Questions about Moiraine ???

[Nightstrike]

You've basically said, in this particular post, that the word "send" cannot be used that way, because you don't use it that way. 

No, I didn't.

 

But Verin's Oath is not interpreted through your consciousness.

I didn't say that it is.

 

So, in all honesty, your understanding of the word "send" is moot.

No, it isn't.

 

I would hasten to add, mine is too.  It is not our individual interpretations of the word, but the simple fact you and I have demonstrated different understandings of the same word, that is relevant. 

I think Verin has the correct understanding of the word "sent". That would be relevant.

 

 

[RobertAlexWillis]

What is your basis for defining your usage as the only correct one?

 

[lt;(^-^)gt;]

Are you claiming that simply making a statement cannot cause something to happen?  Because I've made a lot of statements that caused things to happen over time, and not all of those things were intentional.  We don't normally use the word "send" in that way, but it remains a valid use.

I do not make that claim, but I do think the statement you make must contain a "trigger" of some kind.  The only "trigger" in Moiraine's statement is "must find".  Verin knows what the word "send" means.  She knows that, "we must find X" is not the same as "I send you to others who are looking for X".  Verin thinks that Moiraine thinks a Sister would be helpful.  Verin made up the "sending", and found a way to rationalize it.  I am not sure if what she said broke the Oath.  I think that it would definitely break the Oath if she said "Moiraine sent me." and left it at that.  I think she needed to explain that Moiraine only "sent" her in the sense that Moiraine thought she might be needed.

 

While that is a facile re-invention, that is not the dialogue which took place.  Particularly your inclusion of the idea that Ingtar would have been included in Moiraine's "we".  Ingtar was not present, and he was not Aes Sedai.  He was not capable of doing anything to help Mat once the dagger was found, or to contain the damage it might do.  When a Sister, in the presence of no one but other Sisters, makes a statement about what "we" must do, she generally means either 1) the specific individuals present here, or 2) Aes Sedai in general.  In this specific case, it had to be directed at a Sister because only a trained channeler could help Mat once he got the dagger.

Those are valid points.  I did not intend to include Ingtar in the "we" but I see how it reads that way.  I do think the "we" refers to the three Aes Sedai in the room.  My main point was to show that there is no instruction passed from Moiraine to Verin.  There is no trigger, no cause that originates from Moiraine that Verin can use to rationalize interpreting Moiraine's words to mean "I am sending you to Ingtar's group."  Verin has to construct that in her own head.  Therefore, Verin needs to explain further.  You could rephrase what she told Ingtar as "Moiraine's thoughts sent me to you".  That is not a lie (probably), but I still think it would be a lie for Verin to JUST say "Moiraine sent me" without an explanation.

 

Again, these are not the only possible interpretations.  But to circumvent the Oath, Verin needed only one plausible interpretation that would allow her to act as she wished.  Moiraine's actions (leaving Rand alone, and thus leaving Ingtar's party without a Sister), in combination with her statement, created a situation which caused Verin to go.  Therefore, Verin's decision to leave was caused by Moiraine's actions/words.  Therefore Moiraine caused Verin to go.  Therefore, Moiraine sent Verin, her actual intentions notwithstanding.

You are skipping the step where Verin deliberately construes Moiraine's actions and statements into a trigger.  If Moiraine unintentionally sent Verin there are 2 possibilities:

1) Verin doesn't know that Moiraine is unintentionally sending her. (She misunderstands Moiraine)

2) Verin knows that Moiraine is unintentionally sending her. (She deliberately construes a statement that she knows Moiraine did not intend to make)

If #1 is the case then Verin did not lie.  However, based on what we know about Verin and the whole situation, it is more likely that #2 is the true case.  If #2 is the case, then I believe my argument about Verin explaining her intentions applies.  She can't just say "Moiraine sent me." because that imparts untrue information, namely, the fact that Moiraine did some triggering action that caused Verin to go.  Verin knows that Moiraine did not do such a thing, and under the Oath she can not say "Moiraine sent" anything to Ingtar's group.  Unless she explains that she is acting on her interpretation of Moiraine's thoughts, in which case she leaves open the possibility that she is wrong.

 

 

Think about it the other way around.  Using your arguments, Verin could say "Moiraine sent me and the same Moiraine did not send me".  That is very obviously a lie unless Verin is confused, or she explains further.

[RobertAlexWillis]

I did not intend to include Ingtar in the "we" but I see how it reads that way.

 

LOL ... you mean your statement caused me to make a response to an idea that you did not intend?

 

Gods, the irony ...

 

You are skipping the step where Verin deliberately construes Moiraine's actions and statements into a trigger.

 

I didn't skip it.  I freely admit that Verin deliberately did that.  It still doesn't change the fact that Moiraine's statement caused her to deliberately do that.

 

Using your arguments, Verin could say "Moiraine sent me and the same Moiraine did not send me".

 

No, using my arguments, Verin could say "Moiraine sent me," while thinking to herself "even though she didn't mean to."  We've seen Aes Sedai use half of a sentence that way before too.  Specifically Verin in the prologue of TPoD, when she is talking to Beldeine about Compulsion.  Beldeine asks "What are you ... ? What is happening?"  Verin replies "Nothing that will harm you."  Then thinks to herself, "The woman might die inside the year, or in ten, as a result of this, but the weave itself would not harm her."  Then Verin says, "I promise you, this is safe enough to use on an infant."  Then thinks to herself again, "Of course, that depended on what you did with it." 

 

See the pattern?  Vague deceptive statement, followed by internal rationalization.  There would be no need for that if she were not bound by the first Oath.

 

Using only half of a true statement, like, "Moiraine sent me, Lord Ingtar, whether she meant to or not," is standard Aes Sedai procedure.  If we had Verin's POV in the Ingtar encounter, it may very well have actually said that in her head.  Just as she deceived Beldeine (because Beldeine certainly would have considered being Compelled harmful, as Verin just as certainly knows) she deceived Ingtar (with the intention, probably, of deceiving Rand, who she did not yet know was missing).

[lt;(^-^)gt;]

LOL ... you mean your statement caused me to make a response to an idea that you did not intend?

 

Gods, the irony ...

Yeah, stuff like that happens all the time.  It is a good illustration of my point though: I did not "send" you the misinterpretation, you created it yourself by making up a connection between the sentences.  If you knew that I did not mean it that way, you would be lying to tell others that I did.

 

Also, it would be a lie for you to claim that I sent you to the keyboard to write your reply.  Even if my post made you want to reply, I never requested, invited, or implied that you should respond.  Even if I said "We must find the truth of this", it is not true that I sent anyone to do anything.

 

I didn't skip it.  I freely admit that Verin deliberately did that.  It still doesn't change the fact that Moiraine's statement caused her to deliberately do that.

Moiraine's statement did not cause Verin to deliberately twist the words in her head.  Verin decided to twist the words on her own.

 

I am too divided on this one to defend my gut opinion with much force.  I can't make up my mind whether Verin lied.

[Jethro]

I dont see how Verin lied at all myself as all know. My belief is that most people on here overestimate the lying Oath. Not just because people think an intentional mislead counts as a lie, but because many people here seem to assume that the Oath can tell what was said to the person bound. My belief is that the Oath takes into account two things and two things only. The exact wording of the bound Aes Sedais own speech, and then whether or not the bound Aes Sedai believes the specifics of what the exact wording implies.

 

For example, the exact wording of the Oath, yet again, is "I vow to speak no word that is not true." The Oath, in my opinion, looks only at what she is saying, not what she is replying to and not in the slightest what she may b implying. So, I could answer any question anyone will ever ask me with "Yes" on its own, even if it is incorrect or if it isnt a yes-or-no-answer question, and the Oath would be none the wiser since I havent said a word that I dont believe to be untrue. If someone asked me to explain my answer, thats when I would have to be quick on my feet.

 

I could answer with a more specific response as long as I can think of something I believe which I can say something about while leaving out enough for my irelivent comment to be "words that are not untrue" when formed out loud in a sentence.

 

I will use a personal experience as a comparison. For the first half of secondary school I lived in France and moved back to England after about six months. I moved to France in 1996 and returned in 1997. But if I was bound by the Oaths I would be able to make people think I lived in France a lot longer. Imagine this, someone trying to figure out if I had been involved in something the day before I left.

 

SOMEONE: When did you leave for France then?

ME: I lived in France in my early childhood. I moved over there at an early age and came back to England during high school.

 

There is no word that isnt true in that passage yet it sounds like Ive lived in France for at least a few years. I was intentionally trying to make them think I had lived in France longer than I had yet the wording is all true and I know and believe it. I have not lied, I have mislead.

 

The Oath means almost nothing. Verin didnt lie.

[Swigaro]

Moiraine's statement did not cause Verin to deliberately twist the words in her head.  Verin decided to twist the words on her own.

 

I am too divided on this one to defend my gut opinion with much force.  I can't make up my mind whether Verin lied.

 

Moiraine's statement did not cause Verin to deliberately twist the words in her head, rather it allowed Verin to twist Moiraine's words into a command to join the group, while also furthering her agenda of driving a wedge between Rand and the Aes Sedai.

 

To me, it has always come down to the Verin PoV in PoD.  If she is not bound by the first oath, why go to the lengths she did in rationalizing what she was doing.  Furthermore, if she is not bound, and she is so smart, why on earth would she risk her cover whith such an insignificant, easily verifiable lie as "Moiraine sent me?"  It makes no sense.  I always saw the scene in PoD as a clear message that Verin is more skilled at twisting her words, and even her thoughts to follow the letter of the oath, while completely ignoring the spirit of the oath than any other Aes Sedai since the oaths were introduced.  Numerous people have asked in this thread if the oaths were useless.  They are, completely.  They serve no purpose even remotely connected to their original intent, and frankly in most cases they make Aes Sedai's jobs far more difficult than they could be.  This is why Egwene spent several books contemlpating doing away with them.

[Osan`gar]

i do not see how verin could possibly construe anything moiraine said to be a request for her to join the goup. moiraine and siuan aggreed that it was best to leave them boys alone for a while. i am not sure if verin was there for the discussion but still moiraine wanted them unattended by aes sedai for a while. why would she say anything that could be twisted enough to allow verin to make that statement and it be true. now we all know that it is possible to tell a lie speaking no word which is not true. just because the words that came out of verins mouth may have been true in some fashion; it does not necessarily mean she did not lie. i do not think that moiraine sent her. i think she found some way to twist the truth to fulfill her oath in such a manner as to convey an untruth...a lie.

[RobertAlexWillis]

i do not see how verin could possibly construe anything moiraine said to be a request for her to join the goup.

 

I agree.  Verin never thought that Moiraine wanted her to join the group.  Moiraine simply created (unintentionally) a situation in which Verin felt that she should join the group, and so, through a combination of her actions and words, Moiraine caused Verin to go, although that was clearly never her intent. "To cause to go" is one acceptable definition of "to send".  It is usually construed as intentional, which is how Verin was able to use it deceptively.  But the most common usage is almost never the only usage, and that is the case here.  Nothing in the definition requires intent.  Others can artificially insert that qualification, but it is not in the definition.

 

It is possible, likely even, that Verin actually manipulated Moiraine into creating that situation, specifically for the purpose of claiming that "Moiraine sent me."  Verin is extremely adept at deception.  But the broadest interpretation "speak no word that is not true" gives her just enough room to do it.

 

At this point, it is astonishingly unlikely that anyone will be convinced.  I'm just trying to explain this as plainly as possible.  I'm genuinely surprised (although perhaps I should not be) that this is so difficult a concept to accept.  There are valid uses for words other than the commonly used ones.  If that were not the case, linguists probably wouldn't have jobs.

[Gentled Ben]

i think she found some way to twist the truth to fulfill her oath in such a manner as to convey an untruth...a lie.

That seems to be correct. Verin deceived them in accordance with her own agenda while remaining true to the First Oath, with which she is bound. Welcome to the club; better late than never. One down, a couple more to go...

[Osan`gar]

i think she found some way to twist the truth to fulfill her oath in such a manner as to convey an untruth...a lie.

That seems to be correct. Verin deceived them in accordance with her own agenda while remaining true to the First Oath, with which she is bound. Welcome to the club; better late than never. One down, a couple more to go...

 

i never said she violated her oath... i said she lied. :P just because the words she spoke may have been true does not mean she was truthfull with her statement. it is a clever deception better known as a...lie ;)

[Mr Ares]

i think she found some way to twist the truth to fulfill her oath in such a manner as to convey an untruth...a lie.

That seems to be correct. Verin deceived them in accordance with her own agenda while remaining true to the First Oath, with which she is bound. Welcome to the club; better late than never. One down, a couple more to go...

i never said she violated her oath... i said she lied. :P just because the words she spoke may have been true does not mean she was truthfull with her statement. it is a clever deception better known as a...lie ;)

If what she said was true but misleading, how is she different from any other AS?

[lt;(^-^)gt;]

Moiraine's statement did not cause Verin to deliberately twist the words in her head, rather it allowed Verin to twist Moiraine's words into a command to join the group, while also furthering her agenda of driving a wedge between Rand and the Aes Sedai.

It doesn't make sense that Verin can claim that Moiraine sent her when she knows that Moiraine did not send her.  It's akin to the cheating example I gave: if someone tells you to "win", that is not the same as telling you to "cheat to win".  They did not tell you to cheat.  Winning does not imply cheating in any way.  The same is true for "finding" and "sending".  If someone tells you to "find" an object, they are not "sending" you anywhere.  It is not included in the definition of "find".

 

NEVERMIND

 

Find: succeed in reaching; arrive at; "The arrow found its mark"

"Find the dagger" could mean "arrive at the dagger", which means that Verin WAS sent to the dagger, in the same way that an arrow is "sent" to the target it eventually arrives at.

 

I think that Verin is a tricky, tricky woman.

[Gentled Ben]

i think she found some way to twist the truth to fulfill her oath in such a manner as to convey an untruth...a lie.

That seems to be correct. Verin deceived them in accordance with her own agenda while remaining true to the First Oath, with which she is bound. Welcome to the club; better late than never. One down, a couple more to go...

 

i never said she violated her oath... i said she lied. :P just because the words she spoke may have been true does not mean she was truthfull with her statement. it is a clever deception better known as a...lie ;)

 

In that sense of the word, I agree; she lied. The argument we've been having isn't about whether sneaky Verin is sneaky or not, but whether or not because of that lie, is she bound by the First Oath? I say, "Yes, she is bound by the First Oath regardless of her lie, as she told it without breaking the Oath." Verin is just that awesome.  :)

[Nightstrike]

I wouldn't like it at all if RJ meant for her to have known that Moiraine didn't intend to send her, waiting until on the way to TV, and then say:..."Moiraine Sedai sent me. She thought you might need me.". That would be bad. I wouldn't like that part of WoT, if that's the case. I'd prefer her not being bound or her misunderstanding Moiraine. It seems like there are things to indicate that she might be bound, to some 3 oaths at least. And I don't know how she could have thought that Moiraine meant to send her. It seems like there is some risk that I might be disappointed on this part of WoT. I don't like it at all.   >:(

 

 

 

 

[Mr Ares]

It's akin to the cheating example I gave: if someone tells you to "win", that is not the same as telling you to "cheat to win". They did not tell you to cheat. Winning does not imply cheating in any way.

Especially as the example you gave is irrelevant as the cheaters lost.

The same is true for "finding" and "sending". If someone tells you to "find" an object, they are not "sending" you anywhere.

They are sending you to find it. If I say "go find my keys", then I am sending you to find my keys. Moiraine said that "we" (i.e., her, Siuan and Verin) must find the dagger, and neither she nor Siuan is going - in other words, Verin has to find the dagger. In other words, she is being sent to find the dagger.

[Osan`gar]

i think she found some way to twist the truth to fulfill her oath in such a manner as to convey an untruth...a lie.

That seems to be correct. Verin deceived them in accordance with her own agenda while remaining true to the First Oath, with which she is bound. Welcome to the club; better late than never. One down, a couple more to go...

 

i never said she violated her oath... i said she lied. :P just because the words she spoke may have been true does not mean she was truthfull with her statement. it is a clever deception better known as a...lie ;)

 

In that sense of the word, I agree; she lied. The argument we've been having isn't about whether sneaky Verin is sneaky or not, but whether or not because of that lie, is she bound by the First Oath? I say, "Yes, she is bound by the First Oath regardless of her lie, as she told it without breaking the Oath." Verin is just that awesome.  :)

 

i just want to know why she Lied and what it means ? there was no need of a lie there. no one would have questioned her presence nor balked here in any way. she could have said something much less deceptive but she chose to deceive... what does that mean ???

[RobertAlexWillis]

i just want to know why she Lied and what it means ?

 

She wanted Rand to think that Moiraine had sent her to keep tabs on him (the conclusion which Mat and Perrin immediately reached), because she knew that would make him suspicious and weaken Moiraine's influence on him.  Indeed, that is the effect her presence had, when they finally met again in Cairhien.

 

She knew enough of Rand from their first encounter (and probably some well placed questions) to know that if he thought Moiraine was still trying to control him (which she most certainly was at this point) that the effect would be to lessen her influence (which is why she chose not to go herself, and did not INTEND for Verin to go).  Conveying that false impression, for the purpose of making Rand suspicious and presumably less susceptible to manipulation, required deception on her part.  She cleverly found a way to convey that deception without violating the First Oath, as Aes Sedai have done for so long that it has become literally proverbial in Randland.

 

What it means is that Verin did not trust Moiraine.  She probably trusted Moiraine's motives, for the most part, just not her judgment. 

[lt;(^-^)gt;]

It's akin to the cheating example I gave: if someone tells you to "win", that is not the same as telling you to "cheat to win". They did not tell you to cheat. Winning does not imply cheating in any way.

Especially as the example you gave is irrelevant as the cheaters lost.

The same is true for "finding" and "sending". If someone tells you to "find" an object, they are not "sending" you anywhere.

They are sending you to find it. If I say "go find my keys", then I am sending you to find my keys. Moiraine said that "we" (i.e., her, Siuan and Verin) must find the dagger, and neither she nor Siuan is going - in other words, Verin has to find the dagger. In other words, she is being sent to find the dagger.

 

Really Mr Ares you should have noticed that I crossed that out and said "nevermind" afterward.

[Osan`gar]

i just want to know why she Lied and what it means ?

 

She wanted Rand to think that Moiraine had sent her to keep tabs on him (the conclusion which Mat and Perrin immediately reached), because she knew that would make him suspicious and weaken Moiraine's influence on him.  Indeed, that is the effect her presence had, when they finally met again in Cairhien.

 

She knew enough of Rand from their first encounter (and probably some well placed questions) to know that if he thought Moiraine was still trying to control him (which she most certainly was at this point) that the effect would be to lessen her influence (which is why she chose not to go herself, and did not INTEND for Verin to go).  Conveying that false impression, for the purpose of making Rand suspicious and presumably less susceptible to manipulation, required deception on her part.  She cleverly found a way to convey that deception without violating the First Oath, as Aes Sedai have done for so long that it has become literally proverbial in Randland.

 

What it means is that Verin did not trust Moiraine.  She probably trusted Moiraine's motives, for the most part, just not her judgment. 

 

she had absolutely no need to be deceptive. yet she chose to be deceptive...why???... this is a significant issue for which we do not yet know the meaning???

[Gentled Ben]

i just want to know why she Lied and what it means ?

 

She wanted Rand to think that Moiraine had sent her to keep tabs on him (the conclusion which Mat and Perrin immediately reached), because she knew that would make him suspicious and weaken Moiraine's influence on him.  Indeed, that is the effect her presence had, when they finally met again in Cairhien.

 

She knew enough of Rand from their first encounter (and probably some well placed questions) to know that if he thought Moiraine was still trying to control him (which she most certainly was at this point) that the effect would be to lessen her influence (which is why she chose not to go herself, and did not INTEND for Verin to go).  Conveying that false impression, for the purpose of making Rand suspicious and presumably less susceptible to manipulation, required deception on her part.  She cleverly found a way to convey that deception without violating the First Oath, as Aes Sedai have done for so long that it has become literally proverbial in Randland.

 

What it means is that Verin did not trust Moiraine.  She probably trusted Moiraine's motives, for the most part, just not her judgment. 

 

she had absolutely no need to be deceptive. yet she chose to be deceptive...why???... this is a significant issue for which we do not yet know the meaning???

Luckers started a thread the other day called "Verin: An Objective Analysis" that offers some ideas about that. It should still be on the front page...

[Osan`gar]

i will try to find it then :P

[RobertAlexWillis]

she had absolutely no need to be deceptive. yet she chose to be deceptive...why???

 

Yes, she did.  The impression that she wanted to convey was that Moiraine wanted to keep directly influencing Rand.  She wanted to convey that impression so that Rand would trust Moiraine less, and thus be less susceptible to her influence.  Since Moiraine understood what Rand's reaction to continued direct pressure would be, Moiraine did NOT want overt tabs kept on him.  Verin had to be deceptive about Moiraine's overt motives to expose what Verin felt (quite accurately) were Moiraine's real motives, since Moiraine was, herself, being deceptive about her desire to continue influencing Rand.

 

I know that is a little complicated ... she was trying to play on both Moiraine's and Rand's personal psychologies.

[Osan`gar]

she had absolutely no need to be deceptive. yet she chose to be deceptive...why???

 

Yes, she did.  The impression that she wanted to convey was that Moiraine wanted to keep directly influencing Rand.  She wanted to convey that impression so that Rand would trust Moiraine less, and thus be less susceptible to her influence.  Since Moiraine understood what Rand's reaction to continued direct pressure would be, Moiraine did NOT want overt tabs kept on him.  Verin had to be deceptive about Moiraine's overt motives to expose what Verin felt (quite accurately) were Moiraine's real motives, since Moiraine was, herself, being deceptive about her desire to continue influencing Rand.

 

I know that is a little complicated ... she was trying to play on both Moiraine's and Rand's personal psychologies.

 

i suppose that makes sense...provided that you are right about verins motivations ??? but i admit that it looks very plausuble the way you state it.

[Mr Ares]

Really Mr Ares you should have noticed that I crossed that out and said "nevermind" afterward.

I did. You should have noticed there was a delete button. And if you didn't want anyone responding to that, used it.