|
|
NM (![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} narcissam) wrote in ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/community.gif){kind=small} fandom_wank,@ 2006-02-24 12:13:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
Self-righteous juvenile philosophy flame wars? Yep, it's the Star Wars Fandom
Mouse onwank_report came bearing Star Wars wank. Three months worth of fanboy moral superiority complexes fighting it out. I'm no expert on Star Wars novels myself, having only read a few of the first ones, but I can give a brief guide to understanding this wank. The novels discussed here are set long after the Original Trilogy. Han and Leia's (living) adult children are named Jaina and Jacen Solo. Jacen Solo has a daughter named Allana with a woman named Tenel Ka. And Luke's married to fellow Jedi Mara Jade and they've got a kid named Ben Skywalker.
Lately, Jacen Solo has been engaging in all sorts of questionable behaviour. So back in late December a poster by the name of YodaKenobi starts a thread titled : Proof that Luke is being manipulated by a Dark Lord named Jacen Solo (DN3 Swarm War spoilers!!!).
There are thirteen pages here and two separate outbreaks of wankery, the most spectacular ongoing.
My commentary will be in italics, quotes in plain text, to make for easy reading
Within two posts, the thread takes a nasty turn.
Havac: Proof that some people need to get a grip on themselves!
Jacen is doing bad things. Is he a Dark Lord? God no, and the next person who says so will receive Immediate Credibility Loss. Is he a self-consciously evil manipulator with a dark agenda? Nothing suggests it. Did Troy Denning read the BFC and throw in some tiny reference just to tip us all off? Please. He has a life, and can't read every book that has characters and/or organizations he briefly references. Like he would have crammed on it becasue Akanah makes one tiny cameo and there are offhand references to the Fallanassi.
You don't like what Jacen's doing? Fine. But don't feed me this "OMG I HAV TEH PROOF JACEN IS TEH SITH LORRD!!11!!!!11!!!!1!!!!!11111 HE IZ ABBSULOOTLY EVILLORZZ AND HE WANTZ 2 KILL THEM AWL!!!1!1!!!!!!!!!1" garbage. He's making some bad decisions. But don't tell me he's Sith. Because if you do, you're wrong. You can think he will end up being Sith, but canon right now gives absolutely no reason to believe he is, so don't go passing off your silly conspiracy theories as fact.
Lots of applause for Havac. And on to Page Two: disagreement.
Tiershon_Fett:
Anyway you put it, Jacen is being a lying scumbag. He's keeping his kid from her grandparents, ones that would LOVE her, not try to murder her. He's just insanely selfish. Akanah, as much as I hate to say it, is right about him. He's selfish, greedy and self important. He doesn't love his family, he only loves himself.
What a joke that Han thinks he's crying over them. Like Jacen would shed a single tear for his parents' deaths.
Rohniss: Please, jacen is as close to Sith as you can be without the Darth title, just like his master Vergere. They and the moral relativsm they brought are the worst thing to ever happen to Star Wars.. it goes completely against Lucas's intent.. IE a defined struggle between GOOD and EVIL.. Jacen is scum, going from a little crybaby to ahh screw it, lets kill them all because a section may want to kill my family.. Which would be a great thing.. and by his own definition of ethics, acceptable. funny how the rules change when they effect him.
Havac comes back to lay down the law.
Havac: Oh, come on. You think Jacen wouldn't care if his parents died? This is exactly the sort of overblown idiocy I've been saying needs to end. He's gotten somewhat ruthless. He's not emotionless -- as a matter of fact, his ruthlessness is the result of his passion to protect his loved ones. So stop spewing that BS, because you're only making yourself look foolish.
Tiershon_Fett: First of all, I don't take orders from you, who never misses the opportunity to near call me names, and second of all, it's your opinion. I'd say, stop making excuses for jacen's dispicable behavior. Just pretend it was Anakin Skywalker doing these same things, then all the shrill haters woulkd come out of the woodwork.
I don't even dislike Jacen, but he's completely wrong, selfish and blind. He's using the darkside, he's harming people, he's duplicitus, he's a liar, and he does all that for his personal gain. This is the same person that argued that we couldn't kill the Vong because they are all people just like you and me, just had a bad upbringing, even though they killed 365 trillion citizens, but his daughter supersedes the universe? Will he ruminate on what he asked of war victims now? Of course not! As long Jacen's consciense is clear, that's ALL that matters.
That's not exactly selfless is it? The point is, he ain't walking the walk when it counts. Makes him a hypocrite and phony. And a darksider.
Page Three: We're still in December.
Havac: I don't "never miss an opportunity to call [you] names". When you're making wild claims I call you on it. Learn to deal with criticism.
Pages Four, Five, and Six return to an even key.
Then comes Page Seven.
JacenKatarnC3PX: Come on guys, this is pathetic. First of all, Luke is too strong for Jacen to be rubbing his mind and all that. He has really only lied 1 TIME. Second, that thing about learning the memory rub, probably just a mistake. I can count a 100 things where one author said 1 thing and another spouts the exact opposite. For instance, that Nubula-Class Star Destroyer incident took quite a few years to resolve. We can only wait and see within time. And everybody knows that Lowbacca and Tesar have it in for Jacen because he's not a Joiner and is 100% against the Kiliks, while they are all the way for the Kiliks. God, why in the world do yall do that. Yall always just give part of the facts to make it seem like he's all bad, but yall never add the other half to it.
SpiritofEowyn: If everyone else is wrong, why don't you quote the books for backup? Please do show me the error of my ways. I don't like thinking Jacen is an immoral monsterous sithspawn in the latest books.
Documentation?
BIG_BAD_JEDI_MAN:
There's about 5 other threads with all the documentation you could need.
Path_of_theOreo:
These empassioned speechs are interesting.
It certainly is an interesting theory, Luke being manipulated by Jacen. I think it's possible, but I'm open to hear the other side if anyone is willing to point me in the direction of literary evidence that Jacen is a good caring individual worthy of emulation in the latest books, therefore making this theory bunk.
I haven't found any. Only guys who see Jacen as some rallying Man Power excuse to abuse the force.
Havet_storm: Because Jacen is the most powerfull...
...and in the NJO Power is more important than morality
SpiritofEowyn: That's a sad state of affairs.
I was rereading "The Last Command" where Jobaoth says how he changed people's brains, rearranged them with the force, is it possible that Jacen did that to them? Because they're starting to act rather out of character. It's like mass brainwashing.
[*snip]
I think I'd stop reading if Jacen ends up becoming a lifelong Palpatine. The GFFA would suck just a little too much.
The moral relativism is very obnoxious and counter the whole point of the Jedi since the 1970s.
Page Eight:
Embrace_of_Chain: Maybe. I still think the view has some merit - that sometimes the intention of the force user is what makes an action light or dark.
Prequel_Dreamer: That might be correct on a moral level but it's not right on a Force level. If I kill a man who is threatening a bunch of little kids with a knife then I think we can all agree that it's not an evil act. I acted to defend a bunch of kids. That's a good thing. But what about the guy I killed? The guy with a knife? What if in his mind the only way to protect the kids from the threat of disease/famine/poverty/terrorism was to kill them? In his mind he's doing it for their own good.
Is his killing those kids really a light act just because he thought he was helping them?
That's not a light act by any means. That's rationalization. It's still a dark act no matter how you try to moralize it. But if indeed there is no dark side you could do anything you want as long as you can rationalize it and claim you didn't go dark. But that's just rationalization.
But imagine there IS a darkside. We know that it is an energy that is released by a person giving into their anger/hatred/fear. We know that it has a negative physical and psychological effect on the person. It's like a drug and overrides their judgements and morals and causes them to experience delusions of granduer and homocidal mania. It is dangerous and it cannot be controlled. That's why the dark side is so dangerous.
It's clear that Jacen Solo is not rationalizing his actions but rather is giving in and being controlled by a dark power beyond his comprehension and it is destroying him from within.
Wank continues with Page Nine:
JacenSol0: So the darkside made me do it? Jacen isn't giving in to the darkside of the force because he doesn't believe there is a darkside of the force. He believes that the darkness resides within the individual, not the force. If you read the discriptions of the feelings the Jedi may be having at the times they are using the force you hear things like "anger" and "fear" all the time. They should all be darksiders by now if that is the criteria. Luke had a great analogy of the force being like a river and when it is bottled up/dammed for use by an individual that it is then of the darkside. Palpatine bottled up the force for his use to try and overwhelm others. Even when you are going with the flow of the force and open yourself up to it to be used it still exacts a toll on you. It aged both Luke and Jacen. Which begs the question , If the "lightside" can use people then can the "darkside" as well? And if you open yourself up to be used by the force how do you control which side of the force controls you, if there are indeed two sides? And if you are controlled by the darkside, should you be held accountable for actions taken while under control of the darkside?
I look at it as having more to do with your intentions and whether you are controlling the force rather than going with the flow. And, Jacen does believe in a darkside and he does have a moral compass. They are just internal, not something that the force made him do. Anything else is an abdication of responsibility for your actions. Saying the force made me do it is a cop-out.
Prequel_Dreamer: That's not really what I said though. It was Jacen's actions that opened himself up to the power of the darkside. The power corrupted him and changed his personality just like it did to Anakin Skywalker. It took the worst part of his personality and blew it up by 10,000 times. The darkside is intoxicating in its power. It hallows him out leaving him and empty shell hungry for power.
JacenSol0: No not really. If it had hollowed him out then why is Luke on the supposed side of light after falling to the "darkside" himself? Why didn't it take the worst part of his personality and blow it up 10,000 times? Why isn't Kyp out taking suncrushers and destroying star systems in order to further his power? Why isn't Mara still out whacking people in a grab for power? Why isn't Jaina still out creating havoc and trying to make the universe pay for Anakins death? People continually blow what may be questionable acts, but not necessarily "darkside" acts out of proportion. People continue to label someone a darksider for what are perfectly justifiable acts.
Eleventh_Guard:
I think that as long as someone is justifying what he is doing as for good and not evil, then he is not completely consumed by the Dark Side... yet. Those rationalizations for behavior might mark the beginning of someone's fall, or points along the way of that fall, but as long as he is trying to do the right thing then there is still the possibility that he (or she) is not of the Dark Side, and if he is going that way, that he can still return.
JacenSolo89:
Yeah, if he can THINK that he's doing the right thing and KNOW that it's protecting his loved ones, as well as the entire galaxy, from getting in a eternal war, I think it's not the darkside. I know Anakin thought the same, but he also knew he was doing wrong. He knew it was wrong, and he knew he was on the darkside. Wheras Jacen knows it is right, and he knows that there is no darkside in the Force, but in his heart. I think we can all say Jacen is not on the darkside until he starts killing younglings because of his daughter or Tenel Ka. He has justified his actions, so what's the problem? Even Luke justfied them by saying Jacen is right. You can't tell me that most of the Jedi Order didn't want to kill the Killiks. Yes, Luke believed that they only had to take down Raynar Thul and Lomi Plo and Jacen agreed with him. I think he dropped the idea of killing them all during the Swarm War. You don't see Jacen going up to Luke and telling him to kill them all. You see him going up to Luke and telling him to take out Raynar and Lomi Plo. Just as Luke thought.
Prequel_Dreamer:
I also saw Jacen Solo telling Luke to give in to his anger and hate so he could destroy Lomi Plo. As much as I agree she needed to be destroyed to end the Killick threat I wouldn't listen to advice from a Darth Sidious sound-alike. Luke also didn't listen to advice. If anything I think he's coming out of his denial state. I'm sorry but the whole idea of there being no dark side flies in the face of thousands of years of knowledge and I don't believe it. The fact that Jacen Solo is clearly such a different person than he was before his capture-damn near sociopathic-should serve as proof of an external dark side. If not I hope you're ready for this theory to be debunked in the LotF series. How people could take a chickens double-talk as truth I'll never know. And how civilized people like yourselves can believe that if you delude yourself into believing something is right that it makes it right. Moral relativism is utter nonsense and rubbish and a cowardly attempt to NOT take a moral stance on an issue by saying it's all relative. Well some acts are absolutely good and some are absolutely evil and not all the rationalizing in the world will change that.
Eleventh_Guard:
I did not say that thinking something is right makes it right - far from it. What I said was that if Jacen thinks he's doing the right thing, then he still thinks that doing the right thing is important. He hasn't completely fallen into the clutch of evil yet, and there is hope of a turnaround.
JacenSol0:
If I here the term "moral relativism " again I'm going the slaughter some people!!... Oh, did I say that out loud. Jacen is not being morally relative. Jacen is being guided by the same set of morals that were ingrained in him since he was a child. The only difference is that he is making a decision and sticking by it. We are guided by a set of guidelines and morals that were taught to us while we were growing up and that is without the benefit of the force. My God can it be that we can make a good or bad decision withiout the force telling us to? To say anything otherwise is a cop-out. And no one is saying that just because you think someting is right it makes it right. What we're saying is that based on the values given to him while growing up and his knowledge of right and wrong, that you can make a good or bad decsion while using the force and that is what makes it dark. Not the darside made me do it. He is making a decision based on right and wrong goverened by the values given to him by his parents and society. Billions of people do it every day in the SW universe. This isn't moral relativism. It's just a term Jacen bashers throw around to try and "rationalize" their arguments.
Rouge77: In his own way, Darth Sidious thought that he was doing the right thing for the right reasons and that what he did, he had to do. Of course, for the Sith and himself especially, but also for the whole galaxy. Revenge and power, but also security from the Far Outsiders, who the weak Jedi and the corrupted and ineffective Republic wouldn´t have been able to resist, according to him. Everybody thinks that they are doing the right thing, that they are, in the end, the "good side" - even the Vong did.
Page Ten: More wanking, what do you think?
JacenSol0:
But that isn't what Jacen is doing. Sidious committed numerous atrocities which he knew was wrong in a grab for power. He didn't do it for the Safety and security of the Republic. Jacen has not committed any of these evil acts and he is still being compared to Sidious.
Jedi_Matt: Look i'm a Jacen Fan but that's just flat out wrong. Jacen attacked the Chiss for power, attacked the Hapan woman (forgot her name), although 'slightly' justifiable, for power, all the lies he's told, the memory rub, ALL for power. Power over his daughter, power in the way of control over other people. Everyone else is just deciding to see it in a different light because of the lies he's told and the way he's managed to fool everyone.
JacenSol0:
I'm sorry, was this one of those "Infinites" stories you read, because it wasn't the DN trilogy? You in none of these instances was it a grab for power. You may need to read the story again if that's what you believe.
JacenSolo89:
Just as Luke and Mara want power of their son. They won't admit it, but they do. They want him to be a Jedi and use the Force. Are they Sith for wanting something? No, so is Jacen a Sith for wanting to protect his daughter? No, not yet, anyway.
So, let's get back to what this thread was ORIGINALLY talking about. You know, about the proof that Luke was being manipulated? My answer is no, he was not manipulated by Jacen. There.
Rohniss:
Yes, I sure would feel comfortable opening up with someone who force garrote's me and tosses me into a wall for good measure.. classic codependance.
and
Some of them cant even see the most OBVIOUS signs of whats coming.. I am postiviely giddy about what I FORSEE coming to pass, and thier pathetic attempts to whitewash it.
BIG_BAD_JEDI_MAN:
How about some people's pathetic attempts at superiority by purposely misreading and propogating falsehoods just because they can't accept that things may not go they way they think they should, or that things might still be up in the air?
Quiet_Mandalorian: As a wise tiger once said, "maybe they're not very self-aware".
On to Page Eleven
Rohniss:
Garrotting is the name given in England to a form of robbery with violence which became rather common in the winter of 1862-1863. The thief came up behind his victim, threw a cord over his head, and tightened it nearly to strangulation point
Sounds just like what Jacen did in Swarm War to me.. or perhaps, your selective reading just happend to skip that part.
Quiet_Mandalorian: C'mon, Rohniss. You know that's unneccesary.
Rohniss:
no its not. I kid you not. One entire book could be devoted to Jacen going around killing babies and some people on this board would still say hes a good guy, and everything he did was A-OK.. they already did it to an extent with Anakin Skywalker and this is the same old game.
and
Im willfully ignoring you Q_M. as for not bieng self-aware, I would dispute that (obviously) im just more rigid and inflexible than most people.
And then we get that stale old 'If you could go back in time and kill baby!Hitler, would you?' scenario, only with Palpatine substituted for Hitler.
Shrimpus:
Hypothetical Situation: You get a vison of the future and learn of the evil that Palpatine will perpetrate on the galaxy. You understand that it is he and he alone that will cause this evil. Problem is palpatine is 4 years old and you have 15 seconds before his mother pulls him into a crowd and you will never see him again. At least until he is untouchable to your power. You have a blaster pistol and are force sensitve enough to get the vison and be susceptable to the "dark side" but you have no training.
What is the greater crime. Shooting the boy that will become palpatine or lettign him go? Which action serves the "darkside" more.
IF you answered that shooting the "innocent" was the greater crime/serves the darkside. You are a fool. It doesn't matter how innocent the boy is now he will basically destroy the galaxy and you pity dooms the entirety of the galaxy to subjugation and torment.
This is called moral utilitarianism. And that is what JAcen Follows. Moral Relatavism is for the millionth time, when you believe that morality and right/wrong can only be judged from the perspective of the society the person belongs too. Hence it is not wrong for an aztec to rip someones heart out if they are a sacrifce and its not wrong for a sith to kill their master because he was weak.
Utilitarianism says. What creates the greater good. And evaluates the rightness or the wrongness of an action based on that. Noting this then we can understand why Jacen does what he does.
Choking Ben Skywalker: Ben is a gorog joiner, or close to it, he sees the defender droid torching the assassin bugs and goes apeshit. He slams Tenel Ka into the corner of a dresser, knockign her out and nearly killing the child in her arms and then leaps on the defender droid trying to disable it. Jacen uses the force to grab tenel ka and the child force pulls Ben to his hands applys a naked strangle and implants a force sleep. Ben goes out like a light and the chance that he was going to get everyone killed because of his Joiner tendancies drops to zero with him. No lasting damage.
The Ta'a Chume Mindwipe: Moral grey area. NO one can say she didn't have it coming. This is a ruthless and questionable action on a standard moral scale. But when comparing the good that comes from her being out of the picture. IMagine all the good that would have happened if this had happened 20 years earlier?
Inciting the Killik Chiss war: Jacens Vison shows him that the dark nest will plunge the galaxy into eternal war. He sees that the only way to prevent the war of his vison from coming to pass is to get it started before the Killiks are ready. So he tricks everyone into attacking a Chiss supply depot.
Every action that he takes is very very justified. The only danger that he faces is that if he loses his perspective he can start to make wrong decisions. However they one thing that he is not in danger of losing is that. He is perfectly considerate of teh fact that Lowie and Tesar where not under the Colonies influece even when such a point is one against his position. And furthermore he is not the only one vulnerable to wrong decisions. For example there are dozens of examples of the goodness of the lightside leading to worse consequences. For example, if Anakin had just killed Lomi Plo on the Baanuu Raas and forced welk to show them around the entire dark nest crisis would have been avoided. Good intentions more often than not create the worst results. Just because you feel bad about it afterwards doesn't bring the dead back to life. Jacen instead chooses to never let a tiny bad feeling dissaude him from doing something that must be done for the greater good. All this crap about moral relativisma and dark lord is baseless.
The only rational points one can make is.
A. There is an actual darkside adn he is skirting the edge.
-Note this is a weak point given multiple examples of passion put to a good purpose and the 3rd person omniscient narrator in the final sequence of the unifying force.
-note also that this is a weak point because many people have done dark side things and remained light.
B. His blindness to societal shackles and moral meaning might cause him to overlook something critical. This is astrong point. In the arguement with Luke over the use of anger in the Lomi PLo fight he is geniunely confused as to why luke would avoid using his passions. This is dangerous if only because he is operating on an almost inhuman moral level. His clarity of purpose is as they say blinding.
Page Twelve:
JacenSol0 : No, in no way did Jacen "garrott" anyone. I think it has more to do with your selective reading/interpretation of the text. No matter what is written in the book, you let your hatred for the character color every remark you make about him. You take every statement to the extreme. To a point where more often than not it is not factual. You blatantly misquote the text or mirepresent the facts all in the name of bashing Jacen Solo and making him a Sith. I'm not defending all the actions of Jacen Solo, rather trying to defend the facts as written in the text. Since, all we get from you is misrepresentation and mischaracterization.
Rohniss :
when you read the definition of what garrotte or -ing is. Which was already been posted by me you will see that is the correct word to describe what Jacen did to Ben. He force-gripped his neck.. cut of the air supply and commanded him to sleep.. now lets see what the definition of garrotte is:
Garrotting is the name given in England to a form of robbery with violence which became rather common in the winter of 1862-1863. The thief came up behind his victim, threw a cord over his head, and tightened it nearly to strangulation point, while robbing him.
And for the fact that you can accuse me of bieng biased when you have his friggin NAME as your UID.. is laughable. You simply dont like what I say because I actually read critically and call it as I see it.
Shrimpus:
I wouldn't bother responding to Rohniss, he sees the world, at least the star wars one in a very manchiean manner. Anything that violates the laws of dogma is immediately a threat and an enemy and there is nothing really that can be said to change that. All the stuff you have said is perfectly logical and has been ignored by him before from a different mouth. Case in point he has been told about the moral relativism 3 times in the threads I have read. Yet he persists on using the phrase every second word. He is not even consistent with himself. He hates what jacen represents so much that his story about his crimes shifts from moment to moment. Its a top down process. He hates therefore he finds "facts" to support, as opposed to the rational bottom up examination of the facts and conclusion from that.
Rohniss:
No the fact is that i havent even used the phrase "moral relativism" in this thread, until this point.. so me using it every second word is utter shavit.
Manichaeism:
1. The syncretic, dualistic religious philosophy taught by the Persian prophet Manes, combining elements of Zoroastrian, Christian, and Gnostic thought and opposed by the imperial Roman government, Neo-Platonist philosophers, and orthodox Christians.
2. A dualistic philosophy dividing the world between good and evil principles or regarding matter as intrinsically evil and mind as intrinsically good.
Thats the only part me and that belief system has in common. (bolded)
I ignore Moral Relativism simply because it is self contradictory and therfore incorrect.
Jacen's list of crimes only change, because he keeps on adding more and more.
You are right about one thing. I do hate Jacen and all that he stands for.
You fanboys make my life worth living.. what are you 15?
BIG_BAD_JEDI_MAN:
when you read the definition of what garrotte or -ing is. Which was already been posted by me you will see that is the correct word to describe what Jacen did to Ben. He force-gripped his neck.. cut of the air supply and commanded him to sleep.. now lets see what the definition of garrotte is:
First of all, it wasn't in Swarm War...if you can't get the titles right, how are we supposed to take anything else you say seriously?
Second at all, has has been proven time and again with the actual text, Jacen PHYSICALLY put Ben to sleep...the Force was only used to pull him close and then subtly suggest he go to sleep.
"You fanboys make my life worth living.. what are you 15?"
Says the fanboy who takes daily pleasure in belittling everyone else on here, then gets cranky and defensive when people call him on it...
Darth-Ghost:
The movies definitelty don't say so. No matter how much evil they've done. Killing a defeated Dooku was shown to be wrong. Killing the unarmed Separatist leaders was shown to be wrong. If Luke killed his father, who was defeated and at his mercy, it would have been wrong. For each case, if they lived they would have had the chance to go on and do more evil, like what happened when Padme spared Nute Gunray. But it was still the right thing to do.
BTW, with your hypothetical situation, you should never trust visions of the future. Look at Anakin. What if, in your example, you shot at baby Palpatine. But then Palpatine's mother sacraficd herself to save him. You were then arrested and imprisoned for life. Because Palpatine is now an orphan, he has no one to love or look after him. Someone standing by got his attention on Palpatine after you shot at him, and he offers to adopt the boy. His secret identity is Darth Plagueis. So you caused hat you were trying to prevent.
And how about if it wasn't Palpatine, but Palpatine's mother as a baby. Would you try and kill her for the future crimes her son would commit?
ruinevil
It's still not garroting... garroting requires a cord. Choking would be a more correct word, since Jacen grabbed Ben's neck with his hand. He then pinched down on his carotid arteries and gave his brain a force command to sleep. Jacen used the Force to bring Ben to his position... so that would almost be clotheslining him. Whatever you say, there was no garroting.., your own definition.
BIG_BAD_JEDI_MAN:
This is why it gets difficult to argue this sort of thing, and why it should be just left open-ended. Had Anakin not killed Dooku, would have still fallen anyway, leaving 3 trained Sith in the galaxy as opposed to two? And even if Luke did kill Vader, the Death Star was about to be blown up anyway, and the Emperor would be just as dead.
"Common good" always falls to a personal choice...the only things that determines whether it is "right" or "wrong" are the situation and the person choosing.
Currently,Page Thirteen.
Darth-Ghost: Still, no matter how much damage it would cause, not killing them would have been the right thing to do. It was a life, it had surrended, so you should show mercy. If it repented, you should forgive it.
You're saying it's okay to kill, just because they were going to die soon anyways? Morality has nothing to do with what your actions cause, or even if they make a difference, but whether you did your part the right way or not. Morality is not to be abandoned just because it's all about to end soon anyways. Should you cheat just because it's the last round of a game? Would you steal even if you knew you would never get caught? Would that make those two situations any more or less wrong? Morality is about YOU and YOUR ACTIONS, not the consequences of your actions, just what you did about your situation. And it doesn't have to be a personal choice if there is a set of rules to follow.
Jacen Sol0:
Jacen used the force to pull Ben to him, then he pinched down on the carotid arteries on each side of his neck with his hand, then commanded him to sleep. There was no force grip on his neck. I think using a "Jedi" sleep technique is a far cry from "garrottig" a person. As I stated above, you again misrepresented the facts. Again you twisted the text to suit your purpose. Again, you prove my point for me.
Shrimpus:
Who gets to decide anything? Who gets to do anything. Why don't we all just sit around on our hands, becuase if we decided anything we might be commiting EVIL.
Continuing that point let me say right now that the prequels are the worst form of moral infantalism I have seen in a long time. Not a shred of complexity or an acknowledgement of any depth. The problem with visons is as you say, but the problem that you give is the same problem that everyone faces in every decision. Will it have the desired effect? Will it have unintended consequences? And with visions comes the question of predestination. Since the nature of force visions is that they give the truth of a likely future wthout disembling. Every vision save the moronic chosen one prophecy, which I might add is a prophecy not a vision come with qualifying feelings. You can know that this will be true or somewhat. The force isn't out to trick you.
Thus yes I will continue to feel that not pulling the trigger is a crime of the worst magnitude. I would go so far as to say it is a crime worthy of your execution if it was ever found out. The degree of selfishness displayed in the moralism of some people is nothing short of a war crime.
Let's try not to get that baiting, shall we?
Thread still in progress. More wank to come, I'd bet on it.
Mouse on
wank_report came bearing Star Wars wank. Three months worth of fanboy moral superiority complexes fighting it out. I'm no expert on Star Wars novels myself, having only read a few of the first ones, but I can give a brief guide to understanding this wank. The novels discussed here are set long after the Original Trilogy. Han and Leia's (living) adult children are named Jaina and Jacen Solo. Jacen Solo has a daughter named Allana with a woman named Tenel Ka. And Luke's married to fellow Jedi Mara Jade and they've got a kid named Ben Skywalker. Lately, Jacen Solo has been engaging in all sorts of questionable behaviour. So back in late December a poster by the name of YodaKenobi starts a thread titled : Proof that Luke is being manipulated by a Dark Lord named Jacen Solo (DN3 Swarm War spoilers!!!).
There are thirteen pages here and two separate outbreaks of wankery, the most spectacular ongoing.
My commentary will be in italics, quotes in plain text, to make for easy reading
Within two posts, the thread takes a nasty turn.
Havac: Proof that some people need to get a grip on themselves!
Jacen is doing bad things. Is he a Dark Lord? God no, and the next person who says so will receive Immediate Credibility Loss. Is he a self-consciously evil manipulator with a dark agenda? Nothing suggests it. Did Troy Denning read the BFC and throw in some tiny reference just to tip us all off? Please. He has a life, and can't read every book that has characters and/or organizations he briefly references. Like he would have crammed on it becasue Akanah makes one tiny cameo and there are offhand references to the Fallanassi.
You don't like what Jacen's doing? Fine. But don't feed me this "OMG I HAV TEH PROOF JACEN IS TEH SITH LORRD!!11!!!!11!!!!1!!!!!11111 HE IZ ABBSULOOTLY EVILLORZZ AND HE WANTZ 2 KILL THEM AWL!!!1!1!!!!!!!!!1" garbage. He's making some bad decisions. But don't tell me he's Sith. Because if you do, you're wrong. You can think he will end up being Sith, but canon right now gives absolutely no reason to believe he is, so don't go passing off your silly conspiracy theories as fact.
Lots of applause for Havac. And on to Page Two: disagreement.
Tiershon_Fett:
Anyway you put it, Jacen is being a lying scumbag. He's keeping his kid from her grandparents, ones that would LOVE her, not try to murder her. He's just insanely selfish. Akanah, as much as I hate to say it, is right about him. He's selfish, greedy and self important. He doesn't love his family, he only loves himself.
What a joke that Han thinks he's crying over them. Like Jacen would shed a single tear for his parents' deaths.
Rohniss: Please, jacen is as close to Sith as you can be without the Darth title, just like his master Vergere. They and the moral relativsm they brought are the worst thing to ever happen to Star Wars.. it goes completely against Lucas's intent.. IE a defined struggle between GOOD and EVIL.. Jacen is scum, going from a little crybaby to ahh screw it, lets kill them all because a section may want to kill my family.. Which would be a great thing.. and by his own definition of ethics, acceptable. funny how the rules change when they effect him.
Havac comes back to lay down the law.
Havac: Oh, come on. You think Jacen wouldn't care if his parents died? This is exactly the sort of overblown idiocy I've been saying needs to end. He's gotten somewhat ruthless. He's not emotionless -- as a matter of fact, his ruthlessness is the result of his passion to protect his loved ones. So stop spewing that BS, because you're only making yourself look foolish.
Tiershon_Fett: First of all, I don't take orders from you, who never misses the opportunity to near call me names, and second of all, it's your opinion. I'd say, stop making excuses for jacen's dispicable behavior. Just pretend it was Anakin Skywalker doing these same things, then all the shrill haters woulkd come out of the woodwork.
I don't even dislike Jacen, but he's completely wrong, selfish and blind. He's using the darkside, he's harming people, he's duplicitus, he's a liar, and he does all that for his personal gain. This is the same person that argued that we couldn't kill the Vong because they are all people just like you and me, just had a bad upbringing, even though they killed 365 trillion citizens, but his daughter supersedes the universe? Will he ruminate on what he asked of war victims now? Of course not! As long Jacen's consciense is clear, that's ALL that matters.
That's not exactly selfless is it? The point is, he ain't walking the walk when it counts. Makes him a hypocrite and phony. And a darksider.
Page Three: We're still in December.
Havac: I don't "never miss an opportunity to call [you] names". When you're making wild claims I call you on it. Learn to deal with criticism.
Pages Four, Five, and Six return to an even key.
Then comes Page Seven.
JacenKatarnC3PX: Come on guys, this is pathetic. First of all, Luke is too strong for Jacen to be rubbing his mind and all that. He has really only lied 1 TIME. Second, that thing about learning the memory rub, probably just a mistake. I can count a 100 things where one author said 1 thing and another spouts the exact opposite. For instance, that Nubula-Class Star Destroyer incident took quite a few years to resolve. We can only wait and see within time. And everybody knows that Lowbacca and Tesar have it in for Jacen because he's not a Joiner and is 100% against the Kiliks, while they are all the way for the Kiliks. God, why in the world do yall do that. Yall always just give part of the facts to make it seem like he's all bad, but yall never add the other half to it.
SpiritofEowyn: If everyone else is wrong, why don't you quote the books for backup? Please do show me the error of my ways. I don't like thinking Jacen is an immoral monsterous sithspawn in the latest books.
Documentation?
BIG_BAD_JEDI_MAN:
There's about 5 other threads with all the documentation you could need.
Path_of_theOreo:
These empassioned speechs are interesting.
It certainly is an interesting theory, Luke being manipulated by Jacen. I think it's possible, but I'm open to hear the other side if anyone is willing to point me in the direction of literary evidence that Jacen is a good caring individual worthy of emulation in the latest books, therefore making this theory bunk.
I haven't found any. Only guys who see Jacen as some rallying Man Power excuse to abuse the force.
Havet_storm: Because Jacen is the most powerfull...
...and in the NJO Power is more important than morality
SpiritofEowyn: That's a sad state of affairs.
I was rereading "The Last Command" where Jobaoth says how he changed people's brains, rearranged them with the force, is it possible that Jacen did that to them? Because they're starting to act rather out of character. It's like mass brainwashing.
[*snip]
I think I'd stop reading if Jacen ends up becoming a lifelong Palpatine. The GFFA would suck just a little too much.
The moral relativism is very obnoxious and counter the whole point of the Jedi since the 1970s.
Page Eight:
Embrace_of_Chain: Maybe. I still think the view has some merit - that sometimes the intention of the force user is what makes an action light or dark.
Prequel_Dreamer: That might be correct on a moral level but it's not right on a Force level. If I kill a man who is threatening a bunch of little kids with a knife then I think we can all agree that it's not an evil act. I acted to defend a bunch of kids. That's a good thing. But what about the guy I killed? The guy with a knife? What if in his mind the only way to protect the kids from the threat of disease/famine/poverty/terrorism was to kill them? In his mind he's doing it for their own good.
Is his killing those kids really a light act just because he thought he was helping them?
That's not a light act by any means. That's rationalization. It's still a dark act no matter how you try to moralize it. But if indeed there is no dark side you could do anything you want as long as you can rationalize it and claim you didn't go dark. But that's just rationalization.
But imagine there IS a darkside. We know that it is an energy that is released by a person giving into their anger/hatred/fear. We know that it has a negative physical and psychological effect on the person. It's like a drug and overrides their judgements and morals and causes them to experience delusions of granduer and homocidal mania. It is dangerous and it cannot be controlled. That's why the dark side is so dangerous.
It's clear that Jacen Solo is not rationalizing his actions but rather is giving in and being controlled by a dark power beyond his comprehension and it is destroying him from within.
Wank continues with Page Nine:
JacenSol0: So the darkside made me do it? Jacen isn't giving in to the darkside of the force because he doesn't believe there is a darkside of the force. He believes that the darkness resides within the individual, not the force. If you read the discriptions of the feelings the Jedi may be having at the times they are using the force you hear things like "anger" and "fear" all the time. They should all be darksiders by now if that is the criteria. Luke had a great analogy of the force being like a river and when it is bottled up/dammed for use by an individual that it is then of the darkside. Palpatine bottled up the force for his use to try and overwhelm others. Even when you are going with the flow of the force and open yourself up to it to be used it still exacts a toll on you. It aged both Luke and Jacen. Which begs the question , If the "lightside" can use people then can the "darkside" as well? And if you open yourself up to be used by the force how do you control which side of the force controls you, if there are indeed two sides? And if you are controlled by the darkside, should you be held accountable for actions taken while under control of the darkside?
I look at it as having more to do with your intentions and whether you are controlling the force rather than going with the flow. And, Jacen does believe in a darkside and he does have a moral compass. They are just internal, not something that the force made him do. Anything else is an abdication of responsibility for your actions. Saying the force made me do it is a cop-out.
Prequel_Dreamer: That's not really what I said though. It was Jacen's actions that opened himself up to the power of the darkside. The power corrupted him and changed his personality just like it did to Anakin Skywalker. It took the worst part of his personality and blew it up by 10,000 times. The darkside is intoxicating in its power. It hallows him out leaving him and empty shell hungry for power.
JacenSol0: No not really. If it had hollowed him out then why is Luke on the supposed side of light after falling to the "darkside" himself? Why didn't it take the worst part of his personality and blow it up 10,000 times? Why isn't Kyp out taking suncrushers and destroying star systems in order to further his power? Why isn't Mara still out whacking people in a grab for power? Why isn't Jaina still out creating havoc and trying to make the universe pay for Anakins death? People continually blow what may be questionable acts, but not necessarily "darkside" acts out of proportion. People continue to label someone a darksider for what are perfectly justifiable acts.
Eleventh_Guard:
I think that as long as someone is justifying what he is doing as for good and not evil, then he is not completely consumed by the Dark Side... yet. Those rationalizations for behavior might mark the beginning of someone's fall, or points along the way of that fall, but as long as he is trying to do the right thing then there is still the possibility that he (or she) is not of the Dark Side, and if he is going that way, that he can still return.
JacenSolo89:
Yeah, if he can THINK that he's doing the right thing and KNOW that it's protecting his loved ones, as well as the entire galaxy, from getting in a eternal war, I think it's not the darkside. I know Anakin thought the same, but he also knew he was doing wrong. He knew it was wrong, and he knew he was on the darkside. Wheras Jacen knows it is right, and he knows that there is no darkside in the Force, but in his heart. I think we can all say Jacen is not on the darkside until he starts killing younglings because of his daughter or Tenel Ka. He has justified his actions, so what's the problem? Even Luke justfied them by saying Jacen is right. You can't tell me that most of the Jedi Order didn't want to kill the Killiks. Yes, Luke believed that they only had to take down Raynar Thul and Lomi Plo and Jacen agreed with him. I think he dropped the idea of killing them all during the Swarm War. You don't see Jacen going up to Luke and telling him to kill them all. You see him going up to Luke and telling him to take out Raynar and Lomi Plo. Just as Luke thought.
Prequel_Dreamer:
I also saw Jacen Solo telling Luke to give in to his anger and hate so he could destroy Lomi Plo. As much as I agree she needed to be destroyed to end the Killick threat I wouldn't listen to advice from a Darth Sidious sound-alike. Luke also didn't listen to advice. If anything I think he's coming out of his denial state. I'm sorry but the whole idea of there being no dark side flies in the face of thousands of years of knowledge and I don't believe it. The fact that Jacen Solo is clearly such a different person than he was before his capture-damn near sociopathic-should serve as proof of an external dark side. If not I hope you're ready for this theory to be debunked in the LotF series. How people could take a chickens double-talk as truth I'll never know. And how civilized people like yourselves can believe that if you delude yourself into believing something is right that it makes it right. Moral relativism is utter nonsense and rubbish and a cowardly attempt to NOT take a moral stance on an issue by saying it's all relative. Well some acts are absolutely good and some are absolutely evil and not all the rationalizing in the world will change that.
Eleventh_Guard:
I did not say that thinking something is right makes it right - far from it. What I said was that if Jacen thinks he's doing the right thing, then he still thinks that doing the right thing is important. He hasn't completely fallen into the clutch of evil yet, and there is hope of a turnaround.
JacenSol0:
If I here the term "moral relativism " again I'm going the slaughter some people!!... Oh, did I say that out loud. Jacen is not being morally relative. Jacen is being guided by the same set of morals that were ingrained in him since he was a child. The only difference is that he is making a decision and sticking by it. We are guided by a set of guidelines and morals that were taught to us while we were growing up and that is without the benefit of the force. My God can it be that we can make a good or bad decision withiout the force telling us to? To say anything otherwise is a cop-out. And no one is saying that just because you think someting is right it makes it right. What we're saying is that based on the values given to him while growing up and his knowledge of right and wrong, that you can make a good or bad decsion while using the force and that is what makes it dark. Not the darside made me do it. He is making a decision based on right and wrong goverened by the values given to him by his parents and society. Billions of people do it every day in the SW universe. This isn't moral relativism. It's just a term Jacen bashers throw around to try and "rationalize" their arguments.
Rouge77: In his own way, Darth Sidious thought that he was doing the right thing for the right reasons and that what he did, he had to do. Of course, for the Sith and himself especially, but also for the whole galaxy. Revenge and power, but also security from the Far Outsiders, who the weak Jedi and the corrupted and ineffective Republic wouldn´t have been able to resist, according to him. Everybody thinks that they are doing the right thing, that they are, in the end, the "good side" - even the Vong did.
Page Ten: More wanking, what do you think?
JacenSol0:
But that isn't what Jacen is doing. Sidious committed numerous atrocities which he knew was wrong in a grab for power. He didn't do it for the Safety and security of the Republic. Jacen has not committed any of these evil acts and he is still being compared to Sidious.
Jedi_Matt: Look i'm a Jacen Fan but that's just flat out wrong. Jacen attacked the Chiss for power, attacked the Hapan woman (forgot her name), although 'slightly' justifiable, for power, all the lies he's told, the memory rub, ALL for power. Power over his daughter, power in the way of control over other people. Everyone else is just deciding to see it in a different light because of the lies he's told and the way he's managed to fool everyone.
JacenSol0:
I'm sorry, was this one of those "Infinites" stories you read, because it wasn't the DN trilogy? You in none of these instances was it a grab for power. You may need to read the story again if that's what you believe.
JacenSolo89:
Just as Luke and Mara want power of their son. They won't admit it, but they do. They want him to be a Jedi and use the Force. Are they Sith for wanting something? No, so is Jacen a Sith for wanting to protect his daughter? No, not yet, anyway.
So, let's get back to what this thread was ORIGINALLY talking about. You know, about the proof that Luke was being manipulated? My answer is no, he was not manipulated by Jacen. There.
Rohniss:
Yes, I sure would feel comfortable opening up with someone who force garrote's me and tosses me into a wall for good measure.. classic codependance.
and
Some of them cant even see the most OBVIOUS signs of whats coming.. I am postiviely giddy about what I FORSEE coming to pass, and thier pathetic attempts to whitewash it.
BIG_BAD_JEDI_MAN:
How about some people's pathetic attempts at superiority by purposely misreading and propogating falsehoods just because they can't accept that things may not go they way they think they should, or that things might still be up in the air?
Quiet_Mandalorian: As a wise tiger once said, "maybe they're not very self-aware".
On to Page Eleven
Rohniss:
Garrotting is the name given in England to a form of robbery with violence which became rather common in the winter of 1862-1863. The thief came up behind his victim, threw a cord over his head, and tightened it nearly to strangulation point
Sounds just like what Jacen did in Swarm War to me.. or perhaps, your selective reading just happend to skip that part.
Quiet_Mandalorian: C'mon, Rohniss. You know that's unneccesary.
Rohniss:
no its not. I kid you not. One entire book could be devoted to Jacen going around killing babies and some people on this board would still say hes a good guy, and everything he did was A-OK.. they already did it to an extent with Anakin Skywalker and this is the same old game.
and
Im willfully ignoring you Q_M. as for not bieng self-aware, I would dispute that (obviously) im just more rigid and inflexible than most people.
And then we get that stale old 'If you could go back in time and kill baby!Hitler, would you?' scenario, only with Palpatine substituted for Hitler.
Shrimpus:
Hypothetical Situation: You get a vison of the future and learn of the evil that Palpatine will perpetrate on the galaxy. You understand that it is he and he alone that will cause this evil. Problem is palpatine is 4 years old and you have 15 seconds before his mother pulls him into a crowd and you will never see him again. At least until he is untouchable to your power. You have a blaster pistol and are force sensitve enough to get the vison and be susceptable to the "dark side" but you have no training.
What is the greater crime. Shooting the boy that will become palpatine or lettign him go? Which action serves the "darkside" more.
IF you answered that shooting the "innocent" was the greater crime/serves the darkside. You are a fool. It doesn't matter how innocent the boy is now he will basically destroy the galaxy and you pity dooms the entirety of the galaxy to subjugation and torment.
This is called moral utilitarianism. And that is what JAcen Follows. Moral Relatavism is for the millionth time, when you believe that morality and right/wrong can only be judged from the perspective of the society the person belongs too. Hence it is not wrong for an aztec to rip someones heart out if they are a sacrifce and its not wrong for a sith to kill their master because he was weak.
Utilitarianism says. What creates the greater good. And evaluates the rightness or the wrongness of an action based on that. Noting this then we can understand why Jacen does what he does.
Choking Ben Skywalker: Ben is a gorog joiner, or close to it, he sees the defender droid torching the assassin bugs and goes apeshit. He slams Tenel Ka into the corner of a dresser, knockign her out and nearly killing the child in her arms and then leaps on the defender droid trying to disable it. Jacen uses the force to grab tenel ka and the child force pulls Ben to his hands applys a naked strangle and implants a force sleep. Ben goes out like a light and the chance that he was going to get everyone killed because of his Joiner tendancies drops to zero with him. No lasting damage.
The Ta'a Chume Mindwipe: Moral grey area. NO one can say she didn't have it coming. This is a ruthless and questionable action on a standard moral scale. But when comparing the good that comes from her being out of the picture. IMagine all the good that would have happened if this had happened 20 years earlier?
Inciting the Killik Chiss war: Jacens Vison shows him that the dark nest will plunge the galaxy into eternal war. He sees that the only way to prevent the war of his vison from coming to pass is to get it started before the Killiks are ready. So he tricks everyone into attacking a Chiss supply depot.
Every action that he takes is very very justified. The only danger that he faces is that if he loses his perspective he can start to make wrong decisions. However they one thing that he is not in danger of losing is that. He is perfectly considerate of teh fact that Lowie and Tesar where not under the Colonies influece even when such a point is one against his position. And furthermore he is not the only one vulnerable to wrong decisions. For example there are dozens of examples of the goodness of the lightside leading to worse consequences. For example, if Anakin had just killed Lomi Plo on the Baanuu Raas and forced welk to show them around the entire dark nest crisis would have been avoided. Good intentions more often than not create the worst results. Just because you feel bad about it afterwards doesn't bring the dead back to life. Jacen instead chooses to never let a tiny bad feeling dissaude him from doing something that must be done for the greater good. All this crap about moral relativisma and dark lord is baseless.
The only rational points one can make is.
A. There is an actual darkside adn he is skirting the edge.
-Note this is a weak point given multiple examples of passion put to a good purpose and the 3rd person omniscient narrator in the final sequence of the unifying force.
-note also that this is a weak point because many people have done dark side things and remained light.
B. His blindness to societal shackles and moral meaning might cause him to overlook something critical. This is astrong point. In the arguement with Luke over the use of anger in the Lomi PLo fight he is geniunely confused as to why luke would avoid using his passions. This is dangerous if only because he is operating on an almost inhuman moral level. His clarity of purpose is as they say blinding.
Page Twelve:
JacenSol0 : No, in no way did Jacen "garrott" anyone. I think it has more to do with your selective reading/interpretation of the text. No matter what is written in the book, you let your hatred for the character color every remark you make about him. You take every statement to the extreme. To a point where more often than not it is not factual. You blatantly misquote the text or mirepresent the facts all in the name of bashing Jacen Solo and making him a Sith. I'm not defending all the actions of Jacen Solo, rather trying to defend the facts as written in the text. Since, all we get from you is misrepresentation and mischaracterization.
Rohniss :
when you read the definition of what garrotte or -ing is. Which was already been posted by me you will see that is the correct word to describe what Jacen did to Ben. He force-gripped his neck.. cut of the air supply and commanded him to sleep.. now lets see what the definition of garrotte is:
Garrotting is the name given in England to a form of robbery with violence which became rather common in the winter of 1862-1863. The thief came up behind his victim, threw a cord over his head, and tightened it nearly to strangulation point, while robbing him.
And for the fact that you can accuse me of bieng biased when you have his friggin NAME as your UID.. is laughable. You simply dont like what I say because I actually read critically and call it as I see it.
Shrimpus:
I wouldn't bother responding to Rohniss, he sees the world, at least the star wars one in a very manchiean manner. Anything that violates the laws of dogma is immediately a threat and an enemy and there is nothing really that can be said to change that. All the stuff you have said is perfectly logical and has been ignored by him before from a different mouth. Case in point he has been told about the moral relativism 3 times in the threads I have read. Yet he persists on using the phrase every second word. He is not even consistent with himself. He hates what jacen represents so much that his story about his crimes shifts from moment to moment. Its a top down process. He hates therefore he finds "facts" to support, as opposed to the rational bottom up examination of the facts and conclusion from that.
Rohniss:
No the fact is that i havent even used the phrase "moral relativism" in this thread, until this point.. so me using it every second word is utter shavit.
Manichaeism:
1. The syncretic, dualistic religious philosophy taught by the Persian prophet Manes, combining elements of Zoroastrian, Christian, and Gnostic thought and opposed by the imperial Roman government, Neo-Platonist philosophers, and orthodox Christians.
2. A dualistic philosophy dividing the world between good and evil principles or regarding matter as intrinsically evil and mind as intrinsically good.
Thats the only part me and that belief system has in common. (bolded)
I ignore Moral Relativism simply because it is self contradictory and therfore incorrect.
Jacen's list of crimes only change, because he keeps on adding more and more.
You are right about one thing. I do hate Jacen and all that he stands for.
You fanboys make my life worth living.. what are you 15?
BIG_BAD_JEDI_MAN:
when you read the definition of what garrotte or -ing is. Which was already been posted by me you will see that is the correct word to describe what Jacen did to Ben. He force-gripped his neck.. cut of the air supply and commanded him to sleep.. now lets see what the definition of garrotte is:
First of all, it wasn't in Swarm War...if you can't get the titles right, how are we supposed to take anything else you say seriously?
Second at all, has has been proven time and again with the actual text, Jacen PHYSICALLY put Ben to sleep...the Force was only used to pull him close and then subtly suggest he go to sleep.
"You fanboys make my life worth living.. what are you 15?"
Says the fanboy who takes daily pleasure in belittling everyone else on here, then gets cranky and defensive when people call him on it...
Darth-Ghost:
The movies definitelty don't say so. No matter how much evil they've done. Killing a defeated Dooku was shown to be wrong. Killing the unarmed Separatist leaders was shown to be wrong. If Luke killed his father, who was defeated and at his mercy, it would have been wrong. For each case, if they lived they would have had the chance to go on and do more evil, like what happened when Padme spared Nute Gunray. But it was still the right thing to do.
BTW, with your hypothetical situation, you should never trust visions of the future. Look at Anakin. What if, in your example, you shot at baby Palpatine. But then Palpatine's mother sacraficd herself to save him. You were then arrested and imprisoned for life. Because Palpatine is now an orphan, he has no one to love or look after him. Someone standing by got his attention on Palpatine after you shot at him, and he offers to adopt the boy. His secret identity is Darth Plagueis. So you caused hat you were trying to prevent.
And how about if it wasn't Palpatine, but Palpatine's mother as a baby. Would you try and kill her for the future crimes her son would commit?
ruinevil
It's still not garroting... garroting requires a cord. Choking would be a more correct word, since Jacen grabbed Ben's neck with his hand. He then pinched down on his carotid arteries and gave his brain a force command to sleep. Jacen used the Force to bring Ben to his position... so that would almost be clotheslining him. Whatever you say, there was no garroting.., your own definition.
BIG_BAD_JEDI_MAN:
This is why it gets difficult to argue this sort of thing, and why it should be just left open-ended. Had Anakin not killed Dooku, would have still fallen anyway, leaving 3 trained Sith in the galaxy as opposed to two? And even if Luke did kill Vader, the Death Star was about to be blown up anyway, and the Emperor would be just as dead.
"Common good" always falls to a personal choice...the only things that determines whether it is "right" or "wrong" are the situation and the person choosing.
Currently,Page Thirteen.
Darth-Ghost: Still, no matter how much damage it would cause, not killing them would have been the right thing to do. It was a life, it had surrended, so you should show mercy. If it repented, you should forgive it.
You're saying it's okay to kill, just because they were going to die soon anyways? Morality has nothing to do with what your actions cause, or even if they make a difference, but whether you did your part the right way or not. Morality is not to be abandoned just because it's all about to end soon anyways. Should you cheat just because it's the last round of a game? Would you steal even if you knew you would never get caught? Would that make those two situations any more or less wrong? Morality is about YOU and YOUR ACTIONS, not the consequences of your actions, just what you did about your situation. And it doesn't have to be a personal choice if there is a set of rules to follow.
Jacen Sol0:
Jacen used the force to pull Ben to him, then he pinched down on the carotid arteries on each side of his neck with his hand, then commanded him to sleep. There was no force grip on his neck. I think using a "Jedi" sleep technique is a far cry from "garrottig" a person. As I stated above, you again misrepresented the facts. Again you twisted the text to suit your purpose. Again, you prove my point for me.
Shrimpus:
Who gets to decide anything? Who gets to do anything. Why don't we all just sit around on our hands, becuase if we decided anything we might be commiting EVIL.
Continuing that point let me say right now that the prequels are the worst form of moral infantalism I have seen in a long time. Not a shred of complexity or an acknowledgement of any depth. The problem with visons is as you say, but the problem that you give is the same problem that everyone faces in every decision. Will it have the desired effect? Will it have unintended consequences? And with visions comes the question of predestination. Since the nature of force visions is that they give the truth of a likely future wthout disembling. Every vision save the moronic chosen one prophecy, which I might add is a prophecy not a vision come with qualifying feelings. You can know that this will be true or somewhat. The force isn't out to trick you.
Thus yes I will continue to feel that not pulling the trigger is a crime of the worst magnitude. I would go so far as to say it is a crime worthy of your execution if it was ever found out. The degree of selfishness displayed in the moralism of some people is nothing short of a war crime.
Let's try not to get that baiting, shall we?
Thread still in progress. More wank to come, I'd bet on it.
Post a comment in response:
