphysical detail be less important than the mundane details like colour and size?

But ... we are on slightly different tangents, I think. 
Retracing his bloody footprints, the Wizard limped on.