DS Bastila Shan vs. ROTS Obi-Wan Kenobi

(con't...)

Originally posted by Advent
First, in accordance with the stance taken, all mind-affecting powers are ultimately based on the applier's mind compared to the target's - willpower, training, and strength in the Force all must be taken into account. So,

because her Sith powers (Grip, Plague, Breach, Stasis Field, Insanity) are mental-based, and

because "[b]through sheer force of will [Shan] could influence the course of massive battles...bolstering the courage of one side...while draining the other", which means having control over the psyche of thousands upon thousands of Jedi and Sith, Dark Jedi, mercenaries, officers and troopers on both sides, and

because "Jedi Battle Meditation [was] a rare ability usually only accessible to the most skilled and wizened Jedi Masters" [Star Wars Databank, Bastila Shan],

it is obvious that Shan's training was extensively focused on influencing the mind of another,

which her feats demonstrate: BM, her ability to create Force Bonds - such as the one linking her life-force to Darth Revan, the only thing keeping him alive, dominating Motta the Hutt's mind, simultaneously Force Stunning Jolee Bindo and Juhani, and

because she was one of the strongest Force users of the era; undeniably, the second strongest Sith in the entire battle-hardened, power-obsessed Empire,

It is therefore a safe and logical assumption to make that Bastila would be more than capable of mangling someone like Obi-Wan "Got-Pwned-With-A-Flick-Of-The-Wrist" Kenobi with any of the aforementioned powers she knows [thus, quantified], assuming she had the proper training with them, leading to my second point.

Second, the above taken into consideration, it is reasonable to conclude that Bastila would have the proper training in the techniques described: (1) ipso facto, she could actively perform them in combat, (2) considering Bastila's prodigious learning capabilities, combined with the fact that - at the very least - she spent several weeks of formal training under Malak, an established Dark Lord of the Sith with an implicit familiarity with these moves and a specific intent for wanting her to learn as much as possible - Revan - which gives us a rational reason for the variety of moves taught, and (3) in the case of virtually all her new-found powers (e.g., Grip, Plague, Stasis Field, and Insanity), she had already been familiar with the derivative moves from which the powers stemmed (Grip: TK, Plague: Slow, Stasis Field: Stun, Insanity: Dominate Mind). [/B]

^ I am sorry, but you have not provided a single shred of evidence - for anything, FFS! I have - for everything.

Do you even understand what a strawman argument is? I ask, as I neither made one, however you did in the very same post you accused me of!

Your words,

Originally posted by truejedi
Yes, they use the force to create a whirlwind, sure, but it is still just TK. So i don't deny the ability, just the pokemon name and the fact that such an attack would be so utterly unknown to Kenobi that he couldn't counter it. It is just TK after all.

Originally posted by truejedi
Kenobi doesn't "know force wave" as you put it. He simply uses the force to push anakin. Therefore a "force-whirlwind" isn't going to be completely strange to him, since he is aware of force TK attacks.

...which never specifically apply to Bastila.

My reply,

Originally posted by Advent
While it may be that he has the possible defenses to keep himself from harm from someone else's TK, knowledge does not equal defense if your opponent is stronger than you (or if you're overwhelmed). It is relative - the relationship of power between the attacker to the defender or vice versa.

For example, Kenobi could be Force Pushed by Yoda because any defenses would be over-powered. Thus, your assertion of Kenobi countering is a non sequitur.

This is not definitely not a strawman. I was merely using Yoda as an example to demonstrate relativity and how spastic the line of reasoning that was being used in your argument was.

In other words, you are committing a fallacy of improper attribution for an inability to read your own statements. I have to wonder if you are actually drunk at this point.

My mountains of evidence trump your naked assertions and unfounded assumptions. They have from the very beginning. They will until the end. Thus,

Q.E.D.

I feel the need to be blunt here with you, as well as Slash KMC, because both of your arguments - on literally every issue - have been terribly illogical, and demonstrably so. I have to be upfront and tell you that, because this is dragging on for no reason other than sheer stubbornness on your behalves to accept something more than "CANON SEZ!".

Originally posted by Advent

- To make the analogy even faultier, the quickness of the med-packs is nothing more than a game-play mechanic - you are comparing a game's health mechanism to the Force. I'm sure BioWare would have totally pleased gamers if they could not heal in mid-combat without acquiring (and thus, spending points on) the necessary Force Power. Alright, insta-heal med-packs didn't exist and were attainable, but we know Force Powers existed, therefore there is absolutely no reason that an attainable Force Power in KOTOR would be anything other than mythologically established.

But we have indeed established that simply because something is in the game and isn't directly contradicted elsewhere, doesn't make it canon. You tried to call it C-Canon, simply for being in the game, previously, and that is incorrect. Faulty Analogy or not, I think I have taken the only point I wanted too with this direction of the argument.

- To make the analogy even faultier and demonstrate that insta-heal med-packs were nothing more than game-play mechanics, med-packs were very mythologically real. Quite obviously, as said, BioWare didn't want the player to die countless times and wanted a means of relief for low health in mid-combat. Rather than portray it true-to-mythos and have the player have to sit and personally unravel a medical kit to stitch invisible wounds and no blood, they opted for insta-heal med-packs.

Calling one the force, and one a mechanic is a blurry line, since one of the force "moves" in the game was to heal yourself in combat. You could instantly restore life to yourself with the force. If the game-maker gave you THAT ability (which is pretty close to canon as far as I can tell) why bother to create a game-play mechanic to address something that is ALREADY addressed within canon? seems kinda like maybe they intended BOTH things to be an option, and therefore that would mean:

A. Either the force heal AND the medpack were gameplay mechanics and therefore non-canon.

or.

B. Neither the force heal OR the medpack were gameplay mechanics and are therefore canon.

- To make the analogy confusing, there was no "Weapon Force Sense", as far as I recall. Could you be more clear, please?

Jedi Knight and Jedi Academy. Games that are exactly as Canon as KOTOR. Allowing the force attacks in KOTOR as real means everything from every video game is also canon. Therefore everything from every video game is now admissable to DISPROVE the canonicity of said game-play mechanics.

Are you referring to the loot system, which would qualify for game-play mechanic, too? Or are you talking about Feats, which merely describe a proficiency in X? Either would be nothing more than irrelevant at least, faulty analogy at worst.

Why? Because you say so? Advent, why are YOU getting to be the "decider" of what is a game-play mechanic and what is C-Canon? Seems to me like oh... anyone else might have a different opinion.

"Weak-minded" is relative. To whom are you comparing the mind? Or on what basis is a mind weak? Watch the Episode IV scene again; notice that it's a Master Jedi hermit-crab, who has been meditating upon the Force for practically five decades (virtually two decades straight), and it's a pair of idiotic, non-Force sensitive, non-Force resistant Stormtroopers. That is not proof of anything of other than Kenobi was strong enough to trick those two, which shows nothing aside from relativity. Period.

So... You need to come up with a pretty airtight argument that Bastilla is >>>>>>> Kenobi in the force before her mental attacks are going to render Kenobi "relatively weakminded", amirite?

YouTube video

Yes, here we see one non-force resistant, non-force sensitive fight off the combined powers of four powerful Jedi. He then agrees to do what they want, not because his mind has been defeated, but because he "has had enough of that."

Would you like to know more? This is ultimately all a mind-trick:

Notice how Darth Andeddu proclaims "[b]Your mind is no match for mine!", which denotes relatively.

Oh, shit. Is that Darth "God-King" Andeddu getting killed by Darth Wyyrlok's mind-manipulation? Wait, so Darth Andendu, the Ancient Sith who also influenced Wyyrlok's mind, is weak-minded? So, they're both the lesser of Ahsoka Tano? The argument boils down to reductio ad absurdum, a logical fallacy.

So Bastilla is on the same level as Wyyrlok now? She just keeps getting better and better.

Would you like to know more? Your circumstantial evidence to the contrary consists of what is known as amphiboly (Greek: "indeterminate), a fallacy of ambiguity, for what I detailed earlier in the "Watch Episode IV" bit of my post.

So... not one, BUT TWO quotes from G-canon movies are now considered circumstantial evidence? The bar get raised around here while I wasn't paying attention?

Would you like to know more? The answer: it's factual that the ability to influence minds is based primarily on the strength of mind, training, and Force power ratio of the attacker to the defender.
[/B]

Interestingly enough, I agree with you on your main point. Weak-minded IS relative. Its just the sort of thing that the word relative was invented for. However, for you to try to insinuate that Kenobi is weak-minded compared to Bastilla is unsupported at the moment. You are welcome to continue to try.

Advent, you clearly MUST provide evidence, and we need not too, because you are attacking a KNOWN character with an UNKNOWN. that's the point. We dont' need to defend Kenobi. He is completely established. You are getting closer to successfully arguing for an unknown than anyone ever has gotten on this forum.

To say that because we go over your evidence, and refuse to accept your assumptions make our argument devoid of proof is stupid.

You can do better.

Do it.

Until you actually defend against my post however, your current argument (whether or not you repost it) stands countered.

I have to be upfront and tell you that, because this is dragging on for no reason other than sheer stubbornness on your behalves to accept something more than "CANON SEZ!". [/B]

If canon doesn't say, then it is your opinion. So yes, we will continue to wait for evidence where "CANON SEZ" the words that back up your current opinion on the matter.

Now i'm not going to get caught up in name-calling, and attacking someone else as illogical. I will continue to counter your posts in a professional manner. If my post frustrates you to the point of being unable to continue, then please, don't, I don't want to cause you any undo stress.

Remember, you saying you win, and the other person is illogical only makes it true for you. (especially when you went back to your ORIGINAL post for your QED, meaning you are completely convinced that your entire post from the beginning is 100% correct, and no one has touched it.)

An arrogant position.

Barely skimming through that mess, because it's almost 4:00 AM,

Originally posted by truejedi
So Bastilla is on the same level as Wyyrlok now? She just keeps getting better and better.

Did you not, literally, a post ago, claim knowledge of a strawman argument, a logical fallacy (I know you didn't understand it obviously)?

This is one of those.

Again.

I only used Wyyrlok-Andeddu as an example to demonstrate relativity, which is obvious to anyone not under the influence of an intoxicating substance.

Nice reading comprehension, and it tells me you really understand my argument or "the direction to which you're taking it", huh, mastermind?

I appreciate the effort, but refusal to accept sound arguments does not make them false.

Originally posted by Advent
I have to be upfront and tell you that, because this is dragging on for no reason other than sheer stubbornness on your behalves to accept something more than "CANON SEZ!".

That's, kinda what we're all about. Actually...

Originally posted by truejedi
Advent, you clearly MUST provide evidence, and we need not too, because you are attacking a KNOWN character with an UNKNOWN. that's the point. We dont' need to defend Kenobi. He is completely established.

Originally posted by Advent
Moreover, Bastila Shan is not an unknown any more than most other characters used in the Versus forum. "BUT ADVENT, WE DON'T KNOW THESE THINGS ABOUT X!" - you're right, this is where we reasonably and logically deduce from established facts to create a platform base on which to argue from. We do know enough about Bastila to make inferences about her talents, and if one is incapable of deriving conclusions (whether sound or not) from the information available, an unknown that makes one not, but a known nincompoop.

Burden of proof is a logical fallacy (the onus is on you to provide evidence for Kenobi's power; Bastila's strength has been "established", especially in this thread)

Begging the question, logical fallacy (Kenobi is established, so he doesn't need defense? So almost all threads involving a "known" need no posts?).

You're drunk. Go to sleep.

Originally posted by Advent
Begging the question, logical fallacy (Kenobi is established, so he doesn't need defense? So almost all threads involving a "known" need no posts?).

You're drunk. Go to sleep.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Oh. yeah... 'bout that...

That's, kinda what we're all about. Actually...

Everything I have argued has a canonical base to it, so...yeah what 'bout that? The point is, I use my brain and try to make rational inferences based on the information available; which is perfectly acceptable. You guys pretty much take any phrase or sentence from a source at its word without taking it into any context whatsoever or critical thought applied to.

And thus, all the hullabaloo.

Originally posted by Advent

Begging the question, logical fallacy (Kenobi is established, so he doesn't need defense? So almost all threads involving a "known" need no posts?).

If you hadn't notice, we've been doing this for YEARS, so yes. Most posts involving knowns (especially well-knowns like Kenobi) are pretty much consensus picks, because everyone who has spent much time on this forum DOES KNOW everything Kenobi has been proven to be capable of (The CWC's and the books about Ahsoka are slowly updating Kenobi)

We certainly aren't doing Kenobi vs. Yoda are we? we know them both, we know Yoda wins. Done.

That thread, with two knowns needs absolutely no discussion.

And that is true in almost all situations where you put in two of the very well-knowns like Kenobi is.

I'm not drunk, but you are sounding sleep-deprived. Take your time with your next post, you seem to be making snap-decisions at the moment.

Originally posted by Advent
Everything I have argued has a canonical base to it, so...yeah what 'bout that? The point is, I use my brain and try to make rational inferences based on the information available; which is perfectly acceptable. You guys pretty much take any phrase or sentence from a source at its word without taking it into any context whatsoever or critical thought applied to.

And thus, all the hullabaloo.

Where do you get off bringing your gawd damned "logical deductions" around here? You damn asians, you think you can just waltz in here and toss buzz words like "common sense", and "logic", in our faces. We don't like your kind around here.

Stoner.

edit- Note to future self: Look up "here" in thesaurus.

Double edit- "Damn", as well.

Originally posted by Advent
Everything I have argued has a canonical base to it, so...yeah what 'bout that? The point is, I use my brain and try to make rational inferences based on the information available; which is perfectly acceptable. You guys pretty much take any phrase or sentence from a source at its word without taking it into any context whatsoever or critical thought applied to.

And thus, all the hullabaloo.

I agree with this completely, except for the inference at the end that your way is superior. Yours is simply another way of looking at the literature.

I personally THINK revan is the third most powerful sith behind Sidious and Bane. However, I can't prove it. So... I don't try.

I could put a lot of quotes, and a lot of things that SUGGEST it, but What if someone comes along and reads the same evidence and interprets it differently? There can't be a consensus if we don't agree.

The perfect example is how Gideon(May he rest in peace) and I interpret several of Luke's lightsaber fights differently. Same exact evidence, same level of reading comprehension, just different analysis. So we had to agree to disagree.

By not allowing personal analysis to color our debating, we stay away from the flaming and name-calling that used to be such a huge part of this forum when everyone was sure their OPINION was correct.

So, True Jedi, you actually mean to say that the threads of Obi-Wan vs. Mace Windu, ROTS Kenobi vs. Darth Sidious, Jedi Master Yoda vs. ROTS Anakin - combined at more than 600 posts - all involving established movie characters, has only the words "uh-huh" and "yup, that guy" in it?

Do you wonder why so many of the older, more-able debaters stopped coming here or made their own forums? Look no further than your posts or the replies to my posts.

Originally posted by Advent
Everything I have argued has a canonical base to it, so...yeah what 'bout that? The point is, I use my brain and try to make rational inferences based on the information available; which is perfectly acceptable. You guys pretty much take any phrase, sentence, or paragraph from a source at its word without taking it into any context whatsoever or critical thought applied to.

And thus, all the hubbaloo.

It's the... unspoken(?) rule here that if it's not a "phrase, sentence, or paragraph from a source" than it's subject to too much personal opinion. I for one would like Revan and Bastila and any other Jedi to be miles above anyone from the PT in terms of power and skill, but canon says otherwise. And unless there's some accurate, measurable, quantifiable statistic for Bastila, then I (we) have no interest in bringing her up in threads. Revan too.

Nihilus is one the exception to this era for Unknown with his super TK feat (that was contested by Gideon and others over the loading screen and Tobin). It's comparable, measurable. Not like Bastila. But you knew this, so no biggie.

Originally posted by Advent
Do you wonder why so many of the older, more-able debaters stopped coming here or made their own forums? Look no further than your posts or the replies to my posts.

Originally posted by Advent
So, True Jedi, you actually mean to say that the threads of Obi-Wan vs. Mace Windu, ROTS Kenobi vs. Darth Sidious, Jedi Master Yoda vs. ROTS Anakin - combined at more than 600 posts - all involving established movie characters, has only the words "uh-huh" and "yup, that guy" in it?

Do you wonder why so many of the older, more-able debaters stopped coming here or made their own forums? Look no further than your posts or the replies to my posts.

First one is sabers only, which made it interesting. (since we bicker over how much the force affects Mace's Vaapad)

Second was someone who doesn't post here often getting explained to him why Sidious would wipe the floor with Kenobi.... (and I believe we delved into Anakin/Kenobi AGAIN with the same person.)

And Yoda and Anakin, really? Would you really think that needs debated?

Originally posted by Advent

Do you wonder why so many of the older, more-able debaters stopped coming here or made their own forums? Look no further than your posts or the replies to my posts. [/B]

Its that proof vs. Evidence thing. Proof is going to win. they couldn't accept that.

But looking back at their conclusions in some threads, even HWKA knew better than to call them the "more-able debaters".

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
[B]Well, actually what you're doing is applying your aggressive style of debating with a less than subtle touch of mockery, the effects of which are exacerbated by your excellent command of the English language to support your stand with a character who has nothing quantifiable to her roster of feats. And that's we love you 😍

Right, because you know I haven't provided any shred of evidence and you know that my opponents gave universes of it. Or wasn't it the opposite? And weren't you agreeing with me? Oh, yeah, that's right - I'm the only one that ever has to prove anything around here; everyone else seems free to make all the "say-so" assertions while making demands for evidence, nevertheless supplying none of their own.

Bastila is not an unknown; an unknown would be someone like Ajunta Pall.

Originally posted by Advent
So, True Jedi, you actually mean to say that the threads of Obi-Wan vs. Mace Windu, ROTS Kenobi vs. Darth Sidious, Jedi Master Yoda vs. ROTS Anakin - combined at more than 600 posts - all involving established movie characters, has only the words "uh-huh" and "yup, that guy" in it?

ahhh, and the Yoda/Anakin thread turned into a discussion about how hard Dooku tried to win against Anakin.

You might of at least looked into these threads before posting them as examples...

Originally posted by Advent
Right, because you know I haven't provided any shred of evidence and you know that my opponents gave universes of it. Or wasn't it the opposite? And weren't you agreeing with me? Oh, yeah, that's right - I'm the only one that ever has to prove anything around here; everyone else seems free to make all the "say-so" assertions while making demands for evidence, nevertheless supplying none of their own.

Bastila is not an unknown; an unknown would be someone like Ajunta Pall.

You have provided evidence. No one is denying this. What you haven't given us is proof. You haven't quantified her abilities to known characters. You have made a DAMNING argument for Bastilla, i'll give you that. My personal opinion of her has gone up. But I recognize it as my opinion based on the evidence, and not superior to someone else who looks at the same evidence and doesn't think as highly of her.

Originally posted by truejedi
First one is sabers only, which made it interesting. (since we bicker over how much the force affects Mace's Vaapad)

Second was someone who doesn't post here often getting explained to him why Sidious would wipe the floor with Kenobi.... (and I believe we delved into Anakin/Kenobi AGAIN with the same person.)

And Yoda and Anakin, really? Would you really think that needs debated?

You've made nothing but excuses here and sorry ones at that. "First one is sabers" - wait, they're unknowns in terms of sabers? Laughable. Or wait, you have to use rational and logic to establish "how much the Force affects Mace's Vaapad", you say? But you refuse to accept it here?

Hypocritical non-sense. I reserved my flamings after a thorough debate in which the evidence firmly was on my side and the challengers gave precisely squat other than psuedo-intellectualism. That's fair-play in my book, especially when one considers what I have been dealing with here.

I refuse to purchase, downloaded, or otherwise read,

Just to be dragged down to the necessary intellectual levels so that I can argue with idiots.