http://www.killermovies.com/forums/435031_24-darth-nihilus-and-darth-sion-vs-the-rots-jedi-order
Originally posted by xxXAcStylesXxx
This is straight from Escape and I never seen him lie, and Advent would have corrected it by now as its been posted many times, so eitherA. Your Lying (the most likely)
B. Your not looking hard enough.
If not scan page 109, and prove me wrong.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Advent, respond to my interpretation of Lucas' quote. I'm pretty sure I understood it perfectly and yet I got a completely different theory.
Your explanations ultimately all fall under the same points no matter how you word them, or what variation there may appear to be. There isn't much difference, honestly. You're both not adding much supplementary information, and I'd just be parroting my arguments again.
But, to entertain:
What was Anakin supposed to become? The most powerful force user ever, and twice as powerful as Sidious.
What was Anakin supposed to become in this specific context? "Somebody who would be more powerful than he [the Emperor] was and could help him rule the universe."
His son could become that
In the context of what George is talking about, yes. He could surpass Sidious, but that's the only implication George gives about what Anakin was supposed to become at this point.
The only actual part about Anakin's potential in regards to the response is that he could've eclipsed Sidious in power (and taken his rank by eliminating him). He doesn't necessarily have to be talking about his potential to become most powerful.
we can derive from that quote that Luke was supposed to become the most powerful force user ever, just like Anakin was supposed to
Originally posted by Advent
What?The entire thing ties into one whole point, which is what Anakin was suppose to become, but couldn't. And now Luke can. What Anakin was suppose to be was more powerful than Sidious, [b]that's what Lucas is talking about
.The entire answer George Lucas gave has nothing to do with just Anakin and Luke, as everyone seems to insinuate. It's about killing Sidious and surpassing him, a feat not attainable by Anakin, but instead now by Luke. It's only dealing with growing past Sidious' power, not Anakin's full potential, other than being able to eliminate Sidious.[/B]
Furthermore, through your arguments, you must realize that you're setting a prerequisite for being able to be stronger than Darth Sidious in potential, which would require one to be have to have the highest potential to surpass him. Seeing as, if we follow your line of logic, Darth Sidious has to have the third highest potential ever, and the second highest currently. Do you have any proof to back up that?
If you intend to answer that question for whatever odd reason, keep in mind feat wars are not relevant to the discussion, and things like "X is the most powerful", even stated by a narrator, also aren't suitable to be added, seeing as many haven't reached their potential (either because they are still training (Jacen Solo) or because they died) and/or we don't know what happens to them.
It's not to say that Darth Sidious doesn't or can't have the third highest ever, but since that's not set in stone, your perspective on the discussion isn't either.
Furthermore, through your arguments, you must realize that you're setting a prerequisite for being able to be stronger than Darth Sidious in potential, which would require one to be have to have the highest potential to surpass him. Seeing as, if we follow your line of logic, Darth Sidious has to have the third highest potential ever, and the second highest currently. Do you have any proof to back up that?
It's not to say that Darth Sidious doesn't or can't have the third highest ever, but since that's not set in stone, your perspective on the discussion isn't either. [/B]
All of that is logical deduction I believe. However, while you are focusing on the statement that GL made alone, I'm focusing on it plus what he said about Anakin, which would ultimately back his interview up, unless of course you'd say the two are independent of each other, and I would disagree. George Lucas originally states that Anakin was supposed to become the chosen one, the most powerful force user ever, twice as powerful as Sidious, etc. And I see Lucas reiterating that point in the interview even though he mentions overthrowing Sidious. To me I see that "He didn't become what he was supposed to become", as "he should have been twice as powerful as Sidious and had the most potential ever/strongest force user ever", and "his son could become that", as "his son had the ability to become twice as powerful as the emperor and be the most powerful force user ever". But that's just me.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Not necessarily, although I do believe Sidious is the most powerful Sith and could possibly have the 3rd-4th highest potential.
He may be the most powerful Sith in power, but potential? That's up for discussion, and cannot be proven.
However I'm not saying that to be stronger than him you have to have the highest potential
I thought you were taking the position of Darth Subjekt (saying you must be the best to be stronger than Sidious), but since you made clear the differences below, that was my fault, but I can comprehend what you meant now.
I am instead saying that the only two characters that were going to be TWICE as strong as Sidious at his peak, ARE the two characters with the highest potential ever
The only added difference, from what I was saying and what Subjekt believes, is that you seem to operate under the assumption that Luke Skywalker will become two times as powerful, correct? Which would require you to prove that Luke's potential even goes that far as to eclipse Sidious' own by double.
So, care to prove up? Also, prove that Luke's potential as being the (current) highest is absolute, anyways; both without the use of the allegedly cryptic quote made by Lucas.
so I don't think it's a stretch to say that only someone with some of the highest potential in the SW galaxy, could be twice as strong as Sidious.
Well, I do.
unless of course you'd say the two are independent of each other
Good observation skills.
It's not that "I'd say" it, it's that I've said it already. I have constantly stated "in this context" and that George isn't referring to other things associated with Anakin's potential, which obviously signifies that I'm assuming George Lucas is disassociating the other factors of Anakin's potential, and defining a new one for the purpose of that sole statement.
and I would disagree.
So? I would and have disagreed with the majority of things stated thus far on your behalf.
George Lucas originally states that Anakin was supposed to become the chosen one, the most powerful force user ever, twice as powerful as Sidious, etc. And I see Lucas reiterating that point in the interview even though he mentions overthrowing Sidious.
He talks about Anakin Skywalker and all this prophecy and potential nonsense in other interviews, other discussions, and statements. In this specific interview, he makes it clear as to what it was that Obi-Wan ****ed up (in this context), and why Darth Vader is "a lackey", and thus looking for Luke; like the Emperor was.
He's obviously not outlining anything about being the Chosen One, as Anakin fulfilled that destiny.
To me I see that "He didn't become what he was supposed to become", as "he should have been twice as powerful as Sidious and had the most potential ever/strongest force user ever", and "his son could become that", as "his son had the ability to become twice as powerful as the emperor and be the most powerful force user ever". But that's just me.
I've already made known exactly what I am lead to believe regarding the dispute at hand on numerous (every) occasions, so I'm not repeating myself, but like I said, it's just a circular discussion, because you're not saying much of anything different from what Subjekt was saying other than one specific part.
Originally posted by Advent
He may be the most powerful Sith in power, but potential? That's up for discussion, and cannot be proven.
The only added difference, from what I was saying and what Subjekt believes, is that you seem to operate under the assumption that Luke Skywalker will become two times as powerful, correct? Which would require you to prove that Luke's potential even goes that far as to eclipse Sidious' own by double.
So, care to prove up? Also, prove that Luke's potential as being the (current) highest is absolute, anyways; both without the use of the allegedly cryptic quote made by Lucas.
It's not that "I'd say" it, it's that I've said it already. I have constantly stated "in this context" and that George isn't referring to other things associated with Anakin's potential, which obviously signifies that I'm assuming George Lucas is disassociating the other factors of Anakin's potential, and defining a new one for the purpose of that sole statement.
He talks about Anakin Skywalker and all this prophecy and potential nonsense in other interviews, other discussions, and statements. In this specific interview, he makes it clear as to what it was that Obi-Wan ****ed up (in this context), and why Darth Vader is "a lackey", and thus looking for Luke; like the Emperor was.
I've already made known exactly what I am lead to believe regarding the dispute at hand on numerous (every) occasions, so I'm not repeating myself, but like I said, it's just a circular discussion, because you're not saying much of anything different from what Subjekt was saying other than one specific part. [/B]
Perhaps, but I can(and I think I have) justify what i'm saying, just like you did. It's just two different perspectives.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Well again, we come to I believe the ROTS commentary, some sourcebooks and various sources lightsnake has where GL states what Anakin is and should be. I believe that his interview complements his stance on Anakin and Luke, saying Anakin is supposed to become the most powerful force user ever and twice as powerful as Sidious, and he didn't but Luke would become that. But neither of our interpretations is really wrong, so we'd be sitting here endlessly debating them.
Neither is wrong at this point (and the truth will probably never be found out unless one of us talks to George Lucas himself), but one of the judgements is unquestionably wrong; which one we don't know. That's the actual problem.
Anyways, what was your motive for those last few words, really? Haven't I already stated that it's a "circular discussion" on this page, and tried to agree to disagree on the previous? Why yes, I have.
How would you prove potential without quotes?
Without a quote, you mean? I was referring to a single thing, not multiple sources, but it's okay, I know what you're saying with that.
To actually answer the question, it's not up for me to tell you how to find something, the onus was on you to do such (don't respond to this, just see below).
It's not something you can logically deduce, so I don't understand why you're taking away a source and asking me to prove the impossible without that source.
If you cannot comprehend, let me explain. I wasn't meaning for you to actually back up the assertion anyways. I already knew it would be impossible, but that was my point.
The source is ambiguous, that's why you cannot use it. Why should I allow you to use that to support your argument? I'd submit even if I were to concede (which I wouldn't), I'd only be agreeing to the part about Luke being the most powerful ever, not necessarily being two times greater in power than Sidious, which would mean rivaling Anakin's potential.
But I interpreted this statement in regard to what I heard on the ROTS commentary and the various lightsnake sources, so your view makes them independent, and my view makes the statements compliments. Again, I don't think either is wrong but they are two contrasting views.
You act as if I need this shit spoon fed to me, I know what you're talking about. You don't have to repeat it over and over.
One of them is wrong, but at this point in time neither can prove, as an absolute, what he was talking about. In general, and to either side, from what I now gather. So, this is why I said:
Originally posted by Advent
Regardless of the above, it's apparent that neither side will fold, and neither side's interpretations can be made absolute to each other. I would say just agree to disagree, as lame as it may be, seeing as we've been arguing in circles since my initial post. That doesn't mean that I won't continue to argue this later, or right now even (if you weren't to submit), but currently I really don't feel any progress will be made.
Again, I see "someone who would be more powerful than him, becoming what he was supposed to become". When I word it like that I'm sure you understand my stance on it and where it comes from. The whole issue is whether the statement is independent from other statements or a compliment to others.
What the hell is your point? I already know this, but it doesn't mean that I still can't try to sway your views (obviously I care, even a little, if people disagree).
If people are still going to argue back, I don't let much go unanswered. Which is why we're still discussing this when all I needed was a simple "Okay, Advent. I'll agree to disagree, seeing as neither side can be proven to each other, or in general (as definite)".
Perhaps, but I can(and I think I have) justify what i'm saying, just like you did. It's just two different perspectives.
See above.
Again, what the hell is your point? I already know this. Another thing is, you, along with Lightsnake, have used this as a definitive source before regarding potential (in this thread even; albeit, not stating it as definite as before, but to the point where you would lead one to believe it's definite) and if I can recall, about Luke being the most powerful, so even if it is open to interpretation, then it cannot be used in the way you have done such.
Originally posted by Lightsnake
There's still the NeC, and the DE sourcebook apparently. Plus Heritage of the sith.In other words, Sith'Ari's full of shit as usual
1. tNEC is fallible, the statement inside is nothing more than an opinion, I've explained why very many times.
2. DE sourcebook says jack, and seeing as the statement just kinda came up out of the blue with nobody taking responsibility for it...
3. Until you can actually prove that it's in Heritage of the Sith, I see no reason to believe you as every other source you have given has been proven fallible, and many of your claims have been proven lies. I'm not saying this in a mean way, it's just the truth, that's all.
Databank is one place.
Strange, I couldn't find it anywhere in the databank. Could you maybe give a quote?
Strange, I couldn't find it anywhere in the databank. Could you maybe give a quote?
The two entered into a spectacular duel -- a contest between the most powerful practitioners of the Force's light and dark sides.
- From the profile of Yoda
No one is quite sure how Palpatine was first introduced to the power of the dark side, or how he came to be Darth Plagueis' apprentice. He is the most powerful practitioner of the Sith ways in modern times. He studied the ancient ruins on the Sith mausoleum world of Korriban. He unlocked secrets of the Force from a captured Jedi Holocron. The dark side energies flowing through Palpatine's body were so intense, that they ravaged his mortal frame. The very source of Palpatine's strength was killing him.
- From the profile of Palpatine
In addition, there are tremendous feats and other sources I'm sure that prove Sidious to be the strongest Sith.
Originally posted by Advent
Neither is wrong at this point (and the truth will probably never be found out unless one of us talks to George Lucas himself), but one of the judgements is unquestionably wrong; which one we don't know. That's the actual problem.Anyways, what was your motive for those last few words, really? Haven't I already stated that it's a "circular discussion" on this page, and tried to agree to disagree on the previous? Why yes, I have.
Without a quote, you mean? I was referring to a single thing, not multiple sources, but it's okay, I know what you're saying with that.
To actually answer the question, it's not up for me to tell you how to find something, the onus was on you to do such (don't respond to this, just see below).
If you cannot comprehend, let me explain. I wasn't meaning for you to actually back up the assertion anyways. I already knew it would be impossible, but that was my point.
The source is ambiguous, that's why you cannot use it. Why should I allow you to use that to support your argument? I'd submit even if I were to concede (which I wouldn't), I'd only be agreeing to the part about Luke being the most powerful ever, not necessarily being two times greater in power than Sidious, which would mean rivaling Anakin's potential.
You act as if I need this shit spoon fed to me, I know what you're talking about. You don't have to repeat it over and over.
One of them is wrong, but at this point in time neither can prove, as an absolute, what he was talking about. In general, and to either side, from what I now gather. So, this is why I said:
What the hell is your point? I already know this, but it doesn't mean that I still can't try to sway your views (obviously I care, even a little, if people disagree).
If people are still going to argue back, I don't let much go unanswered. Which is why we're still discussing this when all I needed was a simple "Okay, Advent. I'll agree to disagree, seeing as neither side can be proven to each other, or in general (as definite)".
See above.
Again, what the hell is your point? I already know this. Another thing is, you, along with Lightsnake, have used this as a definitive source before regarding potential (in this thread even; albeit, not stating it as definite as before, but to the point where you would lead one to believe it's definite) and if I can recall, about Luke being the most powerful, so even if it is open to interpretation, then it cannot be used in the way you have done such.
Ok, fair enough, makes sense. So as you said lets agree to disagree.
Originally posted by General Kenobl
The two entered into a spectacular duel -- a contest between the most powerful practitioners of the Force's light and dark sides.- From the profile of Yoda
This only applies to the time, this in no way proves that he's the most powerful sith ever.
No one is quite sure how Palpatine was first introduced to the power of the dark side, or how he came to be Darth Plagueis' apprentice. He is the most powerful practitioner of the Sith ways in modern times.
This only applies to the time, this in no way proves that he's the most powerful sith ever.
He studied the ancient ruins on the Sith mausoleum world of Korriban. He unlocked secrets of the Force from a captured Jedi Holocron. The dark side energies flowing through Palpatine's body were so intense, that they ravaged his mortal frame. The very source of Palpatine's strength was killing him.- From the profile of Palpatine
Highly irrelevant.
How about trying again. 🙂
In addition, there are tremendous feats
Sure, there are tremendous feats that would naturally place him as #1 given what we already know, but that in no way prevents the chance that someone like Bane or Zannah will rise and take his place.
and other sources I'm sure that prove Sidious to be the strongest Sith.
No, not one, all have been proven to be fallible.