The Force, Sith, and Potentium

[Azakel]

The other night I was thinking about this, and came up with something. Knowing that for the most part the Force is based on Taoism(but knowing vary little about it), I have my own though on it. The Force to me is like the way I see Magic.It's every where, in all living things, and can't be chained up by definitions.
It's boundless.
Then while reading more about the Force I found that I also see the Force the way Potentiums see it. That there is no Light Side of the Force and there Is no Dark Side of the Force. There is only the Force(Unifying Force, which the Jedi consider heresy). They also believe the use of what is called the Dark Side is not right off bad. It's all about how one going about it(like how I see what people call black magic). There is only the Force.
Well if that's how I feel then why call myself a Sith. In truth I might be closer to a Drak Jedi. But I see the Dark Jedi as sitting in the middle, I just at time swing close to Sith Philosophy(maybe with some Jedi, not much). I know I'm to nice a person to be a Sith ^_^(I'm sure must if not all Sith would also consider me a heretic).
But they can *cencered* ^_^

-The Force will set me free-

Some link so people can get a better idea of some of the things I'm talking about:
The Force - Wookieepedia, the Star Wars Wiki
Potentium - Wookieepedia, the Star Wars Wiki

 

[Shelley]

I am a "middle of the road" believer myself. The Force is pure energy, and what makes if "light" or "dark" is the person's intent and perception. I don't think the Force has the cognitive ability to care which way you use it. However, I chose to follow the hard path, and to me, that's the Light side.

 

[Makaveli]

Ah, so you have a John Doris-esque take on ethics, then?

Aristotle espoused that morality is akin to a bar of iron, and your personality is a formless blob that surrounds it; while your personality may change, your morality does not. To achieve the flourishing of human potential he called eudaimonia, you would have to be so virtuous that when presented with any scenario you would always choose the mean, the intermediate, or the most moral option. If even you slipped up but once, you would no longer be virtuous, or indeed you were never virtuous at all, just close to it.

John Doris, on the other hand, criticizes this take on morality and says that all morality is based on situation, and a person can and will act differently based on the situation and the auxiliary circumstances. Furthermore, one can still be a good man even if one commits bad deeds, and one can be a bad man even if one commits good deeds; Martin Luther King helped to bring civil rights to black people, but he also cheated on his wife. He is still a good man, but he did do some immoral things; however, the good outweighs the bad exponentially. Adolf Hitler was directly responsible for the deaths of 11 million people and tens of millions of others through war, but he was also able to bring Germany out of a depression, reinvigorate his people, and bring order; the bad in this case outweighs the good exponentially.

So, if I'm getting you correctly, there is no Light, or Dark, only the Force, and that how you use it, whether it would be considered Light or Dark, is only good or bad depending on how it is used and your intentions?

 

[Troublemane]

I would agree with that. God (i.e. the Force, the Great Spirit, Great Mystery, IAO, the Arcanum, etc.) created and organizes all existence, including all things Good or Bad. So, morality is in a sense a matter of perspective: when someone is desperate or disillusioned, or having been conditioned to perceive other beings as having inherently lesser value than the self (thus open to exploitation); then violence ensues and a tragedy results.

The basic idea of the Force as being generated by all living things, is similar to [but different from] the idea that Magi derive their abilities from the Source of Life itself. However, among Magi, there is a basic understanding that Magick cannot be cast against another living being, because should we bring harm against another being through the use of the Source of Life (which is Magick), then we do harm to that very source. Black magick never works for long for this very reason. Yes, you can use magick to harm another, but the energy field of Life is intelligent and seeks to oppose things which harm it, so any Dark Magus will not accumulate much power before the Source will do one of several things to negate his power: (1) disconnect him from the Source so his spells no longer work, and he will find it more and more difficult to accomplish the simplest operations; (2) this disconnect from the source will eventually drive him insane, thus further making his actions against it more harmless. This type of action does not occur with the fictional "Dark Jedi", who seem to only get more powerful the more destructive they are.

Thus, in George Lucas' theology, there is a Manichean-type inherent dualism to the Force, by making it wholly divided into "LIght" and "Dark" sides. In my view this is the only way he can rationalize the ability of his villains, the Sith, to manipulate the Life Force in order to destroy itself. He may be making a statement through this about man's essential nature being both towrads self-creation (Eros) as well as self-destruction (Thanatos), which also ties into something Peter Carroll and his band of Chaoists have latched onto (i.e. Illuminates of Thanateros). The Dark Side of the Force would then represent Thanatos, the part of the psyche which delights in hatred, destruction, pain and suffering, which are very real aspects of every man's soul--and since The Force is said to derive its power from every living thing, it seems that is exists more or less as a projection of the collective wills of all the living things of the entire cosmos, including its darker aspects.

That is the significant difference i think between actual magical theory and fictional jedi practices:---that of who made who? magi interact with an energy field which is the Source of Life, it is from which Life originates, which is why abusing it is destructive to the abuser (though he may make short term gains at first); whereas jedi interact with a Force generated from living beings, and so is necessarily subservient to them, so is really a vast, subconscious mental projection from all beings onto a [previously] neutral energy field. I realize Lucas had to build up his bad guys to be really powerful for dramatic purposes, however, in my humble opinion, he has gotten the whole order of where magic power ultimately derives completely wrong.

So, yeah---if youre personal view on magick, your evolving "magick modality" has gone to a more neutral view, I fully endorse it! The Magus must be above dualities in order to be the master of illusion, since the external world is an illusion (called Maya); so the manipulation of things is undertaken with a sense of play, the accumulation of wealth may be accomplished or not it is of no concern since all material wealth is ultimately an illusion (as the current market meltdown is demonstrating). from this persepctive, all conflict and suffering is also temporary and illusory, so we could in theory engage in attacking another person if we do not attack their person, i.e. their souls, but only their physical body. however, a far more effective strategy of magical warfare using "white magick" would be simply to place a shield around them, preventing them from harming anyone while reflecting their own negative energies to reflect back on themselves. This is not an attack while being very effective, think of it as a kind of magical Aikido! :angel2:

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The other night I was thinking about this, and came up with something. Knowing that for the most part the Force is based on Taoism(but knowing vary little about it), I have my own though on it. The Force to me is like the way I see Magic.It's every where, in all living things, and can't be chained up by definitions.
It's boundless.

From Tao te Ching,..
The Way begat One (the lifeforce), which in turn begat Two (Yin and Yang), finally producing the entirety of the world as we know it.

From Bible, Isaiah 45:7,...
I form light and create darkness,
I make well-being and create calamity,
I am the Lord, who does all these things.

 

[MoonWater]

In star wars terms I am a gray jedi much like Qui-Gon Jinn. I've actually been thinking about this subject a lot myself as I am working on a star wars fanfic that deals with this very issue. The conclusions I have come to which will be presented in said fanfic and are views I hold myself about the difference between light and dark are basically that the main difference between the two are not that of good vs. evil but passive vs. aggressive, where light tends toward the passive while dark tends toward the aggresive. This naturally leads many to the conclusion that light is good and dark is bad because of the outcome inherent when one goes to the extreme on either side. Many view dark side as bad because when one goes to the extreme on the dark side you get extreme selfishness and agressiveness... it is here where you find people who destroy others in an attempt to gain more power. They often end up destroying themselves in the end but not before leaving a wake of destruction behind them. However with light the outcome of following the extreme is the exact opposite, however it can be just as, if not more damaging. With extreme light you get ultimate selflesness and passiveness, which many of us praise. But when brought to the extreme those who follow it often destroy themselves because they are so focused on helping others they forget to take care of themselves. And as they are destroying themselves they also bring about the slow decay of others. It's like the parent who wants to gaurd her child from all the "evils" of the world and thus throws everything she has and everything she is into protecting that child. Because of all the stress and everything else she ends up dying of a stroke at a young age or driving herself crazy or simply becomes someone no one else wants to be around simply because she's s obsessed. She destroys herself. Meanwhile the damage she does to her child is more subtle. Because of her protective nature the child never learns independance, is never able to grow and fully mature and thus become a competent individual able to care for itself. So the extreme on either side is bad, the only difference is that the bad brought about by extreme dark is more noticable, however as a result it also more easily(comparitively speaking) to fix it. With extreme light you often don't even realize there's something wrong or bad going on as a result until the damage is so much that it is nigh irreversible. Thus I am very much in agreement with Jolee from Knights of the old republic, it's far better to try and find a place in between the two rather than trying to follow one or the other exclusively. However problems can also arise from extreme neutrality. The problems here arise when someone wants so much to remain neutral that they don't do anything for fear of "upsetting the balance". I think the force is a far more complicated subject then George Lucas and Star Wars made it out to be.

 

[Azakel]

In star wars terms I am a gray jedi much like Qui-Gon Jinn. I've actually been thinking about this subject a lot myself as I am working on a star wars fanfic that deals with this very issue. The conclusions I have come to which will be presented in said fanfic and are views I hold myself about the difference between light and dark are basically that the main difference between the two are not that of good vs. evil but passive vs. aggressive, where light tends toward the passive while dark tends toward the aggresive. This naturally leads many to the conclusion that light is good and dark is bad because of the outcome inherent when one goes to the extreme on either side. Many view dark side as bad because when one goes to the extreme on the dark side you get extreme selfishness and agressiveness... it is here where you find people who destroy others in an attempt to gain more power. They often end up destroying themselves in the end but not before leaving a wake of destruction behind them. However with light the outcome of following the extreme is the exact opposite, however it can be just as, if not more damaging. With extreme light you get ultimate selflesness and passiveness, which many of us praise. But when brought to the extreme those who follow it often destroy themselves because they are so focused on helping others they forget to take care of themselves. And as they are destroying themselves they also bring about the slow decay of others. It's like the parent who wants to gaurd her child from all the "evils" of the world and thus throws everything she has and everything she is into protecting that child. Because of all the stress and everything else she ends up dying of a stroke at a young age or driving herself crazy or simply becomes someone no one else wants to be around simply because she's s obsessed. She destroys herself. Meanwhile the damage she does to her child is more subtle. Because of her protective nature the child never learns independance, is never able to grow and fully mature and thus become a competent individual able to care for itself. So the extreme on either side is bad, the only difference is that the bad brought about by extreme dark is more noticable, however as a result it also more easily(comparitively speaking) to fix it. With extreme light you often don't even realize there's something wrong or bad going on as a result until the damage is so much that it is nigh irreversible. Thus I am very much in agreement with Jolee from Knights of the old republic, it's far better to try and find a place in between the two rather than trying to follow one or the other exclusively. However problems can also arise from extreme neutrality. The problems here arise when someone wants so much to remain neutral that they don't do anything for fear of "upsetting the balance". I think the force is a far more complicated subject then George Lucas and Star Wars made it out to be.

I would say that makes sense to me really(a lot). Thank you for sharing.
Agree, though that's why I go with KOTOR, and Expanded Universe, it goes into more and the Force at times.

 

[MoonWater]

I would say that makes sense to me really(a lot). Thank you for sharing.
Agree, though that's why I go with KOTOR, and Expanded Universe, it goes into more and the Force at times.

That's also why I stick with knights of the old republic and the ancient history surrounding it. You had a bit more freedom back then and the force wasn't always black and white.

 

[[email protected]]

I suppose that using Force-Lightning (a Dark Side power) on somebody who really deserved it would not be considered an evil act if it could be justified by saving lives. Otherwise it would eventually corrupt the user, even if they professed the "Unified Force". Eventually, the user would cease to value "Light Side" activities such as healing and protecting the weak.

 

[Not Bob]

The other night I was thinking about this, and came up with something. Knowing that for the most part the Force is based on Taoism(but knowing vary little about it), I have my own though on it. The Force to me is like the way I see Magic.It's every where, in all living things, and can't be chained up by definitions.
It's boundless.
Then while reading more about the Force I found that I also see the Force the way Potentiums see it. That there is no Light Side of the Force and there Is no Dark Side of the Force. There is only the Force(Unifying Force, which the Jedi consider heresy). They also believe the use of what is called the Dark Side is not right off bad. It's all about how one going about it(like how I see what people call black magic). There is only the Force.
Well if that's how I feel then why call myself a Sith. In truth I might be closer to a Drak Jedi. But I see the Dark Jedi as sitting in the middle, I just at time swing close to Sith Philosophy(maybe with some Jedi, not much). I know I'm to nice a person to be a Sith ^_^(I'm sure must if not all Sith would also consider me a heretic).
But they can *cencered* ^_^

-The Force will set me free-

Some link so people can get a better idea of some of the things I'm talking about:
The Force - Wookieepedia, the Star Wars Wiki
Potentium - Wookieepedia, the Star Wars Wiki

Like magick, I suppose the Force can be used for either good or bad, and all that depends on whether you're a Jedi or a Sith is your intent. Just my opinion.

 

[Master Vigil]

One thing we have to remember as well, is the difference between selflessness, and selfishness. While it can be argued that the Jedi were just as selfish as the Sith, I see that as a misunderstanding. I see selflessness in the Jedi, and selfishness in the Sith. This is what caused Anakin's turn, even though out of love, it was still a selfish desire based on his attachment to Padme.

Instead of seeing the Jedi as the light, and the Sith as the black (yin and yang). I see Sith like Anakin as the extreme light, and the Sith like Palpatine as the extreme black. The Jedi I see as being the middle balance. This is the same in Taoist philosophy, a sage is concerned with neither extreme, but is exactly in the middle where neither exist.

 

[Functionless]

Instead of seeing the Jedi as the light, and the Sith as the black (yin and yang). I see Sith like Anakin as the extreme light, and the Sith like Palpatine as the extreme black. The Jedi I see as being the middle balance. This is the same in Taoist philosophy, a sage is concerned with neither extreme, but is exactly in the middle where neither exist.

I think that is a very interesting way to look at it. Its like if one sees all white, they are still blind.

However, if that is the case, then why would the Jedi be upset with Potentium?

 

[Master Vigil]

However, if that is the case, then why would the Jedi be upset with Potentium?

I would see the concept of Potentium as the start of a path to the darkside. While it seems like a good idea, if you start to truly believe that good and evil do not exist, what will stop you from going to far. And as Yoda points out, once on the path to the dark side, forever will it dominate your destiny. So while the Potentium in it's conceptual form, sounds good... it doesn't work in real life. Much like communism.

 

[Master Vigil]

This is sad to say, but due to the authors Such as Troy Denning's lack of understanding of the REAL philosophical and spiritual applications that the Force was based off of. The books can say one thing, when more than likely would not be the case in Real life.

But that's ok, if you read them just as books. However, If you truly want to live as adherents to the Force, it is best to understand the real philosophies that the Force came from.

 

[Master Vigil]

I expound more about it in this thread...

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/philosophy/74106-star-wars-philosophy.html

 

[rageoftyrael]

Wow, you guys take the force pretty seriously!
Now, to take what you were saying about morality to another level, lets look at morality anew for a moment. Now people try to define good and bad, passive and aggressive, etc, etc... as morality. Now, what people often forget is that they are trying to singularly define something that is largely plural, aka morality is what people in general see it as, not what i necessarily see it as. I think rape, murder, needless theft, and the like to be wrong and things like healing, charity and helping and old lady across the street as right, not everyone will necessarily agree, they will make allowances for evil deeds and reasons why they cannot do the good ones. Honestly it all spirals as each person tries to define morality and eventually comes to the fact (hopefully) that there is no TRUE right or wrong, right? WRONG! or right? hmm..... What we forget that in general morality is based on the beliefs of what is right and wrong by the majority of people, what is accepted as good and what is accepted as wrong. while people will have small variances, most people in general(myself included) will generally follow that belief of rights and wrongs established and basically pounded into them by society. Some have a more upright sense of morality(thus they apply the good part to themselves more rigorously) while others dont really care(thus, they find less importance in following the accepted right ways). If i took a bunch of babies, and just myself, and raised them alone, with no outside influence, i could teach them a completely warped morality. Let's say that i were to reverse what we generally believe is right and wrong. Only exclusion i would make is that we cannot harm each other, because then my experiment would kill itself pretty quickly ay? Now if you introduce these men and women into society, they would kill, rape and murder, thinking they are doing people a favor, because after all, the vast majority, myself and they, believe this is the right thing to do. They will look down upon anyone who helps others in any way as being evil and will kill them as well.(i know a contradiction, if killing is good, why punish with death, i would build that contradiction intentionally of course, and say that you are doing good for you are ridding the world of the weak by doing this). Now, some might say that you could not raise people to believe in this, it is against a natural morality that people hold within themselves. To that i say malarky! People believe in santa, easter bunny and the tooth fairy until we tell them otherwise. As i said, some will take the morality system more rigorously and uphold it(in this case, in our collective opinion being evil killers and rapists) while others will have a more lax attitude about their place in morality and wont much care(thus they wont kill or rape everyone on sight and will be seen as slightly better people). That is the crux of my argument, that morality is simply a concept created by a vast majority, an accepted belief system if you will. That does not mean that i dont think there is no right and wrong, im merely saying that it isn't really definable because the vast majority redefines it constantly and on a regular basis.