The obsession with Rank

I have no interest in rank but I have a certain appreciation for structure. I think totjo has too much rank and not enough structure.

steamboat wrote: I think it is well worth remembering that the "obsession with Rank" isn't the only form of vanity or attention-lust that exposes itself here at the Temple. Like many other congregations, this group has it's fair share of "humbler than thou" competitions, "Look at my sermons about how to eschew vanity" hypocrisies, and "I need to be the center of attention"-itis.

There's the thought police too, although they seem to have calmed down a bit.

(joke) This thread is rank (/joke)

:silly: (as in stinky)

Rank's just work well as functional nodes of the structure, otherwise every twist, bend and node could have its own name leading to too many ranks; and our biological instinctual drive to determine an order of dominance would rush to populate it... and that subjective view would serve to occupy the beholder of the eye, but an actual formalized hierarchy would then represent a ladder of authority. But TOTJO is not the military or paramilitary.

Those authority ladder's represents the 'chain of command' if movement is either up or down. But at TOTJO though I think we have a few ladder's of service rather then authority, one for each functional area and all these are overseen by the single body being Council. Naturally though some of them inherit an element of authority which exceeds beyond the self, but I think that is inherent with responsibility of their functional scope.

I don't think its too bad here, but I'm only really used to the military paradigm's, where they have the duty quite rigidly associated with rank. Here its not so tight, but does have the occasional association - which is logically given the emergence of that aforementioned duty responsibility in various positions.

Edit; so then it comes down to how to define a functional node, which I think does nicely change to represent the node itself, being initially about the progress through ones own training, and then changes to become about training others, and finally about administration. The rank's appear linear, because they benefit from that type of relationship, but I think its coincidental rather then a facet of dictatorial organizational 'rankizm'.

"My shit stinks much better than yours!"

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Just my own opinion someone seeking to only achieve a higher rank in this temple tells me that they crave power and authority not with this temple teaches. I have been active at this temple since 2011 in such a time I want achieved apprentice. I feel no rush to finish too fast other than the fact I get very eager and excited about my studies I love to learn. But what is rank really if it isn't something that you worked hard for and feels good after you've obtained it? I feel to be an honor to be someone's apprentice that someone in this temple is willing to spend hours months if not years with me they don't necessarily know me and it's a job I might not see any fruit but this is a teacher and a master and I feel very grateful if someone is willing to teach me. It's a journey I find it silly and almost pointless we have a title in this temple if you haven't learned anything and you're only Russian so that you can gain more status this temple. But I know it's human nature to want power I don't know is this making sense?

For me, I see rank as something that represents your commitment/dedication to this temple. Ranks shouldn't be gained quickly or obsessed with really. I understand that may want to rush into it, but being patient pays off a whole bunch. If they do, they will surely discover and realize that they should have spent as much time as they could have to learn and realize what is needed to be.

I was talking with someone who is very insightful, a knight exactly. This knight said that they waited so long to become a knight, which has greatly benefited him greatly in my point of view. Before I became an apprentice, his brief assignments that were only for initiates helped me greatly to be better prepared for knighthood.

Thus, this proves my point that ranks show a person's knowledge, as well as their dedication and commitment to this Temple. This is what I have realized throughout my journey here. The most important thing is that lots of patience, time, knowledge, commitment, and dedication is needed to become a knight. Please feel free to comment or add on.

(Admitting upfront I haven't read responses to this thread)

I personally would like my words to speak for my personal study, and my rank to show my studies in this particular school. I've not had much time recently, unfortunately, to dedicate here, but when I do I hope to show wisdom, and do intend to gain rank through dedication and study. It is worth so much more to work for it, in my humble opinion.

However, the idea isn't unique here. I've seen many people attempt to switch to a new martial art and skip belts. Simply put, if it isn't what you were doing before, you aren't as learned.

magmon wrote:
However, the idea isn't unique here. I've seen many people attempt to switch to a new martial art and skip belts. Simply put, if it isn't what you were doing before, you aren't as learned.

They wanted to skip ranks with being tested? I think some are given honorary rank in recognition of their experience?

On one hand I can understand someone wanting their years of dedication and experience recognised and validated. On the other hand, organisational philosophy and mission differ from group to group. A 30 year McDonald's manager (as skilled and adept they might be in all things McDonalds) would have difficulty even running the till much less getting fries and building Whoppers without first putting an adequate amount of time through training and immersion at Burger King. In both cases, the fundamentals are the same: they are burger joints. But their products and their structures are not at all the same. In this context, that 30 years' McDonalds experience amounts to nothing much at all until they've done the required work to sufficiently understand and represent Burger King.

Sorry to use a fast-food analogy. We spent some time in chat last night talking about fries and tacos, so the decandent scent-memories of McDonalds fries are still haunting me today, infringing my personal freedom.

Rickie wrote:

magmon wrote:
However, the idea isn't unique here. I've seen many people attempt to switch to a new martial art and skip belts. Simply put, if it isn't what you were doing before, you aren't as learned.

They wanted to skip ranks with being tested? I think some are given honorary rank in recognition of their experience?

Not trying to argue the validity of it.

But. I took geesh....six to umm...eight? Years...I started at a younger age so I don't remember the years. Anyways! not important.

My Sensai actually allowed new students from other schools to participate with their earned belt rank from said "Other" School. We were a Wado Ryu school and had a Tai Kwan Do student come in with her earned rank and was still concidered "One of us" In fact...My Sensai encouraged it.

The reason for this acceptance and encouragement is because it gave us fresh and new "Outside" perspective to work on. He never saw himself as "Different" or "Apart" from other practices, he just saw as a group of Wado Ryu practitioners who trained against anything.

She even was allowed to teach or provide her own insights into the class because it gave us something new to think about and work with. In Wado Ryu we did this kind of throw but what if we faced a Tai Kwan Do student that could counter said through with this move?

We used outside experiences as a means of improving our own.

Obviously at the end of the day it is up to each teacher and group/school/temple to do things how they feel best.

But at my own group (Just Jedi) I plan to implement my Sensai's methods Maybe it will work. Maybe it wont. But i feel there is no such things as a "One Size Fits All" Not ALL Martial Arts Schools denys the "skip" or "Intigration" of rank. Just like not all of them will accept such.

*bows*

Jestor wrote:

Tellahane wrote:

steamboat28 wrote: One of the things I have been screeching about here since 2012 is that TOTJO needs a formalized doctrinal structure, but that TOTJO members are not required to agree with said doctrinal structure on an individual level. This has caused something of a cognitive dissonance in most of the people who have heard me say it, and I'm typically waved away as a crazy for believing such.

Doctrinal adherence does not make a Jedi a "good" one or a "false" one. It makes a doctrinal Jedi, which is wholly separate from an effective one.

Very well said, and I agree!

So, to understand you, and that is all I am trying to do...

You think we should have a a more formalized (which i dont understand how ours is not, honestly) doctrine, but not require members to strictly adhere to it?

If I misunderstand, I really hope you will explain it...

SO, then what is wrong with a 'loose' doctrine? (Although I dont see it like that still...)

We have a doctrine, and we allow interpretation, now, isnt that what you are saying?

Ok to clarify here, after re-reading I realized how much my point didn't fit.

I'm not against the different interpretations of doctrine as so much as I am people not following their versions.

If it's one thing I've learned about any of my experiences related to jediism, that no matter which code you follow, which interpretation you follow, and respectively the doctrine as well. If you say you are a follower of xyz, then you need to follow xyz, even if your version of xyz is abc, you need to stick to it 100%. Not just when you feel like sticking to it. If you can't commit to following these codes, whatever version you do, your not going to get out of it what they are intended, and the lack of discipline in following it is only going to...not necessarily hurt you but promote some unhealthy habits in other aspects of your life.

The part that I agreed with is people should hold themselves accountable if they don't follow their own doctrines and codes(with the understanding that interpretations evolve as we evolve and grow within ourselves). If you vow to follow a code where you must eat a cheeseburger only once a week, then stick to it and only eat it once a week, don't sign off an oath to it, say you follow it, while eating at mcdonalds every day! I've seen some who do that and probably don't realize it.