Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Sith absurdities - the difficulty to design plausible evil
Elikal
Member UncommonPosts: 7,912
Evil has always been an interest of mine. I read a plethora of books about, what makes a person evil, or what makes people act evil, both based on psychology and philosophy. So the idea - as probably many from a fictional point of view - fascinates me. Now the thing is, I find the Sith ideology TOTALLY and entirely absurd. Even as evil.
The Sith creed is not such a bad core idea. Follow your passion and attain liberty, branding moral as chain and confinement of the will. All human beings have an anti-social desire, a will to power, and thus that is an understandable angle to make evil plausible. However, in the real senarios, almost all Sith act entirely dumb and short sighted. It never really follow that creed, but the Sith practice this "betrayal" as hobby. And that is where it gets absurd. I just can not find it plausible or believable that a society could exist on a concept where every single individual fights only for himself, his own benefit and backstabs everyone at every opportunity. Just like the idea of the Drow from Faerun, such a society would just collaps in no time, and it would have no strength to fight against ANY halfway organized system.
The only glue such a society has, is fear. And while fear sure is a good motivator in short terms, it only works while you literally hold the gun towards that person. The moment you turn away, he stabs you. And that isn't strength, that is merely anarchy. And it goes against everything we know about how humans function. Besides the natural "will to power" humans are also herd animals. Humans never are able so much to do alone as they wish, being alone makes every human being insecure and uncomfortable. All desire a herd to which they want to belong, some stable anker of a peer-group, and no greed or evil can break that fundamental desire. So aside from the fact that such a Sith society would just fall apart and be victim of any organized society, it goes against a fundamental desire, the peer-group belonging. People need faith in others and trust in a "greater good" as much as air to breath; they literally can not function without. All sociological analysis agrees on that.
And there WOULD be a more plausible way to design a Sith empire, and our own history shows that: The Nazi's Third Reich. They were undoubtly very evil, but they did not practice backstabbing, no they had groups they targetted as evil, and used this target to glue the followers together. They created on the contraty very strong feelings of sticking together, of feeling united for a "greater good" (or greater evil rather, but from the inside it was seen as good). That is how I can see evil plausible. Peer pressure to cooperate, to leave individual desires (and with it individual reason) outside by fabricating the idea of a greater cause and also fabricating an enemy. The entire system of propaganda to unite people and strengthening their resolve. Such a society is, as proven, much stronger economically and in war, because their doubts are eliminated, their individual thinking is eliminated, all things which slow down a democratic society, where all things are always questioned and debated, and different interest groups all pull in different directions. The evil of such a Nazi soiecty is, that the individuality is eliminated and all are streamlined. That makes their strength and their evil. And that is an evil I find plausible, because it can "work". It is based on human nature, the true evil potential of humans. But this Sith idea of constant backstabbing or everyone fighting against everyone just would never work in any way, and just sounds like a very childish idea of evil. Like a 6 year old would imagine evil maybe.
So, even if I as roleplayer try to play out something within me that is "bad", the idea of live in a society of constant backstabbing just sounds absurd to me. Thats not evil, thats lunatic.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Comments
I guess that is why the Sith lost in the end. Even if they win for awhile, they end up killing each other until there is only one with an apprentice. Then keep killing anyone that gets to powerful and could be a challenge. Until that one gets killed, and the apprentice turns back to the good side. Game over......
As far as a philisophical depate on evil. That isn't a debate I would like to have on a game site. I play games to leave reality. I can do or be anything I want and it has no baring on how I live my life. So being completely evil in a game can be done by a priest and mean nothing IMO.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?
R.A.Salvatore
The only reason this doesn't seem plausible to you is because you have a frame of reference from nazism, which is of course directly taken from the ideals of Friedrich Nietzsche. There was a whole philosphical mindset in Germany that made this not only happen, but inevitable. There is an excellent movie on YouTube you should see called:
Nietzsche and the Nazis
that explains how a society comes to a central consciousness. Hitler youth were not only encouraged to beat, fight and test each other from the early ages of six, but they were ridiculed and shamed by the adults if they showed weakness. As higher members of the party said, they wanted to hammer out weakness of any kind.
The only reason the back-stabbing Sith world doesn't make sense is because you haven't seen any philosophers espousing that viewpoint, nor a young enough audience willing to hear it. In a universe such as Star Wars (fantasy), this ideal could very well be plausible and even likely. Read some of the Sith books to get an idea of how, which I don't think you have.
I remember a set of free novels from Barnes of four Sith novels that described what happens to Sith when their ship crashes on an unknown planet. The book goes deep into the lives of Sith when they were children and how that shaped their attitudes on their ship and in the novels. How things like loyalty exist; how backstabbing actually solidifies the Sith society instead of weakening it.
Btw: you realize that by mentioning Nazis you've just doomed this thread to the Off-topic section, right?
"TO MICHAEL!"
Evil is a human construct that has nothing to do with actual human behavior.
A good game is like a good story: it makes me think, look at my own coordinates. And good moral storytelling always makes me reflect my morality, if it's plausible. I don't mind that. On the contrary, ideas in a game world which I find totally unplausible is something I can not "sink into". I must be able to imagine "this COULD exist".
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I know mentioning Nazis is still a hot topic.
But when a story (and a game IS a story) speaks about good and evil, for me that always raises the quesiton of believability. And how else could be discuss the believability of an Evil Empire if not look at our histories own evil empires? Understanding needs referrence.
The doctrines of the Hitler Youth are very educational when you want to understand how you create evil, or bring forth the evil part in every person. One of the central ideas was, that a member of a Hitler Youth should rather lie to a superior adult than backstab a comrade. This is as I see it the only way to coerce conformity: by peer pressure. Backstabbing as ideal would create the very opppsite, the lack of any peer pressure. I still do not find that believable to function.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Why does things like the death penalty exist and are popular? Why is the natural reaction that if someone hits you, you want to hit them back? Why is it that when people flame someone on a forum, the person wants to retaliate?
Those are SITH ideals, not Jedi ones. The only thing keeping people in line is laws and who has guns (force) to keep them in check. If this was after WW3, how many people do you think would think a Jedi system would be possible?
It is not the natural reaction of people to have been harmed and to forgive, unless it's someone they care for.
If a Jedi had 10 bad things happen to him and a Sith had 10 good things happen to him, based on what you know of our own society... which world would be more likely?
"TO MICHAEL!"
well i am no expert on evil but i would like to point out a few things:
you are leaving out "indoctrination" out of your equation. both sith and jedi did indoctrinate their mentees since a very young age. the sith were indoctrinated from a very early age to accumulate as much power as possible at whatever cost; and that anything short of becoming a Sith Lord and killing their former master is failure.
the sith have also experienced moments where backstabbing were not expected or part of their system. an obvious example is the Brotherhood. The Darth Bane trilogy explains in detail why what system, however, was considered inapropriate.
and finally
not all sith are the same. some are cold and calculating, whilst some do in fact find it rather difficult to backstab their mentors; and even undergoing cruel experiences in their training they develop a devotion and affection towards them. best example here is darth maul.
I guess that is why some gamers like or dislike this game or that game. It is based on a mindset going into a game. Or a general view of what a game is, or fiction for that matter.
I read, play games, go to movies for entertainment value. Not a reflection of life in general or how my own life can relate. I guess that is why I don't have a lot of problems with what some call fluff. The parts of a game that add to realism like swimming or fishing or relationships with NPCs. I will use them if they are there as part of the game, but it doesn't change the fact that it is only a game. Not a real world you join when you go online.
That doesn't mean I don't prefer BW story telling vs text. That is why I will be playing this game is the story telling. And I have read the two books from this setting and will read the next one before the game comes out. For background and the understanding of the TOR time line. Even the ways of the Sith and Jedi factor in. So I can understand wanting to relate.
But for me there is a difference in knowledge of fiction and knowledge in the real world. I want the two to be separate. I live my life based on my own morals and views of the world. In a game I can behave any way I want and it won't change my morals in any way. Having said that, I do usually pick human characters and the good guys for most games. But with TOR, I will be going Sith at some point. And playing as I believe a Sith would in the fiction I have read.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?
R.A.Salvatore
I still think a society mired in constant inner conflict would be WAY too weak compared to any other power to exist.
Also, every doctrine as I see must at some point be in accordance with true inner desires of people, it never works if it goes against the fundamental principles of psychology. For a while indoctrination and fear can move people, but it would always end in anarchy. People have natural desire to form communities and cooperate, to form bond of trust and loyalty, the comraderie where they belong. I don't think you can create a soiecty in ignorance of this basic desire. I don't think humans are "black boxes" which can be molded into anything.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Look through your history and you'll see that's that case.
"TO MICHAEL!"
From what I understand the Sith aren't backstabbers.
They're social darwinists. They have a strict hierachy based purely on power. In which each rank strives to attain enough power to become part of the next rank. Becoming part of the next rank is often, but not all the time, done by betraying one's superior and taking his/her place.
The reason why the current Sith Empire is so incredibly stable is because the emperor is a being of such extreme power that there's nobody strong enough to challenge his rank.
The Sith do not seek to betray everyone. They only seek to betray those weaker then themselves who are of higher rank.
The Sith respect power and most of them are loyal as long as it's to someone who is of greater power then themselves. And because there's nobody even remotely close in power to the Emperor there's an incredible amount of loyalty and respect towards him.
And that's their greater good, power. Not just the power of the individual, although that's a large part of it. But also the power of their society. A 'true' Sith will not mind being betrayed by his apprentice, as long as that apprentice is more powerful. As Darth Bane, creator of the rule of Two (patly based on Darth Revan's teachings) says:
"When your power eclipses mine I will become expendable. This is the Rule of Two: one Master and one apprentice. When you are ready to claim the mantle of Dark Lord as your own, you must do so by eliminating me."
Granted, the rule of two came after the Empire we see in SWToR, but the core values behind the rule do hold true.
Their entire belief is based on a sort of social evolution. The strong rule the weak.
The Dark Side use flows naturally from this, it's the fastest way to achieve incredible power without any thought for balance. But seeing as the Sith only value power and not balance that's no downside to them.
The Sith aren't about passion. They're about power. Passion is only a tool to achieve that power.
The Sith aren't about betrayal. They're about social darwinism. Betrayal is only a tool to achieve that.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
Humans are pack animals not herd animals, and we've seen plenty of backstabbing behavior in different species of pack animals.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
Evil rarely believes itself as being evil. Sometimes they believe what they are doing is in the name of what is in their perception of what is good. Sometimes they simply believe that their actions are not doing harm, or that those they are doing harm to deserve it. In other instances, they just don't care that what they do is causing harm, and just do it because they want to or because it benefits them. Then there's the true evil that knows what it is doing is causing harm, and they do so because it brings them pleasure to inflict harm upon others.
Personally I don't see Sith as being evil. Rather they are simply the opposite of the Jedi. Rather than shun emotion, they embrace it. Rather than having ideals based on empathy and pity, their ideals are based around survival of the fittest. Jedi follow their morals to the letter, where as for Sith the ends justify the means. The Sith creed isn't necessarily evil, but rather a contrast to the altruism of Jedi.
There are IMVPO two flaws in this.
First, Sith only focus on a narrow definition of "ability", mostly physical power. A modern society is a sort of mechanism, and the individuals in it fulfill functions. Now I assume every person can fulfill SOME function, but it may not be to find the right one in the first try. Now if you fail in a Sith Empire, you usually get no second changes. How can that work, if ONE failure = death? How can people learn and improve with such a curve? If every mistake in a Sith career is deadly, that assume strong never make any mistake, and that ability often is either plotting schemes or physical power. For both reasons, I find this absurd.
Real darwinism is "free market". Free market allows to win the strong ideas and good concepts. (If we assume there were no corruption, just as idea). I see no logical necessity for a failing person to be killed. What purpose should that serve, evil or not?
And yes, if you read the many SW stories, SIth betrayal is VERY common, especiall in those old days we talk about in SWTOR, and it almost always ends in the death of the person.
Ok, then take wolves. They fight over a hierarchy, but they do not kill each other over it. And I would still say most people are not wolves but more sheep. But even pack animals do not kill each other inside the group, usually.
Also, if being Sith means being free, why is EVERY single Sith totally drowned in one single emotion only: hate? Even if I wanted to be totally selfish and egoistic, I would have a 1000 things other I would want to experience than hate! I mean, even evil given, what person would want to spent ALL of his life solely based on hate and anger? How believable IS that?? I mean, ok, maybe I am naive here. But I just don't buy that. Heck, I would feel quite alone, and having friends to share the goods would be a necessity for me to feel good, even if I were totally selfish, it always would have the idea to have friends with me. And I still think that is what every human being wishes. Who can really claim he would want to live totally without any friends?
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Did someone actually use the phrase plausable in a conversation about Star Wars? Nothing is plausable in Star Wars and I don't mean the technology. The entire backstory of the Sith and Jedi conflict makes as much sense as a Trade Federation trying to stop ... trade.
You are over thinking this people. It's just cardboard bad guys wearing black versus cardboard good guys wearing non-black. Now if you excuse me I have to go smash the dreams of some Star Trek fans...
It's a game. Play it.
You also have to remember that those in the Sith Empire may not be psychological duplicates of us.
The Sith Empire wasn't founded by humans. It was founded by the actual Sith race. Over time and with lots and lots of interbreeding it become human dominated. But one has to ask what that interbreeding does to a person's psychology.
Does the Sith race feel empathy? Do they feel comraderie? Do they have a need for trust and loyalty?
And after interbreeding will those psychological traits be inherited by their offspring?
The Sith, especially those higher in the hierachy, may not be entirely human and as such may carry some genetical traits that slightly alter their psychology. If these traits were always inherited by offspring then it could be a matter of 2-3 generations before any immigrants into the Sith empire would also inherit them.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
People will also have a natural desire to cheat the very systems they create. Everyone is greedy, altrusim only goes so far, the closer the people are the stronger it is, but it eventually loses out to greed. I'd never ever cheat my family, take from them or take advantage of them. I would very much take advantage of other people if I deemed the benifits were greater than any possible penalty I might run into. At the same time I am away that other people would do the very same for me, even though both myself and those other people very much desire these "rules" we would attempt to break. I don't want anarchy, I want the protection of a system, but that doesn't mean I won't give into my more base desires because I'm only human.
Human nature is very hard to break, but very easy to manipulate. I don't think I'll ever be free of the temptations to cheat, to try to get more for less, no matter how hard I try. Because I'll always want that, people will always try to prey on that (See: every email scam ever).
You seem to overestimate altruism, as it is a pretty weak emotion. I want to pass on my DNA, however I share 99% of my DNA with all other people, so by helping other people pass on their DNA, I'm doing 99% of my job right there, however most animal life shares the vast majority of their DNA, and I have no problem eating meat, killing spiders, and taking care of the stupid moles in the lawn. Greed is much stronger than altruism, and because of that greedy people will prey on other peoples greed to further their ambitions.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
Nazi's did no backstabbing?
What about the Night of the Long Knives? That's as backstabby as you can possibly get
Also the plots to overthrow / assassinate Hitler could potentially be labled as backstabbing.
Also societies based on fear can last for a long time: communism in the Soviet Union, North Korea, etc.
I agree though, that societies where personal gain is valued over the greater benefit of the group don't tend to last very long ... oh wait, there's capitalism!
My brand new bloggity blog.
Look at chimps, gorillas and monkeys. They backstab eachother in an attempt to get ahead all the time. Look at male lions who kill all the cubs when they take over a pride. Look at elephants who attack any mature male who attempts to enter a... whatever a group of elepahnts is called.
And wolves aren't a great example either, you should see the abuse an omega has to put up with, and the coniving a beta does on a daily basis to get his turn in bed.
EDIT: Also, Sith don't only feel hate, they feel tons of things. It is the Jedi who try to stifle emotion completely, which could be seen as the single largest cause to the empire, telling Anakin he couldn't be in love. Sith are all about emotions, good and bad, that is where the dark side of the force comes from, strong emotions. Hate is a great one, we are really good at feeling that strongly, but other ones can work just as well.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
Betrayal isn't nearly always punished by Death.
Vader fails repeatedly in the capture of Luke, yet he always survives and doesn't even seem to be punished.
Or as Vader says to Admiral Ozzel: "You have failed me for the last time". Clearly the guy has previous failures, yet he still lives.
Only too many mistakes or incredibly stupid ones result in death. Most mistakes don't carry fatal punishments.
And you have to realize that the SW stories cover only the most exciting times. Nobody's going to write a book about Jake the Sith apprentice who never achieved anything but also never failed spectacularly enough to be killed.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
But all sith are not like this. The Sith are very different, and that is what you can roleplay in the Old Republic.
Naga Sadows tomb on Korriban in Knights of the Old Republic, the remnants of his gost says something akin to this; "Isn't it obvious what we did? We destroyed each other".
The Sith didn't lose Korriban over war with the Republic or something. They did eventually consume each other. But there is much more to the Sith. And the Sith changed too.
I am looking forward to exploring the Dark Side in TOR. My guess is that you will be more evil as a Jedi who goes to the Dark Side. Because you are fighting to defend the people who need you. On the Empire side, everyone should know that it's only for the strong. Like a Spartan soceity that breeds out the weak DNA in the faulty bloodlines, only to have the toughest and purest warriors possible. Weed out those who will not drive our species forward.
I know people in RL who actually will agree with some of the Sith philosophies. A guy I meet once had no problem cheating or lying to people. His argument was just "the smarter, tricks out the less smarter" and that was his justification for everything. He felt that society shields those of us who are weak.
OP - Do you think the Jedi way is better? How can it be better to act without emotion. What about the good emotions? To me, that ideology is truly psychotic. At least the Sith have a will to live.
But I believe all ideologies are faulty. It's like religion. It's just implanting yourself with an operating system so you don't have to ask the hard questions and make the harsh choices. "ohh I will go to heaven. lol no consequences for me if I pray this and worship dad.. lol life".
Ofc I'm not against idelogy/religion, but they are all faulty. But I don't see Sith being more faulty than the Jedi!
It's just a video game. You don't have to take things SO SERIOUSLY.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
El, seriously. Go watch that film and you'll see not only is what you are saying implausible PLAUSIBLE, but you'd see that Star Wars lore is written almost perfectly in many respects as is. (the base values I mean)
In that film I linked, the author goes on at one point and lists these sets of traits:
Pride, Self-esteem
Wealth
Ambition, Boldness
Vengeance, Justice
Self-Worth
Profit
Challenge
Indulgence
Pleasure, Sensuality
Individualism
Independence
Autonomy
then these:
Humility
Poverty
Patience, Meekness
Forgiveness
Weakness
Self-Sacrifice, Charity
Safety
Self-retraint
Anti-physicality, Shame
Altruism
Dependence
Obedience
Then he asks which set of values do you think would allow a society to most thrive best? Turns out, the more agressive list is what Nietzche espoused that the Nazis agreed is the best qualities people should have while the others would doom a society because they wouldn't be able to rule.
Now, which list do you think the Sith would pick and which one would Jedis pick?
In the scheme of Star Wars, the only implausible thing that I think of the whole series actually is the point where Darth Vader kills the emperor. Up until that point, he had tried to kill or capture Luke the whole series whenever he could. He even tortured (TORTURED!) his own daughter who he knew who she was already. That is evil.
There is no way Darth Vader just turns around in the end and suddenly cares for his son after living his life the way he had up to that point unless he hated his life, which he didn't. He enjoyed the power, the hate and all it brought, yet one speech on a ladder turns him around and saves the galaxy? Now imagine Sith children raised from the womb to love those ideals and all it brings... it only stands to reason that society would be much stronger than a Jedi one because over centuries they would have weeded out the "weakness" of caring as a communal ethos.
To me, that's the most implausible part of Star Wars when you think about it; Luke being able to turn his father to the Light side.
"TO MICHAEL!"
I agree. I wanna be a good guy. But I am asking myself - If I play a Jedi Knight Lightside, would I really be able to stand in for some of the things I would?
As oppossed to being a Lightside Sith Warrior - Part of an argueable(evil?) empire, you could be a good person in a bad situation.
There were many good people who were fighting for the nazis. This is hard for us to comprehend. But people had to. And people were full of hatred. Hatred that had been growing since world war 1. When Germany took Poland they thought it was just. Hitler didn't want to go with war with England if he could have avoided it, but do you think he thought highly of the british empire?
Hitlers fascist regime was awful, as was Stalins communism, but lets not forget the horrors the british empire put many opressed nations around the world.
Likewise, I am sure many worlds feel the Republic failed them. Many Sith probably feel justified in their anger. The Republic had to make sacrifices or abandon aid and protection to certain worlds too. They aren't perfect. They are also just a system of gov.
I think Sith are idealist. In Episode 2 - Anakin shows this side himself. He naively thinks that some great politican could become the better person for the entire galaxy, than all the beaucracies in the senate. and if we look at the uselessness of the UN today we can see some parallels to these idealistic ideals.
But it's not feesable. If you did have a gandhi as a universal all powerful leader, then perhaps it could work out. but it can't. The Republic is a lesser evil from a logical and historical point of view. The Sith Empire is a reform of action and of a belief that change is good and the strong will survive. only the weak will shelter behind diplomacy.
I never said Nazis did no backstabbing. But their society wasn't based on that idea. Backstabbing their own was not the usual thing. Given we talk about the lifespan of 25,000 years for the Galactic Republic, the 70 years of Stalinism, the 12 years of Hitler are relatively short, I'd say.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert