Jedi and Doctrine question

Wow. You know....Snowy. Your attitude could be adjusted a bit here. Codex was just trying to centralize the main point of this topic. Which, ya know....is kind of the rules around here. Staying on topic. Even I didn't catch the underlying point she was making. I do now from her last post to you. Chill out.

I agree. That part in the Doctrine could use a word tweak/edit.

Trisskar wrote: Wow. You know....Snowy. Your attitude could be adjusted a bit here. Codex was just trying to centralize the main point of this topic. Which, ya know....is kind of the rules around here. Staying on topic. Even I didn't catch the underlying point she was making. I do now from her last post to you. Chill out.

I agree. That part in the Doctrine could use a word tweak/edit.

Right on cue. At least you stopped being a passive-aggressive coward about it.

Snowy Aftermath wrote:

Trisskar wrote: Wow. You know....Snowy. Your attitude could be adjusted a bit here. Codex was just trying to centralize the main point of this topic. Which, ya know....is kind of the rules around here. Staying on topic. Even I didn't catch the underlying point she was making. I do now from her last post to you. Chill out.

I agree. That part in the Doctrine could use a word tweak/edit.

Right on cue. At least you stopped being a passive aggressive coward about it.

Your personal attacks are about to get a stern report from me to the admins. So I will say one last time. Chill out.

Trisskar wrote:

Snowy Aftermath wrote:

Trisskar wrote: Wow. You know....Snowy. Your attitude could be adjusted a bit here. Codex was just trying to centralize the main point of this topic. Which, ya know....is kind of the rules around here. Staying on topic. Even I didn't catch the underlying point she was making. I do now from her last post to you. Chill out.

I agree. That part in the Doctrine could use a word tweak/edit.

Right on cue. At least you stopped being a passive aggressive coward about it.

Your personal attacks are about to get a stern report from me to the admins. So I will say one last time. Chill out.

lol.

Snowy, please can the personal commentary and stay on topic.

tzb wrote: Snowy, please can the personal commentary and stay on topic.

Ignore the fact that I started ON TOPIC and was told to shut up by Aqua because there wasn't enough woo and feely-feels in my post. Then Trisskar showed up to join in because that's what she does here. Now you.

You people are hypocrites. The only ones who can speak are the lapdogs.

Snowy Aftermath wrote:

Codex wrote: Hello Snowy. This topic is not about me, I really would like to keep it that way, please. This topic is about the question how the Doctrine was written. Do understand please that I follow the doctrine as a code, and that I do not have any issue with me believing or following the doctrine. Sorry that I cannot make my intention in this topic more understandable to you. But this topic served its purpose already.

I don't actually give a crap about you and your purpose, Aqua. I'm responding with an alternate point of view, which may actually be useful to people who like using their brains for thinking in the future. You are not the only character in this play.

Sorry that I cannot make my intention in this topic more understandable to you.

I have never asked ever to give about what I say.. I mean no offence :blink: to you and I am not trying to attack you in any way. If you feel not so happy, please talk with someone about it. If you do not understand my words, please ask me to clarify things. I happily explain it as many times you need. :blush: But if I may ask, please do not respond to me aggressive like this again.

~

However you began, you're now the one telling people you don't give crap about them and calling them cowards in a thread which is about adherence to doctrine.

Stop, please.

So sorry for not repeating everything that I'm told to repeat, master tzb. I'll shuffle along and get in line now.

Snowy Aftermath wrote: So sorry for not repeating everything that I'm told to repeat, master tzb. I'll shuffle along and get in line now.

What are you trying to achieve dear , i am certainly not one for parroting what other people are saying but we do like to communicate in a certain way here , this means we dont attack eachother and try to be understanding , now i have no clue why you should shoot of at someone here , and if you want to vent , please do and sent me a pm , i dont bite ...much

Enough for now.

Cabur Senaar wrote: Enough for now.

This goes WAY too well with your avatar

My major issue with Doctrine is it's definition of Jedi-ism as religion VS Jedi way as a philosophy.

I feel quite uncomfortable with the words "believe", "faith' - they all exclude critical thinking and self-sufficiency, sort of. Campbell's position of "I don't need faith, I have experience" feels like the only right one for me.

IMO, religion is a crutch.

I wonder how many of you feel this way.

den385 wrote: My major issue with Doctrine is it's definition of Jedi-ism as religion VS Jedi way as a philosophy.

I feel quite uncomfortable with the words "believe", "faith' - they all exclude critical thinking and self-sufficiency, sort of. Campbell's position of "I don't need faith, I have experience" feels like the only right one for me.

IMO, religion is a crutch.

I wonder how many of you feel this way.

This is why we study and learn about the proper ideas of belief and faith here against the misunderstood and mistreated notions of it among society... Ignorance, yet Knowledge.

@Proteus

In that light. Yeah, that way religion is fun. But it's still hard sometimes - to encounter people who believe uncritically... I had few encounters and they were scary.

Perhaps, we might add some psychology into IP, to fortify sound sense and safeguard from manipulations, lunacy and plain old bullshit. The problem is, most psychology books seem to be bullshit, too.

A lot of our "problems" with religion, I think, come from the actual word more than what it stands for. When we say Jediism is a religion, we instantly associate it with all the other religions in the world. We're projecting their downfalls onto us.

But, if I said... Jediism is a spiritual path, it doesn't trigger the same inner turmoil.

*shrugs*

Yep. But there's a difference between the two, ain't it?

den385 wrote: Yep. But there's a difference between the two, ain't it?

Personally I don't see a difference. I've never quite understood why people argue over whether Jediism is a religion, spiritual path, philosophy, or something else. I've always viewed all those things as the same thing. Which is why I never tell anyone that they're wrong when they say that's what they think it is. They're all right in my eye.

I still see a vast gap between Jedi and Jediist. Philosophy/religion/spiritual terms help navigate it. It's akin to gap between Christ and christian, Buddha and buddhist - so is with Jedi and Jediist. Maybe, by this definition I myself am not a Jedi. But better shoot for the stars for me.

den385 wrote: Perhaps, we might add some psychology into IP, to fortify sound sense and safeguard from manipulations, lunacy and plain old bullshit. The problem is, most psychology books seem to be bullshit, too.

This your professional opinion, grounded in science? I'd like to see your sources...