So, what REALLY motivates Darth Caedus?

Hopefully, we'll be able to discuss Inferno Spoilers here after a few weeks.

However, for the other books, what really motivates Darth Caedus?

I don't buy he's doing it for the galaxy. Anymore than I buy Darth Vader was motivated by his love for Padme.

I think part of it is his Greed for More Power.

I think part of it is hatred for the Galactic Alliance's failure in the Vong War.

I also think a part of him just gets off on the power over life and death.

There's also a great deal of pride involved.

 

In a word: insanity.

--HW

 

He's become completely preoccupied with his role as a gardener for the galaxy.

 

He's doing it to create a universe that is free from chaos and disorder. No its not about power, its not about greed, and its certainly not about life or death. If you had read NJO/anything else with Jacen in it you would know none of these mean a thing to him. He uses power as a means to an end, simple as that. I love how some people refuse to believe that a person doing bad things can't have good intentions.

After all the saying, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" describes Jacen's predicament quite well.

Basically, you can have good intentions and still screw things up.

 

After all the saying, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" describes Jacen's predicament quite well.


I haven't seen any evidence of him working to make the galaxy a better place.

I've seen a great deal of murder for the pleasure of it.

 

Really? Are you sure your not only seeing what you wanna see? Please point me to a passage where he revels in a kill. Even when he killed Mara there was no "pleasure" there was only resigned acceptance.

And I wonder if its with Jacen's tactics that you are upset? Incase you haven't noticed his tactics are quite common in our history as well. They have been used in the firebombings of cities in WW2, to the annilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire-bomb. Infact, if you look at the history books there have been far more ruthless leaders then Jacen that managed to create a country of peace through force.

I understand if your appalled by his methods, but don't think that the main countries today haven't used similiar tactics to win.

The only question that remains is whether he's a strong enough leader to make such a transition. Clearly, so far he is not.

 

Really? Are you sure your not only seeing what you wanna see? Please point me to a passage where he revels in a kill. Even when he killed Mara there was no "pleasure" there was only resigned acceptance.

Read Inferno.

And I wonder if its with Jacen's tactics that you are upset? Incase you haven't noticed his tactics are quite common in our history as well. They have been used in the firebombings of cities in WW2, to the annilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire-bomb. Infact, if you look at the history books there have been far more ruthless leaders then Jacen that managed to create a country of peace through force.

I consider Napoleon, Julius Caesar, Sherman, and plenty others to be monsters. I also consider the tactics used in World War 2 to barbaric even if I recognize that depriving an enemy of resources is necessary in a total war. I can still find them vile and abominable tactics even against the most evil regimes ever.

I could also describe the kinds of tortures Jacen deserves to undergo for what he's done but that'd be breaking forum policy. He's an animal.

 

Well then you are simply an idealist. Why you may certainly consider all those you listed to be monsters, their methods have given us the world as it is today. I'd say thats a pretty good standing for their methods.

And I have indeed read inferno, my challenge still stands.

Sometimes a situation calls for the most extreme of measures. While I certainly don't agree with his methods or many of the leaders you listed, to think that methods like Jacen's don't "work" is foolish.

 

You do realize that that argument excuses the actions of every single person in history, right?

 

I didn't say anything to do with blame or repentance. I was merely showing the results of people with similiar tactics to Jacen. Has absolutly nothing to do with excusing anyone. Many have been the "monsters" that Charlie keeps speaking about. But others helped form the U.S, Great Britain, and all the countries that are formed today. Hell some are one in the same. I was merely saying that its a bit hypocritical to be pointing out deplorable tactics of Jacen Solo, when many of our countries today are still using those tactics as we type.

I'm not trying to excuse anyone, society judges people as a whole. But if you notice, winners happen to always get judged better then losers.

 

I didn't say anything to do with blame or repentance. I was merely showing the results of people with similiar tactics to Jacen. Has absolutly nothing to do with excusing anyone. Many have been the "monsters" that Charlie keeps speaking about. But others helped form the U.S, Great Britain, and all the countries that are formed today. Hell some are one in the same. I was merely saying that its a bit hypocritical to be pointing out deplorable tactics of Jacen Solo, when many of our countries today are still using those tactics as we type.

How is it hypocritical if I condemn it?

 

I wasen't referring to you, I was speaking in general. People tend not to realize that villains sometimes are undescernable from heroes when judged simply by their methods.

The fact is Jacen believes what he is doing is right and basically thinks that the ends justify the means.

Luke and Jacen are simply of conflicting ideologies. If someone was to ask Luke and Jacen if they would sacrifice 1,000 people for the benefit of the entire galaxy. Luke would of course say no, and Jacen would of course say yes. Neither one of them is right, and neither is wrong. Just different visions. And thats ultimately why the two have to fight, to achieve their goals.

 

The only problem is there can never be a question that academic when it comes to something as hazy as the good of the entire galaxy. Jacen thinks he's killing people for the good of the many, but who's to say what the good of the many even is?

 

He did it for the lulz.

Or, you know, Vergere gave him a brightly, wildly new and dangerous philosophy that saved him, but was so radical, he kept pushing forwards and finding Vergere had set him no boundries, wandered into a dangerous part of his garden. Eventually he that the gardener's choice is the same thing as ends-justifies-the-means. Which it isn't.

Vergere freed him from the binary worldview he existed in, which gave him incredible new horizons and brilliant ideas. But perhaps she neglected to point out that when one stops viewing the world as a series of dualities and starts viewing it as a continuum, one does not remove the extremes, only the clear boundries between them. And Jacen exercised no self-control to stop himself sliding down - to steal a cliche - a slippery slope, confident there was no way he'd ever find an extreme as bad as the dark side of any duality, at the other end.

Simply because the gardener can choose to firebomb his garden to get rid of all the pests, thus eradicating many rare plants, but providing an ordered garden for next year's plants (which will be far less varied), doesn't mean he should.

Or perhaps, Jacen simply remembered that gardening is about killing weeds, and forgot it was about cultivating flowers.

Or perhaps, Jacen simply decided he was the only flower.

Or perhaps he did it for the lulz.

 

paranoia

"subconscious" ego...he's spent a lifetime denying himself in a quest to be the uber-Jedi...that has to build up.

zealous self-righteousness...again, fostered in his training.

and the external? the person most important to him...not Allana or Tenel Ka or his parents or his uncle...it's Vegere...she is the only person to whom Jacen has ever nodded the head...and however his perspective on her is at that moment, so go his motivations and desires.

Vegere is the true love the Jacen's life.

 

I think I'll take the first and last options, thanks.



--HW

 

Sheer, rote stupidity is his motivation. The losing of most of his IQ and common sense.

 

Megalomania.

With a hint of boredom.

 

I'm only on Exile so far, but I don't think Jacen seems to be doing it for the power. He's certainly not reveling in his "Ulimited Powah!" or anything. All his political and military promotions he seems to be taking simply as a necessity.

Although I can't say for sure what he's after, I think it's safe to say he's the only one for the job. In Jacen's mind, the Order will never do what he believes needs to be done. Lumiya cannot do whatever needs to be done, and he can't bring himself to force Ben to do what needs to be done. Jacen considers himself the ideal person for whatever it is. He's willing to make any sacrifice but one (two?) for his vision. He's willing to do whatever morally questionable acts his vision might entail. He cannot, in his own warped 'good conscience', put anyone else in his combat boots to go off and save the Galaxy or whatever. It's his cross, and only he can bear it.

 

He reminds me a lot of Che Guevara. Someone who had dreams and aspirations of fixing the world/galaxy but whose actions actually undermined everything he stood for. Once you get caught up in that revolutionary fervor it's hard to step back and look at yourself objectively.

 

I think the answer is simple. Jacen is just a nut. Anakin's death followed by Vergere's torture broke his mind. Ever since then, he's had psychopathic tendencies.

Let's just look at a textbook description of psychopathy (are psychopathy, socipathy, and antisocial personality disorder all interchangable terms? I've gotten mixed answers on this).

Psychopaths lack a sense of guilt or remorse for any harm they may have caused others, instead rationalizing the behavior, blaming someone else, or denying it outright. Psychopaths also lack empathy towards others in general, resulting in tactlessness, insensitivity, and contemptuousness. All of this belies their tendency to make a good, likable first impression. Psychopaths have a superficial charm about them, enabled by their low self-consciousness, a willingness to say anything without concern for accuracy or truth. This extends into their pathological lying and willingness to con and manipulate others for personal gain or amusement. The prototypical psychopath's emotions are described as a shallow affect, meaning their overall way of relating is characterized by mere displays of friendliness and other emotion for personal gain; the displayed emotion need not correlate with felt emotion, in other words.

Jacen perfectly fits.

 

There will be distinct differences between each or else the terms would not exist. For example I've often seen Hitler described as a sociopath rather than psychopath.

Ah, here we are, courtesy of Wiki:

"Sociopathy
The difference between sociopathy and psychopathy, according to Hare, may "reflect the user's views on the origins and determinates of the disorder."[38] Most sociologists, criminologists and even some psychologists believe the disorder is caused by social conflicts, and thus prefer the term 'sociopath.' Those who believe as Hare does, that a combination of psychological, biological, genetic and environmental factors all contribute to the disorder are more likely to use the term 'psychopath'.

David T. Lykken proposes that psychopathy and sociopathy are two distinct kinds of antisocial personality. He holds that psychopaths are born with temperamental differences such as impulsivity, cortical underarousal, and fearlessness that lead them to risk-seeking behavior and an inability to internalize social norms; sociopaths, on the other hand, have relatively normal temperaments; their personality disorder being more an effect of negative sociological factors like parental neglect, delinquent peers, poverty, and extremely low or extremely high intelligence. Both personality disorders are, of course, the result of an interaction between genetic predispositions and environmental factors, but psychopathy leans towards the hereditary whereas sociopathy tends towards the environmental.[33]


[edit] Antisocial personality disorder
Main article: Antisocial personality disorder
Comparing psychopathy to antisocial personality disorder is a continuing source of debate within the psychological community. The official stance of the American Psychiatric Association as presented in the DSM-IV-TR is that psychopathy and sociopathy are obsolete synonyms for antisocial personality disorder (APD).[verification needed] The World Health Organization takes a similar stance in its ICD-10 by referring to psychopathy, sociopathy, antisocial personality, asocial personality, and amoral personality as synonyms for dissocial personality disorder.

Hare and others take the stance that psychopathy as a syndrome should be considered distinct from the DSM-IV's antisocial personality disorder construct.[39] even though APD and psychopathy were intended to be equivalent in the DSM-IV. However, those who created the DSM-IV felt that there was too much room for subjectivity on the part of clinicians when identifying things like remorse and guilt; therefore, the DSM-IV panel decided to stick to observable behaviour, namely socially deviant behaviours. As a result, the diagnosis of APD is something that the "majority of criminals easily meet."[40] Hare goes further to say that the percentage of incarcerated criminals that meet the requirements of APD is somewhere between 80 to 85 percent, whereas only about 20% of these criminals would qualify for a diagnosis of psychopath. This twenty percent, according to Hare, accounts for 50 percent of all the most serious crimes committed, including half of all serial and repeat rapists. According to FBI reports, 44 percent of all police officer murders in 1992 were committed by psychopaths.[41]

One study found that only 20 percent of those diagnosed with APD qualified as psychopath on the PCL-R.[42]

Another study using the PCL-R to examine the relationship between antisocial behaviour and suicide found that suicide history was strongly correlated to PCL-R Factor 2 (reflecting antisocial deviance) and was not correlated to PCL-R factor 1 (reflecting affective functioning). Given that APD relates to Factor 2, whereas psycho

 

Some Sith do it for the power, some Sith do it for revenge, and some Sith just plain do it for the lulz. Darth Caedus is one of the most dangerous types: the kind of Sith who thinks he's doing the galaxy a favor. He's got it into his head that out of untold trillions of beings that he, and he alone, is the only one with the drive, the wisdom, and the power to bring the galaxy into a unrealistic, unattainable, and undefined state of order that only exists within the twisted architecture of his mind. His method of doing so seems to be dividing the galaxy, pissing a whole lot of people off, and blowing lots of stuff up...which seems kinda counterproductive to me, but then I'm not the Chosen One here. All the while, he's got it into his head that he's making an epic, selfless sacrifice by doing so, crucifying himself against the stars.

So what is it that really motivates Darth Caedus? Simple.

His ENORMOUS ego.