movies/tv Jedi or Sith

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Now, we all know how these two mystical circles are portrayed in the films.

 

Jedi = flawed but well meaning.

Sith = eat ewoks and live in pools filled with tears of despair.

 

For just a bit, let's remove the films from our minds, remove the past heroes and villains, even remove the Dark Side from the equation.

 

What are both of these philosophies truly about? If morality were divorced entirely from a Jedi or Sith's life and they truly were an island unto themselves, what would either want?

 

For this, we shall look to both of their codes and analyze what they mean in practice. We'll start with the Jedi code.

 

There is no emotion, there is peace.

There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.

There is no passion, there is serenity.

There is no death, there is the Force.

 

The Jedi often give the advice to "clear your mind." They believe that acting on emotion or hunches leads to mistakes. The belief is that, by calming their own thoughts and agendas, they can more easily hear of feel the Force and be influenced by it. Hence, no emotion, peace. (And for those of you about to bring up Qui-gon's "feel don't think" remember he was infamous for playing fast and loose with the Jedi code.)

 

The Jedi were often very studious, they had a massive archive of both their own history as well as general knowledge for a reason. When confronted with a problem that couldn't be solved with the wave of a hand (or lightsaber), a Jedi was generally thought to be better served by research, communication, or otherwise taking a step back. This facet could be said to be an extension of the first stanza by application. Again, acting on the authority of the objective external rather than the fallible self.

 

By far the most controversial of the Jedi ways, this stanza reinforced the idea that one mustn't allow their natural emotions and desire to precede their actions. The Jedi held that the volatile nature of emotions created an internal domino effect. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, as they say. The ultimate point, is that Jedi DO allow themselves to feel, but they strive to discipline themselves enough that they can divorce their emotions from how they live their lives.

 

The last part could almost be said to be a prayer. It's merely a reassurance that the Jedi ultimately draw their power, and indeed their life, from something far greater than themselves. By surrendering one's self to the Force, then death (or the illusion of the material world) no longer has power over them.

 

 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

 

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.

 

The first stanza I myself often have wondered about. How could one take the denouncement of peace as anything other than a declaration of war? However, you can't declare war once it's already begun can you? To say that "peace is a lie" is an observation on the nature of reality. All things slip toward entropy, no man is an island, and no empire is invincible. Anything that is meant to withstand the ages and all that can be thrown against it, must do so actively. If one does achieve a sense of relative peace, the battle is still far from over. Everyday, every moment, whether it be a usurper, conquerer, assassin, or slippery banana peel can take all you've achieved away. So you must always be ready, always be vigilant, because? . . . .

 

 

The Sith held firmly that passion and ambitions were not to be squandered. It is by seeking challenges, mysteries, and experiences that we can grow as people. The old phrase "what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger" is an apt summation of the second stanza.

 

The third stanza might seem redundant, but consider it like a counterpoint to the Jedi's "there is no ignorance, there is knowledge." Where strength is the toolkit and power the finished product. By experience, and training, one becomes stronger. With that strength, a sith is more able to readily deal with obstacles and achieve goals, and is therefore more powerful.

 

Many have different definitions of power. For some, it's influence over others, for others it's a mastery of given domain. However a sith defines their power, they must prove it's genuine. In the words of Gandhi,

 

"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence." So a sith that proclaims his power comes not from his lightsaber but his willingness to face danger without resistance better damn well back that claim up otherwise his peers will be in the right to call him on it because any victory he claims therefore, is not genuine.

 

The last stanza is also reminiscent of it's Jedi counterpart, but with a different attitude. The "chains" might be defined in many different ways. As we go through our lives, many things bind us and are capability. Be it laws, borders, prejudice, or any number of outside slings and arrows. But by attaining our ultimate goals, our self-defined victories, we can at last be free of want. Because then we can embrace whatever lies beyond, knowing we had a hand in shaping the world through our passion, talent, and sheer force of will.

 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~~

 

 

So ultimately, it could be said a Jedi is someone who views the natural world as something to be revered and human nature as something to be controlled. Whereas a Sith is someone who sees the world as tool or project, and human will as something to embrace and harness.

 

 

Any different interpretations? What do you guys think? 

Edited March 18, 2014 by Steel Accord

[Derpaholic 1,155]

Jedi.
I dislike the Sith ideology intensely, but then again, there are many aspects about the Jedi Order that I do not agree with, either.
In the end, though, I'm a peace-loving individual who likes to help others in need.
I much prefer the pre-Sith War Jedi Order where the rules and regulations were a bit looser. There was no dress code, and the non-attachment principle was only put into full practice after the Mandalorian Wars.

Edited March 18, 2014 by Bron-Yr-Aur

[PsychedelicPony 440]

I would say Sith. People lean toward Jedi because they seem like the "good guys" but if you truly break it down they both have their flaws and advantages. The Sith's ideology seems to be the most reasonable as well as they aren't limited in their quest for knowledge like the Jedi. The Sith have no bounds in where their studies can take them, while the Jedi seem to have pieces of knowledge that are "off limits" 

[Derpaholic 1,155]

 the Jedi seem to have pieces of knowledge that are "off limits" 

 

"Abilities are not inherently good or evil, it's how you use them."

-Kyle Katarn.

 

Any Jedi with sufficient self-control can wield numerous Dark Side powers without the fear of corruption.

Furthermore, there are certain extremely powerful techniques in the Light Side of the Force that can only be utilized if the Force user calm, and at peace with themselves. These powers are not accessible to Dark Siders.

Edited March 18, 2014 by Bron-Yr-Aur

[Steel Accord 6,660]

@,

 

I agree with you. The Jedi were closer, I think, to their philosophical roots when they acted as a religiously aligned peace corps. When they bound themselves to the defense of the Republic, they became slaves to a polity, and all the twisted foils of bureaucracy that brings. Whereas before, they were incorruptible. Why do you think the Bhuddist monks never took sides but still aided refugees? Tellingly, they are still around, even in the presence of an empire that hates them.

"Abilities are not inherently good or evil, it's how you use them."
-Kyle Katarn.

Any Jedi with sufficient self-control can wield numerous Dark Side powers without the fear of corruption.
Furthermore, there are certain extremely powerful techniques in the Light Side of the Force that can only be utilized if the Force user calm, and at peace with themselves. These powers are not accessible to Dark Siders.

 

Ah yes, but remember, the whole point was to divorce the use of various abilities and instead focus on the viewpoints though.

 

I see what you mean though, look at the lightning technique of firebending. To use such a power, one must be clear of both thought and purpose. Azula was able to use it obviously, being of such prodigious talent, but also because her personal image and mission were always crystal clear to her.

 

Whereas Zuko struggled with the move because he was still going through a period in his life where he didn't truly know what he wanted or he saw himself as.

Edited March 18, 2014 by Steel Accord

[Derpaholic 1,155]

 

Ah yes, but remember, the whole point was to divorce the use of various abilities and instead focus on the viewpoints though.

 

Personally, I subscribe to Kreia's philosophies more than anything. She honestly believed that the Galaxy would just be better off without the Force.

Her entire life goal was to prove to the Galaxy that, in the end, Jedi and Sith were nothing more than mere pawns of the Force, and she viewed the Force itself as a sort of cruel, selfish, and manipulative deity.

 

"It uses us all, and that is abhorrent to me."

 

It's the same as our age-old question about religion: Would we be better off without it altogether?

I like to think so.

 

Edited March 18, 2014 by Bron-Yr-Aur

[Dddrgn 450]

Honestly, I prefer the sith. Of course both sides are flawed, but both sides have great good as well. Personally, it's part of what makes star wars SO GREAT in my opinion, there is no real "good" or "bad" side, just two sides with differing outlooks. Personally, I think that allowing emotion and passion to roam free is a good thing, too much control, even for peace, is bad. What kind of peace is it if you are hiding your emotions? It's fake. Expressing your own emotions is good, but it can unfortunately get out of control and lead to destruction, which is what happens far too often for the Sith.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Personally, I subscribe to Kreia's philosophies more than anything. She honestly believed that the Galaxy would just be better off without the Force.

Her entire life goal was to prove to the Galaxy that, in the end, Jedi and Sith were nothing more than mere pawns of the Force, and she viewed the Force itself as a sort of cruel, selfish, and manipulative deity.

 

"It uses us all, and that is abhorrent to me."

 

It's the same as our age-old question about religion: Would we be better off without it altogether?

I like to think so.

 

 

Ah, but religion and God are not the same thing. The Force clearly exists, whether it's benign, or even intelligent, isn't clear even to the wisest Jedi or most powerful Sith. Nevertheless, it clearly has an effect on the galaxy at large and especially those who wield it.

 

God, cannot be adequately proved to exist, or if He/It does have an active hand in our lives. Religion is people trying to understand the greater questions of the universe and the self, it doesn't grant superpowers to those who understand it's tenants. (Unfortunately.  )

 

 

there is no real "good" or "bad" side, just two sides with differing outlooks.

 

Well Star Wars very much does have the classic setup of "good vs. evil" I think what you are referring to more is that, the universe is so vast that one's faction does not always dictate one's morality. It's perfectly possible for an Imperial soldier to honestly be trying to protect the Empire's citizens, while a plucky rebel operative might not have an altruistic bone in his body and just wants to kill people.

 

 

I dislike the Sith ideology intensely

 

Care to elaborate on your reasons? I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just curious, Master Jedi.

[Derpaholic 1,155]

 

Care to elaborate on your reasons? I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just curious, Master Jedi.

A philosophy that centers around the individual, acquisition of power, and treating those that are weaker than yourself as tools to further your own agenda and to achieve your own goals. I think it's sick.

Edited March 18, 2014 by Bron-Yr-Aur

[Steel Accord 6,660]

A philosophy that centers around the individual, the acquisition of power, and treating those that are weaker than yourself as tools to further your own agenda and to achieve your own goals. I think it's sick.

 

Well you were right up until a certain point. Yes, it is about the individual, yes it is about the acquisition of power, but no, it's not about mistreating others. That is what happens often in the Star Wars canon, but not all Sith treat their ranking inferiors with disdain and I can think of two alone that have demonstrated genuine love and friendship.

 

The Sith could be compared to some Classical Liberalism or Objectivist lines of thought, that hold the individual above all is sacred.

 

"Sick" is kind of strong though don't you think? I may not agree with the Jedi in a lot of ways, but I can certainly find enough in them to see where they make their valid points.

[Derpaholic 1,155]

it's not about mistreating others. That is what happens often in the Star Wars canon, but not all Sith treat their ranking inferiors with disdain and I can think of two alone that have demonstrated genuine love and friendship.

No, this is wrong.

Darth Bane's Rule of Two puts specific emphasis on the exploitation of others.

Love and friendship can be used as weapons against the individual, and because of this, the Sith refrain from such attachments. Take a look at any great and true Sith Lord in the history, and you'll see that they care about power. Nothing else. They do not trust anybody but themselves. 

The Sith *use* other beings to achieve ever higher power. Palpatine himself wrote an entire volume on this very subject in his Sith Compendium. It's called "The Weakness of Inferiors."

 

Edited March 18, 2014 by Bron-Yr-Aur

[Steel Accord 6,660]

@,

 

True, but that's part of the reason I have a similar issue with Darth Bane that you do with the Jedi in the Mandalorian conflict. What was a workable ethos became perverted when the order hinged itself to an external body. The Sith were only different in that they put themselves at the top of the pyramid, whereas the Jedi put themselves somewhere near the foundation.

 

One thing I personally hold, in conjunction with this philosophy, is that all pursuits can be valid. I don't think Jedi and Sith need to fight and could even co-exist peacefully, just as many religions do. Again, their conflicts stem from being attached to their respective factions as much as it does their opposed beliefs.

Edited March 18, 2014 by Steel Accord

[TheChosenPony 279]

Jedi of course!

 

Its clearly shown in the whole of the story of "Star Wars" that Succumbing to evil ways destroys everything you love, including yourself.

 

The whole "Sith code" is a lie, the Jedi kept peace for 1000 years only for the sith to interrupt it with selfish "passion" (Lust for power, Greed, etc)

Edited March 18, 2014 by TheChosenPony

[Serbon div 386]

Sith, since Jedi are overrated and mainstream.

[MLPForums Phanact 1,374]

Ewoks are yummy.

 

I'd rather be a Sith. Their creed makes much more sense to me.

[Geek0zoid 1,468]

Jedi.

I want to be good-hearted.

[Untitled Goose Q 5,137]

Sith. I like my passions, thank you very much. Plus, what use is having the good guys if there are not bad guys around? Only the Sith can match the Jedi.

[Khaoios 1,970]

You know........I had a strong feeling that some one would make a thread discussing which side to choose, lol.  However, I want to say Dark Jedi.....which, if I am not mistaken is being both a Jedi and Sith.  That is b/c I have emotions and compassion, and at the same time I have peace and serenity.    Look at Galen Marek and how he turned out.

 

Sith. I like my passions, thank you very much. Plus, what use is having the good guys if there are not bad guys around? Only the Sith can match the Jedi.

 

I concur...........Good cannot exist without Evil, nor Evil cannot exist without Good. 

[Untitled Goose Q 5,137]

I concur...........Good cannot exist without Evil, nor Evil cannot exist without Good. 

I have always wondered why stories do not tell of an organization or individual that acts to prevent one side winning. It's the ar that is important, not the resolution.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

I'm glad to see plenty of diversity within this thread. I was afraid one side of the other was going to be a majority, but it seems you all have the freedom of thought that I've come to expect from my fellow bronies.

[Fluttershutter 2,453]

Chaotic neutral force using technomage

[CT-1138 3,182]

Grey Jedi is best Jedi. They are not limited by dogmatic rules of the Order, but do not allow themselves to be swallowed by their own hatred and anger to become evil and ugly monstrosities like the Sith. Grey Jedi do what they think is right, even if it gets them into trouble somewhere further down the road. 

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Chaotic neutral force using technomage

 

Do you mean this nut ball?

 

[ReverseFaller 2,483]

Hmmm. This is a tough choice. I like things about both of them.

 

I like how the Sith are okay with emotion, and passion. I also like how the Jedi want to be one with nature, and to not use it as a tool.

 

Looking at the creeds I'd have to say that the Sith remind me of humanity. Humans are passionate, and emotional. We manipulate nature. We are always preparing for war. We let our feelings get the best of us.

 

I'm all for justice, and being good but having too much control over things like emotion doesn't seem all that enjoyable. I understand it's probably about "discipline", but what is living if you don't feel things?

I guess I'm going to have to go with Sith.

[Scootalove 10,689]

I'm going to go with the Sith, to see how discipline is dealt with in the world of Star Wars.