Lit "Light Side" Sith

I think that is cool too. I just don't like to see it that way myself. However, I think a lot of the Legends EU was written for us to see it that way. I have to be a bit of a rebel reader in that regard.

Well that is my point exactly. It isn't a real world that I will wake up in. Instead, it is a fictional world that I can dream in. There is certainly room for 'the human condition' in the GFFA among non-Force users, among them you have shady characters, good and bad, grey, etc. But that is the backdrop for the focus of the main story, which is Force Users and their struggle.

I use the terms when speaking about the EU, because some of the books use the terms. But my perspective is that there is no such thing as a "light Sith" or "dark Jedi". These people are just struggling on account of the human condition which includes most individuals feeling happy, angry, sad, jubilant, etc., at times. And those times would not always be conducive to carrying out Sith or Jedi work. For example, if I want to manipulate the Force using the dark side, I need to relish those things that foster it, but if I am feeling sentimental and happy, it isn't going to work as well. So that is the struggle for some Sith. (Note that I use "human condition" liberally. Some characters are not classified as human, but still experience similar psychology and emotions in the GFFA).

What about you? Do you feel that there are light sith and if so, how do you feel that an individual remains simply a 'light Sith' as opposed to turning full Sith. Also, would the individual be more inclined to become a Sith? Also, why do you not feel that they are merely struggling with being a honest to goodness Sith dark lord?

 

I understand what you're saying. I'm again saying that i'm pretty sure, without going back to count, that the majority of Force Organizations we saw were Dark Side ones.

 

DigitalMessiah Yup, couldn't agree with you more.

As for Vergere... discussion probably best reserved for your NJO analysis thread, but I'm not sure what I'd add to the discussion, since I don't really have anything more to say than what has been said already. Vergere makes some irrefutable observations about reality (like Jacen, or any Jedi, being 'the gardener'), relies on a Socratic teaching method that has resulted in a lot of wrong assumptions by fans - and Denning - as to her actual beliefs, and certainly isn't remotely 'Grey' in the sense that, for instance, the Je'daii were. How her character has been so poorly interpreted and butchered by fans and other authors alike, I'm not sure - has something to do with general philosophical ignorance and lack of understanding of aforementioned Jungian/Campbellian bases for Star Wars IU philosophy, I suspect.

xx_Anakin_xx I'm still curious as to how your perspectives would change if you woke up in the GFFA as a reality, though.

And as for light Sith, I think it very much depends on how we're using the term 'light side' here. All I can say is that there are certainly Sith who weren't merely struggling along the way to becoming Dark Lords, but who explicitly and completely rejected the merits of utilising passion for strength, and in fact espoused traditional Jedi ideology while retaining allegiance to and membership of the Sith Order. Kel'eth Ur is probably the most prominent example of this. Darth Gravid attempted to marry Jedi and Sith dogma, and was said to be drawn to the light side without ever becoming a Jedi.

I believe there's many a Sith who focused on understanding their emotions, and in so doing did not fall prey to the (perhaps Force-exaggerated, if Mace in Shatterpoint is to be believed) unreasoning compulsions that Vergere spoke of; self-esteem without perverse vainglory, anger without uncontrolled rage, control over and utilisation of their emotions without the Jedi trait of suppression of emotion nor the all-too-common Dark Jedi trait of becoming controlled by emotion.

There's also many a Sith who weren't murderous creatures of rage, or cold, reasoning yet sociopathic monsters, but they remained loyal to the Sith Empire in which they were raised. Why wouldn't they, when their people's enemy had committed genocide against their ancestors? There's also many a Sith who did not reject good or evil as concepts as Palpatine did, and certainly believed in the righteousness of their cause - and depending on one's ethical views, e.g. deontological ethics vs utilitarianism, it's possible to point out Sith Lords who were both more ethical in consequentialist terms and more ethically motivated than the Jedi of their day.

Do any of these, or all of these, count as 'light Sith?' Depends on your definition of the term. Does light equate good? All I can say is that I'd happily sign up for the nearest Sith Academy if I woke up in the GFFA, or create a new Order if there wasn't one already around, and I wouldn't be inclined to embrace the appellation of 'light Sith' while simultaneously being confident in the ethical superiority of the Sith and in my being the 'good guy.'

OOU, organisations such as the Baran Do, Jal Shey, Gray Paladin, Matukai, Zeison Sha and even races like the Aing-Tii or Force traditions of the Draethos certainly aren't described as dark side organisations. When I think of Force traditions other than the Jedi or Sith, I think of 'neutral' organisations - neutral in the sense they are neutral in terms of the Jedi/Sith divide, not 'neutral' like D&D alignment. Few of these Force traditions are explicitly aligned with the dark side, and those that are are mostly derivatives of the Sith, with only a select few being truly unique in origin (e.g. Nightsisters, perhaps the Shapers of Kro Var). I do find some of the dark side pirate/Force user for hire organisations quite interesting though, like the Black Chain raiders in the Unknown Regions and the Seyugi Dervish assassins.

 

I very much prefer the viewpoint that there is a very big 'Grey side' in the midst of all this. While Star Wars may have started out as a fairytale, there is nothing wrong with advancing. A fairytale might be good for movies, sure, definitely, but it doesn't make for good writing when it comes to novels, comics, etc. One could argue it only partially made for good movies, Episodes 4 through 6. Everything else being a little.. eh. Darth_Dreadwar makes a perfect case for what a 'light' Sith could essentially be.

As for the divide on appearance, I think it depends not on when one starts learning or how powerful they are, but how much in control of themselves they are. If they're in full control, meaning not going overboard with power, they could probably keep their appearance normal, with the Sith eyes. We know that early on Palpatine was more 'in control' especially during his time as Chancellor, but when he had no reason to hide, he also had no reason to 'stay in control' and by the time of Dark Empire, he was practically Lord Voldemort.

This gives a case for the Sith we've seen in SWTOR that look 'normal' have also been those that we can consider 'Light Sith'. They're more in control of their anger and haven't become mindless rage monsters, nor are they fully sociopathic. We've seen some Sith (Lost Tribe) even go as far as to form families, so they definitely can't be all sociopaths, nor all uncontrollable rage monsters. Hell, Lost Tribe Sith are obsessed with physical perfection, meaning they definitely have a way of staying good-looking while using the Dark Side.

 

Havoc123, I think you made some good points. You're always distinguishable by that CIA dude in your profile pic. Seriously, though, that was awesome, and I hadn't thought of the "control" aspect you brought up ever before. That would explain why Tyranus, Galen Marek, and others did not sport the yellow eyes and decaying appearance most of the time. Obviously, there are Sith like Sidious, Malgus, Plagueis, Bane, etc. who became hideous and terrifying, but it is true that they were less in control than others like Tyranus, Marek, and the Lost Tribe of Sith.

I do prefer the Grey Side way of looking at things. I really appreciate TCW and EU novels and games for their moral ambiguity and multiple ways of looking at things. I would have to defer GreyJedi91's analysis on this. http://boards.theforce.net/threads/light-side-sith.50024586/page-8 I think that the grey side/ambiguities have been marvelous for novels, comics, etc. We could have used more of that in the movies. But the dark side is so pervasive that GreyJedi91 is correct.

 

Darth_Dreadwar Even if they branched off from the Sith, like the Krath, i'd still call them organizations in their own right as they end up developing their own traditions and such. So even if a Jedi or Sith had a hand in their creation, i'd still classify them as separate organizations, as the members themselves aren't classified as either Jedi or Sith. In which case you not only have the Krath, but the Legions of Lettow, the Reborn, the Prophets of the Dark Side, the Nightsisters of course, the Dark Side Adepts, the Inquisitorious, the Disciples of Ragnos, etc. All organizations that are completely aligned with the Dark Side. To me, their relation to the Jedi/Sith conflict has nothing to do with it at all, as that's then something else entirely.

 

DarthJenari Even if we do accept all Sith derivative organisations as entirely independent Force traditions, a brief perusal of Category:Force-based organizations (which certainly misses out on a few in the Knights of the Old Republic Campaign Guide, and that's just off the top of my head) on the Wook tells me 'unaligned' organizations outnumber those in Category: Dark side organizations.

 

Look at both the Dark Side Organizations page (total number of 41 different groups) as well as the Sith organizations page (81 different groups), all of which are Darksiders, compared to the neutral page (71 different groups)

 

Ah, but Sith organisations aren't independent Force traditions even in the most liberal definition, they're just exactly what it says on the tin - Sith. If we were to include them, then we'd have to include the 77 Jedi organisations.

I was saying that the majority of non-Jedi and non-Sith organisations were 'neutral,' not that the majority of all Force-based organisations were.

 

Gotcha

 

Although come to think of it DarthJenari, a total of 122 dark side/Sith organisations vs 148 non-dark side organisations... That means the majority of Force-based organisations aren't aligned with the dark side.

Ah, Literature, where a topic on Light Side Sith becomes counting pages in Wookieepedia categories.

 

I made a note to watch it, and it's basically what my line of thought was - the Dark Side -can- be used for relative good, but your typical Sith trained as a Sith wouldn't do it. The Sith teachings simply don't work well with 'good intentions' and if a 'good Dark Sider' came he/she'd have to be outside of the usual Sith dogma. Though, a new thought came to me.

What if it's someone that already has power who then trains in the Dark Side? Think a political leader or businessman or something of the sort, such as Dooku. Someone who technically already had power, and didn't see fit to move for further. I think that's how Vectivus was essentially born. Someone who was satisfied with the influence that he had and simply used the Dark Side as an additional set of defenses to said power. A sort of, 'defense of the ends' instead of 'means to an end', if that makes sense.

 

It stands to reason that the dark side can be used for petty purposes, yeah.

Though I object entirely to the idea that it can be used for good, relative or otherwise. Using the dark side with good intentions is like training a guide dog by kicking it. Even if it works, you're still vile, ignorant, or both.

 

it's like the interpretation of Vader chucking Sheev down the reactor shaft so Luke can be master of the Sith

 

Using the dark side is... wait for it... using the dark side.

"There are two halves of the Force of Others. One is positive and will help you if you learn how to use it. But the other half will kill you if you aren’t careful. This negative side of the Force is called the Bogan, which is where the expression came from, and it is the part that is used by the Dark Lords to destroy their opponents."

 

bogan?

 

What's a Deak?

It's an Australian thing.

 

I always thought the best part of The Star Wars is that the ten year old gets killed right away.

 

If the Potentium has any truth to it, then using the dark side for good is by definition impossible.

If not... well, why couldn't you? Is there anything explicitly vile about utilising emotion to fuel one's imposition of will on the Force? Is there anything ignorant about tapping into a more entropic, destructive Force in nature? Strikes me as calling splitting an atom an abomination regardless of whether you want to use it to blow up a city or to provide sustainable energy for a nation.

Isn't there any room for Kreia's interpretation of Revan (regardless of whether the character actually was so) to be right?

I think the problem lies in the fact that the dark side is just a label, and has many, varying definitions both IU and OOU. Under some definitions, there wouldn't seem to be anything stopping using the dark side for good. And that's how I like it - no one has the truth of anything in Star Wars, and characters can't even agree on what they mean when they talk about the dark side. There's just a whole lot of varying beliefs and philosophical conceptions that we can argue about having validity or not. Just like IRL.

 

I don't agree. Being a Sith or being a villain doesn't mean they never do any good, just they only do things that's going to benefit themselves. If they could gain something from doing good, they will do it.

The Light Side could also be used for bad purpose.

 

I think we should define the Potentium if we're going to name drop it considering the fact that it has like fifteen definitions now.

 

So I believe if using the light side could help and empower themselves, the Sith would use it.

 

well, I guess that explains that the light side is useless

but now we need to define what using the light side is

ashla? what's that besides a togruta in episode 2

 

According to Dark Jaesa, there are a lot of Sith in the SWTOR Empire who are close to the light and not "pure" and her duty is to purge them.

 

Very true, and again, another thing many people criticise as IU and OOU inconsistency but I personally find realistic; a philosophical movement like the Potentium is going to have many different shades and interpretations.

I am using it in the following sense: the belief that there is no external and inherent duality in the Living Force, that "Bogan" or "dark side" are meaningless terms not grounded in any possible empirical observation beyond (a simplistic, flawed and vague) description of individual behavioural patterns and motivations.

Furthermore, (separate from this definition) I think that there is nothing inherently malign, just as there isn't anything inherently evil in anything, about utilising passion for strength. Indeed, if there's one thing I challenge Vergere on, it's the seeming implication that Sith teachings do call for one to fall into the clutches of unreasoning compulsion. I think that's a trait of a Dark Jedi, not a Sith, who in my conception of them control their emotions rather than letting them control them. Sociopathy, which admittedly does seem all too common a trait among Sith, is a very different beast than falling prey to unreasoning passion.