Moriane's Role in the New Books

[Hybrid]

I certainly hope that you havn't lost touch with the fact that we're discussing a fictional story.  It is all "made up stuff" and "wishful thinking."

The events of the series are not "made up stuff" and "wishfull thinking" within the context of the series.  Whereas fan speculation, within the context of the series, is always "made up stuff" and often "wishful thinking."

 

Fair enough

We can discuss all this in the context of reality, but somehow I don't think we'd do so well.   ;)

 

Meh, speculation is fine, but if it contradicts the events of the series or there is a better, simpler explanation, then I disagree with it.

[mb]

I am still not buying that Lews Therin is a symptom of the Taint.

It may be a form of madness, yet the Taint is not the only cause of madness; and it might not be the only cause of Rand's 'madness'.

Do we have any other examples besides Rand?

 

The Taint might produce memories, but can it produce accurate ones?

It might alter personality, yet there is at least one difference in their personalities (Lews Therin suicidal, Rand not).

The Taint giving abilities that would not be there otherwise, that does not make any sense.

 

 

Theory of it being a merge seems more supported by the books than it being caused by the Taint.

We have 2 other examples:

-Fain & Mordeth

-Luc & Isam

 

[Owners.Inc]

I am still not buying that Lews Therin is a symptom of the Taint.

It may be a form of madness, yet the Taint is not the only cause of madness; and it might not be the only cause of Rand's 'madness'.

Do we have any other examples besides Rand?

 

The Taint might produce memories, but can it produce accurate ones?

It might alter personality, yet there is at least one difference in their personalities (Lews Therin suicidal, Rand not).

The Taint giving abilities that would not be there otherwise, that does not make any sense.

 

 

Theory of it being a merge seems more supported by the books than it being caused by the Taint.

We have 2 other examples:

-Fain & Mordeth

-Luc & Isam

 

 

Your 2 examples, don't involve channeling the OP, so its a very different kind of madness.

 

For the characters, it makes sense from them to call the Taint-filled men mad, because, well, I'll call most people who hear strange voices in their head mad. In the case of most Ashaman, it pretty much is madness, its not like they're following a voice in their heads - they're just nuts. In Rand's case, though, we are specifically told that it is a rare and advanced form of the madness. How Semirhage would know so much about a madness that began only after she was sealed remains to be seen, or whether its even the truth, but until we're sure she lying, I think its safe to assume that LTT was brought into Rand's mind because of the Taint, but at the same time, LTT is very real, and hence the truth of his words (sometimes).

 

I have a theory on why the Taint would cause a blending of the minds or a thinning of the divisions the separate one's past and current lives.

We are told that the reality of Randland was created by the OP right? Saidar + Saidin. So if half of the power that created the universe and the driving force of the universe becomes tainted, surely there has to be some negative effect on the world right? I can't sure why there is no other visible effect of the Taint, other than perhaps because these things were already created before the DO-induced taint, idk.

[mb]

By fact of it being rare, it seems very unlikely that Lews Therin was caused by the Taint alone since the Taint is a relatively common thing.

 

My first question rephrased:

Has there been any other examples besides Rand where the Taint was involved?

 

Some other questions to consider:

-How many saidin channelers besides Rand have memories that are not their own?

-How many saidin channelers besides Rand have non-channeling abilities they did not have before channeling?

-Or if Rand is the only one for both, how many saidin channelers besides Rand have unique symptoms?

 

To assume Lews Therin was caused by the Taint, one or more of these would also need to be assumed:

-Other saidin channelers have similar symptoms.

-The Taint is able to produce different symptoms for different saidin channelers.

 

[Mr Ares]

would you be willing to accept the idea that the evidence given is a miniscule amount of the potential total evidence that may be given by the end of the series?

No. RJ planned one more book. So any other evidence would have to be introduced in the last book. Bad storytelling. We have no clues pointing towards any other conclusions, and then this mountain of contradictory evidence only makes an appearance at the end? None of the foreshadowing that RJ was so fond of?

I agree that you're postulate is the most concise and well supported, but that doesn't mean that it's the only one.

Just the only reasonable one.

A look at the history of the sciences

Will tell us nothing about good storytelling. This isn't science, it is literature, art. The rules are different.

 

Occam's Razor..

Excellent point. But also consider Schrödinger's cat

How is it relevant? And I'll see your Schrödinger's cat, and raise you Russell's teapot.

 

I am still not buying that Lews Therin is a symptom of the Taint.

Try again.

It may be a form of madness

It is.

 

The Taint might produce memories

It doesn't, it causes insanity. The insanity might.

The Taint giving abilities that would not be there otherwise, that does not make any sense.

It causes madness, the "abilities" are symptoms of Rand's condition.

 

Theory of it being a merge seems more supported by the books than it being caused by the Taint.

It isn't.

We have 2 other examples

No, we don't. The two you cite are too different.

 

How Semirhage would know so much about a madness that began only after she was sealed remains to be seen

It didn't begin after the sealing. The taint doesn't cause any specific form of madness. Any form of madness it causes would be possible without the taint.

 

By fact of it being rare, it seems very unlikely that Lews Therin was caused by the Taint alone since the Taint is a relatively common thing.

No. 1% of the population can channel, half of those are men, most channelers are learners. So the taint is reserved for a small fraction of a small fraction of the population. So a rare form of madness in a small group.

 

Has there been any other examples besides Rand where the Taint was involved?

We have seen no others at all.

 

-How many saidin channelers besides Rand have memories that are not their own?

None. Male channelers are killed if they go mad.

 

-The Taint is able to produce different symptoms for different saidin channelers.

That's not an assumption, that's a fact. We've seen it in the books.

[Redstone Doorway]

I’m just saying that it is plausible that this could have broken the bond.

But utterly unsupported. I'm a fan of evidence.

Very well. What do you wish to define evidence as? Pick a definition, and we’ll both hold to it for the remainder of this discussion.

 

And my statement still stands. You seem to be implicitly agreeing with it, by the way.

 

I was just wondering if it could be proven that she didn’t

It is possible, according to RJ, for an AS to dissolve the Warder bond, but we know Moiraine didn't do it. It requires physical contact, time, concentration, none of which Moiraine had, and it prevents the Warder suffereing the negative effects of a bond snapping, which we know Lan suffered.

I know it prevents the Warder from suffering the negative effects. Do we know the others?

 

And I think that Kryshah’s response is sufficient for this one.

 

Unless she didn’t know about their weakness to fire

They ask about fire. You don't think she might try it?

unless she decided to let herself be captured, unless the Eelfinn have ter’angreal that the Aelfinn don’t...Etcetera.

Unless she turns into a magic mile high gerbil who can't fit through the Doorway, etc., etc. Crackpot.

Plausibility. I have nothing to say here that I have not already said elsewhere.

 

Also, the rhyme about the Finns implies that you need all four components in order to win against the Finns. It doesn’t say anything about whether you can win with only one.

 

And “crackpot” is subjective. :)

 

I’m inventing

You don't need to. We have an answer supported by evidence, that requires no invention at all.

See my question above, about evidence.

 

And please stop cutting bits out of my sentences unless you intend to answer the whole thing in bits, because the first two words were not the relevant part of this section of my reply.

 

 

In the absence of a solution, invention is fine, but when we have one why bother? Occam's Razor.

 

Occam’s Razor refers to multiple explanations for multiple observations when one will do, or improbable explanations when a probable one will do, or the number of assumptions used in attaining those explanations.

 

My point is that there exist other explanations that are not improbable. One would think that a single example is enough to prove this, and I have given several. I am not talking about evidence or a lack thereof. 

 

And of course, please remember that “not improbable” does not mean “probable.”

 

 

Even if she did, she would have eventually needed to sleep.

Tie it off.

For one thing, she becomes a static target.

 

You are suggesting that it is utterly impossible for a non-channeler (even if they are non-channelers) to overcome and capture a channeler.

I'm suggesting that capturing someone when they're blinding you is a lot bloody harder than when you can see.

You’re suggesting that it is utterly impossible for a non-channeler (even if they are non-channelers) to overcome and capture a channeler. If you need them, there are examples in the books to prove this wrong. All it requires is surprise, and Moiraine and Lanfear were busy with one another.

 

And even if she did that, it is not improbable that they have ways to deal with that.

 

As you pointed out earlier, a ter’angreal was violently malfunctioning. Who knows what it could have done?

According to the books, it could burn her out. Ter'angreal have been known to do that when mishandled.

I know that. That wasn’t what I was talking about. Please refer to the quote of yours that I was replying to.

 

I agree; that’s a plausible alternative, perhaps even the most plausible. But we don’t know it for fact.

We know it for the only solution which isn't made up stuff and wishful thinking.

Do you understand my position? Can you restate it? In your own words, without quotes.

 

I don’t like using the term “madness,”

Even though it's the one the books use.

Again...I know that. I was expressing an opinion about one of RJ’s choices as a side thought. You’re also quoting pieces again.

 

And by the way, the only reason you could have possibly have brought this up is to indicate a lack of competence and/or understanding on my part to subsequently apply it to any other statement that I make. That’s a logical fallacy.

 

No. RJ planned one more book. So any other evidence would have to be introduced in the last book. Bad storytelling. We have no clues pointing towards any other conclusions, and then this mountain of contradictory evidence only makes an appearance at the end? None of the foreshadowing that RJ was so fond of?

Oh, there are so many things wrong with that...

 

Are you a writer? Clues/evidence and foreshadowing are not always the same thing. And even at that, foreshadowing does not necessarily come true...We can get back to this after you define “evidence.”

 

 

 

Finally, there are a number of points you have avoided, two of them twice over in fact. I very much dislike evasion in Internet debates (almost as much as I dislike quote mining), and I have included a selection of the points here. Please attempt to refute each of these, and please do so directly.

 

We barely know anything about [the Finns]. All we know is that one person channelled and frightened [the Aelfinn] with fire and subsequently got out, and another channeller went in [to the Eelfinn doorway] and didn’t come back out (having been somehow overcome). That doesn’t necessarily mean that the second person was incapable of channelling; it’s just a possibility.

 

Also, at some level you seem to recognize this yourself, as evidenced by use of the word “should” – indeed, she should have been able to [hold the Finns off with fire], but we don’t know that she could have or even would have, were she not stilled.

 

We know that the Tower is hard to leave through. We don’t even know if she could have found it or the other doorway once in Finnland.

 

... what about the point that Moiraine was trying to pull the angreal away from Lanfear? If that was how [Lanfear] was stilled, she wasn’t necessarily stilled by falling through the door.

 

... we’re in a world where the normal circumstances don’t seem to apply.

 

 

 

[Mr Ares]

What do you wish to define evidence as? Pick a definition, and we’ll both hold to it for the remainder of this discussion.

If you insist. Anything that supports Mr Ares's case. That is the definition we can use. That, or facts that support an assertion. Nothing supports you.

 

I know it prevents the Warder from suffering the negative effects. Do we know the others?

Yes.

 

Also, the rhyme about the Finns implies that you need all four components in order to win against the Finns.

No it doesn't. It says nothing either way about how many you would need.

 

And please stop cutting bits out of my sentences

No. I will respond to the relevant parts. We are given an outcome, and possibilities that would lead to that outcome. We have no need to start inventing "plausible" possibilities that are unsupported by anything RJ wrote in an effort to come up with a new theory when the one we have comprehensively answers everything with no extra invention needed.

 

Occam’s Razor refers to multiple explanations for multiple observations when one will do, or improbable explanations when a probable one will do, or the number of assumptions used in attaining those explanations.

I know what Occam's Razor is. Shall we apply it? We see two women fall into a violently malfunctioning ter'angreal. Ter'angreal, violently malfunctioning or otherwise, can burn people out. We see one woman later, diminished in strength. The only thing we know of that could cause that in a woman is if she was severed from the Source and Healed by a woman. We see a channeler, who should be capable of escape, in need of rescue. We see a Warder bond snapped, and only know of two things that could cause it - death and severing. We know she isn't dead. All this can be explained by them being burnt out by the ter'angreal. Moiraine's imprisonment, Lan's bond breaking, Cyndane's reduced strength. All can be explained by one thing, with no need to make any assumptions, for any extra invention.

 

My point is that there exist other explanations that are not improbable.

No. The only other explanations can be referred to as "not impossible", because we haven't yet had anything to rule them out, but they remained utterly unsupported by anything in the actual books. Ditch the plausibles and the "not implausibles" and the other crap and look at the evidence. What does it say? Without any extraneous invention, just look at what the author (that guy who wrote the books, you remember him?) had the good grace to actually write. Now, what answer does that give you? That there's nothing to say there isn't a third group of Finns, who are actually quite nice, and no-one bothered to come up with a rhyme for them because if you go to their world they'll give you a cup of tea and a biscuit and no-one thought it worth trying to extort a second biscuit, and that Moiraine ended up with them, and Mat just needs to show up and tell her it's time to go home, doesn't mean we should start championing this as a plausible theory, as something not-unlikely, or any other such terms, because it is not going to happen. Look at the books, come up with a theory based on what is there. That is the only theory worth a damn.

 

And of course, please remember that “not improbable” does not mean “probable.”

No, it's just another weaselly, meaningless term because you can't face up to the fact that you've got nothing.

 

You’re suggesting that it is utterly impossible for a non-channeler to overcome and capture a channeler.

I'm suggesting nothing of the sort.

 

According to the books, it could burn her out. Ter'angreal have been known to do that when mishandled.

I know that.

Good. So why do you want to start inventing fancy explanations for something really simple because it's "not implausible".

 

Do you understand my position?

Yes.

Can you restate it?

Who gives a toss about evidence? RJ might have come up with any number of other solutions that he never bothered to hint at, and they might be plausible, and not improbable, so let's spend a lot of time talking crap rather than looking at facts.

 

Again...I know that.

Then stop disagreeing with what's in the books.

 

And by the way

By the way, you're not saying anything relevant.

 

Oh, there are so many things wrong with that...

No, there aren't.

 

Are you a writer?

I'm not not a writer.

And even at that, foreshadowing does not necessarily come true.

Yes, it does, of necessity. If it doesn't, it isn't foreshadowing. It might be a red herring.

 

 

... what about the point that Moiraine was trying to pull the angreal away from Lanfear? If that was how [Lanfear] was stilled, she wasn’t necessarily stilled by falling through the door.

We have no reason to suppose that would still someone.

 

... we’re in a world where the normal circumstances don’t seem to apply.

We're in a world with a different set of normal circumstances.

 

Now, on the one hand, we have a weight of evidence to suggest she was burnt out. On the other, we have a lot of weaselling out of things, talking about not unlikely this, not improbable that, not saying anything of substance. We have been given over the course of the books a series of clues that lead us inexorably to one conclusion, and nothing at all to lead us to any other. So, unless RJ was such a bad writer he would just introduce everything at the last minute, in a very unsatisfying way (most unlike him - he almost always sets things up in advance if they are as important as this). Ditch the weaselling, look at the facts.

[Wonzer]

Moiraine, when she returns, will almost certainly be severed. And it's doubtful she has enjoyed her holiday in Finnland (quite right too, Finland is a ghastly country, not nearly as lovely as Sweden. Visit Sweden!). So we can expect some changes based on that.

 

« Last Edit: Just now by Majsju, on the instructions of the Swedish Board of Tourism »

 

There's 1 thing Sweden has that Finland doesn't have: intelligent life behind the border  ;D

[Mr Ares]

I very much dislike wankers. Make do.

Ironic.

Not in the slightest.

[Redstone Doorway]

I will post again once you have responded to the entirety of my last post.

 

Filling in the context of the quote-mined parts of your last reply would be nice too.

[Mr Ares]

I will post again once you have responded to the entirety of my last post.

Don't hold your breath. I've responded to all that's worth responding to.

[mb]

By fact of it being rare, it seems very unlikely that Lews Therin was caused by the Taint alone since the Taint is a relatively common thing.

No. 1% of the population can channel, half of those are men, most channelers are learners. So the taint is reserved for a small fraction of a small fraction of the population. So a rare form of madness in a small group.

The form of madness seems more rare than the Taint; also more rare than male sparkers.  Like you tell in the following quote, Rand is the only example.

Has there been any other examples besides Rand where the Taint was involved?

We have seen no others at all.

 

-The Taint is able to produce different symptoms for different saidin channelers.

That's not an assumption, that's a fact. We've seen it in the books.

Male channelers that have the Dark One's protection could be expected to have different symptoms than ones that do not have the protection.

Maybe a difference between sparkers and learners.

There might need to be more groups than those to assume Lews Therin was from the Taint.

 

 

Like I told earlier, 2 examples support a merge.

In both those examples each share memories & abilities with the other.

 

[Mr Ares]

The form of madness seems more rare than the Taint

Well, it would be. A rare condition, and a rare thing that causes madness, cases of that particular form of madness are not going to be common.

Like you tell in the following quote, Rand is the only example.

Bear in mind we do not have many instances of madness in the books. In the Asha'man, most are killed as soon as they manifest symptoms. We hear of one guy thinking he's covered in spiders, and Fedwin Morr regresses to a childlike state, as well as Rand. Who else do we have? One case of something said to be very rare in a very small group to begin with.

 

Male channelers that have the Dark One's protection could be expected to have different symptoms than ones that do not have the protection.

Those protected from the taint would be expected to have no syptoms at all.

Maybe a difference between sparkers and learners.

Why? What we see is that the taint does not cause any specific kind of madness.

[mb]

Since Rand's case is rarer than the madness cases we have seen, it seems unlikely that that his form is from the Taint alone; unless other saidin channelers have as complex symptoms.

Also since Semirhage has knowledge of his kind, it seems more reasonable that his kind occurred before the Taint was created.

 

[Mr Ares]

Since Rand's case is rarer than the madness cases we have seen, it seems unlikely that that his form is from the Taint alone; unless other saidin channelers have as complex symptoms.

That doesn't make any sense. There is no specific form of Taint madness, the forms of madness it causes are possible without the Taint acting as a catalyst. Of the three or so cases we have seen, we only have any depth on one, and that, we are told, is a very rare form. So we wouldn't expect to see any others. But that doesn't make it unlikely it was caused by the Taint. Given the Taint causes madness and Rand is mad, it is actually very likely.

Also since Semirhage has knowledge of his kind, it seems more reasonable that his kind occurred before the Taint was created.

We know it did. Rand's was still caused by the Taint.

[Padraic_Seebrr]

The Taint induces madness in male channelers, but the form of madness is not set in stone. It just means you go generally mad, and that would depend on the person I'd guess. Like that Asha'man who's name escapes me that goes back to childhood pyshce, or that training loss with the spiders. People aren't always mad loudly or violently, theres quiet madness too, like with Aram trying to hack off Perrin's head. Well before he tried to hack off his head I mean.

[mb]

Also since Semirhage has knowledge of his kind, it seems more reasonable that his kind occurred before the Taint was created.

We know it did. Rand's was still caused by the Taint.

There is no proof that it was caused by the Taint.

Nor proof for it being a merge.

Yet Rand's case has the similarity of having new memories & new abilities in common with both merge examples.

Also, subtracting Rand's situation from the examples of both theories leaves 2 examples for merge and 0 examples for taint.

Those things make a merge more likely.

 

[Padraic_Seebrr]

So mb your saying that all of a sudden for no apparent reason he went insane, while theres a perfectly good madness-inducer inside his mind? He wasn't spoken to by Lews Therin until he had been channeling awhile, so the Taint obviously had something to do with it.

[mb]

So mb your saying that all of a sudden for no apparent reason he went insane, while theres a perfectly good madness-inducer inside his mind? He wasn't spoken to by Lews Therin until he had been channeling awhile, so the Taint obviously had something to do with it.

I did not say that the taint had no role in it, only that a merge seems more likely.

 

A clarification:  A merge seems to better account for the memories and abilities than the Taint.

 

[Padraic_Seebrr]

Ah, point taken. But remember the Taint isn't a form of madness, its something to makes people mad. So he's really just hearing his soul's past life in his head. Which is a form of madness I guess.

 

So anyway any1 else think that Moirane is gonna be the one to break Rand's 'dry' spell of crying?(Worked on that 'dry' joke for like 20 minutes, please at least curtosy laugh >.>) Like she comes back and he finally gets rid of that list, since shes always first on the list anyway?

[a pale tanned lover]

Ah, point taken. But remember the Taint isn't a form of madness, its something to makes people mad. So he's really just hearing his soul's past life in his head. Which is a form of madness I guess.

 

Thats assuming the voice in his head was caused by the Taint,LTT is mad however. Perrin can talk to wolves in his head, and if he let go of his humanity would believe himself one, thereby merging and giving into madness like we have seen previously so therefore he must be mad also?. That said a human merging into another human wouldn't have such an impact as a human into animal, so man can merge with wolf, why not man/dragon into man/crazy dragon?

[Mr Ares]

There is no proof that it was caused by the Taint.

There is evidence.

Yet Rand's case has the similarity of having new memories & new abilities in common with both merge examples.

And the enormous difference of those being two souls merging, this being two personalities of the same soul.

[Lindorm]

Ah, this is a subject that i have speculated a bit upon. I have always had a problem with the assumption that it was the taint that brought Lews Therin out. I mean, the taint appears to be a catalyst for madness, but for me to see that is not what is happening with Rand and Lews Therin. I believe that Rand would always have had to share his head with Lews Therin, and here`s why.

 

We learn from Semirhage in KoD that Rands condition was apparently well known in the in the AoL, and that got me to thinking about how on earth such a phenomenon could occur in the first place. I mean its not like everybody goes around talking with their earlier lives. My feeling is that this is something the dead personalities does on their own accord. I think that they were persons that, like Lews Therin, inadvertently caused death and, perhaps, went mad. Perhaps the drunk driver who runs over a child or the the mother who accidently kills her own child. These, when reborn, are then subsequently unable to find rest in the completeness of the soul. Their feelings of shame and horror makes them rise to the surface, so to speak, and brings madness with them.       

[CUBAREY]

I think that the use of simple logic points us to the conclusion that the Taint most likely did not cause LTT to be awakened inside Rand's head.

 

My argument is as follows:

 

Semi states that she is aware of other cases in which channelers hear voices in their heads.

 

These cases were from the Age Of Lengends, thus pre-taint.

 

Thus we know the condition can occur without the Taint being present.

 

Therefore, while the Taint can and often does cause insanety there is no evidence that LTT's manifestation is caused by the Taint and instead have proof that the condition has occured without the inducement of the Taint. Thus, the logical conclusion is that the Taint did not cause LTT to manifest in Rand's mind but that it was caused by whatever caused the cases which Semi is aware of and which could not have been causedby the Taint.

[mb]

The complexity of the symptoms may need to be considered.

Memories & abilities might be considered much more complex than perception things (hearing voices, feeling things on skin).

So far we do not know if the Taint can cause other symptoms that are as complex as memories & abilities; nor if there are any in-between degrees of complexity in Taint caused symptoms.

 

Merging, maybe what is needed is a corpse (or at least a person near death) and a living person.  Perhaps distance could be a factor; maybe carrying an item like linked to the corpse.

Maybe Lews Therin's body was preserved.