Discussions Why is Palpatine so evil?

I agree that there are many similarities between Palpatine and the Sith Emperor from TOR.
However, I do not think they both wanted to destroy the Galaxy. In my opinion, they wanted to rule it.

Why so?

 

Nadd turned to the Dark Side on his own and tortured both Arca and not-yet-evil Kun.

 

1. You're gonna give me "same title"? Really? That doesn't mean anything.
2. Destroy/conquier the galaxy... So have hundreds of other Sith Lords... That's a moot point.
3. That doesn't prove anything at all.
4. And...? So since they both killed their families that makes it clear that they are the same person? No, it doesn't work that way. Going by that logic, any other Sith Lord who murdered his own family could possibly be Palpatine... It doesn't work that way either.
5. That has nothing to do with this.


As I've said--- and as you know, but are clearly ignoring--- the movies were created decades before this game. Nobody (not in Bioware, not in LucasArts), not a single official source has even hinted at the possibility of Emperor Vitiate and Palps being the same person. Again, as I've said, you're just assuming things that are quite improbable, and basing your idea on absolutely nothing but speculation.

 

Let's agree to disagree

 

Alright, let's.

 

i think palpatine is evil

 

Wow, gosh, really? I never would have guessed.

 

What? he is evil! but yeah...

 

The matter discussed isn't whether he is evil or not, it is whether he knows it or not.

 

Pointed out before, he was definitely evil, but just didn't see himself that way. Same goes for a lot of the Imperials you see in later novels. When you get a look at their own thoughts they speak of how the Empire was far more orderly than the New Republic and that it gave everyone a purpose, yet they will then commit numerous atrocities along with that.

 

Not all of them did.

Roger. Roger.

 

lol which is why I said a lot of instead of all.

 

There is no such thing as objective evil.

 

sure there is, but that depends on the definition of 'objective', which, according to the google definitions is: 'Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.'
The interpretation of someone's acts can be influenced by bias, such as whether something someone did was evil or not (or also to the extent to which it was if it almost certainly was evil).
Surely there is an evil out there that absolutely everyone can guarantee would be certainly evil.

 

roger roger

 

I know this comment is VERY late, but could you provide with a quote or say what GL said. Im always very interested in Palpatines motivations and goals

 

I disagree with the OP's claim of 'absolutely irredeemable monster' and the reason Sidious is done that why is because it's what the creator wanted far as the films anyway.

 

Sidious has himself stated that he does not believe that there is such a thing as evil, that only power exists. His ultimate goal was to gain immortality and to continually grow more powerful.

 

I think that he not only regarded himself as something of a savior, but it was also due to his sheer hubris and intellect. He must have viewed people as being very weak, depraved, cynical, and unintelligent, and consequently, it's no wonder he thought that he alone was qualified to rule the galaxy. However, he certainly was sadistic and out there. Vader went so far as to say, "I'm not the Emperor. I don't kill for amusement; only when it serves my purposes." I think Vader really believes that the Empire's perverted form of justice was a force for good and order. Sidious believed that, as well, but he enjoyed it too much and was clearly not that different from people in the real world who regard themselves as saviors named Mao, Stalin, and Hitler.

 

Sith are merit-based. Aside from thinking himself a savior, Palpatine could of just thought that he deserved to rule the galaxy as he wanted because of his power and intelligence, as sith often believe. If anyone more fit to rule the galaxy existed, he would have been overthrown, at least from the side of sith philosophy. After all, you pretty much would have to be smarter and more cunning, if not more powerful, to succeed in overthrowing him.

 

I think an important point to make is that Palpatine is a sociopath. As such, he lacks empathy and any sense of conventional morality. It's always hard for the average human being to try to see the world through the sociopathic lens, but just imagine what you'd do if you weren't constrained by social norms, ethics or any kind of morality.

You'd no doubt pursue happiness and stimulation like anyone else, but you'd have no checks and balances, no consideration of how your own selfish pursuits could trample over others. If you hurt - and, much like a small child, you'd be hurt over the smallest, pettiest things - you'd lash out in anger, and that anger would be murderous and wouldn't exclude slaying your family.

That is not to say a sociopath can't develop an ethical system in the abstract. In fact, in some cases I think it'd be easier to make and follow through on utilitarian decisions if one was a sociopath (which I think pretty perfectly describes pre-mind wipe Revan), and I suppose it's possible Palpatine did think what he was doing was right, and perhaps had some higher purpose e.g. defending the galaxy from the Yuuzhan Vong. But I think most indications point to Palpatine rejecting the concepts of good and evil as entirely meaningless, and purely pursued the goal of achieving apotheosis, even if such a goal entailed, ultimately, a Dark Empire in which Palpatine would usher in an eternity of pure destruction and misery over which he could Lord himself, an immortal god-emperor of ashes... Startlingly similar to Emperor Vitiate, one supposes.