[Wilshire]

I dispute this but my arguments all rely on stuff from the first trilogy so if he somehow became a literal God in the 20 year interim where we have nothing from his POV I wouldn't know it.

Please, dispute away. He has some blindspots, certainly. My point being that saying he is 100% evil is just as valid as saying he is 100% perfect.

[The Sharmat]

Evil? Good? The very poison we seek to suck from this world?

[Simas Polchias]

Being smarter doesn't make him above consent, he just seizes and violates upon the moment of first meeting, he's basically got a permanent sranc erection of the metaphysical variety, constantly penetrating, trying to slake his unquenchable lust, and failing.

Almost certainly I'm going to regret this, but... Consent is a concept and thus born of necessity. Dunno if dunyain have overgrown it, but modern rapist are certainly not.

[Wilshire]

To add, this 'intellectual rape' that keeps being brought up is extremely vague, and doesn't really mean anything, especially to the Dunyain.

IMO, far, far less invasive than forcing a horse to bare a rider, or yoking oxen. This alleged violation is nothing more than an extension of what people do daily to other animals, or even the boss/employee interaction. One is simply the wielder of a tool , the other a tool. Unless you eschew all the trappings of modern society, you are no less guilty than Kellhus.

[Seökti]

Look at kellhus' rapist/pedophile rationalization for raping Leweth's soul.  Leweth was like a child and could be controlled, so kellhus exalted in controlling for controls sake, Leweth was asking for it, so to speak, Leweth "liked" it in the end, kellhus was smarter/more mature/stronger/better so he was entitled to Leweth's soul because of those things, Leweth's consent was irrelevant to kellhus slaying his unquenchable desires.  And of course kellhus eventually hunts down Leweth's soul and rapes it the way the bard hunted down the bastard  and raped him a few pages earlier.

But kellhus rationalized away all his crimes, his motivations, his emotions, dismissing them by claiming he was above them.

Honestly I can't think of anything truly awful that Kellhus has done.  About the worst of it are some lies.  I'd like some concrete examples of ways Kellhus may have damned himself if that is what people are suggesting.

The assumed lack of 'consent' itself is suspect until it can prove consent wasn't given by Leweth for all of it. 

'He makes us love!'


The world is simply more visible to Kellhus - he was conditioned for it in ways beyond his own comprehension.

[The Sharmat]

Kellhus has presided over and ordered a number of huge atrocities in both the First Holy War and the Unification Wars. The only one I can remember specifically (because it's the last I read) is ordering anyone in the Tydonni Orthodox execution lines (to be executed for not being Zaudunyani and resisting Kellhus' conquest of their nation) that had been spared for seeing the light as it were (by Kellhus' order) to have their eyes put out.

[Hirtius/Pansa]

There is a choice line somewhere about how the Yatwerians cannot be defeated through violence; "They are too broad and myriad an organization, they are not a people we can simply uproot and exterminate like the Mongilean Kianene."  Genocide?

[The Sharmat]

Genocide is among the many tools of Empire building that Kellhus has no moral compunctions about using.

[Wilshire]

"Empire building" is a crime that I imagine most Emperors have committed, with all its attributions. These atrocities seem mundane, and while not excusable and likely enough to 'get him damned' (at least in a judeo-christian sense), I see it as a far cry from the kind of meta-evil that seems to be suggested above.

Truly awful, sure. Its hard to ignore genocide. The forceful conquest of the Three Seas is not a 'good' thing either. Kamikaze messengers, also bad.
... But he's not a Ciphrang, or a God, who have been ceaselessly torturing souls since the dawn of time. He's not as bad as the nonmen either, who committed atrocities for so long and on such a scale that they created topoi, tore asunder the very fabric of reality with their malice. If you want soul raping meta-evil, there are examples to be found, but not in Kellhus.

Caveat, this is up through WLW. The end is a mystery. If it turns out the Great Ordeal is just some vehicle for his own ends, then he sacrificed an entire nation with no regard for them at all, and this would put him pretty high up on the atrocity meter.

[The Sharmat]

So are we judging him from an amoral utilitarian POV (in which case nothing is evil or good, only adaptive or maladaptive) or from a moral point of view?

[Wilshire]

Hasn't been defined. All are free to choose.

[The Sharmat]

Well we're pretty sure at least one agency in the Outside really wants to chew on his soul.

[Wilshire]

Is any outside POV amoral or moral? I'd guess amoral, maybe?

Is there a moral POV base we can point to from Earwa? Would it have to be something vague like 'what everyone think's?

[The Sharmat]

The Outside entities may be hugely moralistic. It depends on how much what their followers think of them reflects what they think of themselves.

Of course it may not even be a meaningful question. The minds of Yatwer and co may be so different from those of mortals as to be incomprehensible.

[Wilshire]

Its an interesting question though.

Is the God that created everything moral or amoral? Probably however it decided to define itself. Would its creations be able to tell?