Star Wars Philosophy

[Lief Erikson]

This is a thread for discussion of any aspects of Star Wars philosophy.

Now, I will respond to couple points Rohirrim TR was making in the Theology thread in General Messages.

When Obi-Wan said, "Only the Sith deal in absolutes,"

1) When Obi-Wan said this, he was responding to Anakin's "you're either with me or against me." He was pretty much saying, "there's always an exception to a rule," or, "there's a lot of gray area," objecting to fanaticism that draws up barriers without attempting to see the other side. He wasn't saying "there's no absolute good," or, "there's no absolute truth." Those weren't what he was talking about at all. In context, he was referring to refusal to see the other side in an argument.

2) Even if he were talking about any form of absolute, this would be somewhat limited to his own world. The Force may not be wholly the same as a perfect, flawless Christian-Judeo God. Perhaps in the Star Wars universe, there aren't any absolutes? I don't know . . . though I don't care for the idea at all.

[rohirrim TR]

1) thats typical obi-wan, he's always saying things like "it was true from a certain point of view", and kinda waffles sometimes, but "actions speak louder than words" so characteristically Jedi behave as though they believe in absolutes of good and evil, and honor and chivalry, (they are knights after all). where as the sith behave as if good and evil were the same remeber palps "from another(the sith) point of view the jedi are evil" using obi-wans own words against him causing anakins fall. in the whole absolute debate the jedi are a bit muddlled i.e. saying one thing, behaving differently, these inconsistencies may have led to anakin's fall.

2)obviously the force isn't God, think about it: pure energy that can only be accessed by some, very dissimilar to my view of God. it does bring up the question of where do the jedi get their values? I don't see how the force would really contribute to that.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by rohirrim TR

1) thats typical obi-wan, he's always saying things like "it was true from a certain point of view", and kinda waffles sometimes, but "actions speak louder than words" so characteristically Jedi behave as though they believe in absolutes of good and evil, and honor and chivalry, (they are knights after all). where as the sith behave as if good and evil were the same remeber palps "from another(the sith) point of view the jedi are evil" using obi-wans own words against him causing anakins fall. in the whole absolute debate the jedi are a bit muddlled i.e. saying one thing, behaving differently, these inconsistencies may have led to anakin's fall.

2)obviously the force isn't God, think about it: pure energy that can only be accessed by some, very dissimilar to my view of God. it does bring up the question of where do the jedi get their values? I don't see how the force would really contribute to that.

Okay, well, there are a small handful of points about the Force which tend to indicate it's more than an energy field. It has a "will" for example, according to Qui-Gon-Jin. It can "speak" to people. Plus, the Force never is referred to as having a "light" side. People refer to a dark side, or just "the Force". This implies that the natural state of the Force is good, and that the darkness is unnatural to the Force. Thus, by eliminating Dark Side users, Anakin would really be restoring balance to the Force. Any Dark Side throws the Force out of balance, because the Dark Side is unnatural and what is bright and good is natural.

So this is kind of a "godly" perspective. An ultimate good with what could be termed "fallen angels" throwing things out of balance.

[rohirrim TR]

whoa time warp, it says you posted that last post yesterday, freaky.

well those are some good points, and it would provide an answer to why the jedi believe in knightly standards.

as to if there are absolutes in the SW universe it seems an obvious yes to me, you can't really have a battle between good and evil without having some semblance of absolutes, at the very least you could say that "freedom good, tyranny bad" could be the absolute that comes through most strongly, although there are others there as well.

[King of The Istari]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Plus, the Force never is referred to as having a "light" side. People refer to a dark side, or just "the Force". This implies that the natural state of the Force is good, and that the darkness is unnatural to the Force. Thus, by eliminating Dark Side users, Anakin would really be restoring balance to the Force. Any Dark Side throws the Force out of balance, because the Dark Side is unnatural and what is bright and good is natural.

So this is kind of a "godly" perspective. An ultimate good with what could be termed "fallen angels" throwing things out of balance.

I always considered the force as neutral it is the wielder that makes it light or dark. but because in the begining there was only Jedi, the sith developed from jedi that had fallen from grace, anakin is bringing the force back into its original state

[inked]

Do you guys know how to spot Roman Catholics and Anglicans at a Star Wars flick?

It's easy.

Whenever anyone says, "The force be with you,"

they are the folks who say,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"And also with you!"

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by King of The Istari

I always considered the force as neutral it is the wielder that makes it light or dark.

Well, that ignores a few important bits of evidence from the movies, which I've already brought up. First of all, the Force has a will (Qui-Gon-Jinn went into discussing this with Anakin in "The Phantom Menace"). It expresses its will in a voice people can hear and follow. Thus it is personal and intelligent, rather than merely energy. This alone makes it something other than neutral.

Then, we can also know that eliminating the Dark Side users brings the Force back into balance (According to Mace Windu in Episode 3). This assumes that good is the norm for the Force, something that also implied in the fact that the "light side" of the Force is never mentioned. It is assumed that the Force is naturally light, and any darkness is an aberration and an imbalance.

Originally Posted by BB

but because in the begining there was only Jedi, the sith developed from jedi that had fallen from grace, anakin is bringing the force back into its original state

Another important point is that though in the movies, the idea that the Force can be brought into balance by destroying the Dark Side users is mentioned, the idea that the Force can be brought into balance by destroying the Jedi is never mentioned by anyone. This absence of anyone expounding the theory in the films implies that it wasn't the plan George Lucas had in mind. Otherwise one would think he would bring up the real meaning of the prophecy, as well as the eroneous (which doesn't seem that eroneous an interpretation, in view of Episode 6's events).

So we have the Force being thrown out of balance by evil, which means the normal state of the Force is good, and we also have it personal, intelligent and eager to communicate. This begins to look very much like a pure, holy, personal and intelligent deity. The Dark Side of the Force is abuse of something good, rather than a natural state of things. I think . This is the only conclusion I can draw that makes sense, in view of the evidence, at this time.

[tolkienfan]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Then, we can also know that eliminating the Dark Side users brings the Force back into balance (According to Mace Windu in Episode 6).

Episode 6??? sorry, I'm a little confused.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by tolkienfan

Episode 6??? sorry, I'm a little confused.

Sorry . Episode 3. Mistype. Editing . . .

[brownjenkins]

there is no "one-god" religion in star wars... the jedi more-closely resemble a buddhist-type culture than a western christian culture... salvation and perfection coming from within, not from without

this quote from yoda reflects this more personal journey:

Death is a natural part of life. Rejoice for those around you who transform into the Force. Mourn them do not. Miss them do not. Attachment leads to jealously. The shadow of greed, that is.

[inked]

Actually, BJ, I am glad you can distinguish between Star Wars stuff and reality. I was beginning to wonder there for a while. But the distinction is correct. In Western and Eastern Christian traditions, salvation is from outside of humanity which is incapable of recovering what it lost in the fall, and therefore needs a Saviour. The Jedi are their own saviours. But, do Buddhists actually believe in any sort of personal god? Do the Jedi? The Force in SW seems much more like the Cosmic Energy capable of direction by those with minds in any direction since it apparently does not have one.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by inked

But, do Buddhists actually believe in any sort of personal god?

a "true" buddhist does not... siddharta gautama spoke of himself basically as an enlightened teacher without any supernatural underpinnings, though some sects tend to dieify him

Originally Posted by inked

The Force in SW seems much more like the Cosmic Energy capable of direction by those with minds in any direction since it apparently does not have one.

i basically agree... though there may be some "direction" behind that energy... from a lucas interview:

MOYERS: What do you make of the fact that so many people have interpreted your work as being profoundly religious?

LUCAS: I don't see Star Wars as profoundly religious. I see Star Wars as taking all the issues that religion represents and trying to distill them down into a more modern and easily accessible construct--that there is a greater mystery out there. I remember when I was 10 years old, I asked my mother, "If there's only one God, why are there so many religions?" I've been pondering that question ever since, and the conclusion I've come to is that all the religions are true.

MOYERS: Is one religion as good as another?

LUCAS: I would say so. Religion is basically a container for faith. And faith in our culture, our world and on a larger issue, the mystical level--which is God, what one might describe as a supernatural, or the things that we can't explain--is a very important part of what allows us to remain stable, remain balanced.

MOYERS: One explanation for the popularity of Star Wars when it appeared is that by the end of the 1970s, the hunger for spiritual experience was no longer being satisfied sufficiently by the traditional vessels of faith.

LUCAS: I put the Force into the movie in order to try to awaken a certain kind of spirituality in young people--more a belief in God than a belief in any particular religious system. I wanted to make it so that young people would begin to ask questions about the mystery. Not having enough interest in the mysteries of life to ask the question, "Is there a God or is there not a God?"--that is for me the worst thing that can happen. I think you should have an opinion about that. Or you should be saying, "I'm looking. I'm very curious about this, and I am going to continue to look until I can find an answer, and if I can't find an answer, then I'll die trying." I think it's important to have a belief system and to have faith.

MOYERS: Do you have an opinion, or are you looking?

LUCAS: I think there is a God. No question. What that God is or what we know about that God, I'm not sure. The one thing I know about life and about the human race is that we've always tried to construct some kind of context for the unknown. Even the cavemen thought they had it figured out. I would say that cavemen understood on a scale of about 1. Now we've made it up to about 5. The only thing that most people don't realize is the scale goes to 1 million.

MOYERS: The central ethic of our culture has been the Bible. Like your stories, it's about the fall, wandering, redemption, return. But the Bible no longer occupies that central place in our culture today. Young people in particular are turning to movies for their inspiration, not to organized religion.

LUCAS: Well, I hope that doesn't end up being the course this whole thing takes, because I think there's definitely a place for organized religion. I would hate to find ourselves in a completely secular world where entertainment was passing for some kind of religious experience.

MOYERS: You said you put the Force into Star Wars because you wanted us to think on these things. Some people have traced the notion of the Force to Eastern views of God—particularly Buddhist--as a vast reservoir of energy that is the ground of all of our being. Was that conscious?

LUCAS: I guess it's more specific in Buddhism, but it is a notion that's been around before that. When I wrote the first Star Wars, I had to come up with a whole cosmology: What do people believe in? I had to do something that was relevant, something that imitated a belief system that has been around for thousands of years, and that most people on the planet, one way or another, have some kind of connection to. I didn't want to invent a religion. I wanted to try to explain in a different way the religions that have already existed. I wanted to express it all.

MOYERS: You're creating a new myth?

LUCAS: I'm telling an old myth in a new way. Each society takes that myth and retells it in a different way, which relates to the particular environment they live in. The motif is the same. It's just that it gets localized. As it turns out, I'm localizing it for the planet. I guess I'm localizing it for the end of the millennium more than I am for any particular place.

MOYERS: Is it fair to say, in effect, that Star Wars is your own spiritual quest?

LUCAS: I'd say part of what I do when I write is ponder a lot of these issues. I have ever since I can remember. And obviously some of the conclusions I've come to I use in the films.

MOYERS: The psychologist Jonathan Young says that whether we say, "I'm trusting my inner voice," or use more traditional language--"I'm trusting the Holy Spirit," as we do in the Christian tradition--somehow we're acknowledging that we're not alone in the universe. Is this what Ben Kenobi urges upon Luke Skywalker when he says, "Trust your feelings"?

LUCAS: Ultimately the Force is the larger mystery of the universe. And to trust your feelings is your way into that.

MOYERS: One scholar has called Star Wars "mysticism for the masses." You've been accused of trivializing religion, promoting religion with no strings attached.

LUCAS: That's why I would hesitate to call the Force God. It's designed primarily to make young people think about the mystery. Not to say, "Here's the answer." It's to say, "Think about this for a second. Is there a God? What does God look like? What does God sound like? What does God feel like? How do we relate to God?" Just getting young people to think at that level is what I've been trying to do in the films. What eventual manifestation that takes place in terms of how they describe their God, what form their faith takes, is not the point of the movie.

MOYERS: And stories are the way to ask these questions?

LUCAS: When the film came out, almost every single religion took Star Wars and used it as an example of their religion; they were able to relate it to stories in the Bible, in the Koran and in the Torah.

MOYERS: Some critics scoff at this whole notion of a deeper layer of meaning to what they call strictly kid stuff. I come down on the side that kid stuff is the stuff dreams are made of.

LUCAS: Yes. It's much harder to write for kids than it is to write for adults. On one level, they ill accept--they don't have constraints, and they're not locked into a particular dogma. On the other side, if something doesn't make sense to them, they're much more critical of it.

MOYERS: So when you write, do you see your audience, and is that audience a 13-year-old boy?

LUCAS: I make these films for myself more than I make them for anybody else. I'm lucky that the things that I believe in and the things that I enjoy and the things that entertain me entertain a large population. Sometimes they don't. I've made a bunch of movies that nobody has liked. So that doesn't always hold true. But I don't really make my films for an audience per se. I'm hoping that a 12-year-old boy or girl will enjoy it. But I'm not dumbing it down. I think I'm making it with enough credibility so that anybody can watch it.

MOYERS: It's certainly true that Star Wars was seen by a lot of adults, yours truly included. Even if I hadn't wanted to pay attention, I realized that I had to take it seriously because my kids were taking it seriously. And now my grandkids take it seriously.

LUCAS: Well, it's because I try to make it believable in its own fantastic way. And I am dealing with core issues that were valid 3,000 years ago and are still valid today, even though they're not in fashion.

MOYERS: Why are they out of fashion?

LUCAS: Because the world we live in is more complex. I think that a lot of those moralities have been degraded to the point that they don't exist anymore. But the emotional and psychological part of those issues are still there in most people's minds.

MOYERS: Wendy Doniger, who is a scholar of mythology at the University of Chicago, says that myths are important because they remind us that our lives are real and our lives are not real. We have these bodies, which we can touch, but we also have within us this omnipotent magical world of thought.

LUCAS: Myths tell us these old stories in a way that doesn't threaten us. They're in an imaginary land where you can be safe. But they deal with real truths that need to be told. Sometimes the truths are so painful that stories are the only way you can get through to them psychologically.

MOYERS: Ultimately, isn't Star Wars about transformation?

LUCAS: It will be about how young Anakin Skywalker became evil and then was redeemed by his son. But it's also about the transformation of how his son came to find the call and then ultimately realize what it was. Because Luke works intuitively through most of the original trilogy until he gets to the very end. And it's only in the last act--when he throws his sword down and says, "I'm not going to fight this"--that he makes a more conscious, rational decision. And he does it at the risk of his life because the Emperor is going to kill him. It's only that way that he is able to redeem his father. It's not as apparent in the earlier movies, but when you see the next trilogy, then you see the issue is, How do we get Darth Vader back? How do we get him back to that little boy that he was in the first movie, that good person who loved and was generous and kind? Who had a good heart.

MOYERS: In authentic religion, doesn't it take Kierkegaard's leap of faith?

LUCAS: Yes, yes. Definitely. You'll notice Luke uses that quite a bit through the film--not to rely on pure logic, not to rely on the computers, but to rely on faith. That is what that "Use the Force" is, a leap of faith. There are mysteries and powers larger than we are, and you have to trust your feelings in order to access them.

MOYERS: When Darth Vader tempts Luke to come over to the Empire side, offering him all that the Empire has to offer, I am taken back to the story of Satan taking Christ to the mountain and offering him the kingdoms of the world, if only he will turn away from his mission. Was that conscious in your mind?

LUCAS: Yes. That story also has been retold. Buddha was tempted in the same way. It's all through mythology. The gods are constantly tempting. Everybody and everything. So the idea of temptation is one of the things we struggle against, and the temptation obviously is the temptation to go to the dark side. One of the themes throughout the films is that the Sith lords, when they started out thousands of years ago, embraced the dark side. They were greedy and self-centered and they all wanted to take over, so they killed each other. Eventually, there was only one left, and that one took on an apprentice. And for thousands of years, the master would teach the apprentice, the master would die, the apprentice would then teach another apprentice, become the master, and so on. But there could never be any more than two of them, because if there were, they would try to get rid of the leader, which is exactly what Vader was trying to do, and that's exactly what the Emperor was trying to do. The Emperor was trying to get rid of Vader, and Vader was trying to get rid of the Emperor. And that is the antithesis of a symbiotic relationship, in which if you do that, you become cancer, and you eventually kill the host, and everything dies.

MOYERS: I hear many young people today talk about a world that's empty of heroism, where there are no more noble things to do.

LUCAS: Heroes come in all sizes, and you don't have to be a giant hero. You can be a very small hero. It's just as important to understand that accepting self-responsibility for the things you do, having good manners, caring about other people--these are heroic acts. Everybody has the choice of being a hero or not being a hero every day of their lives. You don't have to get into a giant laser-sword fight and blow up three spaceships to become a hero.

[Lief Erikson]

Thanks for posting that interview, brownjenkins. I read the whole thing and enjoyed it a great deal, and it clarified for me some what George Lucas was trying to do. I very much appreciate and approve of his mission to get young people to question whether or not there is a God, and to seek the answer. That is a very positive goal, in my opinion. I disagree with George Lucas' own liberal theology, but he doesn't try to bring his own belief out in the movies, but rather seeks to encourage others to some belief. So I'm happy.

Originally Posted by inked

Actually, BJ, I am glad you can distinguish between Star Wars stuff and reality. I was beginning to wonder there for a while. But the distinction is correct. In Western and Eastern Christian traditions, salvation is from outside of humanity which is incapable of recovering what it lost in the fall, and therefore needs a Saviour. The Jedi are their own saviours.

There is that. The God of the Force is one who seems possible to approach through human effort and choice. However, the nature of this God is somewhat similar to the Judeo-Christian and Islamic God, one who is good and has his own personal will that he works through his followers.

Originally Posted by inked

But, do Buddhists actually believe in any sort of personal god? Do the Jedi? The Force in SW seems much more like the Cosmic Energy capable of direction by those with minds in any direction since it apparently does not have one.

That interview doesn't really answer the question of whether or not the Force is a personal God, but the movies themselves suggest that it is. George Lucas did say that there is a "will of the Force," that it can talk to people, and Qui-Gon said that Anakin would "hear them speaking." That scene did strongly suggest that the Force was a personal sort of God.

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

there is no "one-god" religion in star wars... the jedi more-closely resemble a buddhist-type culture than a western christian culture... salvation and perfection coming from within, not from without

I agree about salvation and perfection coming from within rather than without. However, the nature of God is more in line with monotheism than with Buddhism.

There is definitely a one-god religion apparent in Star Wars. Evil throws the Force out of balance, which shows that it is by nature good, and furthermore it has its own will, which makes it a good, personal God. There are differences, but there also are close similarities. The Force is not neutral.

I realize that there definitely is some Buddhism, Hinduism, and even pantheism and such in Star Wars as well. It's a bit of a mixture of everything. There also are some elements of the monotheist religions, as was mentioned in that interview. The nature of God seems to be largely paralleled with the monotheist religions, though the Jedi's personal journey seems to be more Buddhist.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

George Lucas did say that there is a "will of the Force," that it can talk to people, and Qui-Gon said that Anakin would "hear them speaking." That scene did strongly suggest that the Force was a personal sort of God.

the key word is "them" (the midi-chlorians)

The word "midi-chlorian" appears to be a blend of "mitochondrion" and "chloroplast", two organelles found in real cells and thought to have evolved from bacteria as endosymbionts inside other cells, as purported in the endosymbiotic theory. Lucas has indeed stated that the midi-chlorians are based on the endosymbiotic theory, and it appears that in the story of Anakin Skywalker, he wanted to create a more modern "virgin birth" in the Star Wars saga that was as much based in science as in philosophy and religion, with the mythic "givers of life" being microscopic lifeforms, rather than gods.

of interest is a quote from obi wan from the first movie (describing the force):

An energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us, penetrates us, and binds the galaxy together.

note the "created by", almost as if the force arose from life, and not the other way around

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

the key word is "them" (the midi-chlorians)

Not really, for they were merely passing on what they heard from the Force itself. They serve in the function of translators, not of speakers.

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

note the "created by", almost as if the force arose from life, and not the other way around

It could be interpreted that way, but that interpretation doesn't make sense without coming to an even more Judeo-Christian view of the Force than the one I proposed. The Force, according to Obi-Wan, "binds the galaxy together." Now if we accept that life creates the Force and that it binds the galaxy together, we must accept that life existed from the instant of the galaxy's formation. But organic life could not have existed from the instant of the galaxy's beginning. That means we're not talking about organic life but spiritual life, which actually leads us to an even more precise image of the Judeo-Christian concept of God than the one that appears from movie quotations.

However, I don't really think he was saying life actually created the Force. More likely, he was saying it emanates from life in a special way, like what Yoda said on Dagobah, "luminous beings are we, not this crude matter!" So I think George Lucas had in mind that the Force would emanate particularly strongly from lifeforms, but not necessarily exist only because of life forms. The interpretation that the Force only exists because of other life forms doesn't jive with the other stated function of the Force regarding the galaxy.

Furthermore, I would add that your interpretation doesn't make sense because of a quote from Qui-Gon-Jin in Episode 1. He said, "Without the midi-chlorians, life could not exist, and we would have no knowledge of the Force."

That directly implies that the Force would have existed, whether we did or not. It's saying that midi-chlorians are responsible for both life and knowledge of the Force, but it implies that the Force would have been there anyway. After all, the mid-chlorians are responsible for bringing people knowledge of the Force, rather than the Force itself.

[inked]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

the key word is "them" (the midi-chlorians)



of interest is a quote from obi wan from the first movie (describing the force):



note the "created by", almost as if the force arose from life, and not the other way around

Precisely. Backwards from the Judeo-Christian viewpoint! Ex nihilo and all that. And the force is impersonal, definitely not a Judeo-Christian belief.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Furthermore, I would add that your interpretation doesn't make sense because of a quote from Qui-Gon-Jin in Episode 1. He said, "Without the midi-chlorians, life could not exist, and we would have no knowledge of the Force."

it's a symbiotic relationship... did you read the other theory i linked?

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by inked

Precisely. Backwards from the Judeo-Christian viewpoint! Ex nihilo and all that. And the force is impersonal, definitely not a Judeo-Christian belief.

Definitely not a Star Wars belief either. Have you ever watched "The Phantom Menace"?

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

it's a symbiotic relationship... did you read the other theory i linked?

I know the relationship is supposed to be symbiotic- Qui-Gon said that in Star Wars. The two life forms (us and the midi-chlorians) live together for mutual advantage, and our life could not exist without the midi-chlorians. I don't see how this relates to my point.

And no, I'm afraid reading about the prokaryotes and eukaryotes without knowing how they were supposed to relate to Star Wars wasn't something I chose to pursue.

[inked]

Lief,

I have seen all the SW (some more than once, but long ago) but I'm not sure of your reference. Please enlighten me.

[Lief Erikson]

Qui-Gon-Jin talking with young Anakin in Episode 1, when they're about to fly back to Naboo. In that conversation, Qui-Gon said that midi-chlorians make known to people the will of the Force, and that in time, Anakin would hear them speaking to him. From that conversation it became clear that the Force is not neutral but has a will.

Also, it is clear that the Force is not neutral from the fact that destroying users of the Dark Side brings the Force into balance. This implies that the natural state of the Force is good, rather than evil. This also shows it is not neutral.

So we have that the Force is a good, personal, intelligent God with a will of its own.