main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

Saga Why is the light side bad? (Balance in the Force)

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by MilakeRaznus, May 6, 2016.

  1. LordDallos

    LordDallos Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Feb 2, 2016
    A prophecy that originated from the force. Always in motion the future is...
    As can be seen in how people differently interpret scripture and prophecies from The Bible.
     
    Iron_lord likes this.
  2. Alexrd

    Alexrd Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 7, 2009
    That's irrelevant. Nobody is talking about the Force. The prophecy says A, B and C. Anakin meets condition A. If he's the Chosen One, he'll meet conditions B and C. If he doesn't, then someone else is the Chosen One. Luke doesn't meet condition A. So if the prophecy is true, he's not the Chosen One. If Luke does B and C then the prophecy was false. If Obi-Wan thinks Luke will destroy the Sith and bring balance to the Force, then all it means is that he ceased to believe in the prophecy. There's no Chosen One to him.

    Yes, also something that nobody is arguing.
     
  3. anakinfansince1983

    anakinfansince1983 Skywalker Saga/LFL/YJCC Manager star 10 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Just a friendly warning to play nicely in here. The subject of the Jedi tends to be a sensitive one. Argue your points without getting personal or degrading people who disagree.
     
  4. LordDallos

    LordDallos Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Feb 2, 2016
    The prophecy which aims to bring balance to the force means no one is talking about the force? Ok then.

    All it means is that Obi-Wan came to a different interpretation of the prophecy. He may be wrong, but it's his interpretation.
     
  5. Ghost

    Ghost Chosen One star 8

    Registered:
    Oct 13, 2003
    darth-sinister


    Agreed.


    Agreed.


    Close to agreeing.

    You see, I think it's fine for a Jedi to be attached to someone, as long as they're willing to let go when the time comes. That doesn't mean they need to be detached... they just need to know how to let go. And this actually is something that I think is found in the movies, not just my opinion. Yoda says he's going to miss Chewbacca and Tarful, and earlier he doesn't tell Anakin to not be attached in the first place but to "train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose." And he can do all that without being single, or having no children, too.


    Exactly my point, we agree.


    I agree. Like my original point there: you can have more personal love for your family, but still have equal compassionate love for everyone, and have mastery over your feelings and never do something like Anakin did with killing Jedi to save Padme.




    Alexrd


    I hope that came across the right way, I was attempting to clear up a potential miscommunication between us, and build common ground.

    You said you were describing how things are depicted, and that's the difference between us. I said yes, but in this discussion we're in right now, it's not about what's depicted, but what should be. So I was saying you don't need to limit yourself to just what's depicted. If you agree with it, that's great, just please share your own reasons why, aside from it simply being depicted or simply being what Lucas said. Why do you agree with what Lucas said, why do you agree with what was depicted? Lucas also depicted and talked about the Sith, why they have a Rule of Two, etc. but you obviously don't agree with them.


    There are many discussions happening within this thread. But what I was responding to you was "should" and me describing human nature in general.


    Where do you think their philosophy is proven right time and time again?

    For me, one of the most powerful parts of the movies was Luke proving Obi-wan and Yoda were wrong... that his personal love for his father ended up not only being a good thing, but also that he didn't have to kill his father, and this his father could be and was redeemed.


    They are part of the official saga now too.

    Lucas let that happen, he gave them permission.

    Just like how he let someone else direct The Empire Strikes Back. Lucas didn't agree with every change that director made, including the "I know" lines... but TESB is still an official part of the saga. Lucas gave his approval to it. Just like Lucas gave his approval for Kathleen Kennedy to run the show with some supervision from Disney from now on.


    I just did. It's not hating yourself, not neglecting your needs, remembering you're a person worthy of love too. It's self-esteem, not pride. It's not putting yourself above anyone else. It's recognizing you can't keep feeding the poor if you forget to feed yourself.


    For me, passion doesn't imply desire or infatuation. It just means "deeply felt." I've been writing something for Easter the past few days so that's on my mind, so here's another example: "the Passion of the Christ." Passion there is definitely not intended to be used as infatuation or desire, but deeply felt, and in that particular case, going through suffering because of how (according to the Bible) deeply he loved others. When I use the word "passion," I just mean deeply felt, a strong emotion, and I think others use passion the same way.


    Please read what I wrote to darth-sinister earlier in this post. You can be attached and be able to let go.

    Just as we were discussing earlier... Jedi feel emotions, but they have mastery over them. Jedi can feel attached to someone, but they have mastery over that feeling, and can let go when the time comes, not becoming possessive.


    Luke isn't the exception, he's still a Jedi, and the ultimately triumphant Jedi who succeeds where the others before him failed.

    Please see what I wrote above about attachment. I think we may have different definition of that word too, in addition to passion.


    Think of real-life comparisons to the Jedi as they are. Priests in many denominations can be married. Members of the military and the diplomatic corps can be married. Luke being married to someone wouldn't turn him to the dark side, or make him unable to be a Jedi.


    It's not that. Think about human nature. If Lucas had done the PT a little differently, as we went back and found out Yoda had a wife who died of old age a few decades before him, would that have felt like it went against everything we knew about the Jedi in the OT? You can be a Jedi, openly married, and not automatically feel the need to swear yourself to a fascist dictator and murder children and former friends/coworkers.


    Yes, you can have all three and not commit any crime.

    But being married and having personal love for your family can coexist with compassionate love for everyone, without greed or possessiveness or being unable to let go. You can care for others along with yourself, and it's often necessary. You can't help others if you can't take care of yourself. You won't be feeding the poor for long if you neglect to feed yourself.


    Again, we simple disagree on the definition of words, but agree on the larger point. I would just use the world "self-discipline" instead of "suppression" in this case.
     
    Iron_lord likes this.
  6. theraphos

    theraphos Jedi Knight star 2

    Registered:
    May 20, 2016
    This is a pretty serious misquote of the episode. The actual line is
    "Perhaps it is the will of the Force that the Jedi and all your kind perish!" The Bendu's entire rant is raging out about mortals and their conflicts as a whole - Empire, Rebels, Jedi, random bystanders, everyone - because he's fed up with them and just wants to be left alone to sleep (and that's direct from Filoni, in the rebels recon), and that's why he's not going to intervene to save a single person and in fact does his best to kill everyone, regardless of allegiance, when he finally snaps. His back and forth with Kanan amounts to Bendu saying "if people are dying, maybe they were just meant to die. I don't care and I don't want to hear about it" and Kanan saying "Well I do care about standing up and doing the right thing and I'm not going to sit here and watch it all burn." The Bendu is being a cranky distant nature spirit that absolutely will watch the galaxy and everyone in it burn as long as it doesn't affect him. And Kanan is being a Jedi.

    They aren't.
     
  7. Alexrd

    Alexrd Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 7, 2009
    It's not the Force that's up to debate.

    You can't have a different interpretation of the prophecy by disregarding or cherry picking its content.

    You misunderstand. It's my opinion that it's not up to me to decide what the Jedi should be. The Jedi dedicate their lives to others. It's who they are. To say that they should allow themselves to be married is simply going against who they are. It's like saying that Superman shouldn't fly. Marriage is a commitment to dedicate your life to someone else. Family is a commitment to dedicate your life to it. The Jedi chose a different path. And they are who they are because of the path they chose. Marriage serves no purpose to a Jedi. It doesn't fit nor is it part of their philosophy. Their marriage is to the Jedi way. To serving others.

    Human nature is very broad and not always something that one should follow. The Jedi decided what to dedicate their lives using the "good side" of "human nature". Everyone makes their own choices too.

    Everywhere. We see what happens when characters decide to apply their philosophy and when they don't. Good things happen when they do, bad things happen when they don't.

    That's a completely different issue and has nothing to do with Jedi teachings and philosophy. Obi-Wan and Yoda lost faith in Anakin. They thought him to be lost forever. It's a very particular issue that is beyond what the Jedi are about.

    Lucas ended up approving the "I know" line and everything else that's in the movies he didn't direct. Kershner and everyone else were working for him. Not comparable to what they are doing now which is no different than what was previously known as the EU.

    The Jedi don't hate themselves nor do they neglect their own needs. What's considered a need is up to them to decide.

    It goes back to what I said about passive emotions. The Jedi don't have a problem with those.

    Of course he is the exception. They were taking a great risk. He failed to unlearn what he had learn. He failed at the cave. He failed by acting on his emotions, attachments and fear of loss. Fortunately he decided to do the right thing at the end (to let go of the dark side. To face death rather than turning), but his journey proved why the Jedi rules are the way they are and they exist for a reason.

    I'm just repeating myself over and over. To marry someone goes against the Jedi way. It's not evil to marry someone. It's simply not what being a Jedi is about. The Jedi dedicate their lives exclusively to serve others. They are keepers of peace and justice. It's who they are. If you want to marry and have a family, you can't be a Jedi. Just like you can't have five 8h jobs a day. It's impossible. Not compatible.

    Again: It's fantasy. What Anakin did is an hyperbole of what happens when you act on fear, passions and emotions. It's the end road.

    It can't because family becomes inherently more important and it's hard to train against that.

    Good to know.
     
    theraphos likes this.
  8. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    In some forms, yes. In others, the degree of dedication is a bit looser.

    Police officers and judges are "keepers of peace and justice" too - but their dedication, while still present - is of a slightly different degree.

    It is the "exclusive" bit that is being argued as excessive and unnecessary - that a Jedi can still serve others without being quite as exclusive about it, and still fit the general concept of what a Jedi is.
     
    Emperor Ferus, Ghost and Sarge like this.
  9. Alexrd

    Alexrd Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 7, 2009
    And it plays a factor on the difference between and good and a bad husband/family man.

    Indeed. Also one of the differences between a job and a way of life.
     
    theraphos likes this.
  10. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    There's an intermediate factor between Good and Bad - "Adequate".

    So - Jedi who devotes themselves completely to serving others, is Good at serving others
    " Ghost style Jedi " who devotes themselves mostly to serving others, is Adequate at serving others
    Anakin Skywalker, whose devotion ends up failing miserably, is Bad at serving others
     
    Emperor Ferus likes this.
  11. Alexrd

    Alexrd Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 7, 2009
    But being a Jedi is not about being "adequate" at serving others. It's about dedicating your life to it. To be compassionate and selfless, to be in tune with the Force and keep peace and justice in the Republic (or the galaxy, if it allows them to do that). It's not about themselves. That's what makes them Jedi.

    You don't have to be a Jedi to do good. But you must follow the Jedi way of life to be a Jedi.
     
    theraphos likes this.
  12. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    If if turns out that the vast majority of would-be Jedi fail and wash out because they can't dedicate themselves this completely (or never get recruited in the first place, because despite all their power they were a little too old)

    then, might the galaxy be served less well by a miniscule number of "dedicated servants" then by a vast number of "adequate servants"?

    Maybe there's such a thing as "too-high standards" - and that a looser "Jedi Way" might actually be better for the galaxy as a whole?


    That's a way in which there can be "too much light" in the Jedi, where "light" is equated with "selflessness" - a Jedi Order that is just a little "greyer" could actually be, in a certain way, better.
     
  13. Alexrd

    Alexrd Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Those that can't be Jedi are free to do whatever they think it's best. It's not the Jedi that should change their ways because not everyone is made up to be a Jedi.
     
    theraphos likes this.
  14. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    That's interesting. I've often wondered. What about those that are strong with the force who cannot adopt the code or the doctrine of the Jedi order, or are never initiated into it? It seems unlikely that the Jedi would recruit and keep nearly all (thought that is their aim) and those that rebel would necessarily be enemies of the Jedi.
     
  15. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    In some cases it might be a moderately amicable split. Ahsoka leaves the Jedi Order - but she doesn't become an enemy of the Jedi - and aids Anakin and the Republic during the Siege of Mandalore (unfinished arc, alluded to in the Ahsoka novel).

    In the EU there was a certain amount of variety in the "failed Jedi" type of characters - some became villains, some didn't.
     
  16. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    But "serving others" is a demonstrably malleable concept. Anakin attempts to rescue several republic troops who are escorting him and Obi Wan to the ship where the Chancellor is hostage but Obi Wan forbids him from helping those others to concentrate on serving one other, the Chancellor.

    Militarily, politically and pragmatically, Obi Wan may have been right to remain focused only on the mission objective. It clearly doesn't satisfy Anakin's admirable desire to help others though.

    So "serving others", as one might instinctively try to, can be undermined by the need to unquestioningly obey orders handed down from the very order that promotes the selfless service of others.


    Cool. Thanks for the info.

    I assume that Ahsoka is an exceptional case and that the order tries their best to keep those with potential wedded to their doctrine.

    My take on it is that this policy could be perceived as the end itself, an order that has the monopoly on force use in the galaxy, rather than the means to ensure peace and democracy in the galaxy is safeguarded by them.
     
    Iron_lord likes this.
  17. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    I don't know how many Padawans or Knights walked away - but some 20 Jedi Masters did (including Dooku) - the "Lost Twenty" referenced in the AOTC novelization, from an AOTC deleted scene.

    Given that at least one newcanon source mentions them too:

    http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Lost_Twenty

    that's probably one of the canon deleted scenes.
     
    Martoto77 likes this.
  18. Alexrd

    Alexrd Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 7, 2009
    They serve the Republic. Saving the clones troopers (who were also serving the Republic) would jeopardize their mission. It's not that saving them was wrong. It was saving them at the expense of completing the mission they were sent to fulfill. To save the leader of the Republic, as their service required in that moment.

    I believe the dialogue in the deleted scene doesn't specify if the lost twenty were only Jedi Masters. But I might me wrong. It's been a while since I've watched the scene itself.
     
  19. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    We don't know that Anakin saving the clones would have necessarily been at the expense of the Chancellor. Obi Wan is in the position to call that decision, due to the hierarchy. Obi Wan may be right. But the tension between intuitively selfless service and a life of service to an order, for the benefit of others still exists

    Compassion, mercy altruism etc are instinctive and fall into the category of "serving others". But Obi Wan's judgement that completing the mission and saving one at the expense of others may be a wise one. But it also comes at the expense of Anakin's relationship with his own feelings about serving others. The movie shows that Anakin is not equipped to deal with that tension. And the best that Yoda can come up with is that he must train himself.
     
    Ghost and Iron_lord like this.
  20. Alexrd

    Alexrd Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Obi-Wan says so himself:

    "They are doing their job so we can do ours." To divert his actions towards the clones, their efforts would have been for nothing.

    Anakin was about to make a decision based on emotion. He needed to be able to control his feelings and focus on the situation they were in. Just like on the previous movie when Padmé fell off the gunship.
     
    theraphos likes this.
  21. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    You don't know that their efforts would have been for nothing. I also doubt that Anakin would still need constantly reminded of his duty to obeying orders and why they are given in the first place, at this late stage, and that his suitability as a Jedi knight would remain unquestioned. Never mind placed on the council and with Palpatine.

    Compassion, altruism and selflessness are emotionally anchored. Emotions are required to make decisions. It is not always logical to sacrifice yourself except for a guaranteed outcome or in desperation to prevent one.


    Selflessly obeying orders for the greater good (e.g. the society that the Jedi serves) is perfectly valid too. But it's not the same as the other thing.

    They co-exist and so there is tension. One of them cannot simply be controlled or suppressed at the expense of the others, at all times. Unless one has some special qualities. Anakin would seem to fit that description. Yet it is he who fails at this most spectacularly.

    Who knows? Maybe it would have been a different story if there had been a little more guidance other than "Do not .." or "You must..." etc.
     
    Iron_lord likes this.
  22. Alexrd

    Alexrd Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Yes, I do because it's stated that they were doing their job so that the Jedi could do theirs. If the Jedi don't do their job and go save the clones, then the whole endeavour would be pointless.

    It's character exposition. The whole reason for why he fell is because he let his attachment affect his actions at the expense of everything/everyone else. This is a small example of his problem.
     
  23. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    No you don't know that. You know what the intent of their deployment is but you do not know that it will have been for nothing if Anakin does not allow them to be sacrificed. It's a reasonable strategy. Obi Wan's judgement that they should stick to it was reasonable. But it is not based on known outcomes. Only probable outcomes and risk, backed up by authority.

    Anakin's job is to go in with Obi Wan and rescue the chancellor. Not to try and rescue the chancellor and Obi Wan, which he nevertheless does.

    I doubt very much that Anakin has significant attachment to the clones he wanted to help out. That was Anakin's selflessness that prompted him to try. What I'm saying is that being a Jedi is not as clear cut as some of the advice Anakin receives. And trying to be a selfless Jedi and being a selfless person seems to pull Anakin apart.
     
    Sarge and Iron_lord like this.
  24. Alexrd

    Alexrd Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 7, 2009
    If Anakin goes save the clones, he might succeed in doing just that, but he will fail to be there with Obi-Wan and go rescue the Chancellor.

    And it's true that he does rescue Obi-Wan after he rescues the Chancellor. In the situation they are in, as he puts it himself: "His fate will be the same as ours."
     
  25. darth-sinister

    darth-sinister Manager Emeritus star 10 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 28, 2001
    You do understand what misreading the prophecy means? Remember, in ROTS, he says that the prophecy never stated that Anakin would join the Sith and leave everything out of balance. So it is easy to believe that the Jedi had gotten it wrong when the Chosen One became a Sith Lord. You're arguing from a position of knowing the outcome, not the characters who don't. It's along the lines of Arthurian legend that Galahad will quest for the Holy Grail and find it, only to learn that it is Lancelot's son who is named after his father's true name, who finds the Grail and not Lancelot himself. It's not cherry picking when it comes to interpretation and Lucas himself said that it appears that Qui-gon was wrong about Anakin until he is proven right.

    They don't need to have families in order to be happy, or to scratch an itch. If they want to have more than that, then they can leave and pursue their own lives.

    Actually, there is. Oddball has been with Anakin and Obi-wan since early in the war. So he has a bit of attachment to him as he did to Rex. But the point of the mission was Red Squadron was to make their way to the Invisible Hand. Given what Obi-wan said, it seems that the rest of the squadron was to provide either cover fire or serve as a distraction, while they made their way in. Rescuing Palpatine had to take top priority over helping Oddball, just as capturing or killing Dooku was more important than rescuing Padme. At the Battle of Yavin 4, it was the job of Red and Gold Squadrons to provide cover fire against the Death Star's armaments and TIE Fighters, while two separate teams attempted to target the exhaust port. Or Rogue Squadron to slow down the AT-AT's during the Battle of Hoth, while the evacuation was completed. Or the units the followed Lando and Wedge into the Death Star would provide a distraction while they reached the core.

    As to Anakin, it does because he has failed to grasp the difference due to his initial upbringing. He is loyal to people more than principles. This is an asset, but a great source of weakness which Palpatine exploits. This is why Lucas said that if he was trained like other Jedi, he wouldn't have been as vulnerable as he was.
     
    theraphos likes this.