yeah, i don't know. I think that it was a case of RJ didn't want anyone to have the ability of flight because it would kinda be lame, Aes Sedai flying round everywhere fighting in the sky. Technically, you are probably correct, but I am happy that channelers can't fly round the place, Gateways are good enough IMO.

I guess I just like the mental image. And honestly, all that power and you still can't fly, I'd be rather depressed when I thought about it.

I think that maybe Mat could end up giving it back to Perrin as part of the alliance between the North and East, and the South and West. That's the best theory out there I've read (so far )

 

I think the trees flowering all around him could relate to the seed singing, or uber ta'verenism like Rand in Apples (ToM)

I really don't get the tree part, although Perrin did make the wolf dream bloom at one point right? Remember he said it still wasn't right, but it showed a level of control and power there that we haven't seen before. He affected a HUGE area with that.

Maybe Mat could, but I mean was that vision worthy?

you cant make yourself fly with the power.

 

Never been proven one way or another. Given the context we have of abilities, it should be possible, even if all you're doing is making a wingsuit of air and using another weave of air to propel yourself thru the air.

 

That being said, the mental image of Lanfear Super-man flying about amuses me greatly.

 

It would require some sort of device, but without some sort of aid it is impossible.

 

INTERVIEW: Oct 28th, 2005

KOD Signing Report - Jason Wolfbrother (Paraphrased)

 

JASON WOLFBROTHER

Can a channeler fly without any ter'angreal or equipment (like sho-wings) if he or she knows the right weave?

 

ROBERT JORDAN

No. Flat out, no hesitation, no thinking. Simply put, NO.

Well damn.

Hmm. Oh well, guess this is another "Word of God" moment, although I'd like to know why the wingsuit of air idea wouldn't work. You can make objects with air, a wings can fly with propulsion, weaves of Air can provide propulsion. It should be possible.

Oh well, thanks for the quote.

you cant make yourself fly with the power.

Never been proven one way or another. Given the context we have of abilities, it should be possible, even if all you're doing is making a wingsuit of air and using another weave of air to propel yourself thru the air.

That being said, the mental image of Lanfear Super-man flying about amuses me greatly.

I don't get how the Seanchan holding one banner, would be in Mat's future. Is he going to take the banner back? It doesn't make much sense, although a nod for the actual theory.

I wasn't lumping you in with anyone else. I was responding to you, and you alone. Your position is offensive

Actually you were. You said “In fact, this attitude--that a person should be able to control their mental problems, and that their failure to do so is indicative of weak will--has been directly connected to incidences of suicide.”

I did not say that. At all. You read too much into my statement and therefore reached conclusions lumping me in with a category of people you dislike. Of course that is totally up to you.

Psychologically and psychochemically, no, this is not subject to debate. It has been proven that mental illness--including things like alcohol and gambling addiction which are the most commonly cited 'they lack the will to fight their urges' mental issues--involves a neurochemical effect that changes perception itself. Their brains literally train themselves to negate inclinations to act against their illness on a chemical level, thereby nullifying willpower.

 

Furthermore its been proven that those who find ways to deal with their illness on their own invariably have shot themselves in the foot in the long run, but even so if you have managed to find a sustainable way to deal with your issues--more power to you. But the presentation that it is no more than a matter of willpower is both ignorent and offensive.

Actually it has not been proven in every case. And even then, neurochemical effects can be controlled mentally, again that’s been proven. I’d also like to state that it doesn’t work for everyone everytime.

As to the bottom paragraph that is a bold faced lie. You statement implies that every person who deal with their illness on their own have issues further down the line. There aren’t many absolutes in the medical field, I won’t say there are no absolutes in the medical field, because that would be an absolute itself. Studies have shown, in the cases studied, the a majority of those perhaps have relapsed or has issues further down the line, but if you show me a study that shows ALL people who deal with their illnesses in that way have relapsed or had issues further down the line, I’ll show you a flawed study sir.

And you don't see the judgement inherent in that comment? If you aren't strong, what does that make you?

No I don’t, because I take things at face value. Just because you aren’t as strong as someone else, that doesn’t make you weak. To assume that means you have other issues to deal with.

I believe you did not intend to be offensive. I believe your attitude is nonetheless deeply offensive. It is ignorent. It is arrogant. Had you stated that you had an experience with mental illness and overcame it through will power, and thought maybe others could too, that would be one thing. You didn't. Your comments have at all stages disdained those who did not achieve the same control over their issues as you believe you have, both by inference and directly.

That’s your right. Although, to be frank the bolded part is exactly what I stated. You took my statements the wrong way and assumed I stated something else. I’ve stated nothing else other than that bolded part. Not once have I claimed disdain for anyone who did not have the ability to achieve anything. Show it to me. That is a bold claim sir.

Comparison requires a detailed understanding of both sides of the comparison. You lack that--what you are doing is viewing things through the lens of your own experience, and the information you've gathered in dealing with your own experience. That is not comparison--it's judgement. An assessment of another based on your own position.

 

And that is precisely why it offends me so deeply. You presume to judge others, based not on a study of their experience, but on an understanding of your own laid over theirs.

Now you’re just tossing out thinly veiled insults. But again, your right.

Actually it doesn't, it points to person 2 having a greater pain threshold, which has numerous causes both psychological and physiological.

 

This sort of simplistic assessment of effect being simply the cause of willpower is precisely why I name your position both ignorent, presumptive and offensive.

Actually it does. Studies have shown that one can develop a greater threshold for pain through mental exercises. yes it’s a simplistic scenario because I didn’t feel the need to go in depth. And in fact, had you taken the time to read my entire statement, you would have noticed the word perhaps. Again, not a definite statement, my point was that the ability or lack thereof of a person to funciton in a similar situation to someone else doesn’t make that person less or weaker than anyone. I’ve stated it clearly again, you’ll probably misread it again.

That is not a valid foundation for the statements you have made. Basic psych would have covered what... social psych? An introduction to nuerochemistry? Ethics? Did you even touch on abnormal psychology? Everyone knows basic psych is more about training a student to think in psychological terms than it is about the information it provides. From there you have books... papers... seminars... self-study, all viewed and judged only by you, viewed through the lens of your own experience.

 

Look, I appreciate that you have explored this, but you have made bold declarative statements that are... well, to be frank, baseless, wrong and offensive.

Yes, yes, yes, yes. Classes, not class. Even in classes, of course the information is viewed and studied by me, who else would view and study what I’m learning. I’m confused by your statement. Are you suggesting that since I choose the studies on my own, that I would inherently be biased and not study multiple sides of a topic? Who’s being judgmental now?

Ah! You're right about that. I'm just rereading for the first time in a long time. Sorry.

It's cool. I really may have missed a moment where LTT took over his body. The only thing I can think of that was close was when Rand made a comment about if he gave in now, he knew that LTT would be in control and he would be a voice in his head.

 

But other than that, all LTT taking over was channeling which technically is a mental thing only.

How about the time in FoH (chapter 3) where Rand failed to respond o his own name, but did respond to Lews Therin?

 

I have a simple Question, why does everyone hate Egwene? I understand peoples dislike of Elayne, but not Egwene?

Lol, that's not as easy a question as it seems, countless of topics have started or digressed in Egwene hate/love discussion wich all are shut down by admins for mud slinging.

Haha, Ok then. Can someone explain in brief why she is hated? and maybe a bit about why she is loved?

Egwene is hated for a variety of reasons. A common one is that she is often perceived as a Mary Sue. She becomes an expert politician in a very short space of time, when she is in the WT, an AS asks her for advice on dealing with Warders - in other words, she wins because she gets very good in a short space of time, and because everyone around her is dumbed down in order for her to win. Her opposition to Rand during their meeting is often felt to be unwarranted - some people feel that she is stupid in opposing the Dragon with no good reason, and she should listen to his explanation for why he wants to break the seals. She's accused of lacking a distinct personality, because she merely adapts her identity to whatever situation she's in - around the Aiel she's the perfect Aiel, around the AS she's the perfect AS, and so on. I'm sure if you check the many Egwene hate threads, you can find people explaining their own reasons at greater length.

A Valid question: I'd state that he sitll didn't take over a physical part of his body, it was mental all the same. Although that is an interestng thought.

The "getting mad" point was mostly directed at Luckers. I understand where he's coming from with that, though, and don't disagree with what he says one bit, but I don't think it's worth bringing those points into the discussion. We only have analogous mental illnesses to Rand's in the real world, and analogies can be broken. But fundamentally he's right, it's naive to think that Rand can "control" either the memories or the voice. Sometimes Lews Therin listens to Rand and does what he says, and sometimes, he hangs around in the back of Rand's mind and weeps or gibbers. Rand's not ignoring or controlling the Lews Therin voice in those instances, he's trying to act in spite of (in other words, in reaction to) the voice.

 

Don't take the separation of mental/physical too far, in fact, it's best to not divide them at all. Lews Therin has taken control of Rand's channeling, there's no reason at all he couldn't take over Rand's limbs or voice and act or speak, he just doesn't, because by the time the disorder has progressed that far, Rand and Lews have reached a working agreement. And it can be argued that Rand's picking up Lews Therin's gestures, like thumbing his ear and humming at pretty girls, simply is the Lews Therin personality taking modest control of Rand's body.

 

Look at it this way, in order to think, you've got to have a thinker. We call our thinkers brains. If your thinker's broken, the things you think are gonna be all messed up. Likewise, if the things you think are all messed up, then either your thinker's incompatible with the inputs it's getting, or it's broken. Mental disorders imply physical disorders and vice versa. If you break your leg, that's gonna affect your thinker through all the pain signals its sending plus all the hormones and other chemicals it releases that change the way your thinker behaves. Imagine how a person acts who's just broken their leg. Now, how would you evaluate their mental health if you witnessed their behavior, but we prevented you from knowing their leg was just broken? You'd think they had some sort of mental disorder, possibly ocd mixed with some paranoia among other things.

My reasoning for discounting channeling was because it's a purely mental thing. I.e. non physical (Although it affects the physical world). I understand about not separating them, however in this world we have nothing similiar to that, hence why I separated them. The thumbing and humming were not really physical, more of a bad habit he picked up.

As for your example, the way people react to pain is all a mental thing as well. I've seen some people break their leg go, Son of a b***, I just broke my leg. And calmly ask for my assistance getting to the car. I've also seen the exact opposite. Same with gunshots and other tramautic injuries. We're all different creatures. So in your example, it would depend what his/her reaction was. Although using that same example, I've seen people assume someone was crazy because they injured themselves and didn't react the way they think they should.

I don't know that this is worth getting mad about, seeing as how dissociative identity disorders that result from the resurfacing of past life memories aren't real mental illnesses. To compare what Rand's going through to a real mental illness is a bit silly. Rand's mental illness, like Rand himself, is fictional.

 

With that being said, I think the proper answer here is; No, you can't just ignore the past-life memories and past-life personalities that surface, at least in Rand's case. The very fact that those memories surfaced was traumatic for Rand, and the contents of those memories would have been traumatic for anybody. Together with the fact that the voice was insane, which is not simply a matter of being irrational, but of being possessed by overwhelming emotions, and it becomes not simply a matter of willpower to deal with these things.

But Rand has proven he can "Shut LTT off" right? Why wouldn't he just continue to do that, which is what I was getting at. (Besides the fact that it kinda makes the book series pointless).While Semi may believe what she said was true, I highly doubt there would be no one who failed to go insane from it.

Anyway, you're right, although I'm not mad, I'm rarely mad. It's a waste of energy.

Actually studies show that ignoring mental illness is the least effective and most destructive response possible, and self treatment most commonly leads to addiction issues--whether narcotics, alcohol or otherwise. That is where your comments are the most offensive. You've clearly reached the conclusion that mental illness can be simply ignored or controlled by someone with a strong enough will... and you are wrong. Studies have shown you are wrong. This is not even under debate by the psychological community. In fact, this attitude--that a person should be able to control their mental problems, and that their failure to do so is indicative of weak will--has been directly connected to incidences of suicide.

 

Or am I the one that is wrong? Sorry, you have stated directly now that you have studied mental illness. What precisely did you study? For myself, I studied abnormal psychology and addiction at Sydney University.

Show me where I said, SHOULD. I didn't. I said can, and it has been done, which is not up for debate. Again, stop taking my comments out of context and lumpng me in with people you have an issue with. It has occured, succesfully. Am I suggesting it to people, no. Have I suggested people do it? No I haven't, although you assume I have.

And as to the weak will part, that's open to debate, and can never be proven either way. It will always be an idea, that will never be disproven. Saying weak will however makes it offensive, and I do believe I never used that termology, instead I said someone with a strong will, or extremely strong will. If you wish to take it as an offensive statement, that's your choice. But it's not intended in that way. The fact that person 1 can function with a gunshot wound, while person 2 passes out from the pain doesn't mean person 2 is weak, but instead points to the fact that perhaps person 1 is extremely strong-willed.

Most of my studies have been on a personal level, i.e. not in school but on my own time. Books, papers, seminars, and discussions, mostly on OCD and depression, although some on alcoholism. Basic pysc classes at University.

Because they disregard the severe issues that the mentally ill face in their lives.

Comparing mental issues with other mental issues disregards the severe issues mentally ill people face in their lives? Howso? I didn't compare to something that wasn't a mental illness, unless you're speaking of something else.

Yes, they are. And you apparently have them, by your statements. And I presume that you regard that as a reason your statements should be regarded as informed.

 

That being said, whilst I sympathise with your personal situation, you have displayed a deep and clear lack of knowledge about mental illness, and thus, no, I do not hold that your own conditions lend weight to your argument.

 

I'm sorry.

Never stated that. My arguments stand firm. Unless of course you're debating that no one has ever defeated mental illness without the assistance of medication, which of course you won't. You will however continue to ignore my posts or quote half of my statement in an attempt to make it seem I am saying something I am not. But I'll make it clearer since it's apparently not already clear:

I do not speak in definates or abesolutes. The evidence proves, numbers or percentages withstanding since the numbers are at best an estimate, that mental illnesses have been beaten succesfully without aid of medication, and sometimes without outside help. Are you refuting this?

Specific to your question: "Are you implying OCD cannot be overcame without the aid of drugs? (This one I know for a lie, because I deal with it myself, same with depression)".

 

My answer was, and remains, no.

 

Beyond that, yes, I do thank you for allowing me to clarify. I no longer think you have no understanding of mental illness, I now believe you have a mistaken understanding of mental illness based on your own experiences.

And again I state, I'm not basing everything on my own experiences, although they were what lead me to do a deeper evaluation and study. And it's Dealt not deal.

And you still haven't clarified that part about grouping that statement with the others implying it was wrong, but I suppose you won't.

Yes, it does. In fact that argument has been used to excuse abuse.

Did you reasd my entire statement or just bold that part? I said mental abuse is more damaging, but I stand by my cannot affect you if you don't let it. Why do you think torture isn't 100%. Some people can resist. I wasn't excusing it at all, I don't exsuse it, as I stated.

Yes, actually, when the voice is inside your head you do in fact have to listen to it. I could be cheap and leave it at that, but no... you display an innate misunderstanding of the way mental illness affects the perception of the individual suffering it. Not only do you suffer the effects, but those effects influence every other aspect of your personality, right down to a neurochemical level.

 

You speak in ignorence. Your very comparisons are deeply offensive. If you wish to speak authoratatively on mental illness, please go and study it.

I have, I'm not, and I have. It can be ignored. There are plently of cases of people successfully self treating themselves without the aid of medication. And I'll state it again, since apparently it's offensive, it doesn't work for everyone, why, that's the unknown part. (Which will most likely never be known).

Why are my comparrasions offensive? Are OCD, and Depression not examples of mental illness?

You asked me a question, was I supposed to ignore it? More than that, why wouldn't I quote it, given I wasn't implying it was wrong?

The first time you quoted it. You didn't say anything, you just quoted 5 of the things I said. I made a statement, and you said I had no understanding of it. You didn't even quote my entire statement, just those 5 things.

I said:

I understand it's a mental illness, like OCD, but I also understand as a mental illness, it can be overcome (In some cases, not all cases).

You said I obviously have no understanding of Mental Illnesses. OCD and schizophrenia have been overcome with and without drugs. As well as most other mental illnesses. Apparently, I'm wrong about those facts?

Ah! You're right about that. I'm just rereading for the first time in a long time. Sorry.

It's cool. I really may have missed a moment where LTT took over his body. The only thing I can think of that was close was when Rand made a comment about if he gave in now, he knew that LTT would be in control and he would be a voice in his head.

But other than that, all LTT taking over was channeling which technically is a mental thing only.

Wrong, he tried to choke Min, didn't he? That was Rand's hands doing the choking

What? Semi did that, not LTT. She used the Domination bands on him and forced him to do it.

Cleary I do.

 

I said not everyone has the ability to overcome their illness mentally, however it can be overcame. Normally I'd tell you to point out one mental illness where no one was able to overcome it, just one, but that would accomplish nothing. However would like you to point out where I was wrong in those statements above.

 

Your attitude. You present that hearing a voice is 'merely' hearing a voice. That because it is not physical it is in some way less. That is not only wrong and ignorent. It's offensive.

 

Is the voice physical?

 

No. The inference of this question, that it not being physical makes it somehow less damaging is offensive.

 

Can it do physical harm?

 

No. The inference of this question, that it not being physical makes it somehow less damaging is offensive.

 

Am I wrong in my comparrison to a voice outside your head, i.e. the people who commit mass murder because someone else hounded them until they did it.

 

Yes, you are.

 

Are you implying OCD cannot be overcame without the aid of drugs? (This one I know for a lie, because I deal with it myself, same with depression).

 

No.

(1-3) Less damaging is an interesting term. I cannot refute that, because the way you state it, I suppose I do believe it is less damaging, like I personally consider physical abuse to be more damaging than mental abuse, since the later cannot affect you if you don't let it, as opposed to the former. Now, they both have the same severity, hell mental abuse might be worse, but in the context used, you would be correct.

That doesn't make it offensive.

4) How so? Do you have to listen to the voice? (Not sure how intimately familiar you are with this here, but again there are no absolutes). It CAN be ignored. Can everyone do it? That's a subject of debate in itself. Does everyone have the capaticy to do it, but not the ability? That's probably closer to the truth. To use a base comparison, some people are more suspectible to suggestion, what makes them that way? Why do some people join cults and kill themselves or others and some dont?

5) So then why quote it if you're not implying it's wrong?

Schizophrenia is not curable, you can only treat it. Moreover, we're not talking about mental illness, we're talking about a personality that once lived and shares the mind and body of another person who does live. I think even a very strong minded person would be freaked out, to say the least.

Freaked out yes, go insane, I doubt it would occur everytime. It would go along the lines of depression and OCD everyone is different and reacts differently. Bi-polarizsm as well. It's not always about the degree to which a person suffers from it either, it's about the person and their will (for lack of a better word).

As Lucker's said, it's not merely another voice, LTT was able to take possession of Rand's body.

 

And, you're wrong, many mental illnesses cannot be cured, although many can be treated.

Channeling ability not body. Subtle difference here. (Which makes all the difference)

I understand it's a mental illness, like OCD, but I also understand as a mental illness, it can be overcome (In some cases, not all cases).

 

But yes, at the end of the day it is a mere voice. I.E. it's just a voice and nothing physical about it, thus a mere voice.

 

At the end of the day, voices in your head, like the voices outside, don't have to be listened too.

 

No I'm not attempting to belittle people who suffer from illnesses, I'm just stating facts, how I see them.

 

You clearly understand very little about mental illness.

Cleary I do.

I said not everyone has the ability to overcome their illness mentally, however it can be overcame. Normally I'd tell you to point out one mental illness where no one was able to overcome it, just one, but that would accomplish nothing. However would like you to point out where I was wrong in those statements above.

Is the voice physical? Can it do physical harm? Am I wrong in my comparrison to a voice outside your head, i.e. the people who commit mass murder because someone else hounded them until they did it.

Are you implying OCD cannot be overcame without the aid of drugs? (This one I know for a lie, because I deal with it myself, same with depression).

Better yet, we can finish this topic in PM, as it has no place here.

I was more going along the lines of, why would a mere voice make you go crazy, seems like a weakness you already had. (Especially considering you could "Tune it out" as Rand shows)

 

Because there is nothing 'mere' about it. We are talking about a whole other personality manifesting in your head--to the extent that it can channel on your behalf. Your basically making the same mistake about mental health that has been made throughout history, and that is not knowing a mental state you look at it in terms of your own experience of the world and cannot understand why it's significant. The same way people regard someone suffering depression say 'well, I don't see how merely feeling a bit down is a debilitating illness', so too you think to yourself that a rational person, knowingly hearing a real voice in his head should surely be capable of dealing with it--but what Semirhage has stated is that no, he can't. Any more than the depressed person can realise that they're feeling sad and just do stuff that makes them happy.

 

That is the core of what mental illness is. And Rand shows perfectly how mentally destabalizing that is. Had Cadsuane not intervened the world would have burned.

I think you're reading too much into my statement. Especially with your depression part, I understand it's a mental illness, like OCD, but I also understand as a mental illness, it can be overcome (In some cases, not all cases).

Yes she stated it, so in the terms of the book that makes it true, however in terms of real world applications, there would have been people who dealt with it on their own. Every illness has cases like that, especially mental illnesses. Now at this point, the debate would be, well those who broke free obviously suffered from a lesser example of the aforementioned illness, however this isn't always the case.

It's just like pain. What's crippling to one person, isn't to another.

But yes, at the end of the day it is a mere voice. I.E. it's just a voice and nothing physical about it, thus a mere voice. The channeling for him I'll give you, but it couldn't walk/talk for him. And unless all those cases Semi referred too were channelers, even that aspect is gone, really meaning it's only a voice. At the end of the day, voices in your head, like the voices outside, don't have to be listened too. No I'm not attempting to belittle people who suffer from illnesses, I'm just stating facts, how I see them. People have claimed insanity from listening to voices in their real life, outside their head, when they commited a crime, and gotten off on it. Same logic applies.

Read the Lews Therin: Our Friendly Neighbourhood Madman thread in my Wot FAQ and Theories listing, linked in my sig and at the top of the board.

 

Now that is something that could be soundly debated. I'd argue that the voice in your head would only make a weak willed person go crazy, especially knowing it was real.

 

Actually I don't particularily regard it as something that could be soundly debated. To quote Semirhage: "It makes no difference that his voice is real, however. In fact, that makes his situation worse. Even Graendal usually failed to achieve reintegration with someone who heard a real voice. I understand the descent into terminal madness can be . . . abrupt."

 

I meant more along the lines of, why would having a person in your head make you go crazy things. If it was a real voice, something has to make you snap right? It can't hurt you physically. It's more along the lines of torture, some people die without ever going crazy or giving up secrets, thus my weak willed comment, although I suppose I should instead say, a person who is extremely strong willed shouldn't go crazy from a mere voice in their mind.

 

And yet Semirhage states that they do, if they cannot achieve reintegration. Having two manifest facet personalities clearly destabalizes the mental state--we see it with Rand, and Semirhage makes clear his case, though rare, is not singular.

Yea I'm reading your theory now, I kinda see what you're saying in, cases of the book or series, if someone states something, then we hold it as true.

I was more going along the lines of, why would a mere voice make you go crazy, seems like a weakness you already had. (Especially considering you could "Tune it out" as Rand shows)

Read the Lews Therin: Our Friendly Neighbourhood Madman thread in my Wot FAQ and Theories listing, linked in my sig and at the top of the board.

 

Now that is something that could be soundly debated. I'd argue that the voice in your head would only make a weak willed person go crazy, especially knowing it was real.

 

Actually I don't particularily regard it as something that could be soundly debated. To quote Semirhage: "It makes no difference that his voice is real, however. In fact, that makes his situation worse. Even Graendal usually failed to achieve reintegration with someone who heard a real voice. I understand the descent into terminal madness can be . . . abrupt."

I meant more along the lines of, why would having a person in your head make you go crazy things. If it was a real voice, something has to make you snap right? It can't hurt you physically. It's more along the lines of torture, some people die without ever going crazy or giving up secrets, thus my weak willed comment, although I suppose I should instead say, a person who is extremely strong willed shouldn't go crazy from a mere voice in their mind.

It may, since Lews Therin would have been chillin in Tel aran'Rhiod before Janduin injected him into Tigraine, but I doubt it, because I like to be skeptical about such things. :P

LOL! So wrong.

Hard for me to know what "the voice is real" means.

 

The debate has always suffered from semantics issues. The 'realers' are generally people who have a hard time making distinctions, taking the clear reality of Lews Therin's memories too far. It's what RJ intended—readers accepted Rand's interpretation without questioning it really—and the fact that he was able to pull it off was one of his greatest accomplishments, along with hiding Verin's mission in plain sight. You can argue about it all day, but as long as you recognize that 1) Lews Therin's memories were effectively Rand's memories, and 2) the 'voice' and its accompanying delusions were byproducts of taint madness, then you're all good.

 

I don't know about other 'realers' but I questioned Rand's assertions in great detail, and I have little problem with making distinctions. You claim the memories are real. You claim that Rand constructed a personality around those memories, and called it Lews Therin. Thus, you claim that the voice is not real, whilst the memories are.

 

Semirhage claimed that you are wrong. Lews Therin claimed that she rarely lies. This holds true in an analysis of her comments, including those which she should have no basis for knowing outside an abstract understanding of those with Rand's condition, as she stated Graendal provided her with, and thus I agree with Semirhage, Rand and Lews Therin's claims.

Ok I wish to read this thread now. Where is it? Because what is a soul (A person) but a collection of memories?

1. LTT was never in Rand's head. As Rand said he wasn't "real" and never had been.

 

Actually, Rand states they were not two different men, and never had been, which is entirely true. They were two different facet personalities in the same manner as, say, Maerion, Taedra and Joana are each seperate distinct personalities, but still manifestations of the same woman.

 

Brandon has confirmed that Rand's comment is not indicative either way of the realness of the Lews Therin manifestation. Semirhage, on the other, definately did comment on on the realness of it, stating that the voice was real--the voice, not the memories which inform the voice, as the Construct Theory argues. She states the voice itself is real. This of course makes it no less a form of insanity, as the manifestation of another facet personality definately does interfere with a persons mental stability (as we witness with Rand).

Now that is something that could be soundly debated. I'd argue that the voice in your head would only make a weak willed person go crazy, especially knowing it was real.

Still interesting knowledge.

The severing of the link between worlds happened when the gateway melted.

 

I've thought that ever since I read the passage in the first place (after the initial shock of what I just read wore off anyway). I'm kind of surprised with how many people wouldn't accept that idea over the years.

It just doesn't make much sense that's why. It's not like you just can't walk to the tower and make the triangle and walk in. So what did the doorway really do? Allow easier access. So, since it's an actual world, or perhaps another plane of existence, why would the bond snap. At that point it's just distance. Would it snap if she used the portal stone without him? So I mean I understood where he was going with it, I assumed that was the answer, but at the end of the day, it left me with a bad feeling because it didn't make much sense to me. That's all.

RJ would never answer due to spoilers, but Sanderson did later:

 

Interview: Aug 31st, 2011

 

Reddit AMA (Verbatim)

Terez

 

Why did Moiraine's bond with Lan break when the doorway burned? Did she intentionally release it?

Brandon Sanderson

 

She did not intentionally release it. RJ has something about this in the notes, but I don't have the quote handy. It basically has to do with the severing of the link between worlds.

 

That was my initilal thought, but she went there once before, and it didn't sever.

 

The severing of the link between worlds happened when the gateway melted.

Eh.

I'll accept it, although I don't like it. But thanks.

RJ would never answer due to spoilers, but Sanderson did later:

 

Interview: Aug 31st, 2011

 

Reddit AMA (Verbatim)

Terez

 

Why did Moiraine's bond with Lan break when the doorway burned? Did she intentionally release it?

Brandon Sanderson

 

She did not intentionally release it. RJ has something about this in the notes, but I don't have the quote handy. It basically has to do with the severing of the link between worlds.

That was my initilal thought, but she went there once before, and it didn't sever.

I have a question, that I've never seenbut this thread is 300 pages long now...

Why did Lan's warder bond snap? We know she wasn't dead, so what happened? Is there an RJ quote about that one?

Lan = Ninja.

 

Lol. While I can see Lan being a Ninja, I cannot see him sneaking Moriane in with him and his Ninja skills. But still gave me a chuckle.

 

Everyone else got in thru windows right? although how the hell Rand squeezed in thru an arrow slit, when we all know he has broad shoulders is beyond me. Not to mention climbing what I always thought was a smooth surface. Honestly, the Stone doesn't seem like a very good fortress. I mean many people broke in the first time they saw the damn place, but that's neither here nor there.

 

And yet that is precisely what he did. You can chuckle at it all you want, it is still cannon. Lan found a way to sneak both himself and Moiraine in. Much like Rand, Mat and Juilin found a way in.

 

Aight, some clarity... firstly in researching i realised i misnamed Folded Light, Inverted Light. So... from there...

 

Folded Light = Making oneself invisible. Causes ripples with movement.

 

Illusion = What Moiraine, Alanna and the Salidar embassy did when they made themselves huge. It's basically taking their own image and blowing it up--it is a weak version of Mirror of Mists, much the same as Liandrin and Verin's compulsions are a mild version of true compulsion.

 

Mirror of Mists = Actually creating a fully distinct illusion. Note: in early drafts this was incorrectly called Mask of Mirrors.

 

But if you attach it to the floor, and walk behind it, is that rippling? If so, what was the point of doing their campsite like that, if it would make ripples. So Moraine had to know Mirror of Mists.

 

No. Again, Mirror of Mists is disguising oneself as someone else--like when Lanfear makes herself look like Keille.

 

Folded Light, making oneself invisible, is utterly distinct from Mirror of the Mists. And no, when Folded Light is anchored to the ground it makes them completely invisible, irrespective of movement, no ripples. It is only if the weaving moves that the ripple occurs.

I wasn't laughing at your assertion, I was laughing at Lan=Ninja. It's hilarious.

That being said, if that's the case, which you said yourself, then it's possible she anchored it to the ground and walked behind it. (I think I was just tossing out ideas of how it could have occured, we have no actual canon on what happened, he just said he would find a way, his way could have been using Moriane).

Lan = Ninja.

Lol. While I can see Lan being a Ninja, I cannot see him sneaking Moriane in with him and his Ninja skills. But still gave me a chuckle.

Everyone else got in thru windows right? although how the hell Rand squeezed in thru an arrow slit, when we all know he has broad shoulders is beyond me. Not to mention climbing what I always thought was a smooth surface. Honestly, the Stone doesn't seem like a very good fortress. I mean many people broke in the first time they saw the damn place, but that's neither here nor there.

Aight, some clarity... firstly in researching i realised i misnamed Folded Light, Inverted Light. So... from there...

 

Folded Light = Making oneself invisible. Causes ripples with movement.

 

Illusion = What Moiraine, Alanna and the Salidar embassy did when they made themselves huge. It's basically taking their own image and blowing it up--it is a weak version of Mirror of Mists, much the same as Liandrin and Verin's compulsions are a mild version of true compulsion.

 

Mirror of Mists = Actually creating a fully distinct illusion. Note: in early drafts this was incorrectly called Mask of Mirrors.

But if you attach it to the floor, and walk behind it, is that rippling? If so, what was the point of doing their campsite like that, if it would make ripples. So Moraine had to know Mirror of Mists.