"Only Sith deal in absolutes."

Is it just me, or is that the single most contradictory line in the entire prequel trilogy? Throughout the trilogy, it's been stated and shown that the exact opposite of what Obi-Wan said on Mustafar is true. Half of the reason why Anakin turned to the dark side is that Palpatine convinced him that the morality that he'd been taught by the Jedi is a farce, and to embrace a less "narrow" view of the force.

The Jedi Knights have always been champions of morality, while they paint the dark side as being a seducer of evil doers. After being taught that for 5 movies straight, and then seeing Obi-Wan champion moral relativism in response to Anakin turning to the dark side is completely without logic. If only Sith deal in absolutes, then what did Obi-Wan see wrong with Anakin exploring the dark side? And then, you have Obi-Wan's hypocritical comment only moments later, when he declares to Anakin that Palpy is evil, to which Anakin states "from my point of view the Jedi are evil," even further discrediting Obi-Wan's foolish statement.

So really, when all six movies confirm that the Jedi do in fact believe in absolute good and absolute evil, and when good vs. evil makes up 90% of Star Wars' story theme, why was this line in the movie? If it had been Anakin saying "Only Jedi deal in absolutes," it would have made perfect sense, since the Sith would likely consider that a valid criticism of the Jedi order. But to hear a Jedi saying it about Sith? It makes about as much sense as Yoda telling Chewbacca "Only Wookiees are short and bald." It makes no sense at all. If there is anything in Revenge of the Sith that would make me want the Phantom Editor to come out of retirement, it would be that single line.

 

What you say is valid, but Obi-Wan was referring to Anakins comment about, "if your not with me, you're against me" Or "you're my enemy" whatever it was. That obviously wasn't true. And Anakin had just killed Jeid and Younglings. OF course Obi-Wan didn't agree with Anakins dark-side after that.

Besides the moral relativity has nothing to do with the JEdi code which is their BELIEF that may be narrow not their morals. Their traditions and practices were strict yes, but their morals were still true. THey were essentially diplomats not killers. THe SIth killed and craved power. THe Jedi did not.

 

I think it was just a poorly thought out political jab at George W. Bush. It doesn't make any sense in the context of the story since the jedi clearly believe in moral absolutes, but whatever. It's not that important.

 

I would have to agree. Such trivial political prodding does not belong in Star Wars, because the movies are supposed to be timeless, not timely. 10 years from now my kids won't even know that Bush once said "if you're not with me, your against me," so Obi-Wan's wag of the finger at that line will simply seem out of character to them.

Really though, how do you argue against what Anakin said? He just killed a bunch of kids and commited spouse abuse. It'd be kind of hard to not be against him at that point. All the more reason why Obi-Wan's line should not be in there.

 

Why?It is jz his opinion.The fact that at least some people agree with what Obi-Wan says shows that it might be ok since in the heat of a battle,some people just spurt out whatever they are thinking

 

The thing is, it was a very un-Jedi-like thing to say, and Obi-Wan should know better than to go blabbling things that are a flat out lie just because he is upset.

 

Such an anecdotal connection. Even now there's a lot of people on Earth who didn't know or don't remember that this one GWB had said this or that once.
"If you're not with me you're against me" is a classic of paranoia, for centuries ago and certainly centuries in the future. While seeing the scene, everyone will understand what's underneath, any time.

Concerning the debate about absolute-Jedi or absolute-Sith, yes OB1's line is not very relevant. Both may be "in the grey zone" some time, see Qui-Gon, Dooku, Mace and his vapaad and, of course, Anakin through II, III, V and VI. Even Yoda tries some glimpses in the dark.

 

You have a point but i think it is the nature of Obi-Wan to speak from "a certain point of view".

 

"Once you start down the Dark Path, forever will it dominate your destiny."

Sounds like the Jedi were absolute-ly convinced no-one could renounce the darkside.
Did they learn nothing from Revan's tale, or is that another one of the stories that the Jedi won't tell you?

But yeah, Kenobi line was dumb as was Vader's.

And to know that there was a lot of funny, wit-filled dialogue that got cut from Mustafar instead of that garbage...

ugh.

Good thing the duel mostly rocked.
It almost made me forget the corny-chatter that proceeded it.

 

If you say so.

 

I never got why he said it but I imagined that absolutes meant that once one became a Sith that they dealt in absolutes because they would see no other way.

 

It's one of the most contradictory lines in the PT. One of the main reasons the Jedi were undone was their excessive rigidity and dogmatism.

 

Yep. Failure to adapt = obliteration.

 

In saying that line, Obi-Wan meant that only a Sith would say such a thing, not that nobody else was capable of making absolute statements in different circumstances. He is responding to the intent behind Anakin's statement and the situation they are in.

It's also a pretty good line because it in some ways demonstrates what Palpatine says about the Jedi and the Sith being quite similar and that the Jedi's views are narrow and dogmatic. Not only are they not as perfect as they like to make out, they do not even recognise their own failings. The Jedi have many rules which are 'absolute' and yet Obi-Wan is criticising Anakin for doing the same, something that demonstrates the hypocrisy and arrogance of the Jedi - which was one of the things that turned Anakin against them. After Anakin becomes a Sith Obi-Wan simply sees him as an enemy, unwilling to accept a different interpretation of the Force or understand what has happened to Anakin. The line (which is just supposed to be Obi-Wan's opinion) is supposed to demonstrate the failings of the Jedi which has in part led them to that point.

 

You dwell on that line so much, yet I've never seen anything in the films that contradicts it other than Anakin's redemption, which as far as the films are concerned is the first time anything like that has ever happened in the entire history of the Jedi. While the teachings of the Jedi in the prequels are a hot point of debate, Yoda should not be seen as a hypocrite because of a video game.

 

I think you give Lucas a bit too much credit. The Obi-Wan vs. Anakin fight was clearly meant to represent good making a stand against evil, even though it meant Obi-Wan had to turn on his friend. If Lucas wanted to make a statement about the Jedi being hypocritical and arrogant, that was probably not the right place to do it.

 

There's no conflict in the line when viewed in context. It's a response to Anakin's "If you're not with me, you're my enemy." statement. All Obi-Wan is saying, is that only a Sith would view affiliation in that kind of absolute. The Jedi certainly view the Sith as evil, but they don't dub all who disagree with them their enemy. Look at Count Dooku, he had turned his back on the Jedi, yet they let him walk his own path without interference until he started to harm others.

That's only one way to take the line. A version of the line which fits the OT Yoda's worldview better is that it will simply be a huge factor in your destiny if you ever walk the Dark path. That's proven true with Vader. If he had never fallen, Palpatine's lightning wouldn't have been fatal as he wouldn't have his prosthetics. His time on the Dark Side killed him, which I'd say qualifies as "dominating his destiny."

None of the above. The interpretation above fits Revan perfectly given that his time on the Dark Side tormented him and drove him into the Unknown Regions to prevent the return of the true Sith.

Also, Yoda never says anything in the OT which makes it clear that he believes redemption is impossible. He never says Luke has to kill Vader, but rather he sticks to terms like 'confront' and 'face.'

 

Yoda dealt in absolutes in ROTS by portraying Vader as a separate person from Anakin.

 

I seem to recall members of the vaunted Jedi Council "absolutely" certain that the 'thing' Qui-Gon fought on Tatooine could not be a Sith.

From the TPM shooting script posted on Blue Harvest.net:

KI-ADI : Impossible! The Sith have been extinct for a millenium.

and . . .

MACE WINDU : I do not believe they could have returned without us knowing.

Also, from the ROTS shooting script on imsdb.com:

ANAKIN: You can't kill him, Master. He must stand trial.
MACE WlNDU: He has too much control of the Senate and the Courts. He is too dangerous to be kept alive.

Windu is dealing in absolutes. He is now 'the power,' the judge and the jury.

The once vaunted order now demonstrates zero tolerance for anything that goes against their arrogant line of thinking -- a line of thinking so off the true path, so flawed that it literally opened the door to Palpatine's rocket rise to power.

The order's arrogance is sympolized by the architecture of the Jedi Temple on Coruscant, which not a humble place home to galactic peace keepers and servants of the Republic. The Temple is a standing tribute to unrivaled Jedi power -- power that the order is unwilling to share and afraid to lose (as Palpatine deftly reminds Anakin in the Space Opera).

 

As I've said in other threads, I have no problem with Yoda's comment about the destinies of those who turn to the Dark Side.

I agree with Obi-Chron above, though, that these are good examples of how the Jedi do deal in absolutes.

 

Once in 25,000 years does not make turning from the Dark Side likely enough for the Jedi in the prequels to seriously consider it as an option.

 

"Once you start down the Dark Path, forever will it dominate your destiny.".I don't think it means "Once you start down the Dark Path, forever it will be your destiny.",it probably means that the dark side will affect you in a way negatively for the rest of your life by making you power-hungry etc.

 

If we're to take the EU as canon, changes in Force allegiance are closer to every 6 months.

 

People sometimes complain about how they think the jedi were portrayed in the PT when they really have to be shown that way becouse the whole point of the PT was to show that the jedi (just like the republic) were getting weak and arrogant exc. and to show that would help add the overall story arc of how luke ended up not making the same mistakes of the past and bringing back the "new" and most importantly reinvented jedi order. Just look at the title of episode 6 "Return of the Jedi" get it? When yoda fought palpatine at the end of ROTS the reason why he ran away from the fight was becouse that was the moment where he realized the sith have reinvented themselves while the jedi order has not only grown tired like everything else but has been training for the past 1000 years to fight the last war, the old sith. While the "new sith" have actually learned from there mistakes and reinvented themselves as the jedi now need to. Witch is why he can do more good living to fight another day and training luke when the time is right. Witch is another great thing about the PT becouse that also means that by the time we get up to TESB all those great training scenes on dagobah have a more important meaning than what we would be useto hearing from the PT and does not seem redundant while at the same time a lot of it still remains true.


I would also like to add that there was a very good reason for anakin to say what he sed at that point in the fight ("from my point of view the jedi are evil") becouse it could be sed that that's where obi-wan first learned that "many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on are own certain point of view" as we hear him famously say to luke in ROTJ witch would explain why he thought it was important for luke to understand. Its a great line becouse it really enriches that whole statement a lot and gives the viewer more to think about and reflect on than before ROTS came out. Its a lot of little things like this between the PT and OT that really "complement" each other back and forth.



As for obi-wans line "Only Sith deal in absolutes" i would have to say that even IF it seems contradictory it most likely was purposefully done to show that both the jedi's narrow view as i mentioned above and just how hard it really is to say that palpatines beliefs are truly wrong (even though we know he IS wrong) just to show the viewer that there really is a lot of gray area and it truly is hard to know what is right and wrong sometimes witch would add EVEN MORE to anakins turn and as specially just how powerful palpatines seduction really is making EVEN THE VIEWER think twice about the jedi. and it all goes back to what point of view you have witch would then determine what "truths" YOU would cling to. see!?


This is why i think people need to give more credit to the prequel trilogy becouse its things like this that just add so much more to the original trilogy making it one big saga like it was always supposed to be.

 

The actions of Windu and Obi-Wan are those of a desperate order whose past (in)actions have come to haunt them. They are meant to be hypocritical. It brings home the point Sidious was making all along and which pushes Anakin further to the dark side. Since the moral absolutes of the Jedi did nothing to save their situation, Obi-Wan and Yoda are forced to retreat and reasses the situation which leads to the training of Luke.

lol, I was thinking the same thing, especially considering that the game came some 20 odd years after the TESB