Yeah, you have to be at least 13.
And it's Kreia's own speculation that Revan never fell. I personally disagree with her evaluation. Revan could never have used the dark side and become a Sith Lord if he had not been seduced by the dark side.
Yeah, you have to be at least 13.
And it's Kreia's own speculation that Revan never fell. I personally disagree with her evaluation. Revan could never have used the dark side and become a Sith Lord if he had not been seduced by the dark side.
They makers may reveal something like that in KOTOR III, But I think it's highly unlikely. If he didn't fall, his followers would have sensed it. Besides that, why would he train Sith Lords who plunge the galaxy into darkness on a regular basis, along with thousands of Dark Jedi, along with killing Jedi. If Revan claims that he had good intentions for doing all this(without an AMAZINGLY good reason), he's on the edge of being Psychotic.
Originally posted by Xepeyon
They makers may reveal something like that in KOTOR III, But I think it's highly unlikely. If he didn't fall, his followers would have sensed it. Besides that, why would he train Sith Lords who plunge the galaxy into darkness on a regular basis, along with thousands of Dark Jedi, along with killing Jedi. If Revan claims that he had good intentions for doing all this(without an AMAZINGLY good reason), he's on the edge of being Psychotic.
I never said he didn't fall, I only said I believe that he a good reason. Although personaly I don't think he fell completely, at least nothing like Malak.
Of course then you get into those ugly arguments like per say... if killing this innocent child will let 100 more innocent children live then is it the right thing to do?
Of course, but I think the point was one of consequentialism versus moral motivations. Remember my earlier arguments on the moral goodness of an act- it must have both a good will behind the motivation and the act itself must be good or it cannot be considered a good decision at all. Keep in mind this is disregarding the outcome entirely. Good outcome or bad outcome, the action is morally justified if the motivation and act were founded in good intent.
Unfortunately, Revan may have had good intent, but his actions were evil. Therefore, it is foolish to say that his was a moral choice. The jedi saw this. He had fallen.
Originally posted by Wesker
Of course, but I think the point was one of consequentialism versus moral motivations. Remember my earlier arguments on the moral goodness of an act- it must have both a good will behind the motivation and the act itself must be good or it cannot be considered a good decision at all. Keep in mind this is disregarding the outcome entirely. Good outcome or bad outcome, the action is morally justified if the motivation and act were founded in good intent.Unfortunately, Revan may have had good intent, but his actions were evil. Therefore, it is foolish to say that his was a moral choice. The jedi saw this. He had fallen.
Obviously your moral views differ with that from Revan, but not like it matters. What Revan did was evil and in the Star Wars universe doing an evil act makes you evil. And the more you do them the more you go to the Dark Side. I think that Revan at first like many people that joined the Dark Side went over a bit, to do what was necessary, to destroy the Mandelorian invaders. But as he did he turned darker and darker and started caring less and less for the people on the planets, victory was all that mattered. He probably told himself he was doing the right thing, but most Dark Side users do that, until some point where they just realise they can't stop anymore.
Originally posted by Wesker
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. It's cliche but it's true.
Yeah especially in the Star Wars universe, the only person I can think off this fast that turned Sith without good intentions was Exar Kun, for the rest almost everybody had good intentions when they turned, but that simply isn't enough...
(I am tired though, so there could be a lot more)
Sidious didn't have any good intent. He's probably the most sociopathic of the Sith that I can see. The Ancient Sith were born into their roles. Exar Kun was ambitious and power hungry. Freedan Nadd was the same. Revan had good intent, but he was probably ambitious and controlling. Lord Kaan was nuts, and Bane is... um... Odd.
Well Sids was probably raised as a Sith since birth, he didn't really turn to the Dark Side, I have no idea about Kaan or Bane, I think both of them were born as Sith, but I am not sure.
Still Dooku turned for a reason, Anakin turned for a reason, Luke in DE turned for a reason, Quinlan Vos turned for a reason... all of them turned to do good, pretty much every Sith that followed Revan and/or Malak turned for a reason. Ulic Qel Droma turned for a reason...
More turned to do good then because they wanted to join, but every single last one of them eventually got corrupted and some of them never managed to escape the Dark Side.