What did Anakin "balancing the force" really mean?

Originally posted by Dominis
Yeah, I agree with this. That's one of the quotes I'm remembering.

The Father makes a distinction between his son and the dark side/evil, not that his son is the embodiment of evil the way Nadd seems to be interpreting him to be. It kinda makes his use of the term radicalism seem kinda redundant if he believes there is no middle ground for The Son. IDK, I'm confused with his interpretation.

I think Nadd is going a bit too 'meta' here. /shrug

Originally posted by Galan007
The Ones were undoubtedly aspects of the cosmic Force. The balance on Mortis tipping one way or the other(via the Son or Daughter) directly impacted the Force in the material realm on a galactic scale.

The Father: "As the balance in this world crumbles, so shall war escalate in your galaxy... As my Son has descended into the dark side, so have the Sith gained strength."

And you say I am too meta. 😂

The Son is an aspect of The Force. But what they were trying to tell was that the dark is unnatural in the galaxy. Rage, jealousy, etc were in The Son. The Daughter even mentions at some point that it is in his nature.
If I were to make an analogy. Think of Son as Devil and of Dark Side as negativism. While The Son is a self-aware etc astral being. He is still prone to fall to his animalistic nature.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
And you say I am too meta. 😂

The Son is an aspect of The Force. But what they were trying to tell was that the dark is unnatural in the galaxy. Rage, jealousy, etc were in The Son. The Daughter even mentions at some point that it is in his nature.
If I were to make an analogy. Think of Son as Devil and of Dark Side as negativism. While The Son is a self-aware etc astral being. He is still prone to fall to his animalistic nature.

Right.

But The Son's "animalistic" qualities didn't become a problem until used for selfish desires instead of protecting his sister. That's when he started to become "evil." In your first response to me, you seemed to disagree with that notion, suggesting it's always evil even if it's used in harmony with the light, protecting his sister. Then you later said violence, which is usually a result of animalistic qualities, isn't darkness (which I assume you meant evil) until it becomes oppressive. So, Unless I'm just not understanding you, you seem to be contradicting yourself.

Also, if there is no point where the darker aspects of the son are NOT considered evil, then how does radicalism come to play here? If one side is completely evil, no matter how much it meets the opposite side in the middle, then the only way to not be evil, is by leaning all the way to the opposite side, right?

Originally posted by Dominis
I don't see it, TBH. The only similarity between them, is that neither started out evil, except the devil is just a fallen angel, whose evil actions and manipulations caused a trickle down effect which is still being felt today; whereas The Son, from my understanding, is implied to be a necessary embodiment of something that exists within all living beings, an actual and necessary aspect of the force.

How would you apply "bringing balance" as it pertains to the force to this interpretation?

And you believe The Son and The Daughter are two different representations of how the force is used/abused, instead of being actual aspects of it?

Think of Son as Lucifer/Devil and Daughter as Jesus with Father being The Father.
Not really. It's more like sort of both. I believe they are party aspects of it. Otherwise the galaxy would have ceased to exist when Anakin kills The Son with the Mortis Dagger, and Father taking his life with it.

Originally posted by Dominis
Right.

But The Son's "animalistic" qualities didn't become a problem until used for selfish desires instead of protecting his sister. That's when he started to become "evil." In your first response to me, you seemed to disagree with that notion, suggesting it's always evil even if it's used in harmony with the light, protecting his sister. Then you later said violence, which is usually a result of animalistic qualities, isn't darkness (which I assume you meant evil) until it becomes oppressive. So, Unless I'm just not understanding you, you seem to be contradicting yourself.

Also, if there is no point where the darker aspects of the son are NOT considered evil, then how does radicalism come to play here? If one side is completely evil, no matter how much it meets the opposite side in the middle, then the only way to not be evil, is by leaning all the way to the opposite side, right?

Let me make it crystal clear to you. Violence is not an act of the dark side unless you are being oppressive.

The dark itself is evil incarnate. What keeps it in check is the light. The light tames the dark. But you cannot say: "Oh, dark is good with light.", it does not work that way. The Son does represent a radical force, but that does not mean he WAS always like that. And his descend into base desires had nothing to do with his sister or his 'father'. It was done on his own accord, not influenced by any outside source. Also, when The Father said that his descend to the dark side causes the Sith to win ground he most likely meant that he found some small "cracks"(Shatterpoints, if you will) through Mortis which he was able to use and indirectly(and barely) influence his own hold over the galaxy to make Mortis imbalanced and weaken his father's domination over them.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
The Son does represent a radical force, but that does not mean he WAS always like that. And his descend into base desires had nothing to do with his sister or his 'father'. It was done on his own accord, not influenced by any outside source.

The Father: "You have done what is forbidden. You have chosen the dark side, and allowed it to feed your anger and desire for power."
The Son: "By bringing the Chosen One here, you have shown me my potential. You have only yourself to blame."
The Father: "Do not do this, my son. Do not become what you should not."

As mentioned, the strong implication is that The Son was never 'evil' until the Mortis trilogy itself -- his affinity towards the dark side had been kept in check in the eons prior to that. The Father allowing Anakin(and co) to enter Mortis was the catalyst for The Son's descent into the dark side.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
Also, when The Father said that his descend to the dark side causes the Sith to win ground he most likely meant that he found some small "cracks"(Shatterpoints, if you will) through Mortis which he was able to use and indirectly(and barely) influence his own hold over the galaxy to make Mortis imbalanced and weaken his father's domination over them.

IOW, The Son's power as a Force Anchorite directly influenced the dark side on a galactic scale.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
Let me make it crystal clear to you. Violence is not an act of the dark side unless you are being oppressive.

The dark itself is evil incarnate. What keeps it in check is the light. The light tames the dark. But you cannot say: "Oh, dark is good with light.", it does not work that way. The Son does represent a radical force, but that does not mean he WAS always like that.

If the dark is kept in check by the light and only used for the greater good or when absolutely necessary, then I don't believe it should be considered evil. I don't think someone is evil unless they intend to make bad choices for their own personal gain. Because at the end of the day, the dark is a natural part of everyone, and the light needs it, just as the dark needs the light.

It seems like you would agree with that notion, considering your use of the term radicalism, but for some odd reason, you're just saying you disagree.

Watching the Mortis trilogy, and it seems I misremembered some stuff so far.

When Anakin had reminded Daughter that he had saved her from being crushed after being scolded for touching her, I initially thought she said that it was her brother's job to save her, which is why I kept saying it was his job to protect her, but that is not what she said. What she actually said was "that was my brother's work," referring to the collapsed mountain that nearly crushed her.

Originally posted by Galan007
Not entirely true.

The Father: "You have done what is forbidden. You have chosen the dark side, and allowed it to feed your anger and desire for power."
The Son: "By bringing the Chosen One here, you have shown me my potential. You have only yourself to blame."
The Father: "Do not do this, my son. Do not become what you should not."

As mentioned, the strong implication is that The Son was never 'evil' until the Mortis trilogy itself -- his affinity towards the dark side had been kept in check in the eons prior to that. The Father allowing Anakin(and co) to enter Mortis was the catalyst for The Son's descent into the dark side.

When The Daughter died, the balance on Mortis shifted heavily towards the dark side. As such, The Son(who had now fully embraced the dark side) became more powerful, which in turn strengthened the dark side/Sith in the material realm.

IOW, The Son's power as a Force Anchorite directly influenced the dark side on a galactic scale.

1. Please, re-read my statements. I never said The Son was evil from the beginning. I said he came to be a radical force when he started to give in to his animalistic desires. Satan was not evil in the beginning either. But he BECAME that. As about your other statement. You don't actually have proof that he was not "EVIL" before that. It is obvious that The Son is a deceitful entity. Surely he would not tell his "father" about what he intends to do and hide his corruptive nature.

In fact, Xendor mentions that through Arden Lynn:

"Xendor told me he once journeyed to a dead world where the Force was worshiped as a triad of divine beings. The Daughter was the Light Side. The Son was the DARK SIDE. And the Father? The Father was the Force itself, perhaps."

Given that the Daughter says it is his nature could be implied that she was actually suspecting him of being "corrupt".

2. No, I do not believe that The Son directly influenced the galaxy due to his Force anchorite status. More logical to assume that he found small Shatterpoints that enabled him to do so.

Originally posted by Dominis
If the dark is kept in check by the light and only used for the greater good or when absolutely necessary, then I don't believe it should be considered evil. I don't think someone is evil unless they intend to make bad choices for their own personal gain. Because at the end of the day, the dark is a natural part of everyone, and the light needs it, just as the dark needs the light.

It seems like you would agree with that notion, considering your use of the term radicalism, but for some odd reason, you're just saying you disagree.

Because the dark is evil. The light keeps it in check. If you had thoughts to crush your father's head because he made you angry, but you restrained yourself. Tell me again that anger was good? Was it? No. But you control yourself. That was what The Son forgot to do. He kept giving in to his animalistic desires more and more.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
You don't actually have proof that he was not "EVIL" before that. It is obvious that The Son is a deceitful entity. Surely he would not tell his "father" about what he intends to do and hide his corruptive nature.

The Father: "You have done what is forbidden. You have chosen the dark side, and allowed it to feed your anger and desire for power."
The Son: "By bringing the Chosen One here, you have shown me my potential. You have only yourself to blame."
The Father: "Do not do this, my son. Do not become what you should not."

When The Son fully embraced the dark side, and became 'evil', The Father immediately sensed it and warned him not to continue down that path... And *the* catalyst for his complete descent into the dark side was Anakin arriving on Mortis(as The Son himself explicitly states.) So again: the heavy implication is that prior to the events of the Mortis trilogy itself, The Son's inherent 'evil' had been kept in check -- he was not using the dark side to 'feed' himself/boost his power. That is what disrupted the balance, and why The Father stated he was doing the "forbidden".

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
In fact, Xendor mentions that through Arden Lynn:

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
Given that the Daughter says it is his nature could be implied that she was actually suspecting him of being "corrupt".

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
2. No, I do not believe that The Son directly influenced the galaxy due to his Force anchorite status. More logical to assume that he found small Shatterpoints that enabled him to do so.

The Son is an anchorite for the cosmic Force. Mortis is a universal cosmic Force nexus. So when The Daughter was killed, and the balance on Mortis shifted heavily towards the dark side, The Son(who had now fully embraced the dark side) became more powerful. This subsequently strengthened the dark side/Sith in the material realm as a direct corollary.

The Father: "As the balance in this world crumbles, so shall war escalate in your galaxy... As my Son has descended into the dark side, so have the Sith gained strength."

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
Because the dark is evil. The light keeps it in check. If you had thoughts to crush your father's head because he made you angry, but you restrained yourself. Tell me again that anger was good? Was it? No. But you control yourself. That was what The Son forgot to do. He kept giving in to his animalistic desires more and more.

It depends on why I stopped myself from doing it. Would it be because I knew it was wrong, and so I made a conscious choice not to crush his head? If that's the case, then no, I wouldn't consider myself evil for making a conscious choice to choose what is right over what is wrong.

You're saying the Son is the embodiment of evil, and he knows it. So why wait until Anakin shows him what his true potential would be like before turning completely against his father and sister? If he was intended to be completely evil and had no choice, then wouldn't he be victimizing himself by going against how nature intended him to be for all those eons? He'd be going well out of his way to be "good."

I think I kinda get what you're saying, I just disagree. I think with all the qualities that the Son does embody, it makes it easy to become selfish and evil. But I don't think the universe and the force intended him to be that way.

I don't agree with comparing the Son to the devil. While there are some similarities between them, none of them really seem to help with what you are arguing, IMHO. The Son embodies an aspect of the force that resides in all living creatures in SW, an aspect that is necessary. The devil doesn't, he is just the first being in creation to turn against God's love, and manipulated others into following his path, from some of the other angels (causing them to become demons like he himself became) to Adam and Eve (damaging the human race). There was nothing about the devil that made him any different from the other angels for him to do what he did. He had the same free will and chose to turn against God's love, he just happened to be the first to do it. In SW, the Sith had been cutting themselves off from the light, and using the force in such perverse ways well before the Son was completely consumed by evil. Hell, the sith's use of the force could be why the Son was gradually turning corrupt, since the dark is directly tied to him.

Also, anger doesn't always lead to thoughts like "I want to crush my fathers head." But like I said, it is a quality that easily leads to such dark thoughts and, in some cases, action. But anger itself isn't evil, it just means you're very dissatisfied with something.

Originally posted by Galan007
The proof is in the dialogue I posted-

The Father: "You have done what is forbidden. You have chosen the dark side, and allowed it to feed your anger and desire for power."
The Son: "By bringing the Chosen One here, you have shown me my potential. You have only yourself to blame."
The Father: "Do not do this, my son. Do not become what you should not."

When The Son fully embraced the dark side, and became 'evil', The Father immediately sensed it and warned him not to continue down that path... And *the* catalyst for his complete descent into the dark side was Anakin arriving on Mortis(as The Son himself explicitly states.) So again: the heavy implication is that prior to the events of the Mortis trilogy itself, The Son's inherent 'evil' had been kept in check -- he was not using the dark side to 'feed' himself/boost his power. That is what disrupted the balance, and why The Father stated he was doing the "forbidden".

Yes, The Son and The Daughter embody the dark and light aspects of the Force respectively. That doesn't mean The Son had been using the dark side to further empower himself and subvert the balance on Mortis, though... That only happened when he completely embraced the dark side and became 'evil'(which, again, only occurred in the story itself.)

Of course The Son has a natural affinity toward the dark side, given that he is an anchorite/embodiment OF the dark side. But as mentioned: prior to the Mortis trilogy(when The Son truly became 'evil'😉, the implication is that he had not been actively using the dark side to fuel his power and disrupt the balance on Mortis... He and his sister were kept in balance for eons prior to Anakin's arrival(logically because he had not been using the dark side in such a way):
https://i.imgur.com/LtieLsI.jpg

How is that more logical? Cosmic-scale Shatterpoint exploitation was never mentioned, or even alluded to.

The Son is an anchorite for the cosmic Force. Mortis is a universal cosmic Force nexus. So when The Daughter was killed, and the balance on Mortis shifted heavily towards the dark side, The Son(who had now fully embraced the dark side) became more powerful. This subsequently strengthened the dark side/Sith in the material realm as a direct corollary.

The Father: "As the balance in this world crumbles, so shall war escalate in your galaxy... As my Son has descended into the dark side, so have the Sith gained strength."

And yet you say this in another of your post:

Originally posted by Galan007
The Siblings' infighting was one of the main reasons why The Father took them to Mortis in the first place. So yeah, they'd fight, and the fabric of the universe would tear because The Father wouldn't be around to check them

So, you want to tell me that The Son was not "evil" before the Mortis arc? What now, are you going to tell me that The Son was fighting his sister because no-reason?

It is obvious that it took The Father time to see that his child became corrupt. Otherwise why do you think The Daughter said that the darkness was in his nature?

It is obvious that after The Father took them to Mortis, The Son played low(hid his Force alignment) and waited for the opportunity to escape.

Look, I know that The Ones are partly cosmic aspects of The Force. But it is really illogical to say that they are The Force itself. When they were gone, all the galaxies should have been obliterated, but that did not happen.

Originally posted by Dominis
It depends on why I stopped myself from doing it. Would it be because I knew it was wrong, and so I made a conscious choice not to crush his head? If that's the case, then no, I wouldn't consider myself evil for making a conscious choice to choose what is right over what is wrong.

You're saying the Son is the embodiment of evil, and he knows it. So why wait until Anakin shows him what his true potential would be like before turning completely against his father and sister? If he was intended to be completely evil and had no choice, then wouldn't he be victimizing himself by going against how nature intended him to be for all those eons? He'd be going well out of his way to be "good."

I think I kinda get what you're saying, I just disagree. I think with all the qualities that the Son does embody, it makes it easy to become selfish and evil. But I don't think the universe and the force intended him to be that way.

I don't agree with comparing the Son to the devil. While there are some similarities between them, none of them really seem to help with what you are arguing, IMHO. The Son embodies an aspect of the force that resides in all living creatures in SW, an aspect that is necessary. The devil doesn't, he is just the first being in creation to turn against God's love, and manipulated others into following his path, from some of the other angels (causing them to become demons like he himself became) to Adam and Eve (damaging the human race). There was nothing about the devil that made him any different from the other angels for him to do what he did. He had the same free will and chose to turn against God's love, he just happened to be the first to do it. In SW, the Sith had been cutting themselves off from the light, and using the force in such perverse ways well before the Son was completely consumed by evil. Hell, the sith's use of the force could be why the Son was gradually turning corrupt, since the dark is directly tied to him.

Let's see:

1. Both Satan and The Son had fallen from grace.
2. Both Satan and The Son sought to seduce the Chosen One - Adam&Eve/Anakin to their cause
3. Both are considered embodiments of evil
4. Both were driven by a lust for power

And The Ones actually predate The Sith.

Let me show you how you contradict yourself:

I think I kinda get what you're saying, I just disagree. I think with all the qualities that the Son does embody, it makes it easy to become selfish and evil. But I don't think the universe and the force intended him to be that way.

The Son embodies an aspect of the force that resides in all living creatures in SW, an aspect that is necessary.

First, you say that The Son's dark path was not set in stone, now you say that he is a necessary aspect of The Force.

Originally posted by Dominis
Also, anger doesn't always lead to thoughts like "I want to crush my fathers head." But like I said, it is a quality that easily leads to such dark thoughts and, in some cases, action. But anger itself isn't evil, it just means you're very dissatisfied with something.

Any negative emotion is caused by something harmful done against you. If you give in, you succumb to that dark emotion. If you restrain yourself, you choose to hold onto light.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
And yet you say this in another of your post:

So, you want to tell me that The Son was not "evil" before the Mortis arc? What now, are you going to tell me that The Son was fighting his sister because no-reason?

Hence The Father's implication that The Son "choosing" to empower himself with the dark side was something new(and forbidden)-
The Father: "You have done what is forbidden. You have chosen the dark side, and allowed it to feed your anger and desire for power."

And The Son's corresponding comment that Anakin's arrival on Mortis was the catalyst that made him fully embrace the dark side-
The Son: "By bringing the Chosen One here, you have shown me my potential. You have only yourself to blame."

And then The Father pleading with him not to go down that path-
The Father: "Do not do this, my son. Do not become what you should not."

Also, you realize that a natural rivalry between The Son and Daughter can still exist without him being 'evil', right?

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
It is obvious that it took The Father time to see that his child became corrupt. Otherwise why do you think The Daughter said that the darkness was in his nature?

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
It is obvious that after The Father took them to Mortis, The Son played low(hid his Force alignment) and waited for the opportunity to escape.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
Look, I know that The Ones are partly cosmic aspects of The Force. But it is really illogical to say that they are The Force itself. When they were gone, all the galaxies should have been obliterated, but that did not happen.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
Let's see:

1. Both Satan and The Son had fallen from grace.
2. Both Satan and The Son sought to seduce the Chosen One - Adam&Eve/Anakin to their cause
3. Both are considered embodiments of evil
4. Both were driven by a lust for power

I get that there are similarities, but I'm not sure how they are relevant to what you're getting at?

Satan is generally considered the embodiment of evil or the ultimate evil because it is believed that all the wickedness in the world can be tied back to him, since he is the first being in creation to go against God's love, and manipulated others into following him. The human race became damaged because of Adam and Eve, who were manipulated by Satan into going against God. It's not because he was an evil aspect of the universe that was just waiting for the right time to be evil the way you seem to be suggesting that the Son was. Satan isn't an aspect period. He was created just the same as every other angel.

Other than that they both did evil things, what is your point in comparing them?

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
And The Ones actually predate The Sith.

Just saying that the Son had nothing to do with the evilness the sith were spreading throughout the galaxy for all those years. The Son still had an attachment to the light, his love for his sister, which I assume is what helped keep him from becoming completely evil, and is why he chose to stay on the right course for all those eons. The sith willfully cut themselves completely off from the light to become stronger with the dark side, and had been doing so well before the Son became fully consumed by his dark nature.

(IMO, I believe that by using too much of the dark side, the sith were unintentionally help causing the Son to become corrupt, since the Son is directly tied to the dark, which could have been the reason the Father was growing weak.The implication by the end of the trilogy seemed to be that the sith were the root of the problem, and that's why Anakin's destiny was to destroy Palpatine. Otherwise, staying on Mortis may have temporarily tamed the Son and daughter but wouldn't have fixed the problem with the force's balance.
It seems that just as how what happens on Mortis affects the galaxy, what happens in the galaxy affects Mortis.)

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
First, you say that The Son's dark path was not set in stone, now you say that he is a necessary aspect of The Force.

Where is the contradiction?

Becoming evil was not set in stone. But the darker aspects of the force that he did embody is what made it easy for him to become evil.

Kinda like a person who has a predisposition to become an addict/alcoholic, doesn't make them an addict/alcoholic.

Originally posted by Freedon Nadd
Any negative emotion is caused by something harmful done against you. If you give in, you succumb to that dark emotion. If you restrain yourself, you choose to hold onto light.

Not necessarily, but even so, those negative emotions is what makes an individual human. It's how one chooses to respond to those emotions that matters.