[TGO Spoilers] The Judging Eye - Is it objective truth?

  • 51 Replies
  • 23651 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Titan

  • *
  • Momurai
  • **
  • Posts: 87
    • View Profile
« Reply #15 on: July 25, 2016, 08:50:43 pm »
Ok, then how do we explain Koringhus? Koringhus senses the whatever Mimara has the Absolute is behind it. He figures all this out about the Zero-God, repents, Mimara forgives and the JE approves. Again, the JE approves. So Koringhus goes from as damned as anyone she's seen until then, to forgiven and go to join the Absolute, I'd say it's the most accurate POV of any in the book. Even though there is much I don't like about it.

I guess I need to re-read the book, because that's not at all what my impression was of what happened. But you may be right.

EkyannusIII

  • *
  • Momurai
  • **
  • Posts: 142
  • Archduke Ekyannus of Shitlord Hall
    • View Profile
« Reply #16 on: July 25, 2016, 09:18:00 pm »
I just want to say that I am happy that one Anasurimbor / Dunyain of any family managed to receive salvation. I'm a big softee I guess.
What is reason, but the blindness of the soul?

R. SCOTT RAP3ZT TERRIBLEZ LOLZ.

if Kellhus was thinking all of this, he's going to freak out when he get's back and Kelmomas is all "i lieks to eatum peeples da"

the whole thing is orchestrated by Kellhus who is wearing a Bashrag as if it were a suit

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #17 on: July 25, 2016, 10:28:33 pm »
I just want to say that I am happy that one Anasurimbor / Dunyain of any family managed to receive salvation. I'm a big softee I guess.

My guess is that when Akka and Mimara look upon Kellhus with the JE he'll be wreathed in glory, just like Mimara. Why, when everything points to him being damned? Because, the God (JE) and the 100 are not connected, separate entities. And, Kellhus trying to shut the Outside will restore the natural order of things to what is behind the JE. When Kellhus explains things to Proyas about the Gods it's co fusing to us readers, but he's explaining the 100, not the God.
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #18 on: July 25, 2016, 10:41:18 pm »
Ok, then how do we explain Koringhus? Koringhus senses the whatever Mimara has the Absolute is behind it. He figures all this out about the Zero-God, repents, Mimara forgives and the JE approves. Again, the JE approves. So Koringhus goes from as damned as anyone she's seen until then, to forgiven and go to join the Absolute, I'd say it's the most accurate POV of any in the book. Even though there is much I don't like about it.

I guess I need to re-read the book, because that's not at all what my impression was of what happened. But you may be right.

Here is where Koringhus realizes that the Absolute is behind the JE. Here he accepts its judgement.

Quote
This, Sister … This is why I bare my throat to the blade of your judgment. This is why I would make myself your slave. For short of death, you, Anasûrimbor Mimara, wife-daughter of Anasûrimbor Kellhus, who is also my father … you, Sister, are the Shortest Path. The Absolute dwells within your Gaze. You … a frail, worldborn slip, heavy with child, chased across the throw of kings and nations, you are the Nail of the World, the hook from which all things hang. Thus do I kneel before it, awaiting, accepting, death or illumination— it does not matter which.  So long as I am at last known.

This is where he realizes what is holy and what redeems. This is at the end of a segment of the chapter.

Quote
And so it was with the Absolute. Surrender. Forfeiture . Loss … At last he understood what made these things holy. Loss was advantage. Blindness was insight, revelation . At last he could see it—the sideways step that gave lie to Logos. Zero. Zero made One.

This is the very next segment and the opening of that segment. Its after all his realizations of the Zero-God and after Mimara held him and all that. When he's decided to take flight and join the Absolute, again, what is behind the JE.

Quote
The Eye watches. Approves. He gestures to the boy, who obediently comes to him.

Bold is mine. So, what I am saying is that what The Eye has seen and has changed its stance on damnation in relation to Koringhus. Even though morality is objective, there is also the chance for redemption and forgiveness.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2016, 10:44:19 pm by MSJ »
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

Viridius

  • *
  • Emwama
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
« Reply #19 on: July 26, 2016, 08:15:44 am »
Quote
MSJ: I saw & included your answer from RSB in my post, thanks. It's an important point. I suppose I just don't feel comfortable with that idea! As if these books were meant to make us feel comfortable. LOL. I'm curious about how morality can ever be objective anywhere. (Except in the minds of certain kinds of philosophers & religious zealots.) I suppose it goes back to my original question: is it just a premise that we have to accept, like a McGuffin in a SciFi tale? To which you are, I gather, saying: "Yes it is." If we accept sorcery as a premise, then why not eternal damnation?

I see where your coming from and it's why I asked Bakker the question. I argued a lot about it at Westeros the past couple of years. I was wrong, Bakker says morality is objective. So, I guess in these books, on Earwa, yes it's something we just have to accept.

Yes, I guess so. Thanks for your insight. I read The False Sun but as you say there's a lot to unpack there.

Though I think that Kellhus is trying to stop is said damnation. The God and the Hundred are separate. And the 100 are the ones whom feed off damnation. Have basically set up the system so that everything leads to damnation.

So the Old Polytheistic Gods pass away to be replaced by the One True God. Sheesh. That's a bit disappointing as an arc story. I'm a Pagan at heart.
“Answers are a perilous grip on the universe. They can appear sensible yet explain nothing.”

-- The Zensunni Whip

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #20 on: July 26, 2016, 01:28:48 pm »
So the Old Polytheistic Gods pass away to be replaced by the One True God. Sheesh. That's a bit disappointing as an arc story. I'm a Pagan at heart.

If others are right then no, the Polytheistic Gods (100) were created from the the One true God (Zero-God, Absolute). Created by the Nonmen maybe as a way to avoid damnation, I dunno, but the 100 only want damnation. Its what they feed off of. Hell, praying even gets you damnation. Its so confusing in the books, especially with Kellhus and Proyas's talks. I think Kellhus is explaining the 100, not God (the Absolute). They are two separate entities.
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 2893
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #21 on: July 26, 2016, 01:44:42 pm »
I think Kellhus is explaining the 100, not God (the Absolute). They are two separate entities.

Which has been my point in taking the stance that the Solitary God, the One God, the Zero-God, the Absolute (as God), is a concept, not existent (yet) as an entity.

The Fanim worship an ideal, not a manifest God.
I am a warrior of ages, Anasurimbor. . . ages. I have dipped my nimil in a thousand hearts. I have ridden both against and for the No-God in the great wars that authored this wilderness. I have scaled the ramparts of great Golgotterath, watched the hearts of High Kings break for fury. -Cet'ingira

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #22 on: July 26, 2016, 02:04:16 pm »
I think Kellhus is explaining the 100, not God (the Absolute). They are two separate entities.

Which has been my point in taking the stance that the Solitary God, the One God, the Zero-God, the Absolute (as God), is a concept, not existent (yet) as an entity.

The Fanim worship an ideal, not a manifest God.

I agree , H. My only dispute is the the One God, Zero-God and Absolute are all the same thing and that they do exist. Koringhus tells us they are behind the JE.
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 2893
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #23 on: July 26, 2016, 02:31:19 pm »
I agree , H. My only dispute is the the One God, Zero-God and Absolute are all the same thing and that they do exist. Koringhus tells us they are behind the JE.

Well, I don't understand it well enough to really articulate the difference in a clear way, but what I understood that meaning was that the Cubit exists, the Absolute exists, but it is not a manifest God.  That was gone once the 100 came forth.

I guess it is like if you had 1-100, zero is still there, in fact, it is what allows 1 to exist (and therefor all other 99).  So if you had lineup of all the Gods, of course you wouldn't see Zero, because it's existence is implicit, not explicit.  I think actually I've realized something, that the Solitary God and the Zero-God aren't the same.  The Solitary God is 1, that is, the 100 unified.  The Zero-God is the cubit, the basis of everything.  Perhaps it is Kellhus aim not only to become the Solitary God, but to somehow unify that with the Zero-God (the Absolute)?

In other words, be the Zero and One God?
« Last Edit: July 26, 2016, 02:33:24 pm by H »
I am a warrior of ages, Anasurimbor. . . ages. I have dipped my nimil in a thousand hearts. I have ridden both against and for the No-God in the great wars that authored this wilderness. I have scaled the ramparts of great Golgotterath, watched the hearts of High Kings break for fury. -Cet'ingira

MisterGuyMan

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Momurai
  • *****
  • Posts: 80
    • View Profile
« Reply #24 on: July 26, 2016, 05:12:48 pm »
Damnation is objective but malleable.  Morality is subjective.  The JE equates the two but there is a difference.  Inrau is undeniably damned for example but he morally, at least for most of our standards, hasn't done anything wrong.  The Judging Eye is described as the ability to see from the God's vantage.  Seeing from a single vantage more than implies the existence of other vantage points.  That's proof morality is subjective.  By contrast, Akka's soul will be feasted on by Demons.  That's an objective truth.

So Damnation is objectively defined but not necessarily immutable.  The gods are just big Ciphrang.  Ciphrang are just hunger manifest.  Normal humans can become ciphrang and even the goods walked the planet.  Presumably if Kellhus ever becomes strong enough to get these gods to toe the company line, then damnation will be defined differently too.

I'd also like to add that the gods don't see time linearly.  I suspect that this infuses the Judging  Eye's perspective.  It sees Akka is dambed because from the gods' perspective, they're already munching on his soul.  The JE views the objective fact that he's damned and, right this moment, Akka's soul is being eaten by Demons.

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #25 on: July 26, 2016, 05:17:27 pm »
Quote from: MisterGuyMan
Damnation is objective but malleable.  Morality is subjective.
Quote

This not true. Morality is OBJECTIVE!!!!! It's what the author said, it's not up for debate.
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #26 on: July 26, 2016, 05:21:00 pm »
Quote from: Cu'jara Cinmoi
Morality is objective, so it doesn't matter what Men believe. Lies are also objective, insofar as they a powerful impact on the reality around them, and insofar as they are sinful. They don't become true so much as determine what is taken to be true. Lies are sins precisely because they have real consequences.
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #27 on: July 26, 2016, 05:27:15 pm »
I know, this was very hard for me to wrap my head around also. Because it's not like this in our world. But in Earwa there are set rules. Woman are less than Men as an example. It makes no sense, but it's how it is. And, it is shown to us through the JE. Again, I've argued and argued that Morality wasn't objective, it couldn't be, it made no sense. But, I asked the RSB, and there is his response. Its objective, we just have to deal with it.
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

Madness

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Conversational Batman
  • Posts: 5275
  • Strength on the Journey - Journey Well
    • View Profile
    • The Second Apocalypse
« Reply #28 on: July 26, 2016, 05:28:43 pm »
Lol - MSJ :).

I do think there is far more buried in the "lies..." comment than a repeat that "Morality is objective."

No speculation so far convinces me that the Eye isn't still possibly wrong, though.
The Existential Scream
Weaponizing the Warrior Pose - Declare War Inwardly
carnificibus: multus sanguis fluit
Die Better
The Theory-Killer

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #29 on: July 26, 2016, 05:32:05 pm »
All I can say is what the man says. I has been the number one argument at Westeros especially. Is Morality objective? The man says it is, so we have to say it is and base speculation off of that.
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,