Kurgan wrote:I see Kurgan has decided to play the old classic shell game, switching issues back and forth. When countered on his "was Anakin forced" he switches to the "what havokeff did or did not say". When I'm nailing him on his response to havokeff at point a, he switches to his response to havokeff at point b.
Who says Anakin was forced?
According to YOU, some unnamed SW fan(s) said it.
If nobody in this thread said it, and I didn't say it, then whom are you objecting to?
I'm objecting you you oscillating back and forth between "Were visions planted" and "Was Anakin forced", etc. and using one to try and answer a point about the OTHER.
You're objecting because you think my comments suggest that SOMEONE did say it, and since I didn't identify that person, I'm lying?
No, for the umpteenth time, you're lying because you keep changing your story.
And you DID say someone did say it. You just refused to say who that someone was.
Review:
Kurgan wrote:
I've heard a few people insist that Anakin's "dreams" and "premonitions" of his mother dying and Padme dying were deliberately "planted" in Anakin's mind by Palpatine (presumably without him knowing).
You started this thread asking about the idea that Palpatine planted the visions. That is delporably dishonest debating.
I don't see how this is dishonest. I have heard a few people insist this. You don't believe me... but why?
This is NOT what I'm saying is dishonets. This was simply a reconstruction of what happened. You choose to tear the reconstruction apart and nitpick individual pieces. The individual pieces are not what was dishonest. Your constantly changing your story in the BIG PICTURE is what was dishonest. Your dishonest because the individual pieces contradict EACH OTHER.
If someone says "Pat Jones is a man" and then later says "Pat Jones is a woman", neither of those statements is in and of itself a verifiable lie. But the two put TOGETHER most certainly proves that said someone is lying SOMEWHERE.
Kurgan wrote:
I think either way, people want to give Palpatine more credit by having HIM responsible for Anakin's fall, and so they extend this back to basically everything that comes with it.
I find it much more powerful if Anakin chooses the Darkside himself, gradually, rather than having it fed to him by Palpatine in a single moment.
Here you change gears to "Anakin wasn't forced". THIS bit was not in response to ANYTHING anyone said in this thread.
And this opinion of mine hasn't changed. Did you read it as a mistaken "rebuttal" to havekoff? If so, then perhaps that is where your upset comes from.
Again, fixating on each individual piece of the discussion rather than the whole.
havokeff wrote:
I like the idea of him being "seduced", which isn't being forced...
Why would he say that, unless I suggested he was forced before he did?
Why he said it is irrelevant. The fact remains he DENIES Anakin was being forced, to which you reply that "seduce" does not mean rape (forced)
Unless of course it's permissable to think out loud and not every post has to be a direct rebuttal to the poster that came before.
When you start using the same words, in quotation marks no less, most people will clearly see it as a direct rebuttal. The fact that you didn't use the html quote tags is a red herring.
Kurgan wrote:
"I always assumed "seduction" is enticement, not rape."
Kurgan, you were using words from havokeff's post in yours (e.g. seduced/seduction). You even put it in quotation marks. Then you say don't think that means he was forced.
Which is true. But you think that means I was quoting his post in order to refute it. So you're assuming you know what I intended more than I myself did?
Its not MY fault you don'r realize what using quotation marks means.
Such a statement clearly paints the picture that (in your mind anyway) that havokeff was saying it was like rape. If not, why post this in the first place?
See above. Had I quoted his post and said explicitly that he was wrong and it was X, then you'd have a clear case. I think you misinterpreted my post.
I think you're desprately trying to get yourself out of an uncomfortable situaion.
You deflect criticism of this point to your much later (yesterday's) respons about havokeff's post.
The point is that I didn't whip out "forced" but that it was mentioned by another poster before I did.
That particular word, yes. The idea of being forces, no.
I didn't accuse him of purporting that view, I was commenting on a post that made me think more about the issue and my own position. This sort of thing happens in countless other threads, and people aren't normally pounced upon for it. I didn't do anything wrong, whether you agree with my interpretation or not.
Then you need to make that clear in the first place intsead of trying to squirm around afterwards.
No but he used the word 'forced' before you or I did, so you can't accuse me of pulling it out of my ass, nor of accusing HIM of believing that Anakin WAS forced. And you say *I* have a problem with reading comprehension?
He used it to DENY Anakin was being forced, immediately after which you were off on the tangent about "b-b-but if he was forced then..."
So then my post was agreeing with me,
You were agreeing with yourself? What a surprise.
and you're trying to turn it into disagreement, then a denial that I was disagreeing?
If you saw it as an agreement to begin with that you knew he was saying Anakin wasn't forced, why did you "quote" his words and then say it those words don't mean he is being forced?
This is getting confusing.
Thats what happens when you keep changing the subject.
And anyway, you've run up more of a tangent in this thread than I ever could have (when were tangents forbidden?).
Pointing out your changing story about the thread topic(s) is not a tangent.
To me, making the visions something Palpatine planted into his head limits Anakin's free will. The more power we give to Palpatine in his turn, the less responsibility Anakin has, and to me that diminishes the whole story.
More non-sequitors.
How is this the former a non-sequitor? Please explain rather than just stating it.
Already did with the cake and dieter analogy.
The first part of the second sentence is also true, the more power Palpatine has, and by this I mean "the power over Anakin," the less responsibility Anakin has.
How the hell does "planting visions" lead to "power over Anakin?" This was the same point I made in one of my early posts in this thread and all you could do is repeat yourself.
Me pointing out that your argument is illogical and your if-then statements do not hold is "whining" eh?
You've alleged a lot of things, but demonstrated none with unambiguous examples.
Liar.
I think you misinterpreted my post, got angry, and now you're stuck asserting that I'm a dishonest debater.
You started with "planted visions" changed it to "Palpatine forced Anakin". I asked you to explain this idea. You simply repeated it. I yelled at you to justify the claim. You appealed to the "unknown warsie". I pointed out you were not backing up your claim and you change your story BACK to "only planted visions"
Instead of going that route it may have been more prudent to ask me to clarify my position, and once I had done so, accept it, whether you agreed with me or not.
I did back in my first few posts in this thread. You simply repeated yourself. I see no reason why you deserve to be treated civily.
I take it as whining, because you find fault what what you think I'm thinking, and don't believe me when I say what I intended, and that's taking up more of this than the argument itself.
I find fault with you making unverified claims and changing your story to get yourself out of hot water.
How have I backpedaled? Was I originally accusing someone in this thread of saying Anakin was forced?
You were demanding to know who said Anakin was forced, implying that *I * said someone was,
You ADMITTED someone was but refused to name them, remember?
and was lying in doing so. You thought I was attacking to a poster on page 1, apparently.
You were lying in changing your story from "planted visions" to "forced Anakin" and then back to "planted visions" again.
Nice evasion, asshole. THIS point was NOT about people in THIS thread per-say.
Then who? You don't know what people I've talked to, and if I can't copy and paste deleted threads from other forums, how will you ever know? You just have to take my word for it. If you just assume I'm lying from the outset, then I guess we'll never reach any kind of resolution.
Okay I think I see the confusion. The fans I am talking about insisted that Palpatine planted the visions in Anakin's head. This to me said that his fall to the Dark Side was inevitable because Palpatine was inside his head.
Which is you repeating your non-sequitor once again.
Once he turned to the Dark Side, he was basically taken over, so that his own will no longer existed. This was then connected with the idea that Anakin really "died" in Episode III, and then returned at the end of ROTJ. The "Vader" persona was thus something born of the Dark Side and Palpatine's influence. I didn't explain this in the post, so I can see how it could be confusing. I assumed these theories were well enough known that I could speak about them without having to explain myself.
Again, changing your story. What happend to Anakin AFTER turning to the darkside has nothing to do with how he got there in the first place.
It's my opinion that believing in the "implanted visions" theory points in the direction of saying he was forced.
But it DOESN'T.
Even if the implanted visions folks are not literally saying that ("Anakin was forced to the dark side!") I think that is the logical conclusion of that argument.
You have failed to DEMONSTRATE how its the logical conclusion of that argument.
"everytime a person is born the Earth weighs just a little more."--DMJ on StarTrek.com
"You see now you are using your thinking and that is not a good thing!" DMJay on StarTrek.com
"Watching Sarli argue with Vympel, Stas, Schatten and the others is as bizarre as the idea of the 40-year-old Virgin telling Hugh Hefner that Hef knows nothing about pussy, and that he is the expert."--Elfdart
