Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

Breaking the 3 oaths


pmtang
 Share

Recommended Posts

Rand asks Moiraine about writing a lie and she confirms that she can't write one either. Maybe someone will provide the quote. It's after he gets the letter from Alviarin. But, personally, I believe that it depends on the AS. If they view their oath as a literal one to just "speak" no lie then they could write one. Just like the amount of danger each AS has to be in before they can use the Power as a weapon varies, I think each AS's personal impressions and beliefs in the oaths makes a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it depends allot on individual perception since for example a lie can be spoken if the Aes Sedai speaking it believes it to be truth, so if she believes that writing a lie is not lying perhaps, but generally I think it is that they can not express words that they know to be direct lies, they can not say that the red rose is yellow, but if they are color blind for example they could, it all boils down to personal perception of what is and what is not a lie. It is the same as with how much danger someone have to be in to use the Power as a weapon as it is very personal to what point one feel that one's life is in danger, the oaths is based on personal belief and not objective reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consider, though, that Moiraine nodded to answer the question...

and a nod, unlike speaking "yes" or "no" can mean anything. The exact wording of the oath is "to speak no word that is not true" - as much as many people complain that the AS have become experts in "turning the truth on its head" the oath forbids one from speaking what he/she believes to be an untruth. I personally think that if the oath was "to speak with honor and honesty" would perhaps accomplish more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think that if the oath was "to speak with honor and honesty" would perhaps accomplish more.

 

Perhaps however what is honor and honesty? I mean ask ten different people and while you might get somewhat similar answers they will differ allot, this is to vague I think to be used for an oath like that, the problem is not really that the wording of the oaths is wrong but that the Aes Sedai do twist it and they probably would twist any other wording as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is the AS find a need to bind themselves with Oaths to begin with, and then master the art of breaking the spirit of the Oath while being bound to the letter. If they were honest, they wouldn't need the Oath, because people would trust them anyway. If they're dishonest, the Oath isn't enough, unless you make it insanely restrictive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is the AS find a need to bind themselves with Oaths to begin with, and then master the art of breaking the spirit of the Oath while being bound to the letter. If they were honest, they wouldn't need the Oath, because people would trust them anyway. If they're dishonest, the Oath isn't enough, unless you make it insanely restrictive.

True. In fact, the only Oath i believe necessary is the one against using the Power as a weapon. The others i find to be unnecessary; they cause as much harm as good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Aes Sedai did not feel the need to bind themselves with the three oaths, they did it to placate the rest of the world after their Amyrlin really messed things up. The three oaths in such a way is perfect, it allowed the Tower to escape the ire of the world at large while at the same time being so vague as to be virtually important, the oaths have nothing to do with morality, it is all about politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Aes Sedai did not feel the need to bind themselves with the three oaths, they did it to placate the rest of the world after their Amyrlin really messed things up. The three oaths in such a way is perfect, it allowed the Tower to escape the ire of the world at large while at the same time being so vague as to be virtually important, the oaths have nothing to do with morality, it is all about politics.

And the result? In the short term, it might have fixed the problem. In the long term, it hasn't helped as the AS are still considered untrustworthy. So, politically, it's a bad move. A better move would be to show that you are worthy of trust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...