When did Anakin Skywalker become a sociopath?

[Crom]

I was reading another thread and someone mentioned that Anakin Skywalker was a sociopath.

Was Anakin Skywalker already a sociopath prior to being corrupted by the Dark Side? If he was, when did that happen?

[Patrick Degan]

Well, you're talking about a kid who was born a slave on some hick backwater planet, was treated like a slave for most of his life, had no father, a mother he barely got to see between their working lives, then he gets yanked away from his only source of comfort in life to a monastic order with some of them pronouncing him the Golden Child, others suspicious of him, others simply plainly prejudiced against him just because he didn't grow up in the Jedi Order from birth. There was probably very little love in that upbringing as he gets trained in the exercise of psi-abilities beyond the scope of his maturity to grasp. Growing up, he has a huge hole in his life which Jedi traning cannot wallpaper over. When he senses his mother's in danger, what do his superiors in the Order tell him but to ignore it, let go, don't give in to emotion, it's all to a greater purpose since this life's just a shadow but he knows better. Then, when he finally gets up the balls to defy his masters, he reaches his mother just in time for her to die in his arms.

He got started down the path to sociopathy the moment a well-meaning Qui-Gon Jinn took him away.

[Darth Hoth]

I was reading another thread and someone mentioned that Anakin Skywalker was a sociopath.

Was Anakin Skywalker already a sociopath prior to being corrupted by the Dark Side? If he was, when did that happen?

He was certainly mentally distraught by the time of the Republic comics' "Battle for Jabiim" story arc, in the aftermath of which he suffered from paranoid delusions and was fully prepared to kill a fellow Jedi (A'Sharad Hett) because he thought (without the slightest justification) that he was out to get him. It is arguable whether he manifested sociopathic or schizophrenic tendencies even earlier, but there it becomes unambiguous.

[Solauren]

During Rogue Planet, he killed someone using the Dark Side of the Force.

That was way pre Attack of the Clones. It's about 3 years after The Phantom Menace.

And really, his path to nut-job-hood was set when Darth Maul killed Qui Jon. Qui Jon gives the impression that he would have helped Anakin immensely, having seen his living conditions.

[Darth Raptor]

He's not without empathy pre-Vader, so he was never strictly a sociopath, just completely amoral (as a lot of GFFA folks are) and utterly self-absorbed.

[Crom]

He's not without empathy pre-Vader, so he was never strictly a sociopath, just completely amoral (as a lot of GFFA folks are) and utterly self-absorbed.

As I've come to understand it, sociopaths can care about a small group of people. It's sort of like Anakin cares about Amidala and doesn't want her harmed, but he has no compunction about killing you or the person you love.

[Pelranius]

He also cared about his mom, and those Nelvaanians whom the Techno Union people were experimenting on (at least enough to kill all the Skakoan scientists). Anakin seemed somewhat bothered that he had also killed all the Sand People in that camp as well.

[Eframepilot]

He also cared about his mom, and those Nelvaanians whom the Techno Union people were experimenting on (at least enough to kill all the Skakoan scientists). Anakin seemed somewhat bothered that he had also killed all the Sand People in that camp as well.

Anakin was even bothered after killing Dooku, which he did only at the prompting of an authority figure with whom he had a close relationship. Really, Anakin wasn't a sociopath at all before his actual turn to the dark side. He had terrible anger issues and all sorts of attachment disorders with his mother and Padme, but he had no problems empathizing with others.

[Terralthra]

He also cared about his mom, and those Nelvaanians whom the Techno Union people were experimenting on (at least enough to kill all the Skakoan scientists). Anakin seemed somewhat bothered that he had also killed all the Sand People in that camp as well.

Anakin was even bothered after killing Dooku, which he did only at the prompting of an authority figure with whom he had a close relationship. Really, Anakin wasn't a sociopath at all before his actual turn to the dark side. He had terrible anger issues and all sorts of attachment disorders with his mother and Padme, but he had no problems empathizing with others.

He was bothered at having broken his code of conduct. Not out of remorse for Dooku's life.

[Dillon]

Question: Is sociopathism necessarily as binary as many of you are making it out to be? Can't there be degrees of sociopathism?

[ExarKun]

I always thought that the dark side somehow makes you sociopathic

[Dillon]

I always thought that the dark side somehow makes you sociopathic

Maybe. But that doesn't mean that one can't already be sociopathic beforehand.

[Havok]

I'm not sure about the EU, but in TPM, he seemed like a pretty well adjusted kid. He made adult decisions, took on adult responsibility, and handled pressure extremely well. he was caring, loving and concerned about other people's well being.

As of the opening of AOTC he seems unsure, angry, stubborn and lacking confidence in almost everything except his own abilities.

I know leaving his mom was hard for him, but he was a damn smart kid and it was his choice. I have to believe it was Palpatine's manipulations that caused such a drastic change in personality.

[ExarKun]

I always thought that the dark side somehow makes you sociopathic

Maybe. But that doesn't mean that one can't already be sociopathic beforehand.

Sociopaths are characterized by inability to love and lack of emotional attachment to others. Then you have pathological lying, promiscuity and infidelity, parasitic lifestyle, criminal behavior, manipulative behavior, etc..

I don't think any of these can be ascribed to him before assuming the "title". If anything, he seemed to be too emotional, too caring, he wanted to protect those he loved, etc. He was what people today call and "emo" (I'm not saying emo is a bad thing). I think he's more of a delusional person than a sociopath.

I know he does kill those send people, but it was done in a fit of rage after they killed his innocent mother. I think I would have killed them too. Of course, he kills their women and children, which is a bit over the top, but we all have our levels of insanity. It doesn't really make him a sociopath

On the other hand, once he turns over in ep III, you see him having plans to rule the galaxy, lying to Padme, justifying his actions against the Jedi with sheer nonsense that only makes sense to him, trying to manipulate Padme, being possesive of her, he becomes impulsive and paranoid.

In my opinion the dark side starts making him a sociopath as soon as he fully opens up to it. 20 years down the road, he's blowing up entire worlds, torturing people, killing fellow officers for transgressions that are perceived by him to be their fault, and nearly killing his own son...no love for anybody, nor remorse, contemptuous, no friends, secretive... beware of the dark side indeed

[Darth Hoth]

justifying his actions against the Jedi with sheer nonsense that only makes sense to him,

Excuse me? Did you, too, miss the part of Ep III when the Jedi were couping the legitimate government? Or where Palpatine rightly predicted that they would cause "civil war without end" unless hunted down? He had some very real and objective reasons to neutralise them.

[ExarKun]

justifying his actions against the Jedi with sheer nonsense that only makes sense to him,

Excuse me? Did you, too, miss the part of Ep III when the Jedi were couping the legitimate government? Or where Palpatine rightly predicted that they would cause "civil war without end" unless hunted down? He had some very real and objective reasons to neutralise them.

I hope you're being sarcastic there

Palpatine was a traitor, so he had no legitimacy whatsoever. It was the duty of the Jedi to arrest him/kill him.

[Darth Hoth]

I hope you're being sarcastic there

No, I very much am not.

Palpatine was a traitor,

A very serious accusation for which the Jedi had absolutely zero evidence. I also like how you sidestep the issue that Mace Windu was about to depose him even before a notoriously paranoid and psychologically distraught individual provided the sole testimony. No court in the Western World would act on such "proof", let alone against the head of state in the middle of a war, and the Jedi clearly did not care either way as they went to assume power.

so he had no legitimacy whatsoever.

He was the duly elected and inaugurated head of state and government of the Galactic Republic, who had - as far as anyone knew - executed his duties spectacularly well and fully within the spirit and letter of the law. He certainly had more authority, whether meant to be moral or legal, than an antidemocratic monastic order with coincidental vast influence in the running of matters of state. The Jedi even specifically stated that he must be assassinated because the Courts would never take their case seriously.

It was the duty of the Jedi to arrest him/kill him.

Duty to their own Order at most, certainly not the Galactic Republic. There are a few things you might have heard of called "due process", "rule of law" and "innocent till proven guilty". You do not, whether as a private citizen or a police or military officer, go around killing people and couping democratic governments because you think that someone might be a criminal; if you do, it is you who belong behind bars or in the chair.

This matter has been discussed at length earlier; member Publius has argued this point more persuasively than I ever could. Perform a search.

EDIT: You need not search: Here is the thread in question.

[ExarKun]

Palpatine was a traitor,

A very serious accusation for which the Jedi had absolutely zero evidence. I also like how you sidestep the issue that Mace Windu was about to depose him even before a notoriously paranoid and psychologically distraught individual provided the sole testimony. No court in the Western World would act on such "proof", let alone against the head of state in the middle of a war, and the Jedi clearly did not care either way as they went to assume power.

He said that he is the senate, pretty much admitting his guilt of overstepping his bounds as chief of state to the jedi, and whipping out a light saber and killing jedi without provocation is what exactly? It's a murder attempt and they had every right after that to kill him. The right thing for him to do would be to let himself be arrested and then fight the charges, like anybody else.

so he had no legitimacy whatsoever.

He was the duly elected and inaugurated head of state and government of the Galactic Republic, who had - as far as anyone knew - executed his duties spectacularly well and fully within the spirit and letter of the law. He certainly had more authority, whether meant to be moral or legal, than an antidemocratic monastic order with coincidental vast influence in the running of matters of state. The Jedi even specifically stated that he must be assassinated because the Courts would never take their case seriously.

The war is over, it is time for him to step down, they go to make sure he does. Nothing wrong with that, nor traitorous. His mandate ends with the war, so he has no legal standing the moment the war is over, no matter how well he executed his duties. As for the assassination, no, they said he might have to be removed by force, exactly foreseeing what was going to happen. He will not give up his power. It is within their legal limits to remove him. They never go into his office attempting to kill him, just to forcibly throw him out.

It was the duty of the Jedi to arrest him/kill him.

Duty to their own Order at most, certainly not the Galactic Republic. There are a few things you might have heard of called "due process", "rule of law" and "innocent till proven guilty". You do not, whether as a private citizen or a police or military officer, go around killing people and couping democratic governments because you think that someone might be a criminal; if you do, it is you who belong behind bars or in the chair.

It is also a duty to the Republic, whom they serve. Jedi are not some independent order, they are part of the gov't. Once they found out he's a sith, they easily connect him to the sith lord who they know is behind the war, who lives in the same freaking building as Palpatine. Obi-wan tells Padme as much. They know he's behind everything. They easily put two and two together and decide to arrest him. Some evidence, no matter how minor, is enough to arrest him on the suspicion of treason and give him due process of law. Anakin might not be great as a witness, but the events in the office prove Anakin correct. Once he attempts to kill them, they are entitled to kill him.

This matter has been discussed at length earlier; member Publius has argued this point more persuasively than I ever could. Perform a search.


I've read Publius's post, and frankly, he's clutching at straws. His post is fine in theory, but would never work in the real world.

Imagine 4 top FBI agents, whose #1 target is Osama bin Laden, who, on strong suspicion and some evidence is behind the terrorist attacks, find themselves in the White House. They are there to make sure Bush, who has dictatorial powers contrary to the tradition, and who is in his 12th year in office steps down, because Saddam Hussein has just been captured, US has taken over Iraq and there is minor resistance, but the mission is accomplished, for all intents and purposes. They go there to ask him to step down, but they found out he is bin Laden. They decide to arrest him, but he whips out a gun, shoots 3 of them, and then runs out of bullets. The 4th one can easily arrest him and charge him with murder, if nothing else, and get rid of him. Except that he knows that the courts are filled with Bush's right wing cronies. So he decides to bend the rules and shoot him. Sure, it's wrong from some crazy legal point of view, but any sane person knows it's right, forget the legal. He can just say that he shot him in self defense and sleep peacefully at night knowing that he did the right thing. Of course this is not the exact analogy, but it's close enough. The law gets bent all the time in the real world. Giving some war criminal due process of law when he's clearly guilty is for the theory books and happens only when you are sure that he will be easily proven guilty.

The whole point of your theory rest on the belief that the Jedi went in for a coup and to assume the power themselves, when there is no evidence of that. They went in for the arrest because of reasonable suspicion, due process of law would have easily found him guilty. They try to kill him once he turns dangerous. Do you honestly see Mace Windu or Yoda as the chancellor, or someone put their as there puppet?


.

[Darth Wong]

I always thought that the dark side somehow makes you sociopathic

But in order to embrace the dark side, you need to embrace the worst sides of your own nature: hatred and anger.

[Ziggy Stardust]

The whole point of your theory rest on the belief that the Jedi went in for a coup and to assume the power themselves, when there is no evidence of that.

In ROTS (both the movie and the novelization) there is explicit dialogue by Mace Windu in which he describes his plan to overthrow Palpatine and take control of the Senate. The whole point of YOUR theory rests on ignoring said evidence and blustering about morality.

[Darth Hoth]

He said that he is the senate, pretty much admitting his guilt of overstepping his bounds as chief of state to the jedi,

Was that before or after they had already decided to depose him?

and whipping out a light saber and killing jedi without provocation is what exactly? It's a murder attempt

Have you heard of self-defence? They drew weapons first, not he, and were in the process of illegally detaining him.

and they had every right after that to kill him.

Ignoring the point of self-defence, or the matter of him being the head of state. Impeachment through the Senate would be the way to go, if any.

The right thing for him to do would be to let himself be arrested and then fight the charges, like anybody else.

Except that the Jedi had no legal authority to arrest him. Of course, they were never going to give him a fair trial in the first place. Does "He's too dangerous to be left alive?" ring a bell?

The war is over,

Evidence?

it is time for him to step down,

According to?

they go to make sure he does.

In other words, they are couping the legitimate government.

Nothing wrong with that, nor traitorous.

I beg to differ.

His mandate ends with the war, so he has no legal standing the moment the war is over, no matter how well he executed his duties.

You have a quote, I gather?

As for the assassination, no, they said he might have to be removed by force, exactly foreseeing what was going to happen.

Odd how the motivation changed, then. Did Palpatine become more dangerous after Windu struck him down?

He will not give up his power. It is within their legal limits to remove him.

No it is not.

They never go into his office attempting to kill him, just to forcibly throw him out.

That is still treason. And Windu certainly tried.

It is also a duty to the Republic, whom they serve.

Thus they respect its laws. Oh, wait...

Jedi are not some independent order, they are part of the gov't.

Evidence to counter the sourcebook Publius cited?

Once they found out he's a sith, they easily connect him to the sith lord who they know is behind the war, who lives in the same freaking building as Palpatine.

Unfounded assumption. There is no credible evidence that a Sith is guiding the Separatists, apart from Dooku, nor that there are only two Sith in any case. The Sith religion itself is not outlawed. And you are ignoring the fact that they did not have any solid evidence that Palpatine was Sith at all in the first place.

Obi-wan tells Padme as much.

His opinion is not evidence. He was not even there to witness the action. Nor did he suspect anything before Windu launched his coup.

They know he's behind everything.

They think he is.

They easily put two and two together and decide to arrest him.

Windu was coming for him before he even spoke to Anakin.

Some evidence, no matter how minor, is enough to arrest him on the suspicion of treason and give him due process of law.

Due process for a head of state would be impeachment. And as noted, they were not interested in a fair trial anyway.

Anakin might not be great as a witness, but the events in the office prove Anakin correct.

Of course, they knew what would happen beforehand. Wait...

Once he attempts to kill them, they are entitled to kill him.

No, because they attacked first. He is entitled to kill them.

I've read Publius's post, and frankly, he's clutching at straws. His post is fine in theory, but would never work in the real world.

That is... not a judgment you hear often about Publius's work.

Imagine 4 top FBI agents, whose #1 target is Osama bin Laden, who, on strong suspicion and some evidence is behind the terrorist attacks, find themselves in the White House. They are there to make sure Bush, who has dictatorial powers contrary to the tradition, and who is in his 12th year in office steps down, because Saddam Hussein has just been captured, US has taken over Iraq and there is minor resistance, but the mission is accomplished, for all intents and purposes. They go there to ask him to step down, but they found out he is bin Laden. They decide to arrest him, but he whips out a gun, shoots 3 of them, and then runs out of bullets. The 4th one can easily arrest him and charge him with murder, if nothing else, and get rid of him. Except that he knows that the courts are filled with Bush's right wing cronies. So he decides to bend the rules and shoot him. Sure, it's wrong from some crazy legal point of view, but any sane person knows it's right, forget the legal. He can just say that he shot him in self defense and sleep peacefully at night knowing that he did the right thing. Of course this is not the exact analogy, but it's close enough. The law gets bent all the time in the real world. Giving some war criminal due process of law when he's clearly guilty is for the theory books and happens only when you are sure that he will be easily proven guilty.

I will call red herring on this one. But if you persist, I can take it apart as I did the rest of your argument.

The whole point of your theory rest on the belief that the Jedi went in for a coup and to assume the power themselves, when there is no evidence of that.

Because the film dialogue about taking control of the Senate showed no such thing. Wait...

They went in for the arrest because of reasonable suspicion,

Ehm, no.

due process of law would have easily found him guilty.

Windu did not think so.

They try to kill him once he turns dangerous.

So he becomes more dangerous after the fight? How?

Do you honestly see Mace Windu or Yoda as the chancellor, or someone put their as there puppet?

I shall let the evidence speak for itself:

KI-ADI-MUNDI: If he does not give up his emergency powers after the destruction of Grievous, then he should be removed from
office.

MACE WINDU: That could be a dangerous move ... the Jedi Council would have to take control of the Senate in order to secure a peaceful transition . . .

KI-ADI-MUNDI: . . . and replace the Congress with Senators who are not filled with greed and corruption.

YODA: To a dark place this line of thought will carry us. Hmmmmm. . . . great care we must take.

Emphasis mine.

[Anguirus]

Just because someone is an evil SOB doesn't make him a sociopath. A much closer example of a classic sociopath is Count Dooku. Stover's description of him indicates that long before his fall to the Dark Side he was mentally classifying people as either "threat" or "irrelevant," and has only a dim understanding of why one would associate with anyone without either manipulating them or bowing to their superior power.

Skywalker's psyche is vastly different, if ultimately not that much healthier.

[Knife]

Palpatine was a traitor,

A very serious accusation for which the Jedi had absolutely zero evidence. I also like how you sidestep the issue that Mace Windu was about to depose him even before a notoriously paranoid and psychologically distraught individual provided the sole testimony. No court in the Western World would act on such "proof", let alone against the head of state in the middle of a war, and the Jedi clearly did not care either way as they went to assume power.

You also missed the point that they were right. Palpatine was a traitor to the Republic and was evil incarnate. Sure the Jedi were stupid about it, that was the point of the movie, not that the Jedi were wrong. Also, they were at the end of the war not the middle, Dooku dead, and Obi Wan actively engaging their supreme military commander in an attack pretty much spelled the end of the war.

so he had no legitimacy whatsoever.

He was the duly elected and inaugurated head of state and government of the Galactic Republic, who had - as far as anyone knew - executed his duties spectacularly well and fully within the spirit and letter of the law. He certainly had more authority, whether meant to be moral or legal, than an antidemocratic monastic order with coincidental vast influence in the running of matters of state. The Jedi even specifically stated that he must be assassinated because the Courts would never take their case seriously.

As far as anyone knew. That's the underpin of your argument, once we kick that out since Palpatine was not the duly elected head of state, rather guilty of exactly what you accuse the Jedi of; using Force powers to elevate himself, your argument crumbles around you.

It was the duty of the Jedi to arrest him/kill him.

Duty to their own Order at most, certainly not the Galactic Republic. There are a few things you might have heard of called "due process", "rule of law" and "innocent till proven guilty". You do not, whether as a private citizen or a police or military officer, go around killing people and couping democratic governments because you think that someone might be a criminal; if you do, it is you who belong behind bars or in the chair.

And yet cops can defend themselves as do military people from hazardous and armed opponents. It is quite clear that a highly trained Force user just standing there without a weapon is and can be very dangerous.

Sure Palpy was sitting at his desk and later up against a wall with out a lightsaber and yet in both instances he can be deadly at the blink of an eye. A trained Force user would know that, it's not the same as an ordinary person standing there without a weapon.

This matter has been discussed at length earlier; member Publius has argued this point more persuasively than I ever could. Perform a search.

EDIT: You need not search: Here is the thread in question.

Palpatines ultimate success was because he subverted the Republic and made it look like others did it. Doesn't change that he indeed subvert the system, nor does it change that the Jedi were right, he did sleeze his way in there with Force Powers and he was a traitor.

[Imperial Overlord]

Publius's work addresses the legal basis of arresting Palpatine, which is to say the Jedi were arresting him illegally and leading a coup. This should not be confused with the reality of Palpatine's guilt (he most certainly was in the process of overthrowing the Republic, was responsible for countless deaths and helping engineer a horrific civil war) or the Jedi's correct assessment that Palpatine intended to become a dictator. The legal structure of the Republic and the amount of reliable evidence they had on hand would be insufficient to convict in a court of law and the Jedi's legal authority derives from the Supreme Chancellor's office so they have no legal authority with which to arrest him.

That they are consciously breaking the law doesn't make them "the bad guys" or evil. The audience knows better than the Jedi how much blood is on Palpatine's hands and the results of him being in power will be. Legally speaking, the entire Rebel Alliance are traitors even though they are clearly the good guys in the original trilogy.

[Darth Wong]

The whole point of your theory rest on the belief that the Jedi went in for a coup and to assume the power themselves, when there is no evidence of that.

In ROTS (both the movie and the novelization) there is explicit dialogue by Mace Windu in which he describes his plan to overthrow Palpatine and take control of the Senate. The whole point of YOUR theory rests on ignoring said evidence and blustering about morality.

Besides, the Jedi basically had no choice. Nobody but them knew that he was secretly in league with the separatists to essentially overthrow the Republic government and replace it with his own autocracy, and they couldn't prove it. Even if they could, Palpatine was in control of the courts and the Senate, so their objections to him would have most likely been shot down in flames and/or buried in procedure (look at the current administration to see how easily a popular autocrat can evade prosecution for illegal activities even in a supposedly democratic law-and-order society).