The 'True' Lesson of Strength 

This is one of the best videos I have ever seen on youtube. Thank you for putting the time into making this.

Thanks.

I have some questions about Kreia from your video. As the jedi and sith are dependent on the force, is kreia creating echos to manipulate those who dependent on it? You referred to Kreia as being similar to Marchiavelli, so to add to the question, when Kreia uses echos in the force is this act and advise you offers something similar to Marchiavelli? Thank you.

Oh, I just used Machiavelli as a synonym for manipulative, as I also named Shakespeare in that sentence. It doesn't entirely have anything to do with Machiavelli's book the Prince on ruling through pure logic, dominance and fear.

I understand. I then have another question on Kriea. I'm trying to understand the nuance of Kriea advising the player to have power that is not dependent on something else. In a way we are all to an extent limited and dependent on another. For example if Kriea has succeeded in creating a synthesis then force sensitives would be dependent on the exile for this philosophy. Hence we can't always escape being dependent on 'something'. I understand that if you are dependent on something for power then that becomes a weakness for if you are robbed of this external thing that you are dependent on then you become powerless. Yet I suspect I might be missing something so if I am would it be okay if you could elaborate on how Kriea things one ought to not be dependent on other things? Thanks

Correct. Kreia even says, after escaping Paragus II, to not let the Sith discover what makes the Exile special before they find out for themselves. And it is only when the player recognizes Kreia's philosophy that they learn the core importance of the Exile. The truth of the Exile is made blatant when confronted by the Jedi Masters on Dantooine.

That's why she calls it the choice of Malachor V. Everyone else turned to join Revan because they could not turn away from power. They let him rule them, which is not true strength, even if they gained a bunch of powers in the process. Because all that power is not for them to achieve their own goals, but Revan's. Following Revan at the end is not actually Kreia's preference for your final choice, because as a character, your Exile would kind of have regressed into who she was before the war ("I will follow Revan, as I did before") instead of being her own person.

@@The.RU-vidr.with.no.Name. Since i don't know how to contact you I am just gonna reply to one of your comments I have a minor question/clarification If the exile is light side does that make him/her weak since he still a slave to the jedi code?

@@CryonicCy It depends on *you* and how you see it. If you play the game always being a goody-two-shoes 'just because it's what the Jedi do' then yes, they are a slave to the code. If you examine all possibilities, think about your choices and follow the light side, then they are not a slave. The point is independent judgment and making choices. A slave cannot choose. The Sith obviously emphasizes the importance of personal responsibility and choice but they have to dabble in the Dark Side which corrupts the self.

@@The.RU-vidr.with.no.Name. Thank you for answering

The Goofball well what if you want to learn something?

I liked that, too!

Oh my god I can't even understand Kreia's JOKES!

Little moments of humanity like that made Kreia feel like more than just a mentor but also a member of the team like everyone else. Made things that much more painful in the end.

"Always be on your guard-- otherwise you may learn something." What does that mean?????

Funnily enough, our submission to dogmatism is ingrained into our language. "My God" refers to a supernatural deity that people are supposed to submit to, to give themselves to fully, and to receive absolution and strength from. God as a concept denies a person full access to the power of his own will.

@@roadent217 I think you'd enjoy the book "The Magic of Psychic Power" written by Joseph David Schwartz. It's out of print but I got a copy on Ebay. It's amazing.

@@roadent217 its funny Saying "my god" and other mentions of god is consdiered bad "Do not speak lords name in vain" So from certain point of view Saying "my god" could be an insult to the christian god And thats exactly why you should, say "oh my god" to every mundane thing Cause fuck the guy who made "pain" and "fear" a thing that exists He also made the devil too So you cannot say "devil made all the bad things" and make it all seem better Sorry, i detest Christianity with passion.

@@HellishSpoon you're a little incorrect: the christian god (and no other god) cannot be insulted. God is god, you can't reach it with stupid things like that. When someone tells you otherwise, they just try to manipulate you.

@@roadent217 Islam is restraint and bondage- the Bible teaches otherwise= how to transcend past the flesh

It's coming... But the lesson Kreia wanted to teach is to rely on your own strength as the source of your power. Not only that, but to think for yourself and to live for your self by valuating your life.

" rely on your own strength as the source of your power" *"In my mind a true friend never relies on another's dream. The man, who would be my friend, must have his own reason for living, beyond me."* " Not only that, but to think for yourself and to live for your self by valuating your life." *"And he should put his heart and soul into protecting his dream. He should never hesitate to defend it, even against me."*

BEEEEERRRRRSSEEEEEERRRKKEEEEEERRRR

Problem is that Griffith read Nietzsche wrong. He was totally full of shit and didn't realize the ties that empowered him. Its to draw power from others, but not be dependent on it.

If you rely on strenght that is not your own then your power can be stripped from you -leaving you naked and surprised at no longer having what you thought was yours, but if you're the source of your own greatness than nobody but you can take that away.

And that's is Kreia's true lesson. It's not just about endless slaughter to gain exp lol.

In Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines killing gives you nothing. You gain experience by accomplishing or finding something. And of course there's Planescape: Torment where Intelligence+Wisdom is the best build even for a fighter (combat is easy), because thinking, discovering and remembering is the most important part of the game.

Awesome. And yes, Kotor 2 does flip the morality on its head, but only further reinforces the general philosophy that was already present in Star Wars. After watching the Star Wars movies and playing through Kotor 1 and 2, do watch my video on Kreia do understand what I mean.

I just watched your excellent Monster analysis, and have put KOTOR video on on my Watch Later list. I'll be sure to watch it.

Cool. Also, don't forget to install the Restoration Mod for Kotor 2 once you get to playing it. It completes the game.

Hemang Chauhan watch the first 6 ;)

@@The.RU-vidr.with.no.Name. too bad TLJ attempted a deconstruction just to surprise us but it only said Jedi bad and any rise of light rises darkness too, shit that doesn't make sense, and then it doesn't reinforce anything, it's just Luke being nihilistic, I really expected some KOTOR II level storytelling when Luke said it's time for the Jedi to end

Nipah~

You know the guy with a Lelouch avatar knows what there talking about when it comes to Amazing characters. Both him and Kreia are at the very top of my list aswell.

Wotan awakens wotan in tbe people

Sutibu San to be good is not a virtue. To *choose* to be good is a virtue. And you can't make such a choice if you don't know another option. So without realising how evil you can be you cannot be virtuous because you cannot make a choice to be a good person.

Now I'm suddenly getting this mental image of how Kreia's persona's power would be through the roof. lol

I don't know source, but one who denies his shadow is merely its slave.

She doesn't wish to destroy Jedi and their "religion" she always wished to enhance Jedi teachings by abandoning their code and being more critical of their own ways. She hates their blind-following of the code, not the Jedi themselves. Meanwhile Sith and their ideologies she completely despises. Many say that Kreia is a Grey Jedi, but that's not true because of that. She is a sort of anti-hero. The one who seeks the truth, using both sides of the Force in equal manner but remaining in the lighter side. She doesn't neither Jedi or Sith codes, but in the end she does try to kill you if you are Nihilus-like dark lord, and tries to save you if you are a light-sided character. She is just sort of person to stay in the light, but hating the current system so that code won't restrain someone from doing whatever they feel like doing.

well they released a book that follows what happened to Revan and the Exile after the end of KOTOR II but butcher's KOTOR II story. EA and Bioware released an mmo called Star Wars: the Old Republic(SWTOR) which most KOTOR I & II fans consider heresy because of how they handle Revan & the Exile (or in the exiles case not handle at all and instead just killed off). So they did continue this universe but no KOTOR III.

@@Jessica-pg8tf And KoTOR III is being delayed constantly by EA as well. Oh well, if Obsidian or OG BioWare ain't making it, then it won't live up to the predecessors.

only problem is that bioware will probably make it

EA owns the rights now. I would rather wait more than 20 years for the rights to go to another hands.

We'll probably get an FPS or something like that.

Rest in peace, friend.

And Half-Life Thr-*OH WAIT*

If you want an answer to that, I recommend watching my video The Foundations of Star Wars that examines the nature of the Force. The short answer is that going to the Dark Side is addictive and makes you prone to act irrationally and desire power for its own sake, like a drug.

@@The.RU-vidr.with.no.Name. I guess my biggest problem with Nietzschian philosophy is everyone always assumes they'd be the Ubermensch. They never consider they'd only be the people that tries to stop or supports them, or worse: they're just the Last Man.

@@AxelXGabriel Basically, it's like people who play video games with a shallow sense of morality. In a "good" playthrough, they'll always pick the "good" options. In an "evil" playthrough, they'll always pick the "evil" options. Never do they cast aside such falsehoods and pick the smart options.

​@@DarkAdonisVyers Honestly, that's just people being lazy. Because to do otherwise would be to assume the game even has more choices to explore. Ofcourse, as we now know, the world building of KoTOR II was exceptional, giving us all shades of grey, and deconstructs the black and white.

"Kreia, are you a Jedi or a Sith?" "Does it matter? If course it does. It allows you to split the galaxy in two; categorize it. Know that I wielded both, and recognize them for what they are: pieces of a whole." ...or something like that.

Yeah, they have strong similarities where both emphasize choice and their intention rather than the actions themselves be beholden by the light or dark side. Also too Vergere severed Jacen's connection to the force to rely on his own rather than the force when once regained, he became stronger than before another trait Kreia shares. The only main difference I see is where Kreia sees death and ultimately pessimist about the force, Vergere is rather more positive about it though her goals are far more elusive in that regard.

*Have you considered putting the short videos into a play list?* Not really. This video exists because this specific choice was never uploaded on youtube.

I believe most of her sith showings comes from beinga sith

But a Sith without self destructive tendencies is what no Sith could ever do, and also stops them from becoming truly evil and able to shape the world in their image without destroying it. It's not complicated, but it's existence makes the Jedi teachings unneeded and all the other Sith weak addicts.

@@JZjzred I think you're pretty much right, Kreia could have made a reform of the sith teachings instead of trying to destroy all of the force. Her belief about the force controlling everything is unfounded.

You can't. If you're neutral or on the light side, the game forces you to have Mira as your party. So unless you go dark side then change light after getting Hanharr, it's impossible.

I see you have hunger of power, you are not ready to let go strength if u value more numbers than the will that open new ways. Keep trying, you may learn something.

When Kreia reads Atton's mind at Atris academy

You gain a +2 to strength. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-s5w9LBcYu5g.html

It helps if you think of them as a character in a story and not just an avatar of yourself. So, like a JRPG basically.

i never thought my character is my avatar in any of rpg games, i am male but i always make female character usually making my character looks femiliar with other character in movie or games that i like.

But with a game like KOTOR2, where player agency is a central theme, doesn't that build a disconnect between you, your character, and the choices you make as that character?

Fair point. That the same reason I never finished the dark side ending, I just couldn't relate to it.

just treat it as a playable movie you're an observer a fly on the wall.

Hanharr. Did you even play Kotor 2?

i've never really understood the part about the beast, is the beast the dark side of the force ? that's what I've been thinking it was

Play it with the Restoration Mod.

Does it also fix the random difficulty spikes? (Finally got around to playing this a few months ago)

If you talk to Sion at the end of the game, he says that the reason Kreia sought the Exile was because she couldn't live to be without power. Just like her hatred for the Force, she came to rely on power. She had the correct philosophy but could not do what she preached. Even then, it is a lesson few people ever learn.

that was a damn fast reply nice effort on 2 hour vid very good. I always wondered if Kreia took Exiles place after malachor V as general who else could command all those forces/fleet while Revan and Malek went searching for sith? If you take that Vitiate did play with there minds kreias prob one of the only ones who could break the hold. Malek at dantooine at star map says we can never go back if we continue meaning he was no longer under the influence. Maybe while they look for star maps kreia was sent to the academy as number of Revans plans he always seemed to have multiple stratergies going on.

Thanks :) It's not known what Kreia did other fight in the war with Revan and Yunasis. She was a Jedi Master, so she had to have taken an important position. I haven't played TOR but from the small heresay here and there about how they screwed over Revan and Kreia, I don't think it matters. I consider Kotor 1-2 to be their own thing, unrelated to TOR.

Revan was ok up till the end but they only did 4 on 1 which seemed off and then said he was mad and fell dark cos he wanted to destroy billions of sith to stop them. Which i would say Revan had always done that. Mandalorian wars when returned and attacked Telos so yeah they messed that up a bit. I think they didn't want someone popular to be someone who often dips there toe in mass genocide to save the galaxy to kids lol.

Better late than never, right?

its never to late to redo the game again.

Then again, Lorgar, you and your Legion never learned that lesson either; you draw such power from Chaos only to let it enslave you. No wonder most say that Konrad and Alpharius were stronger Primarchs...

You have failed her, completely and utterly.

but realizing it now.....that's what matters. Disney will fog over these teachings. we must remember the new shit is never going to teach us or make us think. not like kreia...or palpatine. not even the jedi will be the same. but never forget..............or forgive

Ahhhhh then you are learning

I know you just made a joke, but... The Sith are really just Jedi of a different kind. They define themselves entirely through their adversity towards the Jedi. The entire Sith Order, the entire religion, is built around the idea of destroying the Jedi and that, after this goal has been reached, everything will be glorious. They are wrong, of course, even if the Jedi certainly are deserving of destruction - but the death of all Jedi everywhere is not a cure-all for the ailments of the Galaxy. That this is so is shown whenever the Sith were victorious. Whenever they had a Golden Age, it didn't last, undone by their own infighting. Without an enemy to unite against, the Sith are bereft of any true goal and meaning and thus obliterate themselves. In a strange way, the Sith very much need the Jedi to justify their own existence, as the striving for power alone without a directed focus leads to nothing, as we can see in Kotor 2. Nihilus and Sion, so complete in their victory over the Jedi, built nothing, left nothing behind. The end of the Jedi means also an end of the Sith philosophy - albeit a terrible end that leaves a lot of destruction in it's wake before disappearing. In this sense, the Sith and the Jedi are the same. They are both dogmatic adherers to an idea - one who defend the idea, and one who wish to destroy this idea. So in a way, both adhere to it, but from different directions. As such, the Sith cannot ever be truly disconnected from the Jedi. If they were, they'd cease to be Sith and become something new entirely.

@@DraculaCronqvist In SMTIV:A, in order to draw Yahweh out, you need to defeat both Lucifer and Merkabah. The chaos and the order. FYI, firearms (not blasters) can kill most Force users, thereby reducing the Force's monopoly on power, at least in terms of combat power.

@@DraculaCronqvist the sith and jedi are both extreme branches of a religion, both squabbling cousins whose conflicts cause the galaxy to bleed

@@DarkAdonisVyers Can firearms actually kill Force users more effectively than blasters though? Leaving aside cases like surprise attacks and heavy artillery (which would the same for blaster type weapons) - it seems to me that defending from bullets would just require a specialized form of TK that most Force users are capable of using in some form. And since Jedi's defence comes in part from precognition, allowing them to sence the attacks coming - it's not that much of a stretch for them to be able to create a telekinetic cushion to sap the bullet's kinetic energy.

Yeah, KOTOR II was a masterpiece, eventhough it was unfinished. When i played it back in the day it was so painfully obvious that the game wasn't finished, yet it was still so fucking great.

KOTOR II played like a great book for me. I could feel myself becoming so enwrapped in the story, the characters, and defining how my character acted. It’s seriously in a league of its own, I don’t think there’s a single game out there that can compare to the absolute depth it has. We can only pray that maybe one day Disney will bless us all and have both KOTORs remastered and the second one finished and patched up, for now the restoration mod will have to do.

LordGroyper The fuck

@@rainy7106, Planescape Torment

@LordGroyper no you dont... people often claim that as a way to make themselves feel more intelligent. like the rick and morty fans who claim that about their favorite show. kotor 2 has a very deep script that toys with many concepts. but you do not need to be highly intelligent to understand or even catch onto its themes

MisterAwestasia And yet you still have to rely on your party member's strengths to assist you.

@@0816M3RC By mid game nothing can touch you, so no.

0816 M3RC there’s a reason the Exile was written as having an innate ability to bond with those around her through the Force and ends up drawing upon their strength and life force (the latter of which occurs upon the death of her enemies). The Jedi Council views that as a quality among the Sith assassins who’ve learned to absorb the life force of others, when in reality, that’s just proof of how in tune with the Force the Exile is - the energy field of the universe that permeates every atom and living being.

@@0816M3RC to utilise another's skills, talents, and strengths is not the same as being reliant on them.

Chesterton talked about you: "That publisher who thought that men would get on if they believed in themselves, those seekers after the Superman who are always looking for him in the looking-glass, those writers who talk about impressing their personalities instead of creating life for the world, all these people have really only an inch between them and this awful emptiness. Then when this kindly world all round the man has been blackened out like a lie; when friends fade into ghosts, and the foundations of the world fail; then when the man, believing in nothing and in no man, is alone in his own nightmare, then the great individualistic motto shall be written over him in avenging irony. The stars will be only dots in the blackness of his own brain; his mother's face will be only a sketch from his own insane pencil on the walls of his cell. But over his cell shall be written, with dreadful truth, "He believes in himself.""

josh smith But what does that mean though? How do you interpret that? I've pondered this, and I can't find any legitimate meaning that makes sense.

WeArePSU632 betrayal is disloyalty. Disloyalty is a half of the dichotomy of loyalty and disloyalty. One cannot exist without the other. Without potential of betrayal there can be no loyalty. Without potential of betrayal you cannot *choose* to remain loyal. Without being willing to betray your ideal you cannot *choose* not to do so. Without such willingness you do not believe in the ideal, you are possessed by it, a slave to it.

@@happyvalleykid6324 An ideal is something that you can never atain or achive. It's something you strive for, but never reach. If you trully believe that something IS an ideal, you also know that you cannot ever reach it, so you can, from time to time, brake the "code" of you ideal, if you deem it necessary. What she essentially is saying is that if you want to be a true Jedi, you must also be willing to think and act like a Sith if needed. Or if you are a king and you want to bring peace, you must be able to be ruthless and fierce to ensure that you can keep having power (so that you have the power to ensure peace). Or a good officer in the military needs to be able to send people under their command to a certain death (knowingly) to ensure the safety of all the others under their command, etc etc.

@@Mukation I disagree. An ideal is attainable. This notion of it being something beyond reach is not one I concur with.

As you said, its a dichotomy, you can choose both at all times implicit on the escence of loyalty. What is more praisable tho? Someone who always was good? Or someone bad that it is?

Well, wait, what does it mean?

@@ArvelDreth The Exile is a wound in the force like Nihilus. They feel similar hungers ,Nihilus eats force sensitives and sometimes planets trying to quench it but never works.

@@Aintnoonewatching but unlike Nihilus, the Exile controls the hunger, instead of letting it overtake him/her

@@raijyn2452 Thus rejecting the strength that is not her own, the choice of Malachor V, reason why she is cut from the force. This game is marvelous.

Konstantinos Vasilakakos it's one of the most important lessons of Kreia: to not rely on anyone but yourself. You can use others as a tool, but too many rely on those around us and that is a weakness

Yes my friend. For me Kreia has given some of the coolest lessons for life. You have to be strong by your self. If you depent on others to give you strenght you will always be weak. It's us that made thinks go on. not the others..

The flipside to this philosophy is the idea that one's strength is limited to one's own potential. Lose a hand and you'll never play the piano, lose a leg and you'll never compete against Usain Bolt. However, by relying on others, or more accurately including others, your strength is increased, often more than the sum of the parts. To be individually powerful is to be solitarily powerful. It's a strength that can't be taken from you, but it's also incredibly limited, single voice in crowd and all that.

I think you can bend that and say situations like loosing a leg etc requires you to personally adapt without anyone's help. Again, the betrayal of an ideal such as sport. Loose a leg, you betray your lifes work. Though in this, you can find resolve if you are Willing to find it. It's all in regards to the strength of the individual and all links it, no matter the scenario.

You can still play piano loosing one hand, Captain Cook use his hook :), what is strength? It is the power to overcome your limit by yourself

And in the "You were afraid" dialogue, she didn't drain the life forces of the Jedi Masters-- she disconnected from the Force. *They died of SHOCK.* She demonstrated the exact same point-- the Force was so deeply ingrained within them that their bodies gave up when disconnected, almost like an immediate, deadly withdrawal. They relied on it, like a drug.

Hehehehehehehehehehehe. HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE Maybe you should watch my video on the philosophy of Kreia.

Just saw it, mwahahahahahaha.....

Because philosophy is hard and not something most people get into. That is why the developers did the game a disservice IMO by giving bonuses to being light side and dark side but not when being independent. Basically, to min-max the game, you need to pick a side and stick with it. Either always be a saint or always a murderous power hungry maniac. What does that say about Kreia's message? When the developers themselves punishes those that follow it?

@ sounds like you arnt spec'ing your characters correctly if you need to min - max your alignment. Most of the time I play I usually end up so dabbled in the middle due to most responses not sounding realistic, usually get Mira, then loads of Dark side dialogue till lvl15 to prestige to the sith abilities and lock in the name crystal. Sure if you want to unlock every upgrade go min max but not missing out too much

@@more-reasons6655 I always try to be dark side on Dantooine to get Force Crush which is the coolest power ever. Also Sith Lord + Force Storm is silly effective. I definitely want to be light side on Nar Shaddaa though, I wouldn't be able to stand being stuck on the ship with Hanharr.

@ It ties into Kreia's message perfectly. Choosing the light side or the dark side makes you a slave to that side of the force, as acting against it will weaken you.

@TomMe the slave part, yes. But Kreia claims it weakens you, and spiritually, it may. That part is not really manifested in the game, though. I mean, you, the human, become a slave, but not the character. That will make the message harder to grasp for many people. It is too "meta", don't you think?

You're not the only one my friend

Then you'll be happy with the next video I'm working on: An hour long video detailing Kreia's philosophy and how she was critical of the Star Wars universe (see the description if you wish to see a preview).

Mine too, I love it

Garmagic2yFhenrakh9 he’s just trying to forget malacor five

[Warning: This comment contains Symbolism] Finally someone who supports my Theory! Dark Side are just the Smokers in Schools. Jedi are the Righteous Teachers who Never got me, Smokers are the Dark Side People Who act like they're cool and Edgy. I was just The Guy who walked on every side. Because why niche oneself in School!? I hate Videogames but Kotor 2 Is just a hidden Love of mine. People think Playing games is fun? Yea sure Grind them Diablo Clones while I'm getting lectured by Kreia for smoking again trying to forget Malachor 5.

​@@namesareforfriends4552 I suppose you meant that you don't hate all videogames, rather, dislike videogames that do not provide you with thought-provoking material (which are most of videogames) letting you reflect on new interesting concepts and personally improve based on this (of which KOTOR2 is a great example)? Then allow me to make a few recommendations. A few games I found interesting because of their themes were The Red Strings Club, Night in The Woods, LISA, and Persona 5. Persona 5 may look like a typical animeh game, but it's reliance on Jungian psychology, mythology, symbolism and great execution of the game's message makes it stand out (though it still has plenty of animeh moments). Night in the Woods is a walking simulator that may seem to some like a cute-looking game about teenage rants, but the game delves into the stagnation of the US' Rust Belt and how it affects its different generations, mainly expressed through the youth's feeling of hopelessness and the old people's memories of how it used to be better. LISA is an amazing story about a broken man trying to do the right thing and losing himself through his journey. The Red Strings Club is a pixel-art cyberpunk visual novel/quest game that discusses freedom and happiness, one's own will and security. I find all of these games amazing, and, who knows, maybe you too will enjoy some of them. :)

There's a dialogue in KotOR2 on Dantooine, where indeed one NPC asks about your face, and you deflect by something like "I've been traveling to the shittiest places in the galaxy, I wonder what your face would've looked like after that".

But that's the thing... why must I be willing to betray an ideal? Why must I be willing to do away with thing I believed in? To me it makes no sense. When you're presented with a problem within the ideal, you sit back and try to think of a way to not make it a problem anymore, or just keep going despite the problem. Why do I have to abandon the ideal? So many people try to explain the line to me, but they never tell me why and personally it's gotten to a point where I think most people don't know why and are simply saying all of the explanation to sound smart.

@@hysterical5408 You have to be willing to betray it, even if you don't, so that the ideal has no power over you. It's simple, really. If you are never willing to betray that ideal, that means that whoever created that ideal in the first place has power over you (in the sense that the dude is probably dead but you're here acting out what he scribbled down somewhere, think religion). You don't have to betray it right now, or perhaps never. But you have to be willing to toss it aside if it makes sense to do so, that's how you can truly enact your will instead of someone else's.

@@bryangan2224 that sounds more like a lack of any sort of commitment to an ideal if you have to be willing to toss it just like that. If that's the case, you'll go from one ideal to another, never truly believing in anything. That is something I just cannot agree with. If there was something wrong with the ideal I follow, I will go out of my way to try and fix that problem and to make that ideal better. I recognize that no ideal is perfect and they never will be, but I would much rather believe in something and try it mend any faults in it than be a philosophy hobo.

@@hysterical5408 What makes you think commitment to an ideal is a good thing? It just makes you a slave to whoever thought of that ideal, because you cannot find it within you to let it go should you need to. Adaptability is true strength, and true freedom, because you can do the best thing at the best time when needed.

​@@bryangan2224 Adaptability isn't true freedom whatsoever. You adapt, or you die. You have no choice there. You don't adapt because you want to, you adapt because you are forced to, being adaptive only makes you a "slave" to the natural order, to time and your environment. There is no true strength, there is no one right way in this kind of question. To think there is only makes you as close minded and blind as the people you think you are less free than you. Commitment, though is a choice. You commit yourself to an ideal only because you truly believe in it, you think it is right. Unlike adaptability. You are not forced to commit. To think it is bad simply because it does not allow you to continue being an ideal leech is disturbing to be.

Watch my other video on Kreia to get a full understanding how. But to believe in an ideal means that you must seek out its opposite to strengthen it. If you don't, you become dogmatic, stagnant, and eventually, that ideal will die from lack of growth. So if you believe in an ideal, betray it; find its opposite so that you may strengthen it.

Ok then, what does it mean to believe in an ideal? What purpose does the ideal serve if you are willing to betray it anyway?

To believe in an ideal means to believe in an ideology; a system of belief. Like the Jedi and Sith. Or any system of morality or philosophy. If you believe in any philosophy, many choose to never find what critics say, believing their truth is the only truth. Being dogmatic makes you blind, a slave, incapable of seeing the truth or to strengthen what you believe.

Yes that is true, but my question still stands: if you question your own beliefs in order to strengthen them, were you really adhering to them in the first place?

Yes. The opposite question can also be said. Were you really adhering to an ideology in the first place if you blindly follow everything it says?

Then I recommend watching my video explaining in greater detail Kreia's criticisms of the Jedi and Sith.

I would, but your profile picture doesnt really say: I like to discuss Nietzsche and exisentialism haha Nah I saw that and will probably check it out

The profile picture comes from a Visual Novel called Higurashi which is overtly Nietzschean. I'm very big on Nietzsche. Hehe.

Well that showed me haha

That is precicely what she is.

If every interesting dialogue was available for the light side, there wouldn't be a point in playing dark side. I prefer it the way they made it.

Could there be a just, good teaching that's worth believing in?

Ahhhhhh...and that is the choice of malecor V

Yoooo, who said this?

@@Whodjathink myself, after reading the Dresden Files, a few warhammer 40k books and listening to this video I made a few conclusions about Power. After all I'm not a wizard.

@@cypher4783 I see I see! I think that too is also the lesson Kreia teaches. To come to our own conclusions from the information the world gives us

To have a name is to identify and bring upon meaning. You may call me whatever name you wish.

that might be that most pretentious thing iv read all week

finna cal yu bich niga

I would argue that's a load of defecation! Your picture already gives an impression for whomever reads your comments. I've already identified you as a Rika fan. *"You may call me whatever name you wish."* Freakin' wish I could, god dammit. You've brought plenty meaning upon yourself already. Those double standards will destroy every ounce of respect anybody has ever had for anything you've ever done in your entire life; including forthcoming work. On a less important note: I dig your conciseness. You sound a lot more convincing when you paint things in black and white, separating the objective from the subjective. It also compensates greatly for your lack of vocal variety. That does come with a cost however. When you talk about stuff that the audience have prior knowledge to - You can come off as narrow minded, or at least poorly researched and unfinished. To give an example from your Digibro response vid. You said that anime eyes came from Tezuka attempting to draw Disney/Betty Boop. Then you go and say: *"Larger eyes create a greater sense of beauty and attractiveness"* However, "Urasawa Naoki no Manben Manga Documentary S0E0" provides a more simple and logical reason for big eyes. Kawaguchi Kaiji, a famous manga artist of the past who was known to switch from small eyes to big eyes with enormous popularity closely following. He said that eyes was the most convenient method to convey every kind of emotion. And because of the nature of manga panels, those emotions was harder to show through other forms of body language. This advice apparently came from his editor, whose sole job is to identify audience appeal. I hope you can see why that explanation is more tempting. That quote I took from you was not wrong by any means, but I still find it vastly insufficient in explaining your later point. For example, why would a show that doesn't intend to cater with fanservice, instead being fully focused on its themes or whatever, still have those eyes? You seem to argue "why not, sex should be celebrated." But the more likely answer is that it's simply a literary device that Japan have perfected as their cultural compromise to convey certain information where more obvious solutions weren't sustainable, now an easily accessible tool. In other words: Larger eyes provides more personality and information about the characters, with beauty and attractiveness as the most common focus since anime is a medium rife with fanservice. My point is, *dead fish-eyes are fucking baller mate.*

*I would argue that's a load of defecation!* And you'd be right. It's just funny and off putting to a lot of people. It's just funnier and with more impact. *I've already identified you as a Rika fan.* *Those double standards will destroy every ounce of respect anybody has ever had for anything you've ever done in your entire life; including forthcoming work.* Yeah, I know. Honestly, I'm getting a bit tired of the whole invisible name crap, and I'm just thinking of changing my name to 'Rikafag' and leaving it at that instead of being coy about this whole matter. It was honestly just used as a funny personal inside joke of Johan not having a name, but meh. *However, "Urasawa Naoki no Manben Manga Documentary S0E0" provides a more simple and logical reason for big eyes.* On the criticism about anime eyes, I am aware of the history of how anime eyes became popular but I mostly brushed it aside to explain where the direct influence of larger eyes came from and what larger eyes say about sexuality. I wasn't really going about to explain how each part of anime came about. *For example, why would a show that doesn't intend to cater with fanservice* It's rather more interesting that shows that put a greater focus on aesthetic realism, like Monster or Aku no Hana, do not have larger eyes, something I slightly alluded to. Theme does not go counter to asthetic idealism regarding the bodies of the characters, even if a show does not show any fanservice. I just think that larger eyes, much like every female characters having a perfect body, is a type of fanservice in of itself. *However, "Urasawa Naoki no Manben Manga Documentary S0E0" provides a more simple and logical reason for big eyes.* The thing is that I did not mean to imply that larger eyes were created for the sole reason of fanservice, only that larger eyes convey a greater sense of attractiveness. (Eyes are the doors to the soul and whatnot). Initially, I was going to show actual Japanese people making their eyes bigger with makeup to look more attractive but scrapped it because I only wanted fanservice clips in the video. It is a weird Japanese quirk that making your eyes larger, like anime characters, is a form of attractiveness. But then it becomes a chicken-egg problem of whether anime created that cultural standard of beauty or if larger eyes in general are more attractive. I dunno. But anyways, thanks for the lengthy reply and criticism of my mannerisms.