de sidious vs kun

Oh well...I have to introduce the term "freedom" here or that what Kant would call a "causality of freedom".

The whole question is not a problem of conscience. The question is not what you should do the question is what you personally want to do. And you can't answer the question what you want to do unless you have done it. It's not your identity that determines your actions - it's your actions that determine your identity.

Now you have to see the action you have to take out of context. Do you want to kill the child ? Hell...no...Do you have to kill the child because this is the only way to save millions of people ? Probably yes in the situation you created. And in this case the freedom of choice you have might force you to take an action and thereby it will determine your character.

That means: Killing the child might be seen as "right" if you view it from a point of necessity but it can never seen as being the moral right thing to do neither for you (because you can't say: "I'm proud because I've killed the child !"😉 nor for the public or lets say the people you have saved because they will know that to save their lives you had to kill an innocent baby.

Now...to come back to Revan again. What Revan did...was it "right" ? Was it necessary ? Was it good ? Hell...no.
He killed many Jedi, he killed innocent people, he assassinated politicians to do what - strengthen the Republic ? What kind of thinking is this ? That's like saying (Janus gave the example) "If I am the ruler of the world their will be no wars anymore because there is no opposition to fight" or - more exaggerated - "If I kill all human beings there would be no criminality any longer".

He was neither acting because of a moral righteousness nor out of necessity so what he did can only be considered as being wrong. And that's why he takes the "right" action (from a moral point of view) past KotoR and goes to fight the Sith Empire on his own - without using / risking / taking the lives of others like he did it before.

You are right about Revan there and that surprises me a lot, I would have expected him to use army's to fight the Sith. Afterall that seemed like the reason he turned and that could have made it necessary to do, but obviously it wasn't. Obviously he didn't want to avoid the destruction of the Republic or some governing organisation because he didn't. It could have started off noble but turned worse and worse and worse. A good example of the end justifies the means gone out of hand.

However during the Mandelorian wars, pretty much everybody agreed that the end justified the means. Even though it made Revan as bad as the Mandelorians. But look at this from a different way.

The Jedi Order wanted to make a threat to them known, thats why they didn't act becuase they didn't think the Mandelorians acted alone. They were willing to let billions of people die just to find out who could possibly be controlling the Mandelorians. How would you classify that action? They did not directly kill any of the people, yet they refused to help.

Originally posted by Fishy
However during the Mandelorian wars, pretty much everybody agreed that the end justified the means. Even though it made Revan as bad as the Mandelorians. But look at this from a different way.

The Jedi Order wanted to make a threat to them known, thats why they didn't act becuase they didn't think the Mandelorians acted alone. They were willing to let billions of people die just to find out who could possibly be controlling the Mandelorians. How would you classify that action? They did not directly kill any of the people, yet they refused to help.

And now we are back at a what-could-have-happened situation. The Jedi wanted to investigate a threat further because they thought there might be something else behind it. Doesn't that remind you of something ?

Imagine the Jedi in the PT would have never entered the clone wars / used the clones. What would have happened ? The Seperatists might have been able to take over the Republic thereby getting Sidious out of the position as chancellor. As a result their would never have been an Empire, Order 66 would have never been carried out and all the Jedi wouldn't have been killed. If the Jedi had just tried to solve the conflict in a diplomatic way Sidious would have become a victim of his own plan.

Now for Revan: Imagine what would have happened if Revan had given the Jedi the time to investigate the threat and decide after doing so. The Jedi Civil War with all of it's victims (through Revan and Malak - Jedi and innocent people) would never had happened and that also counts for the consequences. The Exile would have never existed nor would Nihilus have and since Nihilus wouldn't have existed Katarr would have never been destroyed.

The end can never justify the means if the end remains unknown. What Revan did might actually have costed more lives than there would haven been lost acting like the Jedi Council wanted to.

Agreed, but there inability to act was the same thing as what Revan did in a manner of speaking. They refused to act, Revan refused to stay silent. It could also have been that the Mandelorians would have taken over the galaxy and that they would have destroyed the Jedi and everybody would be speaking Mandelorian, that the Republic would have never been rebuild and that most of the galaxy would have been enslaved for thousands of years to come.

Aren't both Revan and the Council responsible for millions of deaths, the council could have prevented it all would they have moved faster and Revan could have listened to the council you don't know whats to come you don't know whats going to happen, both did what they thought was the right thing to do. Who is to say that either one of them is wrong?

kun would take out sids especially if sids was mutalated like he mostly was

Originally posted by DarthMaul9123
kun would take out sids especially if sids was mutalated like he mostly was

I love how you don't read the topic at all, and then spout off whatever you have to say.

Originally posted by Illustrious
I love how you don't read the topic at all, and then spout off whatever you have to say.

Originally posted by Fishy
Agreed, but there inability to act was the same thing as what Revan did in a manner of speaking. They refused to act, Revan refused to stay silent. It could also have been that the Mandelorians would have taken over the galaxy and that they would have destroyed the Jedi and everybody would be speaking Mandelorian, that the Republic would have never been rebuild and that most of the galaxy would have been enslaved for thousands of years to come.

How should the Mandalorians have taken the Republic ? Revan with 1/3 of the Republic forces and not all of the Jedi was enough to stop them - all Republic forces and all Jedi would have done the same.

Aren't both Revan and the Council responsible for millions of deaths, the council could have prevented it all would they have moved faster and Revan could have listened to the council you don't know whats to come you don't know whats going to happen, both did what they thought was the right thing to do. Who is to say that either one of them is wrong?

No. The Jedi Council might be seen to be responsible for the deaths of people the Mandalorians have killed to the point where Revan entered the war. From this point on Revan is responsible - for every single Mandalorian, Echani, Jedi, Sith, Republic soldier, civilist and whoever killed in the Mandalorian Wars and in the Jedi Civil war and the events people from the Mandalorian or Jedi Civil war evolved participating in.

Actually I think that Revans actions caused more deaths than the hesitance of the Council.

They say that the council served no one with inaction. But even Canderous tells you that the Mandalorians were prompted to soften up the Republic (If I recall correctly) by some entity outside of the Outer Rim territories. Yes, the jedi council would have been standing by and letting millions die or become subjugated. This is hard to imagine, much less tolerate.

In any case, the jedi live to stop the spread of the dark side in the galaxy, and NOT to play general. The Republic is responsible for its own fate. It is responsible as a unity to provide defense for its own people. And it should have the ability to repel such an attack, even if it is a bloody and long defense. If anything, the Republic's inability to deal with the Mandalorian threat is a clear indicator that it, as a conglomeration of planets and star systems, was too weak, passive, and perhaps too large to defend itself. Instead of having ample garrisons in outer sectors to deal with potential threats, the Republic forces were lumped together and too centralized to deal with the Mandalorian raids. If anything, the raids went on for some time undetected by the Republic and the senate, which is pathetic. Imagine ruling the Roman Empire and not having a clue that you just lost Gaul to those damn Germans again. I mean, talk about out of touch with the needs of your people.

But the jedi, it is their duty to combat the dark side and the Sith, not to fight for the Republic which can't fight for itself. From where I'm looking at it, Revan was spurred on by dreams of gaining knowledge and power through combat, and he used the plight of the Outer Rim sufferers to compel more compassionate jedi to join his crusade. And he won, but at what cost? The Sith returned to the known galaxy, causing the obliteration of the Jedi Order as it was known. The Republic is financially bankrupt. They are rebuilding the damage from the Jedi Civil Wars one planet at a time. As of five years after the war, they were perhaps maybe 40% done with one planet. It could take centuries to heal from the scars of battle, both with the Mandalorians and with the new Sith. And we can only guess at what is to come. So no, Revan did not act in the right mindset, a moral one, and he perhaps caused so much damage he is feeling guilty for his decisions, and is seeking to solve it himself.