Talk:Obi-Wan Kenobi/@comment-31778166-20170501133557/@comment-1672596-20180801162356

Based on some of Lucas's comments (such as his implying that even trying to defend family or having any attachments to family makes you "greedy" when explaining why Anakin became Vader.), I think that Obi-Wan and the Jedi as a whole actually DID fit Lucas' view of perfection rather than his intending for them to be flawed. Essentially, the Jedi and to a certain extent Obi-Wan were basically like Mike Wallace in that Ethics of America segment, where they mistake being objective/lack of greed with lacking empathy or connections to others, whether it be to your home nation, friends, or family (and you have to admit, that definitely was very cold of Wallace to think that). Ironically, Anakin came across as being a bit more like Peter Jennings in the same segment, particularly if Jennings actually stuck by his guns rather than backing down when Wallace brow-beat him.

I wasn't fond of the whole "Only a Sith deals in Absolutes" line, especially when it effectively implied that the Jedi believed in moral relativism as the highest good, in other words, being amoral. And don't get me started on his whole "certain point of view" bit which also came across as promoting moral relativism, specifically that truth is relative. I'm sorry, but I need absolutes to even function. Heck, in the Revenge of the Sith novelization by Stoner, it even implies that part of the reason the Jedi Order even bothered to use Anakin as their spy into Palpatine's office was essentially to sabotage their friendship specifically to ensure they retained control of the Chosen One (wasn't that a violation of "no attachments"?). Obi-Wan, to his credit, did object to the plan, although it's clear it's more Anakin being used in the plan due to realizing how stupid of an idea it was than any moral objections.

I used to think of the Jedi as heroes, but now I'm not so sure...