Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
1. Those books are newer and just as valid as any other published material, and they offer a more realistic and refined assessment of galactic history up to the point of SWTOR original stories. Your opinion is fallible and worthless on the other hand and you don't have the authority to dismiss credibility of any source. Anybody who takes you seriously needs to get his head examined.2.The first two quotes refer to Vitiate before he set foot on Dromund Kaas.
1. I have every right to dismiss its credibility. TORE is written from the perspective of in-universe historians. Do I really need to explain to you why that makes everything said in the book extremely questionable, and quite frankly, not usable if you want conclusive and objective evidence of something?
2. The first quote refers to him as a child, and the second is obviously referring to him as of the making of the encyclopedia, as in he is history's most powerful dark side master (from the perspective of historians) as of the writing of the book. Thus, neither can be used when discussing novel Vitiate. Or would you seriously argue that if a statement like this was made...
Adolf Hitler, history's most evil man, took singing lessons and sang in the church choir in his youth.
...that he was already "history's most evil man" when he was eight years old?
Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Azronger dismissing SWTORE but clinging to sources from the 90s.
Is this supposed to be some shitty bait? I know you're smarter than this, Ant. I have seen you at your best, and I know you are an intelligent individual when it comes to debating.
So why do you have to be such a petty b-itch?
[i]Originally posted by Azronger
1. I have every right to dismiss its credibility. TORE is written from the perspective of in-universe historians. Do I really need to explain to you why that makes everything said in the book extremely questionable, and quite frankly, not usable if you want conclusive and objective evidence of something?2. The first quote refers to him as a child, and the second is obviously referring to him as of the making of the encyclopedia, as in he is history's most powerful dark side master (from the perspective of historians) as of the writing of the book. Thus, neither can be used when discussing novel Vitiate. Or would you seriously argue that if a statement like this was made...
...that he was already "history's most evil man" when he was eight years old?
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
So what? Star Wars - The Complete Encyclopedia (SWTCE) is written from the perspective of in-universe historians as well, so we dismiss it too?
Yes.
Only another (newer) source can challenge the credibility of revelations in SWTORE. This is the rule.
If we go by that logic, then we accept every in-universe statement ever made as fact. Choose that or start applying critical analysis to things.
Originally posted by MythLord
Jesus, your trolling sucks.But just for the hell of it, the Jedi Path notes that every Jedi was trained within the Jedi Temple first, while they were initiates:
Thus Ulic was indeed a Jedi who walked the halls of the Temple and qualifies as such until he became a Sith.
You do realize all those quotes are talking about Mace circa-TPM, correct? Well, the "most powerful" one is. 🙂
ill address your second post first.
Along with Mace Windu, a senior member of the Jedi Council, Yoda was the most respected and most powerful member of the Jedi Order.
-Star Wars Fact File 11
Is there any reason to assume this would refer to all jedi in the orders entire history? I see no reason to make such a assumption.
As to your first post that may be the case for the vast majority of students in the PT era, however you won't argue that every jedi in TOR has been to the temple. How abouts those jedi "Padawans" on russian? (Basically force sensitive kids) Did they all go to the temple to learn? or go there at all? This is obviously a general statement with many exceptions. Ulic and Cay are provably two of them.
"His mother was a Jedi Knight. Along with his brother, Cay, they were apprenticed to the Jedi Master Arca on Arkadia."
Star Wars encyclopedia
"Only when they reached a proper age did she agree to send them (Ulic and Cay) to Master Arca Jeth, a skilled jedi teacher who maintained a training compound on arkania."
Star wars Tales of the jedi companion.
Note that they were of a proper age, future back it tells about how she had thought them about everything, except the force. This indicates a being rather old. Second note that she sends them to Master Arca, who is not at the jedi temple, hes on arkania. And they had zero training at this point. So they never went to the temple before meeting arca.
Sorry wollf, your points just don't hold up.
Originally posted by TheMuser
ill address your second post first.Along with Mace Windu, a senior member of the Jedi Council, Yoda was the most respected and most powerful member of the Jedi Order.
-Star Wars Fact File 11
Is there any reason to assume this would refer to all jedi in the orders entire history? I see no reason to make such a assumption.
It isn't restricted by era, and last I checked, the Jedi Order is an organization that has been around 25 millenia. So going with the most straightforward interpretation.
Originally posted by Azronger
Yes.If we go by that logic, then we accept every in-universe statement ever made as fact. Choose that or start applying critical analysis to things.
The primary purpose of a piece of literature is to establish truthfulness of developments in a (Sci-Fi) lore, whether through in-universe writing format or out-of-universe writing format. However, the in-universe writing format is the [default choice] for establishing truthfulness in such works because a (Sci-Fi) lore based development is not relevant for our world. This is it.
PerspectiveIn-universe
If something is in-universe, or is described as such, it belongs to the Star Wars universe exclusively and not to the real world. Characters, for example, are in-universe, but the actors who play them are out-of-universe. Another example is that the correspondent in-universe term for the English language is Galactic Basic, which is the common language in Star Wars. Pseudohistory is an integral part of in-universe treatment of canon material.
The only section where out-of-universe information is appropriate is the "Behind the scenes" section and its subsections of an in-universe article. See below for more details.
Out-of-universe
Out-of-universe refers to the perspective in which an article is written; it is the opposite of in-universe. Something written from an out-of-universe (OOU) perspective is written from a real-life point of view. It will refer, for example, to real-life publications, actors, authors, events, and so on, acknowledging that its subject is fictional. In contrast, an in-universe perspective will strive for verisimilitude; that is, it will be written as though the author existed within the Star Wars universe. Articles about any in-universe things, such as characters, vehicles, terminology, or species, should always be written from an in-universe perspective. If a section in the article is not, such as the listing of a character's published appearances or behind the scenes details, it should be tagged as such. In contrast, articles about books, movies, games, or other real-life Star Wars material should obviously be written from an out-of-universe perspective, but should still be noted as such. Basically, in-universe articles should never refer to Star Wars by name, or any other real-life things such as publications, actors, or the like.
Source: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Manual_of_Style
One guy nailed it stackexchange:
What you're describing is canon.
In-universe means something that is described in the story, that's part of the plot. For example, if the protagonist loses in a fight with his arch-nemesis, an in-universe reason would be that the protagonist tripped and fell, or that the nemesis took steroids. An out-of-universe reason would be that the lost fight was the conflict that set the protagonist on his path to adventure.
---
You cannot just dismiss the credibility of a piece of literature because it has in-universe conceit under the pretext of critical analysis. Majority of Star Wars books have in-universe conceit but their truthfulness cannot be questioned for Star Wars related developments.
We, at most, have the liberty to identify contradictions and retcons in relation to a particular development and base our argument on them in order to reach a meaningful conclusion. However, a newer source carries more weight than an older one because the newer source brings refined assessment of events in the past to the table.
Originally posted by TheMuser
As to your first post that may be the case for the vast majority of students in the PT era, however you won't argue that every jedi in TOR has been to the temple. How abouts those jedi "Padawans" on russian? (Basically force sensitive kids) Did they all go to the temple to learn? or go there at all? This is obviously a general statement with many exceptions. Ulic and Cay are provably two of them."His mother was a Jedi Knight. Along with his brother, Cay, they were apprenticed to the Jedi Master Arca on Arkadia."
Star Wars encyclopedia
"Only when they reached a proper age did she agree to send them (Ulic and Cay) to Master Arca Jeth, a skilled jedi teacher who maintained a training compound on arkania."
Star wars Tales of the jedi companion.
Note that they were of a proper age, future back it tells about how she had thought them about everything, except the force. This indicates a being rather old. Second note that she sends them to Master Arca, who is not at the jedi temple, hes on arkania. And they had zero training at this point. So they never went to the temple before meeting arca.
Sorry wollf, your points just don't hold up.
Az already addressed your first point, so I'll address the second one:
You do realize "when they were of proper age" refers to them becoming padawans, correct? This also aligns with the Jedi Path, as it notes padawans are trained under a single teacher(in this case Arca Jeth) and their training is mostly off-world(Coruscant), in this case Arkadia:
It's obviously referring to Cay and Ulic as of their teenage years, when they became padawans. Prior to that they were initiates, and thus walked the halls of the Jedi Temple.
And Ruusan is an obvious exception due to the massive war that was at hand; but we don't judge stuff by exceptions since that's an anecdotal fallacy, we judge stuff by the rule.
Originally posted by Nephthyswow, was expecting something a bit more witty...
Says the guy almost-unanimously voted to be kicked off the forum, kukuku.Also when we're talking about negatives is it really that bad to be highest? I mean being the highest in terms of credibility doesn't..... sound bad?
Originally posted by MythLord
Az already addressed your first point, so I'll address the second one:You do realize "when they were of proper age" refers to them becoming padawans, correct? This also aligns with the Jedi Path, as it notes padawans are trained under a single teacher(in this case Arca Jeth) and their training is mostly off-world(Coruscant), in this case Arkadia:
It's obviously referring to Cay and Ulic as of their teenage years, when they became padawans. Prior to that they were initiates, and thus walked the halls of the Jedi Temple.
And Ruusan is an obvious exception due to the massive war that was at hand; but we don't judge stuff by exceptions since that's an anecdotal fallacy, we judge stuff by the rule.
Wollf, I am pretty sure you are missing the obvious. They were with their mother before going to Arca, they lived on alderaan with her, where she taught them about everything save the force. They had never gone to the temple because they had zero training before going to arca, which would not be true if they had ever been to the temple. And Arca, Again, was not at the temple, and there is no reason to assume they had ever been there.
Also, while that may have been an example of one exception due to odd circumstances, I'm relatively certain I can find other examples given time, point being, this quote is not a be all end all.
Sorry, that TPM quote about walking the halls of the temple does not apply.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Do you understand the meaning of word 'canon' or shall I elaborate this simple concept to you?The primary purpose of a piece of literature is to establish [B]truthfulness
of developments in a (Sci-Fi) lore, whether through in-universe writing format or out-of-universe writing format. However, the in-universe writing format is the [default choice] for establishing truthfulness in such works because a (Sci-Fi) lore based development is not relevant for our world. This is it.Source: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Manual_of_Style
One guy nailed it stackexchange:
What you're describing is canon.
In-universe means something that is described in the story, that's part of the plot. For example, if the protagonist loses in a fight with his arch-nemesis, an in-universe reason would be that the protagonist tripped and fell, or that the nemesis took steroids. An out-of-universe reason would be that the lost fight was the conflict that set the protagonist on his path to adventure.
---
You cannot just dismiss the credibility of a piece of literature because it has in-universe conceit under the pretext of critical analysis. Majority of Star Wars books have in-universe conceit but their truthfulness cannot be questioned for Star Wars related developments.
We, at most, have the liberty to identify contradictions and retcons in relation to a particular development and base our argument on them in order to reach a meaningful conclusion. However, a newer source carries more weight than an older one because the newer source brings refined assessment of events in the past to the table. [/B]
Yes, I do understand the meaning of canon, in-universe, and out-of-universe. Apparently you do not, though, despite just posting a rather extensive explanation from Wookieepedia.
So let me say it to you one more time: the historians who wrote TORE and TCSWE etc. are fictional people from the Star Wars universe, and their works also exist in the SWU, or at least the text within them. Thus, their words have no more value than for example Palpatine claiming he is the dark side itself, or Darth Nyriss recounting the tales of Vitiate's childhood, unless reinforced by fact. They are simply their opinions that they have formed studying the information available to them, which may or may not be accurate at all. Some may even be pure speculation, like for example some of Gnost Dural's timeline reports.
Using them as evidence essentially means you're using subjective information to try to reach an objective conclusion. Do I need to tell you why that does not work, or do you have the mental capacity to understand that yourself? If it's the former, then too bad, because I'm done wasting my time on you.
The SWTORE isn't actually described as having been written by historians to my knowledge. On the other hand it's labelled as the "definitive guide to the epic conflict", so I'm going to have to disagree with you. 🙁
FYI: TCSWE is indeed described as having been written by historians, but these historians are detailed as omniscient.