Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

"Only the Sith deal in absolutes"

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > STAR WARS Discussion
"Only the Sith deal in absolutes"

-kobie-'s Avatar


-kobie-
12.24.2011 , 05:56 PM | #21
Quote: Originally Posted by the-algebraist View Post
He was in NO WAY stating that 'only' the Sith deal in 'Absolutes' for everything.
Except that's exactly what he said.

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes." That is the line.
Barrahm/Loora/Tylarr
The Arkanus Legacy
The Harbinger

Captain_Failure's Avatar


Captain_Failure
12.24.2011 , 06:17 PM | #22
Quote: Originally Posted by -kobie- View Post
Except that's exactly what he said.

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes." That is the line.
You totally skipped the rest of what they wrote, didn't you? Best go back and educate yourself.

BladeStrike's Avatar


BladeStrike
12.24.2011 , 06:40 PM | #23
Obi-Wan was just trying to confuse Anakin. It worked.

-kobie-'s Avatar


-kobie-
12.24.2011 , 08:58 PM | #24
Quote: Originally Posted by Captain_Failure View Post
You totally skipped the rest of what they wrote, didn't you? Best go back and educate yourself.
Oh, cram it. The rest of what he wrote is wrong.
Barrahm/Loora/Tylarr
The Arkanus Legacy
The Harbinger

Jak-Jak's Avatar


Jak-Jak
12.24.2011 , 09:40 PM | #25
Quote: Originally Posted by the-algebraist View Post
I see this debate a lot, and it makes me really quite sad.

A large part of the English language is in leaving implicit information out of dialogue because its unrequited. Obi Wan and Vader's exchange on that planet was about choosing a side, morality, and righteousness.

He was in NO WAY stating that 'only' the Sith deal in 'Absolutes' for everything. He was meaning that it was the Sith position, not the Jedi position that you were an ally or an enemy. That there was a 'right' way to do anything. The Sith believe that the power of the darkside is absolute and incontrovertible, but the Jedi believe in a living, changing force and that the only true power is in a balance of both.

He was implying that although he could not agree with Vaders point of view, he still (barely) held some love and affection for him - which was subsequently let go when he realised how far Vader had really fallen.

The statement makes perfect sense, unless read on its own as a standalone statement to the universe. And in those circumstances Obi Wan would of course never have said it.

What you have done is essentially as follows:

"Where are you going?

"The shops."

"The shops what?"

"I'm going to the shops..."

"Well why didn't you say?"

"Uh, I did."

You've completely pretended the context didn't exist.
People really have a knack for taking a single sentence out of context and making it a blanket statement.
Jak-Jak Far-lee: Bria Galaxy
LSJ/DSJ
*RIP Galaxies*

Captain_Failure's Avatar


Captain_Failure
12.24.2011 , 09:46 PM | #26
Quote: Originally Posted by -kobie- View Post
Oh, cram it. The rest of what he wrote is wrong.
This made me laugh. No really, it did. No more needs to be said.

Wikrosa's Avatar


Wikrosa
12.25.2011 , 03:53 AM | #27
Quote: Originally Posted by -kobie- View Post
Except that's exactly what he said.

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes." That is the line.
If I was walking in a park with my mom, and then out of nowhere I just pulled up a gun and shot a guy a guy for no apparant reason at all.

my mom would go "What the **** are you doing"?

It would be obvious to her WHAT I did, what she is really asking is WHY I did it, yet that isnīt what she asked.

This is the same thing. You are listening to what he is saying, instead of what he means with it.

DarthVarrak's Avatar


DarthVarrak
12.25.2011 , 04:53 AM | #28
Quote: Originally Posted by Wikrosa View Post
If I was walking in a park with my mom, and then out of nowhere I just pulled up a gun and shot a guy a guy for no apparant reason at all.

my mom would go "What the **** are you doing"?

It would be obvious to her WHAT I did, what she is really asking is WHY I did it, yet that isnīt what she asked.

This is the same thing. You are listening to what he is saying, instead of what he means with it.
This is the most useless excuse in the book, meant for children who are not old enough yet to know what they mean themselves.

Child: Gosh sometimes I just wish I didn't live here!
Parent: Then don't!
Child: I didn't mean it like that!

I think it's time that we start saying what we mean. First of all, how is anyone supposed to take what he said other than at face value? The sentences were pretty clear, I couldn't find any ambiguity.

Secondly, a majority of his explanation seemed to be pulled out of thin air. "not the Jedi position that you were an ally or an enemy"? Really? The Jedi have made it their purpose since the introduction of the Sith to eradicate them. Every time they win, they think the Sith are done, then as soon as they come back it's war all over again. This is seen in KotoR, Episode I-VI, and several books. Here's an example:

Evidence of Sith in the galaxy
Jedi witch-hunt begins
Sith dies
Jedi become complacent
*skip far in the future*
Evidence of the Sith returning for the first time in living memory
Jedi witch-hunt begins.

So on and so forth throughout all of history. Are Sith blameless? Of course not, a majority of them want to rule the galaxy (though for different reasons). However, the Jedi are far from open-minded on the subject. They are very black-and-white when it comes to Force users not practicing their beliefs. At least until the Imperial Knights. Even then it is a touchy subject.

*Edit*
As for his insistence that the Jedi believe in a balance of both the lightside and darkside, that belief didn't even come into existence until Luke Skywalker created the new Jedi Order and the new Jedi Code. Obi-wan Kenobi never expressed any feeling for the darkside other than what was required of him by the Order, which was to fight the darkside wherever it sprang up and to never EVER use it.
*/Edit*

Point being, if we take his explanation at face value (which we have no choice but to do unless he himself clarifies his statement because the phrasing he used is quite clear to begin with), the entire explanation is just assumption based on personal preference in the conflict. He sympathizes with the Jedi, therefore he looks for non-existent ambiguity in the dialogue of the movie (the line in question in the OP) to justify his beliefs. It is common, but that does not make it correct.
Vendri Aybara, Level 50 Bodyguard Merc
<Because Good Is Dumb>
Iron Citadel

-kobie-'s Avatar


-kobie-
12.25.2011 , 04:43 PM | #29
Quote: Originally Posted by Wikrosa View Post
If I was walking in a park with my mom, and then out of nowhere I just pulled up a gun and shot a guy a guy for no apparant reason at all.

my mom would go "What the **** are you doing"?

It would be obvious to her WHAT I did, what she is really asking is WHY I did it, yet that isnīt what she asked.

This is the same thing. You are listening to what he is saying, instead of what he means with it.
No, it's totally not the same thing. He is basically conceding that Anakin is gone, but doing so in language that is highly contradictory. It's a poorly written line by a terrible writer.
Barrahm/Loora/Tylarr
The Arkanus Legacy
The Harbinger

the-algebraist's Avatar


the-algebraist
12.25.2011 , 06:30 PM | #30
Quote: Originally Posted by DarthVarrak View Post
This is the most useless excuse in the book, meant for children who are not old enough yet to know what they mean themselves.

Child: Gosh sometimes I just wish I didn't live here!
Parent: Then don't!
Child: I didn't mean it like that!

I think it's time that we start saying what we mean. First of all, how is anyone supposed to take what he said other than at face value? The sentences were pretty clear, I couldn't find any ambiguity.

Secondly, a majority of his explanation seemed to be pulled out of thin air. "not the Jedi position that you were an ally or an enemy"? Really? The Jedi have made it their purpose since the introduction of the Sith to eradicate them. Every time they win, they think the Sith are done, then as soon as they come back it's war all over again. This is seen in KotoR, Episode I-VI, and several books. Here's an example:

Evidence of Sith in the galaxy
Jedi witch-hunt begins
Sith dies
Jedi become complacent
*skip far in the future*
Evidence of the Sith returning for the first time in living memory
Jedi witch-hunt begins.

So on and so forth throughout all of history. Are Sith blameless? Of course not, a majority of them want to rule the galaxy (though for different reasons). However, the Jedi are far from open-minded on the subject. They are very black-and-white when it comes to Force users not practicing their beliefs. At least until the Imperial Knights. Even then it is a touchy subject.

*Edit*
As for his insistence that the Jedi believe in a balance of both the lightside and darkside, that belief didn't even come into existence until Luke Skywalker created the new Jedi Order and the new Jedi Code. Obi-wan Kenobi never expressed any feeling for the darkside other than what was required of him by the Order, which was to fight the darkside wherever it sprang up and to never EVER use it.
*/Edit*

Point being, if we take his explanation at face value (which we have no choice but to do unless he himself clarifies his statement because the phrasing he used is quite clear to begin with), the entire explanation is just assumption based on personal preference in the conflict. He sympathizes with the Jedi, therefore he looks for non-existent ambiguity in the dialogue of the movie (the line in question in the OP) to justify his beliefs. It is common, but that does not make it correct.
You are very wrong about Obi Wan. How did Obi Wan over come Darth Maul? He once held his lightsaber to the throat of the man that killed the woman he loved, and very nearly lost himself. Obi Wan Kenobi fell in love - count em - three times in his life. One of which when he was a full Master during the clone wars. Which might explain his lenience with the Padme situation.

The jedi do not evidently have as black and white a perspective as you appear to think. Consider the founding of the sith empire. Discord among the jedi about the very nature of the force let to the exile of the dark jedi. Not the destruction, they simply would not have them as part of their order. The violence only came much later, when the dark jedi became intent on imposing their will on others. There is much evidence to show that it isn't the /SITH/ aspect of a person they object to, but that those people tend towards the same thing - acts of horror and violence. What about all the dark jedi / sith that have changed sides and been accepted? What about the chances many a jedi have given for the sith to surrender, or be convinced that the dark side isn't the only way.

The fact that there were two philosophies of the force: unifying and living. This on its own is evidence that the jedi have a variety of beliefs, opinions and positions on the force.

Mace Windu's variant of form VII. Frankly, the list goes on and on.

I'm pretty tired right now, but I'll finish with this. As to the bit about personal preference, and essentially looking for what we want to see in the dialogue. I think you'll find that should you take the line on its own, free from context it makes no sense. But should you consider the scene before, and the scene its said in, there is no searching for anything at all.

The line makes perfect, self-explanatory sense in much the same way subject-less sentences do in everyday use.
It's not living that counts, it's living rightly.