#disclaimer is that I have only studied ethics in my native language so it is hard to find the english terms for things like ethical models

[huntunderironskies]

I am literally 90% weird animal facts. My time has come.

[emetophobia cw because animals are gross sometimes]

Vulture stomach acid is one of the most acidic among any animal which is how they're able to digest bone and kill almost all contagions in carrion they scavenge. They also will vomit on potential predators to scare them off. I would imagine it hurts.

American possums cannot be carriers for rabies, their body temperature is too high. They also are very good at clearing out parasite species since they eat ticks and mosquitos, so having one hanging around is a good thing for the most part.

Lemon sharks are one of the very few social sharks. They often share hunting grounds. This behavior has also made them the easiest sharks to study because they have no prey drive towards things that are human-sized while also being fine with other things in their territory.

There is anecdotal evidence that rattlesnakes have social preferences (or, in normal person language, friends) and will hibernate around the same individuals from year to year.

Portia spiders are the first spider species that has been objectively documented to show adaptive learning. The are primarily araneophagic (e.g. eat other spiders) and adjust their hunting techniques based on the species of spider they see. They learn from observation and show novel techniques against spiders that are not native to their environment.

There is a species of bat (I think Mexican Free-Tailed Bats but don't quote me on that) who all have songs that are unique to each member of the colony.

Vampire bats are one of the few animals that have observably and objectively demonstrated social altruism (disclaimer there might be more but this gets hard to measure, I have to say this or my environmental ethics professor will be mad at me.) They will share blood with colony members who are too sick or weak to hunt.

Rats also exhibit this! An experiment showed that a rat would consistently choose to free another trapped rat instead of going straight for a reward.

Harris hawks hunt in flocks, which is extremely unusual for birds of prey. I believe they're the only raptor to consistently do this.

Elephants, crows, and some primates (...don't quote me on the last one, again, but if it's one species specifically it's probably bonobos) seem to perform something adjacent to funerary rites for deceased members of social units.

I think that the whole "bees will play with toys" thing went viral recently enough to be in everyone's memory but there was also an experiment done where rats learned how to drive tiny cars. They would continue to drive the tiny cars even with no apparent reward provided, so rats like driving I guess.

Coyotes and badgers show symbiotic relationships in the wild while hunting small mammals (which they both eat.) Badgers are better at digging and flushing out ground-dwelling animals and coyotes are, unsurprisingly, better at chasing things since they don't have tiny stubby legs.

I need writing inspo. Please fill the notes with your favorite bizarre animal and medical facts, or recommend your favorite educational medical youtube channel or podcast.

[shouldprobablybereading]

Why Gavinor should not be Odiums champion

A way too in depth argument against a (sort off) crack theory

And I don’t mean in the “of course he shouldn’t he’s a baby” way. But that it would actively go against the larger ideological messages of the story.

Taravangian is strongly utalitarian, he believes that the end justify the means. It’s why he is willing to make a deal with Odium about preserving Karbranth at the expense of roshar as a whole. He believes this is the best option because he believes that it is the only way he can save anyone.

The knights radiant as a group believe in journey before destination, it is what you do that is important. It’s really only the windrunners that lean towards a kantian approach (actions matter and value the human life, but you can kill as punishment) Dalinar is imo more on the aristoteles route by looking at individuals that he views as just and then mimic their behavior (Gavilar, Nohadon etc.) Szeth is even more extreme in this case. What they exactly believe is somewhat irrelevant as the point is that they are not primarily utalitarian.

This isn’t saying that Sanderson or even the books are against utilitarianism, morals are complicated (an understatement) and I think there are few people who can actively choose one model that is applicable to all situations. Jasnah is notably utilitarian, although the story frames her approach very different from Taravangians. He is more or less an extremist and in a lot of ways a personification of some of its negative attributes.

This way the duel of champions becomes to a degree a fight between ideologies. Making Dalinar face of against Gavinor would be an extremely on the nose way of asking“would you kill a child if it meant saving the world” putting one innocent life against millions, making Dalinar lose as a result of this would make the statement that his morals is what made him fail, making Taravangian ultimately right.

That could be a very interesting story. We even see it to a smaller degree in Oathbringer when Jasnah has to decide whether or not to kill Renarin and ultimately lets her love for him win.

The problem is that it is Dalinar doing the fighting. His inability to murder children or even loved ones has never been a character flaw. See the burning of Rathalas. To pit him against Gavinor or any of his loved ones like Adolin would while creating great and enjoyable angst also suggest that the Blackthorn would have been able to save the world. Had he just remained as he was at his worst, never evolved or changed, the world would have been better off. This would be extremely unsatisfying after spending nearly 5 books working away from that.

Having an adult loved one like Adolin might work if the tension comes from a difference in belief as well as the pain of it being a loved one. Gavinor is just especially bad since he is too young to have any complex philosophical views or even consent to being a champion under fair terms. His unwillingness to kill someone like Sadeas would imo make for a more compelling conflict since him being too trusting of problematic people is an actual flaw that is consistent through his life. (Gavilar, Sadeas, Amaram, even Taravangian himself)

The tricky thing here is that he will most definitely have to loose somehow so it is possible that Sanderson will go this route. I just do not think that it would make for a satisfying or narratively compelling story based on the characters involved as well as the larger themes at play.