The Second Apocalypse

Earwa => The Aspect-Emperor => The Unholy Consult => Topic started by: Yellow on August 06, 2017, 07:13:16 pm

Title: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Yellow on August 06, 2017, 07:13:16 pm
We learn through the series that particular nasty individuals, those with the strongest wild, who have the most vile ill - intent, tend to become Ciphrang.

But not the Inchoroi? I don't buy it. By all the reasoning given, Aurang for sure, and probably *all* of the Inchoroi, fall into this category.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: The Sharmat on August 06, 2017, 07:16:51 pm
I don't think just being really evil is all it takes to be a ciphrang. We only see two, maybe three confirmed cases. And even then, being a Ciphrang isn't necessarily very fun. Gin'yursis seemed to be suffering quite profoundly even as the master of his own mini-hell.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Yellow on August 06, 2017, 07:27:52 pm
But Cnaiur would enjoy himself quite a lot, I think. Anyway, the point is that as nasty a piece of work Cnauir (or Ginyursis or any of them are)or how strong willed they are, they pale in comparison, no? Ten thousand years of hatred, of inflicting misery and pain, drenched in suffering and malice. Come on!
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: jurble on August 06, 2017, 08:05:27 pm
I don't think just being really evil is all it takes to be a ciphrang. We only see two, maybe three confirmed cases. And even then, being a Ciphrang isn't necessarily very fun. Gin'yursis seemed to be suffering quite profoundly even as the master of his own mini-hell.

Right, Gin'yursis, confirmed as Ciphrang, still talked about himself being damned.  So "better to reign in Hell than to serve in Heaven" doesn't really apply to Ciphrang.  Sure, you aren't getting eaten, but it doesn't seem pleasant.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Yellow on August 06, 2017, 08:40:37 pm
OK, I fear we're missing the point. Let me rephrase the question not as "why would they fear damnation" but rather "why wouldn't they all be Ciphrang".
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Crtha on August 06, 2017, 09:10:16 pm
It seems pretty clear that the inverse fire reveals only certain facts of individual damnation.

The JE shows both examination and redemption exist, even for shitbags like Galian.

The non-men who were exposed believe oblivion is a lie, but we have seen that even erratic can attain it.

The IF is a tool to goad it's victims, intended to enslave rather than enlighten.

Same logic would apply for ascension as Ciphrang. The progenitors who created the Ark clearly only wanted those who serve the Inverse Fire to seek one nihilistic goal, not to consider other options.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Baztek on August 06, 2017, 09:14:20 pm
Why wouldn't the Inchoroi become a part of Gierra's, or whoever is the goddess of lust, paradise?
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Woden on August 06, 2017, 09:25:51 pm
They are so fucking perverted that even in lust paradise are too hardcore for Gierra.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: The Sharmat on August 06, 2017, 11:03:15 pm
The non-men who were exposed believe oblivion is a lie, but we have seen that even erratic can attain it.
Since that's the only one we've ever seen manage it, for all we know only an erratic could attain it.

I honestly don't think we have enough information here to answer why the Inchoroi aren't ciphrang.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on August 06, 2017, 11:11:55 pm
I can't help but wonder if it's to do with Earwa's literal anthropomorphism, as in "the Gods are centered around Men".
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Crtha on August 07, 2017, 12:48:16 am
The non-men who were exposed believe oblivion is a lie, but we have seen that even erratic can attain it.
Since that's the only one we've ever seen manage it, for all we know only an erratic could attain it.

I honestly don't think we have enough information here to answer why the Inchoroi aren't ciphrang.
You are missing the point. The mechanics of avoiding damnation are not important.

We know the Inverse Fire is a tool of control. It's a compelling truth, but not the whole truth. Any Dunyain knows the value of partial truths in conditioning via deception.

The Inchoroi are conditioned to believe there is only one way to save their souls because of that. Extermination.

We know that Oblivion is an option. They deny that.

We know that Redemption can come from the one God or the Hundred. They say EVERYONE is damned forever.

We know you can level up your soul. They aren't interested.

Logical induction dictates being careful with immortality means not dying means no damnation. They would rather render themselves extinct trying to shut the world.

Maybe exterminating everyone and erasing history will work to save their souls, maybe they are doing it to free the progenitors from Hell, or maybe the progenitors just want to terraform planets.

Point is, their mission is focused to one goal only, the Inverse Fire is there to keep them on track.

Happily for them, the Dunyain want to do the same thing in pursuit of a Self Moving Soul. The Inverse Fire is barely required to get them to join according to Kellhus PoV in TTT.



Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: The Sharmat on August 07, 2017, 12:59:31 am
Eh, I'm tired of plot points that require everyone but Kellhus being a moron.

Plus I'd argue the mechanics of damnation are in fact the single most important thing in the series, so we clearly don't see eye to eye on some very basic premises. And the mechanics are kind of critical to the entire subject of this thread.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Crtha on August 07, 2017, 01:10:51 am
I merely tried to clarify my point.

You don't get it, that's fine, we'll leave it there.

edit: at any rate, it's not about Inchoroi dumb - Kellhus smart. Simply that there are important things made clear to the reader that contradict the Inchoroi perspective. Kellhus was plenty wrong too and died for it.



Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Madness on August 07, 2017, 02:05:56 am
We learn through the series that particular nasty individuals, those with the strongest wild, who have the most vile ill - intent, tend to become Ciphrang.

But not the Inchoroi? I don't buy it. By all the reasoning given, Aurang for sure, and probably *all* of the Inchoroi, fall into this category.

Inchoroi aren't from Earwa?
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: The Sharmat on August 07, 2017, 02:06:59 am
That may be important, I'd never considered that. It is apparently a special place.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Woden on August 07, 2017, 05:43:03 am
It could be. But why damn to hell all aliens? This would be a xenophobic concept of salvation/damnation, hahahaha.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: solipsisticurge on August 07, 2017, 07:57:30 am
It could be. But why damn to hell all aliens? This would be a xenophobic concept of salvation/damnation, hahahaha.
...kind of like Abraham anthropomorphic religions you might have heard of? ;)

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Wilshire on January 13, 2020, 08:45:10 pm
The non-men who were exposed believe oblivion is a lie, but we have seen that even erratic can attain it.
Since that's the only one we've ever seen manage it, for all we know only an erratic could attain it.

I honestly don't think we have enough information here to answer why the Inchoroi aren't ciphrang.
You are missing the point. The mechanics of avoiding damnation are not important.

We know the Inverse Fire is a tool of control. It's a compelling truth, but not the whole truth. Any Dunyain knows the value of partial truths in conditioning via deception.

The Inchoroi are conditioned to believe there is only one way to save their souls because of that. Extermination.

We know that Oblivion is an option. They deny that.

We know that Redemption can come from the one God or the Hundred. They say EVERYONE is damned forever.

We know you can level up your soul. They aren't interested.

Logical induction dictates being careful with immortality means not dying means no damnation. They would rather render themselves extinct trying to shut the world.

Maybe exterminating everyone and erasing history will work to save their souls, maybe they are doing it to free the progenitors from Hell, or maybe the progenitors just want to terraform planets.

Point is, their mission is focused to one goal only, the Inverse Fire is there to keep them on track.

Happily for them, the Dunyain want to do the same thing in pursuit of a Self Moving Soul. The Inverse Fire is barely required to get them to join according to Kellhus PoV in TTT.

This is pretty much the narrative I've settled on at this point. The IF is a whetstone to sharpen the tool that is the Inchoroi. Happens to work on other conscious beings as well.

Its too bad TJE never gazed upon it. I wonder what it would see. Its also too bad that this seems to be the only tool the readers are given to determine what is 'real' in Earwa.

What is or isn't reality (within a book) is ever the perennial problem of too many unreliable narrators :P .
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Odium on January 29, 2020, 12:33:10 pm
At what point did we discover that Oblivion is an option, that the Hundred and the Solitary God alike can bestow redemption, and that you can level up your soul? I recall hints about these things but not confirmation. I hadn't realized in my reading that there was much solid evidence that the Inverse Fire is just a tool of control, I thought there might be subtle indications that it could be but that the text presents it as a factual vision of damnation.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Wilshire on January 29, 2020, 02:34:40 pm
At what point did we discover that Oblivion is an option,
There's some hints early on, but its not until TAE, maybe Ishterebinth that the idea gets any real credit. Even still, since the Nonmen continue living, its still a pretty dubious claim.

that the Hundred and the Solitary God alike can bestow redemption,
Never. We dont even know the Solitary God is real, and the Hundred are never mentioned as giving redemption like when Mimara forgives via TJE. The Hundred claim dead souls, not redeem them.

and that you can level up your soul?
Unclear. Ironsoul, Cnaiur, and Kellhus, maybe Serwe, have some mentions of looking like ciphrang either through TJE or in Kellhus' case the IF. But we don't know if that is just a metaphor rather than literal, if they did something specific to 'earn' that designation, or if they weren't just "always" that way.

TJE also describes Akka and all schoolmen as similarly blasted and terrifying, in a way that is reminisant of the above examples (IIRC). So it also could be there's plenty of Ciphrang, but equally likely that its all metaphorical.

I hadn't realized in my reading that there was much solid evidence that the Inverse Fire is just a tool of control,
I wouldn't call it 'solid' ;)

I thought there might be subtle indications that it could be but that the text presents it as a factual vision of damnation.
This is the overt direction the books point us in. Just like how TJE is assumed to show objective reality.
Unfortunately we never get a look at something that is seen both through IF and TJE, so we can't really determine which is true, if either, nor see if the visions differ in some meaningful way.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on January 29, 2020, 04:07:46 pm
At what point did we discover that Oblivion is an option,
There's some hints early on, but its not until TAE, maybe Ishterebinth that the idea gets any real credit. Even still, since the Nonmen continue living, its still a pretty dubious claim.

Yeah, it is only in TAE we gets hints of it via Cleric (I think) and it is only more explicitly laid out in Chapter 12 of TGO.

that the Hundred and the Solitary God alike can bestow redemption,
Never. We dont even know the Solitary God is real, and the Hundred are never mentioned as giving redemption like when Mimara forgives via TJE. The Hundred claim dead souls, not redeem them.
Right, there is no "confirmation, per se, of redemption at all.  To me, the "closest" we see is what happens to Sorweel, but even that is ambiguous to some degree.

I hadn't realized in my reading that there was much solid evidence that the Inverse Fire is just a tool of control,
I wouldn't call it 'solid' ;)
I'd actually object to the word "just."  I don't think it is just an tool of control, it's practical application, as we see it, is a tool of control though.  What is it actually?  What is it "really" showing someone?  That is a whole other can of worms.

The "fact" of damnation is well and "open" though, but I don't, personally, believe the Inverse Fire lies at all.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on January 31, 2020, 07:27:58 am
To my recollection, the so far one and only solid confirmation of Oblivion being an option has been given to us when a Ciphrang was unable to snatch the soul of a Nonman while rampaging through the Ark. The soul just vanished, like it was never there.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: mostly.harmless on January 31, 2020, 08:51:43 am
To my recollection, the so far one and only solid confirmation of Oblivion being an option has been given to us when a Ciphrang was unable to snatch the soul of a Nonman while rampaging through the Ark. The soul just vanished, like it was never there.
Interesting, that didn't register with me! Do you remember where or a phrase that I can use to look up that scene?

Sent from my LYA-L09 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on January 31, 2020, 01:10:37 pm
Here's RSB's quote on the matter:
http://www.second-apocalypse.com/index.php?topic=2278.msg36429#msg36429

The scene itself is in TUC, in the only Ciphrang POV in the book. I'll add the quote in a bit.

Here it is:
Quote from: R. Scott Bakker, "The Unholy Consult", Chapter 15, Golgoterrath
Vile angel.
Its triumphant screech brings down a haze of dust and flaked mortar.
Kakaliol, Reaper-of-Heroes, dandles the thing in its fiery talons. Lolling limbs, head hanging as if from a stocking. Soft skin blistered or abraded or shorn away, a bladder for gelatinous innards and absurd quantities of blood, like an unwrung rag.
But where? Where is the soul?

By the way, I wonder if the boat we all might've missed is the Ark itself (a literal boat, do you see what RSB did there?). It was an advanced AI once upon a time, it might still be only mostly dead.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on January 31, 2020, 05:31:01 pm
By the way, I wonder if the boat we all might've missed is the Ark itself (a literal boat, do you see what RSB did there?). It was an advanced AI once upon a time, it might still be only mostly dead.

It might be the case.  Remember that Bakker likened the function of Insertants into the Sarcophagus as replacement "circuits."  So, if it were the case that it "always" need circuits and it "always" did what they No-God does.  You have a point though, what the Inchoroi lament seems less Ark's death (really) and more it's leadership.  So, it is probably still partly "functional" in the technical sense, but it has no "intentionality" or the like.  This might well be what the Sarcophagus was "always" for, especially when integrated into Ark.

My personal crack-pot is still that Ark was "loaded" with the souls of the Progenitors themselves to bring them and "divest" then when they had reached the "Promised World" but there is nothing to support that, aside the vague allusion of the word Ark in itself.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on January 31, 2020, 06:29:45 pm
It was always unclear to me what to make of the Progenitors. They might have devolved into what we now know as the Inchoroi, becoming slaves to their own technology. They might have created an advanced weapon in the form of the Ark and sent it on its Crusade, while they themselves remained on their home world, awaiting the results. Or the Progenitors have died off long ago, while their creations waged war against all life. Or any number of other possibilities, including the Progenitors uploading themselves into the Ark.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: mostly.harmless on January 31, 2020, 06:45:19 pm
Here's RSB's quote on the matter:
http://www.second-apocalypse.com/index.php?topic=2278.msg36429#msg36429

The scene itself is in TUC, in the only Ciphrang POV in the book. I'll add the quote in a bit.

Here it is:
Quote from: R. Scott Bakker, "The Unholy Consult", Chapter 15, Golgoterrath
Vile angel.
Its triumphant screech brings down a haze of dust and flaked mortar.
Kakaliol, Reaper-of-Heroes, dandles the thing in its fiery talons. Lolling limbs, head hanging as if from a stocking. Soft skin blistered or abraded or shorn away, a bladder for gelatinous innards and absurd quantities of blood, like an unwrung rag.
But where? Where is the soul?

By the way, I wonder if the boat we all might've missed is the Ark itself (a literal boat, do you see what RSB did there?). It was an advanced AI once upon a time, it might still be only mostly dead.
Much obliged. I can't believe I read over that or missed its significance.

It seems obvious now that that is a probable reference to the Ark ('missed the boat' response). I wouldn't wanna jump to any premature conclusions but it fits nicely on the face of it.

No life-rafts or signal flares/call home features on this boat?

Sent from my LYA-L09 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on February 03, 2020, 02:59:07 pm
No life-rafts or signal flares/call home features on this boat?

To me, there are two possible "answers" to this.

One, is that if Ark was somehow still "alive," it could.  Or, two, it never had any intention to, it was all the eggs in the basket, the Progenitors were on board, likely in soul form.

I'd tend to buy the Ark, like Noah's arc, to be more of the latter sort.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Wilshire on February 03, 2020, 03:32:21 pm
No life-rafts or signal flares/call home features on this boat?

To me, there are two possible "answers" to this.

One, is that if Ark was somehow still "alive," it could.  Or, two, it never had any intention to, it was all the eggs in the basket, the Progenitors were on board, likely in soul form.

I'd tend to buy the Ark, like Noah's arc, to be more of the latter sort.

If it had a distress signal to send out, the trouble with FTL travel is you end up with very long travel times for speed of light transmissions. Its pretty common in most scifi universes to have either FTL travel or communication, but not both. Its conceivable that a distress signal has not yet reached wherever it was sent to.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: stuslayer on May 04, 2020, 05:14:55 pm
It crosses my mind that the Ark is simply a vessel, controlled by an advanced AI, which requires a guidance system/OS (Sarcophagus with an Insertant), and every Inchoroi etc. is actually a biomech machine, soulless from the beginning. The Progenitors deceived the Inchoroi with the Inverse Fire as a goad to carry out their orders, by showing the truth of damnation - however this damnation was only applicable to the Progenitors, NOT the Inchoroi, that are like upgraded Sranc and subject to the NG themselves upon Initiation/Resumption.

Under this scenario the 'truth' of damnation is not the Inchies' truth, but they are driven to act upon it. There is no soul to damn. Perhaps this is where Kellhus' mistake originates.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Madness on May 04, 2020, 08:56:54 pm
It crosses my mind that the Ark is simply a vessel, controlled by an advanced AI, which requires a guidance system/OS (Sarcophagus with an Insertant), and every Inchoroi etc. is actually a biomech machine, soulless from the beginning. The Progenitors deceived the Inchoroi with the Inverse Fire as a goad to carry out their orders, by showing the truth of damnation - however this damnation was only applicable to the Progenitors, NOT the Inchoroi, that are like upgraded Sranc and subject to the NG themselves upon Initiation/Resumption.

I think this is very likely succinct, stuslayer :). Though, Somnambulist has always made me wonder if Shauriatas has somehow managed to co-opt "the AI" and the Mutilated with some soultech sorcery combo.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on May 05, 2020, 01:36:29 pm
Hmm, I don't know that I subscribe to that.  I think Inchoroi really are damned.  I think they really are souled.  Because what gives the soul is, in a sense, language and self-consciousness.  Sranc, on the other hand, or bashrags and the like, are conscious in a sense, have language, but they do not have the ability, for whatever reason to grasp the Dasein of spirit, that is, to Be in a way to which the question of Being has meaning.  In other words, Sranc have no ability (desire?) to question the Meaning of Being.  Therefor no soul.

This is always why some "unsouled" things can gain a soul.  If it gains some sort of language by which to form the question and can identify itself, as a self, then it can have a soul, so it can be damned.  Because at that point, it can question the nature of Being, it can ask and interrogate sorts of Is/Ought distinctions, it can modify it's behavior and isn't just what Bakker might call "a meat machine."  Therefor it bears something like what we'd call Identity, it bears something like what we would call Responsibility.  That is the Dasein of Spirit, sort of, the Being of a Soul.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Wilshire on May 05, 2020, 01:45:57 pm
It crosses my mind that the Ark is simply a vessel, controlled by an advanced AI, which requires a guidance system/OS (Sarcophagus with an Insertant), and every Inchoroi etc. is actually a biomech machine, soulless from the beginning. The Progenitors deceived the Inchoroi with the Inverse Fire as a goad to carry out their orders, by showing the truth of damnation - however this damnation was only applicable to the Progenitors, NOT the Inchoroi, that are like upgraded Sranc and subject to the NG themselves upon Initiation/Resumption.

Under this scenario the 'truth' of damnation is not the Inchies' truth, but they are driven to act upon it. There is no soul to damn. Perhaps this is where Kellhus' mistake originates.

The biggest issue with this idea, to me, is that the Inchoroi can use magic in Earwa. As far as we know, you must have a soul to use magic. Now, it could very well be that the vast majority of the Inchoroi didn't have souls. Recalling that the Onta graft had an extreme culling affect, we might assume that all those who died simply didn't have souls and so the procedure killed them off.

There are relatively few Skin-spies compared to the original number of Inchoroi. Even is it was a 1/1000, or 1/1,000,000 chance, its possible that a few hundred, or a few dozen, Inchoroi have souls.

But, unfortunately, by the time we enter the story, its a pretty moot point... Since all (both) living Inchoroi survived the Onta graft, we must assume they have souls, and therefore the IF is probably legit for them.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on May 05, 2020, 02:03:58 pm
Well, you need a soul to grasp the onta, but just having a soul doesn't guarantee that you can grasp the onta.  Basically all Nonmen and humans, presumably, have souls, yet only how many are actually the Few?

I don't think the fact that the Onta Graft killed many of them really proves much, if anything, with respect to the status of their souls.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Cyx on May 05, 2020, 11:04:24 pm
The "soul" was described by some Dunyain or other as "the confluence", a part of / activity in the brain. The Inchoroi who survived the latest Graft have human skulls inside of their mouths. That is what I understood to be the reason they are able to grasp the onta and sing sorcery. Skulls (Edit: and BRAINS lol, can't believe I forgot to include originally!) of former Few or cloned/modelled after them.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on May 06, 2020, 12:43:22 pm
The "soul" was described by some Dunyain or other as "the confluence", a part of / activity in the brain. The Inchoroi who survived the latest Graft have human skulls inside of their mouths. That is what I understood to be the reason they are able to grasp the onta and sing sorcery. Skulls (Edit: and BRAINS lol, can't believe I forgot to include originally!) of former Few or cloned/modelled after them.

Well, we don't have actual dates, but we know that the Inchoroi "birthed mouths" and could speak Ihrims during/after the First Watch.  Because what ends the First Watch is the Inchoroi sending an envoy to Viri, which could speak to Ninjanjin.

We only know of the Grafting that let the Inchoroi grasp the Onta extra-textually.  But, from what Bakker said of it, the process lead to the death of many, maybe even most, of the Inchoroi left.  Again, we don't have exact dates, but the Inchoroi didn't seem able to use sorcery themselves during the Cno-Inchoroi Wars, rather, after Pir Pahal, they used the Nonmen Aporetics to make the Chorae.

I think it is only post-war, but pre-Apocalypse, that the Inchoroi actually tried to use sorcery themselves.  One, just for the power, but two, because they likely realized that relying on the ever-increasingly erratic Nonmen probably wasn't ideal.

Also, keep in mind that having a soul is a necessary condition for being one of the Few, but not a sufficient condition to be of the Few.  You need a soul, plus the ability (seemingly inborn) to grasp the Onta.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Rots on May 08, 2020, 06:13:40 pm
IIRC - wasnt there a souled skin spy or am i totally making that up? Or was it a skin spy who was part of the mandate?

Anyway, i think the inchies must have souls otherwise this is like 8-10000 years of bullshit and totally pointless. Then again that might make RSB giggle to do that to the readers. Who knows?
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Madness on May 08, 2020, 08:06:29 pm
I have other thoughts I want to get to in this thread (but I need time and space) and I'm actually not sure that we can do more than correlate souls to the ability to exercise sorcery *but* I can see only those who survived the onta-grasping graft (six Inchoroi total) being the only ensoulled of the Inchoroi-Sranc.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Wilshire on May 08, 2020, 10:11:54 pm
From a narative perspective it makes sense to me, which is why I mentioned. Kind of a poetic justice thing - Inchoroi giving endless lives to nonmen but killing all the women, nonmen's magic grafted giving inchoroi endless power but killing most of them.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on May 11, 2020, 12:51:39 pm
IIRC - wasnt there a souled skin spy or am i totally making that up? Or was it a skin spy who was part of the mandate?

Anyway, i think the inchies must have souls otherwise this is like 8-10000 years of bullshit and totally pointless. Then again that might make RSB giggle to do that to the readers. Who knows?

Yes, there was, it is the one that replaces Simas.

Bakker even said, extratextuality that sometimes things just "gain" a soul sort of spontaneously.  Probably that skin-spy just happened to have the right combination of some strange mutation to be able to grasp the Onta and develop a soul at the same time.  One in a million, maybe even longer odds.  But odds are likely not the right way to talk about it.

I'd think the "soul" is really a particular manner of self-consciousness.  Sranc are conscious, but not self-conscious in a way that gives rise to what we would terms as soul.  And their brains aren't much"wired" in the Earwan sense, for much other than instict and impulse.

Interestingly enough, Sranc do have language though.  So, I think, in theory, Sranc could gain souls, if they really "tried."  But, realistically, a philosophical minded, self-conscious Sranc would likely be killed and eaten by the rest, right out of hand.

While we could be radical skeptics on Inchoroi souls, I don't think it makes too much sense for the Progenitors to go through all the trouble of making the Ark, making Inchoroi, setting up the Inverse Fire as a goad, only for it be a whole meta-trick, because they didn't actually give the Inchoroi any souls.  That just seems like a bad plan, since there could be a chance then that the Inchoroi realize they actually have no souls and just give up the Progenitor's mission.

From a narative perspective it amesk sense to me, which is why I mentioned. Kind of a poetic justice thing - Inchoroi giving endless lives to nonmen but killing all the women, nonmen's magic grafted giving inchoroi endless power but killing most of them.
There is a nice symmetry there.  Tekne "killed" the Nonmen, Sorcery "killed" the Inchoroi.  Not exactly, but in a sort of way.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on May 14, 2020, 11:51:51 am
Other ensouled beings looked into the Inverse Fire and their experience was very similar to that of the Inchoroi. In fact, Kellhus was the only different one in this regard.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Madness on May 14, 2020, 03:36:26 pm
Other ensouled beings looked into the Inverse Fire and their experience was very similar to that of the Inchoroi. In fact, Kellhus was the only different one in this regard.

True say. I need to write up on this - I do think (and I might be an outlier) that that one difference was due to Ajokellhus' possession (?) at the time.

EDIT: Accurate television portrayal. Convinced Murder-Bots to believe it mattered to them. Something something ;).
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on May 14, 2020, 04:16:20 pm
True say. I need to write up on this - I do think (and I might be an outlier) that that one difference was due to Ajokellhus' possession (?) at the time.

Well, I would not discount the Ajokli-confluence, but also not discount the fact that he was (seemingly) the only person in Earwan history we know of to go visit the Outside, visit The Pit, visit Hell, and come back at least somewhat sane enough to go and do anything else but rave.  Part of that is just what he managed, I think, via the Head-on-a-Pole and part of that is the fact that part of Hell came back with him (Ajokli).
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Madness on May 14, 2020, 05:16:11 pm
Most, if not all, of those journeys are Ajokli-mediated, though, right? Even in Kellhus' (!!) ignorance.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on May 15, 2020, 01:23:22 pm
Most, if not all, of those journeys are Ajokli-mediated, though, right? Even in Kellhus' (!!) ignorance.
Might go either way here, the books don't go into enough detail to be in any way certain.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on May 15, 2020, 02:11:04 pm
Most, if not all, of those journeys are Ajokli-mediated, though, right? Even in Kellhus' (!!) ignorance.
Might go either way here, the books don't go into enough detail to be in any way certain.

Well, yes.  We know there is an "Ajokli factor" to consider.  That factor could plausibly be anywhere from 0-99% (I'd discount 100%, because that is what I arbitrary mark as the head-eruption in the Golden Room, even though that is not really, in all likelyhood a "real 100%" case).

Given that though, we can only speak of the mediated, never the immediate.  So, in a sense, since everything is mediated, we can just drop it and speak of the mediated as the normative case, since the level of mediacy is never known.  So, for every post-Circumfix, pre-head-eruption case, we never have immediate Kellhus.  We can just consider all cases of Kellhus to be Ajokli-mediated Kellhus and move on, I think.

We can't have access to an immediate Kellhus, because there is none.  We could think of trying to place what we might think of as "immediate Kellhus" (that is, pre-Circumfix) in the Golden Room, but we could never know anything, really, about that possible world.  The answer, I think, is always just something like, there is no immediate Kellhus and the Akojli mediation is always a factor in unknown amounts.

I just don't really think we should consider the reverse either.  To say that Kellhus' "defiance" in the face of the Inverse Fire is 100% Ajokli, no-Kellhus.  No, if Kellhus is mediated, so is Ajokli.  Again, this is why, even in the head-eruption, I don't think we actually have a 100% immediate Ajokli.  In fact, I'd point to the fact of Kellhus seemingly "snapping-to" when little Kel shows up as proof that Ajokli was not immediate.

Again, we can play with numbers forever though, but there is no quantitative procedure here.  Honestly, there isn't even a qualitative one either.  We simply have to consider a sort of mediated case, sort of, a 2-in-1 where one can never know the exactly nature of which is in what part which (because they just are one thing, not separates mixes).
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on May 15, 2020, 04:10:48 pm
Again, we can play with numbers forever though, but there is no quantitative procedure here.  Honestly, there isn't even a qualitative one either.  We simply have to consider a sort of mediated case, sort of, a 2-in-1 where one can never know the exactly nature of which is in what part which (because they just are one thing, not separates mixes).
I would say this is going too far. Not everywhere in the world is a massively powerful topos.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: H on May 15, 2020, 04:55:15 pm
I would say this is going too far. Not everywhere in the world is a massively powerful topos.

Well, I mean in the context of what influences what though, not in the sense of Ajokli fully manifesting or the like.

So, indeed, in some places, like a Topos, Ajokli might manifest in more prevailent ways, I think the greater question that we want to ask and answer is about the relative bi-directional influence.  So, for example, when Kellhus lets little Kel live, was that decision a Kellhus-alone one, or was it partly Ajokli's influence that made he choose as such?

To that, I say that there is no answer, because there is no Kellhus-alone at that point.  The water has already been muddied and there is no clear place where Kellhus-alone ends and where Kellhus Ajokli-Influenced begins.  The "answer" is something like, there is no line of demarcation, there is no demarcation at all.  Kellhus is Ajokli tainted and there can no longer be a disentanglement of what is done with or without that taint.

To me, that is a part of the whole sort of parable of Kellhus.  He thinks the Logos sits "above" or "beyond" the Darkness, that he is truly something like Self-Moving.  The real fact is that he is still blind to his own personal Darkness, even as clearly as he sees the Darkness in others.  So, where he can move nations, proverbial mountains, and even himself from time to time, he is still a moved-mover at other times.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on May 16, 2020, 02:24:57 am
Well, I mean in the context of what influences what though, not in the sense of Ajokli fully manifesting or the like.
Ah, you meant in a more general sense. That's much more likely, yes.

Though some things can still be viewed as much more consistent with just Kellhus, since his modus operandi as seen in all the books combined corroborates them.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Cyx on May 16, 2020, 07:16:35 am
Kellhus was a prodigious sorcerer. Extremely quickly he learned to manipulate Cants in ways unknown to Akka; adding inutterals to produce effects like Translocation, his business with fire-sight, the head-swapping.  I believe that when Kellhus went to the Outside - that act of "seizing and ripping" that he did which brought him to the Hundred was not something that a non-Dunyain Daimotic sorcerer could have done.

Inversions are a known (and prohibited) Daimotic practice which allows living men to walk the halls of the dead.  The passage where Kellhus visits the Outside mentions his eyes rolling back in his head. He was alive, and to our knowledge the Gods/the Hundred have no agency.  How then could the Most Crocodillian of Sons talk to Kellhus? How could that which has no intellect produce speech?  I believe every word spoken to Kellhus by "Ajokli" was in a roundabout way spoken by Kellhus himself.  The Voice that speaks to Kellhus - his own.  The half-man (man as a God analogue), half beast (beast as a man analogue) beneath the tree - two perceived, and maybe ultimately/eventually realized to be factual-all-along aspects/facets of Kellhus himself. 

I believe he strongest evidence I can point to is in the Outside passage itself, once Kellhus has done whatever he did when he "siezed" and swapped from Hell with the Sons to Heaven with the Other Sons (which were definitely supposed to be the Gods), he notes the place is "where he has always waited, always watched". That can only make sense if he has always been there, right?

Look to the evident fate of Malowebi; he is fully conscious within his Decapitant prison.  Which leads me to the Decapitants themselves. Unfortunately I've lost a lot of the details surrounding them and it's been a while since my last re-read but Malowebi's companion Decapitant definitely looked like Ajokli. The only way I could make sense of that (and like almost everything else I've written here admittedly its quite a stretch) is that this head WAS Ajokli's head and that taking it (or summoning it? whatever the mechanic) was part of the pact Kellhus made with the Pit.

At the end of the day I think Kellhus has either himself orchestrated and enacted a plan - OR he realized that the Ground has already been conditioned thus by another,  he has learned (some portion) of this conditioning and seemingly assumed his role in it (whether in truth or for show) - to specifically attain Hundredhood.

I think that Ajokli is a NEW God and that in this series we saw its birth. Ajokli is the 100th Hundred, the 100th Stone; even though "Ajokli was always there" due to the way the Gods work, he actually was not really there at all for pretty much the entirety of this series, he was as the concealed Chorae in TUC - hidden, a non-factor that remained so only until it was no longer a non-factor. 

I don't know that it actually makes sense and I'm sure there's plenty that contradicts much or all of this, but this makes the MOST sense to me so far after a few casual re-reads:

1. There are actually only 99 "Hundred"; at least, there is no such thing as Ajokli YET, but because of the nature of the Outside's timey-whimey-ness Ajokli "exists" throughout the series ONLY because of what will happen later on.

2. Cnaiur really fucking hates Kellhus. He fucking HATES in general! He had unquestionably been conditioned to hate, going way back to papa Moe. He had been conditioned to kill; he amassed more souls (Swazond) than anybody else ever has. He is the most violent of all men, the reaper of hundreds, possibly thousands of souls. He was conditioned to be a walking Topos, a proper womb for gestating a God of hatred. On Golgotterath Ajokli is born of Cnaiur and on Golgotterath Ajokli dies as Cnaiur strides into in the Whirlwind and into oblivion. In effect, Ajokli V1 / Ajokli-pre-Kellhus, despite being an eternal being due to the nature of the Outside, only actually existed for a fraction of a day.

3. The Outside is weird as shit. When Kellhus "went to the Outside" on his Inversion trip he found he had already been there before. We as readers are like "Oh, okay of course, that makes sense, that's because the Gods are timeless so they would have naturally been here the whole time so yeah, they'd respond like that". However, we have to note that similarly to the White Luck Warrior, one predetermined Cause - even thousands upon thousands of cooperating "fortuitous correspondences of cause", do not guarantee an expected Effect if you do not have ALL of the information... and...
 
4. The Ajokli/Crocodillian Son that Kellhus meets in the Outside, uknown to us at the time of introduction, is much like the 2nd iteration of the White Luck Warrior - this was actually the Ajokli who exists AFTER the Golden Room; it is Greater Kellhus, which is the reason it had agency, spoke and was willing to "make a Pact" with Lesser Kellhus. The Trickster God tricked his mortal self into killing himself, so that, he himself, could become a God.

5. So if Kellhus is Ajokli, how did he take Ajokli's head from the Outside, and where is Lesser Kellhus now?  Don't know the mechanics but my assumption is that the head on Kellhus' neck belongs to Lesser Kellhus.  Lesser Kellhus' head is salt. That puts Greater Kellhus within the dangling Decapitant bearing Ajokli's visage, and I imagine THIS fact being the exact thing that is/would be/has been preserving his agency Outside and therefore it is this that allowed him to communicate with Lesser Kellhus in the first place. The Topos of the Golden Room is surely a factor.  I do NOT believe Lesser Kellhus knew what was going on at the point when Kelmomas popped in and "short-circuited Ajokli", but I do suspect the Greater Kellhus knew and had even planned for it.  I believe he kept Kelmomas alive intentionally and I certainly do not believe he did so for the sole benefit of Esmenet's feelings or fear of her reaction, much less his own guilt/sadness.

6. Seen some recent posts about Angeshrael and the Inchoroi and the Tusk. I saw that folks believe it was Aurang who appeared to Angeshrael and convinced him to bow his head into the fire. I do not discount this as the most likely possibility but do want to note, Kellhus became familiar with such scriptures. If anybody - especially a timeless entity with some semblance of agency and familiarity with fire-scrying magics - was going to be able to deduce when and where this Angeshrael dude had dipped his head into a fire and arrange some shit to enable his eventual ascension to godhood, it would most def be Greater Kellhus. Angeshrael was a prophet, his woman's name was Esmenet and he sacrificed his youngest son.  The similarities/links to Kellhus are glaring like a fire that your face is bowed into!   ;) As we know, the events concerning the Eanna tribes and the Tusk must happen in order for what we see in the stories to occur.  I'm wary of my susceptibility to fall into the "Kellhus is infallible" trap, just wanting to throw out the possibility of someone/something other than just Inchoroi/Consult schemes at work there.

7. I just gotta say. Y'all be accepting Aurang's death too easy. Bros, this was the first and only Inchoroi we witnessed utilizing Synthese. Projecting your mind (soul) into something else.  This Tekne-sorcerous (is Tekne involved?) ability, it may be a result of or have contributed to the creation of Shae's "soul-bouncing" damnation-evasion technique. I do not for a second believe that Aurang or ANY Inchoroi would be like "Oh, sweet spell Shae!" and NOT immediately do the saaaaame exact shit to ensure they do not suffer eternal damnation.  What kind of a fool would Aurang have to be to go out into battle - especially with Kellhus - without taking this immediately-necessary-as-soon-as-confirmed-possible precaution?  Does Shae need to hog all the Mutilated to himself, and/or is there REALLY nothing else available for 'Rang to bounce around in? C'mon now. I'm utterly disappointed if Aurang is truly gone. Maybe he'll have hitched a ride on his bro a'la Kelmomas and Samarmas. Twins are such a huge huge theme BTW.  Not surprised one of Mimara's babies didn't survive. I suppose it's possible Kellhus had a twin that died and we just weren't made aware of the fact - that would be pretty interesting considering the implications of what I've posited to be "his" (Greater Kellhus) voice.  Kellhus' version of Samarmas?  Didn't Kellhus confirm or at least at some point allude to the fact that he was aware that Kelmomas heard his brother's voice in his head, and even that Kelmomas wasn't able to tell who was who?  HA!!!! Quite fitting coming from Kellhus given what we (presume to) know about his "solidity of self" during the latter parts of the series!

Where the Progenitors/Inchoroi/Ark/Inverse Fire come into play? The Nonmen creation myth? Lol. Man do I wish I had good theories.  I feel like either the No-God or the creation of Ajokli, or both, are either the cause of the Shattering of The God, or inevitable effects of the Shattering, or both... and they may each still play a role in the reconciliation of The God; whatever that may mean for the poor, poor souls of Earwa in the end!
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on May 16, 2020, 01:45:12 pm
He was alive, and to our knowledge the Gods/the Hundred have no agency.
What do you mean? This confuses me. To our knowledge, the Gods have plenty of agency, as expressed by both Ajokli and Yatwer, and also possibly Gilgaol.

How could that which has no intellect produce speech?
This is also a part that I simply don't get. The Gods are portrayed as possessing intellect. Sure, it's a different type of intellect considering its atemporal nature, but intellect nonetheless.

Additionally, at least the Aurang thing is quite easy to believe. To use a Synthese he needed his real body, which was exactly what was destroyed by Kellhus. And what Shae does to remain alive is a double-edged sword. Part of his soul is essentially already suffering eternally in hell. Achamian explains it at some point, I think in the Great Ordeal, but I'm not certain.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Cyx on May 16, 2020, 03:02:36 pm
Quote from: SmilerLoki
What do you mean? This confuses me. To our knowledge, the Gods have plenty of agency, as expressed by both Ajokli and Yatwer, and also possibly Gilgaol.

I might ask the same, what do you mean? What are you attributing/designating to be a conscious action that Ajokli/Yatwer/Gilgaol took?  For example, I don't think "Yatwer selects White Luck Warriors" - a WLW simply emerges and "Yatwer" "intuits it" like a rock intuits that it is in open air, under water, or covered in mud. If nothing else I believe their lack of agency is textually supported by both Kellhus and the Mutilated. My take is, without actual living people to attribute actions/events as "Yatwer is acting through these actions/events" (like whoever-WLW1 was, Pstama, Sorweel) there is no presence of Yatwer to speak of whatsoever.


Quote from: SmilerLoki
This is also a part that I simply don't get. The Gods are portrayed as possessing intellect. Sure, it's a different type of intellect considering its atemporal nature, but intellect nonetheless.

But we're shared only perspectives of living Earwans who are attributing the things they experience to these "Gods". Portrayed where and how? We're never given a God's perspective nor privy to any internal thoughts or any discussions between the Hundred.

Quote from: SmilerLoki
Additionally, at least the Aurang thing is quite easy to believe. To use a Synthese he needed his real body, which was exactly what was destroyed by Kellhus. And what Shae does to remain alive is a double-edged sword. Part of his soul is essentially already suffering eternally in hell. Achamian explains it at some point, I think in the Great Ordeal, but I'm not certain.

I get that a Synthese requires a body, I meant that whatever Shae does to circumvent his own damnation, it makes very little sense for the remaining Inchoroi and/or Consult sorcerers not to do the same. "Double edged sword" as it may be, who cares? I thought that the Consult would do ANYTHING to prevent eternal damnation because nothing could possibly be worse.  Why should Aurang and Aurax, as sorcerers, not take the same "way out"?  If Inchoroi have souls, they have the exact same stakes in the game as Shae, and if that is the case, if HE is willing to be partially already suffering eternally in hell, what logical reason do the rest of the Consult have to say "that is not worth it to me"?
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on May 16, 2020, 03:35:32 pm
I might ask the same, what do you mean? What are you attributing/designating to be a conscious action that Ajokli/Yatwer/Gilgaol took?  For example, I don't think "Yatwer selects White Luck Warriors" - a WLW simply emerges and "Yatwer" "intuits it" like a rock intuits that it is in open air, under water, or covered in mud. If nothing else I believe their lack of agency is textually supported by both Kellhus and the Mutilated. My take is, without actual living people to attribute actions/events as "Yatwer is acting through these actions/events" (like whoever-WLW1 was, Pstama, Sorweel) there is no presence of Yatwer to speak of whatsoever.
Intuition is agency, but it's even more complicated than that. WLW's emergence is an act attributed and later supported by the entity Yatwer, its emergence required juice (as every act of the Gods does, I can get you RSB's quote on the matter), its emergence was later alluded to when Sorweel started slipping into his own possession (which is essentially Yatwer "speaking" to him), etc. On the level of the characters, who are intelligent and possess agency by default since they are the starting point of this discussion, this is an intelligent act of an entity that possesses agency.

The Gods act of their own volition, pursuing their own goals. For all intents and purposes that's agency. Saying that it's just the appearance of agency is a philosophical zombie argument, which is embodied by the No-God in TSA, not the Gods.

I get that a Synthese requires a body, I meant that whatever Shae does to circumvent his own damnation, it makes very little sense for the remaining Inchoroi and/or Consult sorcerers not to do the same. "Double edged sword" as it may be, who cares? I thought that the Consult would do ANYTHING to prevent eternal damnation because nothing could possibly be worse.  Why should Aurang and Aurax, as sorcerers, not take the same "way out"?  If Inchoroi have souls, they have the exact same stakes in the game as Shae, and if that is the case, if HE is willing to be partially already suffering eternally in hell, what logical reason do the rest of the Consult have to say "that is not worth it to me"?
You misunderstood me. Shae does not escape damnation by using his circle of wretches. He is, in part, already damned and suffering. That's why he's the only one who undertook this transformation. Others didn't want to condemn parts of themselves to hell, they were looking for a better solution. Shae was a Man, he had no choice when his body started to expire, but Erratics and Aurang are immortal.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Wilshire on May 16, 2020, 10:10:25 pm
FWIW, I think that's a pretty great interpretation of things so far Cyx. It accounts for and/or explaines a lot of things while still reamining within the bounds of the story (from a meta/themantic perspective). It does put Kellhus at the top of the pile, which I dislike, put you've managed to do so without making it seem cheap (like the theories about Moenghus Sr. still being around abd doing everything from behind the scenes). Nice catch with Angeshrael/Kellhus btw - this sounds like something that has been pointed out before but its so easy to forget.

Aurang is still dead though ;). Call it his Moenghus Moment - Bakker just loves his anti-climaxes. If you're going to consider Kellhus alive and "winning", then you gotta at least let the Old Consult (Inchoroi and Shae) be dead.

Yes, Kellhus knew Kelmomas was hearing voices. I kind of suspect this is something to do with the Dunyain, as wrestling with the darkness/voices/hunger is a key part of the training we see. Its definitely presented as metaphorical, a way to anthropomorphize our hungers etc., but it could also be taken quite literally given the events of TAE.

I too wish we got more from proginators/IF/etc. in TUC. Really thought there was going to be some more exposition on metaphyics and backgrounds of our mysterious antagonists. Alas, at least there are supposed to be more books.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Cyx on May 16, 2020, 11:32:37 pm
Intuition is agency, but it's even more complicated than that. WLW's emergence is an act attributed and later supported by the entity Yatwer, its emergence required juice (as every act of the Gods does, I can get you RSB's quote on the matter), its emergence was later alluded to when Sorweel started slipping into his own possession (which is essentially Yatwer "speaking" to him), etc. On the level of the characters, who are intelligent and possess agency by default since they are the starting point of this discussion, this is an intelligent act of an entity that possesses agency.

I'm sure much of the issue is likely due to me not being educated enough on mind-stuffs to properly understand.

The Gods act of their own volition, pursuing their own goals. For all intents and purposes that's agency. Saying that it's just the appearance of agency is a philosophical zombie argument, which is embodied by the No-God in TSA, not the Gods.

But DO they act, have will and volition? Or are actions attributed to them and will and volition assumed/anthropomorphized?

I'm familiar with a philosophical zombie argument and I would agree it could be said that I was positing one IF at any point there was objective evidence provided of one of the Hundred (discounting Crocodillian Son) demonstrating consciousness via saying, thinking, or doing something and I were claiming "no, that just LOOKS exactly like they are saying, thinking, or doing something"...  but that's not what I'm trying to say, though I may not be smart enough to explain what I see as the difference... so for example, when Sorweel is with the slave that makes Yatwer's face in the mud and the mouth starts bubbling, could or would bubbles have came up no matter who had pressed their fingers rather than a slave (slaves being known to be loved by Yatwer)?  If some random kid had poked the same spot of mud with a stick rather than making a Yatwer face, might bubbles still have frothed up?  Madness is described by Akka as the outside leaking in, and that squares up well with what happens to a WLW, they "see" from an Outside perspective.  The Outside leaking into Sorweel doesn't necessarily mean that an entity/agency Yatwer chose to do this to him and took action, it could be entirely circumstance.  Saying "that was an Act of Yatwer" seems almost like the opposite of a p-zombie argument, doing so is potentialy anthropomorphizing & attributing consciousness and an action to what may essentially be a primal aspect of nature (Birth, fertility et al) simply due to associations (the slave, the face) VS. what an actual p-zombie argument is, positing non-consciousness in something that is explicitly demonstrating what equates to evidence of consciousness where there's no way to tell the difference.

To be clear I do mean that when our reference point is a soulled person who is seeing or hearing what they believe to be a God, what they are seeing and hearing etc. doesn't necessarily represent the truth.  Obviously we aren't provided any perspective from the Hundred; rightly so if they are NOT conscious; sneaky of Bakker if they are.  In the Outside scene we are given evidence of only one of the Gods speaking to Kellhus - Ajokli - despite him noting the presence of additional Gods/Other Sons.

You misunderstood me. Shae does not escape damnation by using his circle of wretches. He is, in part, already damned and suffering. That's why he's the only one who undertook this transformation. Others didn't want to condemn parts of themselves to hell, they were looking for a better solution. Shae was a Man, he had no choice when his body started to expire, but Erratics and Aurang are immortal.

That's true and a good point that I don't think registered with me, as immortals without immediate threat to their physical bodies the Inchoroi would have the time needed to find something better than Shae's soul trap.   That makes sense!

FWIW, I think that's a pretty great interpretation of things so far Cyx.

Thank you!

Aurang is still dead though ;). Call it his Moenghus Moment - Bakker just loves his anti-climaxes. If you're going to consider Kellhus alive and "winning", then you gotta at least let the Old Consult (Inchoroi and Shae) be dead.

I think you and Loki are possibly or probably correct about Aurang... but let Shae be dead?  :o Oh hell no! I'm in the Shae is residing in the Mutilated camp 100%.

I too wish we got more from proginators/IF/etc. in TUC. Really thought there was going to be some more exposition on metaphyics and backgrounds of our mysterious antagonists. Alas, at least there are supposed to be more books.

Sure hope so.  ;D Until then it's always fun to read and join in on the discussions here!
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on May 17, 2020, 06:34:34 am
@Cyx
Now I see your lines of thinking better. And you certainly shouldn't be worrying about not being educated enough or the like! This stuff is not rocket science (also, rocket science is not rocket science).

But so, there is a number of weaknesses in your arguments, and the most obvious ones are extratextual. For example, if we consider the way Bakker himself talks about the Gods, he ascribes them agency by default:
http://www.second-apocalypse.com/index.php?topic=2278.msg36488#msg36488

Of course, it's not only that:
Madness is described by Akka as the outside leaking in, and that squares up well with what happens to a WLW, they "see" from an Outside perspective.
Here, you confuse definitions. What Akka means by madness is what we mean by madness - acting irrationally, without grounds, with little to no correlation with reality. A human condition.

What's happening with WLW is much more than that. He possesses real power, that has him acting completely rationally and allows for feats way beyond human capacity (like correctly seeing the future and besting Maithanet). He is not mad, he demonstrates agency. Later, we even find out that this agency is not his own, since nothing in his previous life would suggest that he is completely focused on killing Kellhus by using a power that can't be explained and, in fact, is never attributed to agencies of the Inside. Rather, the person that WLW had been before at some point ceased to exist, changed (was displaced) instantly and completely.

Essentially, the Outside leaking in and leading to madness doesn't turn agencies of the Inside into agencies of the Outside. To be of the Outside, completely atemporal, you need to die first.

Another weakness of your argument is the Ciphrang. They talk, they act, they have their own agendas and desires. And what they are is essentially Gods-lite - Outside agencies of a smaller caliber. We even get a Ciphrang POV in TUC.

Next weakness would be the Dunyain (be it Kellhus or the Mutilated) ascribing agency to the Gods. Their "intuit" comments don't mean lack of agency, they describe, the way I understand it, the difference between temporal and atemporal perspectives.

A person living in Earwa (in the Inside) thinks, reasons - they see time happening moment by moment. They watch events unfold gradually, being connected to each other, influenced by a variety of forces, etc. This leads to logic, categorization, theoretical models, you name it. But most importantly it means that knowledge is always emerging, it can change, it can be gained, it can even be lost. There is never anyone in the Inside who possesses total knowledge of anything. New data changes conclusions, leads to other theories, different acts and views.

Now compare and contrast the Outside perspective. An Outside agency is total in itself, it possesses complete knowledge of itself and its acts. Those are done, they were always done, they will be always done. There is no need for logic or reason, an Outside agency "knows" what it must do, because it has already done it, this knowledge is implicit, a kind of intuition. This is how the Gods act and see the world. But what's important to note here is, while each Outside agency is total in itself, it's not absolute. They have limits, they are bound by their own nature, and they compete among themselves. This competition (atemporal, already done in its entirety, always done in its entirety) is one of the things that define the Outside and its agencies - the God is fractured, broken into a thousand pieces.

Now, here I must note that there is a variety of issues with what I describe above in relation to how it's used in TSA. I do at least attempt to wrap my head around spacetime physics and math, and it very well might be that my understanding of this field exceeds Bakker's. Or he had a very bright idea that goes over my head, that's a distinct possibility, too. The end result is, I simply can't tell whether it's me not understanding Bakker or Bakker not working out the atemporal nature of the Outside to the point of me not seeing flaws in the concept. So I can only operate with my understanding in these matters.

Back on track, though. Another example of the Gods expressing agency would be Gilgaol giving Anasurimbor Celmomas the Celmomian Prophecy. Which is a real prophecy that Celmomas couldn't have spontaneously concocted at the moment of his death.

Then you can remember the Nonmen of Ishterebinth being afraid of Sorweel. They see him being marked by Yatwer and are scared of her infiltrating their sanctum so easily. It's not them being delusional, it's them seeing the signs of power wielded with agenda, in an unprecedented way. They see agency.

Saying "that was an Act of Yatwer" seems almost like the opposite of a p-zombie argument, doing so is potentialy anthropomorphizing & attributing consciousness and an action to what may essentially be a primal aspect of nature (Birth, fertility et al)
The weakness of this argument is in the fact that from that moment on Sorweel is protected from the scrutiny of Kellhus and his half-Dunyain children by means that do not occur naturally and are time and again ascribed to strictly Outside agencies, the Gods. This power is never attributed to agencies of the Inside.

Following your argument further, denying that it was an act of Yatwer means it was done by the slave. Which, in turn, means that the Gods simply do not exist beyond the categorization of this new power. But this contradicts everything everyone who at any point wields a power like this says. Their collective experience is, the power was granted by a God (they even agree on what their respective God is, to an extremely coherent extent). This kind of corroboration simply can't be refuted. Sure, anything can be anything, but here, there is no reason to consider every character wrong.

That being said, I completely agree that the Gods are anthropomorphized. In fact, they are anthropomorphized by the narrative so deliberately and blatantly that I can only conclude that this is the intended perception telling the reader that yes, in the context of TSA the Gods are anthropomorphic. It shouldn't come as a surprise, though, since Bakker wanted to have arbitrary (but absolutely enforced) anthropomorphic morality in the series.

Obviously we aren't provided any perspective from the Hundred; rightly so if they are NOT conscious; sneaky of Bakker if they are.
Lastly, here are a few more Bakker quotes:
http://www.second-apocalypse.com/index.php?topic=1755.msg27801#msg27801

Note how he describes the No-God as a perfectly nonconscious god. This is in contrast with the Hundred, and that contrast is represented by the way the No-God acts every time we see it. It is a p-zombie, it expresses agency without being conscious (and likely without truly being an agency, even, though that's a topic for another discussion), and this is where its odd properties originate. Since it has no connection to the Outside, the Gods can't see it, for them, it doesn't exist. But it also means that it cannot see itself - hence its litany of questions (WHAT DO YOU SEE? WHAT AM I?).

All of this stems from the No-God being nonconscious. None of the Gods act in such a way.

In conclusion I would also say that we are given the perspective of the Gods, in part. The White Luck itself is a fraction of Yatwer's perspective (a fragment of a tapestry that she is). It's always the same, centered on the same result, even though it's expressed through two different hosts - the first WLW and Sorweel. I don't think there is any question that Sorweel-as-WLW is not Sorweel as we had seen him before.
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: Cyx on May 17, 2020, 07:14:05 pm
@Cyx
Now I see your lines of thinking better. And you certainly shouldn't be worrying about not being educated enough or the like! This stuff is not rocket science (also, rocket science is not rocket science).
But so, there is a number of weaknesses in your arguments, and the most obvious ones are extratextual.

Thanks! Let me preface my continuation of this discussion by acknowledging right here and now that I don't actually expect that I have or necessarily ever will be able to understand or solve the series or its metaphysics. Talking about it however is such great fun and even a great learning experience, so I want to bounce my thoughts back based on your replies.   

For example, if we consider the way Bakker himself talks about the Gods, he ascribes them agency by default:
http://www.second-apocalypse.com/index.php?topic=2278.msg36488#msg36488

(Likaro's question) 2. Are Ajokli and the Gods still completely unaware of things with the Consult/No-God? Doesn't Ajokli have enough information now to infer that there are things that he cannot see ? I mean he was briefly right there interacting with the DunSult so he has to have some clue about whats going on. Or the God's just not reason that way?

(Bakker's answer) 2) Thinking from an atemporal POV gives me a headache. Ajokli 'knows' (whatever this means from an eternal POV), but it takes juice, divine intervention, steering the space-time continuum this way and that, and the No-God has begun gnawing at the joists between the temporal and eternal.

This was more or less a yes or no question, and the answer starts off "sure he knows in whatever way Gods know" (so, yes) and then he trails off into a "but" (?) which gets into the juice comment you had mentioned to me before... I guess I think the simplest interpretation would be that Bakker is saying Ajokli knows in his way of knowing but due to Resumption his capacity to know (and/or exist) is diminished or diminishing.

Just for shits and giggles I'll add that if my Ajokli-Kellhus crackpot is true this question would've put RSB in a shitty position to attempt to answer since Ajokli2 would indeed know and have always known, but Ajokli1 never would never have nor necessarily could have.

Here, you confuse definitions. What Akka means by madness is what we mean by madness - acting irrationally, without grounds, with little to no correlation with reality. A human condition.

What's happening with WLW is much more than that. He possesses real power, that has him acting completely rationally and allows for feats way beyond human capacity (like correctly seeing the future and besting Maithanet). He is not mad, he demonstrates agency. Later, we even find out that this agency is not his own, since nothing in his previous life would suggest that he is completely focused on killing Kellhus by using a power that can't be explained and, in fact, is never attributed to agencies of the Inside. Rather, the person that WLW had been before at some point ceased to exist, changed (was displaced) instantly and completely.

Essentially, the Outside leaking in and leading to madness doesn't turn agencies of the Inside into agencies of the Outside. To be of the Outside, completely atemporal, you need to die first.

Another weakness of your argument is the Ciphrang. They talk, they act, they have their own agendas and desires. And what they are is essentially Gods-lite - Outside agencies of a smaller caliber. We even get a Ciphrang POV in TUC.

You make very, very good points!

I see your point regarding the definitions of madness but hasn't Kellhus' own sanity been called into question time and again due to his Ajokli-possession on this and various other media? Yet I can't recall a situation in which Kell truly acts illogically or as if he's what we would describe as insane...

"Each man, he explained, was a kind of hole in existence, a point where the Outside penetrated the world. He tapped one of the beads with his finger. It broke, staining the surrounding parchment. When the trials of the world broke men, he explained, the Outside leaked into the world."

If we take the above statement literally there seemingly could be quite significant implications regarding the Outside and it's "spheres of influence" or whatever they're called if we then consider the possibility that a sufficient "amount of Outside leaked into" Cnaiur('s mind) during his lifetime to allow him/his immense hatred and rage to form a large enough bubble in the Outside to manifest as a new God, where with less madness/Outside it would have manifested some smaller level of Ciphrang.

On Ciphrang themselves, you again made great and largely irrefutable points!  I'd like to share that I thus far have believed the Outside is some type of a mindspace that does nothing more than reflect experiences of those who live/have lived/will live on the Inward. Even discarding that consideration, in some way everyone is actually always "of the Outside" to some degree and due to it's atemporal nature you need not die "first" as indeed the concept of "first" makes no sense in the context of the Outside.

In my headcanon of mindspace-Outside, a Ciphrang was a representation or echo of someone's acts/experiences in life, so a Ciphrang-in-itself would have no form nor capacity to think, and is "provided" or forced into both by the Daimos/summoner... unfortunately for me that doesn't jive too well with the fact that when Kellhus is in the Outside at least one Ciphrang speaks to him. 

I suppose for the sake of discussion I might suggest it's possible that this since (if) this scene was occuring entirely within Kellhus' own mind the Ciphrang's speech may be reflected/provided by his very own thoughts (similarly that may be the case with summoners & Ciphrang).  I'm not convinced, but I posit the possibility. 

Next weakness would be the Dunyain (be it Kellhus or the Mutilated) ascribing agency to the Gods. Their "intuit" comments don't mean lack of agency, they describe, the way I understand it, the difference between temporal and atemporal perspectives.

A person living in Earwa (in the Inside) thinks, reasons - they see time happening moment by moment. They watch events unfold gradually, being connected to each other, influenced by a variety of forces, etc. This leads to logic, categorization, theoretical models, you name it. But most importantly it means that knowledge is always emerging, it can change, it can be gained, it can even be lost. There is never anyone in the Inside who possesses total knowledge of anything. New data changes conclusions, leads to other theories, different acts and views.

Now compare and contrast the Outside perspective. An Outside agency is total in itself, it possesses complete knowledge of itself and its acts. Those are done, they were always done, they will be always done. There is no need for logic or reason, an Outside agency "knows" what it must do, because it has already done it, this knowledge is implicit, a kind of intuition. This is how the Gods act and see the world. But what's important to note here is, while each Outside agency is total in itself, it's not absolute. They have limits, they are bound by their own nature, and they compete among themselves. This competition (atemporal, already done in its entirety, always done in its entirety) is one of the things that define the Outside and its agencies - the God is fractured, broken into a thousand pieces.

Now, here I must note that there is a variety of issues with what I describe above in relation to how it's used in TSA. I do at least attempt to wrap my head around spacetime physics and math, and it very well might be that my understanding of this field exceeds Bakker's. Or he had a very bright idea that goes over my head, that's a distinct possibility, too. The end result is, I simply can't tell whether it's me not understanding Bakker or Bakker not working out the atemporal nature of the Outside to the point of me not seeing flaws in the concept. So I can only operate with my understanding in these matters.

I think I follow you, as you noted it kinda becomes rather hard to understand and discuss.  Most importantly: "There is never anyone in the Inside who possesses total knowledge of anything. New data changes conclusions, leads to other theories, different acts and views."

As we know, it's actually somewhat the same for Outside - it can be changed, re-written. Retrofitted if you will lol.
So in truth, the tapestry is not, as we imagine the Gods might perceive it "complete" - and that makes complete sense if (perhaps - only if?) the Outside is indeed generated by/reflective of the Inside.

Back on track, though. Another example of the Gods expressing agency would be Gilgaol giving Anasurimbor Celmomas the Celmomian Prophecy. Which is a real prophecy that Celmomas couldn't have spontaneously concocted at the moment of his death.

I agree, the Prophecy is definitely something! To try to turn it into something that supports my crackpot though, isn't or wasn't there some confusion or potential for the God giving this prophecy to actually be AJOKLI? 

Then you can remember the Nonmen of Ishterebinth being afraid of Sorweel. They see him being marked by Yatwer and are scared of her infiltrating their sanctum so easily. It's not them being delusional, it's them seeing the signs of power wielded with agenda, in an unprecedented way. They see agency.

I do recall this but would note that Sorweel is only there because of K - meaning the power is there as you say, and the power itself is associated with/attributed to Yatwer, but the actual agency arranging/placing it there need not necessarily be ultimately associated/attributed to Yatwer.

The Nonmen would have had no way to see, or reason to suspect, some super-high-level-Ajokli V2/Kellhus-manipulation of circumstances, so they'd naturally only be able to recognize what is recognizable to them (so to speak) and Yatwer would be the obvious assumption/enemy/threat/fear from their perspective.

The weakness of this argument is in the fact that from that moment on Sorweel is protected from the scrutiny of Kellhus and his half-Dunyain children by means that do not occur naturally and are time and again ascribed to strictly Outside agencies, the Gods. This power is never attributed to agencies of the Inside.

Following your argument further, denying that it was an act of Yatwer means it was done by the slave. Which, in turn, means that the Gods simply do not exist beyond the categorization of this new power. But this contradicts everything everyone who at any point wields a power like this says. Their collective experience is, the power was granted by a God (they even agree on what their respective God is, to an extremely coherent extent). This kind of corroboration simply can't be refuted. Sure, anything can be anything, but here, there is no reason to consider every character wrong.

Ugh, I hate that my argument/theory keeps needing to resort to this type of reasoning, but I still feel I have to say it... DOES Kellhus not calling Sorweel out have to NECESSARILY mean "he was protected from Kellhus' scrutiny" (that Kellhus couldn't see it)?  Couldn't it be the case that Kellhus did in fact recognize "the Yatwer"/WLW in Sorweel, and chose to let the course of events flow because they needed to for "his"/Ajokli's ultimate purposes?

That being said, I completely agree that the Gods are anthropomorphized. In fact, they are anthropomorphized by the narrative so deliberately and blatantly that I can only conclude that this is the intended perception telling the reader that yes, in the context of TSA the Gods are anthropomorphic. It shouldn't come as a surprise, though, since Bakker wanted to have arbitrary (but absolutely enforced) anthropomorphic morality in the series

Note how he describes the No-God as a perfectly nonconscious god. This is in contrast with the Hundred, and that contrast is represented by the way the No-God acts every time we see it. It is a p-zombie, it expresses agency without being conscious (and likely without truly being an agency, even, though that's a topic for another discussion), and this is where its odd properties originate. Since it has no connection to the Outside, the Gods can't see it, for them, it doesn't exist. But it also means that it cannot see itself - hence its litany of questions (WHAT DO YOU SEE? WHAT AM I?).

Its all too clear that the people of Earwa perceive their Gods the way that they do but like real life religions, massive number of believers doesn't necessarily equal reality. They may have it completely wrong.  But on the flip-side of that, the truth of Anthropomorphized Gods in Earwa may be specifically DUE to collective beliefs/thoughts/experiences; and I suspect this truth (& the Outside in general) may ultimately be malleable.

All of this stems from the No-God being nonconscious. None of the Gods act in such a way.

I think I understand the idea that the Gods exist, see all, and therefore ask nothing vs. TNG exists, sees nothing, and therefore asks all.

I guess my issue lies in the fact that we can't claim to actually know what "way the Gods act" because in the story we are provided no more than interpretations and assumptions by mere Men/Nonmen/Inchoroi.  (I almost suspect Bakker would say his goal was to confuse me with this... LOL)

In conclusion I would also say that we are given the perspective of the Gods, in part. The White Luck itself is a fraction of Yatwer's perspective (a fragment of a tapestry that she is). It's always the same, centered on the same result, even though it's expressed through two different hosts - the first WLW and Sorweel. I don't think there is any question that Sorweel-as-WLW is not Sorweel as we had seen him before.

You're right that Sorweel is definitely not the same as we had seen before but that is true for all Men all the time. Sorweel was probably going to live some uneventful life, a princeling who would live then die and not do much of metaphysical significance... but his circumstances changed drastically, of course he was not as we had seen him before. Even without being able to see time the way he did he may have done the same exact things, I actually see little reason to believe that he would or could have ever done differently; how could he not (whether or not he understood it at the time) take up the charge to be Yatwer's warrior and to allow himself to be "hidden" given the circumstances he was paced in. What would the alternate option be? Torture and death? SMH, I definitely need to do another re-read because I can't recall the specifics around Sorweel as much as I'd like right now.

Thank you again for the feedback!  I openly acknowledge my ignorance and the unlikelihood that I will ever attain the level of understanding of the events in these books that you and many others around here have.  I just absolutely love these books and the way they get my mind working, and I love them more and more when I read the discussions on this forum and am able to gain insight and alternate opinions and perspectives from other readers like yourself.  I hope my comments don't come across in any negative or know-it-all-ish way.


Edited to add: Oh yeah!!! A thought occurred to me today regarding the Angeshrael/Inchoroi/Tusk business and I wanted to toss it out there for y'all cause it's super interesting... I think it's a distinct possibility that if Kellhus were indeed somehow involved in this scenario and was somehow manipulating events, it may be the reason that one of the tribes (the one that starts with a Z is it?) remained in Eanna.  :o
Title: Re: Why would the Inchoroi fear damnation?
Post by: SmilerLoki on May 18, 2020, 07:54:14 am
Thanks! Let me preface my continuation of this discussion by acknowledging right here and now that I don't actually expect that I have or necessarily ever will be able to understand or solve the series or its metaphysics. Talking about it however is such great fun and even a great learning experience, so I want to bounce my thoughts back based on your replies.
Oh, for sure, some things are just too unclear to reason about them in any coherent way. It makes sense, though. Not everything is immediately relevant enough to find its way to the page.

And it's my pleasure talking to you!

I guess I think the simplest interpretation would be that Bakker is saying Ajokli knows in his way of knowing but due to Resumption his capacity to know (and/or exist) is diminished or diminishing.
Yeah, that's my take, too. The No-God does gradually diminish the capacity of the Gods to interact with the world, and the 144k is likely a critical threshold here.

I see your point regarding the definitions of madness but hasn't Kellhus' own sanity been called into question time and again due to his Ajokli-possession on this and various other media? Yet I can't recall a situation in which Kell truly acts illogically or as if he's what we would describe as insane...
This is an interesting topic. I would say it's about Kellhus having convictions he really shouldn't have. For him, said convictions (any convictions, really) should be a clear darkness, something that precedes him and thus must be fought, yet he acts on them still. It's insanity, he understands it, but it's not something that really seriously impacts his reasoning in day-to-day matters (create a religion, build an empire, become a genius sorcerer, go to Hell to look at the God, you know, the usual stuff we're all accustomed to). It's not about how he acts but about why he acts and what goals he pursues. Nonetheless, it ultimately leads to the Golden Room debacle.

I'd like to share that I thus far have believed the Outside is some type of a mindspace that does nothing more than reflect experiences of those who live/have lived/will live on the Inward.
Oh, it sure is. It's just it's more than that, since it's also connected to the God and a plethora of odd phenomena like the Judging Eye. But it for sure is also shaped by the Inside, and the Gods are reflections of beliefs. I always posited, even, that they are reflections of strictly human beliefs. This is why Earwan morality is arbitrary human morality, and thus is completely foreign to other races, like Nonmen, or Inchoroi, or Progenitors. Which is why Earwa is the Promised World - the root of the problem, humans, are there.

I suppose for the sake of discussion I might suggest it's possible that this since (if) this scene was occuring entirely within Kellhus' own mind the Ciphrang's speech may be reflected/provided by his very own thoughts (similarly that may be the case with summoners & Ciphrang).  I'm not convinced, but I posit the possibility.
At some point when something looks like a bird, flies like a bird, sings like a bird, and tastes like a bird, it can be assumed to be a bird in the frame of reference that insists with every given sense that it is a bird. In our case that frame of reference would be the world of Earwa as described in TSA.

Or, more clearly stated, a total illusion is, essentially, indistinguishable from reality.

As we know, it's actually somewhat the same for Outside - it can be changed, re-written. Retrofitted if you will lol.
So in truth, the tapestry is not, as we imagine the Gods might perceive it "complete" - and that makes complete sense if (perhaps - only if?) the Outside is indeed generated by/reflective of the Inside.
There is a key difference here, though. When the Outside is rewritten, it gets rewritten in its totality, there is no memory of the previous iteration. Unlike in the case of someone in the Inside, because they would remember themself thinking differently and making a mistake because of it. It would never be the case for an agency of the Outside.

I remember musing about it before in regards to the WLW:
Humans have ontological perspective of things, while the Gods have Eternal perspective. Being created somewhere in the timeline, the Gods then exist for the whole of that timeline, ensuring their own creation. The Gods act without time restrictions, so every action they take was always taken, is always taken, and will be always taken. When the universe somehow changes without the knowledge of the Gods (say, by the No-God), the Gods instantly populate new timeline differently. It accounts for any changes made, and also accounts for their previous actions (for example, Sorweel wasn't the White-Luck Warrior v. 2.0 while the first Warrior wasn't thwarted by Kelmomas, but the first Warrior was thwarted, so Sorweel was always meant to supplant him now that Yatwer is aware of the first Warrior's failure, and this turn of events already is incorporated in the timeline; at the same time, the first Warrior always existed, and so from Yatwer's perspective always should have existed, even if doomed to fail)
---

I agree, the Prophecy is definitely something! To try to turn it into something that supports my crackpot though, isn't or wasn't there some confusion or potential for the God giving this prophecy to actually be AJOKLI?
I always liked to say that obfuscation-wise this dream of Celmomas receiving his prophecy takes the cake. Everything in there can be interpreted in at least 2, but mostly even more, ways.

I do recall this but would note that Sorweel is only there because of K - meaning the power is there as you say, and the power itself is associated with/attributed to Yatwer, but the actual agency arranging/placing it there need not necessarily be ultimately associated/attributed to Yatwer.
The Nonmen are sure it's Yatwer, though. Like, so sure that it never even comes into question. They would fear any God equally, but they instantly jump to Yatwer, and this level of certainty that's never questioned in the narrative makes me think it's supposed to be taken at face value. It's also not really ever contradicted, on the contrary, it gets confirmed (or at least corroborated) time and time again.

DOES Kellhus not calling Sorweel out have to NECESSARILY mean "he was protected from Kellhus' scrutiny" (that Kellhus couldn't see it)?
There is a two-fold answer here. First, it's not only Kellhus who doesn't see Sorweel's intentions, it's his children, too, and on more than one occasion, which in the case of Serwa is even described from her own POV.

Second, it's also Kelmomas, who does see Sorweel's intentions, clearly and instantly, even contradicting Serwa and his father (who possesses superior faculties in every respect, by Kelmomas's own admission). This is confirmed when Kelmomas saves Kellhus by killing Sorweel. Kellhus would've been killed and didn't see it, only the fact that Kelmomas was there prevented it. Remember, from the Eternal perspective of the Outside Kelmomas cannot be seen. That would be true for Kellhus-in-the-Outside, too.

and I suspect this truth (& the Outside in general) may ultimately be malleable.
This is the part where it all starts to become really confusing because there is not enough data. Yes, the Outside is malleable, but when it's rewritten, its next iteration is still total in itself, encompassing everything it can encompass. Yes, the Outside is shaped by the Inside, but not everything that happens in the Inside has its Outside counterpart, of which the No-God is the most blatant example.

You're right that Sorweel is definitely not the same as we had seen before but that is true for all Men all the time. Sorweel was probably going to live some uneventful life, a princeling who would live then die and not do much of metaphysical significance... but his circumstances changed drastically, of course he was not as we had seen him before.
No, I meant the instant and clear switch in Sorweel's POV that happens sometime around the Last Whelming, if I remember correctly. One moment he thinks and acts completely like himself, a normal human being, the next he is exactly what the first WLW was, seeing into the future and the past through all of his actions combined as though they are already done, and always were.

Thank you again for the feedback!  I openly acknowledge my ignorance and the unlikelihood that I will ever attain the level of understanding of the events in these books that you and many others around here have.  I just absolutely love these books and the way they get my mind working, and I love them more and more when I read the discussions on this forum and am able to gain insight and alternate opinions and perspectives from other readers like yourself.  I hope my comments don't come across in any negative or know-it-all-ish way.
I can assure you you're not the only one whose mind gets stimulated by TSA! It's a great series in the sense that it contains and fosters original thought. I wish there were more fiction like this.

And I hope I don't come off as attacking you or impolite. I'm a big believer in brevity and precision, but, unfortunately, a precise brief statement of disagreement can often be read in a negative way. That's never my intention.

Also, like, if this is brief, imagine how my posts would look like if I wasn't trying really hard to make them short!