Originally posted by Ms.MarvelBeautifully succinct.
😂the top tiers of the kotor arent impressive in comparison to the top tiers of the pt and up. and i dont think that leading a bunch of non-impressive people is an indication of your power. not by itself.
that is what i believe.
There's no one here who argues that the KotOR Jedi aren't impressive or skilled. We just don't know how skilled. There's no details. No inter-era comparisons.
Originally posted by truejedi
we don't know what he learned there, so we are hard-pressed to say he learned anything of use.
Bullshit. Malachor V was described as being "underground cities with sith scrolls and holocrons", or something to that nature. We all know the value of the Korriban treasures and tombs, and Revan was the first to plunder them. Don't argue out of ignorance.
Originally posted by truejedi
DS, you are full of BS. What was on those scrolls and holocrons? You are the one abandoning known fact for pointless speculation.
It doesn't matter. Both were sith worlds. Revan put some of his findings into his holocron and Bane could hardly "wrap his mind around the techniques." It doesn't matter what specific powers he found. And you're going to REALLY debate the value of the tombs and relics of an unplundered Korriban? Please.
Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
It doesn't matter. Both were sith worlds. Revan put some of his findings into his holocron and Bane could hardly "wrap his mind around the techniques." It doesn't matter what specific powers he found. And you're going to REALLY debate the value of the tombs and relics of an unplundered Korriban? Please.
i'm not going to waste my time debating your imagination with you period DS. You don't have one fact to substantiate your supposition, and all of the attitude you choose to throw in your posts isn't going to change that.
We all agree that Revan probably was powerful. I have him in the 3rd or 4th range of Sith all time myself, but you certainly can't prove it.
You see neb, you're confusing the issue. I have no problem with the idea of probability. Science doesn't make absolute statements. So the best we can do is say that Sidious will probably murder Coleman Trebor's face. Only probably. What we can't speculate on, what can not be "only" probable is the data that we base our conclusions on. We can't say 'Revan is probably good at lightsabers so he beats Trebor' any more than we can say 'the atomic bomb test we just did probably exploded when it hit the ground rather than in midair.'
Data has to be solid in order to draw a conclusion. Revan has no solid data. Therefore we cannot draw a conclusion for Revan at this time.
So: NO
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
Data has to be solid in order to draw a conclusion. Revan has no solid data. Therefore we cannot draw a conclusion for Revan at this time.
Not when following inductive reasoning.
As an example,
Assuming that:
1. The probability that Revan has a combat ability that can be valued at X = 0.9
2. The probability that a combat ability valued at X would enable one to defeat Darth Sidious on an even footing = 0.9
3. The probability that a fight between the two is fought on an even footing = 0.9
Then using the "and" rule of probability we can state that the probability that Darth Revan defeats Darth Sidious in a versus battle = 0.9 X 0.9 X 0.9 = 11! 0.729!
Which would still state that it's likely that the event would take place. Not that we necessarily have access to such precise probabilities but it clearly illustrates that conclusions based around inductive reasoning can be reached using probability based data.
Erho: YES 😄