OOTS #1154 - The Discussion Thread

[Skull the Troll]

Hey how about we get back to discussing that fantasy story with the swords, and magic, and the hero who's dad made really bad choices and didn't really love him. The hero has a short sidekick who is rude, but pretty useful and the tall sidekick who's tall and tells good stories but is pretty dumb, and a girl sidekick who leads a rebellion, and .....

OK, never mind.

Carry on.

[Fyraltari]

For Force users. Han still shot Vader's wingman, flew threw the asteroid belt, Lamdo still flew threw the Death Star, Wedge still survived all three movies, etc. etc. etc.

What's your point?

[littlebum2002]

Luke ended the order because of bad writing. Apparently, the Luke who demonstrated he was willing to face personal annihilation as a Jedi before the Emperor is supposed to be someone who be panicked into nearly murdering a student because he saw a powerful something in the Force he did not understand in someone else's dream.

"Turning on your lightsaber" is a FAR stretch from "nearly murdering someone". Luke had literally a second where he was tempted to do the wrong thing, and then immediately regretted that thought.

I can't even comprehend the train of thought that leads to "our protagonist is so absolutely perfect that even having a lapse in judgement for one second in his life means there must be bad writingr", and even worse, I can't think of why on earth anyone would want to watch a movie about such a boring person who is so incredibly perfect he can't even have literally a second of his life where he considers doing the wrong thing. He doesn't do it, mind you. He doesn't even try to do it. He just considers it, for one second, but apparently that totally ruins his character. Yup, that makes total sense.

That a mere adolescent can be manipulated by the Bad Man sending scary dreams into his head worked in okay in Ep3 and Order of the Phoenix. That just scary dreams that have no known quality of precognition can spook a seasoned Jedi Knight...I think that is stupid. Mark Hamill said as much.

The Jedi have no known quality of precognition? Wow you and I must have been watching WILDLY different movies.

Also, what does it have to do with Luke ending the Order?

[zimmerwald1915]

"Turning on your lightsaber" is a FAR stretch from "nearly murdering someone".

No it isn't. Given how lightsabers work, it's literally a turn of your wrist away from murdering someone.

I can't even comprehend the train of thought that leads to "our protagonist is so absolutely perfect that even having a lapse in judgement for one second in his life means there must be bad writing"

Giving a character a momentary lapse in judgment is not bad writing. Giving a character a theatrical, overwrought, melodramatic lapse in judgment can be, depending on the genre and tone of the work. Taking it as a given for the moment that the Rashomon scenes with Luke and Ben at Luke's temple are theatrical, overwrought, and melodramatic as opposed to realistic or naturalistic, YMMV on whether Star Wars's genre and tone permit theatrical, overwrought melodrama. I believe they do.

[Peelee]

What's your point?

Only Force users get better at what they're doing when they listen to the Force. Plenty of plane-Jane ordinary folk are already pretty honkin' good at what they do and the Force has jack-all to do with that.

ETA: Let's take two examples. Luke makes an incredibly difficult shot at the Death Star's exhaust port. He turns off his targeting computer, takes several deep breaths, closes his eyes for a bit, calms himself, centers himself, reaches out to the Force, and makes the shot.

Han Solo jumps through planetary shields and just tries to figure out when's the best time to drop out of hyperspace.

One of them is clearly letting the Force flow through him. One of them is clearly just relying on his experience and skill. Both are performing amazing feats few, if any, others could do. The Force is working through one, and not through another. Coincidentally, one if Force-Sensitive, and one is not.

[Kish]

Mark Hamill said that he had trouble with Luke bowing out entirely for as long as he did rather than coming back without Rey pushing him to--not that Luke's being tempted to kill Ben/Kylo was implausible--and since he said he regretted sharing his reservations in public and thought the Last Jedi was a great movie, it seems...petty...to use him as an argument against it.

[Fyraltari]

Only Force users get better at what they're doing when they listen to the Force. Plenty of plane-Jane ordinary folk are already pretty honkin' good at what they do and the Force has jack-all to do with that.

That's a non-sequitur. Non-Force sensitive people, by definition cannot listen to the Force to get better at what they're doing. That doesn't mean that if they could, they wouldn't be even better at it.

[Peelee]

That's a non-sequitur. Non-Force sensitive people, by definition cannot listen to the Force to get better at what they're doing. That doesn't mean that if they could, they wouldn't be even better at it.

My entire argument has been that the Force isn't exerting itself on non-Force users. If you agree to that, I'll certainly welcome it.

[Fyraltari]

My entire argument has been that the Force isn't exerting itself on non-Force users. If you agree to that, I'll certainly welcome it.

Nothing I have said agrees to that so I don't understand your reply. Non Force-sensitive cannot use the Force, that doesn't mean the Force cannot affect them. Obi-Wan reaches through the Force to trick the mind of a stormtrooper on Tatooine. Was that trooper Force sensitive?

[Peelee]

Nothing I have said agrees to that so I don't understand your reply. Non Force-sensitive cannot use the Force, that doesn't mean the Force cannot affect them. Obi-Wan reaches through the Force to trick the mind of a stormtrooper on Tatooine. Was that trooper Force sensitive?

That's Obi-Wan exerting the Force on the stormtrooper, not the Force exerting itself on the stormtrooper.

[recentlyafish]

The password nearly made me spill my coffee.
Awesome comic.

ditto but Redbull; afternoon here

[Aveline]

In the Millenium Falcon, which has a particular reason that its "pilots" so often perform improbable feats.

More "a Star Wars Story" related.

If may (as in, may regret re-interpeting Zimmerwald for the second time in recency), this gives me an interesting insight.

Spoiler: Solo, or whatever it's called (a new spinoff feature film about the origin of Han Solo and the Millennium Falcon) and bits of Episode 2 as well

Show

Supposedly (once again, this is secondhand from my friend who complains about new Star Wars releases) the vessel named Millennium Falcon is an AI survival of a close friend to Han.

This came up in the course of a discussion about how the Prequel Trilogy enriches the Original Trilogy in some senses. I specifically recalled the scene where young Boba Fett clutches his the head and helmet of his father Jango, slain by a Jedi.

My friend agreed that this enriches Original Trilogy, and complained that the recent Solo spinoff doesn't have any such relationship regarding the Millennium Falcon and the person ensouling it.

This comment makes me wonder if that does manifest - in the subtlest way - as the Falcon accomplishing inhuman feats of aviation.

Noting further (with a very strong IIRC) that Han says "this ship" made the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs, rather than claiming he accomplished this (and he was the pilot then, again with a strong IIRC).

Art, at its most fundamental, is a driver of experience and appreciation, in my belief.

No it isn't. Given how lightsabers work, it's literally a turn of your wrist away from murdering someone.

Here's a question I've had since I saw lightsaber fights for the first time.

When the sabres are locked together in combat, is it suicidal to withdraw? Since the slightest contact with your opponent's blade is fatal?

[Fyraltari]

That's Obi-Wan exerting the Force on the stormtrooper, not the Force exerting itself on the stormtrooper.

Right But it's possible for the Force to exert itself on a non-force user if propmpted by a force user. Now the question becomes can it do so without a Force user? Which I think boils down to does the Force has a will. I think the movies telegraph strongly that yes, the Force has a will because it likens the Jedi Cult to a religion and several metaphysical claims of the Jedi are confirmed on screen while none of them are denied.

[Peelee]

Here's a question I've had since I saw lightsaber fights for the first time.

When the sabres are locked together in combat, is it suicidal to withdraw? Since the slightest contact with your opponent's blade is fatal?

Nitpick: Sabers hit several of people without killing them. Ponda Baba, Vader, Luke, Vader again, and that's just the OT.

Right But it's possible for the Force to exert itself on a non-force user if propmpted by a force user.

No. That's not the Force exerting itself, that's Force being exerted by the Force user. Hell, the single biggest example of the Force exerting itself on a non-Force user, Anakin's conception, is later heavily implied to be not it exerting itself, but Plagueis doing it. Possibly Palpy, but it's more strongly hinted at his master.

[Fyraltari]

Here's a question I've had since I saw lightsaber fights for the first time.

When the sabres are locked together in combat, is it suicidal to withdraw? Since the slightest contact with your opponent's blade is fatal?

No? Just keep parrying while stopping attacking and yelling "I yield" until the message gets through.

[zimmerwald1915]

If may (as in, may regret re-interpeting Zimmerwald for the second time in recency), this gives me an interesting insight.

Spoiler: Solo, or whatever it's called (a new spinoff feature film about the origin of Han Solo and the Millennium Falcon) and bits of Episode 2 as well

Show

Supposedly (once again, this is secondhand from my friend who complains about new Star Wars releases) the vessel named Millennium Falcon is an AI survival of a close friend to Han.

This came up in the course of a discussion about how the Prequel Trilogy enriches the Original Trilogy in some senses. I specifically recalled the scene where young Boba Fett clutches his the head and helmet of his father Jango, slain by a Jedi.

My friend agreed that this enriches Original Trilogy, and complained that the recent Solo spinoff doesn't have any such relationship regarding the Millennium Falcon and the person ensouling it.

This comment makes me wonder if that does manifest - in the subtlest way - as the Falcon accomplishing inhuman feats of aviation.

Noting further (with a very strong IIRC) that Han says "this ship" made the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs, rather than claiming he accomplished this (and he was the pilot then, again with a strong IIRC).

Spoiler: Solo

Show

It also answers Threepio's question in The Empire Strikes Back about "where your [Han's] ship learned to communicate."

[Peelee]

Spoiler: Solo

Show

It also answers Threepio's question in The Empire Strikes Back about "where your [Han's] ship learned to communicate."

The Falcon has the most peculiar language.

[Fyraltari]

No. That's not the Force exerting itself, that's Force being exerted by the Force user. Hell, the single biggest example of the Force exerting itself on a non-Force user, Anakin's conception, is later heavily implied to be not it exerting itself, but Plagueis doing it. Possibly Palpy, but it's more strongly hinted at his master.

"The Force can have a strong influence on the weak minded". Obi-Wan used the Force to reach into the mind of the stormtrooper and changing it, meaning that it is possible for the Force if guided to reach into the mind of a storm trooper and change it so the question becomes can it do so of its own volition. Refer to previous post for rest of argument.

Also, it's implied the Sith experiment* failed and the Force created Anakin in response to that, which is why he was born in the arse-end of nowher and not inside Plagueis' lab.

*That failed experiment was my favourite theory on Snoke's identity by the way. It would make him Vader's sort-of half brother which could have been interesting if they had decided to explore the character.

[SilverCacaobean]

They are there to nrgotiate the ned of the blocus.

This is the best sentence of this thread. Google helped me understand that it's a mix of French and Typos :P


I will preface this by saying for the nth time that I've only watched the OT only once in my life (though thanks to threads like this one I knew almost everything about it. I ended up not being bothered by that because the movies had so much more than the plot going for them.) Rogue One too.

Even if it's not an "objective" test, since it still depends on the judge's values, you can give them absolute power and see what happens.

Of course there's a big problem with this test.
In the real world, if this test proves that the side that has absolute power is horrible, the world's already screwed. It also does nothing to prove that the other side wouldn't make things better or worse, unless we test them both, which will ensure that we'll give absolute power to the worse side at some point. But you already know all that.
In a fictional world, however, it would only show us which side the author thinks is better, not which side is better. One might very well accept "That's how things work in this particular universe" if the author is full of ****, but in my opinion, every time one has to say this about a work of fiction, when it concerns social issues, it detracts from its value. The only kind of realism that I think is mandatory in fiction is the depiction of human behaviours.

So the question about star wars would be "Is Lucas full of **** by making two extreme sides, one emotional and one detached and then proclaiming that the detached one that rejects emotions completely is right"? I'd say yes, but the thing is... the OT didn't give me this impression. The Jedi seemed to preach more "Don't be controlled by your impulses" and other philosophical mumbo-jumbo about balance and unity in the world that felt like weed-induced epiphanies rather than "Be an emotionless robot". They cautioned Luke against letting his emotions and feelings control him, but that's not the same as rejecting them completely. It feels like they got flanderized, for lack of a better word, in the prequels.

Luke not attacking the Emperor is another instance where "Is Lucas full of ****" needs to be asked. I think Lucas was trying to be allegorical there. Wild theory: The real battle is raging outside and the good guys are willing to fight and kill. By real I mean physical. Outside of the death star is the physical battle of the two sides of the war and inside is the spiritual battle. Luke represents the spirit of the rebellion and the Emperor the empire. The Emperor tells him that he needs to be cruel like him to win. Luke, catching himself slipping and feeling that he really can only win by giving in the the dark side, chooses to give up rather than to become like the Emperor. Vader, who represents the ones broken by the empire, finally decides to rebel when confronted with the sight of Luke being tortured by the emperor. If you think about it, the Emperor is the ideal evil, Luke the ideal good and Vader is the human. That's why he is the one who gets to choose between them. The climax is Vader seeing pure evil about to destroy pure good and having to decide the fate of the world. He isn't an ideal, so he can commit the little "necessary evil" of dropping the emperor down that... giant gap next to his throne room . Lucas thinks that humans eventually choose good over evil, apparently. /Wild theory

RotJ is by far the weakest movie of the three, and I think that without the other two, I wouldn't even remember it. That said, I don't like the "heroes never kill" mentality, but I think that the climax of RotJ isn't that nor is it as thoughtless as it appears initially. Certainly much better than what a friend of mine told me: "The ending of RotJ was so lame, but there's an awesome comic where the emperor has clones and his soul flees in them when he dies and they finally fight with Luke and he finally kills him with a lightsaber". That's just stupid. The climax and the point of the movie is that Luke didn't kill the emperor with a lightsaber. He killed him with love for his genocidal maniac father. That's how things work in this particular universe.

It's a universe which favors the dispassionate ruling class over those who have an emotional, passionate need for things to change.

Again, OT didn't give me this impression. The rebels were pretty passionate, Luke was passionate. All the good guys are passionate, while the Imperials are the ones that look detached and uncaring.

It feels as if Lucas did an 180 every time I hear about the prequels and how he portrayed the Jedi there. Or, maybe he succeeded well enough presenting a dystopia in the OT, but when he had to show the utopia the Jedi had created he, like a lot of people who present their ideal vision of the world, got a bit... myopic. I'm not sure if the hubris witnessed in the prequels is the Jedi's or Lucas's. I also have to admit that the Jedi have always felt a bit like what a simpleton thinks wisdom looks like... I guess you could call them archetypal to be more charitable. The Emperor is pretty archetypal too. "The good guys look all tranquil and **** while that dirty old man is about(?) to have an orgasm while throwing lightning bolts at that boy!"

[Ruck]

Hey how about we get back to discussing that fantasy story with the swords, and magic, and the hero who's dad made really bad choices and didn't really love him. The hero has a short sidekick who is rude, but pretty useful and the tall sidekick who's tall and tells good stories but is pretty dumb, and a girl sidekick who leads a rebellion, and .....

OK, never mind.

Carry on.

I wonder what the record for "most consecutive comic discussion threads derailed into Star Wars discussions" is around here.

[Peelee]

"The Force can have a strong influence on the weak minded". Obi-Wan used the Force to reach into the mind of the stormtrooper and changing it, meaning that it is possible for the Force if guided to reach into the mind of a storm trooper and change it so the question becomes can it do so of its own volition.

Bolding mine. I've never claimed that Force users can't use the Force on people. I've only ever claimed that this whole "will of the Force" thing is bunk.

Let me try to rephrase. If I had no historical knowledge and saw a movie about 18-century French nobility, I could come out wondering why the French weren't just eating cake, since one of the main characters flat-out told us they could. That wouldn't that belief correct, that would just mean I only got that point of view from a cake eater who literally could not imagine not having cake to eat.

[Aveline]

I wonder what the record for "most consecutive comic discussion threads derailed into Star Wars discussions" is around here.

Yeah, I've been feeling guilty about that.

[Fyraltari]

This is the best sentence of this thread. Google helped me understand that it's a mix of French and Typos :P

And, now I'm ashamed of myself. Damn.

I will preface this by saying for the nth time that I've only watched the OT only once in my life (though thanks to threads like this one I knew almost everything about it. I ended up not being bothered by that because the movies had so much more than the plot going for them.) Rogue One too.

You know I kind of wonder what someone who would know the prequel only through the memes would think the movies are about.

Of course there's a big problem with this test.
In the real world, if this test proves that the side that has absolute power is horrible, the world's already screwed. It also does nothing to prove that the other side wouldn't make things better or worse, unless we test them both, which will ensure that we'll give absolute power to the worse side at some point. But you already know all that.
In a fictional world, however, it would only show us which side the author thinks is better, not which side is better. One might very well accept "That's how things work in this particular universe" if the author is full of ****, but in my opinion, every time one has to say this about a work of fiction, when it concerns social issues, it detracts from its value. The only kind of realism that I think is mandatory in fiction is the depiction of human behaviours.

So the question about star wars would be "Is Lucas full of **** by making two extreme sides, one emotional and one detached and then proclaiming that the detached one the rejects emotions completely is right"? I'd say yes, but the thing is... the OT didn't give me this impression. The Jedi seemed to preach more "Don't be controlled by your impulses" and other philosophical mumbo-jumbo about balance and unity in the world that felt like weed-induced epiphanies than "Be an emotionless robot". They cautioned Luke against letting his emotions and feelings control him, but that's not the same as rejecting them completely. It feels like they got flanderized, for lack of a better word, in the prequels.

I think the issue is that a lot of people think the whole detachment from emotion is wrong and alien because it isn't part of their cultural landscape (when this is an integral part of zen budhism and Taoism).

Luke not attacking the Emperor is another instance where "Is Lucas full of ****" needs to be asked. I think Lucas was trying to be allegorical there. Wild theory: The real battle is raging outside and the good guys are willing to fight and kill. By real I mean physical. Outside of the death star is the physical battle of the two sides of the war and inside is the spiritual battle. Luke represents the spirit of the rebellion and the Emperor the empire. The Emperor tells him that he needs to be cruel like him to win. Luke, catching himself slipping and feeling that he really can only win by giving in the the dark side, chooses to give up rather than becoming like the Emperor. Vader, who represents the ones broken by the empire, finally decides to rebel when confronted with the sight of Luke being tortured by the emperor. If you think about it, the Emperor is the ideal evil, Luke the ideal good and Vader is the human. That's why he is the one who gets to choose between them. The climax is Vader saw pure evil about to destroy pure good and had to decide the fate of the world. He isn't an ideal, so he can commit the little "necessary evil" of dropping the emperor down that... giant gap next to his throne room . Lucas thinks that humans eventually choose good over evil, apparently. /Wild theory

Ooh, I like that one.

RotJ is by far the weakest movie of the three, and I think that without the other two, I wouldn't even remember it. That said, I don't like the "heroes never kill" mentality, but I think that the climax of RotJ isn't that nor is it as thoughtless as it appears initially. Certainly much better than what a friend of mine told me: "The ending of RotJ was so lame, but there's an awesome comic where the emperor has clones and his soul flees in them when he dies and they finally fight with Luke and he finally kills him with a lightsaber". That's just stupid. The climax and the point of the movie is that Luke didn't kill the emperor with a lightsaber. He killed him with love for his genocidal maniac father. That's how things work in this particular universe.

It's kind of amazing how everything about Dark Empire sounds stupid. Maybe I should try it someday to see what I think of it. Maybe I'd make a thread like that one on the Thrawn Trilogy a while back.

Again, OT didn't give me this impression. The rebels were pretty passionate, Luke was passionate. All the good guys are passionate, while the Imperials are the ones that look detached and uncaring.

It feels as if Lucas did an 180 every time I hear about the prequels and how he portrayed the Jedi there. Or, maybe he succeeded well enough presenting a dystopia in the OT, but when he had to show the utopia the Jedi had created he, like a lot of people who present their ideal vision of the world, got a bit... myopic. I'm not sure if the hubris witnessed in the prequels is the Jedi's or Lucas's. I also have to admit the the Jedi have always felt a bit like what a simpleton thinks wisdom looks like... I guess you could call them archetypal to be more charitable. The Emperor is pretty archetypal too. "The good guys look all tranquil and **** while that dirty old man is about(?) to have an orgasm while throwing lightning bolts at that boy!"

I really don't think the Prequel fram the Jedi Order as being in the right, especially about love.

Everybody is archetypal by design, though and while Palpatine chharacter is basically "as evil as we can make him" he is so over-the-top he is still super entertaining*. The UNLIMITED POWER scene is still way too goofy.

*Seriously Ian McKellenDiarmid and Ewan McGregor are the best things about this trilogy and I would really like to see either of them do more Star Wars.

[zimmerwald1915]

*Seriously Ian McKellen and Ewan McGregor are the best things about this trilogy and I would really like to see either of them do more Star Wars.

Ian McKellen is not in Star Wars. The Emperor is played by Ian McDiarmid.

[Fyraltari]

Bolding mine. I've never claimed that Force users can't use the Force on people. I've only ever claimed that this whole "will of the Force" thing is bunk.

But you said you didn't believe the Force could affect non-Force users!

Let me try to rephrase. If I had no historical knowledge and saw a movie about 18-century French nobility, I could come out wondering why the French weren't just eating cake, since one of the main characters flat-out told us they could. That wouldn't that belief correct, that would just mean I only got that point of view from a cake eater who literally could not imagine not having cake to eat.

You would kind of need to miss the entire rest of the movie where people complain that they don't have anything to eat and are starving to death, though.

Nothing in Star Wars is contradicting Obi-Wan so why insist that he is wrong? That would be like saying Gandalf doesn't actually have magic powers and is just a really convincing con artist with a lihter hidden inside his staff.

Ian McKellen is not in Star Wars. The Emperor is played by Ian McDiarmid.

My face is red right now.

[Peelee]

But you said you didn't believe the Force could affect non-Force users!

Then let me apologize for misstating my case, and restate that I don't believe the Force could affect non-Force users by itself.

You would kind of need to miss the entire rest of the movie where people complain that they don't have anything to eat and are starving to death, though.

I'm not seeing the people starving to death. I'm only seeing people who are eating bread. Sucks that they don't eat the cake they obviously have, according to the always-had-cake-in-the-cupboard lady.

It's not a perfect analogy, but you see what I'm getting at.

[Fyraltari]

Then let me apologize for misstating my case, and restate that I don't believe the Force could affect non-Force users by itself.

Okay, so can it affect Force users by itself?

I'm not seeing the people starving to death. I'm only seeing people who are eating bread. Sucks that they don't eat the cake they obviously have, according to the always-had-cake-in-the-cupboard lady.

It's a weird kind of movie, it seems to want to focus on the lives of the aristocrats and yet still use a famously ahistorical quote to characterize the Queen.

It's not a perfect analogy, but you see what I'm getting at.

That the filmmaker wants you to think the Queen is right and the gosh darn peasant should have just eaten cake?
'cause see the difference between that hypothetical movie and Star Wars is that Star Wars is wholly fiction while that movie pertains to reality. So in one case what the filmmaker is telling the audience is the truth of the setting and in the other truth is divorced from them and they can be wrong.

So I don't think it's a good analogy.

[SilverCacaobean]

You know I kind of wonder what someone who would know the prequel only through the memes would think the movies are about.

I know them through muuuch more than memes. I've read the prequel part of Darths and Droids and I've read and watched endless analyses about them. I know everything about the plots of all the prequel movies like I did the originals. One of the hazards of surfing the internet without having seen star wars, is that it's impossible not to do that

I think the issue is that a lot of people think the whole detachment from emotion is wrong and alien because it isn't part of their cultural landscape (when this is an integral part of zen budhism and Taoism).

The thing is, I doubt Lukas has anything more than a surface understanding of either of those... That's before we get to the part that if he did, he'd be inserting a real world religious dogma as the one true way in his world. A dangerous thing to do if one is trying to have any nuance in their story.

I really don't think the Prequel fram the Jedi Order as being in the right, especially about love.

Everybody is archetypal by design, though and while Palpatine chharacter is basically "as evil as we can make him" he is so over-the-top he is still super entertaining*. The UNLIMITED POWER scene is still way too goofy.

*Seriously Ian McKellenDiarmid and Ewan McGregor are the best things about this trilogy and I would really like to see either of them do more Star Wars.

I really can't say if they are, having not watched the prequels. If I ever watch the prequels though, I'll do it to see those two.

[blademan9999]

That's one nice looking hammer!

[Fyraltari]

I know them through muuuch more than memes. I've read the prequel part of Darths and Droids and I've read and watched endless analyses about them. I know everything about the plots of all the prequel movies like I did the originals. One of the hazards of surfing the internet without having seen star wars, is that it's impossible not to do that

Oh, I didn't mean you in particular.

The thing is, I doubt Lukas has anything more than a surface understanding of either of those... That's before we get to the part that if he did, he'd be inserting a real world religious dogma as the one true way in his world. A dangerous thing to do if one is trying to have any nuance in their story.

Oh, yeah he wasn't trying to create a cult or anything. I think his goal with the Jedi was to mix as much religions as possible to get something that would feel relatable to everybody (and xkind of alien too by necessity). Strictly speaking, the whole "no attachment thing" is present in some form or another in every religion, with the idea that one should detach themselves from the temporal world to reach a more spiritual truth. It's interesting to see the ressemblance between the buddhist enlightenment and the greek ataraxia. Both of those sound really close to what the Jedi aim for without being quite it