The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
14 Points

Sith Philosophy Applied to the Real World

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 6/23/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,540 times Debate No: 57040
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (2)




In this debate, I am referring to the Philosophy as well as the code of the Sith organistions seen in the fictional Star Wars universe, (extended and canon), and its application to the real world.

I believe that the Sith philosophy, if modified to a certain extent, can create a prosperous civilisation as well as launch the hypothetical nation further in the subjects of military might, educational and scientific prowess, and general productivity and commerce.

I would like my opponent to be fairly educated on the Star Wars universe as well as an educated and critical thinker. This first round will be the position declaration, the second and third will be persuasive points and responses, and the fourth will be our conclusory statements.


I accept this debate. This will be a very interesting debate, as I am big fan of the Star Wars universe. Just some clarification for the purposes of the debate. I know that very recently Disney declared that many of the Extended Universe novels and such to be non-Cannon. Are we still allowed to use the characters and situations contained within that Extended Universe, or are we relying solely on that which happens in the Six Movies.

Simply: I would like more clarification on what sources we can draw upon. I would also hope that Wookiepedia can be considered an appropriate source for this debate simply so that the both of us are not forced to reference the books and movies in detail. Thank you!

Additionally, can you spell out a resolution so that there is a distinct Resolved statement or position that you are taking so that the audience can more easily distill what is going on in the debate and what would warrant a negative ballot or an affirmative ballot.

I look forward to it. Thanks for setting this up! It should be a lot of fun.
Debate Round No. 1


Yes, the extended universe is still valid for information.

The conclusory statement should be a concession or rebuttal to the point that the prompt is a better model for living than it's counterpart in the universe or modern systems.

As I stated before, I believe that the Sith philosophy, if modified to a certain extent, can create a prosperous civilisation as well as launch the hypothetical nation further in the subjects of military might, educational and scientific prowess, and general productivity and commerce.

Obviously, the sith of the fiction cannot truly exist as the Force is not a real thing, however the philosophy and tenants of the order are valid in principle. For instance, the sith code would be an excellent model for raising youths in our hypothetical nation. The concept of always acting with passion, always being deliberate and thorough, and striving for constant success and achievement is very important to raising responsible, wise, and ambitious members of society.

In systems of business and government, it would be important to constantly promote and elect the strongest, smartest, and most capable while also cutting out the weak, ignorant, and foolish in order for prosperity to occur and be maintained. This alongside the constant drive by the younger generations to make themselves greater than their predecessors,

In science, the contributors will be constantly driven to achieve, not only for themselves but for their countrymen. The more advancements a scientist would make would earn him more prestige among society as well as bring new knowledge to the people.

While ambitious people already exist in schools, politics, and science, it is not something we as a people stress or encourage among all of us to be as great as we can be, we must stress and enforce physical, mental, and social prowess in order to survive as a nation and as an individual, as well as prosper and advance beyond any who would challenge or defy us.


Thanks to my opponent for creating this debate. For a Star Wars geek like me, this is going to be fun.

The motion that we are debating has not really been formalized into a resolution of sorts, but in general the idea is simply that it would be good or provide for a prosperous civilization in various spheres. Particularly: military, educational, scientific, productivity, and commerce.

As the Con in this debate, I must prove the Pro incorrect in this assertion that a nation based on Sith philosophy would provide for a prosperous people. In order to clarify the manner in which the judges should decide who wins the debate, I think it would be fair that of the five spheres presented by the Pro, if the Con can successfully negate the benefit of Sith philosophy in that sphere, the Con should win.

Thus, I would like to begin with a basic overview of Sith philosophy. It is truly necessary to elucidate the horrors of this system of thinking in order to illustrate why a Sith philosophy would not provide for anything resembling a prosperous civilization. My opponent makes the argument that the Sith philosophy is one of ambition. And although the argument is that Sith philosophy can be modified slightly to provide for a prosperous civilization, it is necessary to hilight the ambition that the Sith philosophy calls for.

The dogmatic approach to ambition in the Sith philosophy is understated severely by my opponent. In many ways ambition is a good thing. it is always good in a society to have an element that is pushing everyone to be better. But at what cost? In many cases the Sith philosophy calls for murder to eradicate the week. This sounds alarmingly similar to the eugenicists and the Social Darwinists that exited in our history. Those who subscribed to the theories believed that there were some who were inferior innately and by natural selection they deserved to die. This extreme of belief holds various problems which I will now demonstrate.

Military Strength: There are various reasons that a Sith philosophy would not provide for a strong military. Though it seems that the search for ambitious and strong warriors would lead to a strong force, the truth is that it leads to the meaningless death of many of the strong just for the pursuit of power. in many cases the ambition of the Sith has cost them many a strong warriors. In fact, when we look to the case of Darth Plagueis, Darth Sidious resorted to killing one of the strongest Sith in terms of power in the force in the middle of the night just in the pursuit of power. [1] That does not provide for a strong military presence. In fact, it could be argued that the Darth Plagueis sparked a downward spiral for the Sith.

Education: The elitist environment of that the Sith philosophy creates is not in any way a good environment for education. When we look to the examples of the Sith academies that existed within the Star Wars universe. The environment that is created is one of murder and elitism. For many of those who have undiscovered, they are murdered just for the fun of it or as an expression of power. Just to get into the academy, prospective students were encouraged to kill other current students. [2] This is a waste of resources (those wasted training the student that dies) and encourages the type of subterfuge and deceit that goes against the ideas of the Sith code. In many ways, the ways of the Sith encourage breaking of the codes therein. Yuthura Ban argued that there was no sweetness in victory unless there was strife. The manner in which the Sith philosophy encourages competition also contradicts itself by actually reinforcing motives to be cowardly and break the strictures of the code. [3]

Productivity: Though the Sith philosophy may encourage a small number of elite to rise to the top (until a weaker member kills them through subterfuge) . The sacrifice is a great many loyal members. It seems contradictory to the ideas of productivity to simply rid yourself of the weak. Just because is a modicum less powerful than others does not mean that there is not some purpose that they could serve.

Science: Sith philosophy does not really have anything to do with science. In fact, the Sith emphasis on strength rather than intelligence would decrease competence in scientific competition.

In summation, the position of the Pro can be distilled to the idea that the Sith philosophy implies "cutting out the weak, ignorant, and foolish in order for prosperity to occur." However, the problem with this idea is that it is not only the weak who face the consequences of the ambition that surrounds the Sith philosophy. In practice the Sith philosophy decays to infighting and less and less cohesion. I

In many ways, the Pro in this case is ignoring one of the major elements in creating a prosperous society: stability. A society can not be prosperous unless it is stable. Thus, when we look to the structure of a society or nation structured on the ideas of the Sith, we can see that because there is not even a modicum of stability, the nation does not have any hope of being prosperous. When a nation is in an ever changing an mercurial station the only prosperity that is possible is short term. And that is not prosperity. That is just a temporary illusion.


Spread throughout the case, I have used information from the following book: and
Debate Round No. 2


Nicoszon_the_Great forfeited this round.


Really a shame. This was going to be a rather interesting debate. I urge a vote for the Con in this debate. Please vote all points Con. Thank you.

Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Nicoszon_the_Great 2 years ago
I actually genuinely believe this kind of thing is a plausible philosophical discussion, but yeah, we can have some fun.
Posted by witheringtrees 2 years ago
you guys make up the weirdest debates . . .
I think you should have fun with debates like these, but also use this amazing website and get information, find out the truth, hear good observations, etc etc.
Posted by Nicoszon_the_Great 2 years ago
I didn't mention it in my post, but thank you for accepting, this should be an interesting debate.
Posted by Nicoszon_the_Great 2 years ago
Ragnar, of course I'd focus on the Pre-Bane Era of the Sith...Pre-Brotherhood as well actually
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
"if modified to a certain extent" I could see that going really really far. In fairness, the whole "there's only two" would have to be dropped, as it never made sense anyway; but than again, it was Jedi who insists "only Sith speak in absolutes," which by way of confession means there were already plenty of Sith.

Funny enough, there was a Ukrainian politician who legally changed his name to Darth Vader, and ran for the presidency.
Posted by Nicoszon_the_Great 2 years ago
Phantom, by that I mean where the focus is not on one's ability to use fictional power, but rather on one's drive and ambition.
Posted by phantom 2 years ago
I'm not familiar enough with Star Wars; otherwise I'd be interested. Also, the, "if modified to a certain extent" is bound to produce problems.
Posted by Nicoszon_the_Great 2 years ago
Jikamu, I'm not entirely certain of your point, but since you're quoting the bible I think it'd pretty safe to say that we set ourselves on different moral standards.
Posted by Jikpamu 2 years ago
I can't believe you are really trying to debate this:

2 Timothy 4:3 (New International Version 2011)
2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
Posted by Nicoszon_the_Great 2 years ago
A faction in the Star Wars universe
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by phantom 2 years ago
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Con rebuts Pro with the argument that the Sith philosophy is self-destructive and extreme. To win this debate, Pro would have had to 1) elaborate a moral framework to overcome the extremity of Sith philosophy, and 2) build on his already flimsy arguments that ambition would drive the Sith society to success. He forfeited so neither happened.