TCSWE Sidious / Yoda supremacy quote

Inside the spacious interior of the Galactic Senate chamber, Yoda challenged the Emperor. The two engaged in a spectacular duel—a contest between the most powerful practitioners of the Force's light and dark sides.

Does the quote establish Sidious' supremacy over all prior dark-siders that had existed in the lore, or just those alive at the time?

People could argue that it states he's stronger than the Son, people could argue it doesn't apply to the son because he was dead at the time, or people could argue that the Son is exempt because he's not a practitioner of the dark side; he's the personification of the dark side.

I think the fairly obvious answer is the first one: "He was the strongest living dark side Force-user."

Nothing suggests it refers to all of history, and rather than force a contradiction with The Son we can just defer to the idea that it is solely talking about the present.

Note that Kulvax is a hypocrite if she says it's invalid, yet relies on the source to determine that Ood Bnar sacrificing himself to kill Sedriss means he killed himself rather than letting Sedriss kill him.

And that it's a different interpretation from The New Essential Chronology that's more valid because it's newer.

If we take it literally, only the Son, Abeloth and maybe Valkorion are excluded. If we don't, it either means at that point in time or of that period (more likely the second, since there were only about 6 known Jedi survivors at this point IU so it'd be a pretty redundant quote).

Also, there's a quote from Star Wars Legends Epic Collection: The Empire Vol. 1 (published 2015) that ranks RotS Sidious over all other Sith Lords, regardless:

With the galaxy now ripe for conquest, the Emperor has become the most powerful Sith Lord of all and a master of the Dark Side of the Force, ordering the extermination of the Jedi Order with the aid of his apprentice, the deadly Darth Vader.

That collection is purely the Dark Times era, so I wouldn't take it as encompassing all of history. More likely it means he's the most powerful out of Vader, Dooku, Maul and himself.

Lastly, I don't see why there'd be so many accolades proclaiming Sidious as the most powerful Sith or dark-sider if that wasn't GL's intent.

[url] http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f6/t640242.html[/url]

Though I dislike "most powerful" = "most politically powerful" arguments because it sets a shaky precedent, I think the unique wording that Palpatine "has become" the top Sith "with the galaxy now ripe for conquest" refers to his unique political position. That's reinforced by stating "most powerful Sith Lord of all AND a master of the Dark Side of the Force," which is redundant if it's both referring to Force power. Also, if it is taken as referring to Force power, that indicates Palpatine was not the top Sith until the Order 66 power boost. 

I interpret the quote in the thread title as time-specific also, though I'm pretty confident there's ROTS Palpatine supremacy quotes that do apply.

Why would politics even matter? If authors are writing about a character and how powerful they are or whatever, who would think that it refers to politically? That doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense, it would if the writing is also about the organization or some such of what they are in charge of, or if the writing is specifically about the character's rise to power.

But most powerful= politically powerful....like...what? Where is that even coming from? I'm sure even the authors weren't thinking with that mindset.

Sheev was constrained in what he could do as Supreme Chancellor. By becoming Emperor and having virtually no one of note left to challenge him, he essentially became more powerful than any other Sith in history. The few Sith emperors throughout history were always met with significant resistance or infighting, so it can definitely refer to most politically powerful. That's just one interpretation, obviously. You can take it as being "most powerful in terms of innate, personal power" if you want.

This is something I actually pondered a few weeks ago.







It's an "omniscient committee of historians and scholars taking a look back over tens of thousands of years of galactic history" from a vantage point of 150 ABY, calling Palpatine the most powerful practitioner of the dark side. If The Complete Philosophy Encyclopedia declared Baruch Spinoza the wisest philosopher, or The Complete Science Encyclopedia called Albert Einstein the greatest scientist, it would naturally be assumed that would refer to all of history if nothing contextually attaches such statements to a specific timeframe, which is not the case with Palpatine's accolade. It should encompass all of history up to 150 ABY.

BoD wrote:Sheev was constrained in what he could do as Supreme Chancellor. By becoming Emperor and having virtually no one of note left to challenge him, he essentially became more powerful than any other Sith in history. The few Sith emperors throughout history were always met with significant resistance or infighting, so it can definitely refer to most politically powerful. That's just one interpretation, obviously. You can take it as being "most powerful in terms of innate, personal power" if you want.

I could see some quotes referring politically sure, but I don't see why it would solely only be that, because the Sith who held political power also had...well personal power too.

@Azronger: Unlike with "X is the wisest philosopher" or "Y is the greatest scientist," the Palpatine/Yoda quote is explicitly anchored in a specific time and place. To give an example, if an encyclopedia said, "In Carthage, Hannibal and Scipio engaged in battle--a speculator engagement between the two greatest military minds," nothing about that indicates it's being applied throughout all of time. We'd probably interpret it the same way we conventionally interpret this Palpatine/Yoda quote.

Another way to think of it is that your logic means the omniscient narrators also believe Yoda is more powerful than peak Luke Skywalker.

Geistalt wrote:Note that Kulvax is a hypocrite if she says it's invalid, yet relies on the source to determine that Ood Bnar sacrificing himself to kill Sedriss means he killed himself rather than letting Sedriss kill him.

And that it's a different interpretation from The New Essential Chronology that's more valid because it's newer.

You literally can't stop thinking about me. Lmfao.

The quote is not invalid but also not historical at all.

Geistalt wrote:Also, there's a quote from Star Wars Legends Epic Collection: The Empire Vol. 1 (published 2015) that ranks RotS Sidious over all other Sith Lords, regardless:

With the galaxy now ripe for conquest, the Emperor has become the most powerful Sith Lord of all and a master of the Dark Side of the Force, ordering the extermination of the Jedi Order with the aid of his apprentice, the deadly Darth Vader.

Care to show us how that's historical?

It does say "the Emperor has become the most powerful Sith Lord of all."

It would provide no new information if by that the source merely meant "the most powerful Sith Lord alive."

In fact, he had already become the most powerful Sith Lord alive upon killing Plagueis.

Not that I expect to convince you; you're the most stubborn-minded "Kunt" (or SW fan in general) I've ever met, and accolades mean nothing to you.

1.All by itself doesn't equate to all-time. As shown by Ant above the quote is redundant if it refers to power.

2.Your inability to prove a point doesn't equate to my inability to change stances.

Way to ignore the statement I made pointing out that it means Palps has become the most powerful Sith Lord of all (not limited to his own time) by RotS because, as I pointed out, the interpretation of it being time-dependent is false due to the fact that he had already become the most powerful Sith alive / in the galaxy by the time he killed Plagueis.

It's clear at this point that you're ignoring the point of my post that actually contains a new observation with substance and repeating yourself to try to justify your mancrush for ponytail man.

1.You're making the assumption that said source cares about what other sources have said on the matter or is somehow bound contextually by other sources. Even if your TPM Sheev quote worked the way you wanted it to. It's not relevant to the internal context of that source and isn't restricted contextually by anything said by external sources.

2.Refer to point two in my prior post. Your blatant, nay palpable vitriol at who I choose to support is most amusing. Please continue.

The quote says that Yoda and Sidious are the most powerful users of the Light and Dark Side of the Force, but it doesn't say "ever" or "of all time", and it doesn't include the Son because he is the Dark Side, he's not a user of the Dark Side, plus the quote itself predates the Son's official conceptualisation by 2-3 years if you're not one of those people who say quotes are binding unless if they've been retconned.