Sith

In real life, if a person was to play against the rules without heeding the wellbeing of others, they are sociopaths or even straight deranged and will end up safely locked away in a padded room.

That really requires the people at the Padded Room Hotel to be smarter than the sociopath in question.
The prepared meals are convenient, but they don't have HBO. 2/5 Stars. Would not recommend.

There was some other point about evil people?

Oh right! Good people don't need religions or creeds, it's only those of us with a crippling sense of our own lack of humanity that cleave desperately to inspirational rules in order to get us through the day.

The Sith, if you will, are confident in their own worth and virtue so are happy and fulfilled doing their deeds whatever they may be in the full knowledge they are the right deeds.

The Sith, it seems, are closer to Plato's Philosopher Kings than the mewling, doubtful and terrified of their own shadows Jedi will ever be.

:whistle:

MadHatter wrote: ZealotX your line of thinking is one that is dangerous. I ought to know as its one of my greatest weaknesses as a Jedi. You see your line of thinking draws hard lines in the sand and says my side good, their side bad. It then sets up a moral line that allows you to not only think higher of yourself than you should but to dismiss other thought processes as evil and those that follow them as such as well. Its risky and can lead to monstrous actions as bad or worse than the ones you set out to combat. Look at the crusades. Those that got involved did horrid things in the name of good. Look at Darth Tyrannus. AKA Count Dooku. He wanted to order the world and help those around him. Yet in the end, he became evil due to it. Neither side wanted to be selfish. But some of the worst acts of human history are committed for the good of the many.

You cannot no true Scotsman those that are Sith if they do not fit what you think a Sith ought to be. The fact is there are Sith groups out there and they do not fit what you claim a "true sith" to be and they still are Sith no matter how much you might try to disagree.

You're logic about absolutes is straight out of SW Canon. I have no problem with that. Was there ever a single moment in the entire SW universe where the Jedi weren't clear on whether or not the Sith were "bad"? The moral line is drawn by what people will do to obtain power, what they'll do to claim victory, what they'll do "be free". The sith code starts out by saying peace is a lie. Do you know why? It is because their code is a response to the Jedi code. It is a refutation of the Jedi code. And if you believe Peace is a lie you are disagreeing with "emotion, yet peace". Where the Jedi seeks peace, the Sith call it a lie. And yet is my thinking that is dangerous?

The Sith Order:


According to canon the Sith were created by Dark Jedi. The use of this term already applies to a non-true Sith because it was actually a species. So what differentiates the Sith species from the Sith order? Yes, I'm getting into canon right now but for a good reason.

The original sith weren't bad (recall I treated people different from religious ideology). They were enslaved and ruled by Dark Jedi. So it makes sense then that their code would originally be a means of breaking their chains. They were enslaved. By the same token, Sith can be applied differently to different groups. The Sith who are on this site are what I (speaking for myself) would call "Sith devotees" - dedicated to the proliferation of the sith and their teachings. Their right to call themselves "true sith" is their prerogative, not mine. If I see another as "true Sith" then that's who is the true sith to me. In other words, it is relative. If you're saying I'm wrong and that they are sith then you're dealing in absolutes. If you understand that there is a difference between these "Sith groups" and what I'm saying "true Sith" are then you should understand why I use the word "true" to denote the type of Sith I'm referring to as opposed to those who are calling themselves that for whatever reason.

You referenced Count Dooku. Good example. Dooku was basically a Dark Jedi who "fell". If you have read much about Jedi lore/history there are many such cases. The Force is power. Power corrupts. The reason the Jedi Code exists and all the rules exist is in order to protect the Order and the Universe from the person wielding power. If you agree that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely then you should understand both the disfiguration of the Sith in the movies as well as the reasons why Jedi must be very disciplined in order to keep from falling to the dark side. Some here view the darkside as merely shadow. But it is more than that. Yoda's warnings to Luke and his resistance to training him was because of the threat he posed if he too would be consumed by the dark side. People who use the dark side think the dark side is something they can use to get what they want. But Jedi masters understand that the dark side is seductive and that seduction is a side-effect of having power; period. There is a saying that says the road to hell is paved with good intentions. My ex-wife loved to hit me with that one because I would always argue that my intentions were good. At some point Dooku went from being a good guy to clearly being on the wrong side. How did that happen?

Long before this there was a Jedi civil war. Revan, once a Jedi, fought in the Mandalorian wars against the wishes of the Council. The intent was good. But eventually Revan created his own Sith empire and tried to take over the Republic. Why on earth would he do that? Because he feared a larger threat. The reasons people seek power... is often the weakness by which power corrupts them. Is it guaranteed to happen? No. But using the Sith philosophy? That's like going to 'evil school' just for the school lunches.

Just for the record: Even though we disagree I am enjoying this conversation and I respect your opinion and point of view. I want you to know this so you understand where I'm coming from is only love.

As I said in the previous post, the "Sith" weren't really the Sith. What we know of as the Sith is a pre-defined pattern of behavior based upon Sith philosophy and teaching, started by Dark Jedi and likely as a "Reaction" to Dark (corrupt) Jedi.

The problem is that the cure to the effects of the Dark Jedi was/is the enlightenment of the "true" Jedi Path.

The Sith are reacting to problems created by those who are not following the path which creates a situation where anger and hatred create more anger and hatred.

They seek power as a means of solving the problem which simply creates more problems for other people.

The real (objective) solution is to not get corrupted by power and to hold those who do to account. The powerful should be a force for justice uplifting the powerless, not proponents of their own power.

Otherwise, there is chaos.

We create power naturally by working together towards peace.

The powerless seek power because their own power has been taken but you have to understand that the cycle that caused it is a result of "Sith-like" behavior and/or philosophy.

This is why it should be important to stand for Jedi teachings as a way to bring order out of chaos.

I see nothing un-Jedi about black robes and red sabers, and so in the same way anything deeply confronting and difficult seems just as apt to me in a Jedi path as a Sith path. As I think the real lessons are found in the dark, in those fearful corners.... you grow the most when the morning sun strikes you after the long night. Being sensitive is not vulnerable, and being vulnerable is not [strike]failure[/strike] fragile.

From the snippet of Vader in Rogue One I just watched it really seemed to reinforce the concept of ideating unbound survival of the fittest - which only has marginal import into real social living beyond the most superficial self mastery which could these days be satiated with over consumerism and over confidence... to a large extent, for some period of time. The long standing bane of drug users is a dream of the ideal recreational drug, or altered state, is a vision of pure self mastery probably, for example.

If you were going to take the fiction literally the Sith would just be organized crime, with a spiritual focus IMO.

But this is not a Star Wars thread I don't think, so both light, dark and mixed variations of the Force community probably share that essence of personal development. I just think the terms are flavours to help different people achieve different types of growth at different times - but since I like the Star Wars approach for the variety found in real society, I actually define the whole Force community as Jedi - just to myself though, no-one likes being called names they do not want to be called. But it does make the anti-Jedi shenanigans of some real Sith seem a bit self deprecating - its the risk or reward of asserting ones views over others I guess - but I guess in something aligning with the concept of a dark path the pull will always be there to force ones will over others to some extent.... maybe. But that doesn't mean I don't see real value in working with the symbols, labels, imagery etc, even exclusively, if it makes the work more fun!

The concept of the meek inheriting the earth is a false one because our reality is based on the survival of the fittest.

The concept of the meek inheriting the earth is a false one because our reality is based on the survival of the fittest.

Ah...yeah. Two completely different concepts mashed together.

Makes a good bumper sticker though.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: The concept of the meek inheriting the earth is a false one because our reality is based on the survival of the fittest.

I'd say false is too strong. Looking at the evolution of successful societies tends to show that the better ones mitigate that survival of the fittest as much as possible to increase the benefits of diversity. But I'd say most people cannot connect to that scope (for various reasons) and are instead controlled by the more pressing issue of survival, which makes using those terms of reference seem more appropriate... and which in turn creates an opportunity for the most vulnerable to be manipulated in some cases probably.

True. My comment is not to say that all are eradicated in the onslaught of the elite, rather the middle is dragged along by the elite as is their design, while the weak are left behind according to their design. And of course in these contexts "the meek" is a relative term based on your standing in society. You either accept your station in life through justification or a cry of injustice or you fight to improve it as is the destiny of a natural leader, thus facilitating that trek into unknown parameters of diversity.

Have I posted in here before? Ergh...

Zenchi wrote: I studied in-depth each of the Sith communities that were in existence before coming here and starting an account and a few have popped up since then, each one has disappointed me heavily. Perhaps things have changed since then but I have not seen a study on Lifeforce or cultivating such.

In fact I would go so far as to say a study of the force in general is usually frowned upon by most within the Sith community. I've also noticed a lack of study within these groups on the Reptilian Brain & it's possible applications throughout one's daily life, which is sad as there's so much there to explore even from a Sith perspective...

I think this sort of touches on something that concerns me with the whole "Sith" thing. And I've avoided bringing it up before, but it still feels like something we should talk about.

We already struggle with the accusation that we're roleplayers, and then we have a sort of subset that is sort of like... Star Wars Satanists, in effect. Or like the vampire subculture, you know?

"We don't really believe in Satan, just the glorification of the self." Then why call yourselves Satanists?
"Those vampires in movies are fiction, we aren't really undead." Then why call yourselves vampires?
"Sure, the Sith are blatantly evil and lead an Empire of rule by fear, racism against non-human species, and ruthless force, throwing an entire galaxy into imbalance, but we're nothing like them!" Then why call yourselves Sith?

Symbolism. That's pretty much the extent of it. And it borders on roleplay. Theatrics.

And the reason why I've been uncomfortable bringing it up (besides the antagonism launched from Sith, or Jedi who may nevertheless argue otherwise) is because the same challenge could be brought upon us, as well. Of course Star Wars is fiction! But if we don't believe in a metaphysical Force, or if we don't draw from the Source Material for some aspect of ethics or spirituality... then why call ourselves Jedi?

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: The concept of the meek inheriting the earth is a false one because our reality is based on the survival of the fittest.

Survival of the fittest though. Not the strongest. There's a reason why so many megafauna died out with the end of the ice age. They were powerful, but couldn't adapt to the change. Same goes for dinosaurs. Large and powerful, but it was the "meek" little mammals who survived the mass extinction and took over the planet. What dinosaurs survived became the chickens we now eat. Take that, dromeosaurs!

Adder wrote: I see nothing un-Jedi about black robes and red sabers, and so in the same way anything deeply confronting and difficult seems just as apt to me in a Jedi path as a Sith path. As I think the real lessons are found in the dark, in those fearful corners.... you grow the most when the morning sun strikes you after the long night. Being sensitive is not vulnerable, and being vulnerable is not failure.

From the snippet of Vader in Rogue One I just watched it really seemed to reinforce the concept of ideating unbound survival of the fittest - which only has marginal import into real social living beyond the most superficial self mastery which could these days be satiated with over consumerism and over confidence... to a large extent, for some period of time. The long standing bane of drug users is a dream of the ideal recreational drug, or altered state, is a vision of pure self mastery probably, for example.

If you were going to take the fiction literally the Sith would just be organized crime, with a spiritual focus IMO.

But this is not a Star Wars thread I don't think, so both light, dark and mixed variations of the Force community probably share that essence of personal development. I just think the terms are flavours to help different people achieve different types of growth at different times - but since I like the Star Wars approach for the variety found in real society, I actually define the whole Force community as Jedi - just to myself though, no-one likes being called names they do not want to be called. But it does make the anti-Jedi shenanigans of some real Sith seem a bit self deprecating - its the risk or reward of asserting ones views over others I guess - but I guess in something aligning with the concept of a dark path the pull will always be there to force ones will over others to some extent.... maybe. But that doesn't mean I don't see real value in working with the symbols, labels, imagery etc, even exclusively, if it makes the work more fun!

Wise words, but I think the importance on spiritual development for the Jedi is on discipline so that the knight overcomes the dark, not the other way around. While they physical fights can be won through will and focus and skill, the real enemy and the real battle is always within. It is the darkness within that we must battle. The Jedi use discipline to master and control tendencies towards behavior that... in large doses or done to the extreme... could create a significant threat to society. Both Sith and Jedi achieve power through alternate means but the Jedi's focus is not to be corrupted by the lure and lust of power. Personally I shun the idea that the difference between Jedi and Sith is insignificant. In many religions there are gods for different ways of being and different "modes" in the spiritual path that are tools to use in different circumstances. Egyptian religion, for example. But even with all the freedom of religious expression and all the spiritual tools the heart is still judged and weighed against the feather.

All religions use symbols. Because the Jedi and Sith are an artistic expression their character is represented by visual effects. Religions are also reinforced by symbolism and the corporate use of these symbols. The Christian cross, for example, is meaningless if you're not a Christian. And to different Christians the meaning varies but if nothing else, most Christians use the symbol to identify themselves. So it is also practical that Sith were given red sabers. Imagine if an army of Jedi and Sith were fighting with light sabers and they all looked alike and had the same color sabers. How would you know who was who?

Survival of the fittest... yes and no. The following is just my opinion but as humans evolved it wasn't about the survival of an individual. Humans are more like an organism with different organs. Some people are better than others at talking. Some are better than others physically. Some are smarter. Some are more popular. The fittest in the animal kingdom is almost entirely physical. However, some animals survive because they are good at hiding, others because they are good at running, others because they are poisonous, others because of camouflage. Most animals are prey for another but they still survive, as a species. Sea turtles have a hard time surviving long enough to get into the ocean but once they're there they have the advantage and can outlive you and I. Trees can live for thousands of years. Are they the fittest?

Survival of the fittest seems to rule when a powerful predator is mowing down prey effortlessly. However, what ultimately defeated that same predator wasn't more power or more skill. It was love. Had Luke Skywalker been anyone else, having no blood relation to Anakin and/or Padme do you really think he would have won? And would the emperor who was superior to Luke, have been dethroned and cast down?

Evolution doesn't stop at physicality. Whatever can be used as a weapon will be used as a weapon. Humans are predators to animals because of our intelligence. However, the most intelligent among us are usually physically weak specimens. And we've had periods in our history where we killed them out of religious paranoia. We operate in groups. That's where are true power comes from. Our warriors can focus on being warriors. They don't even have to create the tools they use in battle. If we didn't have farmers those warriors couldn't eat. So as a society we survive through different strengths working together. But in doing so we protect the weak. If you are a man your chances of procreation will be low if you have no desire to protect your wife. Your child starts as a baby that is weak and vulnerable for years. They couldn't survive without the strength of their parents. So survival of the fittest, if anything, is not true on an individual but a corporate level. In fact, a weak kid with a gun and murder 20 people without breaking a sweat. His fitness is an illusion created by the power of the collective who created

Because the Jedi work within the context of the organization they recognize the need to protect the weak. I think you're right about them all being Jedi. Real Sith would have an aversion to Jedi (by nature) and would only be here to sew the seeds of chaos. They might argue and debate us but it would be more hostile. I really think they like the name because they are seduced by power and by the coolness of SW villains. So they want to bend the identity of the Sith and their code to be more like them without realizing that real Sith get their power, not by being 60% good and 40% bad, but by being 100% bad and doing whatever it takes to reach their goals. Any Sith not taking this approach would be seen as weak or wannabes by real Sith. What bothers me a little is that these Sith act like Jedi have no individual system of self mastery or path to acquire power. We gain individual power to serve the greater good. They seek greater power to serve the individual. They try to categorize aspects of being a Jedi as light or dark without understanding that the difference is how the Jedi utilize the force and how that how that is determined by character/spiritual progression.

Perhaps the best example of Jedi vs Sith are Parents vs Children. Children always want everything, they lack patience, they want to grow up so they can do everything their parents do, they covet size and strength of their parents, they want money so they can buy whatever they want. Meanwhile the parent is more concerned that their child grows up with a moral compass; so that they will do the right things with whatever strength or money they obtain. One hopes that by the time a child gets to the age of the parent that they mature enough not to throw their lives away in risky behaviors trying to get everything they want instead of what they need to survive. And many children who don't learn these lessons end up in jail, living fast and dying young. Older Jedi can still fall to the temptation of power but for them it's usually misguided altruism.

@xiam
Same concept follows... why call yourself a "Christian"? Your really just a roleplayer of the character of christ.

From all I've read of your posts to this thread, so far, Zealot, you've done little research to back up these claims you keep making. It seems as if you're making assumption after assumption, based solely on your perception of things you are ignorant about. Or, maybe you have only read things but haven't actually interacted with sith to close that gap. What I get from your posts is conjecture.

"We don't really believe in Satan, just the glorification of the self." Then why call yourselves Satanists?
"Those vampires in movies are fiction, we aren't really undead." Then why call yourselves vampires?
"Sure, the Sith are blatantly evil and lead an Empire of rule by fear, racism against non-human species, and ruthless force, throwing an entire galaxy into imbalance, but we're nothing like them!" Then why call yourselves Sith?

This is exactly what I was trying to say. You did a great job putting it into a coherent argument.

I don't feel like the Sith here are "true Sith" because they don't really take it seriously. I sense it is more of a fan club, idolizing the Sith. Then when I talk about the Sith code and how these behavior patterns result in disaster and suffering they act like I'm beating up on them. It's not even about them. It's about 2+2=4. We don't have to guess at what it means to be a Sith or what the result is. The mythologies of the movies give us multiple examples.

I'll give you another example. If someone says "I'm a sexist" guess what? I'm going to assume that they do the things that sexists do. If they say "HI, I'm a racist" I'm going to assume that they do what racists do. There is absolutely no reason to redefine any of these things to fit what people think they are. We grapple with people having legitimate reasons for identifying with a different gender. But you know what I don't like? I don't like when guys act like what they think women act like when real women don't act like that. They create a caricature of femininity. And ultimately, it's not feminine. It's an imitation. Likewise, imo we're dealing with imitation Sith... which is NOT BAD... because do we really want real Sith running around here? But at the same time I think they spread a watered down ideology of both the Jedi and Sith with a leaning towards Gray Jedi because they're trying to combine everything they like into one. But it doesn't work like that. The Jedi is the way it is in order to prevent the corruption that comes with having access to so much power. The Sith is the way it is because of its corruption. They think they can have the power of the Sith without the discipline of the Jedi and not be corrupted by it.

ZealotX wrote:

"We don't really believe in Satan, just the glorification of the self." Then why call yourselves Satanists?
"Those vampires in movies are fiction, we aren't really undead." Then why call yourselves vampires?
"Sure, the Sith are blatantly evil and lead an Empire of rule by fear, racism against non-human species, and ruthless force, throwing an entire galaxy into imbalance, but we're nothing like them!" Then why call yourselves Sith?

This is exactly what I was trying to say. You did a great job putting it into a coherent argument.

I don't feel like the Sith here are "true Sith" because they don't really take it seriously. I sense it is more of a fan club, idolizing the Sith. Then when I talk about the Sith code and how these behavior patterns result in disaster and suffering they act like I'm beating up on them. It's not even about them. It's about 2+2=4. We don't have to guess at what it means to be a Sith or what the result is. The mythologies of the movies give us multiple examples.

I'll give you another example. If someone says "I'm a sexist" guess what? I'm going to assume that they do the things that sexists do. If they say "HI, I'm a racist" I'm going to assume that they do what racists do. There is absolutely no reason to redefine any of these things to fit what people think they are. We grapple with people having legitimate reasons for identifying with a different gender. But you know what I don't like? I don't like when guys act like what they think women act like when real women don't act like that. They create a caricature of femininity. And ultimately, it's not feminine. It's an imitation. Likewise, imo we're dealing with imitation Sith... which is NOT BAD... because do we really want real Sith running around here? But at the same time I think they spread a watered down ideology of both the Jedi and Sith with a leaning towards Gray Jedi because they're trying to combine everything they like into one. But it doesn't work like that. The Jedi is the way it is in order to prevent the corruption that comes with having access to so much power. The Sith is the way it is because of its corruption. They think they can have the power of the Sith without the discipline of the Jedi and not be corrupted by it.

If we stick to that argument, then we should assume there are no real Jedi, because if you call yourself one I will assume you live a monastic life with vows of non-attachment and are deployed for diplomatic ops where you use telekinesis and a lightsaber to enforce justice.

@Luthien

What claims are you referring to? And what exactly do you think I should have read beyond the Darth Bane series and the other SW books in my collection? Not even worth mentioning are the games I've played that used the SW license with a sanctioned understanding of Sith.

What I'm saying is based on SW canon. People reject it because it is true to SW but not to them. I can't research a group of pelicans to learn about bears. I can't spend time interacting with mice to learn about snakes.

I mean no offense, but how do I know the subjects of study actually are the thing I want to know about? Because they say they are? The bible says there are those who "say they are Jews and are not" and calls them the synagogue of Satan. What people claim, even if they agree together about their claims, doesn't equate to an objective fact.

And no one has yet to explain what makes them a Sith rather than a Gray or Dark Jedi... or even just a normal person looking out for themselves. Because what would makes me a Jedi is not simply calling myself a Jedi.

@ZealotX

I think your reply to Luthien about sums up the issue. What else could you have read beyond SW mythology in a debate about Sith in the real world? Perhaps information about the Sith in the real world?

I agree with Lithien, conjecture does not an argument make.

ZealotX wrote: Wise words, but I think the importance on spiritual development for the Jedi is on discipline so that the knight overcomes the dark, not the other way around. While they physical fights can be won through will and focus and skill, the real enemy and the real battle is always within. It is the darkness within that we must battle.

Might depend how one defines 'dark', as it seems integral to this theme so abandonment of it would be... curious.
Finding a useful context for it might even change over time as one progresses perhaps? I tend to reject its use for concepts of evil, and instead just call that evil, and maybe its most accessibly practical for negative inclinations or forces on ones path. But there are many ways to use it, some people like the light on their face and some like the light on their backs, so if your in the light and facing the dark you view is dark but your essence is light
So I tend to a functional individual definition as having more importance, and keeping it relevant and effective to ones path IMO.

@Magnus Staar

If I was expecting Sith to have holocrons and lightsabers you'd have a point. Even in the SW your definition doesn't hold up. Jedi used vibroswords before the invention of lightsabers.

The Jedi /ˈdʒɛˌdaɪ/ are the main protagonists in the Star Wars universe. They are depicted as an ancient monastic and academic meritocratic organization whose origin dates back to c. 25,000 BBY (Before Battle of Yavin; the destruction of the first Death Star).

The Jedi Order mostly consists of polymaths: teachers, philosophers, scientists, engineers, physicians, diplomats and warriors, who value knowledge and wisdom above nationality. By serving others, the Jedi give of themselves through acts of charity, citizenship, and volunteerism. A Jedi's ideology and strict way of life as a worthwhile challenge to live up to is a recurring theme in the Star Wars universe. Their traditional weapon is the lightsaber, a device which generates a blade-like plasma controlled by a crystal. The fictional organization has inspired a real-world new religious movement, Jediism.[1]

The difference is you can have Jedi without the dogma of non-attachment (as we have examples of that even in the SW canon) or the membership to the fictional organization.

However, you can't escape what the Sith represent and what their ideology teaches.

The Sith are dedicated to the "Sith Code" and to mastering the Dark Side of the Force.[5] Sith Lords traditionally use the title Darth-prefix before their Sith name. The Sith's Dark Side methodology, which draws on the Force through severe negative emotions, is antipodal to that of their archenemies, the Jedi, who rely on the Force's "Light Side," i.e., the Force as experienced through disciplined states of quietude and compassion. Notably, both the Jedi and Sith shun romantic and familial love, as the Jedi fear such love will lead to attachment, and thus selfishness, and the Sith fear it will compromise their connection to the Dark Side of the Force. Although the Sith are intimately linked to the Dark Side, not every "Dark Side"-user is a Sith; nor is every "Light Side"-user a Jedi.

The Dark Side of the Force is stigmatized as corruptive and addictive by the Jedi, who view it as evil.[6] As portrayed in all Star Wars-related media, the Dark Side provides users with powers similar to those of the Light Side-using Jedi, but as it leverages passion and violence, its use is enhanced by negative raw and aggressive emotions and instinctual feelings such as anger, greed, hatred, and rage. Extended indulgence in the Dark Side creates a loss of humanity, morality, empathy, and the ability to love, leaving the Sith indifferent, sociopathic, aloof, amoral, cruel, sadistic and violent. Considering this dark change in personality to be a transformation into a different person altogether, some who turn to the Dark Side take on a different name, as they regard their former persona as dead and destroyed. - wikipedia

What sense does it make to claim to be a Sith without regard to the corruption that is a result of adherence to the Sith code and philosophy?

Arisaig wrote: @ZealotX

I think your reply to Luthien about sums up the issue. What else could you have read beyond SW mythology in a debate about Sith in the real world? Perhaps information about the Sith in the real world?

I agree with Lithien, conjecture does not an argument make.

But with all due respect... you're basically creating a difference between real life Sith ideology vs SW mythology and you want me to treat the "real life" sith as real sith which would make the sith in the SW... "wrong"? You're using THEIR Sith Code but saying their interpretation isn't correct. That's like me quoting the founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses and claiming to have created a JW church but then any part of it I don't like (like no blood transfusions) I just leave out and I can just decide to change their doctrines into Catholicism but since I'm calling it Jehovah's Witness people have to respect it as such.

No, they don't. That choice is entirely up to the person and their knowledge of what JW is actually supposed to be. You can't give something a new definition and expect everyone to accept it. The Jedi view of the Sith doesn't need to change. Jedi do not need to ignore the hatred, anger, greed, etc. employed by Sith philosophy as a source and catalyst of power. It is the antithesis of the Jedi teachings.

How do I know? Because that's how it started in the first place. And you can't take on the identity and say you are a true Sith without understanding how the Sith began; their origin, and why they behave as they do. You're making it sound like their behavior in the movies has nothing to do with the tenets of their ideology. I'm saying no, their ideology is the reason why they behaved that way in the SW universe. So you can't be a "Real life" Sith and not expect to suffer any corruption as a result of that ideology. It simply wont be artistically maligned by yellow eyes and deformity. These changes were representative of the fallen character of "the adversary". They weren't chosen at random. The whole point of the SW mythos was to retell a story of good and evil and the balance of power between dualistic forces and how they use wield power. That's why you have the Nazis mixed into the British empire. The movie is telling you "we've been here before".

So forgive me if I feel like the "real life sith" are ignoring the whole meaning of the whole mythos entirely. And if you're going to do that then fine, but why then call yourself a Sith? Using that word invokes the very mythos you're trying to ignore. The bible, for example, says the wages of sin is death. It doesn't mean that every time you do something wrong you're going to die. It also doesn't mean that if you break the law you have to be executed. What it means is that sin is a path. If you follow that path it leads to death. Why? The bible defines sin as both the "transgression of the law" and the law as love. Therefore, if we do not maintain the bonds of love between ourselves, as a group, we'll destroy ourselves as a group. If we steal from each other, murder each other, take someone's wife or husband, etc. we will make each other into an adversaries (satan). And why would someone steal from you? Because they put their own wants over your needs. It's selfishness vs selflessness. People seek power to vanquish an external enemy when the threat that creates that external enemy has always been the one in the mirror. This is why ancient societies not only had laws but also spiritual systems that created pathways to enlightenment and character progression. Sith is not a model for character progression. It sacrifices it in order make it easier to obtain power. I'm sorry, but I can't recognize anyone being a Sith without at least that aspect.

And since the Jedi story is also one of redemption I wouldn't be much of a Jedi if I didn't instinctively try to bring "Sith" back to the light or prevent any threat they pose to the Jedi and the universe. I don't see why my entire understanding of both Jedi and Sith needs to change to fit a bunch of people who want to call themselves Sith in spite of ignoring the SW mythos that created the name.

But with all due respect... you're basically creating a difference between real life Sith ideology vs SW mythology and you want me to treat the "real life" sith as real sith which would make the sith in the SW... "wrong"? You're using THEIR Sith Code but saying their interpretation isn't correct. That's like me quoting the founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses and claiming to have created a JW church but then any part of it I don't like (like no blood transfusions) I just leave out and I can just decide to change their doctrines into Catholicism but since I'm calling it Jehovah's Witness people have to respect it as such.

I see the point you're trying to make, however there is one slight difference in your example - being that various "Figures" in the JW world could very come around and argue the point about your new splinter group.

In the unlikely event that Darth Maul rocks up and starts slapping people upside the head, then the "real life" sith might have something to worry about - until then, adapting the word to suit their mythology (or methodology) and devising their own path is more or less up to them.

Would it make you happier if they call themselves Z-Warriors instead of Sith?

I don't call myself Sith...and the reason for that is mostly because of the word's connotations for other people. Outside of the Sith/Jedi folk, no one gives a rats arse about the difference between Sith and Jedi., if indeed there is much difference.

When I discuss my "way" I want to conjure up images of Sir Alec Guiness in a homespun robe, not a glossy black cyborg, so the language I use reflects that.

The debate between Sith and Jedi doesn't interest me half so much as the one between Jedi (and Sith and all related offshoots) and Christian or Agnostic.

When one day all of my friends and family are "some sort of" variation of the Jedi group, then I'll worry about the various subdivisions.