How did Sauron do it...

Bill O'Meally wrote:

> Stan Brown wrote:
>
>> You're not serious, I assume.
>
> Sure I am. Perhaps you misunderstood my meaning.
>
> A magnet does not seem to me to have a
>> sense of purpose, any more than a leaf does when it falls from a tree
>> to the ground.
>
> The operative word was "seem". What I was getting at was that the Ring
> had no more intelligence in its attraction towards Sauron than a
> magnet's attraction to metal.
>
I thought it was a pretty good analogy.

>> Or have you been reading this page:
>> http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512
>> "Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent
>> Falling' Theory"
>
> No, I haven't, but 'The Onion' is always a good read. One of my home
> state's better exports -- that and cheese.

Oh please. You need to try some real cheese. I can't believe the stuff
that impresses Americans. Does the Department of Homeland Security prevent
you getting the good stuff? otoh, the Onion's a hit
--
derek
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

In message <news:SeudnROUfOAaqpvanZ2dnUVZ_srinZ2d@rcn.net>
Larry Swain <giles DeleteThis @poetic.com> spoke these staves:
>
> Troels Forchhammer wrote:
>>

<snip>


On the sapience of the One Ring

>> I, on my part, am satisfied that the One Ring would at least have
>> passed the Turing test, in which case one can reasonably ask,
>> 'does it matter?' -- for all practical purposes the One Ring
>> 'acts' in the book as an individual 'character' with as much
>> intelligence and personality as e.g. the Witch-king.
>>
>
> My pets have desires and will and "act", is my dog sapient?

But if we get to the equivalence of animals, the question is one of
degree -- it is recognized that your pets are intelligent, just not
as much as yourself (I'll leave the question of whether they can be
sapient to those who are more knowledgeable on that than I).

The question has been raised before (on more than one occasion), and
I was trying to summarize rather than argue a point. In the end I
think it depends on what you read into Tolkien's descriptions: I
cannot think of a reasonable test that can be used to decide whether
or not they are antropomorphisms (usable in context, of course -- one
that will be able to give an answer based on the known texts).

Heck, some even insist that the Ring could /speak/ (as did Túrin's
sword, the Troll's purse and probably some other inanimate objects
that I've forgotten about)

Personally I am quite happy with Stan's summary in the Rings-FAQ:
<http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm#Q1-Sentient>

My choice of the Witch-king was very deliberate -- we hear of him
that he, as well as the other Ringwraiths, 'had no will but
[Sauron's] own, being each utterly subservient to the ring that had
enslaved him, which Sauron held.' Yet the Ringwraiths are capable of
acting as independent agents carrying out Sauron's will -- but are
they intelligent? Can we think of a good test to discern between the
intelligence of the Ring (whether reality or antropomorphism) and
that of the Witch-king?

As implied above, I don't think it's possible to come up with a
definite answer, but for my own part, I believe that Tolkien did
indeed intend for the One Ring to possess some level of what we would
call 'intelligence' -- that it was self-aware (as an individual
entity separate from Sauron) and conscious of itself and of its
surroundings as being external to itself. None of this, obviously,
requires an intelligence greater that that of the more intelligent
animals.

--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.

Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no
basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power
derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some
farcical aquatic ceremony.
- /Monty Python and the Holy Grail/
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

Sean wrote:
> A chess-playing friend and I used to team up to play against it.
> He was constantly anthropomorphizing the program: "It's up to
> something." "It's obviously planning something devious."
> "It's trying to lure us into a trap," etc. But it wasn't
> really a mind, it was just a rule engine.

Exactly my point. The Ring "seems" to have a mind of its own, but more
likely what we are seeing is the equivalent of a very complex computer
program (to continue the analogy).

--
Bill
"Wise fool"
Gandalf _The Two Towers_
(The wise will remove "se" to reach me. The foolish will not!)
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

Troels Forchhammer wrote:

<snip>
> As implied above, I don't think it's possible to come up with a
> definite answer, but for my own part, I believe that Tolkien did
> indeed intend for the One Ring to possess some level of what we would
> call 'intelligence' -- that it was self-aware (as an individual
> entity separate from Sauron) and conscious of itself and of its
> surroundings as being external to itself. None of this, obviously,
> requires an intelligence greater that that of the more intelligent
> animals.

While its fun to speculate on such things, what you are suggesting goes
against what we know about Sauron's (or Morgoth's, or any Ainur's)
abilities. To suggest he Ring has its own intelligence, its own self
awareness -- essentially a life of its own, is to state that Sauron
created a sentient life-form. We know that he did not have this ability.
Rather he could only pervert what already existed.

One might try to compare the "Ring as a life-form" question to the
'automaton' issue, that is, beings that can only perform under the
direct control of their creator. When the creator's mind is elsewhere,
the beings flop to the ground like puppets. Such beings would include
Aule's Dwarves before Eru filled them with the Flame Imperishable.
Tolkien dabbled with Orcs being the same for a while, but abandonded
that idea as they clearly could think for themselves, or even plot
against the direct wishes of their Lord. We know that the Ring, though
full of Sauron's power and malice was not such a being. It could
function independently of Sauron's direct thought or even his presence.
For instance it worked for Isildur after Sauron's physical death during
the Last Alliance. Quite the opposite, really: Sauron relied more on the
Ring's presence than the Ring on his.

I like what you referenced elswhere from Stan's FAQ of the Rings
http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm comparing the ring's
activities to essentially an elaborate computer program. I'll quote the
particular passage:

Tim Howe [r.a.b.t article, 14 May 2002,] suggests another intriguing
"non-sentient Ring" explanation: Sauron may have programmed the Ring as
we program a computer or a robot. (Only some of what follows was in his
article.) Computer programs can be fantastically complicated and can
seem to make decisions; computer programmers even speak of a program
"deciding" to do this or that. Even so, we don't say that the computer
program (or Ring) is thinking; all the sentience lies with the
programmer (or Sauron).

Howe points out that the Ring's actions could be explained by the simple
program "slip on or off a finger at any time it will place an enemy in
peril, and abandon an owner who holds the Ring too long without using
it." Such a program would have the effect of making the Ring turn up
eventually if it were ever separated from Sauron - and as an immortal he
could afford to wait. Obviously Tolkien was not familiar with computer
programming and would not consciously have intended such an explanation,
but that doesn't mean we cannot use it as an analogy. We would think of
Sauron not as programmer but as sorcerer, making these instructions part
of the spell he cast when putting his own power into the Ring, so that
it would eventually come back to him if he ever lost it. (Against this
we must set the fact that Sauron did not seem very good at planning for
unexpected contingencies, and ask why he would plan for being separated
from the Ring when he had no reason to believe that could ever happen.)

--
Bill
"Wise fool"
Gandalf _The Two Towers_
(The wise will remove "se" to reach me. The foolish will not!)
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

Derek Broughton wrote:

> I thought it was a pretty good analogy.

Thanks

<snip>

>> No, I haven't, but 'The Onion' is always a good read. One of my home
>> state's better exports -- that and cheese.
>
> Oh please. You need to try some real cheese. I can't believe the
> stuff that impresses Americans. Does the Department of Homeland
> Security prevent you getting the good stuff? otoh, the Onion's a hit
>

Please come to Wisconsin, and I'll turn you on to some artisanal cheeses
that will knock your socks off!

--
Bill
"Wise fool"
Gandalf _The Two Towers_
(The wise will remove "se" to reach me. The foolish will not!)
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

On Oct 2, 4:28 am, Dirk Thierbach <dthierb....RemoveThis@usenet.arcornews.de>
wrote:
> teepee <nom....RemoveThis@nomail.com> wrote:

>
> > It's clear that even Morgoth suffered from the disappation of his
> > power over the ages.
>
> Morgoth didn't "suffer" from it, he voluntarily dissipated his "power"
> (or will, or substance, or whatever you like to call it) into all of
> Arda, to taint it and so to create "Arda Marred".

Though it's not quite clear that he entirely understood the full
implications of what he was doing for himself, that is, I'm not sure
he realized just how _much_ this would weaken him in the individual,
specific-incarnation sense.

That would seem odd at first, but we have to assume that Morgoth was
adept both at self-deception and genuine lack of understanding, after
all, he's trying, ultimately, to rebel utterly against _God_. It
would take a very peculiar mindset to combine both Melkor's tremendous
intellect and knowledge with a lack of perception that rebeliion
against Someone possessing literally infinite power and knowledge is
futile.

I wonder sometimes if Morgoth hadn't managed to just about convince
himself, by the time of the wars of the FIrst Age and the
Silmarillion, that Eru did not exist? When he told Hurin that he made
Arda, I wonder if Morgoth _almost_ believed it, the way Smeagol on a
smaller scale almost believed his own lies about the 'birthday
present'?

>
> Sauron, OTOH, "externalized" a substantial part of himself into the
> Ring. (BTW, this is a common fairy-tale topic). This part of his "power"
> was safe (as long as the Ring existed), and he could still use it.
> But other parts of his "power" (namely those he used to built his
> physical body) were not. They were used up every time his body was
> destroyed.
>
> > Thanks to the One, Sauron remained as strong as ever despite his many
> > defeats.
>
> No, he didn't. After each destruction of his body, Sauron is first
> reduced to a mere "shadow" of himself. He can, more and more slowly
> after each desctruction, rebuild himself, but some things are lost --
> for example his ability to take on a "fair" shape is gone after his
> first destruction.

I once posited a comparison, a long time ago, between the innate
strength of an Ainu and a financial investment. My suspicion is that
the basic, innate strength of an Ainu is a little like a capitol
investment that returns interest, and as long as an Ainu is acting in
accordance with the Divine Plan, in his/her proper sphere and scale,
it's like drawing on the interest income, the money will renew itself
endlessly from interest on the original investment.

Thus an Ainu acting entirely properly might grow tired, but need only
rest for a time after his/her labors to regain his or her full,
original strength. The Valar, for ex, were said to have rested at
times after great efforts, but they alwasy regain their total power,
Manwe is no weaker today than he was at the start of the world.

Now, IMHO if an Ainu starts acting outside that 'proper' sphere and
scale, s/he has to spend more energy, drawing on the capitol to
achieve whatever end. The more malicious and rebellious the action,
the more it ends up 'costing' sooner or later.

An Ainu doing something not quite what he's supposed to be doing, but
not malicious or evil, would have to rest longer afterward to regain
full power, because the 'capitol' is smaller now and the interest from
it proportionately smaller, and the income has to first go back into
restoring the capitol before it can then be tapped to regain the
original strength.

An Ainu who falls entirely is likely to end up spending strength like
mad, faster than the income from the capitol can possibly keep up
with, and even draining the original capitol, which in turn makes it
even harder to regain the lost strength. Eventually, an Ainu acting
against Eru's Will might end up draining himself essentially dry, like
an investor who spends all his capitol and has no money left to draw
any interest on. He's 'broke', in effect. The only place to go then
to gain more 'capitol' is Eru, and presumably that won't be granted
without some repentence.

I think that's what happened to Saruman, in effect, even more than
most of the fallen Ainur, he 'spent' so much of his native strength
and essence that there was nothing left at the end, just enough inner
strength to sustain his existence, like an Elf or a Man. The Saruman
we at the end of LOTR was reduced in effect to nothing more than a
human who didn't age, trapped in physical form and effectively
powerless. Relative to his initial status, he lost even more strength
and status than Morgoth.

The Valar are so much greater than Saruman that it's hard to imagine
one ever draining himself or herself down to that level...but I think
in theory it _could_ happen.
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

"Bill O'Meally" <omeallymd.DeleteThis@wise.rr.com> wrote

> While its fun to speculate on such things, what you are suggesting goes
> against what we know about Sauron's (or Morgoth's, or any Ainur's)
> abilities. To suggest he Ring has its own intelligence, its own self
> awareness -- essentially a life of its own, is to state that Sauron
> created a sentient life-form. We know that he did not have this ability.
> Rather he could only pervert what already existed.

It may be that he perverted what already existed - namely himself - by
placing a portion of his consciousness in the ring.
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

"Larry Swain" <giles.TakeThisOut@poetic.com> wrote:

> My pets have desires and will and "act", is my dog sapient?

Have you tried asking your dog?
In a language it will understand, of course.

And if you talk to your dog, you don't expect an answer, do you, but in some
cases you do expect it to respond to your tone and gestures. It's not a
black-and-white question, is it?

Christopher
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

"Johnny1a" <shermanlee1 DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

> I wonder sometimes if Morgoth hadn't managed to just about convince
> himself, by the time of the wars of the FIrst Age and the
> Silmarillion, that Eru did not exist? When he told Hurin that he made
> Arda, I wonder if Morgoth _almost_ believed it, the way Smeagol on a
> smaller scale almost believed his own lies about the 'birthday
> present'?

That's very interesting. It sounds like a convincing scenario. I'm also
reminded of Sauron building temples to Morgoth on Numenor. We know that
Sauron knew that Morgoth existed, but whether Sauron really believed that
Morgoth could come back, or whether he was just using Morgoth as a way for
him to gain more power, I'm not sure.

<snip>

> I once posited a comparison, a long time ago, between the innate
> strength of an Ainu and a financial investment. My suspicion is that
> the basic, innate strength of an Ainu is a little like a capitol
> investment that returns interest, and as long as an Ainu is acting in
> accordance with the Divine Plan, in his/her proper sphere and scale,
> it's like drawing on the interest income, the money will renew itself
> endlessly from interest on the original investment.

I think a direct comparison with energy and entropy works better. I think
the way the "powers" and Elves fade into the background and become myth and
legend and how "all things beneath the Sun wear to an end at last" (at least
in Middle-earth if not in Aman), sounds a lot like entropy, with energy
becoming more and more dissapated and requiring more and more energy to
gather back up again. Though the real analogy (or the reality) should be
with myth and legend! With history and the long defeat.

And the points you make about "proper actions" are crucial. It was the evil
of melkor's actions that directly cause him to become fixed and bound into
his form. That, and the pain, I think.

Christopher
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

Bill O'Meally wrote:

> Derek Broughton wrote:
>
>> I thought it was a pretty good analogy.
>
> Thanks
>
> <snip>
>
>>> No, I haven't, but 'The Onion' is always a good read. One of my home
>>> state's better exports -- that and cheese.
>>
>> Oh please. You need to try some real cheese. I can't believe the
>> stuff that impresses Americans. Does the Department of Homeland
>> Security prevent you getting the good stuff? otoh, the Onion's a hit
>>
>
> Please come to Wisconsin, and I'll turn you on to some artisanal cheeses
> that will knock your socks off!

LOL. I used to live close, but it's quite a trip these days. Some day I'll
take you up on it
--
derek
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:20:11 GMT from Troels Forchhammer
<Troels.DeleteThis@ThisIsFake.invalid>:
> My choice of the Witch-king was very deliberate -- we hear of him
> that he, as well as the other Ringwraiths, 'had no will but
> [Sauron's] own, being each utterly subservient to the ring that had
> enslaved him, which Sauron held.' Yet the Ringwraiths are capable of
> acting as independent agents carrying out Sauron's will -- but are
> they intelligent?

In my opinion, "no will but Sauron's own" doesn't necessarily make
him a robot. For instance, IIRC, in "The Hunt for the Ring" Tolkien
talks about him deciding things and disposing his forces this way or
that.

I've never doubted that all the Ringwraiths had normal human
intelligence. I think the "no will but Sauron's own" means that they
are incapable of acting against Sauron's interests or disobeying any
orders he gives: they are slaves who will never rebel. But I don't
think that means that they lack initiative or intelligence: they are
still Men, after all.

One way to think of it, maybe, is that their Rings changed the
direction of their thinking and desires so that they now identify
their own interests with Sauron's.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://mysite.verizon.net/aznirb/mtr/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:04:00 -0500 from Bill O'Meally
<omeallymd.DeleteThis@wise.rr.com>:
> To suggest he Ring has its own intelligence, its own self
> awareness -- essentially a life of its own, is to state that Sauron
> created a sentient life-form. We know that he did not have this ability.
> Rather he could only pervert what already existed.

But have you forgotten, he put "a great part of his own former
power" into it. Could not some of that have been his will?

I don't believe the Ring had self awareness, but animals can perform
quite complex tasks without having self awareness.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://mysite.verizon.net/aznirb/mtr/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it... 

In message <news:4706d0a6$0$19563$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>
"Bill O'Meally" <omeallymd.DeleteThis@wise.rr.com> spoke these staves:
>

<snip>

> While its fun to speculate on such things, what you are suggesting
> goes against what we know about Sauron's (or Morgoth's, or any
> Ainur's) abilities.

I don't agree that this is the case here. The objection, IMO, applies
only to the Flame Imperishable, or to the possession of a soul (the
two may be essentially equivalent for living creatures), but I don't
think this necessarily applies in this case, as I don't suggest that
the Ring possessed either (other than if Sauron installed some part
of his own Flame/Soul in the Ring; something I would consider highly
doubtful, though I might be persuaded otherwise), and neither Soul or
Flame is, IMO, prerequisite for the level of intelligence and
independence that I suggest.

> To suggest he Ring has its own intelligence, its own self
> awareness -- essentially a life of its own, is to state that
> Sauron created a sentient life-form. We know that he did not
> have this ability. Rather he could only pervert what already
> existed.

I agree. In this case it would rely on the part of himself that he
put in the One Ring (this is also related to the differences between
the Rings -- the Three, for instance, are never attributed with the
same antropomorphic qualities as is the Master Ring).

We are dealing with various related, but still different, concepts
here, and 'intelligence' og 'sapience' as such does not, IMO, imply
the possession of a soul (as is also clear from Tolkien's various
discussions of the case of the Orcs). I would say that the Soul /
Flame is necessary for the possession of Free Will (I've posted in
length about that), by which I also imply that I don't think that the
Ring had, in Tolkien's sense, Free Will (the Ring itself was not
morally responsible of what it did -- those whom it corrupted were,
themselves, responsible; in that sense the Ring was very much a
Boethian concept).

<snip>

I essentially agree with everything else you say -- though obviously
from a different perspective

The Ring's 'intelligence' as clever AI 'programming' is an attractive
alternative, and to some extent I think that what I suggest is the
supernatural equivalent of a very advanced program -- but I'm putting
it in the allegorical language of the fairy story rather than in the
literal language of modern science or materialism.

My claim is that the Ring, within the story, has a role as an
individual 'character' that is at least as great (and independent) as
that of the Nazgûl, and in terms of understanding its role in the
story, it probably makes better sense to think of it as such (with
the above proviso regarding Free Will) and to use the same language
about the One Ring as we would about e.g. the Witch-king.

I think we would need to imagine an adaptive neural programming that
is way beyond the current state-of-the-art in order to describe the
apparent sapience of the One Ring (we might try to imagine the state-
of-the-art in a couple of centuries with fully developed quantum
computing), but on the other hand I don't think you need to worry
about the Ring being capable of adapting to contingencies Sauron had
/not/ imagined.

Lending the Ring the certain ability to communicate wouldn't change
it's level of sapience (as is demonstrated already by current
computers), but imagining this will allow us a
'gedankenexperiment' -- doing the Turing test with the Witch-king and
the One Ring. Would the human judge be able to tell which is which?
And if not, does the difference really matter?

--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does
knowledge.
- Charles Darwin (1809 - 1882)
 >> Stay informed about: How did Sauron do it...