I’m having trouble knowing when and how to give conflict:

anyone have a list or possible ideas of when and how to give conflict besides a force roll that is darkside?

Yoda can get you close: "Anger...fear...aggression...the dark side of the Force are they."

If you've seen The Last Jedi, Luke also says something that can be of help.

The following isn't very spoilerish, but just in case...

SPOILER!

The point of the above quote is to show that the dark side offers you a quick path to what you desire, if only you compromise your morals, your character, a little bit.

SO I agree here to the basic stuff— but if I set up a combat that is obvious bad guys coming and the Jedi runs at them slicing them up that is aggressive nature , so slapping them on the wrist for attack seems harsh and eventually a player will be passive constantly which can be boring

There is a chart on page 324 of Force & Destiny for this.

Use it as a guideline. Add in your own ways that Conflict can be awarded. Remove things that doesn't make sense for your table. It's not an exhaustive list, it's a suggested list really. I'd personally tack on intentionally harming others when you have the option to Sunder their weapons with your lightsaber being worthy of 1 Conflict. Also using the Force aggressively. Pushing someone away is one thing but slamming them into the ground or tossing them high into the air with the intent to harm is clearly excessive. Again, do what works best for your group but don't let your players weasel their way out of ever taking Conflict. They made Force Sensitive PCs, that means they agreed to have a Morality and the associated rules that go with it. Remind them that the Morality system is actually designed for them to tell the story they want to with their Force Sensitive character... a Dark Jedi trying to redeem themself, a Jedi that falls to the Dark by doing bad things with good intentions, a character that stays in one path or the other despite the conflict within them pushing them towards the other extreme, a character that seeks to have balance and therefore tends to avoid situations where they have to participate and take a side, which can still be Conflicting as well due to seeing injustices or ways to alleviate problems quickly, etc...

The book specifically calls out that resorting to violence as the first solution to a problem is only worthy of Conflict if the Force Sensitive PC started the fight. If they were already being attacked, it falls under the "Defense" part of Yoda's line about "A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack."

Have the players describe what they are doing in emotional terms that give insight into their motivations. It may take a bit of buy-in, but if your players are game it makes playing force characters more rewarding. Occasionally throw in a boost die on the roll when they are tapping into emotions that will generate conflict (especially when doing the right thing for the wrong reason).

So in the case of obvious bad guys approaching, have the player say why the PC is rushing in. Maybe it is the tactically sound option (no conflict), maybe it is payback for getting shot earlier (conflict), maybe it is fear of seeing an innocent hurt (conflict and a boost die), either way judge the action and motivation accordingly.

Probably 40% of my players conflict comes from black pip use, 30% from "immoral actions" (the Table 9-2 values), maybe 10% from Fear checks, 10% from other roleplay of "strong emotions", and 10% from their Moral Weakness.

And all of that top 70% plus the Moral Weakness 10% comes from simply presenting scenarios where there's an "easy way" or a "hard way".

The easy way (taking the dark pips on that Power Check, Stealing, Lieing, Combat, etc.) will cause Conflcit.

The hard way (difficult Skill checks, compromising your degree of "success", tough roleplay, etc.) will generally avoid Conflict, or result in a lesser amount.

Its seriously all about presenting choices, and allowing them to accomplish things easily and quickly if they're willing to take Conflict for it.