(I'm working this out as I type it, so bear with me. I think I'm right, though)
Basically, the Oaths aren't a kind of mystical binding- they're just a very specific form of applied Compulsion.
A stick of ivory doesn't know what a lie is. Weaves of Spirit can't tell if you're using the Power offensively or defensively.
But YOU can.
What the Oath Rod does, I'm fairly sure, is make it so you are unable to consciously violate any oath you make on it.
So "To speak no word that is not true" could LOGICALLY forbid sarcasm. It would also logically not do anything, because any word by itself is not a lie. As many have noted, it's not nearly as ironclad an oath as it sounds.
But what matters is what the Aes Sedai (or whoever swears the Oath) thinks. So, the swearer considers speaking a lie saying a "word that is not true." If there's any doubt, even subconsciously, the swearer would not be able to say the lie.
However, something like casual sarcasm, where the speaker knows she isn't intending to lie, and isn't attempting to be deceitful? No problem.
Another example: The "no Power as a weapon" rule. Except in the last defense of life of yourself, a sister, or your Warder.
What does "last defense" mean? Well, you could rationalize it to mean that an army charging at you from half a mile away makes it the "last defense." But wouldn't running away also be a defense? Shouldn't you not be able to make heads explode until you see the arrows coming at you?
Two equally valid interpretations, but the Oath Rod focuses on intent- if the Aes Sedai rationalizes "there's no way I could run away; they'd catch me and kill me" then that's that. The Oath Rod doesn't compute run speed and terrain conditions- the Aes Sedai does.
One last example- "make no weapon for a man to kill another man." What about women killing men, or men killing women? What about weapons for men to kill Shadowspawn? What about weapons without a purpose, that they'll just leave in a big pile over on that table and hope no one takes them, wink wink?
--------
The Aes Sedai have the intent of the Oaths drilled into them long before they ever lay hands on that ivory Rod- so it's very hard, I'd say almost impossible, for them to deviate from the accepted interpretations. Most people don't see using sarcasm as lying, especially when your listeners know you're being sarcastic. The First Oath means "I will not lie," so an Aes Sedai can't lie. But sarcasm? No problem.
Basically, the Oaths aren't a kind of mystical binding- they're just a very specific form of applied Compulsion.
A stick of ivory doesn't know what a lie is. Weaves of Spirit can't tell if you're using the Power offensively or defensively.
But YOU can.
What the Oath Rod does, I'm fairly sure, is make it so you are unable to consciously violate any oath you make on it.
So "To speak no word that is not true" could LOGICALLY forbid sarcasm. It would also logically not do anything, because any word by itself is not a lie. As many have noted, it's not nearly as ironclad an oath as it sounds.
But what matters is what the Aes Sedai (or whoever swears the Oath) thinks. So, the swearer considers speaking a lie saying a "word that is not true." If there's any doubt, even subconsciously, the swearer would not be able to say the lie.
However, something like casual sarcasm, where the speaker knows she isn't intending to lie, and isn't attempting to be deceitful? No problem.
Another example: The "no Power as a weapon" rule. Except in the last defense of life of yourself, a sister, or your Warder.
What does "last defense" mean? Well, you could rationalize it to mean that an army charging at you from half a mile away makes it the "last defense." But wouldn't running away also be a defense? Shouldn't you not be able to make heads explode until you see the arrows coming at you?
Two equally valid interpretations, but the Oath Rod focuses on intent- if the Aes Sedai rationalizes "there's no way I could run away; they'd catch me and kill me" then that's that. The Oath Rod doesn't compute run speed and terrain conditions- the Aes Sedai does.
One last example- "make no weapon for a man to kill another man." What about women killing men, or men killing women? What about weapons for men to kill Shadowspawn? What about weapons without a purpose, that they'll just leave in a big pile over on that table and hope no one takes them, wink wink?
--------
The Aes Sedai have the intent of the Oaths drilled into them long before they ever lay hands on that ivory Rod- so it's very hard, I'd say almost impossible, for them to deviate from the accepted interpretations. Most people don't see using sarcasm as lying, especially when your listeners know you're being sarcastic. The First Oath means "I will not lie," so an Aes Sedai can't lie. But sarcasm? No problem.
I amuse myself.
Cadsuane lies!
- 06/12/2009 06:10:41 PM
2223 Views
Re: Cadsuane lies!
- 06/12/2009 06:18:39 PM
1430 Views
Sarcasm is one thing
- 06/12/2009 06:43:12 PM
1143 Views
I disagree
- 06/12/2009 06:51:27 PM
1095 Views
RJ has said they're allowed to be sarcastic
- 06/12/2009 07:07:32 PM
1052 Views
How does that jive with the Oaths?
- 06/12/2009 07:13:21 PM
1103 Views
Good point, but in that same book Tamra said that Gitara didn't say anything before dying *NM*
- 06/12/2009 07:53:31 PM
510 Views
Re: Good point, but in that same book Tamra said that Gitara didn't say anything before dying
- 06/12/2009 08:03:36 PM
1147 Views
The Oaths focus on INTENT
- 06/12/2009 10:01:27 PM
1079 Views
Because it isn't a lie
- 06/12/2009 07:44:29 PM
1080 Views
I understand this, I'm not arguing that an AS should not be able to be sarcastic
- 06/12/2009 08:08:15 PM
1061 Views
Re: I understand this, I'm not arguing that an AS should not be able to be sarcastic
- 06/12/2009 08:35:23 PM
1088 Views
Quote for you
- 06/12/2009 08:42:52 PM
1017 Views
The sarcasm was for him repeating himself to her. The "remember" is the part she's refering to.
- 07/12/2009 10:15:06 AM
855 Views
That's why I think this example of sarcasm works as opposed to Cadsuane who makes a false statement
- 07/12/2009 03:17:52 PM
927 Views
sarcasm is sarcasm. In both instances their is technically a lie.
- 07/12/2009 11:28:02 PM
875 Views
Not at all the case
- 07/12/2009 11:58:42 PM
958 Views
Do you really believe he waited till the last minute to tell Seonid?
- 14/12/2009 01:32:37 PM
1029 Views
What about the Sheriam thing?
- 07/12/2009 01:49:32 PM
949 Views
Re: What about the Sheriam thing?
- 07/12/2009 02:15:25 PM
822 Views
But surely an Aes Sedai can answer a question she hasn't fully heard yet.
- 07/12/2009 03:06:34 PM
1062 Views
Sarcasm
- 06/12/2009 07:14:47 PM
1097 Views
It's obviously meant to be sarcasm, I just don't like
- 06/12/2009 07:18:40 PM
896 Views
Here is what RJ said about it
- 06/12/2009 07:41:18 PM
1044 Views
Well I have to say I think RJ made the wrong call with this one *NM*
- 06/12/2009 07:43:47 PM
453 Views
Agreed.
- 07/12/2009 01:45:39 AM
862 Views
You can already drive a truck through the oaths. Does this one additional tiny gap really matter?
- 07/12/2009 04:07:16 AM
889 Views
what do you think a RL lie detector would tell in this case?
- 07/12/2009 12:27:07 PM
831 Views
in RL you would get warned by the investigator to cooperate
- 07/12/2009 01:04:33 PM
862 Views
But how would the machine reading indicate?
- 07/12/2009 07:04:22 PM
863 Views
Usually you're s'possed to answer with a yes or no. It's easy to tell when you're evasive
- 09/12/2009 10:46:58 PM
902 Views
Where's the problem?
- 09/12/2009 04:18:40 PM
810 Views
It's in the way the Oath is worded
- 09/12/2009 05:14:39 PM
859 Views
PS You misread my original quote
- 09/12/2009 11:00:56 PM
796 Views
Lies, untruths, sarcasm, and meaning
- 09/12/2009 07:46:25 PM
931 Views
We are starting understand each other
- 09/12/2009 10:09:41 PM
904 Views


