Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
It was different with Bane because he was attempting to perpetuate the Sith order, just in a different way. It's stated by Boyd that Vitiate found Sith philosophy in general to be a "dead end" and that's what led him to seek out Zakuul, where he fell in love with their philosophy.
Originally posted by ares834
I guess I fail to see much of a difference. Bane also found Sith Philosophy to be a dead end and created his own. The point being, why Valkorion's philosophy may be incompatible with the current Sith. There is nothing to prove it contradicts the basic Sith tenets.
It is incompatible with the ancient sith as well, can you find any Sith that have integrated the Lights philosophy into their teachings. And it is relevant to the sith. Just read there code.
Originally posted by ares834You comparing One SITH and SITH'ari to the guy who competely disowns the Sith and creates an entirely new non-Sith Empire and Force Order. 😬
👇That's because you haven't. Sure, Marr and others say Valkorion is not a Sith as he doesn't follow their philosophy. Guess what, Bane says the same thing about Krayt.
Originally posted by Haschwalth
It is incompatible with the ancient sith as well, can you find any Sith that have integrated the Lights philosophy into their teachings. And it is relevant to the sith. Just read there code.
Except that's not what is said in your quote at all... It says they don't view the force as dark or light, that doesn't mean they embrace the philosophy of both the Jedi and Sith.
Well I think the distinction is this:
Bane found the sith philosophy of his time dead because the order had become a bunch of simpering masters. The example he looked toward for true Sith were people like Revan, Sadow, and Exar Kun, and that's how he wanted his SITH line to be run.
With Valkorion, it's stated that the philosophies of Kun/Sadow/Ragnos (the phiosophies he was raised on, with the most basic of Sith ideologies) he found to be a complete dead end, and sought out another philosophy entirely in that of Zakuul (which is completely untouched by Sith or Jedi,) and he quickly fell in love with it. I honestly find this to be no different than someone like, say, Revan, changing from being a Jedi to being a Sith, and from being a Sith to being a Jedi. Hell, I think this is a perfect comparison, because even Jedi Revan had at one point "wielded tremendous dark side power," but you wouldnt exactly call him a Sith.
This, in unison with the litany of quotes about how Valkorion isn't a Sith, about how he ended the Great Galactic War because he wanted to care for his children, how he wanted to experience real love on Zakuul, etc, prove to me that he's not a Sith, even if he's still a dick.
Originally posted by Sinious
You comparing One SITH and SITH'ari to the guy who competely disowns the Sith and creates an entirely new non-Sith Empire and Force Order. 😬
Well, yes. Because it's a similar case. The point being, simply because someone calls you a heretic or says you aren't a Sith doesn't mean you aren't. And that is what the entire "philosophy argument" hinges on.
Now let's be clear, I'm not arguing Valkorion is a Sith. There are plenty of other cases that can and have been made. I am arguing agaisnt this argument however because frankly, I think it sucks.
Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
It was different with Bane because he was attempting to perpetuate the Sith order, just in a different way. It's stated by Boyd that Vitiate found Sith philosophy in general to be a "dead end" and that's what led him to seek out Zakuul, where he fell in love with their philosophy.
@Ares
Does it mean that the Zakuulian empire was already Sith, or did it become Sith when Valkorian(Vitiate) took power, and changed nothing.
It would of had to been already or this statement quoted above doesn't make sense.