Three Seas Forum

the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Kellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. posted 01 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. by Darlan Laerdon, Commoner

Hi there, newbie and avid Bakker fanboi Darlan here, and I was wondering what everyone thought about Kellhus.

I get the impression from some idle snooping around that Kellhus is generally considered the good guy, or hero of the story.

Personally, I get the impression that Kellhus will turn out to be the badguy, or at least a not-so-good-after-all guy.

My reasons are thusly:

1. Kellhus thinks he is something more than a dunyain, due in large part to the halos about his hands that he and everyone else sees. But looks are more often than not decieving, and, as Kellhus himself proved, just because something looks holy, doesnt mean it is. Kellhus's actions, at least before the circumfixion, definatly were evil things done for selfish reasons, namely his mission to reach Shimeh. The point is, he put on the look of holiness, but inside, he was just a detached user of humanity

2. Kellhus brings war. Kellhus brings murder. Kellhus brings manipulation.

Does Kellhus bring healing, does he bring love?

Zin would tell us the answer to this one, but I think thats a bit beyond him now.

3. The dream of Akka near the end of TTT.

In this dream, we see a modified version of where the nogod comes upon anaxophus, but instead of moving to stop him, the king simply stands there, repeating what the nogod says, as doom comes closer and closer.

This dream can be interpreted in many ways, but personally I think it represents what is to come. Kellhus, the precieved savior of humanity (ana) instead of saving the world when the nogod comes, is carying out his will (repeating what he says).

Anywho, just wondering if anyone thinks the same about these events, if its all already been done, ect. Love the boards and such, and definatly love this series. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. posted 01 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. by superkeer, Candidate

This is something I've been debating with myself for a few days now that I've finished the trilogy.

I don't like Kellhus at all. I found myself rooting against him at the end. I really wanted him to receive, what I feel, is coming to him.

There was an important step he missed in going from sociopathic manipulator to (possibly) delusional demi-god, and that step was "humanity." I don't understand his motivation anymore; now that he's faced his father and completed his "mission," he can only continue to be driven by his own personal motives... and the only motivation to continue his charade is that he has either A) gone off the deep end, B) actually discovered a way to achieve divine status and then as a result C) has become obsessed with the knowledge that he continues to unlock.

But along the way, he's cut a swath through the entire world. His personal mission, which he kept from everyone save Cnaiur, has resulted in the deaths of thousands, the displacement of hundreds of thousands, and the complete, 90-degree shift of countless nations, cultures, and histories in the civilized world. And now he's content to continue on, seemingly without regard for anyone other than himself.

I suppose he envisions himself in the scheme of the Apocalypse, perhaps he wants to be humanity's savior, but I don't believe its for any selfless reason. He just wants to make everyone love him, but nothing the world could do would make him love it.

I see him struggling to dominate the Dunyain next, then he may undertake a mission to dominate the Consult, which may prove to be his undoing. If he ends up becoming Mog-Pharau reborn, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. posted 02 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. by Diem Kaye, Candidate

I hope Kellhus turns out to be a bad guy, just for one simple reason.

Right now, he's way too powerful. He's mastered the Gnosis, has the entire Three Seas under his command, and looks like he will only get stronger over the next twenty years.

Now when you have a character that is that powerful, it's hard to write challenges for him that the reader will find interesting. This is why I'm also hoping that Acha becomes the protagonist of the story.

He's flawed. He's human. We can understand him. We can see Acha fighting against the Second Apocalypse, see him doing his best, and still managing to fail. There's an actual challenge there.

Kellhus? Not so much. I mean, he's probably one of the few characters that can go through a public execution ceremony and the whole time you're reading, you're just thinking, "Now how will he get out of this one?" view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. posted 02 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. by Ikiru, Candidate

I couldn't disagree with you guys more. Kellhus is completing his father's work of preparing the Three Seas to face the No-God. Sure, he did some terrible things, but they were all part of the Thousandfold Thought's plan to unify Earwa before the return of the Consult to battle. Put it this way - the Holy War was horrible, but the Second Apocalypse will be worse. Anything that helps humanity survive the No-God's coming is ultimately good. Including the death and upheaval caused by Kellhus, which transformed the world into one ready for the No-God, at least according to the Thousandfold Thought.


I also can't see why you guys think that things must be selfless to be morally right - that seems a very simplistic, traditional conception of morality to me. Besides, is Kellhus really "selfish"? He's not out for personal gratification. Everything he does it out of duty - first to the Dunyain, then to the Gods, in preparing the Three Seas to fight the No-God.

It's not pretty, but sometimes you have to go with the lesser of two evils. Kellhus is interesting because he's a savior with a twist - he's not a stereotypical good guy.

As for there being no real challenge for him anymore - I think the Second Apocalypse will pose plenty of problems, even for someone as godlike as Kellhus. The No-God is immune to the Gnosis and all sorcery, remember? view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. posted 02 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. by anor277, Didact

I agree that Kellhus, arch manipulator, and incorrigible user of other people as means and not ends might not be entirely human. As for the alternatives, the Consult, the Imperium, the Schools, the 1000 temples, Kellhus is probably a far better choice as overlord. Prior to Kellhus, the Three Seas had rigid social stratification, slavery, subjection of women, internecine warfare etc; under Kellhus these things might well disappear or be alleviated, if only on the basis of utility. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. posted 02 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his "good guy" status. by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Kellhus is Kellhus, I think he will continue to be a protagonist and a force working against the Consult but that doesn't mean he is a "good guy." Aspect Emperor will be worth waiting for, and I can't wait to see how many of our assumptions and beliefs get turned upside down <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 02 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Ikiru, Candidate

EE has it right - a character can be on the side of good without being a "good guy," per se. In the same way, Cnaiur spends most of TTT allied with the evil skin-spies, but he's certainly not a "bad guy."

Scott doesn't really do good guys, anyway. Most authors paint in shades of black and white; Erikson and Martin paint in shades of gray; Scott paints in shades of gray AND black. It's either semi-good or pure evil in this series. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 02 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by anor277, Didact

Quote: &quot;Ikiru&quot;:1u1utkho
EE has it right - a character can be on the side of good without being a "good guy," per se. In the same way, Cnaiur spends most of TTT allied with the evil skin-spies, but he's certainly not a "bad guy."

Scott doesn't really do good guys, anyway. Most authors paint in shades of black and white; Erikson and Martin paint in shades of gray; Scott paints in shades of gray AND black. It's either semi-good or pure evil in this series.[/quote:1u1utkho]

Ikiru, I think Cnaiür is a psychopath, at whom I wouldn't look at sideways, let alone walk on the same side of the street. Mind you I agree that it's a strength of the novels that sometimes we see him, rapist, wife beater, and pervert, in a sympathetic light. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 02 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Ikiru, Candidate

Cnaiur is certainly insane, perhaps criminally so, but we never see him as "evil," as we do the Consult. Cnaiur is as a victim of manipulation and mental illness. He's not making the sort of conscious decisions to wipe out entire races that the Inchoroi are. I agree that he's scary and I wouldn't want to meet him, but I still always sympathize with him, whereas I love to hate the Inchoroi and Consult.

Interestingly, I think the Skin-Spies come off as somewhat sympathetic in their conversations with Cnaiur. They seem to have no real understanding of what they are or anything they do, and to have a strange resentment toward their creators. You sort of have to pity them. They're almost like programmed robots with only the barest flicker of consciousness, and absolutely no volition. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 03 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Linnea, Candidate

Yes,I excuse Cnaiur a lot because of his mental illnes but if the Inchoroi are aliens,do we even know if they are capable of what most humans would consider an ethical behavior?
If "fault" is something they only learned about after coming to Earwa then perhaps their own thoughtprocess is quite like their creations.They still might only understand such things as intellectual concepts and be incapable of any true understanding.Not that that would make them more fun to meet...

I`m not bothered about Kellhus ruling the Three-seas,sociopath or not.For the average person I don`t think it would matter,they aren`t going to meet him personally,they would probably suffer more if he were a bad administrator or something.
But I´m not sure he would bother changing the society of the Three-seas very much.Is slavery and the subjugation of women really that less effective,at least in terms of fighting the Consult?
I can see him instituting training for all born to the Few wether they were women or slaves since a sorceror is so useful but why would he object to the mistreatment or inequality of people in general?
His own position is a feature of an unequal society and he wold probably e better served if people obeyed their betters so to speak.
Also,even if he wanted to change these things,would this really be the right time?Fighting the Consult and affecting world spanning societal changes at the same time seem a bit much.And then there are economic changes,and protests from those who benefit from the current society.
I´m sure Kellhus could do it if he really wanted to but it seems like it wouldn`t be worth the effort.
I don`t know but hopefully Scott will write almost at the speed of light... view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 03 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Ikiru, Candidate

Well, Kellhus has already worked some huge societal changes to the end of preparing the Three Seas for Tsuramah's return ... I think he'll do whatever he thinks is necessary. But whether that means ending slavery and such is definitely dubious.

I think the question of the Inchoroi's ethical status is interesting. We excuse Cnaiur because he'd mad, and thus not really in control of his moral choices. But if the Inchoroi are really incapable of being anything other than savage rapists and butchers, does that mean they get the same sort of moral exemption? Doesn't moral judgement only apply to volitional acts? Definitely an interesting ethical question. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 03 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Iceman, Candidate

The obvious lack of humanity in Kellhus means that he'll never be a 'good guy' in my eyes. A neccessity for the survival of the human race, perhaps, but never the good guy.

At the end of TTT I was actually rooting for his enemies, even knowing that they could never succeed (at least not in TTT). view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 03 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by superkeer, Candidate

Quote: &quot;Ikiru&quot;:2y6hta7z
I also can't see why you guys think that things must be selfless to be morally right - that seems a very simplistic, traditional conception of morality to me. [/quote:2y6hta7z]

I would think that the "selflessness" or "selfishness" of any act is what ultimately determines its moral quality.

I suppose it would all depend on the outcome of Kellhus' story, which kind of makes debating it now a moot point. But I still believe that if you're doing good things just for the sake of manipulation, they're not truly good in terms of "morality." They're hollow, and selfish, and if discovered, they become morally bad. If you asked Akka at the end of the story whether or not he still thought Kellhus to be a paragon of "goodness," he'd say most certainly not, despite the undeniably "good" things he'd done up to that point.

I suppose it's all just a matter of perspective. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 03 March 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Ieldra, Commoner

I think that to name Kellhus good or bad is simplistic. Remember that, according to Dûnyain philosophy, there is no morality except by the customs and passions of men, i.e. it has no ultimate reality and there is no "natural" morality. The importance of this is brought to us again and again, right from the start of the story: "So long as men live, there are crimes", says the unnamed Anasûrimbor in the prologue, to which the Dûnyain replies: "Only so long as men are deceived".

Kellhus comes across as the ultimate manipulator with absolutely no scruples, which would make him evil in most systems of morality. But he does not come across as evil - at least not as evil as some other character in the story would if he did the same - because he is convincingly portrayed as being beyond these systems. Nevertheless, one wouldn't want to be in his sphere of influence (or rather, one probably would, which proves this point), and he stays human enough not to be beyond insanity. Or so it seems.

There is also the matter of justification. As I read the books, I found myself thinking that someone with these abilities should really come out of it as the good guy. I wanted a justification. I didn't get it. At the end, we still don't know if there is a reason big enough to justify it all. Oh, did I find myself thinking that the end may justify the means? That's not what I usually think...

As a matter of fact, despite murder, betrayal, deception and rape, I find little of the "ultimate evil" so endemic in most fantasy stories in The Prince of Nothing, to my very great relief, and very little "ultimate good" despite love, duty and friendship. Those great simplifiers all too often mask the underlying complexity. Consider the Inchoroi - there is instant revulsion when I read about them, and there can be no doubt that they are enemies and must be fought. But revulsion is no indicator of "evil" (despite, for instance, the claims of countless homophobics), and it seems such a meaningless term when applied to the Inchoroi - they are too alien to be described by it, and doing so anyway imposes a human framework that does not fit.

At the end, what I think of Kellhus stays largely undetermined because of these reasons. Using his own framework as far as I can, the only thing I would name wrong is that he teaches others nothing of what he himself knows, using it to dominate instead. In his own framework, this does not constitute "evil", but I think that the Dûnyain in general would consider it undesirable. After all, they do have this ideal of becoming "self-moving souls". view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 10 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Primal, Peralogue

Let me pose a question (for which I don't think there is a clear answer):
If the actions of Kellhus and Cnaiur are interpreted as evil, then which of the two is more evil?

You have Kellhus, a master of people politics, seen as a manipulator who uses people to an ends, and not as a means in themselves.

You have Cnaiur, bred on war, who goes on rages and rapes women and kills the elderly and children.

The one is a subtle, different kind of &quot;morally&quot; questionable element. The other is more plain sighted. Also, it would seem that people have more empathy with or sympathy towards Cnaiur. Cnaiur, who instead of &quot;manipulating&quot; people, committs what people would consider atrocities (raping, killing villagers). Maybe people fear or hate Kellhus more because he is more dangerous? And accept Cnaiur's actions due to his &quot;unbalanced&quot; mind?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to some comments:

Kellhus does not bring war. The war was before Kellhus. If anything, Kellhus only brings better organization to the side he's with.

You want Kellhus to be the bad guy just because he's too powerful? Personally, I would want the protagonist to be powerful, especially against the insane Erratic and destructively engineered Inchoroi. Mekeritrig, one of the Erratics, has been practicing sorcery for thousands of years. I think you don't like Kellhus because the idea of him is too different from the idea of your protagonist. You like Achamian because he is human, flawed. The way I see it, Kellhus is the most flawed character. Here you have Kellhus, who as a child is forced to master the Logos. If he fails, he dies. He succeeds and is raised according to Dunyain, who super-develop certain aspects of the human and at the same time eliminate or reduce the human aspects of emotions, keeping Kellhus exposed from that which is considered &quot;normal&quot;. So, in certain regards, he is supremely developed and in other regards, such as the emotional, he is underdeveloped. Remember Esmenet comparing the &quot;gazes&quot; between Achamian and Kellhus during the final battle sequence of TTT, where Achamian and her go at it? Dont remember exact quote but goes something like this: &quot;Achamian...who looked at her with such intensity, such desperation...and Kellhus, with his calm, cool blue eyes, who she knew could never look at her in such a way... &quot;
This is the flaw, and a tragedy, of Kellhus. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 10 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Entropic_existence, Moderator

If I was going to rank the actions of Kelhus and Cnaiur as &quot;most evil&quot; (excluding the good actions of both) I think Kelhus's would rank as more evil. Cnaiur may rape and kill you for looking at him sideways but he'll let you know it. Kelhus would trick you into dropping your own pants and bending over so to speak. He'd also convince you to ask for it and say please. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 10 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by anor277, Didact

Quote: &quot;Entropic_existence&quot;:12j3vdkq
If I was going to rank the actions of Kelhus and Cnaiur as &quot;most evil&quot; (excluding the good actions of both) I think Kelhus's would rank as more evil. Cnaiur may rape and kill you for looking at him sideways but he'll let you know it. Kelhus would trick you into dropping your own pants and bending over so to speak. He'd also convince you to ask for it and say please.[/quote:12j3vdkq]

Even given your scenario I'd still take Kellhus (so would you I think?) and rank Cnaiur as more evil (if we can actually call someone that deranged evil). After all what does a lover do? He tries to seduce his beloved, to captivate her, to consume her (or him), to be the centre of her being - and the lover may be motivated by sexual desire, by gratification, as much as by love. What Kellhus &quot;did&quot; to Serwe and Esmenet (and what Moenghus did to Cnaiur) were only the actions of world-born men, but much more effectively and more clinically. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 10 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Intent, not method, is often more telling when looking at something like this. Sorry but I'm sticking to what I said... Kelhus' actions are frequently &quot;more evil&quot; in a moral sense than those of Cnaiur. Cnaiur is deranged and nasty, but he does his dirty work himself and does it to your face.

Kelhus manipulates on a mass level in order to achieve his goals, using people as tools. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 11 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by anor277, Didact

Quote: &quot;Entropic_existence&quot;:3dm4ctc6
Intent, not method, is often more telling when looking at something like this. Sorry but I'm sticking to what I said... Kelhus' actions are frequently &quot;more evil&quot; in a moral sense than those of Cnaiur. Cnaiur is deranged and nasty, but he does his dirty work himself and does it to your face.

Kelhus manipulates on a mass level in order to achieve his goals, using people as tools.[/quote:3dm4ctc6]

I've already acknowledged Kellhus' &quot;moral&quot; failings in this thread. And at least for most of his mission, so far as we know it, his intent is much more morally defensible than his methods. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 11 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Curethan, Didact

Haha. I like the thought of Kellhus as evil, but I would like someone to present one &quot;evil&quot; act the guy has performed....
Sure, he manipulates people, but their choices remain their own. And the method of his manipulation is certainly not evil. Possesing an encyclopediac knowledge of the scars of the soul and your current emotional state, he knows your possible answers and simply choses the right question. When I manipulate my child in a similar fashion in order to compel him to go to bed or perform a chore, am I too being evil?

Well, I guess it is an aspect of human nature to resent those more powerful/intelligent than oneself, and to pity those less capable than ourselves.

I would refer to Frederik Nietsche (Beyond Good and Evil) for an insight into the concept of the superman as represented by the Dunyain in PON. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 11 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Entropic_existence, Moderator

The Neitzchian Superman and the Dunyain definitly have alot of parallels. Regardless of someone being superior or not, manipulation is still hardly &quot;good&quot; on the moral scale. I'm not saying I wouldn't be the exact same way in Kelhus's position, or that it isn't the proper path to take. Merely pointing out where it tends to fall on the whole collective moral scale, in my opinion. Besdies as far as comparing him to Cnaiur, one could argue that Cnaiur is deranged and a sociopath, he can hardly help it <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) -->

Meh they are both in the gray to black shade of the spectrum and one can point to various things to try and label one as worse than the other. I think I'm going to go with they are both equally bad just in different ways. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 12 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by superkeer, Candidate

Curethan has a point at the moment. As opposed to other &quot;evil&quot; acts, the morality of manipulation can be largely dependent on the end result of said manipulation. If everything turns out for the best, and Khellus saves the world, then hardly anyone could view him more harshly than just &quot;the lesser of all evils.&quot; But if he does something terrible, something completely selfish, well, then... view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 12 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Quote: &quot;superkeer&quot;:1wgzd54s
Curethan has a point at the moment. As opposed to other &quot;evil&quot; acts, the morality of manipulation can be largely dependent on the end result of said manipulation. If everything turns out for the best, and Khellus saves the world, then hardly anyone could view him more harshly than just &quot;the lesser of all evils.&quot; But if he does something terrible, something completely selfish, well, then...[/quote:1wgzd54s]

If someone is manipulated into say... sacrificing their life for instance, when that sacrifice isn't required, but then everything turns out &quot;for the best&quot; where would it stand on the morality scale? <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> Manipulation can lead to good and positive outcomes, but it is still manipulation. The road to hell being paved with good intentions and all that. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 13 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by glaz, Peralogue

kellhus, definitely, is not a &quot;good guy&quot; IMO.

i say, a Machiavellian.

selfish? at some point, yes. but if we were built in the same way as he is, i think i'd do the same thing. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 13 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Primal, Peralogue

When it comes to the uncertainties of Kellhus, I can't really determine whether he is a good or bad guy. Both good guys and bad guys will cause &quot;collateral&quot; strife to achieve their end results, whatever that may be. The Erratics' intention is to kill, torture, degrade, cause as much suffering as possible so they may remember it. To most people, that is an evil intention, regardless of the Erratics' madness. Kellhus, right now, seems not to understand his intention (correct me if I am wrong). He was Dunyain, whose supreme goal was to dominate. If he has become something more...what does he want now? And wanting to have mastery over others...is that good or bad? That was Kellhus's intention.

Regardless whether Kellhus is good or bad, he is still the protagonist. I still find him a fascinating character, like I do the crow Inchoroi, Mekeritrig, Achamian, Conphas, the Emperor, Cnaiur... But, Kellhus is the most fascinating for me. You really got an essence for his Dunyaina in the first book. In the battle with the Nonmen, ...&quot;he moved into the space that was before&quot;; when the sorcerer (Mekeritrig or whoever, how do you know it was Mekeritrig anyway?) started casting a spell and Kellhus saw the distortion in his mouth. Those descriptions, and the descriptions of the &quot;neuropunctures&quot;, a chamber of &quot;defects&quot; with stimulodes attached to the brain; the Logos meditation. Oh yeah, I have to throw this in here too: the scene with Cnaiur hiding among the corpses while he listens in on Conphas--&quot;he did not merely remember...he relived...&quot; The writings were masterful. They conveyed sentiments and scenes perfectly. And I believe the effort gone into making Kellhus was most present here in the first book. There was something special about The Darkness that Comes Before view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 13 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by superkeer, Candidate

Quote: &quot;Entropic_existence&quot;:3165igyz
If someone is manipulated into say... sacrificing their life for instance, when that sacrifice isn't required, but then everything turns out &quot;for the best&quot; where would it stand on the morality scale? <!-- s:) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile" /><!-- s:) --> Manipulation can lead to good and positive outcomes, but it is still manipulation. The road to hell being paved with good intentions and all that.[/quote:3165igyz]

Man I wish I'd studied philosophy at some point in my life. <!-- s:wink: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt=":wink:" title="Wink" /><!-- s:wink: --> I don't feel as if I'm qualified to get into this discussion any further, really. I see myself only being able to present a cyclical argument. But, to answer your question: I personally would find the scenario you described to be horrific. An individual manipulated into sacrificing his or her life when it isn't required, is awful. But I think that non-requirement is the &quot;evil-determinating&quot; factor for me. The fact that the situation benefits the greater good, or that it all turns out for the best, is almost irrelevent at that point, because it was a needless sacrifice.

If I turn the situation back to you, I would adjust it this way: If someone is manipulated into say... sacrificing their life for instance, when that sacrifice is essential to everything turning out for the best, and had the individual not been manipulated, the sacrifice never would've been made... where would it stand on the morality scale?

I've never really thought about manipulation in so much depth before. It is an interesting question, whether or not manipulation automatically qualifies as evil, or whether it is dependent on the causes and effects of the reality it brings into view? I suppose it's all a matter of taste. Sure seems deep, either way. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 13 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Entropic_existence, Moderator

I've only taken one course in philosophy so I'm not exactly a pro with it either. If the sacrifice was essential, for me it isn't necessarily as bad, but then again, co-opting someones free will is always wrong no matter the how or the why I think. It happens all the time in the real world and we usually don't even realize it. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 13 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Curethan, Didact

One who argues his point well manipulates.
Once your point of view, or perception of things has been changed by an argument, you still command your actions thereafter. If you sacrifice your life without cause because I have manipulted you (without lying, as Kellhus does) that is not my moral choice, but yours. Doesn't make me evil - makes you a victim of Darwinism in my book. <!-- s:wink: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_wink.gif" alt=":wink:" title="Wink" /><!-- s:wink: -->

Comunication is nothing but manipulation in this sense of the word; to my mind, falsehood and deception are the root of the fear and evil that can arise from it. As I have previously stated, Kellhus never fabricates lies himself, and rarely dresses the truth to merely to suit his aims. The feelings of deception and betrayal that beset the characters who have dealt with him arise because they have not asked the right questions -either of themselves or him.

Morality is a highly personal thing, and is defined through your life experiences and perceptions, as is one's concept of good and evil.

Kellhus lacks a personal veiw of good and evil as a Dunyain (they understand the way emotions work in order to master them, but knowing something intellectualy is completely different to experiencing it), as a human he still posseses a normal emotional spectrum. Prevoius posts on this forum have done a great job of charting his devolpment and recognition of this. One that I think has been overlooked is his recognition of Conphas as a psychopath, which Khellus certainly is not.

He may yet don a black hat and &quot;turn to the dark side&quot; (snigger). But I think he would be a victim of hubris rather than selfishness in that case. I simply cannot see someone conditioned as a Dunyain becoming a victim of their appetities and hatred. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 13 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Entropic_existence, Moderator

Kelhus is probably best labelled as amoral, as you are right Curethan, the Dunyain are radically different to the rest of humanity when it comes to morals. However for the sake of the debate I was comparing them on our own moral scale as opposed to where they stand on their own.

Yes communication is manipulation, but say philosophical discourse doesn't normally try and circumvent logical or rational thought processes. Kelhus and the Dunyain do. In essence they aren't trying to convince you of something to get you to do what they want, they use semantic tricks, superior intellect, and a superior knowledge of the human psyche to in essence tell you what you think. Sort of ties into a thread that Scott started in the Q&amp;A section about neuromarketing and what it is trying to achieve. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 13 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Dawnstorm, Candidate

Quote: &quot;Curethan&quot;:8aiqcnre
One that I think has been overlooked is his recognition of Conphas as a psychopath, which Khellus certainly is not.[/quote:8aiqcnre]

Ah, personality/mental disorders. The trendy good/evil of our times: healthy/sick.

Conphas is a narcist, I'd say. (Runs in the family, though Xerius is a bit more paranoid.)

And if Khellus doesn't get the hang of his emotions, and they remain alien to him, he's in danger of becoming a fully fledged shizophreniac. I'd argue he's shizoid already, but within Dûnyain society that would be the norm, and considered the only healthy modus operandi. A good disorder for a prophet, in any case.

Cnaiür is your true psychopath, I'd say: a bit antisocial, a bit avoidant.

Heh, this is fun. <!-- s:D --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy" /><!-- s:D --> view post


  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown