Saga Is the light side just as bad for the Force as the dark?

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by Seagoat, Mar 9, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: Darth_Nub, Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn
  1. only one kenobi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 18, 2012
    star 3
    I'm not sure what a drive to evolve is? Evolution is a process combining genetic mutation and natural selection, which is outside of the control of any being. There is no drive to evolve, there is only genetic drift due to external influences. As for losing the survival instinct?! I don't understand. Did everyone want to die?

    Equally, if you sit in a cesspit you will die from your exposure to bacteria. If you work a body constantly joints will grind down the cartilage between them, muscles will tear; the bones of our ancestors (generally dead much younger than our average life-span now) reveal the stresses of unbridled nature. Balance in all things, hmmm?

    Actually, civilised nations, when doing well, tolerate less and less "soft evils", and tend to work toward the good of all. When a nation begins to struggle, then all sorts of ruptures occur. Of course, maybe by "soft evils" you mean something other than I do. I mean things like child abuse decrease and become socially unacceptable, for example. There is plenty of good data that a well-off country tends to perform better in terms of its treatment of its citizens than a worse off nation.

    In terms of your last point here, i should re-iterate again that Tatooine is not in the Republic. they have no jurisdiction over it. And nobody but the Sith were aware that a clone army was being developed ona aplanet that was not in the Republic, and had been erased from the Jedi's records.


    The corruption was not tolerated. In fact we are shown that the Senate removed Valorum, on the understanding that they disliked the 'corruption' they had seen in his actions. The reason that nobody could react to Palpatine's plotting was because nobody knew it was him at the centre of it all. In fact he'd convinced everyone that he was a good man. Deceit was the name of the game. our immune system doesn't respond to cancer either, because cancer seems to be a benign part of the body.


    see my response above to @Arawn_Fenn.


    I'll ask again. Do you think a lion makes a moral judgement when it kills? Justified in terms of what? In what way could Palpatine justify inducing corruption, greed and then war into the galaxy? If a body is well should you inject them with an illness to ensure they don't forget what it is to be ill?Palpatine tells us what his motivation is. "Power. Unlimited power", he doesn't need justification, he simply has no moral responsibility, no morality at all.


    But, from a purely Darwinian point of view humans would not have survived had we not worked together as societies. And civilisation has moved us on from Darwinian forces so that we can talk of how to best help ourselves. We don't die of overwork or insanitary conditions because as societies we have developed systems which mitigate against those things.

    One could, but one would have to omit that the greatest enemy of society is imoverishment. Trailer trash eh? kuh.....brought it on themselves did they?


    And such people are often frauds and actually after one thing and one thing only. Their own power, their own wealth, their own exhaltation, and their followers are gullible enough to fall for it.



    No we don't. we hear Padmé talk about how the laws of the Republic don't allow slavery - she is talking about a situation that already exists.

    As for your reference to Chamberlain....you should try and put his actions into context. Most people did not want a war. It wasn't so long ago since the atrocity that was WW1. You think people should have been baying for war? easy to scoff in hindsight. (now, whether peace should have been 'bought' with the freedom of another nation.....that's a different question).


    Isn't there? Republic credits are worthless there. That would be a bit odd if they were trading with the Republic, don't you think? "The Republic doesn't exist here".....

    Qui-Gon is supposed to take on a whole planet? While he is carrying out his duty to protect the Queen and get her to Coruscant? I think you over-estimate the power of the Jedi.


    That's not what i asked. If evil lurks everywhere (so presumably as much in the day as in the night), what does day and night have to do with it?

    The natural state is apathy? The natural state of the universe is apathy? Well, i suppose on a certain level that could be seen as true. By which I mean, the constructs of good and evil are the realm of man, so the universe does not have a valuative judgement of what is evil and what is good. Which is why the natural state of the Force is...in balance, and that neither evil nor good are aspects of it.
    Last edited by only one kenobi, Mar 18, 2013
    DarthBoba and ILNP like this.
  2. Aaronaman Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2013
    star 4
    How so....he wasn't belittled, made to look weak in front of the Sith, or taken away in a completely different direction from his previous depictions???
  3. Aaronaman Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2013
    star 4
    I would jump in on this conversation and add my two cents but I'm not sure I'm smart enough to hahaha that's one I depth posting.
  4. Placeholder Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 30, 2013
    star 4
    He went from wise old sage to a fool, easily manipulated by Palpatine. Palpatine played him like a piano.
    Last edited by Captain Tom Coughlin, Mar 18, 2013
  5. Aaronaman Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2013
    star 4
    But Yoda had so much more to focus his energy on, I'm sure if he only had to worry about hiding the identity of himself and one other Jedi from Palpatine he could have done it with ease....The PM Yoda transitioned well into the ESB version.
  6. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    I'll take that as a "yes". So which is it? Do you refuse an interpretation of "the scene" while simultaneously acting as if you need to be told "when" it occurred? The dialogue from "the scene" was transcribed in "the thread", so you've seen it, unless for some reason you're reading some posts but not others. Trollish game-playing such as pretending ignorance of the scene and asking successive posters to recopy the same dialogue ad nauseam ultimately serves no purpose, but is not particularly shocking coming from someone who's also selling the "Jedi are baby-snatchers" revisionism. At some point a pattern begins to emerge. Asking for references to the light side is a highly disingenuous tactic if you simply intend to deny the meaning or existence of references to the light side as soon as they are spoonfed to you. As far as "interpretations" and what it "is" are concerned, we have Lucas' words for that. They indicate that some people's "interpretations" are not consistent with the intent of the author.

    I only discount what you're trying unsuccessfully to make Lucas' words mean. Unfortunately, what you want Lucas to have said was never said once by either Lucas or any of his characters, or even written in an out-of-universe fashion by a sourcebook author. That's a little strange, isn't it?

    As far as Lucas' own words on the subject are concerned:

    "The overriding philosophy in Episode I — and in all the Star Wars movies, for that matter — is the balance between good and evil."

    -George Lucas, quoted in L. Bouzereau, Star Wars: The Making of Episode I, 1999


    Try Palpatine and his Empire.

    No, the Force is not so fragile a thing as to be automatically unbalanced whenever someone is using the dark side; that arguably doesn't even work with the presentation in TESB. ( And again, since the films speak of using the dark side, it does not make sense to characterize the dark side itself as use, because then those who use the dark side are using use. ) But make sure to remember you took the above position, because you'll be denying it later when it's become inconvenient.

    EU.

    No, it's based only on your apparent insistence on taking something literally which cannot reasonably be taken literally. As such it is a ridiculous outcome, arrived at by a ridiculous mistake. Nothing too surprising about how that chain of events turned out, but none of it makes a post-ROTJ galaxy without even the possible existence of evil "likely" to be part of Lucas' intentions. The suggestion has only lowered your credibility to new and previously unexplored depths.

    I don't think AOTC Anakin is a Sith yet, and "didn't see it, didn't happen" doesn't allow you to characterize the Force use of every individual in the galaxy based on a small handful of individuals.

    [face_laugh] Nice one. No, totally relevant to the discussion, if you know what those words usually mean.

    At the point when he stops fighting, right? Now should come the point where you tell me that an order of knights is never meant to fight.

    Lucas and various of his characters.

    That's right. Only me. Not Lucas, nor his characters, nor any of the EU characters who have spoken of it. It's all coming from me. I guess denial must look like an attractive strategy when you have nothing else.

    Because you - a.k.a. "Nobody" - made a claim which is equivalent to that argument: It is the Sith use of the Force, the darkside, which is causing the imbalance in the Force. The fact that there were Sith around well before the imbalance, by definition using the Force in the way that Sith do, contradicts this proposition.

    Wrong. The Sith use the dark side, as we are told in ROTS, they do not create it. Its existence does not depend upon them. It has to be there, if Lucas' words are to be taken into account. But of course a position predicated on throwing out the sides of the Force really cannot claim to reflect Lucas' words.

    You can repeat it as many times as you want, that doesn't make it any more true. This is religion, not fact. Much like Force revisionism, it is something which is said to be true merely because someone would prefer it to be true, not because it has been demonstrated to be true.

    No, the Sith and the dark side are not the same thing. One is a group of people, the other is a part of an energy field. You continue to try to rewrite the dark side of the Force into either the "dark side" of Force use ( except Force use is not the Force ) or the Sith themselves ( except Force users are not the Force ).

    You're apparently getting your own positions confused with mine. I maintained that "destroys evil in the universe" was not something that could be taken literally.
    Last edited by Arawn_Fenn, Mar 21, 2013
  7. Placeholder Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 30, 2013
    star 4
    The dark side of the force is simply an aspect of the force, one half of the equation. It exists on it's own, it would exist regardless of who is aware of it or using it. It simply is.

    Again, it's why it's the dark SIDE. It is simply one side of a whole.
    Arawn_Fenn likes this.
  8. only one kenobi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 18, 2012
    star 3
    Mod edit: Getting too personal there.
    Last edited by Darth_Nub, Mar 22, 2013
  9. Darth_Nub Saga, Classic Trilogy and Film Music Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2009
    star 4
    And I think this thread's about done. Locking.
Moderators: Darth_Nub, Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.