The Code of the Grey Jedi

[CephalicRex]

I'm sorry, I couldn't read your post. I was blinded by the gleaming arrogance and pseudo-facts radiating from it.

[Neverfar]

I'm sorry, I couldn't read your post. I was blinded by the gleaming arrogance and pseudo-facts radiating from it.

 

More personal attacks and meaningless condescension. I thought you were done, by the way?

 

I hope you're not done. You damage your argument the more you post about it, showing your true character.

 

You're making moral relativists out to be people who seem to believe "I am smarter than thousands of years of history, philosophical development and the march of civilization. Everything is relative so everyone is equally wrong. But me of course. I am soooo smart."

Edited August 31, 2012 by Neverfar

[CephalicRex]

I was done arguing the main points. Now I'm just around to expose you as the true sith, Mr. Absolutes. How do ya like that for G-cannon.

 

*waits for essay response explaining how classic SW quote is wrong, sprinkled with some backpedalling for flavor"

[Neverfar]

I was done arguing the main points. Now I'm just around to expose you as the true sith, Mr. Absolutes. How do ya like that for G-cannon.

 

*waits for essay response explaining how classic SW quote is wrong, sprinkled with some backpedalling for flavor"

 

You're sinking lower and lower. I really don't need to say much more that your own responses aren't saying for me to bolster my argument for the state of mind of "Grey Jedi" supporters.

 

I get it, you want your cake and you want to eat it too. It's not faiiiiiir that Jedi have codes. Sith are too icky for you. Star Wars should be as muddled in meaningless, self-serving grey area as your arguments.

 

Nope. I disagree.

Edited August 31, 2012 by Neverfar

[CephalicRex]

Of course. You know better. I wouldn't expect anything less.

[Neverfar]

Of course. You know better. I wouldn't expect anything less.

 

Projection is a very funny thing. The very core of your attack against me was how much you knew better.

 

I'll wait patiently for someone else to respond to this thread. Even/especially someone that disagrees with me. Pretty soon you'll be rolling out the big guns of personal attacks, questions about my love-life/income or worse if I keep feeding your rage.

 

By all means, get the last word though. I know it might be important to you, even if your "arguments" are weak and based upon mere personal preference/selfishness and have absolutely nothing to do with Star Wars as a setting.

[CephalicRex]

It is you who is mistaken, about a great... Many... Things.

[kedobanfey]

It is you who is mistaken, about a great... Many... Things.

 

Wasn't that guy mistaken and fell a long long way till he exploded just a few minutes later?

 

Anyway to get this back on track I wanted to call on something from the Power of the Jedi Sourcebook for the d20 version of the Star Wars tabletop game. Now this isn't a book full of rules and stats and tables but ideas, philosophy and means to help players properly portray a Jedi and to understand the Jedi way.

 

The Potentium Heresy

As Jedi learn about the Force, they frequently form their own theories about how and why it works. They question how, if the Force creates and sustains life, it can have a dark side. Some arrive at the erroneous conclusion that the Force is not divided into dark and light-that thereis only the Force and that its energy is inherently positive, despite the use to which it is sometimes put. Those who blieve in this theory feel that no "dark side" waits to corrupt them for daring to explore the limits of the Force any more than monsters wait beyond the galactic rim to devour starships. To them, the Jedi theory of the Force is just one way to percieve this potente life-energy, and the training and disicpline the Jedi emply to reinforce their perspectivge only serves to justify the existence of the Jedi Order.

Seeking another answer, these self-styled philosophers relable the Force something that fits their perception of it-"The Potentium" is but one example-and attempt to eplore their philosophy as far as possible. These "heresies" are fortunately rare, for if unchecked, they can produce dangerously powerful Dark Jedi. Sadly, those who follow this line of reasoning straight to the dark side rarely perceive the danger, believing that they are making new discoveries that the Jedi were afriad to explore.

...The core of this theroy asserts that there is no distinction betweent he light side and the dark side. It claims that both aspects of the Force are the same energy viewed from different perspectives. Its adherents theorize that using dark side powers...in the service of good still serves the cause of good and doing so cannot actually lead a person towant to us ethe Force for evil. They question why using a lightsaber to strike down an opponent is any different from using the Force to choke the breath out of someone. What they fail to see-and what the Jedi so dillegently try to establish-is that being a Jedi is not about exploring the limits of the Force, but about using wha is already known to protect peace and justice.

 

That's a lot to take in, and it doest struggle against previous posts saying that the dark side is a twisted version of the already existing Force, in a Taoist sense. Perhaps some will say that they aren't here to use the Force to protect peace and justice as Jedi, but rather to explore their full potential in power. That is directly a thing of the Sith.

[CephalicRex]

Nah, I'm pretty sure everything had proceeded as he had foreseen--just to throw another movie quote out there. They do seem to fit well within the current context of the discussion.

[Neverfar]

Nah, I'm pretty sure everything had proceeded as he had foreseen--just to throw another movie quote out there. They do seem to fit well within the current context of the discussion.

 

Uh huh. Emperor Palpatine totally made it clear that he foresaw his own utter defeat, the destruction of the Death Star by that "pitiful little band" as he put it, that Vader would throw him down that bottomless pit, all proceeding as he had forseen. Is it so hard to accept that even a powerful being with foresight was very, very wrong, missing what was right in front of him?

[CephalicRex]

He wanted to die. He had better things to do in the astral plane anyway. Stupid rebel alliance always blowing up his death star, a whiny apprentice, and minions that can't hit anything they shoot at. Life left something to be desired.

[Neverfar]

He wanted to die. He had better things to do in the astral plane anyway. Stupid rebel alliance always blowing up his death star, a whiny apprentice, and minions that can't hit anything they shoot at. Life left something to be desired.

 

Not sure if serious.

[Aurbere]

Nah, I'm pretty sure everything had proceeded as he had foreseen--just to throw another movie quote out there. They do seem to fit well within the current context of the discussion.

 

The Emperor wasn't worried about the Rebel Alliance anymore, or Vader. For once in his life, Palpatine was to arrogant to realize that torturing Luke would turn vader against him. In his final moments, Palpatine wanted to make this Son of Skywalker pay dearly for refusing the power he had so graciously offered. Something he wouldn't live to regret. Seeing his son suffering, Vader turned on his master and destroyed him. Something the Emperor hadn't foreseen. How could he though? As Luke said, his overconfidence was his weakness. He was in control. Why should he have worried about Vader? Because he could never predict that Anakin's love for his son would be Palpatine's undoing.

[Invictos]

Now I'm just around to expose you as the true sith, Mr. Absolutes. How do ya like that for G-cannon.

 

That line (from Revenge of the Sith, in which Obi-Wan piously declares that only a Sith deals in absolutes) always struck me as unintentionally amusing. Lucas spent the entire movie portraying Palpatine as the moral relativist -- the guy whispering in Anakin's ear that Good is a "point of view" -- and then, apparently out of a misguided desire to link Sith-hood with a real-world political figure, George does a 180 through the mouthpiece of Obi-Wan.

 

Star Wars has never been about moral relativism. It's a homage to old-time movie-serial adventure movies, which are intended to be simple; there's a good guy and a bad guy, and there's really no room for argument about which is which. In Star Wars, (young) George doubled down on that principle by proclaiming that the Dark Side of the Force doesn't just corrupt you; it turns you into an outright monster. Jedi must remain constantly vigilant against the influence of the Dark Side because their potential fall is both disastrous and swift -- and not just for the Jedi themselves, but for everyone around them.

 

Fast forward to SWTOR. Suddenly, because redemption is cool (right, right?) Jedi are constantly falling (and getting redeemed from) the Dark Side, as if the transition were a matter of trying on a new shirt. The Jedi are portrayed as arrogant, blind, and self-serving because the plot forces them constantly to accept the redemption of Dark Siders -- no matter the Dark Siders' crimes, and no questions asked. Why? Because somehow the concept of the Dark Side as an infinitely corruptive force has twisted itself into a perverse kind of insanity defense for any Force user who commits a crime: "Vitiate made me do it," is apparently an excuse that alleviates any burden for a fallen Jedi to answer for his crimes.

 

And because the Jedi are the ones who handle the rehabilitation of these super-human and mind-controlled criminals, the player is forced to ask who polices the so-called protectors of the Republic. No one does. They are effectively above the law. What's worse? If you (as a player) question the appropriateness of letting even mass murderers skate without a trial, the game gives you DS points. So given Bioware's version of things, I can totally understand why people might conclude that the Republic and the Jedi are unbearably over-pious and hypocritical (and in fact, that the Republic fails to be a Republic). The fact that Sith characters are actually portrayed as somewhat sympathetic only reinforces that impression.

 

But as much as I hate to say it, that's not Star Wars.

[Russkiier]

Ok, I am no canon-expert, but its the internet so I have opinions

 

Grey jedi are not jedi that use "both" sides of the force. They are jedi that disagree with the rules of the council. IIRC Count Dooku was a grey jedi before he fell to the dark side. That doesn't mean he was using both sides of the force, but that he felt restricted by the Councils rules, regulations, etc, and went on his own. Not every grey jedi falls to the dark side of course (jolee bindo and Qui-Gon Jinn, to name the two that I know).

 

The problem with the Jedi in the Old Republic Time and in the prequels is that there hadn't been a (sith) threat in generations. There was nearly 1000 years after the defeat of Naga Sadow before Ulic Qel-Droma and Freedon Nadd instagated warfare. Its lamentably, but also not that unusual that the Jedi Order lapsed into complacency and became increasingly sure of their traditions during that 1000 years truce. Granted, SWTOR is 300 years after that, but I'm not surprised that there is still arrogance in the Jedi Order.

 

And now, on KOTOR2's story telling. I loved it. I think that people mistake that everything Kreia says is canon. I think that its just her perspective on the force and that it is flawed. Also, I don't think the game strove to make the sith sympathetic, but showed how the common man could believe in them more than the Jedi. Because at the time the Jedi were hypocrites. The sworn defenders of the Republic let worlds burn as the mandolorians burned their way across the galaxy. The reasoning of the council "it could lead people to fall to the darkside", well then how is the jedi supposed to engage in conflict if they can't for risk of falling? (thats from the perspective of the average citizen). I think atton rand's dialogue describes the feeling of the soldiers when they have their glorious leader (revan) return and ask them to wage war against what they defended, against the order that was sworn to protect them but failed.

 

I think furthermore, i think the moral relativism of the grey jedi doesn't work. Proficiency with the force comes with calmness and serenity, the more calm and serene you are, the more powerful (and some people have more "natural gift"), its the same with the dark side, the more emotional and passionate you are, the more powerful your connection with the dark side is. You can't be both serene and passionate at the same time, the force would be weak with you.

 

FINALLY, this game presents a few interesting LS/DS choices, were you might compromise your values in order to strengthen the republic (Coruscant quest) or others that i cant remember off the top of my head

[Neverfar]

That line (from Revenge of the Sith, in which Obi-Wan piously declares that only a Sith deals in absolutes) always struck me as unintentionally amusing. Lucas spent the entire movie portraying Palpatine as the moral relativist -- the guy whispering in Anakin's ear that Good is a "point of view" -- and then, apparently out of a misguided desire to link Sith-hood with a real-world political figure, George does a 180 through the mouthpiece of Obi-Wan.

 

Star Wars has never been about moral relativism. It's a homage to old-time movie-serial adventure movies, which are intended to be simple; there's a good guy and a bad guy, and there's really no room for argument about which is which. In Star Wars, (young) George doubled down on that principle by proclaiming that the Dark Side of the Force doesn't just corrupt you; it turns you into an outright monster. Jedi must remain constantly vigilant against the influence of the Dark Side because their potential fall is both disastrous and swift -- and not just for the Jedi themselves, but for everyone around them.

 

Fast forward to SWTOR. Suddenly, because redemption is cool (right, right?) Jedi are constantly falling (and getting redeemed from) the Dark Side, as if the transition were a matter of trying on a new shirt. The Jedi are portrayed as arrogant, blind, and self-serving because the plot forces them constantly to accept the redemption of Dark Siders -- no matter the Dark Siders' crimes, and no questions asked. Why? Because somehow the concept of the Dark Side as an infinitely corruptive force has twisted itself into a perverse kind of insanity defense for any Force user who commits a crime: "Vitiate made me do it," is apparently an excuse that alleviates any burden for a fallen Jedi to answer for his crimes.

 

And because the Jedi are the ones who handle the rehabilitation of these super-human and mind-controlled criminals, the player is forced to ask who polices the so-called protectors of the Republic. No one does. They are effectively above the law. What's worse? If you (as a player) question the appropriateness of letting even mass murderers skate without a trial, the game gives you DS points. So given Bioware's version of things, I can totally understand why people might conclude that the Republic and the Jedi are unbearably over-pious and hypocritical (and in fact, that the Republic fails to be a Republic). The fact that Sith characters are actually portrayed as somewhat sympathetic only reinforces that impression.

 

But as much as I hate to say it, that's not Star Wars.

 

Redemption is part of the Star Wars mythos, that much is apparent with Vader's reversal of allegiance, saving his son and destroying the Emperor at the last moment.

 

Even so, I think I see what you're getting at: Old Republic invites this "grey area" claptrap at a profound level and offers a narrative that's almost as murky (against the style of traditional Star Wars fiction) as KOTOR 2, which seems to be a huge source of inspiration and citation from "Grey Jedi" enthusiasts. (nevermind that their patron saint, Darth Treya, more or less lied and manipulated you between her quasi-moral platitudes to her own "destroy the Force" ends, and that Atton's "at least the Sith are honest" totally ignores the atrocities and mass-destruction policies of the Sith because Jedi are unfairly oppressive or something)

 

Star Wars loses a lot of its charm when its EU and game versions pander to the jaded cynical "nothing matters it's all opinion" moral relativist types. You need not be a moral absolutist in real life (I am not) to see just how damaging and, yes, degrading, all of this nonsense is to Star Wars as a fictional universe and as a franchise.

[Neverfar]

Ok, I am no canon-expert, but its the internet so I have opinions

 

Grey jedi are not jedi that use "both" sides of the force. They are jedi that disagree with the rules of the council. IIRC Count Dooku was a grey jedi before he fell to the dark side. That doesn't mean he was using both sides of the force, but that he felt restricted by the Councils rules, regulations, etc, and went on his own. Not every grey jedi falls to the dark side of course (jolee bindo and Qui-Gon Jinn, to name the two that I know).

 

The problem with the Jedi in the Old Republic Time and in the prequels is that there hadn't been a (sith) threat in generations. There was nearly 1000 years after the defeat of Naga Sadow before Ulic Qel-Droma and Freedon Nadd instagated warfare. Its lamentably, but also not that unusual that the Jedi Order lapsed into complacency and became increasingly sure of their traditions during that 1000 years truce. Granted, SWTOR is 300 years after that, but I'm not surprised that there is still arrogance in the Jedi Order.

 

And now, on KOTOR2's story telling. I loved it. I think that people mistake that everything Kreia says is canon. I think that its just her perspective on the force and that it is flawed. Also, I don't think the game strove to make the sith sympathetic, but showed how the common man could believe in them more than the Jedi. Because at the time the Jedi were hypocrites. The sworn defenders of the Republic let worlds burn as the mandolorians burned their way across the galaxy. The reasoning of the council "it could lead people to fall to the darkside", well then how is the jedi supposed to engage in conflict if they can't for risk of falling? (thats from the perspective of the average citizen). I think atton rand's dialogue describes the feeling of the soldiers when they have their glorious leader (revan) return and ask them to wage war against what they defended, against the order that was sworn to protect them but failed.

 

I think furthermore, i think the moral relativism of the grey jedi doesn't work. Proficiency with the force comes with calmness and serenity, the more calm and serene you are, the more powerful (and some people have more "natural gift"), its the same with the dark side, the more emotional and passionate you are, the more powerful your connection with the dark side is. You can't be both serene and passionate at the same time, the force would be weak with you.

 

FINALLY, this game presents a few interesting LS/DS choices, were you might compromise your values in order to strengthen the republic (Coruscant quest) or others that i cant remember off the top of my head

 

In short, Jedi that go rogue and ignore the council are not "grey jedi." They are rogue Jedi, which do have some canon existence in the lore (Count Dooku left the Jedi Order for very similar reasons and look how he ended up). The Jedi Order is a voluntary organization and going against its codes means you're voluntarily leaving the Order, no question about it.

 

This pretense of "Grey Jedi" and them having some sort of "code" is laughable. It is simply a rebellion, often a dangerous and misguided one, that tends to more or less turn to Sith-lite.

 

Qui-Gon may have defied the council, but he never left the Jedi Order. He was not a "grey jedi", he was simply the honorable opposition, the fringe of the Order that nonetheless abided by most of the Jedi Code.

 

Jolee Bindo was a rogue jedi, and due to isolation and some inner tranquility, avoided a lot of dark temptations. If Revan goes evil in KOTOR, after all, he DOES oppose you.

 

Any more recent contemporary examples of "grey jedi" are just bad EU writing by hack writers pandering to a demographic with power fantasies that don't want the icky bad guy labels of the Sith or the uncool rules of the Jedi. That's my opinion.

[Russkiier]

In short, Jedi that go rogue and ignore the council are not "grey jedi." They are rogue Jedi, which do have some canon existence in the lore (Count Dooku left the Jedi Order for very similar reasons and look how he ended up). The Jedi Order is a voluntary organization and going against its codes means you're voluntarily leaving the Order, no question about it.

 

This pretense of "Grey Jedi" and them having some sort of "code" is laughable. It is simply a rebellion, often a dangerous and misguided one, that tends to more or less turn to Sith-lite.

 

Qui-Gon may have defied the council, but he never left the Jedi Order. He was not a "grey jedi", he was simply the honorable opposition, the fringe of the Order that nonetheless abided by most of the Jedi Code.

 

Jolee Bindo was a rogue jedi, and due to isolation and some inner tranquility, avoided a lot of dark temptations. If Revan goes evil in KOTOR, after all, he DOES oppose you.

 

Any more recent contemporary examples of "grey jedi" are just bad EU writing by hack writers pandering to a demographic with power fantasies that don't want the icky bad guy labels of the Sith or the uncool rules of the Jedi. That's my opinion.

 

Ty for the TLDR version of my post, with appropriate fact checking

 

EDIT: I actually slightly disagree with you, while Grey jedi can mean a user who attempts to use both sides of the force, it also means a Jedi that distances himself (or herself) from the council.

 

According to wookiepedia. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Gray_Jed

Edited August 31, 2012 by Russkiier

[Invictos]

Redemption is part of the Star Wars mythos, that much is apparent with Vader's reversal of allegiance, saving his son and destroying the Emperor at the last moment.

 

Yes, exactly, but Anakin was (presumably) exceptional -- and he had the good grace to die after he redeemed himself. There were no icky legal implications about his redemption; he didn't walk off into the sunset with his smiling son after having massacred countless innocents.

 

So anyway, yes I agree with you, and I appreciate the opportunity to clarify. Redemption is probably the main theme of the movies, but that theme has been horrendously abused by various writers since.

 

Star Wars loses a lot of its charm when its EU and game versions pander to the jaded cynical "nothing matters it's all opinion" moral relativist types. You need not be a moral absolutist in real life (I am not) to see just how damaging and, yes, degrading, all of this nonsense is to Star Wars as a fictional universe and as a franchise.

 

Yep. I wish authors of all stripes would realize that edginess isn't an end in itself. Sometimes the best stories are simple.

[Neverfar]

Ty for the TLDR version of my post, with appropriate fact checking

 

EDIT: I actually slightly disagree with you, while Grey jedi can mean a user who attempts to use both sides of the force, it also means a Jedi that distances himself (or herself) from the council.

 

According to wookiepedia. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Gray_Jed

 

I'll assume you weren't being sarcastic. Without flooding my post, I wanted to be as thorough and even-handed as I could be.

 

The EU may have made room for "grey jedi" but there's also room in the EU for the illegitimate son of Palpatine whose special gift was using the Force on circuit boards and computer (yes, really) and even room for a three-eyed force-using villain called "Oculus."

 

Grey Jedi have practically zero mention in the primary canon, even if rogue jedi do exist, and some might even consider themselves principled in some "salad bar of whatever part of the Jedi Code is okay to me" kind of way.

[Neverfar]

Yes, exactly, but Anakin was (presumably) exceptional -- and he had the good grace to die after he redeemed himself. There were no icky legal implications about his redemption; he didn't walk off into the sunset with his smiling son after having massacred countless innocents.

 

So anyway, yes I agree with you, and I appreciate the opportunity to clarify. Redemption is probably the main theme of the movies, but that theme has been horrendously abused by various writers since.

 

 

 

Yep. I wish authors of all stripes would realize that edginess isn't an end in itself. Sometimes the best stories are simple.

 

Sadly, to a lot of people (especially the two frequent posters that follow all my posts in a stalker fashion and shoot personal attacks at me because I mention off-hand that I was both educated and an educator), a "simple" story that has a moral flavor to it and, yes, moral absolutism added to its fictional universe is "childish" or worse.

 

These moral relativist types are almost religious in their quest to purge anything that doesn't agree from their agenda from society, even from fiction. The especially obnoxious attacks at me only worsen my opinion of them.

 

In Vader's case, yes, he did die in his redemption. I would leave room in for a "living redemption," like the one that Qel-Droma had where he lived long after his severance from the Force, trained Nomi Sunrider, and was eventually killed but only after having lived for many years as a reformed man. Not all redemptions have to end in death, so long as they aren't made cheap and interchangable.

[Russkiier]

I'll assume you weren't being sarcastic. Without flooding my post, I wanted to be as thorough and even-handed as I could be.

 

The EU may have made room for "grey jedi" but there's also room in the EU for the illegitimate son of Palpatine whose special gift was using the Force on circuit boards and computer (yes, really) and even room for a three-eyed force-using villain called "Oculus."

 

Grey Jedi have practically zero mention in the primary canon, even if rogue jedi do exist, and some might even consider themselves principled in some "salad bar of whatever part of the Jedi Code is okay to me" kind of way.

 

No sarcasm intended. I think rogue Jedi definitely exist, and that a name for them is Grey jedi, but that these rogue jedi aren't mystical, both-sides-of-the-force-using, recluses, but are simply jedi (or [light-side] force users) that don't agree with the Jedi Council.

 

I think that the concept of grey jedi that use both sides of the force is shaky at best

[Neverfar]

No sarcasm intended. I think rogue Jedi definitely exist, and that a name for them is Grey jedi, but that these rogue jedi aren't mystical, both-sides-of-the-force-using, recluses, but are simply jedi (or [light-side] force users) that don't agree with the Jedi Council.

 

I think that the concept of grey jedi that use both sides of the force is shaky at best

 

The source of my disgust for "uses both sides no consequences" could more correctly be described as Revanite. Revan has some seriously rabid fanboys that hinge on his every word (probably because he WAS THEM in KOTOR so it's an ego trip), and that "I was Sith I am Jedi" and "Face the power of the Force in balance" stuff really soured my opinion of "grey" anything.

 

Perhaps it was an unfair stretch, me associating "grey jedi" with Revanites and the Revan fanboys. They do seem to have a Venn diagram convergence between them, however. I can safely guess that the troll floating in this thread trying to offend me by saying I speak too intelligently is a Revanite of the worst kind, the "moral relativist" that believes that all opinions are equally invalid... except moral relativism of course.

 

Maybe my problem is less with the concept and more with its worst proponents. It's worth me thinking about.

[Aurbere]

The source of my disgust for "uses both sides no consequences" could more correctly be described as Revanite. Revan has some seriously rabid fanboys that hinge on his every word (probably because he WAS THEM in KOTOR so it's an ego trip), and that "I was Sith I am Jedi" and "Face the power of the Force in balance" stuff really soured my opinion of "grey" anything.

 

Perhaps it was an unfair stretch, me associating "grey jedi" with Revanites and the Revan fanboys. They do seem to have a Venn diagram convergence between them, however. I can safely guess that the troll floating in this thread trying to offend me by saying I speak too intelligently is a Revanite of the worst kind, the "moral relativist" that believes that all opinions are equally invalid... except moral relativism of course.

 

Maybe my problem is less with the concept and more with its worst proponents. It's worth me thinking about.

 

A safe assumption to be sure. The Revanites think that Revan is the true master of the Force. But this isn't about Revan. This is about rogue and grey Jedi.

 

The difference between the two is incredibly great. Grey Jedi are Jedi who are a fringe element in the Jedi Order. They still serve the Light, but they focus more on doing what they view as right. But they are more often following the will of the Force. The best example of a grey Jedi is Qui-Gon Jinn.

 

Rogue Jedi are completely different. These individuals have left the Jedi Order to remove the "shackles" that bind them. Leaving the Jedi Order usually leads to joining the Sith. Count Dooku is the most obvious case of a rogue Jedi turned Sith Lord. But some Rogue Jedi leave the Order to lead a simple life. This also protects them from the lure of the Dark Side. The case of Jolee Bindo comes to mind.

[Neverfar]

A safe assumption to be sure. The Revanites think that Revan is the true master of the Force. But this isn't about Revan. This is about rogue and grey Jedi.

 

The difference between the two is incredibly great. Grey Jedi are Jedi who are a fringe element in the Jedi Order. They still serve the Light, but they focus more on doing what they view as right. But they are more often following the will of the Force. The best example of a grey Jedi is Qui-Gon Jinn.

 

Rogue Jedi are completely different. These individuals have left the Jedi Order to remove the "shackles" that bind them. Leaving the Jedi Order usually leads to joining the Sith. Count Dooku is the most obvious case of a rogue Jedi turned Sith Lord. But some Rogue Jedi leave the Order to lead a simple life. This also protects them from the lure of the Dark Side. The case of Jolee Bindo comes to mind.

 

In defense of my position here, I need only go as far as the "moral relativist" troll in this thread who made it clear before he went to personal attacks that the Jedi Order and the Sith are "equally" evil and that he was all about those shackles you mentioned.

 

In other words, to at least a fair number of "grey jedi" proponents, it's not about following the will of the Force outside the code. It's about an adolescent rebellion against authority because it's unfair that the Jedi have rules that restrict their whims and ambitions.

 

That's where the line is drawn. Some heed the Force (I still dont like calling them "grey jedi" because of the stupidity of group two), and others heed their own selfish interests, call them morally superior, mask them in "relativism" and declare themselves insurmountably better, smarter, and infalliably right than the rest of us.

 

Those people have soured my opinion of "grey jedi" and far too many like to use that label so I can't simply ignore that.