Does Palpy/Sidious believe he is doing what is good and right or does he know what he does is evil?

Anakin thought what he was doing was right, so why wouldn't Sidious? He's been told his whole life, growing up under Darth Plagueis that the Republic and the Jedi were evil.

 

The Emperor does do a lot of mad cackling, especially during the Yoda duel. Palpatine seems to be a moral relativist. He doesn't think that his actions are objectively evil the way that most people would. Sidious believes that his deeds are justifiable because they serve his goal of obtaining greater power. Since the Emperor thinks of power as a good thing, he thinks that whatever he has to do in order to garner power is good. The end justifies the means in Sidious' mind. Believing that good is a point of view allows the Emperor to do whatever he wants, with absolutely no moral compass.

 

Some interesting discussion here.

Sorry to hinder your efforts to bring clarity, but isn't Vader in the OT kind of a blur of both these categories?

 

Just to clarify, I agree with the rest of Cryogenic's post.

I remembered something while re-reading this thread just now.

"The Sith rely on their passion for their strength. They think inwards, only about themselves."
"And the Jedi don't?"

Here's Palpatine admitting that he is selfish. Interesting.

 

I think that Vader is always somewhat delusional -- for his mind has been clouded by the Dark Side. But Sidious doesn't appear to have a conscience at all. Though he has the same inherent weakness: the ability to give into the Dark Side (which he does when he attempts destroying Luke out of pure rage).

I guess Sidious can and perhaps should be considered totally amoral. As someone else said, he says that "good is a point of view". However, everything he says is a distortion of the truth. You cannot take anything of his literally. Thus, while Sidious might consider good a point of view, it's clear to me that he knows that he is evil by conventional standards. He's not really encouraging Anakin to engage and embrace an alternate philosophical discourse -- he's just saying what he does to twist his mind, confuse the fellow and ultimately turn him. I think, deep down, Sidious entirely agrees with the Jedi philosophy -- but he doesn't care for it. This explains some other dialogue to Anakin: "I would worry about the collective wisdom of the Council if they didn't select you for this assignment. You're the best choice, by far." He's telling an interesting truth here. He's saying that Anakin is "the best choice" as a candidate for turning, and at the same time, expressing his opinion of the Council: he would worry if the Council didn't select him precisely because he knows their limitations and any other decision would run counter to those limitations. And something arises from this: in Sidious stating that Anakin is the "best choice", when, as I said, "best choice" means "best candidate for turning", it seems that he's also saying Anakin is the weak link and the Jedi are truly committed to good. Tricky, no? I guess that this interpretation might still be refuted. Say you have a cult. And that cult knows who the gullible people are and who the gullible people are not. They're going to hone in and focus their energies on inducting the gullible people, aren't they? But, in having such perception, might they not also recognise their own beliefs as B-S? It's a tough one.

 

That's the thing, I don't see evidence of Vader having a concscience in ANH. He enjoys being evil.

I'm not sure I follow here. If Palpatine embodies the darkside itself, why would he be giving in to anything? Maybe he's "relaxing" a bit, dropping the politeness and allowing himself to be angry, I can see that. But frying Luke just seemed like an every day kind of thing for the Emperor.

I think it's both. He does see the Jedi as dogmatic, and sees his own views as superior, enlightened if you will. It's just the way he structures the ideas for Anakin that is purely manipulative.

I took that comment literally though. He thinks Anakin is the best choice because Anakin is the best fighter. At the same time, he is only telling Anakin this to make him jealous of Obi-Wan. So it's a truth (I think), but there was no reason to say it other than to turn Anakin.
But at the same time, the way Ian delivers "best choice" you do get the impression it means for Sith apprentice.

Yeah. It's "I would worry if..." knowing that there is no "if".

The way I interpreted it the Jedi being commited to good doesn't really affect the meaning. Palpatine probably was thinking "Best choice (to kill all the Jedi)".

I've written down somewhere the meaning I found in all the nuances in this scene. I'd be interested to hear if you agree when I get around to posting it.

Are we still talking about the same thing?

 

Yes. Mind completely clouded.

Every day kind of thing? How come he's not angry when he's killing Mace or fighting Yoda? He's taking pleasure in it. No: Palpatine has an arc. He is finally consumed by the Dark Side that has ravaged every other aspect of his being when he "completes his journey" and turns on Luke.

Fair enough. That sounds like a valid interpretation to me.

Though Palpatine's grab for power seems inherently sexual to me. By that, I mean he takes immense pleasure in what seems to be the apex of his entire modus operandi: doing away with his opponents and gaining in strength.

Yes. It could have several meanings and functions.

Absolutely. All his bets accounted for.

 

"you're the best choice, by far." Thanks for that one. Brilliant catch!

 

I believe it was you that originally made it...

 

Does Palpy/Sidious believe he is doing what is good and right or does he know what he does is evil?

Yes, yes, no, no, yes.

 

Does the dark side control the user, or does the user control the dark side?? Is it safe to say, Palpatine had learned over the years to control the power of the dark side, and for Anakin, the dark side controlled/consumed him.

But I am one to think, that even though Sidious is a Master in the use and power of the dark side, it still controlled him and his actions. In time, Anakin would learn to control the power of the dark side, but yet it still controlled him and his actions.

Here is a question for you. Was it possible for Palpatine/Sidious to be redeemed from the dark side??

Darth Sin!

 

It not only controls your actions, but also obeys your commands"

I don't think this has anything to do with letting the dark side control you.

GL was still in the beginning stage of his metaphysics when he had Kenobi say this. It could be teh Force is somewhat neutral, thus light-side and dark-side pratitioners can use it, but also must be sensitive to its currents. Even Lord Tyrannus says, "The Force is with us, Master Sidious," im AOTC. Or, it could be more in the line of destiny vs. free will. Or, if anything, if one listens to the midichlorians and attunes to the Will of the Force, using the Force as any ally, then one gives up a certain degree of freedom, control, even to the point of self-sacrifice and sacrificing the ones you love. But, if one uses the Force willfully, commanding it, then one uses the dark side.

 

He believes in moral relativism. Nothing can be known for certain, therefore, concepts like "right" and "wrong" are just words to be manipulated to further his agenda; he appears to only believe in power.
He and Lord Voldemort must've gotten together at some point. Doens't Volde believe that there is only "power, and those too weak to use it."?

 

Yes, he does indeed - but did you ever consider that to be because he was "drunk" with the dark side - like when religious folk are "drunk with The Spirit" and speak in tongues? That's the context of how I saw that scene.

 

That was the context I saw it in. I also think Sidious was "drunk on the dark side" when he was giving Anakin his Darth name. That would explain those strange, low rumbling sounds in that scene.

 

Not the part about Anakin being the best choice. I've never thought about that.

I'd rather put him into the camp of amoralism. Ordinary moral relativism doesn't argue that there is no right or wrong at all, it just states that "good and evil are relative to social, cultural, historical or personal references, and that there is no single standard by which to assess an ethical proposition's truth" (from Wiki). I'm aware Lucas stated in the ROTS commentary that Sidious believes he is doing good, but while this may be true for the politician part of the Sidious character, with respect to the character as a whole I just don't buy it.

The comparison between Darth Sidious and Lord Voldemort is a most interesting topic. Again, too bad there isn't a board for discussing crossover topics here. Yes, Voldi does indeed argue that there is only power, and those too weak to use it. There are similarities in their philosophical outlook, but the characters itself come across as being very different to me.

 

Anakin never loses the ability to know between right and wrong, good and evil.

Neither does Palpatine.

Both know full well the direction of their action. That being, the acquistion of power through any and all means necessary.

Anakin was long witness to the belief that the Jedi Order was a mere shadow of its former (and intended) self. The "Jedi way" was much less evil and destructive but no more correct than any Sith intention.

The system was erred, at is core and from every direction. And when such a thing happens, who can really say who is "more" right or "less" evil.

Without knowing it, Anakin fulfilled his destiny by (eventually) wiping the slate clean (in destroying both the Jedi and the Sith) allowing a new and more fertile growth within the force to take its former erred place.

 

But Sidious was the one creating that chaos and confusion to the galaxy.. i'll have to disagree with how Lucas sees this one

Personally, i think he's just a power hungry and greedy SOB who did all he could to achieve unlimited power

 

Look at it this way: I doubt Hitler would have described himself as evil.

 

IMHO, i doubt that the sith, on a whole, are even remotely concerned with morality, right and wrong. ultimately, theirs is a quest/thirst for knowledge and power. the means are not as important as the ends as they see it, so if they have to crack a few egg shells to make their omelets, they dont really care, IF it results in what they crave. because of that, it's so easy for them to dismiss the idealogy of the jedi and to convince others that they are fanatics.

 

No. He was raised to be evil without even realizing that is what he is. He could not accept a different view of the Force. He saw compassion as a weakness for the Jedi, so he would never become compassionate. He couldn't conceive of being selfless. No, he would never abandon the dark side for a view that did not suit him.

 

In the framework of the films, Palpatine/Sidious is beyond redemption. He is an archetypal devil that draws Anakin to the Dark Side and allows us to consider that the possibility for redemption and liberation exists within us all; all we need do is renounce evil by accepting truth and light (Luke) and conquering our demons (Palpatine/Sidious).

"Well, now you have something else to think about. Carry on." -- James T Kirk, Star Trek II

I don't buy a lot of what Lucas says, either.

The philosophy and interpretations that Lucas espouses are at odds with the complexity built into Star Wars. And how about these...?

- Greedo was "always meant" to shoot first.

- The original films will never be released on DVD in their unaltered state. *snortle*

It's clear that we must think for ourselves. That, of course, is the only way to proceed through life.

 

I was thinking of the quote from Benedict XVI that's getting more attention now that he's the big guy at the Home Office.
"We are entering a dictatorhip of moral relativism, where nothing can be know for certain, and has as it's highest goal the satisfaction of one's own ego and desires." Since Paply's highest goal is the satisfation of his desire - to put the Sith back in power - he can fit the moral relativist mold. It also seems to me that accomplishing his highest goal satisfies his ego, even if he'd deny having any such thing. After the takeover, he acts and speaks like "now things will go the way they're supposed to" when he says "once more we shall have peace." If he believes this (debatable of course), then he have a set of personal and historical preferences.
His "good is point of view" statement also makes me think he fits more into the moral relativist mode, since it reflects a belief that there is "no single standard" to say that "good" means anything independent of one's own view.

 

I see. Well, being German I've been blessed with Ratzinger's characteristic viewpoints for quite a long time now - let's just say that I think his interpretation of moral relativism doesn't quite fit what commonly and in academia is meant by it.

I agree, but again, the idea of moral relativism that there is no single moral standard doesn't mean that there is no moral standard at all. It merely means that moral standards should be set and assessed taking into account the cultural and historical background. The idea that there are no moral standards at all is what distinguishes amoralism, which can be viewed as an extreme form of moral relativsm, but is not identical with it.

 

Wow, such deep thoughts *yawn*
Sometimes we don't need to look any further than this is a
good vs. evil story and hello, Palps is not on the good side.
Palps is doing what is right for PALPS, not the galaxy.
If you believe he is good than how about we talk about this
nice piece of swamp..err property I have for sale, hmm?

"I don't buy a lot of what Lucas says, either"

ppfft who would, he's only the creator of the films.
His words mean nothing! lol