Lit The TRUE LIGHT side aka NOT the Jedi

Is it just Star Wars, or are metaphors taken too literally all the time? Is the concept of figurative speech simply an alien concept? Vergere should have been given a Power of the Jedi WOTC source book in the Jedi academy. I guess she was just deliberately ignoring what she knew to be canon since she's a terrible Sith that couldn't even figure out how to use her Jedi connections to kill Palpatine.

 

The problems with metaphors are that they usually need to be in context and some time the person you are trying to enlighten is an aspergers who will focus to one of the holes in your metaphors and question it. Like me with the three edged blade metaphor

 

The problem is apparently the characters are supposed to know canon fact, or there's even a belief that the great mystery that is the Force can be summed up in the canon fact of an RPG sourcebook. And people complain that midi chlorians demystify the Force.

Religious people, of all religions, believe they know the truth of the universe, and yet not all of them teach it like it is an RPG with certain rules to it, and not everyone believes in the same religion. People can use the Force, yet there are still a ton of different groups that all have different and contradictory views of the Force. Huh. And there's still people like Han Solo that think it is a sham. Huh. But no the characters just need to know canon fact, because they should know in universe that George Lucas wrote Yoda's dialogue so it is representative of CANON and there's no other right way to teach it.

This zealotry over canon is silly.

 

No, sir. If the Force is a sphere, let's call the Dark Side one pole, and the light side the other. Perhaps if there were no Sith, there would be no need for the Jedi. That would restore the balance, too. But since it is established that there is a Dark Side, and that the Force was out of balance (the prophecy of Rana Tey...), then there must be an opposite, i.e., the Light Side, which the Jedi were representing symbolically. This is why I said, though, that the Jedi were just as bad as the Sith. While the Sith may have been very outspoken on their views of power and domination, the Jedi, so fixed on being "perfect" and in harmony with the Force, (and moreover, so focused on rooting out and destroying all Sith and anyone else they thought were heretics) were committing the same mistake as the Sith. I'm having a hard time conveying the concept of what I'm trying to get across...The Jedi became insular and very provincial, just as the Sith already were, only the Jedi were doing it in the "name of good."

Does this make sense? I don't think I can describe it better, and hope I conveyed it understandably. At least then, we'll have a point to debate from! (Stupid brain! lol)

 

Why not? With an out-of-universe source you can get information from a "godlike" or omniscient authorial perspective, escaping the limited knowledge of characters. That's the perfect place to say, for example, this character opinion is correct, that character opinion is incorrect. Or should everything be a "mystery", even to the author? ( Thinks of "the puzzle box" and shudders ) Should all opinions somehow be considered equally correct?

Good for them. There's no indication they actually do. That's where the analogy breaks down. Everyone with different views, and everyone equally unable to do anything that the uninitiated can't do.

But let's imagine that one of these religious people decides to write a book, a space fantasy if you will. In fact, he or she creates a whole fictional universe. Now, this person finally can be said with some certainty to know the truth of a universe - the fictional one they created.

Well, is that viewpoint right or wrong? Can Han even be wrong about anything? And is he supposed to still think that after three movies of Luke's exploits? What happens when his kids start levitating stuff?