Views on "Kinesis" and other forms of energy manipulation

No, Rickie, I was addressing the OP there.

Also, Alethea, there are a couple of problems with what you (or that video at any rate) is saying.
First, not everybody who speaks of "the Force" means "energy" by that. Among those who do not everybody means the same thing by "energy" either, and to enough of them the Force as a label goes beyond what they mean by energy. There is of course no wrong definition of the Force and if you choose to have that as an alternative name for energy, that is fine, but that is not how everybody else means it, I'm not sure any significant subset of all Jedi do, and those who do still have no reason to do so aside from what amounts effectively to personal preference. So that the Force does indeed equal energy is, well... false, I guess. It is at best just one of the myriad competing understandings and there are enough of the others that are by no means any less valid.
Likewise, while you are free to define what you do or do not mean by Jedi, and while your understanding of that name may largely overlap with my own, I do take issue with the idea that any one person has the authority to declare what is or isn't in fact a Jedi. Any one person does not own the label and while I find the tricksters who think their alleged magic is what is necessary or sufficient to be a Jedi just as laughable as you do, there is still no such thing as a "True Jedi^TM ". If anything, the attempt to model one smells to me more like a no-true-scottsman fallacy in the making.

*facepalm* I said "to me". I didn't say for everyone else. And you are clearly missing the point.

The Doctrine here, the teachings here, they are all suppose to inspire you to actually impact the world in your own hero's journey. Wasting your time on force usage that is not going to benefit others is not a good use of your time, as a Jedi.

Let's give an example:

Sith use the Force, they are not Jedi.
Baran Do, a good force user group in the Star Wars Universe, use the Force (they even use it to benefit others), but they are not Jedi.
Jensaari use the Force but are not Jedi.

Jedi is a very particular philosophical group within the Star Wars Universe. There is a particular system which defines you as a Jedi. You don't just get to call yourself one and be one. Even those which were Jedi at one point in time in the fiction acknowledge that there are particulars which make one Jedi and when they fall from it, they no longer fit the bill. So yes, there is a "Here are the lines, go outside the boundaries and you're no longer a Jedi". BUT it doesn't make you a bad person either - unless you become a Dark Force User as a result.

So, let's ask, can you look at someone and determine if they are Jedi? Or do you let them define it for themselves? Because if tomorrow morning Wayne Williams (a man on death row for murdering 29 children) said "I've been a Jedi since the first time I took a child's life" and you say "Well he claims he's been a Jedi, so he must be a Jedi" then you clearly need to rethink whether or not you understand the Jedi Path.

I do not know what is intended by the doctrine. I know that everybody is free and welcome to take from it what they will. None of it says that training magic powers is a waste of time or has no benefit or has nothing to do with being a Jedi. I agree with the content of what you are saying, just not with the universality you may or may not be implying.
What the fiction has to say on the matter matters within the context of the fiction. If your views happen to match it on this issue, that's fine, but they are no stronger and no more valid for being supported by the fiction than the unsupported ones are.

And to answer your question, no I have no way of telling who is or isn't a Jedi. I can hardly even tell who is or isn't a good person across the board, and frankly I doubt that there is even such a thing as generally good or generally evil. So if Mr. Williams said he was a Jedi, all I'd know is that this is what he said. There is no concrete definition of a Jedi, so there is no definition he matches. There is conversely no definition he is missing, so your saying that he isn't one is just as arbitrary as his declaration that he is. Now if that to you sounds like I don't understand "the Jedi Path^TM ", or that I am for this reason no capital-T "True Jedi^TM ", that's your opinion and my point is that while you are free and welcome to hold it, you don't get to declare that it is any more than that - or indeed worth any more than I paid for it. You do get to say that I do not understand your Jedi path, as it were, and you can explain why you find yours so compelling, but this is about as far as you can reasonably go, as can anybody else, including Mr. Williams.

I am personally extremely sceptical of kinesis, but the theory behind kinesis is mainly energy and particles.

If i were to take Pyrokinesis for an example the more closer to science explenation is:

Wich is quite logical yes, i have tried it myself without major success.
If this really does exist, why would one put time into it anyways?
It's not like you are going to be able to ignite a person by looking at him or moving a car with your mind either

Sure I do. As you're the one claiming to be a Jedi, you have to prove that you are. If I claim that you are not, it's not very difficult for me to pull up every order that still exists and point out exactly how a person like Wayne Williams is not a Jedi. In fact, it wouldn't take very long.

You can tell the difference between someone that is clearly not a Jedi, claims to be one, and one that is a Jedi.

Wayne Williams: Murdered 29 children.

"All life is sacred"

Done. Not Jedi. He could transform his life and become one, but if he stated that he was a Jedi the moment he killed his first child onward. He doesn't fit the marker.

As to your "Not a True Scotsman", there is a such thing. For example, the definition states it has to be a male. So if a woman (either by birth [excluding those incidents where they are male with female parts] or under the "this is my gender because I'm trapped in a man's body") came in and said they were a Scotsman, it is not possible. They are not male. Period. They could be a Scots Woman. But not a Scotsman. Thus, there is a such thing as "Not a true Scotsman"

As to your "Not a True Scotsman", there is a such thing. For example, the definition states it has to be a male. So if a woman (either by birth [excluding those incidents where they are male with female parts] or under the "this is my gender because I'm trapped in a man's body") came in and said they were a Scotsman, it is not possible. They are not male. Period. They could be a Scots Woman. But not a Scotsman. Thus, there is a such thing as "Not a true Scotsman"

Well, that was a childish argument.

Amazing that a guy can murder 29 children and still be a Jedi if he "changes".

As if you can change the fact you killed 29 children.

Right, so apparently you don't know what the fallacy is... that's fine, not everybody has to.

So in your opinion if someone does not believe that all life is sacred, they are therefore no "True Jedi", just as Catholics are no "True Christians" and Scottish men who like their porridge with sugar are no "True Scotsmen" because a "True Scotsman" wouldn't. Now, that is your opinion... But that is all it is. Ignoring Wayne Williams for a moment, if disagreeing with you on a doctrinal point means not being a Jedi, so be it. Apparently thinking of themselves as the arbiter of what people are is a perfectly Jedi thing to do, so what do I know? What have you to say against the next bloke to say that you are no "True Jedi" because you don't waste your time training magical powers, as any "True Jedi" would?
All this does is making up arbitrary and unnecessary subgroups and feeding potential schisms and conflicts where there need not be any. It is being consciously and purposefully divisive and nothing else. Apparently in your view being so is something very Jedi-like.

Look, you are very free and welcome to think in this way and you are welcome to found a club of your own on that, and if you wish, you are even welcome to declare those of us who won't join heretics, just as the Orthodox churches do to the Catholics. I don't know if anybody else is going to be hurt by that, but I for one sure can endure that. It is not a very high price to pay, really.

I didn't mean to start any hostility or anything. I was just curious what other people thought of the matter at hand. I'm not trying to draw a relationship between the Jedi training and kinesis or energy, but I was simply wondering what other's thoughts were on it.

Being someone who craves knowledge and learning, I personally found the idea of it fascinating. Sure it may not be real, but the idea of being able to manipulate particles and waves with our minds seems interesting to me. In a situation where it is possible, how and why is it possible? Would it be linked spiritually or scientifically?

I appreciate everyone's thoughts and opinions, and I apologize if my curiosity and questions caused any undue debate or hostility.

Don't worry, brother, it's all in a friendly spirit. It happens here all the time, really.

Actually Catholics are Christian. The doctrine for Christianity that is collective to them all is kind of short:

Believe in Christ
That he died on the Cross for your Sins
Believe in (and try to adhere to) the 10 Commandments
And that you are saved because of Christ's sacrifice

Catholicism fits this description.

Amazing that a guy can murder 29 children and still be a Jedi if he "changes".

I didn't say it would be easy. Nor did I say he would achieve it. I also didn't say it was probable. But that it is possible (even at .0000001% chance things are "possible").

And is it childish? Or is it simply a statement that the "absolute" of Not a True Scotsman is just as flawed as any other absolute statement. All the other fallacies focus on "are you saying that because such and such aligns?" Not a True Scotsman is used for the illegitimate belief that categorization creates further problems rather than celebrating there are differences amongst us that are of great value. It's said every time someone feels like the person calling it ("You're not a true scotsman") is suppose to feel belittled by stating such. Rather than pushing for people to surpass their boundaries.

In modern usage: It's a cop out fallacy.