Something that came up in another SW:TOR thread, the 'good vs evil' thing.

A large number of players who're gonna play SW:TOR probably won't give a s**t about it: they'll pick Sith just because they're badass and pick the Jedi because they're  'the good guys', the lore nothing more than background music on the race to level cap and voice over quests something to skip through as fast as the system allows.

But for those that care about the lore, the difference between jedi and sith isn't as black & white as 'good' vs 'evil', the same applies to the difference between the 'light' and 'dark' side of the Force, especially if you consider the Expanded Universe (see below in post).

Jedi and Sith

The Jedi and Sith doctrines are more like philosophies, like capitalism, communism, gaianism, social darwinism or zen bhuddism: a way of looking at or dealing with the universe and society, not inherently good or evil although the results may be.

The Sith aren't just 2-dimensional evil (although someone can play their char like that ofc): they believe in survival of the strongest/fittest, and that people and civilizations can only grow and evolve through conflict. Conflict is the true challenge, a test for individuals and civilizations: 'might makes right'. Thus their empires throughout the centuries were structured in a very darwinist/Nietschean manner, bearing similarities with totalitarian societies as Sparta, the Roman empire and fascism.

The Sith believed that the avoidance of conflict - like the pacifist teachings of the Jedi - would result in stagnation and decline.

The Jedi on the other hand have a doctrine that had a holistic view of the universe, bearing resemblances with Zen Bhuddism. They strive for balance in everything, resulting in them becoming maintainers of peace and justice. Because of the tempting lure of the dark side of the Force Jedi tend to abstain strong emotions, a 'sacrifice of self for the greater good' viewpoint. Where the Sith often sought to rule the galactic civilisations with their powers, the Jedi sought to guide the galactic civilsations with their powers, although throughout the ages that distinction was often not as clear-cut as it sounded.

Light Side and Dark Side of the Force

In the same way Light and Dark Side of the Force wasn't just merely Good vs Evil, nor were Light Side users just good and Dark Side users just evil persons.

The aspect of the Force that became later known as the Dark Side of the Force wasn't fueled by evil, but by emotions, especially strong emotions: not only negative emotions as anger and hate, but also strong positive emotions as love and passion. The Dark Side of the Force is all about passion and impulse, the stronger the better.

Due to the addictive traits of the Dark Side of the Force and the longterm destructive, negative impact of it on one's body and psyche, the users of the Light Side of the Force (called the Ashla) like the Jedi try to avoid strong emotions, to the point of clearing themselves completely of emotion via meditation.

Since love and passion also belong to strong emotions, this could often lead to inner conflict within a Jedi: in earlier eras it was still common to be married or otherwise romantically partnered up among Jedi, but in the time the movies take place in that was prohibited among Jedi to avoid potential conflict and temptation from the Dark Side of the Force. 

While the Dark Side of the Force is about passion, the Light Side of the Force is all about balance.

The Expanded Universe

Besides the movies an enormous heap of books, tv series, games and comics have been released regarding Star Wars. To maintain consistency there are people at Lucas Arts that are keeping a sharp eye on every new release, and every addition to the larger Star Wars story throughout the millennia has to be approved, so that everything together would form a continuous unity: this larger continuity is called the Expanded Universe.

Since SW:TOR takes place in this Expanded Universe, 4,000 before the movies and not like SWG in the time of the movies, there can be differences in how the Jedi and Sith act and how their societies operate compared to how it was like in the movies.

Ok, that was lorewise. Some links that dive deeper into the stuff in this post:

Sith wikia and Dark Side of the Force

Jedi Order and Light Side of the Force

SW Expanded Universe

Personally I have always taken the light side as less of balance and more of logic.  It is a case of logic versus emotion.  Balance was something the Jedi were never for.  Otherwise they would have seen the Sith as the balance of the Jedi and therefore not tried to wipe them out.

However, in the movies the logic being the light side of the force and emotions being the dark side of the force makes for an interesting story in an of itself.  What are they trying to say here?

That love leads to suffering, suffering leads to anger, and anger leads to the Dark side?  Interesting concept, if you think about it.

I think the purpose of removing the emotion from the power was to keep ambition out of the equasion.  The Force is a powerfull thing that gives the Force Sensitive person the ability to control, manipulate and lord over those who are not force sensitive. 

For the Jedi, they determined that using the power to control was where the force was seductive and degenerative to the person.  To give up the desire to control they gave up control to the Federation of Planets.  Allowing themselves to become an Arm of the Judiciary branch of the Senate for investigation and policing.  Allowing them to keep their emotions in check and use the force as a tool and not as an augmentation to life.  Does not mean they are balanced, just means they are less apt to use the force for personal gain or to advance themselves in society.

Sith determined that control was a right.  They should control those who can be controlled.  This leads to an influx of back stabbing and schemes in which one is always trying to manipulate or control the other.  Thus lending themsleves to the mantras of not being able to survive infers they were not worthy of life to begin with.  To a Sith, going through life without using the Force is not living.  Does not mean they hate everything or are pure evil, just means they will use the full extent of the force they can to advance themselves in society.  In some cases, judiciously NOT using the force can also increment ones social standing.  So wantanly killing is one thing and making alliegences is another.

regardless of the fact that yes, there are two distinct philosophies, they can be interpreted as being "good" and "evil". 

it comes down to what you interpret as being "evil" and what not.

ben kenobi certainly thought the ways of the empire were "evil".

at the same time, the empire (or sidious more specifically) regarded the jedi as myopic and inefficient in the grand scheme of things.

for me the greatest difference in both philosophies is that the sith would sustain that the end result justifies the means; whereas the jedi would argue that the means are as important as the end result.

its this clear distinction that would categorise the sith as being "evil"; because in their pursuit for quick and effective ways to reach their objectives they might choose war over diplomacy, kill the innocent, destroy whole planets, bombard cities to the dark ages...

would you destroy one innocent life to save 1000? 

a jedi wouldn't, and arguably this line of thought cost them the clone wars.

a sith, on the other hand, wouldn't think twice at killing one innocent life and perhaps even the other 1000 if it suited their interests. 

Here we go with this again.  In most civilized cultures around the world, murdering millions of people for a personal agenda is considered evil.  You see the Sith believe in enslaving or killing anyone who stands in their path.  If that seems like "just another viewpoint", then you need some serious counseling sessions.  The Sith are evil, not just because they act like PMSing teenagers; but, because they will do anything to get what they want.  The Jedi on the other hand use a more passive philosphy, "Stop and think about the consequences before you commit to something".

Stop kidding yourself, the Sith are not some misunderstood off shoot of the Jedi, they are corrupted and twisted into evil incarnet by the negative energies they feed off of.  The more of the darkside you use, the more it twists your mind into chaos.  That's why the Jedi are trained to use their powers sparingly.

While the idea behind what the Sith want may not be inherently evil, how the actually Sith people acted upon it was very evil.

The Jedi did often sacrifice one for 1000 IF there was no other option.  They would do as much as they could, almost every time, to save the one.  Even to the point of sacifice.  They said that always giving up on the one was almost as evil as killing the one yourself.

Jedi did not marry, not because it was "forbidden" But because love leads to so many bad emotions so very quickly.  Anyone who has love and lost knows that for sure.

Originally posted by wardog250

Here we go with this again.  In most civilized cultures around the world, murdering millions of people for a personal agenda is considered evil.  You see the Sith believe in enslaving or killing anyone who stands in their path.  If that seems like "just another viewpoint", then you need some serious counseling sessions.  Very interesting point: see my historical example below. The Sith are evil, not just because they act like PMSing teenagers; but, because they will do anything to get what they want.  The Jedi on the other hand use a more passive philosphy, "Stop and think about the consequences before you commit to something".

Stop kidding yourself, the Sith are not some misunderstood off shoot of the Jedi, they are corrupted and twisted into evil incarnet by the negative energies they feed off of.  The more of the darkside you use, the more it twists your mind into chaos.  That's why the Jedi are trained to use their powers sparingly.

Originally posted by Swanea

While the idea behind what the Sith want may not be inherently evil, how the actually Sith people acted upon it was very evil.

Heh, nice to see such different views in the thread on the Jedi - Sith thing, those are some interesting comments

I'd like to add some arguments to the discussion. First of all, the Star Wars wiki entry itself states that the Sith doctrine and the Sith as a group aren't inherently evil, even if some of them or some of their results may be.

Quoted:

"Following the embrace of passion, which was believed to be a powerful aspect of nature, the code explains that the strength granted by passion leads to power, which then leads to victory. By way of victory, the Sith believed they could free themselves from the limitations of regular beings, and achieve their potential.

The Sith believed that conflict was the only true test of one's ability, and so emphasized its importance. It was their belief that conflict challenged both individuals and civilizations, and so forced them to grow and evolve. They believed that the avoidance of conflict–like the pacifist teachings of the Jedi–resulted in stagnation and decline."

and

"Evil is a word used by the ignorant and the weak. The dark side is about survival. It's about unleashing your inner power. It glorifies the strength of the individual." ?Darth Zannah

Secondly, next to that, to use some real life examples:

- the fact that Nero and Caligula were evil and deranged, doesn't mean that all Roman emperors were evil.

- the fact that atrocities were being committed under the Nazi regime, doesn't mean that all Nazis were evil (extreme example of a good person: Schindler's List)

and, the real kicker,

- the fact that - under the belief that they were superior and also sanctioned by their governmental and religious leaders - a whole continent (Africa) was enslaved, the peoples of Middle and South America got eradicated in actions of genocide, and another continent got stolen from its indigenous people (North America) by centuries of destroying and deceiving them, doesn't mean that all Christians are evil.

Of course, it's all fantasy, made up, the whole Star Wars mythology. But even if their beliefs could easily lead to evil results, and even if among their ranks numbered examples of pure evil persons, the Expanded Universe of Star Wars gave enough examples of the Sith doctrine, even its society, not being evil in itself.

This is reinforced by examples of history, where acts of pure evil were committed where the societies that made it happen were of itself not evil. It was only that some of those societies' doctrines and beliefs gave ample opportunity for actions to occur that we would now consider evil deeds.

And thirdly, on top of that, as a token that in the Expanded Universe all Sith and Dark Force users aren't automatically evil, even iconic figures like Luke Skywalker and Mara Jada attached themselves for a while to Sith allegiance and dabbled with the Dark Side of the Force.

Lastly, what is the viewpoint of Bioware people on this? Because that's what we'll see in SW:ToR.

As Erickson states:

"We have two things, which are faction and morality. I think the people confuse the Dark Side/Lightside alignment. One thing important for us is that the Sith are not cartoons. They cannot wake up in the morning and say "oh lets have some evil cofee and some evil pancakes. They got to be real people with a real culture. They have to have a legitimate point of view.

Again Light Side is a very different thing in our game. People often say "Oh - I'd just switch factions!" No you wouldn't. The Sith were literally chased out of the galaxy by the Jedi, you had an entire culture and people who were pushed out of known space. So you get these guys who come back and have a big chip on their shoulder. If you are playing a lightside Sith, you do NOT jump over to the Republic and join the people that tried to wipe out your entire people.

Being a good man [in the Sith Empire] means trying to change the world from the inside. You're trying to make the Empire a better place. We have to make sure that people understood that every evil regime that's ever existed in history has good people in it. The majority of people were just trying to 'do their thing' "

"Its not a chance to be evil, thats NOT what the Dark Side is about. it's about passion, competition, the thrill of victory. And ofcourse the strongest should rule"

@cyphers

To play the sith side or dark side is both a chance to be evil and a chance to embrace what has been defined by others and the wiki and their base beliefs.

The one common thread through both sides is Light side is inherently good.  While the Dark side is inherently bad.  Not saying all of them are one way or the other but, the way they use the force tends to push them in one direction or the other.

The Dark side is seductive because of the power it allows is seductive.  Which leads to a corruption of the one using the darker forms of the force.  

This was what was portrayed in the movies to allow redemption of those who were corrupted by the Dark Side of the force.  However, for story purposes and this game we are set in a world where the 2 sides are represented in different societies.  You can play a Sith that is honorable and does not engage in wanton destruction because there is no challenge.  Or you can play a Sith whose view is anyone not in line with him is weak and does not deserve to survive if they can be killed.  It allows for both views.

On the Light side there are always shades of gray where logic is in play without emotion.  While you may not have the wonton killing for no reason, it might be justified if you feel there is no redemption for the wicked.  A Paladin will fight against evil but not necessarily klill it for the potential that the wicked can be converted or repent.  A Cavelier believes the only good evil is a dead evil.

I guess what I am saying is there will be light side or logic side with some emotion and Dark side or emothional side with some logic.  This allows for more wiggle room in how a character responds without having to CHOOSE to switch sides.  In this time line switching sides is something that only happens in rare occasions.  Making for specific icons or NPC's that do it to justify some story.  As a whole tho, BW can keep this ability from the players through the back ground that keeps it from being abused into a min/max of abilities rather than game play.

Essentially, you need to keep the game fun without allowing the abuse of changing paths for powers and game play only and not supported by any lore of sorts.  IMO this will keep the DRIZZT types from basically overrunning the game.

Originally posted by wardog250

Here we go with this again.  In most civilized cultures around the world, murdering millions of people for a personal agenda is considered evil.  You see the Sith believe in enslaving or killing anyone who stands in their path.  If that seems like "just another viewpoint", then you need some serious counseling sessions.  The Sith are evil, not just because they act like PMSing teenagers; but, because they will do anything to get what they want.  The Jedi on the other hand use a more passive philosphy, "Stop and think about the consequences before you commit to something".

Stop kidding yourself, the Sith are not some misunderstood off shoot of the Jedi, they are corrupted and twisted into evil incarnet by the negative energies they feed off of.  The more of the darkside you use, the more it twists your mind into chaos.  That's why the Jedi are trained to use their powers sparingly.

 While I agree with the most part of what you are saying.  I do not think the Jedi were trained to use their powers sparingly.  They were more trained to be in tune with the force.  To go with the flow and not try to control it as much as be one with the power.  Sith was more about controlling the force and bending it to their will. 

At least, that is how I see it.  Are their actions inherently evil?  I would tend to agree that their lack of respect regarding life as sacred would indicate that they can be defined as evil.  There is a saying though, the path to hell is lined with good intentions.

Originally posted by wardog250

Here we go with this again.  In most civilized cultures around the world, murdering millions of people for a personal agenda is considered evil.  You see the Sith believe in enslaving or killing anyone who stands in their path.  If that seems like "just another viewpoint", then you need some serious counseling sessions.

So I enjoyed the SW movies, and I've played a few of the games.  However, I'm not a lore fanatic.  So I'm not going to pretend to be.  I don't read up on wikis or read any of the books.  The original 3 movies are my favorite because I watched them a lot as a kid.  Seems like every Saturday one of them was on TBS.  So feel free to educate me.  When I was a kid I thought the dark side was evil, just because they wore black robes and the good guys wore white.

With that said, where is it stated that all Sith are about murdering millions, enslaving, and killing those in their path?

The doctrine that was listed in one of the posts above said they believe conflict was necessary for growth.  Conflit does not have to mean war/battle.  It most certaintly does not mean death.  There are multiple definitions.  One could involve a battle, but another just as easily involves a difference in ideas.  To me this only says that the Sith believed in order to grow as a society that ideas and viewpoints needed to be challanged.  Progessive thinking, otherwise things become stagnant and people do not grow as individuals or as a whole society.  Now every society has evil people.  Give those people the ability to control the force and the viewpoint that confict is necessary and you'll get war.  That doesn't automatically make all Sith "evil" and wanting to partake in war.  In the least it doesn't make their doctrine "evil."

Mainly just responding to that quote, because if I was just reading the doctrine I don't see anything about murdering or enslaving millions.

Edit - Just other ideas.

Without conflict wouldn't we still have slaves in America today?  Would women be able to vote?  Aren't a vast majority of the Twi'leks sold as slaves, both within their own society and to others as well.  They are viewed more as status symbols than as a people.  Have the Jedi ever pushed to free their people from slavery? 

Originally posted by Troneas

regardless of the fact that yes, there are two distinct philosophies, they can be interpreted as being "good" and "evil". 

 

it comes down to what you interpret as being "evil" and what not.

 

ben kenobi certainly thought the ways of the empire were "evil".

 

at the same time, the empire (or sidious more specifically) regarded the jedi as myopic and inefficient in the grand scheme of things.

 

for me the greatest difference in both philosophies is that the sith would sustain that the end result justifies the means; whereas the jedi would argue that the means are as important as the end result.

 

its this clear distinction that would categorise the sith as being "evil"; because in their pursuit for quick and effective ways to reach their objectives they might choose war over diplomacy, kill the innocent, destroy whole planets, bombard cities to the dark ages...

 

would you destroy one innocent life to save 1000? 

a jedi wouldn't, and arguably this line of thought cost them the clone wars.

a sith, on the other hand, wouldn't think twice at killing one innocent life and perhaps even the other 1000 if it suited their interests. 

This isn't really accurate.  The Jedi think the Sith are evil, but generally the Sith do not consider the Jedi in the same fashion.  The Sith, as a general rule, aren't concerned with issues of morality.  They are all about indivdual power, passion, ambition, and strength.  They don't bother themselves with silly arguments of morality, because they don't consider it important.  They wouldn't refer to themselves or anyone else as evil.

To them, it's just the weak and the strong. 

Originally posted by ConverseSC

 

This isn't really accurate.  The Jedi think the Sith are evil, but generally the Sith do not consider the Jedi in the same fashion.  The Sith, as a general rule, aren't concerned with issues of morality.  They are all about indivdual power, passion, ambition, and strength.  They don't bother themselves with silly arguments of morality, because they don't consider it important.  They wouldn't refer to themselves or anyone else as evil.

 

To them, it's just the weak and the strong. 

Completely true. The Sith consider morality irrelevant, to them it's all about the struggle, the conflict, a Darwinist/Nietschean 'survival of the fittest' viewpoint: the strong that stand above the weak, that have earned their place by emerging on top through conflict and victory.

As the Sith mantra goes

Peace is a lie, there is only passion.

Through passion, I gain strength.

Through strength, I gain power.

Through power, I gain victory.

Through victory, my chains are broken.

The Force shall free me.

Interesting thread and eye-opening, I never looked at the Sith that way and always assumed it was about good vs evil, but then I've never looked into the lore more deeply than the original Star Wars movies I watched as a kid.

I guess the Sith can almost be considered 'Spartan-like' in their philosophy and society. Which is interesting because by todays standards Sparta could be considered evil, after all they enslaved a population of people and opressed them brutally to maintain their power. I'm sure the Spartans never thought what they were doing was wrong, for them it was natural that the strong rule while the weak serve.

Not only that, you mention the Spartans, but based on historic events a case could be made that all the major European nations only a few centuries earlier, the colonials and the early Americans were evil: conquest of whole continents from the local populations, genocidal eradication of whole civilisations, enslavement of the tribes of a whole race, and exploitation and deportation of the indigenous people everywhere they settled.

An outsider could conclude that since this was all done by Christian nations, that the Christian 'doctrine' must be flawed and evil, and that its people and nations surely must be evil too.

Just an example that there often can be more to it than a good vs evil thing.

Everything that the Sith and their empires indulged in - genocide, slaughter, enslavement, exploitation - are the same things that empires and nations have been doing throughout the centuries, and among those are also numbered nations that we even now still consider as 'enlightened' and certainly not as 'evil' empires.

You could even say that the Sith in a way are better, because like the Spartans they operate from a belief/philosophy of strength and conflict and survival of the fittest, while the European nations and their colonies in the Americas and Africa committed atrocities while they were fully aware of the concept of good and evil.

Well if you think about it it's like compairing WoW's Horde and Alliance, from a design point of view the Alliance are the good guys and the Horde are the bad, but if you look at WoW from a Lore prospective, the Horde are more good then the Alliance, although that might not be so true anymore due to Thrall leaving and the spot of Warchief being given to a war driven idiot.

As for Star Wars, now this one is an obvious no brainer, of course the Sith are evil, they blow up planets with a massive space station, Darth Vader murders Jedi younglings and any Imperial officer who lets him down because they fail at something, and you can't forget the evil lying smurk that is Emperor Palatine.

It just depends who writes these stories, in many you have the classic good vs evil or they twist it up with the uglies being the good and the pretty being the bad.

Heh, nice to see such different views in the thread on the Jedi - Sith thing, those are some interesting comments

 

I'd like to add some arguments to the discussion. First of all, the Star Wars wiki entry itself states that the Sith doctrine and the Sith as a group aren't inherently evil, even if some of them or some of their results may be.

I would argue that the author of the Star Wars wiki is simply wrong on a philosophic level. It seems to me that he or she is coming from a rather common standpoint of, "no philosophy is inherently evil, although the off-springing actions may be perceived as evil." I would strongly disagree and don't feel that my opinion of what evil is can be dictated by the author of the body of work. From a Western cultural standpoint there are philosophies that aren't inherently evil but can lead to evil actions. The Sith philosophy should not be looked at as one of them.

 

Quoted:

"Following the embrace of passion, which was believed to be a powerful aspect of nature, the code explains that the strength granted by passion leads to power, which then leads to victory. By way of victory, the Sith believed they could free themselves from the limitations of regular beings, and achieve their potential.

The Sith believed that conflict was the only true test of one's ability, and so emphasized its importance. It was their belief that conflict challenged both individuals and civilizations, and so forced them to grow and evolve. They believed that the avoidance of conflict–like the pacifist teachings of the Jedi–resulted in stagnation and decline."

and

"Evil is a word used by the ignorant and the weak. The dark side is about survival. It's about unleashing your inner power. It glorifies the strength of the individual." ?Darth Zannah

A philosophy which embraces passion as a means to more power and ultimate victory is inherently evil. Granted, this is my opinion but it is an opinion that I hold to as fact. Darth Zannah states that she, "glorifies the strength of the individual." While this is a wonderful philosophy when put in context of, say, the Special Olympics, this is again an inherently evil philosophy when in the context of what Darth Zannah actually means. As for the first part of Zannah's statement I don't take it as a philosophy that should be legitimately considered, but rather a statement of arrogance from an evil woman.

 

Secondly, next to that, to use some real life examples:

- the fact that Nero and Caligula were evil and deranged, doesn't mean that all Roman emperors were evil.

This is irrelevant. The Sith are all governed by the same philosophy. Roman emperors' philosophies were widely varied. There was, therefore, no consistency in how they governed. One cannot lump Constantine in with Nero and say that they were part of the same sect in the way that all Sith are part of the same sect. 

- the fact that atrocities were being committed under the Nazi regime, doesn't mean that all Nazis were evil (extreme example of a good person: Schindler's List)

There were basically 3 types of Nazis. The SS were full-fledged evil and all about the philosophy that governed the Nazi thinking and subsequent actions. The Nazis that didn't necessarily agree but went along with it were either ignorant or moderate pacifists in their own right. These held to philosophies that weren't inherently evil from a cultural standpoint, but led them to evil actions. Spielberg's version of Oskar Schindler is the third Nazi: a Nazi in name only. So he did not hold at all to the Nazi philosophy and his personal philosophy, combined with his sense of morality, led him to fight Nazism from within. Any Sith that fights the Sith from within would hold to a drastically different philosophy and would, therefore, not be a true Sith.

and, the real kicker,

- the fact that - under the belief that they were superior and also sanctioned by their governmental and religious leaders - a whole continent (Africa) was enslaved, the peoples of Middle and South America got eradicated in actions of genocide, and another continent got stolen from its indigenous people (North America) by centuries of destroying and deceiving them, doesn't mean that all Christians are evil.

This is trickier because I think a lot of people want to pretend all Christians are the same. The reality is that the blanket of Christianity is so far reaching as to cover people from not only wildly differing philosophies, but also wildly differing theologies. One cannot look at the whole of Christianity and say that the actions of all its individuals stem from the same belief system any more than one can look at Roman emperors and state that they all governed out of the same principles.

 

Of course, it's all fantasy, made up, the whole Star Wars mythology. But even if their beliefs could easily lead to evil results, and even if among their ranks numbered examples of pure evil persons, the Expanded Universe of Star Wars gave enough examples of the Sith doctrine, even its society, not being evil in itself.

Again, I have to disagree. Although a Sith may spend some of his time building a house or being passionate about another person, this does not exempt him from being evil.

This is reinforced by examples of history, where acts of pure evil were committed where the societies that made it happen were of itself not evil. It was only that some of those societies' doctrines and beliefs gave ample opportunity for actions to occur that we would now consider evil deeds.

This is certainly a true statement. A pacifistic society is not necessarily evil but their pacifism could indeed cause great harm if implemented at the wrong time. This has nothing to do with the Sith, however.

 

And thirdly, on top of that, as a token that in the Expanded Universe all Sith and Dark Force users aren't automatically evil, even iconic figures like Luke Skywalker and Mara Jada attached themselves for a while to Sith allegiance and dabbled with the Dark Side of the Force.

An allegiance with the Sith, although in my opinion an evil act regardless of the outcome, is not the same as being Sith.

 

Lastly, what is the viewpoint of Bioware people on this? Because that's what we'll see in SW:ToR.

Irrelevant to the ultimate question of good and evil. Again, my opinion is not dictated by what the writers believe.

As Erickson states:

"We have two things, which are faction and morality. I think the people confuse the Dark Side/Lightside alignment. One thing important for us is that the Sith are not cartoons. They cannot wake up in the morning and say "oh lets have some evil cofee and some evil pancakes. They got to be real people with a real culture. They have to have a legitimate point of view.

I'm quite certain Hitler did not wake up asking for evil pancakes. In fact, Hitler did a number of things that benefited German society. This does not change the fact that he was evil. He was a real, non-cartoon, evil person with an illegitimate point of view.

Again Light Side is a very different thing in our game. People often say "Oh - I'd just switch factions!" No you wouldn't. The Sith were literally chased out of the galaxy by the Jedi, you had an entire culture and people who were pushed out of known space. So you get these guys who come back and have a big chip on their shoulder. If you are playing a lightside Sith, you do NOT jump over to the Republic and join the people that tried to wipe out your entire people.

Ah... the great humanizing. This, I fear, may be one of the downfalls to Western society. We want so badly to understand how the evil person became evil that we are no longer capable of accepting that he is evil. We want to believe that everyone is a Darth Vader and can be fixed. This simply doesn't hold true. This idea was why England was incapable of recognizing the evil at their door-step while Europe was being rampaged by Hitler and the SS. "The poor Germans just want to gain back what was theirs and be significant again." Evil men were more than happy to take advantage of this idea.

Being a good man [in the Sith Empire] means trying to change the world from the inside. You're trying to make the Empire a better place. We have to make sure that people understood that every evil regime that's ever existed in history has good people in it. The majority of people were just trying to 'do their thing' "

You can't (or at least shouldn't) redefine Good to suit your needs. One can say, "being a good Sith means..." which denotes a quality of Sithdom but, "being a good man," who holds to an evil way of life is oxymoronic and is a statement devoid of meaning. A good man would not be a Sith unless he is one in name only, ie Oskar Schindler.

And - "every evil regime that's ever existed in history has good people in it." This is absolutely false. Not every German citizen was part of the Nazi regime. The nation had good people in it. The Nazi regime did not. Again, Schindler was NOT part of the regime (if Spielberg's retelling is accurate.) He was as much outside the regime as Winston Churchill.

Lastly - "do their thing?" Hitler was trying to "do his thing," too. How this makes someone not evil is beyond me.

 

"Its not a chance to be evil, thats NOT what the Dark Side is about. it's about passion, competition, the thrill of victory. And ofcourse the strongest should rule"

"Thrill of victory" combined with "strongest should rule" and then placed in the extreme value system of the Sith adds up to an evil way of life and would define an evil society. To reduce this to "just a different way of looking at things" is absurd.

 

The Sith - Jedi conflict should not be compared to Horde - Alliance. Horde - Alliance is all about political struggle and way of life. The most evil race in the game, the Undead, even has some role-playing leeway since Undead were made that way against their will. It would be very easy for a person to role-play a good Tauren, as they are primarily allied with the Horde out of necessity and due to their respect for the primarily good Thrall. The Banshee Queen is an example of a pure evil character, regardless of her significant role in bringing down the Lich King. This for her was an act of revenge and a means of getting a key player out of her way. But this does not make all Undead evil because they may not believe what she does.

Being Sith, though, means you subscribe to a particular belief system. If you consider yourself Sith you are evil in the same way that the people who were in Hitler's inner circle were evil. The writers can spin it how they want, but if you play Sith and you are in any way role-playing, you'd better grab your evil pancakes and evil coffee before you get started.

im pretty sure people who worship "the dark side" can e classified as evil. 

George Lucas wasnt trying to be that deep what he created the concepts of jedis

jedis=good,  sith=bad, is a pretty well established fact.   sith are not perverse lunatics, but they are definitly cruel power mongers who murder everyone and anyone for offering the slightest resistance.  i dont think there was a single scene in any of the movies whena sith appeared where they werent sneering and threatening to kill everyone in the room, either overtly or subtley.

Jedi are totally good and sith are totally evil, the part people dont get is you can be darkside focused without being a stih/evil, though teh darkside has a tendancey to corrupt.

Originally posted by Cruoris

im pretty sure people who worship "the dark side" can e classified as evil. 

 

George Lucas wasnt trying to be that deep what he created the concepts of jedis

 

jedis=good,  sith=bad, is a pretty well established fact.   sith are not perverse lunatics, but they are definitly cruel power mongers who murder everyone and anyone for offering the slightest resistance.  i dont think there was a single scene in any of the movies whena sith appeared where they werent sneering and threatening to kill everyone in the room, either overtly or subtley.

Agreed. What people seem to forget is that Lucas created Star Wars for kids. It's the products in the expanded Star Wars universe, not the movies, that give Jedi/Sith depth and paint things grey (which is better, in my opinion).

When you watched Episode IV for the first time, you knew who the good guys were and who the bad guys were in the first minute of the movie. It was intentional.

I can see why people would classify it good vs evil easily enough. You have to remember the time that Star Wars was written and how the Cold War Era shaped the idea of the monomyth.

The Dark Side is tempting, authoritarian, offers promises of glory but at a price.

The Force's Light Side, freedom and a bit of an aire of hope with the promise of insight.

It's not quite yin and yang, and a little more simple inward vs outward.

Really Lucas himself said he followed some text book ideas on sociology and philosophy to tell his opera. I'm not against players deciding how their role fits into the world tho' and if they think they're evil. I can see how a lot of Sith love 'order' over 'chaos'. It's on par with anyone who's strictly conservative and think there's only one way to do something right. While there's also room for the conniving sociopath who enjoys seeing the suppression of idea.

There's some Jedi who'll be akin to tree huggin' hippie terrorists in their tactics and beliefs. Really that's the beauty of such a simple setting, there's a LOT of room for interpretation.

 Meh, its still good vs evil to me no matter how you break it down. One side seems to use the force more responsible while the other seeks ultimate power at any cost.