EU Continuity problem in KOTOR?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



((The_Anomaly))

Ast Rofan
Actually, though I may be wrong, but I think it was the Jedi Civil War, which would mean Jedi vs. Sith only, not a fullscale war.


Haha, not bad for an E3 guy.*I retract this statement if wrong* stick out tongue

((The_Anomaly))
well if Rebublic fleets are involved with Republic personelle then it is a full scale war.

if it was SOLEY the Jedi fighting them then no, its not. but the Republic is involved. so it is a full scale war

(and yea im a Eps. III guy)

but im also a "all 6 movies guy" lol

Ast Rofan
Damn!


*retracts previously mentioned statement* sad

Emperor Revan

Darth_Rankkor
Even if the continuity doesn't match, I still like both movies and eu material. But you're righ on that one.

Julie
Naboo is a rim planet, it might have missed the Jedi vs Sith war.
When war touches your home you remember it, if not, it's just a topic of conversation at cocktail parties.

Darth_Rankkor
Who could ever forget the sith troopers marching around everywhere? hehehe

El_NINO
What happened in KOTOR is the jedi cival war where you had Darth Revan and Maloch (I probably spelled his name wrong so correct me if i am) lead the war which was against the mandalorians but was not an official war where the jedi counsel sent the order for jedi's to go and fight. Revan and Maloch then turned on each other and each side had about equal jedi followers. Which then turned into the Jedi Cival war

Fishy
Exar Kun raged a full scale war too...

And according to most people the Republic has existed for a thousand years just as long as the Sith are thought to be extinct... The republic was probably reformed 1000 years before TPM.

El_NINO
I have to agree that it was reformed 1000 yrs before TPM because if you remember from the film TMP they mention that the sith have been extinct for a 1000 yrs meaning there must have been a full war.

Human Vader
Originally posted by El_NINO
What happened in KOTOR is the jedi cival war where you had Darth Revan and Maloch (I probably spelled his name wrong so correct me if i am) lead the war which was against the mandalorians but was not an official war where the jedi counsel sent the order for jedi's to go and fight. Revan and Maloch then turned on each other and each side had about equal jedi followers. Which then turned into the Jedi Cival war

Not even close

Not even f*cking close

Revan and malak were allies, revan was the master, malak was the apprentice. the jeedai civil war was really sith against jeedai, why they called it the civil war i don't know. Malak indeed turned on Revan and shot at his cruiser, knocking him out, Revan was then taken to the jeedai council, had his mind wiped, was then trained as a jeedai once again and rose up to kill Malak.

Nactous
Thats why KotOR was set so far back, to give Bioware the freedom, and not to step on GL toes. A lot can happen in 4,000 years. The Republic could have been destroyed, rebuilt, and destroyed again in that span of time. And I remember, cause I just watched it, Palpatine saying. I will not let this Republic, that has stood for a thousand years be split into " He says that in his office in AOTC, after the destruction of Padmeas(hope i spelled that right) ship. So their you go anomaly, you showd have watched for that.

Nactous
And by standing for a thousand years, I believe its formation would have been a thousand years, or at least the current Republic. I believe that it was destroyed, and rebuilt many times. Sio Bibble was referring to its most recent rebuilding. So... take it as you see it, but according to Palps in E2 the one he's ruling isn't that old. And Obi-wan says the Jedi have existed for a thousand generations, which I believe is a reign that is longer than a thousand years. And the Jedi have been in existed as long as the Republic, which has existed sine the discovery of the hyper drive. So if the Jedi have existed as long as the Republic, and that would be a thousand generations, that means the Republic must have restarted itself. BTW the Republic was verging on collapse in KotOR2.

El_NINO
Human Vader---

Ya i knew i was gonna get flamed i only played KOTOR 2 but it explained quite a bit about KOTOR 1

anyways thanks for clearing that up but ya didnt need to exaggerate

Fishy
You only played Kotor 2? Thats a shame, please go get Kotor, you'll love the story a lot more then you could ever love the one in Kotor 2

Ushgarak
Originally posted by Emperor Revan
Good point. I think the Republic was restarted 1000 years before TPM at the time of Darth Bane though this could be wrong. This would also go against the Exar Kun war too I think. Anyway, The Republic was started about 20,000 years before KOTOR or something like that and I don't think it's possible that all the Sith from then up until Darth Bane didn't cause even 1 full scale war. After all, Sidious says that once more the Sith will rule the galaxy so there was surely a full scale war at one point.

This nails it for me; it is the explanation I always had.

We know from GL, let alone KOTOR, that the Jedi and Sith used to fight, and as the Republic, with the Jedi in it, has existed for a thousand generations, we cannot pretend the Republic has never fought a war with the Sith.

Therefore, we can safely assume that Sio is talking about since a thousand years ago, when the current form of the Republic was founded.

Fishy
Also it happens to be 1000 years ago that the Sith became extinct, its only logic thats the last war the Republic had and thats when the "New, Old republic" started.

Emperor Revan
Originally posted by Ushgarak
This nails it for me; it is the explanation I always had.

We know from GL, let alone KOTOR, that the Jedi and Sith used to fight, and as the Republic, with the Jedi in it, has existed for a thousand generations, we cannot pretend the Republic has never fought a war with the Sith.

Therefore, we can safely assume that Sio is talking about since a thousand years ago, when the current form of the Republic was founded.

Thanks. cool

((The_Anomaly))
well it would seem we are right and wrong. the Republic was founded 25,000 years ago. however, there is still a technical contunity problem. Sio says "since the formation of the rebublic" there was only ever 2 official formations, commonly knows as the Old and the New republic. with the "Old" being anytime before palpatines rule over the galaxy and the "New" being after.

however the official SW site says that there were indeed many conflicts during the 25,000 year span of the Old Republic.



so in fact there were conflics, as well as Palpatines (which i forgot he said) "....that has stood for 1000 years" does not make sense because it was (according to EU, 25,000 years) much much MUCH older then a 1000 years.

so, not only is Sio's comment contridictory, but so is palpatines.

now, technically the movies are Canon so it holds anyways, but for EU it makes no sense.

even though it says "full-scale military conflict remained a distant memory." it still happened. technically.

I find it odd that great wars such as these would be "forgotten".

never the less its still a weird problem with EU and Canon.

Ushgarak
No it isn't. Despite all you say, everything we said above holds. The current version of the Republic dates from 1000 years ago. That is from the films. The Republic has existed in some form or other for a thousand generations- about 25000 years. That is from the films. These are undeniable facts.

Therefore Sio and Palpatine are not wrong in the slightest- they are dating it from the most recent inception. Any non-film source which says this more recent inception does not exist is therefore wrong. And so therefore the only possibly erroneous source is the (often fallible) info on the website.

No continuity issue.

Bardock42
Well EU wise there were lots of EU wars "The Stark Hyperspace War" "The Yinchorri Crisis" The Exar Kun war, The Bane War, The Mandalorian War....

EU even contradicts itself Like the idea that People called themselves Darth after Bane but that in KOTOR the Sith Lords are called Darth too....

Nactous
I believe that their is more to this puzzle. The Republic had to have reformed more than twice, it makes no since. BTW, lets deal with the whole canon issue right now, if the official website puts it in the data banks,realizing it, leaving it their for thousands of people to see, lets say its canon, what else are we going to say? The official site wasted time in posting this and that it doesn't/ didn't happen. No, from now on if it is posted its canon, and my dear friends, everything KotOR is posted. Agreed.

Nactous
Originally posted by Ushgarak
No it isn't. Despite all you say, everything we said above holds. The current version of the Republic dates from 1000 years ago. That is from the films. The Republic has existed in some form or other for a thousand generations- about 25000 years. That is from the films. These are undeniable facts.

Therefore Sio and Palpatine are not wrong in the slightest- they are dating it from the most recent inception. Any non-film source which says this more recent inception does not exist is therefore wrong. And so therefore the only possibly erroneous source is the (often fallible) info on the website.

No continuity issue.

Your right, he's wrong. Shame your a KotOR hater though. Sucks to find the movie being wrong doesnt, movie fans.

Darth_Janus
This is a pointless discussion, really. Ush pretty much has it nailed, and in any case, the argument could go either way and what happens? Nothing. Anomaly, as much as you dislike EU it will stand. After all, it makes money. And the movies will stop selling eventually, so I hope you enjoy them while they last.

Ushgarak
Originally posted by Nactous
I believe that their is more to this puzzle. The Republic had to have reformed more than twice, it makes no since. BTW, lets deal with the whole canon issue right now, if the official website puts it in the data banks,realizing it, leaving it their for thousands of people to see, lets say its canon, what else are we going to say? The official site wasted time in posting this and that it doesn't/ didn't happen. No, from now on if it is posted its canon, and my dear friends, everything KotOR is posted. Agreed.

The website is not canon in any way. Please read the thread about canon in the main SW areas.

And I never said I hated KOTOR.

JLRTENJAC

JLRTENJAC
Originally posted by Nactous
I believe that their is more to this puzzle. The Republic had to have reformed more than twice, it makes no since. BTW, lets deal with the whole canon issue right now, if the official website puts it in the data banks,realizing it, leaving it their for thousands of people to see, lets say its canon, what else are we going to say? The official site wasted time in posting this and that it doesn't/ didn't happen. No, from now on if it is posted its canon, and my dear friends, everything KotOR is posted. Agreed.
OH YEA, GO NACTOUS!

HimoKun

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by JLRTENJAC
FIRST: Palpatine said 1,000 years.
SECOND: Obviousally, The Republic has ben destroyed more than once!

No, not according to any EU (that I know of) and official website states only 2 official formations. the old republic, (of 25,000 years) and the new one after ROTJ.

the republic has survived ALL of these attacks, other then palpatine's.

there would be no new formation after a war, that'd be like the USA saying, ok. we just fought Iraq, so fire all of congress, all the senators and fire the president, we need to hold new elections and reform the state.

it makes no sense, there are 2 formations, Old and new. Old (according to EU is 25,000) and new is still ongoing....

now what i'm saying is that officially according to the movies, the republic is ONLY 1000 years old. but according to EU its 25,000

so already theres a contridiction between Canon and EU. (because a republic older then 1,000 years in never mentioned.)

however, Sio's line still stands, if you include EU and disregard what palps says. then it still makes no sense, because the formaton of the republic was 25,000 years before that, and there were in fact many wars.

so its just a huge bunch of contradicting points.

Tulak Hord
Don't try to make sense of Star Wars, it's impossible. I've tried.

((The_Anomaly))
yes, it is if you include EU

if you just take the movies, there fine (other then the many many plot holes present) but adding EU makes things 10 times worse...lol

Nactous
Tulak, do you believe that if its posted on the OS it's canon?

Tulak Hord
Depends. I believe it when it's not too far-fetched. But some shit about Tenel Ka's saber being Rainbow, I dun't understand that.

Nactous
Okay guys, hypothetically speaking, if I ever got to sit down, and talk to GL, and got in writing of him listing EU that he believes to be "canon". Would you all consider it to be? Hmmm... "Tenel Ka's, name sounds familer.

Tulak Hord
She was in the Young Jedi Knight series of books. Supposedly, she has a rainbow lightsaber with a rancor-tooth hilt. I don't know of any rainbow crystals, tho it may be possible to modify a certain crystal or gem to work with a saber.

Nactous
Hmm..., I read the one about Obi-Wans lightsaber being found by Anakin Solo.

Tulak Hord
Boooooooo *Throws popcorn and 'maters at anakin solo* Anakin Solo can suck the open end of his lightsaber and hit the ignition switch.

Nactous
Sorry, must be a touchy subject.

Tulak Hord
Lemme say this much. Chewbacca. Anakin was too wussy to wait for Chewie. Had to leave Chewie behind. I hate Anakin as much as I hate...um....well....I hate him the most. Chewie deserved to live. I hate the author of Vector prime.

Nactous
R.A Salvator, he wrote AOTC. Vector Prime doesnt feel like Star Wars to me. Give a guy the name Luke Skywalker doesnt make him Luke Skywalker, youve got to make him feel like Luke, slapping the name on doesnt cut it.

Tulak Hord
The one book I wanna read badly is Splinter of the Minds Eye. It features Vader and Luke's first ever duel.

Nactous
Its probably good too.

Ushgarak
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
No, not according to any EU (that I know of) and official website states only 2 official formations. the old republic, (of 25,000 years) and the new one after ROTJ.

the republic has survived ALL of these attacks, other then palpatine's.

there would be no new formation after a war, that'd be like the USA saying, ok. we just fought Iraq, so fire all of congress, all the senators and fire the president, we need to hold new elections and reform the state.

it makes no sense, there are 2 formations, Old and new. Old (according to EU is 25,000) and new is still ongoing....

now what i'm saying is that officially according to the movies, the republic is ONLY 1000 years old. but according to EU its 25,000

so already theres a contridiction between Canon and EU. (because a republic older then 1,000 years in never mentioned.)

however, Sio's line still stands, if you include EU and disregard what palps says. then it still makes no sense, because the formaton of the republic was 25,000 years before that, and there were in fact many wars.

so its just a huge bunch of contradicting points.

Incorrect again.

Officially according to the movies, the Republic is also a thousand GENERATIONS old, hence closer to 25000 years.

Hence it must have been re-formed several times. And if you think that's odd, that simply makes you ignorant of history. Look at the number of French Republics there have been, and that is only in mere centuries. Yet that still makes up part of one unbroken French history. Oddly enough, you will find the formations of new ones often come after wars...

In fact, the French Fifth Republic is only fifty years old, dating from 1958, coming after the Fourth Republic which was only 12 years old, dating from 1946 after World War II (that the Third Republic persished in; the Fourth Republic, incidentally, was basically killed off by the Algerian war). But as I say, the history of France itself, as a nation, goes back way further than any single incarnation of its Republic. As GL himself has stated that the Sith ruled the Galaxy at one point, it is in absolutely no way hard to believe that the Old Republic had to re-found itself several times also in the same way.

And the last time was 1000 years ago. Simple as that.

JLRTENJAC
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
No, not according to any EU (that I know of) and official website states only 2 official formations. the old republic, (of 25,000 years) and the new one after ROTJ.

the republic has survived ALL of these attacks, other then palpatine's.

there would be no new formation after a war, that'd be like the USA saying, ok. we just fought Iraq, so fire all of congress, all the senators and fire the president, we need to hold new elections and reform the state.

it makes no sense, there are 2 formations, Old and new. Old (according to EU is 25,000) and new is still ongoing....

now what i'm saying is that officially according to the movies, the republic is ONLY 1000 years old. but according to EU its 25,000

so already theres a contridiction between Canon and EU. (because a republic older then 1,000 years in never mentioned.)

however, Sio's line still stands, if you include EU and disregard what palps says. then it still makes no sense, because the formaton of the republic was 25,000 years before that, and there were in fact many wars.

so its just a huge bunch of contradicting points.

no dig deeper

JLRTENJAC
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Incorrect again.

Officially according to the movies, the Republic is also a thousand GENERATIONS old, hence closer to 25000 years.

Hence it must have been re-formed several times. And if you think that's odd, that simply makes you ignorant of history. Look at the number of French Republics there have been, and that is only in mere centuries. Yet that still makes up part of one unbroken French history. Oddly enough, you will find the formations of new ones often come after wars...

In fact, the French Fifth Republic is only fifty years old, dating from 1958, coming after the Fourth Republic which was only 12 years old, dating from 1946 after World War II (that the Third Republic persished in; the Fourth Republic, incidentally, was basically killed off by the Algerian war). But as I say, the history of France itself, as a nation, goes back way further than any single incarnation of its Republic. As GL himself has stated that the Sith ruled the Galaxy at one point, it is in absolutely no way hard to believe that the Old Republic had to re-found itself several times also in the same way.

And the last time was 1000 years ago. Simple as that.

My point has ben made... now LIVE WITH It

JLRTENJAC
Originally posted by Tulak Hord
Depends. I believe it when it's not too far-fetched. But some shit about Tenel Ka's saber being Rainbow, I dun't understand that.

Tenel KA's Saber was a misty grey... at least that is what her 1st one was.

Nactous
*shakes head* What day of the week is it?"

JLRTENJAC
Wednesday

JLRTENJAC
Jlrtenjac: *yawns and streches*

Tulak Hord
Wednesday? *Checks his list* Yes...yes...I have no scheduled saber duels, nor rampages to go on....And the Jedi arn't scheduled to come kill us sith until next week...wow, gonna be long day.

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by JLRTENJAC
no dig deeper

wtf does that mean? "dig deeper"

the facts are all there, 'deeper digging' would do nothing, because there is nothing deeper.

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Incorrect again.

Officially according to the movies, the Republic is also a thousand GENERATIONS old, hence closer to 25000 years.

Hence it must have been re-formed several times. And if you think that's odd, that simply makes you ignorant of history. Look at the number of French Republics there have been, and that is only in mere centuries. Yet that still makes up part of one unbroken French history. Oddly enough, you will find the formations of new ones often come after wars...

In fact, the French Fifth Republic is only fifty years old, dating from 1958, coming after the Fourth Republic which was only 12 years old, dating from 1946 after World War II (that the Third Republic persished in; the Fourth Republic, incidentally, was basically killed off by the Algerian war). But as I say, the history of France itself, as a nation, goes back way further than any single incarnation of its Republic. As GL himself has stated that the Sith ruled the Galaxy at one point, it is in absolutely no way hard to believe that the Old Republic had to re-found itself several times also in the same way.

And the last time was 1000 years ago. Simple as that.

there is no proof of what you are saying however.

while semi-logical, its all speculation.

I'm going with what the movies and EU (and the official site) says. and with those things we know to be true it makes no sense. simple as that

Emperor Revan
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
there is no proof of what you are saying however.

Ok Anomaly, you're arguing with a moderator that knows what he's talking about. Next, Sidious' quote alone says there was once a full scale war and contradicts Sio Bibble's quote. Next, Sio might be wrong. Yoda says that "once you start down the dark path it will forever dominate your destiny" but he's wrong. Sio might not know his history too well.

((The_Anomaly))
haah! so im supposed to be like "ohhhh hes a mod" making him automatically right!, I dont care who he is.

his arguments meen nothing more then anyone elses.

his job is to make sure this area stays on topic, and that there are no stupid threads, move threads, etc.

this in no way makes him more right then a person who just joined KMC today.

I mean i've been her for 2 years more then you have Revan, does that make me more right then you?

no...

Nai Fohl
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
No, not according to any EU (that I know of) and official website states only 2 official formations. the old republic, (of 25,000 years) and the new one after ROTJ.

First off you have Sidious in AOTC saying that the Republic only existed for a thousand years. Well. There was something called the "Ruusan Reformation" dated 1,000 years before the Battle of Yavin. They made that the year zero of the Republics timeline.

Actualy they didn't change much in the government system BUT the Jedi Order underwent some adjustment:

- the Jedi abandoned their battle armours (replacing it with the known robes)
- they renounced all military titles (for example "Lord"wink
- they placed their forces under the supervision of the Supreme Chancellor
- they began training children from infancy on
- they centralized the training of the younglings on Coruscant.

And their was no full scale war from the Battle of Ruusan (and Ruusan Reformation) to the Clone Wars meaning the Republic as it existed in TPM times had never faced a full scale war.



Survived yes. But it got reformed after all. So it's not the "same" Republic any longer that was formed 25,000 years BBY.



Actualy there are four:
Old Republic: 25,000 BBY -> 1,000 BBY
Reformed Republic: 1,000 BBY -> 19 BBY (replaced by the Galactic Empire)
New Republic: 4 years after the battle of Yavin - 27 ABY
Galatic Federation of Free Alliances (GFFA): 27 ABY - now (capital planet: Denon)



The movies state both things:
1,000 years (from Palpatine) and 1,000 generations (being 25,000 years).



You're simply wrong.



It makes sense if you just read the EU sources what you - obviously - did not do.

((The_Anomaly))
well, I hate EU, so I dont read it. I just went with what I know from the movies.

in which there is a contradiction.

oh, btw, where are these "other" formations mentioned anyways?

Captain REX
Not really mentioned, just implied.

Sidious says that the Republic is a 1000 years old- 1000 seems to be a magic number in the PT- meaning there must have been a reformation at some point. EU calls it the Ruusan Reformation, and it works out.

Like Ush said, using the example of France, reformations happen to government.

exanda kane
Originally posted by Nai Fohl
First off you have Sidious in AOTC saying that the Republic only existed for a thousand years. Well. There was something called the "Ruusan Reformation" dated 1,000 years before the Battle of Yavin. They made that the year zero of the Republics timeline.

Actualy they didn't change much in the government system BUT the Jedi Order underwent some adjustment:

- the Jedi abandoned their battle armours (replacing it with the known robes)
- they renounced all military titles (for example "Lord"wink
- they placed their forces under the supervision of the Supreme Chancellor
- they began training children from infancy on
- they centralized the training of the younglings on Coruscant.

And their was no full scale war from the Battle of Ruusan (and Ruusan Reformation) to the Clone Wars meaning the Republic as it existed in TPM times had never faced a full scale war.



Survived yes. But it got reformed after all. So it's not the "same" Republic any longer that was formed 25,000 years BBY.



Actualy there are four:
Old Republic: 25,000 BBY -> 1,000 BBY
Reformed Republic: 1,000 BBY -> 19 BBY (replaced by the Galactic Empire)
New Republic: 4 years after the battle of Yavin - 27 ABY
Galatic Federation of Free Alliances (GFFA): 27 ABY - now (capital planet: Denon)



The movies state both things:
1,000 years (from Palpatine) and 1,000 generations (being 25,000 years).



You're simply wrong.



It makes sense if you just read the EU sources what you - obviously - did not do.

Ive scanned through most of this thread and just been bored, but this post makes sense. Well done have a skoda!

Captain REX
Yeah, I give props to Nai Fohl...

Nactous
Oh, Mr. "I hate EU so I dont read it." When it comes down to it Nai Fohl is the only one who knows what hes talking about.

Nai Fohl
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
well, I hate EU, so I dont read it. I just went with what I know from the movies.

Oh great. Now sum it up: You come here, assume there is a continuity problem in the EU WITHOUT knowing anything about the EU ? That's what I call "smart".



As I told you: There is not.



Old Republic: KotoR, several comic books (Tales of the Jedi basically)
Post Ruusan Republic: Anything about the Ruusan Reformation is mentioned in the "Power of the Jedi" sourcebook. That's the republic of the prequel trilogy.
New Republic: Any EU stuff that happened past ROTJ (heir to the empire, Dark Empire comics and so on...)
GFFA: New Jedi Order series

Tulak Hord
There is one thing about KOTOR I don't like, and it's confusing. When you speak to Jolee enough times, he talks about "his friend" the blind jedi master who pointed the wrong way for a new jedi. But if you ask him "Did you know this jedi master, or this apprentice" he says "Nononono, they were way before my time". Did I mishear/misread something or is he really senile?

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by Nai Fohl
Oh great. Now sum it up: You come here, assume there is a continuity problem in the EU WITHOUT knowing anything about the EU ? That's what I call "smart".



As I told you: There is not.



Old Republic: KotoR, several comic books (Tales of the Jedi basically)
Post Ruusan Republic: Anything about the Ruusan Reformation is mentioned in the "Power of the Jedi" sourcebook. That's the republic of the prequel trilogy.
New Republic: Any EU stuff that happened past ROTJ (heir to the empire, Dark Empire comics and so on...)
GFFA: New Jedi Order series

"thats what I call smart?"

F**K off *******. go to the Eps. III forum, (or any of the Canon forums) and lets have an argument, I'd crucify you.

the fact is THERE IS a contridiction in the movies THEMSELVES, not including EU.

i guess thats the beauty of EU though, people (if a contridicion is spotted) can just make somehting else up if they feel like it /sarcastic/

darthrevan89
Anomaly, I could swear you made this thread simply to bash EU, and lay off Nai Fohl I might disagree with him on some things, but he happens to be a very good debater and does his homework before he posts.

Nactous
Anomaly, the only way you would win would be if you were backed by many. You would be backed up. Face it, you only see strength in numbers. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH KOTOR, FOR IT IS PERFECT. The only problem I see is with your flawed movies.

Captain REX
Whoa there, Anomaly, calm down. No need to get on Nai Fohl's case simply because he has shown you EXACTLY the correct answer regarding the various years.

Nactous, nothing is perfect.

Ushgarak
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
haah! so im supposed to be like "ohhhh hes a mod" making him automatically right!, I dont care who he is.

his arguments meen nothing more then anyone elses.

his job is to make sure this area stays on topic, and that there are no stupid threads, move threads, etc.

this in no way makes him more right then a person who just joined KMC today.

I mean i've been her for 2 years more then you have Revan, does that make me more right then you?

no...

The fact that I construct a cogent argument is what makes me more right than you.

Your argument is ridiculous. There is no contradiction unless you deliberately wish to see one. The movies do not contradict, they only lead us to an obvious conclusion- than an anicent Republic has been re-founded at least once. The EU may contradict with the canon many times, but this is not one of those places.

Nai Fohl
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
"thats what I call smart?"

F**K off *******. go to the Eps. III forum, (or any of the Canon forums) and lets have an argument, I'd crucify you.

No. You won't. And there is no reason to get insulting. You came here to make a thread about the EU without knowing the EU and that is like somebody would enter the canon forums without having watched the movies.



Now...look at the title of this thread here. If you just wanted to talk about a contradiction in the movies you are obviously on the wrong forum, aren't you ? And it seems strange if somebody known as "EU hater" steps in here and basicaly says nearly everything that did happen in the EU before the times of the PT could not have happened.



I gave you the EU facts about that topic. You can accept them or not.

darthrevan89
Anomaly why don't you go back to the Episode III forums where you belong?

Darth_Janus
This is like the second or third time he's come in here to make trouble.

((The_Anomaly))
hummm.....

maybe i will, for i see that you people are incapable of being at all civil and for no reason like to insult people. which, in responce, gets insults from me, and in turn creates pointless squabbling.

as for Ushgarak, you say a "cogent argument " you have no idea who your talking too, MY LIFE IS AGRUMENTS. thats what I do, I specilize in both Inductive and deductive argumentation. as thats what I've studied for all of my post secondary career. I will tell you that i refrain from agruing formally here becasue none of you would prolly have any sort of idea what im talking about, as it is more like a math equation. and might I point out that an "obvious conclusion" means nothing. there are still no facts, you are talking in hearsay, using opinions to formulate a very unstable inductive argument, because in fact, as i said, all of what you say is hearsay, and I only go with known truths. as for they are the only things that can leave any sort of stable inductive argument. and the only known facts in the movies is that the republic is apparently 1000 years, as well as seveal hundered generations. which leads to a completley illogical conclusion, that the movies contrdict, as I said.

now we might "say" (as you have) that something like another formation happend in the Canon movies, but as i said this is all hearsay, and while it makes sense, is based upon no fact, other then semi-plausable reasons based upon your opinion.

now apparently with EU this problem is cleared up. sort of.

as for me doing my "homework" i must tell you that Im not going to go and read every bit of EU out there (as most of it is not worth my time) nor do I have the time to do such things anyways. some people have lives outside of reading star wars books.

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
This is like the second or third time he's come in here to make trouble.

maybe you should READ what i had said, in no way did i "come here to make trouble"

I saw a contridiction in EU so i pointed it out.

your bias attitude towards me is quite annoying.

I'd assume had i created any sort of thread you'd have said the same thing.

which is sad really, becasue as of right now, i dont care what you say becasue of your attitude towards me. which is completly wrong as well.

since it would seem that you think im doing something that in no way had i intened to do.

you are quite quick to judge a person, which is your problem i guess.

Darth_Janus
(With JanusEdit)


maybe i will, for i see that you people are incapable of being at all civil and for no reason like to insult people. which, in responce, gets insults from me, and in turn creates pointless squabbling. (Nice self-victimization. Take your ball and go home.)

as for Ushgarak, you say a "cogent argument " you have no idea who your talking too, MY LIFE IS AGRUMENTS. (Your life is arguments? I can see why.)

thats what I do, I specilize in both Inductive and deductive argumentation. (Then why does your logic suck? I took logic courses and it sure as hell looks like Ush and Illustrious have know-how in the reasoning field. And last time I checked we all disagree with you.)

as thats what I've studied for all of my post secondary career. and might I point out that an "obvious conclusion" means nothing. (Elaborate, professor.)

there are still no facts, you are talking in hearsay, using opinions to formulate a very unstable inductive argument, because in fact, as i said, all of what you say is hearsay, and I only go with known truths. (If you only go with known truths, why even make any assumptions? In fact, why use Sio Bibble as the resident expert? KNown truths... right)

as for they are the only things that can leave any sort of stable inductive argument. (inductive arguments can only be done with all the facts at hand. All the facts are NOT at hand here, so the reasoning must be deductive. Nice try, poser)

and the only known facts in the movies is that the republic is apparently 1000 years, as well as seveal hundered generations. which leads to a completley illogical conclusion, that the movies contrdict, as I said. (Uh huh)

now we might "say" (as you have) that something like another formation happend in the Canon movies, but as i said this is all hearsay, and while it makes sense, is based upon no fact, other then semi-plausable reasons based upon your opinion. Elaborate on this again, professor)


now apparently with EU this problem is cleared up. sort of.

as for me doing my "homework" i must tell you that Im not going to go and read every bit of EU out there (as most of it is not worth my time) nor do I have the time to do such things anyways. some people have lives outside of reading star wars books. (If you don't have all the facts, keep your damn mouth shut. They teach you that in logics course.... don't they? Or did you attend the Reasoning and Rational Thought College at Asswad, Canada?)

Human Vader
maybe you should READ what i had said, in no way did i "come here to make trouble" (Human Vader: Maybe you should read the posts you made after that, saying how EU people "make up things" when they contradict your opinion.)

I saw a contridiction in EU so i pointed it out.
your bias attitude towards me is quite annoying. (Human Vader: You actually wasted your time typing up a response to the little sentence Janus posted? How sad.)

I'd assume had i created any sort of thread you'd have said the same thing. (Human Vader: I agree, because you probably would have ended up insulting EU fans the same way you did here.)

which is sad really, becasue as of right now, i dont care what you say becasue of your attitude towards me. which is completly wrong as well. (Human Vader: You don't care what he says, yet you responded to his post.......)

since it would seem that you think im doing something that in no way had i intened to do. (Human Vader: Your intentions are irrelevent, because you did insult EU.)

you are quite quick to judge a person, which is your problem i guess. (Human Vader: Judging one by one's actions is hardly "quick"wink

Human Vader
You bastard Janus!!!! I was gonna do the SS responses, damn you and your quick posts.

((The_Anomaly))
"(If you don't have all the facts, keep your damn mouth shut. They teach you that in logics course.... don't they? Or did you attend the Reasoning and Rational Thought College at Asswad, Canada?)"

wow, my point is made. "asswad Canada"? you had quoted something that could have come from my 8 year old brother. bravo. your intelligence is quite amazing, i dare say that i could come up with nothing more mature then "asswad Canada"...

as for "having all the facts" no, not nessassary to argue effectivly, only specific points are needed. actually i could argue with no knowledge about what im arguing about at all. but you wouldent know what im talking about, i could show you, but someone with the wit to come up with "asswad canada" surley already is far above my maturity and intelligence level anyhow.

((The_Anomaly))
haha, funny people you are...

funny people

Human Vader
Aaww couldn't think up a response to that? Darn, I thought you had half a brain. Oh well.

((The_Anomaly))
i dont even need to say anything, because ur responce right now is only proving my point, so please keep going!

exanda kane
I'm sorry Anomaly but you seem to quite sad. Your arguing . . . about arguing, trying to add slick words into the debate so you feel superior, its not working - justmakes you look an idiot . . .

Darth_Janus
Agreed.

THE ANOMOLY= PWN3D.

I think I pwned your ass last time you came in here too.

((The_Anomaly))
well maybe if you understood what i was talking about. oh well

but whatever. im beyond pety insults, ill leave that to all you "superior" people as you so awesomly put it.

ill leave all the "amazing" PW3NING to all you who are so smart.

Darth_Janus
Are you all talk, or are you going to admit you're a fool and go away already?

((The_Anomaly))
need I say any more, please keep it coming, im laughing, its really funny.

as i said janus, "asswad Canada" phew, that was good, so intelligent. please keep things like that coming, it really makes me laugh.

you continue to prove your intelligence to me, please keep going, its rare to meet someone of your intelligence level

Darth_Janus
Hm. Well, Asswad, Canada was pretty terrible, but I couldn't think of anything else. Next time I'll try better.

But you still lose the argument.

((The_Anomaly))
yes, I lose the EU argument, but not the Canon argument.

I had expected to be corrected with the EU. as I dont read EU.

I had come here to get the correct information and argue it as i saw fit. which incedently i was corrected (read my post, i had siad many times correct me if i was wrong)

however, i went from the official info i had, 2 formations of the republic, and the movies. which contridicted. i had been unaware of the other 2 books or whatever. (since i dont read EU)

and yet, you still find it nessassary to jump all over me? why i ask? i dont know...

maybe your as smart as i thought you were.

((The_Anomaly))
at any rate i have a report to write. hopefully the intellignce in here will persist until i return.

Darth_Janus
Attention, everyone. The resident genius is leaving. Note how could only attack me and try and mock my intelligence and that of the rest of us here at EU including Ush, but he couldn't refute a damn thing we had to say.

darthrevan89
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
yes, I lose the EU argument, but not the Canon argument.

I had expected to be corrected with the EU. as I dont read EU.

I had come here to get the correct information and argue it as i saw fit. which incedently i was corrected (read my post, i had siad many times correct me if i was wrong)

however, i went from the official info i had, 2 formations of the republic, and the movies. which contridicted. i had been unaware of the other 2 books or whatever. (since i dont read EU)

and yet, you still find it nessassary to jump all over me? why i ask? i dont know...

maybe your as smart as i thought you were.

Uh just one question? Since when have there been two arguments in this thread? EU and canon? You confuse me with your fawed logic.

((The_Anomaly))
the EU argument = weather EU and Canon movies fit together and do not contradict. (which apparently they do not)

the Canon argument = weather Canon (the movies) have a contridiction withim themselves.

and...lol, please do not tell me what flawed logic is, as you more then likley do not know what logic is in the first place. (this is not an insult btw, most people mistake logic for many things that it is not)



I could only attack you? Mr. "asswad Canada"? yes, your one to talk about attacking someone.

as for Ush, i did refute what he said, perhaps you missed it.

ill quote myself.

Darth_Janus
I refuted your pitiful attempt at refuting him... Asswad. Go home and take your atttitude with you, loser.

Nai Fohl
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
maybe i will, for i see that you people are incapable of being at all civil and for no reason like to insult people. which, in responce, gets insults from me, and in turn creates pointless squabbling.

Oh great. Mention that this is coming from the person that told me to "F*ck off."



Stop boring people.
If you want to "argue formally" just give it a try. Hic Rhodus, hic salta.



Oh great. Might I point out that "truth" means nothing ?



Oh great. Let's see. You use the statement of a single person within the movies (a politician saying: "It's unthinkable! There hasn't been a full scale war since the formation of the Republic!"wink as a "fact" ?
And you are specialized in argumentation ?

Just to play devils advocate here:
- Sio Bibble might be bad at history
- what does the term "full scale war" mean ?
- If there were no "full scale wars" from the formation of the republic (1000 GENERATIONS = 25,000 years) on than tell how do you think the Sith were "extinct" (KI-ADI in TPM:"Impossible! The Sith have been extinct for a millenium."wink and why does Yoda replies on that with "The very Republic is threatened, if involved the Sith are."

You surely can tell me why Yoda is thinking the Republic is threatened by people if they didn't even need a "full scale war" to "extinct" them a millenium before ?



Big words for somebody that based his oppinion on a single line from a politician.



Oh great. I just translate that: "People who do read Star Wars books don't have a live outside of it". Just keep in mind that this is coming from a person that accuses other people here of "incapable of being at all civil and for no reason like to insult people".

Now...that's what I call "selfownage".

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by Nai Fohl
Oh great. Mention that this is coming from the person that told me to "F*ck off."

In response to when you said "thats what I call smart?" which was a meaningless insult that was not needed. You started the hostility, where it was never given before hand on my part.



Unfortunately, as i said, if i do, you wont understand it. not unless you study symbolic logic equations.



the truth? as i said, truth based upon hearsay, not fact. and while logical, it is still based upon opinion.



its in the movies, the "character" has no bounds on the comment. as it was written by lucas. Making it Canon. character attributes are irrelevant. Sio's comment holds as much weight as anyone in the SW universe. him being a politician is irrelevant.



"Sio Bibble might be bad at history"

hearsay, he could just well have been one the greatest historians in the republic equally has he may know nothing about history. it was never mentioned that he was bad at history nor good at it, both points are equally vaild.

all hearsay, and opinion. No fact. Making this point irrelevant.

"what does the term "full scale war" mean ?"

well since the clone wars and the rebellion constitutes a "full scale war" then it would mean the entire republic is at war, not just a specific group. as know other examples are given, the clone wars and the rebellion is therefore, in canon, the definition of a full scale war. Since there are no other examples.

"If there were no "full scale wars" from the formation of the republic (1000 GENERATIONS = 25,000 years) on than tell how do you think the Sith were "extinct" (KI-ADI in TPM:"Impossible! The Sith have been extinct for a millenium."wink and why does Yoda replies on that with "The very Republic is threatened, if involved the Sith are"

it could have just been the Jedi vs. the Sith. no full scale war needed. hearsay? yes. but since not mentioned, both a full scale war and just a small battle between the jedi/ sith are equally valid, making this point also irrelevant.



because the Sith are more dangerous then any war. a war was never implied by anyone in the movies, except by you just now. Making this point irrelevant.



irrelevant. its Canon, as stated before, and holds as much weight as anything, since the character's attributes are not relivant.



selfownage? interesting since all the points you just gave are irrelevant and mostly hearsay.

Captain REX
Anomaly, so far all I've seen here is you choosing to deny the EU answer while in the EU forum. Ush is right, that is kinda ridiculous. erm

((The_Anomaly))
if you are truly intrested in formal argumentation, and logic, this is what it looks like. if your intrested.



thats a short example of true formal logic and argumentation.

Darth_Janus
Let's see your symbolic logic... Last time I checked, it was merely abbreviating written out logical points. You don't know a damn thing, do you?

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by Captain REX
Anomaly, so far all I've seen here is you choosing to deny the EU answer while in the EU forum. Ush is right, that is kinda ridiculous. erm

no no, ive expeted the EU responce. I had expeced to be wrong about it.

but were arguing about the Canon responce at the moment.

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
Let's see your symbolic logic... Last time I checked, it was merely abbreviating written out logical points. You don't know a damn thing, do you?

actually that was DEDUCTIVE logic, much easier to understand.

wait, who was it that didnt know a damn thing?

Darth_Janus
Really? Then why does everyone insist you are wrong. You still have yet to actually present anything believeable.

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
Really? Then why does everyone insist you are wrong. You still have yet to actually present anything believeable.

ummm, i presented, if you had payed attention, that all of the points YOU people made were irrivant, and hersay. making there STILL a contridiction in the movies about the age/ full scale wars in the republic.

Nai Fohl
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
In response to when you said "thats what I call smart?" which was a meaningless insult that was not needed. You started the hostility, where it was never given before hand on my part.

To act as moral apostle you should posess a higher moral standart than the people you want to instruct.



Oh. Great. "<Outside> = Inside" is realy hard to understand, isn't it ? Being "specialized" in arguments you should be able to convince people while keeping the "working process" for yourself or put it into a form people can understand.



Do you want to make me laugh ? To show you what kind of logic you are using: A completely insane person in a movie points to a chair saying "This is a table". Now in your "logic" table = chair is "canon" for the movie.

Anakin to the Jedi Council: "I'm more powerful than any of you.". Canon ? How he's getting defeated by Obi-Wan later ?



You probably should just go and think about what "Devils Advocate" or "Advocatus Diaboli" actualy means.



Now that is your own oppinion because there is no definition of the term "full scale war" within the movies.



And now your mixing your own oppinion with assumptions just to be able to keep your own point of view. The Jedi are the Republics "army" in TPM times so Jedi vs. Sith would also mean "full scale war" as all military forces of the Republic would have been involved.



Oh yes. The Sith were "extinct" (!) because of natural selection...



...in your own oppinion.

Captain REX
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
no no, ive expeted the EU responce. I had expeced to be wrong about it.

but were arguing about the Canon responce at the moment.

If you want to argue the Canon response, Anomaly, here is not the place. All you will receive in the EU answer, which is most likely the only answer in this situation.

Darth_Janus
That's self-ownage in triplicate.

Nai Fohl
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
That's self-ownage in triplicate.

ouch...

Captain REX
I must say that hearsay implies heresy...pfft, heresy against what, Star Wars? George Lucasism?

((The_Anomaly))
Originally posted by Nai Fohl
To act as moral apostle you should posess a higher moral standart than the people you want to instruct.

yes, quite right. as i have been doing for the past while here.





no, not really. id have to explain all the equations first.




yes, its canon that the crazy person in the movie thought it was a table.



yes its canon that Anakin thought he was the strongest. because thats what he said.

.

haha! yes good job! its called the socratic method.

i REALLY dont care at this point. im just here to prove that you also have no basis for argument.

I like to argue, thats what I do. as i told you.



no, not actually. there are 2 "full scale wars" in Canon, the clone wars (as refered to by bibble \"there hasn't been a full scale war..."/, constitute a full scale war) so therefore:

anything equal to the clone wars (which is a civial war) would therefore be a "full scale war" and since the rebellion is a civial war, it fits this definition.



the jedi ARE the republics army eh?

"you must realise there arnt enough jedi...were keepers of the peace, not soldiers"

they are not the army, they are basically police officers.

i said the jedi vs the sith. not the jedi and the republic vs the sith.




this makes no sense at all, in a war between the jedi and sith (as i said) if the sith lost, then the jedi killed them. hearsay. yes, but as my point was first that

"both a full scale war and just a small battle between the jedi/ sith are equally valid, making this point also irrelevant."





no, in fact

Captain REX
Okay, this is getting quite silly... erm

((The_Anomaly))
yep, it is, i love it.

i have been slowly forcing this into real argumentation if you didnt notice smile

and to most people this kinda argumentation seems stupid.

when in fact its the core of arguments, haha, great stuff.

good practice this is. i come here to see how normal conversational argumention is used. so that i may spot flaws etc. very good practice indeed.

((The_Anomaly))
but in actual truth, we are far off topic at the moment.

and I have already said that i agree, including EU there is no problem.

and thank you to Nai Fohl for pointing this out, even if he felt it nessasary to insult me while doing it.

and i use this quote as a closing to the actual topic (though i will continue to argue about the off topic we are discussing right now)

it is.

"People find it far easier to forgive others for being wrong than being right."

Captain REX
Unfortunately, I'm thinking it's too advanced for the KMC folk...hell, it's too advanced for me, and I thought I was great at arguing... messed stick out tongue

((The_Anomaly))
whats too great?

oh and Rex, herasay DOES imply hearsay, that was my point.

that neither of us has any proof, and that i could say anything to contridict his points and they would both be equally vaild. making that point useless.

so we must go with what proof we DO have, which is the quotes in the movies.

u know what i mean?

Nai Fohl
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
yes, its canon that the crazy person in the movie thought it was a table.

yes its canon that Anakin thought he was the strongest. because thats what he said.


Now. Take that two statements. Take a look of the statement from Sio Bibble. Conclusion: It is canon that Sio Bibble thinks that there was no "full scale war" from the formation of the Republic on while it's not canon that there realy was no "full scale war" from the formation of the Republic. Case closed. You have sucessfully annihilated the "continuity problem" yourself.



No. The socratic method means "being sceptical" while "Advocatus Diaboli" referes to "total denial".



a)
Denying the Ruusan Reformation as a fact would mean the Jedi were under the command of the Senate since the formation of the Republic. Now. They can not enter a war against somebody without the Senate giving them the command to do so. Meaning: If there was a war between Jedi and Sith it must have been a war between Republic and Sith.

b)
The Jedi are the only "armed forces" under the command of the Republic. That's why they needed the clone army. Again Jedi vs. Sith = Republic vs Sith = "full scale war".



I'm just getting bored argueing with somebody that seems to have no idea what he is talking about and also seems to argue just for the reason to argue.

Captain REX
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
so we must go with what proof we DO have, which is the quotes in the movies.

Doesn't really work well in the EU forum, I must say. erm

((The_Anomaly))
i dont fully understand what you are trying to say here. please rephrase this.





haha! no, the socratic method is not to be sceptical, unfortunatly. that is the laymens definition of it. but is not what it really is. (i dont know if u noticed this, but im a philosophy major, that majors in argument aka. logic) is using others argumentation against them to prove them wrong. meaning, i do not pretend to know that i know somehting, but you believe to think you know something, so i ask you questions pretaning to what you think you know in order to prove to you that in fact you dont know that you know what you think you know, even though i knew from the start that you didnt know what though you did. get it?

its a very annoying argumentitive form, because you (the user of the socratic method) have no stance in the argument other then the fact that you know you dont know, and the point is to prove to the other person they know as much as you do, which is nothing.

simple really. anyways, thats what the socratic method is, just so you know.





i already said a bunch of times, im not refuting the EU. im not refuting the "ruusan reformation" no where did i say i was, perhaps you should read my posts again.

I HAVE ALREADY SAID "OK, INCLUDING THE EU THERE IS NO PROBLEM, HOWEVER, WITHIN THE MOVIES THEMSELVES THERE IS ONE."

do you understand that?

im not arguing about EU to you, im arguing about the canon material. and i have been for the past day now, and i made that clear long ago.



wrong, the jedi act under the influence of the senate, but, if the sith were fighting the jedi (in a sort of cult war, i should have made that more clear, im sorry) then the republic would not be involved and the jedi could kill the sith directly. therefore destroying the sith. as it says in the movies. this is hearsay, as i said a bout 10 posts back, but what you said (that there was a war) is also hearsay, and therefore, neither of us is wright or wrong, so this point is irrelavent. seeing as we both have equal arguments on events that might (but there is no proff) had happened.





yes, i am arguing for a) the sake of practice for my papers and work and 2) because you are implying you know something that is not said or related too in the movies.

(please note that if you have not understood, this is the canon material, not including EU)

((The_Anomaly))
and rex you said this:



THANK GOD!!! someone was actually paying attention to what i was saying.

this is exactly what i've been saying for a long time now.

in the movies there is a problem, EU apparently solves this problem, but it is not solved in the movies themselves.

haha! you are all so wrapped up in the fact that you thought i was against EU in this one you wernt even paying attention to what i was saying.

hahahaha! you people are hilarious. Rex, it would seem is the ONLY person to realise that i said this long ago, that i said that EU was the answer to it, but it however did not solve the canon movies. (because EU has no effect on the movies) if however you take the movies and EU as a whole, it workes!

did you people not realise thats what i was saying for a long long time now?

or did ur bias towards me influence you to read somehting that was not there? i dunno, you tell me

i had been playing with this all day now...

you didnt even notice i was WITH EU on this one! hahaha, read more closely next time people...hhahaah

and with that i say...

thank you and goodnight

*laughs walking away*

....I love messing with people heads....

hahaha

DiamondBullets
I think Sio Bibble is full of it, and was just being a drama queen.

Like when QGJ says to Amidala; "they'll kill you if you stay", Sio says "THEY WOULDN'T DARE!". That was a bit much and Qui-Gon shoulda b!tch-slapped that pu$$y.

Nactous
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
yes, I lose the EU argument, but not the Canon argument.

I had expected to be corrected with the EU. as I dont read EU.

I had come here to get the correct information and argue it as i saw fit. which incedently i was corrected (read my post, i had siad many times correct me if i was wrong)

however, i went from the official info i had, 2 formations of the republic, and the movies. which contridicted. i had been unaware of the other 2 books or whatever. (since i dont read EU)

and yet, you still find it nessassary to jump all over me? why i ask? i dont know...

maybe your as smart as i thought you were.

Thats your problem pal. You expected to be right about EU when you dont know anythung about it, and like a whimp you try to pull out the "canon" card. Oh I hate that word, its the most irelivant word.

Nactous
Originally posted by Captain REX
Whoa there, Anomaly, calm down. No need to get on Nai Fohl's case simply because he has shown you EXACTLY the correct answer regarding the various years.

Nactous, nothing is perfect.

I beg to differ.

Nactous
Idiots, that thank EU has nothing to do with the movies. To say only that the movies matter is like saying there is nothing outside of your own door.

Nai Fohl
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
i dont fully understand what you are trying to say here. please rephrase this.

OK...again...just for you.
The insane person says something...It's only true for the insane person ("Chair = Table"wink.
Anakin says something...It's only true for Anakin ("Anakin = more powerful than anyone else in the Council"wink.

And when Sio Bibble says something, it's only true for Sio Bibble. It's an expression of his personal oppinion as a acting character or simply that what Lucas wants him to say. If statements from characters are not necesseraly refering to an overall "truth" than it's only there personal oppinion.

Now that simply means if Sio Bibble says there was no full scale war since the formation of the republic that only means that Sio Bibble thinks there was no full scale war since the formation of the Republic. It doesn't mean that there realy was no full scale war.

And thereby you have solved you continuity problem. And also every other problem where the movies seem to contradict the EU or themselves. If anything the people in the movies say is just the "truth" from their own point of view it doesn't have to be "logical", "objective" or "based on facts". It's just their own thoughts and those can be contradicted. In the films as well as in the EU.



Wohoo...and you are philosophy major ? First off: The "socratic method" doesn't have anything to do with "argumentation" because it's a method for philosophical analyses. Maybe you simply missed that point.
The socratic method is sceptical because it begins with Socrates real or professed denial of the "truth" in any matter. That is also called "Socratic irony" a kind of scepticism that was maybe influenced by the Sophists with the difference that their scepticism was difinitive and final where Socrates is not.
In terms of conversation that method employs dialogue not only as a didactic device. Socrates was always searching for "truths" that all humans can agree and therefore Socrates proceeded to unfold such truths in discussions or by doing "question and answer". You just go on with criticism until a more adequate conception emerges. That can also be refered to as the maieutic method, an art of intellectual midwifery which overall goal is to give birth to other peoples ideas. You can also call that a dialectical method or the method of elenchus.
The socratic method relies on concepts (justice, moral and so on) and definitions as a precices definition of terms is the first step in a problem solving process. It's as well empirical or inductive (criticize definitions by reference to particular instances) as deductive (testing definition by drawing out it implications and deducing it's consequences).

And a method for analyses of "truth" is simply not useful for an argumentation since you can't "convince" somebody with it.



The "Advocatus Diaboli" or "promoter fidei" is a canon lawyer appointed by the catholic church to argue against canonization. It's a sophistic method (as it's difinitive and final denial) to look for "holes" in the given evidence. Now - as you see - I just have proven your view on what is "canon" wrong (actualy you have done that for yourself) since anything that people say in the movies can't be automaticaly considered as "canon". The events in the movies are "canon" (and thereby should not be contradicted) what the people say is not.

As I said before: Case closed.

darthrevan89
All this logic and sorcatic stuff is giving me a headache. I mean I just got my permit last month.

Tulak Hord
Originally posted by Nai Fohl
OK...again...just for you.
The insane person says something...It's only true for the insane person ("Chair = Table"wink.
Anakin says something...It's only true for Anakin ("Anakin = more powerful than anyone else in the Council"wink.

And when Sio Bibble says something, it's only true for Sio Bibble. It's an expression of his personal oppinion as a acting character or simply that what Lucas wants him to say. If statements from characters are not necesseraly refering to an overall "truth" than it's only there personal oppinion.

Now that simply means if Sio Bibble says there was no full scale war since the formation of the republic that only means that Sio Bibble thinks there was no full scale war since the formation of the Republic. It doesn't mean that there realy was no full scale war.

And thereby you have solved you continuity problem. And also every other problem where the movies seem to contradict the EU or themselves. If anything the people in the movies say is just the "truth" from their own point of view it doesn't have to be "logical", "objective" or "based on facts". It's just their own thoughts and those can be contradicted. In the films as well as in the EU.



Wohoo...and you are philosophy major ? First off: The "socratic method" doesn't have anything to do with "argumentation" because it's a method for philosophical analyses. Maybe you simply missed that point.
The socratic method is sceptical because it begins with Socrates real or professed denial of the "truth" in any matter. That is also called "Socratic irony" a kind of scepticism that was maybe influenced by the Sophists with the difference that their scepticism was difinitive and final where Socrates is not.
In terms of conversation that method employs dialogue not only as a didactic device. Socrates was always searching for "truths" that all humans can agree and therefore Socrates proceeded to unfold such truths in discussions or by doing "question and answer". You just go on with criticism until a more adequate conception emerges. That can also be refered to as the maieutic method, an art of intellectual midwifery which overall goal is to give birth to other peoples ideas. You can also call that a dialectical method or the method of elenchus.
The socratic method relies on concepts (justice, moral and so on) and definitions as a precices definition of terms is the first step in a problem solving process. It's as well empirical or inductive (criticize definitions by reference to particular instances) as deductive (testing definition by drawing out it implications and deducing it's consequences).

And a method for analyses of "truth" is simply not useful for an argumentation since you can't "convince" somebody with it.



The "Advocatus Diaboli" or "promoter fidei" is a canon lawyer appointed by the catholic church to argue against canonization. It's a sophistic method (as it's difinitive and final denial) to look for "holes" in the given evidence. Now - as you see - I just have proven your view on what is "canon" wrong (actualy you have done that for yourself) since anything that people say in the movies can't be automaticaly considered as "canon". The events in the movies are "canon" (and thereby should not be contradicted) what the people say is not.

As I said before: Case closed.


The sad part is, I understood every word (S?)he said.

Darth_Janus
Me too. Nai is a better arguer by far.

Darth_Frobo
eu is cannon,very cannon lucas sanctions all of it despite a lot of it being just plain stupid,after 4000 years there may not be evidence left behind or the wars may be beleived to be legend like in Lotor

History became legend
Legend became myth
And for two and a half thousand years the ring passed out of all knowledge....

sorry I just love the movies, as far as what that dude says Palpatine says the republic only stood for a thousand years, so in those thousand years which would be after the battle of ruusan the republic may have been re-formed, parts of its past blocked out for morale purposes or the guy could just be dumb and have forgotten about it.

Emperor Revan
Wow, I didn't think the Anomaly was smart enough to realize Nai Fohl pwned him.

((The_Anomaly))
LOL! you guys are funny.

when i said long ago that Nai Fohl was right about the EU. on the second page or something about this thread. so i really dont get what you are talking about.

just to rephrase, I was purposly giving my answers in a specific way in order to see if any of you would pick up that i had agreed with what Fohl was saying. Rex was the only one who picked up on this (by accident, i dunno)



wrong, the attributes of the character have no barring on the words he speakes. Sio is not a real human being, he is a character in a script. therefore it is the script itself that the truth lies in. not the character.

do you understnad what i mean. "there has not been a full scale war since the formation of the republic" although it JUST SO HAPPENS Sio's character says this. it really makes no difference who said it. the actor has nothing to do with it, lucas is the writer, in essence, the script is his words. being delivered through characters he has invented. so, in essence, it is actually lucas that is saying what Sio says, even though Sio said it. understand? you are looking at SW still as a "story" im not looking at it in that light. i have gone past the acting, the characters and everything else, other then the words themselves. as the words themself is where the true meaning lies. and that is "there was no full scale war since the formation of the republic" nothing more, nothing less. that is what lucas has written, and thats what i means. you are overanalyzing this issue. words are words in this context, and those words are canon, and they mean what they mean, nothing more.



wow, whered you get this online definition? anyways, it is argumentation. just not in the traditional sense. and what you said is a long winded version of what i said anyways. i've studied it for a long time, i use it all the time, i know what it is, and how its used. so your text book style definition means nothing to me, as they are rarely correct anyways, since they generally miss the truth of what somehting actually is, by doing what you just did, over analizing. you must look at what Plato does when he uses this method, not what it looks like hes doing, or what a text definition says. and that simply is this (which i said before) he uses questions to induce a person to reason with themself on a particular issue or belief. he takes no personal stance on the issue, as he knows he does not know the answer. but he also knows that though the other person might think they know the answer, they in fact do not.

socrates very life was based upon him being the most wise person. (folktale) but he believed that he actually knew nothing, and the fact that others thought they knew something when in fact they did not, made him more wise then the rest of society. because he had realised that he knew absolutly nothing,

and that is what the socratic method actually is. proving to others that they know as much as you do, and that is absolutly nothing at all.

"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance. " - Socrates




no, the script is by lucas, the words of what lucas has written is canon, not the movie itself, as i have just said.

so no, case not closed.

Darth_Frobo
Saying that the charachter has no influence on whether or not what they said is truth is a complete logical failure, If sidious said the sky is green and I'm a 2 foot dancing chicken would that make it true because lucas wrote it for him? Truth is absolute, the sky is blue whether or not sidious beleives it doesn't mean jack all, just because sio doesn't beleive there hasn't been a war since the forming of the republic doesn't mean it's true, the truth is there has been whether or not sio beleives this or what his opinion about it happening are doesn't change the fact that the absolute truth is that there have been some, on the grounds that eu IS cannon overseen by lucas himself.

Darth_Janus
Anomoly is trying to make us think he was smart all along, just playing dumb. Like he's some great actor. Darth Frobo has a better grasp of logic than Anomoly.

darthrevan89
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
LOL! you guys are funny.

when i said long ago that Nai Fohl was right about the EU. on the second page or something about this thread. so i really dont get what you are talking about.

just to rephrase, I was purposly giving my answers in a specific way in order to see if any of you would pick up that i had agreed with what Fohl was saying. Rex was the only one who picked up on this (by accident, i dunno)



wrong, the attributes of the character have no barring on the words he speakes. Sio is not a real human being, he is a character in a script. therefore it is the script itself that the truth lies in. not the character.

do you understnad what i mean. "there has not been a full scale war since the formation of the republic" although it JUST SO HAPPENS Sio's character says this. it really makes no difference who said it. the actor has nothing to do with it, lucas is the writer, in essence, the script is his words. being delivered through characters he has invented. so, in essence, it is actually lucas that is saying what Sio says, even though Sio said it. understand? you are looking at SW still as a "story" im not looking at it in that light. i have gone past the acting, the characters and everything else, other then the words themselves. as the words themself is where the true meaning lies. and that is "there was no full scale war since the formation of the republic" nothing more, nothing less. that is what lucas has written, and thats what i means. you are overanalyzing this issue. words are words in this context, and those words are canon, and they mean what they mean, nothing more.



wow, whered you get this online definition? anyways, it is argumentation. just not in the traditional sense. and what you said is a long winded version of what i said anyways. i've studied it for a long time, i use it all the time, i know what it is, and how its used. so your text book style definition means nothing to me, as they are rarely correct anyways, since they generally miss the truth of what somehting actually is, by doing what you just did, over analizing. you must look at what Plato does when he uses this method, not what it looks like hes doing, or what a text definition says. and that simply is this (which i said before) he uses questions to induce a person to reason with themself on a particular issue or belief. he takes no personal stance on the issue, as he knows he does not know the answer. but he also knows that though the other person might think they know the answer, they in fact do not.

socrates very life was based upon him being the most wise person. (folktale) but he believed that he actually knew nothing, and the fact that others thought they knew something when in fact they did not, made him more wise then the rest of society. because he had realised that he knew absolutly nothing,

and that is what the socratic method actually is. proving to others that they know as much as you do, and that is absolutly nothing at all.

"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance. " - Socrates




no, the script is by lucas, the words of what lucas has written is canon, not the movie itself, as i have just said.

so no, case not closed.

What a pile of garbage... laughing

DiamondBullets
Daaaaaaaaaamn nigga! Anomaly, you say one thing and like 15 people show you up everytime! Just give it up man!

General Bondius

HimoKun
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
LOL! you guys are funny.

when i said long ago that Nai Fohl was right about the EU. on the second page or something about this thread. so i really dont get what you are talking about.

just to rephrase, I was purposly giving my answers in a specific way in order to see if any of you would pick up that i had agreed with what Fohl was saying. Rex was the only one who picked up on this (by accident, i dunno)



wrong, the attributes of the character have no barring on the words he speakes. Sio is not a real human being, he is a character in a script. therefore it is the script itself that the truth lies in. not the character.

do you understnad what i mean. "there has not been a full scale war since the formation of the republic" although it JUST SO HAPPENS Sio's character says this. it really makes no difference who said it. the actor has nothing to do with it, lucas is the writer, in essence, the script is his words. being delivered through characters he has invented. so, in essence, it is actually lucas that is saying what Sio says, even though Sio said it. understand? you are looking at SW still as a "story" im not looking at it in that light. i have gone past the acting, the characters and everything else, other then the words themselves. as the words themself is where the true meaning lies. and that is "there was no full scale war since the formation of the republic" nothing more, nothing less. that is what lucas has written, and thats what i means. you are overanalyzing this issue. words are words in this context, and those words are canon, and they mean what they mean, nothing more.



wow, whered you get this online definition? anyways, it is argumentation. just not in the traditional sense. and what you said is a long winded version of what i said anyways. i've studied it for a long time, i use it all the time, i know what it is, and how its used. so your text book style definition means nothing to me, as they are rarely correct anyways, since they generally miss the truth of what somehting actually is, by doing what you just did, over analizing. you must look at what Plato does when he uses this method, not what it looks like hes doing, or what a text definition says. and that simply is this (which i said before) he uses questions to induce a person to reason with themself on a particular issue or belief. he takes no personal stance on the issue, as he knows he does not know the answer. but he also knows that though the other person might think they know the answer, they in fact do not.

socrates very life was based upon him being the most wise person. (folktale) but he believed that he actually knew nothing, and the fact that others thought they knew something when in fact they did not, made him more wise then the rest of society. because he had realised that he knew absolutly nothing,

and that is what the socratic method actually is. proving to others that they know as much as you do, and that is absolutly nothing at all.

"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance. " - Socrates




no, the script is by lucas, the words of what lucas has written is canon, not the movie itself, as i have just said.

so no, case not closed.

So if everything in the movie's is true, then when Vader says he's going to kill Luke he is right? Wrong.

So that means that when Obi says Anakin is wise, that's right too? Wrong.

So that means when Grevious says he can handle Obi, it's true?
Wrong.

I can keep going on with this, but as you see, when someone says something in the movies, it is not automatically right. So that automatically defeats your only refute on the Politician being right.

And I still don't think that you get that Lucas looks at the EU, and if their is a problem with it, he calls it non canonical? Lucas controls EU, and says it's right, and since Lucas is God in the Star Wars Universe, I think he's right.

JLRTENJAC
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
wtf does that mean? "dig deeper"

the facts are all there, 'deeper digging' would do nothing, because there is nothing deeper.

No serousally keep digging, There IS more.

Nai Fohl
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
LOL! you guys are funny.

I would say you are funny but basically you life seems to be very sad.



What a stupid view on literature and fiction. Since I already proved you view on "canon" wrong I won't argue about that anymore.



Online definition ? Well...sad but true...I have a BA degree in philosophy. So I don't have to use google to enlight me.



Oh...great...I didn't know that Plato is Socrates. Plato is just inspired by Socrates but isn't actualy using the same method. You should know that being a major in philosophy.



You simply seem to have no idea what you're talking about. "Scio me nihil scire", as Socrates once said just implies that there is no certain knowledge that can be obtained. And convincing people that they know nothing is impossible. You being "specialized in argumentation" should know that.



There are many situations where something that is said by persons is a direct contradiction to the things that happen in the movies. I don't know why you don't want to accept that. If you need another example:

PALPATINE: "In order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the Republic will be reorganized into the first Galactic Empire, for a safe and secure society which I assure you will last for ten thousand years."

Ooops....the Galactic Empire will last for ten thousand of years. It's canon ! THE OLD TRILOGY IS CONTRADICTING THE PREQUELS !!! roll eyes (sarcastic)



"Nosce te ipsum", wise guy.

Camael
all right this is how it really goes down. master camael runs in and cuts up all the jedi and all the sith and becomes the only jedi in existance. the wars never happened, you imagined them.

Darth_Janus
Nai, you have earned a promotion. Go forth and preach the word, brutha.

Oooteenie!

Admiral Akbar
wow..... way to go Nai

Emperor Revan
Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
wrong, the attributes of the character have no barring on the words he speakes. Sio is not a real human being, he is a character in a script. therefore it is the script itself that the truth lies in. not the character.

do you understnad what i mean. "there has not been a full scale war since the formation of the republic" although it JUST SO HAPPENS Sio's character says this. it really makes no difference who said it. the actor has nothing to do with it, lucas is the writer, in essence, the script is his words. being delivered through characters he has invented. so, in essence, it is actually lucas that is saying what Sio says, even though Sio said it. understand? you are looking at SW still as a "story" im not looking at it in that light. i have gone past the acting, the characters and everything else, other then the words themselves. as the words themself is where the true meaning lies. and that is "there was no full scale war since the formation of the republic" nothing more, nothing less. that is what lucas has written, and thats what i means. you are overanalyzing this issue. words are words in this context, and those words are canon, and they mean what they mean, nothing more.


Palpatine in episode 2 clearly says: "I will not let this Republic that has stood for a thousand years be split in two." So in this case Sio Bibble is right and since the formation of the Republic 1000 years ago there hasn't been a full scale war. Before that there have been many wars and the Sith have ruled the galaxy at one point until the reformation of the Republic 1000 years prior to episode 1.

Nactous

((The_Anomaly))
please check your sources, if you knew anything you would know that Socrates never wrote anything down, so everything we "know" about socrates is through plato. all the examples of socratic method, although plato says was invented by socrates, it was plato who was the first to use them in writing. all examples of socrates in everything, all of his work and thought we know only through plato.

everything we know about socrates, including his death (the apology) was written by plato. Socrates NEVER wrote ANYTHING down ever.

B.A in philosophy eh?

oh and i wont explain what i said before with canon and script. since ive done it what? 3 times or something, you obviously do not understand what im talking about.

which is odd since this form of taking apart words and what people say is a standard subject in philosphy. (i.e. logic)

Nactous
*Grabs face and moans* No, not you again. Come on guys were arguing about KotOR and EU, not whos sources we need to check.

Darth_Frobo
Yes and what you said was shown to be bs go back and take a look at what I said about absolute truth. Just because what someone says is in the script doesn't make it so, charachters are more then capable of ignorance in the SW universe as shown numerous times, windu said the sith were extinct for 1000 years but we all know thats not true because darth bane was alive, is it a contradiction to the movies? No windu merely was ignorant of bane's existence.

Darth_Janus
Again, Anomoly... PWN3D.

Darth_Frobo
The picture says it all.

Darth_Janus
lmfao...

Zachara
Originally posted by Tulak Hord
She was in the Young Jedi Knight series of books. Supposedly, she has a rainbow lightsaber with a rancor-tooth hilt. I don't know of any rainbow crystals, tho it may be possible to modify a certain crystal or gem to work with a saber.

This was said a while back and is the only thing I feel I need to replie to.

No, it's not rainbow, lmao. Tenel Ka's first lightsaber was actually silver while the hilt was a racor tooth. But that one blew up, taking her left arm with it. Then the rest of that book happend and there was adventures in the Hapes Cluster....yadayada... After she decided that she was the product of two worlds, her father's (Royal House of the Hapes Cluster), and her mother's (Clan on the Planet of Dathomir), she constructed her new lightsaber out of both Hapan crystals (she smashed her royal tiara to get them) and an other rancor tooth.

The confusion that it was rainbow was probably because you/they got the colour of the blade itself confused with the colour of the Hapan gems which are muti-coloured.

Tulak Hord
Yeah, that could be it. I confuse a lot of things.

JLRTENJAC
Originally posted by Zachara
This was said a while back and is the only thing I feel I need to replie to.

No, it's not rainbow, lmao. Tenel Ka's first lightsaber was actually silver while the hilt was a racor tooth. But that one blew up, taking her left arm with it. Then the rest of that book happend and there was adventures in the Hapes Cluster....yadayada... After she decided that she was the product of two worlds, her father's (Royal House of the Hapes Cluster), and her mother's (Clan on the Planet of Dathomir), she constructed her new lightsaber out of both Hapan crystals (she smashed her royal tiara to get them) and an other rancor tooth.

The confusion that it was rainbow was probably because you/they got the colour of the blade itself confused with the colour of the Hapan gems which are muti-coloured.

So what color is it now?

JLRTENJAC
There is NO Continuity problems in Kotor. It flows Perfectally with the STAR WARS story.

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>