Talk:Force (Star Wars)/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Dark side comparison to real world philosophy

I´m altering a little the part where de DS is compared to existentialism; as i believe that there are both reasons to make the connection and to dismiss it. The same debate is going on in the DS entry at the wookipedia.

Gorsh ( i need to creat an account ... )


[edit] Fandom "Hard Sci-Fi" Force explainations

What about adding a paragraph or new page about the fandom non-canon hard-scifi "explainations" about the force which seems to circulate arround the people who grew up with StarWars but then realised it is more of a sci-fi/fantasy mix and tried to "compensate".

Mostly it goes along the line that coruscant became a planet wide sentient-AI in prehistoric times and then used nanotechnology (midi-chlorians?) coupled with some FTL-communication to keep the galactic humanoid population "in line" in a non-intrusive way, that also being the origin of the balancing dark/light siders etc. I don't know the further details or the deeper implications but the brief explaination I heard was quite intriguing.

[edit] Force in the real world

"Some of the abilities seen in the Star Wars movies are reported to have been attained by high-level Kung-Fu Masters." (From this article)

Is there any source or evidence for this claim? As a Chinese person myself who believes in God (or as we Chinese would say Shang Di) - I am a Christian in fact, I wouldn't completely rule this possibility out. However, I will not simply believe in this either as I think one's beliefs should be based on logic and evidence. I'd say some of the martial arts done by the Shaolin monks (e.g. smashing bricks with one's bare head - this I have definitely seen) are probably close to "borderline" cases, but still a long way away from anything done by people in the Star Wars universe. So this claim is probably somewhat exaggerated. Perhaps one should edit it a bit?

Remember that the Ground of Being is intelligent (omniscient in fact) so just because it is theoretically possible does not mean it will occur in our world. The Force has its own will, if you like. I have read about a reason for such "supernatural" abilities to not exist in our world from a Chinese source: The Ground of Being/God is intelligent and good, and therefores does not permit such abilities to exist in our world because our world is morally not enlightened enough. Imagine if those Star Wars abilities really are possible and accessible to a large number of people in our world, what will be the result? I fear many will turn to the dark side and the whole world will be plunged into war and chaos. So it is for our own good that such abilities do not become available to us.

[edit] My Force "philosophy"

I think Force is both the immanent omnipresent spiritual energy in the universe and the transcedent omnipotent and omniscient root and Ground of Being for all existence, especially for all life. It is similar to both the Hindu concept of Brahman and the Chinese concepts of Qi and Taiji.

Force itself is perfectly Good. There is fundamentally no evil in it. The Jedi are right to seek balance in the universe by preserving the "unbalance" between the light and dark sides, because ultimately Good and Evil are asymmetrical. Metaphysically there is only Good and no Evil. Evil is only an emergent property. Consider this analogy: The fundamental qualities of the universe are like the individual keys on a piano, every fundamental quality is intrinsically good just like every key on the piano produces a pleasing sound. So where does evil come from? Just like individual keys which by themselves all produce pleasing sounds can combine together in a non-harmonious way to form noise, the fundamental good qualities of the universe can combine together to form evil.

Even though strictly speaking everything is ultimately good, even qualities like hatred and anger, the Jedi Code does have its wisdom because although it is not absolute, it is a very good approximation of the Truth. For just like on a piano some keys are used far more than others when producing a beautiful piece of music, certain qualities (such as Love and Compassion and Courage) are required far more often than others (such as hatred and anger and fear) in order to produce a "combination" of fundamental qualities that is Good at the emergent level. So although there are exceptions (there are such things as "righteous anger" or "justifiable hatred" or "understandable fear") to the rule, if one simply lives by the rule of the Jedi Code, one will certainly not be far off the mark and will be very close to the Truth, because it is only in the really rare and extreme situations that the "dark side" passions become good at the emergent level.

I think the two fundamental differences between the light side and the dark side are not the exclusive use of certain fundamental moral qualities (such as love and hatred, though it is certainly true that the light side has love far more often and the dark side has hatred far more often), but in one's fundamental philosophical perception of the universe and the Force. The light side person considers the whole to be philosophically more fundamental than the individual, thus he/she will value co-operation and peace more and be more altruistic. The dark side person considers the individual to be philosophically more fundamental than the whole and therefore he/she will value competition and violence more and be more selfish. The light side person sees himself/herself as a servant of the Force and accept the Force's guidance (May the Force be with you) whereas the dark side person sees the Force as a tool to be used for personal gain (May the Force serve you well).

[edit] Force criticism

The Force is the mumbo-jumbo George Lucas came up with to explain various aspects of magic or rather the Jedi knight's use of either positive or negative energies in the universe. However, I fail to see why this subject deserves its own link. Star Wars, no matter what anyone really thinks is hardly high art. The Force is not going to become the off-shoot of a major new religion, and expressions like "May the force be with you" have already gone out of fashion. I understand the desire to well document entries and make sure as much as possible is covered, but this is getting into trival minutia that could have been taken care within the main article itself. That there are several different links to Star Wars movie instead of just one Star Wars link is a little silly. Hard core Star Wars fans already have plenty of websites to look at, there seems little reason to make this yet another one. --Egospark

ps: thanks for the format move! --Anon
No problem and Welcome! --mav

Okay, now that I've re-logged in, I feel better...ANYWAY:


[edit] General discussion: linking

I'm curious what the rest of people working on definations think. I've noticed a lot of other areas that seem to be calling for links when a few words of explaination can be tossed in within the main article. I've also noticed that some of the "most wanted articles" deal with people or subjects that seem close to pointless -- case in example is the request for info on "Jay." Again, I understand the desire to cover all the bases, but many of them could be taken care of within the main article itself. A request for "tooth" surely could be done in a longer article on TEETH. The Tooth Fairy would be worth an article, but do we really want one article per tooth? Some editing of the overlinks is needed. --Egospark

In general I agree. If and where you see pointless edit links simply remove them. If others disagree they can just put them back. --mav
Yeah, but does the Death Star need its own link? Or the Force? or Jedi Knights? Or Obi Wan Kanobi? It's a hyperlink party that could be done in a single Star Wars article. Maybe, MAYBE, each movie episode could be seperate, but sheesh... I'd hate to see what's in store when a Planet of the Apes fan finds this place. That could be worth 100,000 mini-articles right there, from Ape make-up to Roddy McDowell and Zeera. --Egospark
Does it really matter? It's not like space is limited! If/when the wikipedia starts to run out of entry space THEN is the time to start weeding and combining... Star Wars is not just a movie - it was and still is a cult phenonemon. I can think of how to write a real article on this subject quite easily, and I'm not even really a Star Wars fan. The whole point of having seperate articles is to avoid unneccesary duplication. Sure you could put an explanation of 'the force' into each movie article, but do we really need to write it out six times AND for each of the 35 Star Wars books if somebody decides to write articles for them? As long as its clearly pointed out that 'the Force' is a fictional concept related to the Star Wars universe I don't think it hurts to have an article for it... Ooops... forgot to sign my comment --KJ 20:40 Aug 4, 2002 (PDT)
It's not the space, it's the endless hyperlinking I guess. I suppose twenty years from now, when the Star Wars series is finally over, there might be some questions about the force, but I'm still not sure if there needs to constant links back to it's "meaning." We'll end up writing sentences like Darth Vader, Jedi Knight seduced to the Dark Side of the Force decides to activate the Death Star using his vega-matic light-saber from Wal-Mart. --Egospark

I agree with most of this, but the some things like the quote 'May The Force Be With You' would deserve a space of their own, no matter how small, simply because of their overpowering popularity. In this case, it features consistently on several lists of top quotes from over the years. And Egospark, your last sentence with the dozen hyperlinks does make a valid point, but some minutae do achieve a status of their own. - Nickyindia

[edit] Midiclorians and cause and effect

Are more midichlorians the cause of stronger Force powers, or just a measurable side-effect? (My recollection is that it's never been clearly stated one way or the other, in which case the article ought not to state so strongly that the former is the case.) --Paul A 05:26 Feb 19, 2003 (UTC)

Damn, midichlorians are merely the "alias" for mitochondria - the small organisms within EVERY cell of living things. These organisms convert oxygen and glucose into energy.
The "light side" is they allow all living things to "live", move and exist including making decisions and interacting with other living creatures.
The "dark side" is that this process of energy creation creates heat and toxins which slowly age and then kill the host cell.
Hence the obsession lately with anti-oxidants - which retard the mitchondria and the conversion of energy when not required, thus slowing the aging process.
Now stop wasting mitochondrial time and go out and live or the dark side will slowly devour you LOL. --Anon.
Midi-chlorians are inspired by mitochondria, but they're not merely an alias for the same thing. Mitochondria don't give you Force Powers. :? Irrevenant 23:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

Any cultural phenomena that makes more than a billion dollars, spins off more than a dozen idioms used commonly in the language (even if we would like them to go away), or is still generating new material (books, cartoons, comics as well as movies, video games) after 25 years, does deserve lots of articles... examples include Lord of the Rings, Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, Sherlock Holmes, Star Trek, James Bond... hell it's pathetic but this stuff is the English speaking culture. And look at all the entries for all the characters in the Ayn Rand novels. And no doubt Harry Potter will be equally elaborated. These iconic characters are often used as metaphors, and so a strong case can be made for outlining them to at least the degree we would outline figures in Norse mythology or Egyptian mythology which are also dead ends not worshipped any more, but leaving us a substantial legacy. Without knowing who Loki or Osiris without having to read all the story-telling about them, how the heck are we to comprehend anyone's cultural references?

Agree completely with the above.
Good!


[edit] Is there a Dark Side?

I understand that in the New Jedi Order books, Luke Skywalker decides that there is no dark or light side of the Force anymore: its just one unified thing. I haven't read the entire NJO yet, but it seems like a very important path for the Jedi to take. Therefore we need to cover it here.

Another question to be asked is there a light side. I've heard that Lucas has explained that the Jedi (at least in the movies)never refer to a light side of the Force, only the Dark Side. The Dark Side seems to a corruption of the use of the Force to rule over life instead of to serve and promote life.

There is a light side and there is a dark side. Jon Hart 02:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
The light side and dark side aren't really defined; the force is an omnipresent thing. It isn't the force that is dark-sided, but the wielder. _-M o P-_ 21:21, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Heretic! The Jedi Council will have your head for saying that! --maru (talk) contribs 02:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
"What do Jedi see? What I allow them to" - Kreia. --Darth Revert (AKA Deskana) (talk) 22:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I think that is just the typical power-controlling attitude of a Sith Lord. _-M o P-_ 22:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
"Entertain what illusions you will". --Darth Revert (AKA Deskana) (talk) 23:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
"Actually, if you search the screenplays for the original trilogy (and the prequels), the term "light side" is never used. Likewise, if you examine the novels in order by their release dates, the term first came into use in Kevin J. Anderson's Dark Apprentice--and we all know what a wonderful writer he is. As a side note, none of Timothy Zahn's novels use the term, thus I am obliged to say that the insistence on the duality is an argument perpetrated by the weak-minded.

[edit] Scientific explanation of the Force

Woven into and intertwined with everything - from the smallest molecule to the largest star - is the Force. The Force is an essential part of nature - like energy or matter. It is a field of energy that spans the universe. It surrounds and penetrates all things. This energy field is made up of chlorian "particles" - subatomic, high energy, fluctuations in the quantum state of the space-time continuum. Chlorian particles exist throughout the universe as "background" radiation. Even in the deepest void of space, one can find chlorian particles. Due to the unique nature of chlorian particles, they affect both matter and energy. Chlorian particles are not true particles, but do possess mass. Chlorians also exhibit the wave motion properties of electromagnetic radiation. Hence, they travel through most matter at light speed, while still interacting with matter on an atomic level.

Every sentient being, with a few exceptions, have a symbiotic relationship with microscopic creatures called midichlorians. Since these midichlorians exist in a state of interspatial flux, outside of normal space-time, they cannot be detected by most conventional technologies. We provide them with a place to live and a way to nurture themselves, and they "let us in" on the Force. Midichlorians generate a specific and unique energy. In a similar fashion to the way mass distorts the space-time continuum to bend the fabric of reality and produce gravity, the energy generated by midichlorians distorts the universal chlorian field. The presence of the midichlorian energy causes an increase in density in the chlorian field i.e. the Force itself.

Some sentient beings are able to exert a certain amount of control over chlorian particles. The process occurs during the interaction between midichlorian energy and chlorian particles. In such interactions, the midichlorian energy can alter the wavelength and frequency of chlorian wave properties. Midichlorian energy can also alter the density, quantum oscillation, phase and other properties of chlorian particles. By influencing chlorian particles, they can be directed, used to manipulate energy, matter, spatial anomalies and other phenomena. Now, the more midichlorians one has, the stronger their connection to the Force. However, it is rare for anyone to be able to manipulate the Force with less than 7,000 midichlorians per cell.

The Force, itself, is defined in many different ways. A two ways are the Living Force and the Unifying Force. The Living Force represents all living things while the Unifying Force is everything that lives in the past and future. The Unifying Force is the collective pool of all the energy in the universe. This means it also includes non-living things as even non-living things have matter and matter and energy are interchangable. The Living Force is the collective pool of the energy of living things. It encompasses living things and therefore also sentience.

The light and dark sides of the Force relates to the nature of most sentient beings and of all creatures who have free will. It represents the dark and light sides to us as living creatures, and our ability to control those sides of "good" and "evil". The light represents the good in all, and the dark represents the evil.

Palpatine was around 90 in Return of the Jedi, and I'd say that he was about as fit and healthy as you could expect for someone his age. Sure, Yoda was doing acrobatics at the ripe old age of five hundred something, but it isn't really fair to compare Palpatine to the man who was, in his prime, probably the single most powerful Force-user in centuries. Sith may not have the extended lifespans of Jedi, and the use of the Dark Side is definitely corrupting, but there is no evidence in the movies that Dark Side Force users are any less healthy than mundane (non-Force-using) members of their species. -- Gordon Ecker 01:19, 30 December 2004 (UTC)
Actually, Yoda was in his 800's when he did the acrobatic stuff in Attack of the Clones. And the aging affect of the dark side due to the corruption is talked about in either the novels or Dark Empire. Does any of the DVD commentary or extras talk about this? It is obvious they are aging Palaptine quicker than normal in the movies. Palpatine had a cloning facility setup so he could perpetuate his spirit from one body to the next and theoretically live forever. It is also specified in the Dark Side Sourcebook (p. 39) from Wizards of the Coast that long-term use of the dark side will wither the physical body.
Also, don't forget comparing Yoda and Palpatine is literally comparing apples and oranges. They are different species. --Maru (talk) Contribs 00:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
The "aging effect" of the dark side isn't really age; it is just the extreme physical toll the dark side takes on its users. The intense raw hate and lust for power corrupts them both in mind and body. That doesn't mean they can't perform acrobatics; Darth Sion is composed of a billion tiny shreds of flesh and he still jumps around like a frog. Opposite is the kind of "face lift" the light side brings, as the user is so calm that they don't experience regular bodily stress. _-M o P-_ 22:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

RandomDude-So in youe defintion of the force, The force has no will or sentience at all? doesn't that go against a lot of jedi Ideals?

I se no reason to belive that Force-users live much longer than others of their species. In Episode I ther is a women of the same (unnamed) species as Yoda: her name is Yaddel. She is said to be 340 years jet considered young for her species. I don't know if her age is canon but it suggest that their kind live at least ten times as long as humans. It helps explain why Yoda has not aged noticeably between Episode I and V. (It is 35 years betveen the episodes.) In that case Yoda has not aged much more than Count Dooku. Both have their athletic abilities amplified by use of the Force. Additionly, Count Dooku may use some kind of (scientific) medical treatment to appear younger than he is. If you ask me he looks 25 years younger!

Qui-Gon Jinn is something compleatly different. He was orininally INTENDED to be about 60: similar to Obi-Wan Kenobis age in Episode IV. However, when shouting Episode I Liam Neeson's role was not considered that old, probably at max 45. Don't mix up early drafts with te final result!

2006-11-25 Lena Synnnerholm, Mästa, Sweden.

[edit] Moving The Force to Force (Star Wars)?

I propose moving this page from The Force to Force (Star Wars). See Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Avoid the definite article ("the") and the indefinite article ("a"/"an") at the beginning of the page name. The article uses lowercase "the", as in "life is the Force". Other articles use the same convention, as in "destined to bring balance to the Force." (Anakin Skywalker) Objections? Dbenbenn 18:00, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Done! --Dbenbenn 19:32, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Should we fix the old links or just let the redirect take care of it? I already did quite a bit of fixing the old links, then it suddenly crossed my mind that maybe I should ask someone else's opinion. --Aidje 20:54, 2005 Mar 22 (UTC)

So in your defintion the force has no will or senteince at all? Doesn't that go against a lot of Jedi Ideals?-randomDude.

It is good practice to fix the redirects. --Maru (talk) Contribs 00:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Origins of the Force, etc.

First of all, let me say that I think the Force definitely deserves its own page, if for no other reason that the fact that it has become equivalent to a religion among many people around the world. There are statistics somewhere showing how many people now conider themselves 'Jedi' and believe literally in the Force. Perhaps something should be mentioned about this in the article? Also, I would like to suggest improving the "Orgins of the Force" section. The brief statement about being similar to Taoism, explains very little, and is somewhat inaccurate. Perhaps someone more experienced at this that I am could go into more detail about the relationship between the Force and the Chinese/Japanese beliefs in chi/ki, or at least discuss some of the various ideas that George Lucas combined to come up with the Force? -Thanks, Jeremy 24 Jan 2005


[edit] Capitalisation for the sides/Sides of the Force

I've noticed a terrible inconsistency in the Star Wars articles when speaking of the sides/Sides of the Force. It is the "Light side", the "Light Side", or the "light side". Same with the dark/Dark side/Side: is it "Dark side", "Dark Side", or "dark side". I think it would be beneficial for a consensus to be reached and used. (I am aware that each of the sides/Sides has one more possible manifestation, although I've never seen "light Side" or "dark Side" used. I think it's highly unlikely that they ever would be.) --Aidje 21:10, 2005 Mar 22 (UTC)

It's light side and dark side, no capitalization. "Dark" is capitalized in "Dark Jedi," but when merely speaking about sides of the Force, it is lowercase.


[edit] When can the Force be used against Jedi/Sith?

Quoting the Star Wars databank entry on Maul

"Kenobi, enraged, attacked Maul. This barrage was deflected by Maul who used Obi-Wan's touching of the dark side as a conduit for a Force attack; using the Force, Maul pushed Obi-Wan into a deep mining pit."

I also remember in the Clone Wars cartoons Anakin blocked a force push from the female sith, but other times he didn't block it and was thrown down. Also in the Clone Wars movie Anakin couldn't do anything against Dooku's lightning, but Obi-Wan could at least channel it into his lightsaber, while Yoda could catch it barehanded and even throw it back. So I was just curious as to if there was some deeper explanation of when the force can be used against other practitioners of the force, because that quote about Darth Maul makes it seem like you can't just use the Force against Force-wielders willy nilly --Fxer 19:28, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

In the novel 'Shatterpoint', it's mentioned that resisting Force kinetics is one of the first things a Jedi learns.
In Episode III, Obi Wan and Anakin attempt a Force Push at the same time, and they cancel out, then after some effort, both of them get thrown back. I think the general idea is that for one Force user to throw around another, there either needs to be a serious difference in their respective power levels, or the target must be caught off-guard.


[edit] Origin of The Force: one claim

George Leonard, also a resident of Marin County, wrote a book, titled The Silent Pulse, that may be the source of the description of the Force, as delivered by Obi-wan Kenobi in Episode IV. The author has stated that he and his daughter picked up on this when they saw the film for the first time, and he confronted Lucas about it later.

[edit] The Force (naming again)

Why isn't it located at The Force? it is always referred to as "The Force", and everyone will know what you're talking about, and as far as I know there is no other The Force to disambig with. --Supersaiyanplough|(talk) 9 July 2005 05:54 (UTC)

"The Force", seems better to me. It's how it's referred to in the stories after all. "Force" by itself could refer to any kind of force, from gravity to magnetism to force of will.
Perhaps a compromise of "The Force (Star Wars)" would be in order.--JC
I agree with JC. It's always referred to as THE Force, and the Star Wars disambiguation is appropriate. Irrevenant 23:20, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

It is not "The Force," it is "the Force." —Preceding unsigned comment added by PopCultureIsGood (talk • contribs) 02:17, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Need Help With Major Edit

I have a whole lot to say on this topic, and I plan on doing a major revision to this article in the coming days - complete with references and everything. I am looking for somebody that is in favor of minimizing this article to keep my edit in check (through discussion and perhaps debate) so that a proper article may be formed. Message me if you're interested. --jonasaurus 15:51, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Regarding the Balance of the Force

It strikes me that the interview is long and unwieldy, and provides a minimum of information. I think that it would be best if the interview was summarized. --jonasaurus 00:37, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Can someone explain how destroying all Sith lords would bring balance to the Force? I mean, that would surely be no balance if the Dark Side is no more? I think I'll add this to my list of doubts in my user page. --Lacrymology 05:13, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
You're not the only one wondering; when me and my dad saw Episode I, we kept asking each other on the way back, "But the Jedi rule supreme, they defeated the Sith! Things are seriously unbalanced towards the Light side! Why would they want to "bring balance to the Force"? Isn't it obvios that implies the rise of the Sith?" The only conclusion we could draw (years later) was that the Jedi misunderstood and thought it referred to the balance between the Living and the Unifying force. --Maru (talk) Contribs 00:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Keeping the EU separate...

I'm new here, so apologies if this has come up already, but am I the only one interested in seeing all the Expanded Universe information moved to its own page? Possibly with a title such as "Force (Star Wars EU)?" The EU information is plastered all over these articles and presented as fact, and I know a lot of people who don't like that sort of thing. I don't want to get into a debate on whether or not the EU is acceptable, I just think the two should have their own separate pages. There are little disclaimer clauses in a lot instances (ie: "in the Expanded Universe..."), but there are so many EU occurrences on this page that it looks a little ridiculous. I think it definitely deserves its own page. Thoughts?

The EU is valid. Moving it would damage the article and stigmatize EU subject matter. --Maru (talk) Contribs 00:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
That's your opinion. The EU should definitely be kept separate. 17:40, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
That's your opinion. The EU should definitely be kept in. --maru (talk) contribs 18:03, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sayin it should be cut out altogether, it should be kept of course, only in its own proper place! 18:15, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
It's in its proper place. Jon Hart 02:19, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright violation

Jerzy notes that the {{copyvio}} tag was placed due to the Balance of the Force section. Since there is almost no real content for this section, I'm going to trim it out (for now) and remove the copyvio note. If someone would like to expand this section (so as not to be a copyright violation), please, by all means, do so. – Mipadi 15:34, 27 August 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Force traditions

I've been pondering whether to add the Emperor's Hands to the list of Force traditions. They do deserve a mention, as they were an organized group of Force-sensitives, but I feel adding them is a bit of a stretch- they graduated to Dark Jedi or Sith status, and rarely met one another, so their quasi-Grey Jedi methods could not have evolved. What do you guys think? --Maru (talk) 01:17, 22 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] The Baomarr monks

I don't have my copy of the ROTJ handy; can anyone tell me whether the Bao'marr monks make an appearance, even if only cameo? This is relevant to what organized Force traditions appear in the original movies. --Maru (talk) Contribs 21:01, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lightsaber weights

I'm not sure if I need to mention this here but since G. Lucas said that the sabers were supposed to feel as if they were heavy I deleted the line in the article that said they felt weightless. It was something about a kind of gyroscope effect from the rotating energy fields or suchlike. He said that was why Luke held and moved the saber the way he did in ANH when he was first experiencing it.

George Lucas said they were meant to be heavy originally but then changed that concept- notice how in ANH Darth Vader and Obi-Wan wield their lightsabers with both hands? George Lucas said the lightsabers were supposed to be difficult weapons to handle. He doesn't consider them to be heavy weapons anymore, I don't think. -- His Imposingness, the Grand Moff Deskana (talk) 21:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tai Chi/martial arts parallel

From the context, I think the term wanted isn't "empty force," Ling Kong Jing, but "concealed force," An Jing. An Jing is the term in the internal arts for the highest development of energy, where it is no longer obvious (ming jing) where the power is coming from, like it is with a lower level practitioner. Think of a Tae Kwon Do flying kick as opposed to Bruce Lee's one inch punch for an illustration.

Ling Kong Jing refers specifically to no-touch knockouts and is imaginary or grossly hyperbolized at best, An Jing refers to subtle force and demonstrably exists.

[edit] Forceless beings

"The only known beings without the Living Force are the Yuuzhan Vong,". What about the Ysalamiri? Irrevenant 23:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

They not a-Force so to speak; rather they are anti-Force (that actually isn't a good way to phrase it; anti-Force makes more sense to describe Waru. They are living creatures within and of the Force, which repel the Force.) --maru (talk) contribs 01:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Can I suggest that the section about the Yuuzhan Vong being Forceless beings be moved to Unusual Force occurances in nature? It just seems more suitable there than under Living Force. --AndreRD 12:35, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Is there a better image that demonstrates the usage of the force? Because the current one shows Obi-Wan Kenobi waving his hand. I think I'll dig up an image of Palpatine and Yoda dueling with the senate seats in EpIII. _-M o P-_ 21:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To-do list in my opinion

  • improve lead
  • merge:
    • "May the Force be with you" into the lead or any other section (too small to merit its own section).
    • "The Living Force" with "The Unifying Force" and rename section.

Other than that I think this article is pretty good, and a minor clean up, a few more references, maybe a notes section and this article could become featured. – Tutmøsis (Talk) 14:28, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with your deletions. The NOT section does not support what you want to do- lists are not deletable just because, as the continued existence of many lists prove. In addition, those lists can be useful (I'm thinking of the organized tradition one here) because they back up some assertions, provide some cross-references, and is interesting in its own right. --maru (talk) contribs 19:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for replying, I still maintain my original arguement but if you wish to keep it, I certainly won't delete it. – Tutmøsis (Talk) 23:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. --maru (talk) contribs 00:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree that May the Force Be With You should be merged here. Maestlin 22:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Longetivity

your entry on this article reads: "As for longevity, this comes from the lines of Tarkin in A New Hope who thought that Obi-Wan had died of old age." However, with the insight of the prequels, it this quote is logically erroneous. When Tarkin made the remark "surely he msut be dead by now" one may have thought old age in the old days, but now the logical choice is that he must think that Obi-Wan must have died from Imperial Troops by now. Because of Order 66, if any trooper sees a Jedi, he will kill him instantly. And since the troopers are everywhere it was highly likely that Obi-Wan would have been killed by them. He didnt take into account that Obi-Wan defies all odds.

I se no reason to belive that Force-users live much longer than others of their species. In Episode I ther is a women of the same (unnamed) species as Yoda: her name is Yaddle. She is said to be 340 years jet considered young for her species. I don't know if her age is canon but it suggest that their kind live at least ten times as long as humans. It helps explain why Yoda has not aged noticeably between Episode I and V. (It is 35 years betveen the episodes.) In that case Yoda has not aged much more than Count Dooku. Both have their athletic abilities amplified by use of the Force. Additionly, Count Dooku may use some kind of (scientific) medical treatment to appear younger than he is. If you ask me he looks 25 years younger!

Qui-Gon Jinn is something compleatly different. He was orininally INTENDED to be about 60: similar to Obi-Wan Kenobis age in Episode IV. However, when shouting Episode I Liam Neeson's role was not considered that old, probably at max 45. Don't mix up early drafts with te final result!

2006-11-25 Lena Synnnerholm, Mästa, Sweden.


[edit] The Force: Disambig or redirect?

I see that this page used to be at The Force but was moved, which I agree with; sticking (Star Wars) clearly differentiates it. That said, the number of entries on the The Force disambig page (which I recently changed; there were inexplicably two separate pages for The force and The Force...) is fairly small and the other entries are mostly obscure. I think that The Force should be a redirect to Force (Star Wars), and then this article should have the usual hatnote with "This is about the Force in the Star Wars universe. For other uses, see The Force (disambiguation)"; then move the current The Force page to The Force (disambiguation). I imagine that's what most people mean, at least. Thoughts? SnowFire 18:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lead section - one sentence?!

I thought Star Wars fans were better at writing than what we have here! Surely we can do better than a one sentence lead section? - Ta bu shi da yu 13:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Capitalization of title

I think the title should be "May the Force be with You", as per title naming convention. Any objections? -Slash- 04:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

I've just removed some vandalism that someone did to the Jedi Code. It seems to me that it'd be a good idea to protect this article, since it's the sort of thing that would see constant vandalism. --Muna 17:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

It is claimed that the Palpatine of Dark Empire was just a hoax. There are so many widespread misconceptions about reproductive cloning! According to Steven Pinker 50% of the personality is due to pure random chance, 40% – 50% is decided by the genes and at max 10% by parenting. (This should NOT interpreted as a request to parents to abandon their children! After all, children ARE mentally hurt by not feeling loved.) Consequently, a clone always have an unique personality. Above all, the clone don’t have the cloned person’s memories, and skills have to be learned from scratch. You can’t even be sure that a clone speaks the same language as the cloned person: it all depends on where the clone grows up, what language the guardians speak, an which languages he/she gets the opportunity to learn. To what extent does this apply to the Star Wars universe? Episode II gives some clues. It is unclear how much of the personality a clone shares with the cloned person. Bobba Fett is a clone of Jango Fett: they suggest that a clone don’t have the same personality as the cloned person but a similar. However, it is clear that clones don’t have the cloned person’s memories or skills. In the movies it is also apparent that Forcesensitiveness is hereditary (at least in humans) but that conscious Force use is a learned skill. The Palpatine of Dark Empire obviusly have the original’s memories and skills. So the most credible explaination is that the dead Palpatine’s spirit really took place in a cloned body. That explaination is at least compatible with the Star Wars movies. Does not all agree that they and their scripts are the most canon?

2007-01-20 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

[edit] m theory

does the force seem alot like m theory to anyone? It says that everything in the universe, including the universe, is connected by a infinitely expanding yet infinitely thin membrane. It has its roots in string theory, and is thought to be the much sought after "theory of everything" in the physics world. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.162.241.244 (talk) 03:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] you misunderstood what Tarkin siad

I'm responding to this: "As for longevity, this comes from the lines of Grand Moff Tarkin in A New Hope who thought that Obi-Wan had died of old age. Vader reminded him not to underestimate the Force. "

No, what Tarkin meant was a Order 66 should have killed him by now. Your interpretation would be the most logical one if it werent for the prequels. Come on people! Its supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a forum. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RevSavitar (talk • contribs) 06:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] OR like none

"Some think of the Force as a sentient entity that may be...while others simply consider it something that can be manipulated and used as though it were a tool... A common compromise is that it is an "energy tool" but.." U must be kidding? weasel, POV, OR and unsourced. This has to go.

"An analogy is a sword with no handle—it can only be used by gripping the blade and therefore any attempt to strike someone would result in similar harm to the hand of the striker—the sword itself has no sentience or morality, but nevertheless exacts a price on those who use it unethically." Well, this is a bit farfetched and should be explained more. How can u use it ethically then for example? --Echosmoke 01:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cruft, anyone?

This article needs citation, and badly. I would hate to have to begin removing unreferenced statements, as I think it would leave the article an essentially empty page. Therefore, we should wait about a week, to see if some citation work (remember, reliable, verifiable, non-OR references, please) begins making its way into the article. If the article doesn't get more citable, we will have to start removing uncited statements. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Just an update. on the 16th of this month, I will be removing any uncited material remaining in this article. If you have citations to add to this article, now is the time to be adding them. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 04:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
As noted on the 14th, the article has now been trimmed to remove inadequately or non-sourced statements, OR by synthesis and probably a lot of utter cruft. If anyone wishes to add material back into the article, please make sure to provide a solid, reliable, verifiable source. If adding a point from a novel, please cite the book within the statement and provide a reference for it. Thanks. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EEMeltonIV rocks!

After I went through with a scythe, clearing out al the cruft and doing some copy-editing, it was the exceptionally solid, thoughtful efforts of EEMeltonIV who ties all the ends together nicely. Exceptionally well-done, EE. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 23:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks; I probably wouldn't have tried to straighten things out if you hadn't trimmed a lot of the plot summary. It was pretty daunting. --EEMeltonIV 02:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)