The dark side

Joda Sett wrote: I see your points, and they're well taken. Good or evil is in the eye of the beholder, as is a good Jedi or a bad one. Another discussion on this site is tackling this very issue. What constitutes a good one from a bad one? Who's rules should we use for such a judgment? Is it even our place to do so? Similar debates.

weeeeeelll

i would not say that "good or evil is in the eye of the beholder"

not EXACTLY

these words didnt just invent themselves - there is some real thing that is happening which these words are used to identify

there is some relativity and some subjectivity involved, but these concepts are much deeper than just various personal opinions

well, in my personal opinion at least lol

OB1Shinobi wrote:
these words didnt just invent themselves - there is some real thing that is happening which these words are used to identify
there is some relativity and some subjectivity involved, but these concepts are much deeper than just various personal opinions
well, in my personal opinion at least lol

You are correct the word didn't just invent themselves, they were "invented" by someone. Someone with there own views and perceptions. I disagree that "these concepts are deeper than.. personal opinions", I believe they are just that - opinions. As the saying goes one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. What I consider evil you may consider good.
In my life I have undertaken actions that would be unquestionably considered evil by some, do I believe that I am evil or that my actions are evil, no.
I have also undertaken actions that would be unquestionably considered morally good, do I believe that I am morally good or that my actions are morally good , of course. I like to think of myself as a morally good person, but that does not mean everyone believes I am a good person, in fact I'm sure some think of as me as evil. That is their opinion, and not my own.
Take Gandhi, most would agree now that he is a good person, but at the time of the struggle for Indian independence the British viewed him as a threat. And one might go so far as to say Gandhi was a enemy of the British, or take it one step farther and say he is evil since he opposed British rule. Does that mean Gandhi was evil, I'm sure most would disagree but that is just the opinion of most people, not a fact.

Kace wrote:

OB1Shinobi wrote:
these words didnt just invent themselves - there is some real thing that is happening which these words are used to identify
there is some relativity and some subjectivity involved, but these concepts are much deeper than just various personal opinions
well, in my personal opinion at least lol

You are correct the word didn't just invent themselves, they were "invented" by someone. Someone with there own views and perceptions. I disagree that "these concepts are deeper than.. personal opinions", I believe they are just that - opinions. As the saying goes one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. What I consider evil you may consider good.
In my life I have undertaken actions that would be unquestionably considered evil by some, do I believe that I am evil or that my actions are evil, no.
I have also undertaken actions that would be unquestionably considered morally good, do I believe that I am morally good or that my actions are morally good , of course. I like to think of myself as a morally good person, but that does not mean everyone believes I am a good person, in fact I'm sure some think of as me as evil. That is their opinion, and not my own.
Take Gandhi, most would agree now that he is a good person, but at the time of the struggle for Indian independence the British viewed him as a threat. And one might go so far as to say Gandhi was a enemy of the British, or take it one step farther and say he is evil since he opposed British rule. Does that mean Gandhi was evil, I'm sure most would disagree but that is just the opinion of most people, not a fact.

rarely have i seen anyone using that phrase with a clear definition in mind of either freedom fighter or of terrorist

a terrorist is a person who deliberately targets civilians and non-combatants in order to influence political policy

a freedom fighter is a person who actively is working to defy or defeat an existing political authority structure

one may in fact be both, and simply filling the textbook requirement of being a "freedom fighter" does not suggest at all that one is fighting for anything worthwhile, or that ones real motives for fighting are what we would call "noble"

here is a clear definition of evil:
e·vil
1.profoundly immoral and malevolent.

there are (and always have been) people in the world who are "profoundly immoral and malevolent"

here is an example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu17Wuq3nI8


who cares what the british thought of or said about ghandi?

when i talk of evil i am referring to the decisions and motives of the actor, not to the hasty, uninformed, biased, or politically charged judgments of the observer or the commentator

I believe demons or angels do not exist in the form we know. First heaven and hell exist within us, in my view; then spirits and energies are ready for the world, still stuck in that plan, these refuse to transcend. These spirits has its own energy, often residual from its previous life or time of death. When carry a bad and heavy energy, we connect with spirits with the same thought. The opposite is also true. Therefore, when dealing with these spirits, one must be prepared in body and spirit.

Joda Sett wrote: .......... in order to project their presence in our plane of existence. Feeding on the energies of the living could possibly occur by our understanding of things. One idea that I'm also still working on is, if these dark entities or demons are out there, should we like our other religious counterparts have some folks that specialize in exorcisms and repelling these forces? The Knight's Code says that we should shield those that are weaker from such things. If a person came to us pleading for help with such an entity, how could we help? I look forward to the debate that follows. It should help us grow.

Whether the source is of spirit or mental, coping with it could start with the person's reaction and relationship to it. That is how I approach that topic, since supernatural stuff is by definition beyond the reach of science seemingly - considering the goal is to heal not find some truth about the nature of the metaphysical necessarily. And using belief as one of the tools means a measure of skepticism might have to be suspended at times - so the various constructs of spiritual dimensions fit there for me.

The only sides of the force are the perceptions we have of the force in our minds. I think the whole "Light" and "Dark" thing is more about the individual and his path/doctrine then the force itself.

But what do i know? It's just my perception..

I agree to a point. I would pose the anthesis: why do we have light and dark sides of the Force represented in our temple insignia?

1. The orthodox Jedi Code (5 star)
2. 16 basic teachings of the Jedi (inner 16 star)
3. The interdependence of Light and Dark- A Jediist is in harmony with the Force.

That's what the FAQ says about the insignia

I don't see anything mentioning sides in it

I think that the only possible light and dark within the force is a result of light or dark within ourselves. The force itself is just, pure essence or energy

But why do we need to label the force?