PT Isn't it destructive to Sith order when Sidious is always replacing one apprentice to the next?

lol.

 

Yaaaaaaaaay! I got a lol!

 

always use Wookieepedia, the Star Wars Wiki

 

Okay, not as exciting as the lol, but advice is always good. Yaaaaaaaaay?

 

None of that is in continuity. Ventress was last seen in season five of TCW and was still alive at the time. Her fate beyond that is unknown.

 

Wasn't she supposed to finally die in Labyrinth of Evil? But Lucas said no

 

Leeland Chee was the one who said that any reference to her death was not canon. But I think it was less Lucas and more about TCW.

 

What were the Jedi's extreme methods of viewing the Force?

Reminds me of Set Harth.

 

Regarding the OP question...

I guess I see it as a sort of survival of the fittest, where each potential apprentice must scratch and claw their way to the top, and in some way, this is how the Sith evolve in that the most powerful or cunning retain the top positions, thus insuring the dark strength of the order.

 

That is indeed what makes the Sith formidable, and that is the reason for the law of 2. When there are more than just two Sith, the balance of power is thrown off and it can only be righted by even more betrayal than usual. There must always be just two; one to hold the power, and the other to crave it.

Sidious managed to screw even this up, by stunting his own apprentices and preventing them from reaching his level of skill, mainly by holding back knowledge from them. Earlier in the thread, someone mentioned that he thought his master made a mistake in teaching him everything he knew. Sidious' teaching method was an aberration of the law of evolution, and threatened the Sith Order as well. Instead of the strongest and most cunning inevitably usurping the aging, weakened relic, it's just old Mr. Scrotum Face wasting away over the years while his apprentice is unable to reach the level of mastery that their strength entitles them to. Then, when he eventually croaks from old age, half the Sith knowledge is lost as well, and nobody ever figures out what he took with him. Sort of like when the knowledge of how to make holocrons was lost.

 

Hence Sidious's obsession with Becoming Immortal. "If we work together, in time I know we can discover the secret."

 

No love, no family, no sexual relations, no self-interest, no emotion. If you don't live your entire life as a public servant, trained to be the most dangerous pacifist to ever walk the face of the earth, you WILL become a vicious, evil sociopath.

The no sexual relations thing is mostly inference on my part. I'm assuning that the Jedi were just as opposed to prostitution as they were to emotional entanglements.

 

An understandable inference - still, Lucas eventually stated otherwise:

"Jedi Knights aren't celibate - the thing that is forbidden is attachments - and possessive relationships."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1989505.stm

 

That's not their view of the Force.

Where was that ever stated in the movies?

 

So, they were free to scour Coruscants Red light district and 'enjoy themselves' when they had a bit of downtime..ok it's a bit crass, but that's what he's alluding to

 

Or just the "singles bars". Or for two Jedi on a mission together to get intimate if they're that way inclined - as long as they don't let it become an actual relationship.

Yoda drops a few hints:

"Attachment leads to jealousy. The shadow of greed, that is"
"If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny"
"If you choose the quick and easy path, as Vader did, you will become an agent of evil"

 

Hi Iron lord,

I see here in the first place the jealousy of an order afraid of loosing staunch disciples. For the same reason Sidious was preventing a coming-closer of Maul and Kilinda Matako at Orsis Academy by letting Maul kill every member and student there. For sure - Jedi wouldn't go that far. But I think one attachment shouldn't affect the other. Because they are pretty different by nature.

 

"A Jedi must have the deepest commitment. The most serious mind"
"You've made a commitment to the Jedi order - a commitment not easily broken."

The Sith, as mentioned, have a similar approach when it comes to their apprentices - the Master should be the apprentice's only concern.

Personally I think it should be more like a karate teacher and their dojo - outside the dojo, the apprentice (Jedi or Sith) has their own life to lead.

But that's not the sort of thing either Order would like.

 

Absolutely awesome find there! Man that brings up a lot of questions! One would be that sex without a purpose (children), means it is self-gratification only, which can be looked at as selfishness, which is linked to greed... very interesting!

 

Views on acceptable Jedi behavior are not methods of viewing the Force. Also, "no emotion" is a myth. Jedi are admonished against emotions of a negative nature, not all emotion.

 

My post was an example of exaggeration. I tend to make a lot of them. The general idea is, the Jedi are very restricted, as far as their moral code goes. Arawn wanted examples of how the Jedi represented an extreme side of the force. I obliged him. Inaccurately.

Incidentally, if Jedi aren't celibate, but are prohibited from having meaningful relationships with sexual partners, as in emotional entanglement, that seems to me like a very unhealthy stance for the Order.

How would that conversation even go? Seriously! "You wanna get laid? Sure. Just make sure that toots over there doesn't start poppin' out babies or gettin' all moon-eyes over youse."

The Jedi Order has never felt so skeevy.

 

It is true that "there is no emotion, there is peace" is an EU line in the Jedi code.

Some authors hinted that it was all emotions - but only at "high strength" that the Jedi should forsake:

"When anger becomes rage, fear becomes terror, love becomes obsession, self-esteem becomes vainglory, then a natural and useful emotion becomes an unreasoning compulsion and the darkness is."

 

All these questions the banal and dogmatic Jedi code throw up are indicative of a flawed idea in my eyes. The Jedi should've been akin to a kind of space samurai. The only code they follow is the warrior code. The Jedi character in Rebels looks to be spot on with how the Jedi should've been portrayed. IMO

 

He's talking to a potential Jedi student. He never states that everyone has to live their lives as public servants. He says that if you want to be a Jedi, you have to.

 

There's a hint of this in TPM, when Qui-gon asks Shmi who Anakin's father was. Before she tells him what she knows, Qui-gon is thinking that someone wanted to get their freak on and did so. When he discovers that this is not the case, he's left to ponder the deeper meaning. Hence finally deciding to test the boy.

That's what, "There is no emotion" is. When a Jedi is faced with combat or a personal crisis, a Jedi must put aside all their fears, anger, hate, jealousy, possessiveness and obsessiveness. No greed. No thought of self. No sense of self. None of that. They must be as calm and serene as possible if they are to survive an emotional challenge. When they can't do that....

DOOKU: "I sense much fear in you, Skywalker. You have anger, you have hate, but you do not use them."

VADER: "You have controlled your fear...now, release your anger. Only your hatred can destroy me."

This is their warrior code. The Jedi Order spent a thousand generations serving as the guardians of peace and justice, but did so by learning to control their emotions. A lack of control is where the Sith Lords come from. They were Jedi who felt that their order should be ruling the Republic, rather than being its servants. That they shouldn't limit their emotions and thus their connection to the Force. This is where the schism began and ultimately lead to the Force becoming unbalanced.