Poll: Jedi or Sith Philosophy: Who is right?

FPLOON

Your #1 Source for the Dino Porn
Jul 10, 2013
12,531
0
0
Neighter... I rather be a badass rebel like my main man Han Solo...
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/wwfeatures/464_261/images/live/p0/2p/b5/p02pb5tc.jpg
Because just like his current hair color, I'm about 50 shades of grey from retirement...
 

Vivi22

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,300
0
0
lionsprey said:
neither they are both excellent demonstrations on how to NOT deal with your emotions in a healthy fashion.
This. Both philosophies, as demonstrated in the films anyway, are such over simplified, good and evil, black and white, infantile nonsense as to be almost devoid of any usefulness as a "philosophy." They're a quick and easy way of explaining who the good guys and the bad guys are and literally nothing else.
 

silver wolf009

[[NULL]]
Jan 23, 2010
3,432
0
0
When examining this question, you have to remember that the Force is implied to be at the very least semi-sentient, and definitely split between two entities. In this sense, both sides are right, because both act on the philosophy of a very real higher power.

However I noticed that in the Clone Wars TV show, one of the few things to survive the canon scrub, there was a line repeated by two unsavory people, the Son and Darth Maul.

"The chains are the easy part. It's what goes on in here, that's hard."​

Neither of these people could have possibly met one another, as The Son is far older than Maul, and Maul was out of commission during the time that we see the Son on Mortis. I take their seprate references as evidence that something, most likely the Dark Side, revealed to them, or convinced them that they were chained in some way, implying continuity across time and space, which would in turn imply that their were correct in their assumptions about philosophy.
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
AccursedTheory said:
Whether he honestly believed that, or made the rule up as a ploy to dominate his one apprentice, is left to the reader.
I don't know. The Rule of Two wouldn't guarantee the survival of the sith, all it would really do is limit their growth and guarantee their collapse.

Also, wouldn't that rule just inspire his apprentice to rebel? Which is what ultimately happened, I think, according to Revenge of the Sith?

The Sith work as villains, but I never felt like they had a reasonable philosophy or motivation. They don't really need one to fulfill their limited role in the original trilogy. They just needed to be power hungry dictators.
 

Foehunter82

New member
Jun 25, 2014
80
0
0
I'd say Jedi based on the selflessness thing. However, I think that George Lucas made a mess of things with the way he handled everything, so it's kind of hard to debate it from a philosophical angle. This is made ever more complicated by the fact that old canon (and EU) is now considered Legends, and we have to wait for JJ to invent the new canon in order to debate it more completely.

In other words: It's too soon to debate this without seeing the new films. That is assuming that the new films will even delve into the philosophical angle.
 

silver wolf009

[[NULL]]
Jan 23, 2010
3,432
0
0
Fox12 said:
AccursedTheory said:
Whether he honestly believed that, or made the rule up as a ploy to dominate his one apprentice, is left to the reader.
I don't know. The Rule of Two wouldn't guarantee the survival of the sith, all it would really do is limit their growth and guarantee their collapse.
"The Force is not fire, it is venom. Disperse it through a hundred cups and it will have no effect, but pour it into but two, and it can kill a Kryat Dragon." -Darth Bane.

The Rule of Two was meant to make sure that the Sith would be the best, kind of like tutoring compared to public education. When one student gets all the attention, they're all the more likely to succeed. With this in mind, we can see Darth Sidious' absolute curb stomping DOMINATION of three of the best swordsmen the Jedi had to offer as evidence of that, not to mention the advances in studying the Force itself carried out by Plagius and his master before Sidious.

It did the exact opposite of weaken them, it pulled them together and made sure they were top of the line Force users.
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
silver wolf009 said:
Fox12 said:
AccursedTheory said:
Whether he honestly believed that, or made the rule up as a ploy to dominate his one apprentice, is left to the reader.
I don't know. The Rule of Two wouldn't guarantee the survival of the sith, all it would really do is limit their growth and guarantee their collapse.
"The Force is not fire, it is venom. Disperse it through a hundred cups and it will have no effect, but pour it into but two, and it can kill a Kryat Dragon." -Darth Bane.

The Rule of Two was meant to make sure that the Sith would be the best, kind of like tutoring compared to public education. When one student gets all the attention, they're all the more likely to succeed. With this in mind, we can see Darth Sidious' absolute curb stomping DOMINATION of three of the best swordsmen the Jedi had to offer as evidence of that, not to mention the advances in studying the Force itself carried out by Plagius and his master before Sidious.

It did the exact opposite of weaken them, it pulled them together and made sure they were top of the line Force users.
How did it pull them together if Sidious was the last Sith left? Or if it encouraged them to betray one another? And how did it make them stronger when there were multiple Jedi who were individually stronger then the Sith, including Mace Windu and Yoda?

https://youtu.be/infZSKB5L9I?t=48s

And don't the Jedi train one on one? So they receive the same level of attention from their masters as the Sith. Besides, having 500 Jedi face 1 or 2 Sith means that the jedi ARE stronger then the Sith. The only reason they won anything was because the plot said they had to.
 

conmag9

New member
Aug 4, 2008
570
0
0
The Sith are moronic, self destructive assholes who will never pull off anything for very long because the very thing that makes them strong also inevitably screws them over. That would be the case even if they weren't deliberately out to create the instruments of their own doom in the form of betrayal-happy apprentices.

The Jedi are also heavily, heavily flawed and filled with hypocrisy and self righteousness. They're nowhere near as destructive as the Sith, but that's saying very little. Their teachings go too far in order to prevent the admitedly real danger of falling to the dark side. Ironically, their emphasis on no emotion, rather than no intense, possessive emotion drives more of them mad than the dark side alone. In the KOTOR games, I noticed very clearly how insanely arrogant and assured they were. KOTOR 2 deconstructed this, but perhaps not enough. I noticed in that really neat Jedi Handbook, the one written IC, was smattered with lots of arrogant ideas and the occasional reference that the Jedi Council was always the last word on anything and don't even bother questioning it.

That, and they jump through mental hoops to justify their behavior can be pretty mindboggling. Mandalorians killing millions? Let's wait and see, victory can come in philosophical form too. Vapaad? Oh, it's just a teaching that looks really, really similar to dark side fighting styles and uses all the components thereof, it's not actually evil! Kidnapping children from their families? The fact that they have the force means the universe itself is giving them the thumbs up!

End of day, the Sith are less hypocritical, but so violent and stupid that they end up the worse faction. The Jedi still need a few good hits to the collective heads, but are perhaps salvageable.
 

silver wolf009

[[NULL]]
Jan 23, 2010
3,432
0
0
Fox12 said:
silver wolf009 said:
Fox12 said:
AccursedTheory said:
Whether he honestly believed that, or made the rule up as a ploy to dominate his one apprentice, is left to the reader.
I don't know. The Rule of Two wouldn't guarantee the survival of the sith, all it would really do is limit their growth and guarantee their collapse.
"The Force is not fire, it is venom. Disperse it through a hundred cups and it will have no effect, but pour it into but two, and it can kill a Kryat Dragon." -Darth Bane.

The Rule of Two was meant to make sure that the Sith would be the best, kind of like tutoring compared to public education. When one student gets all the attention, they're all the more likely to succeed. With this in mind, we can see Darth Sidious' absolute curb stomping DOMINATION of three of the best swordsmen the Jedi had to offer as evidence of that, not to mention the advances in studying the Force itself carried out by Plagius and his master before Sidious.

It did the exact opposite of weaken them, it pulled them together and made sure they were top of the line Force users.
How did it pull them together if Sidious was the last Sith left? Or if it encouraged them to betray one another? And how did it make them stronger when there were multiple Jedi who were individually stronger then the Sith, including Mace Windu and Yoda?

https://youtu.be/infZSKB5L9I?t=48s

And don't the Jedi train one on one? So they receive the same level of attention from their masters as the Sith. Besides, having 500 Jedi face 1 or 2 Sith means that the jedi ARE stronger then the Sith. The only reason they won anything was because the plot said they had to.
Sidious was not the last Sith left, he and Vader shared power, and if Vader hadn't gotten himself critically injured, he would have replaced Sidious long before A New Hope. As for the Jedi being stronger, individual aptitude doesn't necessarily reflect on the merits of the system. Further, Sidious beat Yoda, and Windu was far from the prototypical Jedi, and in fact pioneered and mastered Vapaad, which would have been a perfect tool for the Sith thanks to its reliance on the Dark Side.

And yes, Jedi train one apprentice at a time, but not for nearly as long as the two Sith lords would be training. Further the numbers disadvantage is what underlines how the Clone Wars were so deviously perfect a plan to remove the Jedi. That's not the plot decreeing from on high, it's supposed to be the Sith outmaneuvering the Jedi in secret for the 1000 years they were thought defeated.
 

Ishal

New member
Oct 30, 2012
1,177
0
0
Fox12 said:
How did it pull them together if Sidious was the last Sith left? Or if it encouraged them to betray one another? And how did it make them stronger when there were multiple Jedi who were individually stronger then the Sith, including Mace Windu and Yoda?

https://youtu.be/infZSKB5L9I?t=48s

And don't the Jedi train one on one? So they receive the same level of attention from their masters as the Sith. Besides, having 500 Jedi face 1 or 2 Sith means that the jedi ARE stronger then the Sith. The only reason they won anything was because the plot said they had to.
Pulling them together isn't necessarily the goal. Ultimately the "goal" of each side of this never ending struggle is for one side to overcome the other. The Jedi pursue this every bit as much as the Sith do, but just happen to embed themselves in the Republic as a guardians, diplomats, and peacekeepers.

Sidious/Palpatine could be the "strongest" force user in the prequels by virtue of the fact that he defeated everyone. Especially Windu and Yoda. He killed the three Jedi Windu was with in literal seconds. Do you think he was doing anything but playing with Windu and stalling before Anakin got there? But, strongest =/= best or most effective. Palpatine even openly admits this before engaging Yoda.

"You will not stop me, Darth Vader will become more powerful than either of us!"

He just knows he can control him. Palpatine is very much like a monk in old style RPGs in this way, for lack of a better example. He's not the strongest, lacking in raw power or potential. But he's so practiced, so learned, that he can use what he has to overcome almost anything.

Having 500 Jedi face 1 or 2 Sith, I'm glad you brought that up. You are correct, it is because of the plot. However, that could be said of anything. So not really a compelling argument. The Sith have tried to do the whole 500 vs 500 thing more than a few times. It never worked in their favor. Knowing that is exactly the reason why Palpatine was nearly able to exterminate all the Jedi. The Jedi, due in no small part to their own dogma, were training and waiting to fight the last war against the Sith. But it never came. The Sith evolved and changed, this was no plan. The dark lords didn't come together and decide Sidious would be the one to turn the tide. It happened organically, through several different circumstances. The results speak for themselves. All it took was one Master of the Dark Side to nearly kill all the Jedi. What need is there of 500 Sith?

Also, a bit off topic, but I feel like it should be mentioned. The "Sith" as in, practitioners of the Dark Side of the force only exist because of the flaws in the Jedi code. Dark Jedi who rebelled became the first Sith lords. I feel like if you want to understand the problem, you should examine it's source, and that is almost always the Jedi.
 

sumanoskae

New member
Dec 7, 2007
1,526
0
0
It's doing the material a disservice to ignore Legends; it's perspective on many things, especially the Force, The Jedi, and The Sith, are infinitely more nuanced and rich. The Sith in the cannon stories (Sidious, Maul, Dooku, Vader) are almost always portrayed as cartoonishly evil, with no ambition or thought beyond getting more power and stuff than they already had. Vader's really the only exception.

Compare the Canon and Legends version of Dooku. In the canon, we only ever hear briefly about how he used to be a Jedi, and his reasons for joining the Sith or starting the confederacy seemingly amount to simple self interest.

In the Legends canon, there's more to him than that. He is actually a deeply principled man, and is entirely sincere in his wish for a better galaxy. He's also deeply emotionally repressed (Blame that on Jedi training). He expresses a grandfatherly fondness for Obi-Wan and great respect for Mace Windu (Yet another figure who is far more compelling in Legends), but his ruthless ambition is so extreme, and represses his personal emotions so much, that he never allows himself to accept that he feels any connection to anybody. He uses his philosophy to cover up his superiority complex; he rationalizes his elitism, xenophobia, and racism with the Sith principal of survival of the strong.

Analyzing the philosophy of Star Wars without Legends is pointless; most of the Star Wars philosophy is only explored in Legends.

So with that, I will cast my vote. Let;s take a look at the code of the Sith.

Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.


In my opinion, the actions of the typical Sith do not demonstrate the core maxim of this code. Truly, most Sith have proven too ignorant and arrogant, and like the Jedi, they are ultimately unable to reconcile an inconvenient truth; The Force is a singular entity, and light and dark are each and aspect of it. The Force has a will, and it will always take steps to bring itself back into balance.

If either aspect of the Force is unrepresented, it will find a new servant with which to express it. This is why the Jedi and the Sith's attempts to destroy each other are always in vain. The Order of the Sith Lords has developed an obsession with trying to subvert the very thing they gain their strength from.

Darth Plagueis said that the Force "Must be broken" like "A beast of burden", and was ultimately led to doom his order because of this belief.

Kreia, from KOTOR II, in my view, has a much more comprehensive understanding of the Force, and the limitations of those who wield it. She considered the Jedi and the Sith to both be dangerous extremes with incomplete world views. Neither is able to perceive the Force because they are fixated on using it, and this is by no means exclusive to the Sith.

The Jedi, in their own way, have an equally skewed understanding of the Force. Instead of trying to dominate it, they evangelize it. They partake in the fundamentally contradictory task of trying to align their will with that of the Force, when it is the Force that dictates their will and destiny in the first place.

There is no emotion, there is peace.
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity.
There is no chaos, there is harmony.
There is no death, there is the Force.


Each of these former examples is natural, and every bit a part of the Force as the latter. The Jedi code is fundamentally incomplete, and demands from those who follow it such a cloistered and joyless existence, that they practically guarantee that their members will turn to the Dark Side. A code that asks it's followers to ignore or violate the natural law of the universe will never satisfy the needs of every student of the Force. The schism between the two Orders is made inevitable by this code, not that of the Sith.

So thus, it is my assertion that the code of the Sith holds the true secret for living harmoniously with the Force. I will explain.

The key elements of the Sith code are freedom, passion, and the rejection of peace, but consider these ideals as compared to the actions of the typical Sith. Was Darth Vader truly following his passion when he executed children and assaulted his pregnant wife? Passion is simply defined as strong, uncontrollable emotion. Do love and empathy not enter into this equation? The Sith, perhaps in overcompensation for the faults of the Jedi, confound passion with it's exclusively violent and aggressive examples. Passion does not necessarily equal anger or hate.

Further more, describing Anakin's actions as inspired by something as trivial as hatred makes no sense. Hatred is simply intense ill will against someone or something; it does not presuppose unjust action if the subject of scorn is deserving of it. Anakin is not murderous or violent because he is capable of strong emotion, but rather because he misplaces them. He's not just "Passionate", he's hysterical and irrational; a trait that the Jedi's attempts to advise and direct him have only exasperated. Any psychiatrist worth their salt will tell you that you can't get rid of emotions by ignoring them.

Being passionate is a core point of the human experience; could you imagine going through life without ever feeling sadness or joy? Would such a life even be worth living? The affirmation of passion is absolutely essential to leading a satisfying life. Remember, it was not philosophy that ultimately lead the Jedi to victory, it was love. The base, simple instinct of a father protecting his son. Some of the most violent criminals in world history have been defined by a lack empathy; the very definition of a sociopath.

And yet the Sith deny themselves these things; they think only of themselves on principal regardless of what they actually want. This is an idiotic contradiction! And it flies in the face of their other core tenant; freedom.

How can one call oneself free, if one is prevented from pursuing their passion? What if one is overcome with a passionate need to feed the hungry, or driven by a deep love and affection for their friends and family?

The Sith code reject peace not on the basis of principal, but on the basis of objective, unbiased reasoning. Conflict is quite literally sewn into the fabric of life itself, and the pattern is everywhere. Planets are drawn to the orbit of their stars, and repel in kind; animals of all kinds survive by taking from the land and each other. The only constant, the only true stillness, is non-existence.

Harmony is not opposed to conflict, harmony IS conflict. The ecosystem of the Earth runs on conflict. Evolution runs on conflict. There will always be danger and strife, because these things feed the instinct to survive and thrive.

The Jedi fail to understand this, and the Sith misconceive of conflict as something that is generated by the individual, when in reality it is simply a function of entropy.

Total peace IS a lie, but it is not something that must be warded off or fought; it has never truly existed at all.

What I consider to be the true Sith, the perfected Sith, does not reject these things. He is defined by a Dionysian embrace of and affirmation for all that life has to offer. A sort of Nietzschian Ubermensch.

He is first and foremost true to himself, for good or for ill.

He does not fight the Jedi or seek to rule the galaxy out of dogma; his ambitions and passions are solely his own. If his passion should drive him to serve the will of another, so be it; if his passion should drive him to devote himself to protecting those he loves, so be it; if his passion should declare that he should hold the galaxy in his iron grasp, so be it; he cannot deny his nature, and he does not wish to

He does not destroy the obstetricals that oppose him because he believes himself inherently superior; he understands and accepts that all things are the will of the Force, and that he is no more objectively valuable than any other life form.

If he desires dominion over others, he recognizes this desire to be wholly of his own creation, and that the galaxy will not exalt him; he must earn and achieve power through diligence, willpower, and cunning. He accepts the responsibility of independence.

The Sith becomes totally accepting of the nature of existence, and truly one with The Force. The desire to subvert nature and impose his will upon the Force is gone, and the he becomes content with their lot in life; his chains are broken; the Force has set him free.

The Order of the Sith Lords in it's current form is every bit as aimless and futile as the Jedi, but it is in their teachings, their philosophy, that I see the true will of the Force.

"The greatest act of a warrior is to lay down his sword" - Hero
 

Foehunter82

New member
Jun 25, 2014
80
0
0
Vivi22 said:
lionsprey said:
neither they are both excellent demonstrations on how to NOT deal with your emotions in a healthy fashion.
This. Both philosophies, as demonstrated in the films anyway, are such over simplified, good and evil, black and white, infantile nonsense as to be almost devoid of any usefulness as a "philosophy." They're a quick and easy way of explaining who the good guys and the bad guys are and literally nothing else.
Yeah, George Lucas was making family films through the 70s and 80s (and eventually early 00s). The Jedi and Sith were never to be taken as seriously as they're being taken. Philosophically, the Jedi and Sith are oversimplified manifestations of good vs. evil.

Fox12 said:
Also, wouldn't that rule just inspire his apprentice to rebel? Which is what ultimately happened, I think, according to Revenge of the Sith?
Yeah, pretty much any time I've seen the Rule of Two employed, both the Master and the Apprentice each wind up training secret apprentices of their own. Hence much of the Expanded Universe games.

Also, anyone invoking Kreia's philosophy is missing the point that Kreia hated the Force. She's a whiny Jedi that became an even whinier Sith after her Sith Apprentice kicked her ass. After meeting up with the Jedi Exile, she saw hope to destroy the Force (because apparently the Jedi Exile managed to become a great big black whole where nothing escapes, including the Force).

The Grey Jedi philosophy makes the most sense, but technically, that was questionable canon all along, anyway. George Lucas kept flip-flopping about anything Star Wars related, and eventually gave an answer indicating that there were apparently varying degrees of Expanded Universe canon, but also Film canon (which was the only true "Official" canon) which included the movies and cartoons. He did this, in essence, to keep the black and white morality of Star Wars intact (because that's the way he wanted it), all while allowing other Star Wars contributors to try and make Star Wars more appealing to adult audiences with the "Grey Jedi" idea, among other things.

Frankly, I think Star Wars would have been better if it had been allowed to grow-up more over time, and get away from the constantly rehashed cycle of:

Republic rises > Republic becomes an evil Empire > Empire creates Superweapon > Rebels (and Jedi) destroy Superweapon and become new Republic

There are people that complain about some fans wanting to be cynical and edgy, but I disagree. Some may, but I think most are just expecting something to happen that probably won't: For the Star Wars franchise to stop being so plain and simplified. Why do you think people got all excited (and some, angry) over the idea that Luke Skywalker might actually be a villain in the next film? It would have been a twist that would have presented a more mature story. The same sort of thing that gets people excited about Empire Strikes Back.

Also, another thing to consider is the idea that the Dark Side is an allegory for excessive drug and alcohol use. Why do you think Dark Siders are perpetually seeking strength and power?
 

Ishal

New member
Oct 30, 2012
1,177
0
0
Foehunter82 said:
Vivi22 said:
Also, anyone invoking Kreia's philosophy is missing the point that Kreia hated the Force. She's a whiny Jedi that became an even whinier Sith after her Sith Apprentice kicked her ass. After meeting up with the Jedi Exile, she saw hope to destroy the Force (because apparently the Jedi Exile managed to become a great big black whole where nothing escapes, including the Force).
Not missing the point, just that point isn't entirely relevant to the conversation.

Yes, Kreia hated the force for what she saw it as. Doesn't change the fact that she understood it on a level orders of magnitude more than Jedi or Sith. She ultimately took the role of betrayer and strayed a little more to the dark side to achieve her own ends, but she still understood the contrast between both sides. She was much more educated in her decisions than several characters have been in the entire Star Wars universe.
 

Foehunter82

New member
Jun 25, 2014
80
0
0
Ishal said:
Foehunter82 said:
Vivi22 said:
Also, anyone invoking Kreia's philosophy is missing the point that Kreia hated the Force. She's a whiny Jedi that became an even whinier Sith after her Sith Apprentice kicked her ass. After meeting up with the Jedi Exile, she saw hope to destroy the Force (because apparently the Jedi Exile managed to become a great big black whole where nothing escapes, including the Force).
Not missing the point, just that point isn't entirely relevant to the conversation.

Yes, Kreia hated the force for what she saw it as. Doesn't change the fact that she understood it on a level orders of magnitude more than Jedi or Sith. She ultimately took the role of betrayer and strayed a little more to the dark side to achieve her own ends, but she still understood the contrast between both sides. She was much more educated in her decisions than several characters have been in the entire Star Wars universe.
She was still effectively a sociopath, though.
 

Fieldy409_v1legacy

New member
Oct 9, 2008
2,686
0
0
Foehunter82 said:
Ishal said:
Foehunter82 said:
Vivi22 said:
Also, anyone invoking Kreia's philosophy is missing the point that Kreia hated the Force. She's a whiny Jedi that became an even whinier Sith after her Sith Apprentice kicked her ass. After meeting up with the Jedi Exile, she saw hope to destroy the Force (because apparently the Jedi Exile managed to become a great big black whole where nothing escapes, including the Force).
Not missing the point, just that point isn't entirely relevant to the conversation.

Yes, Kreia hated the force for what she saw it as. Doesn't change the fact that she understood it on a level orders of magnitude more than Jedi or Sith. She ultimately took the role of betrayer and strayed a little more to the dark side to achieve her own ends, but she still understood the contrast between both sides. She was much more educated in her decisions than several characters have been in the entire Star Wars universe.
She was still effectively a sociopath, though.
The Jedi and Sith both draw power from the force and claim that the force is some sort of intelligent entity controlling their destinies. And what does it do? It puts the light and dark side in endless wars that rage across the universe. The force is the real sociopath.
 

O maestre

New member
Nov 19, 2008
882
0
0
PaulH said:
Neither... religion and false virtue is garbage compared to the proletariat strength of the earth!

In truth, I'll go Sith because Red > Blue

Sarge can back me up on this.
Red has also been thoroughly proved to be faster!