As a Jedi what is balance to you?

Burnout contagion is an interesting phenomena, might serve to make a useful distinction between balance and harmony perhaps. In a burnout contagious environment it might be best that ones inner balance be out of harmony with other peoples inner balance! Maybe seeking a positive harmony among chaos reinforces a functional yet compassionate approach to try to be able to redress the disfunction.

MadHatter wrote: First for it to be selfish its has to be without regard for others. If you are doing things with others in mind and not to their detriment that is not selfish. There is nothing that requires you check with anyone before you act merely that you do not disregard them when you do it and do not harm them when you do it. Sorry but that is the definition of the word black and white in the dictionary I cited. You do not have to like definitions but they exist and do not change because you wish them to. I cited the definition above and have proven my case according to the actual meaning of the word. Oh and burn out is a thing I dont care how much love you have for a thing you can burn out if you do not take time to relax.

Further yes it is a defensive action so long as you did not start the fight and only use the amount of force required to end it. That is how self-defense works. According to the law and most moral standards ( outside of some pacifistic stuff ) you have the right to finish the fight and are not the aggressor so long as A you did not start it and B you do not use excessive force. Its that simple

Your exactly right but my point is that, as in all things, there is a natural dichotomy, a balance. Selfish pursuits don't have to be bad. While they can be motivated by hate, envy arrogance or manipulation selfish pursuits can also be motivated by empathy and compassion. Its the idea that you need to be good to yourself in order to be good to others. Things like developing your self-compassion skills so you can relate better to others, your self esteem through building confidence and competence, and even self care. You mention burnout, well protecting from burnout is self care, a selfish pursuit. You don't do those things for others, you do them for yourself so that you may continue in your path in the manner in which YOU desire. This is the balance between selfish and selfless when manifested in a positive manner. Both are necessary or one suffers, either those you help or yourself.

As for your thoughts on defensive actions, just because you were not the first aggressor does not mean you don't also become an aggressor when you choose to finish a fight. Both sides take on the role and to claim all your actions were done defensively is just not valid. Any use of force could be termed excessive to those you use it on. It is as much a matter of perception of the observer as anything. From the US point of view dropping nukes on Japanese cities in WWII saved countless lives but don't you think the Japanese considered that an excessive use of force?

I believe Balance, or Harmony, is just when Life is running "smoothly". There is some conflict, or trial, but only within the overall context of tranquility. I wouldn't consider my life balance if there were equal or proportional parts of Light and Darkness coming from within my being.

I believe that sometimes, the imbalance we see in our own lives is a result of the overall imbalance in the world around us..

Striving to correct the imbalance creates conflict with those who initiate and use the imbalance to their own ends..

In a world of Light and Dark, which are mutually exclusive, conflict is inevitable. However, chaos is balanced by order, destruction by construction, and even death by birth. The light of The Force keeps the Darkness, the entropic powers of the universe, at bay..

The Force is Balance and the balancing factor. It is The Light, power, connection, and peace. The attempt to corrupt it and bend it to our own will is what I define as "The Dark Arts".. separating oneself from the current in order to move it as you see fit..

Which creates inbalance in the world.. in my humble opinion of course lol

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

MadHatter wrote: First for it to be selfish its has to be without regard for others. If you are doing things with others in mind and not to their detriment that is not selfish. There is nothing that requires you check with anyone before you act merely that you do not disregard them when you do it and do not harm them when you do it. Sorry but that is the definition of the word black and white in the dictionary I cited. You do not have to like definitions but they exist and do not change because you wish them to. I cited the definition above and have proven my case according to the actual meaning of the word. Oh and burn out is a thing I dont care how much love you have for a thing you can burn out if you do not take time to relax.

Further yes it is a defensive action so long as you did not start the fight and only use the amount of force required to end it. That is how self-defense works. According to the law and most moral standards ( outside of some pacifistic stuff ) you have the right to finish the fight and are not the aggressor so long as A you did not start it and B you do not use excessive force. Its that simple

Your exactly right but my point is that, as in all things, there is a natural dichotomy, a balance. Selfish pursuits don't have to be bad. While they can be motivated by hate, envy arrogance or manipulation selfish pursuits can also be motivated by empathy and compassion. Its the idea that you need to be good to yourself in order to be good to others. Things like developing your self-compassion skills so you can relate better to others, your self esteem through building confidence and competence, and even self care. You mention burnout, well protecting from burnout is self care, a selfish pursuit. You don't do those things for others, you do them for yourself so that you may continue in your path in the manner in which YOU desire. This is the balance between selfish and selfless when manifested in a positive manner. Both are necessary or one suffers, either those you help or yourself.

As for your thoughts on defensive actions, just because you were not the first aggressor does not mean you don't also become an aggressor when you choose to finish a fight. Both sides take on the role and to claim all your actions were done defensively is just not valid. Any use of force could be termed excessive to those you use it on. It is as much a matter of perception of the observer as anything. From the US point of view dropping nukes on Japanese cities in WWII saved countless lives but don't you think the Japanese considered that an excessive use of force?

In the first part, you again do not use the word properly. If you are becoming better at compassion so you can better relate to others you are doing this with regard to others. It is not selfish. For something to be selfish, you have to do it with disregard towards others. As a Jedi ought to be mindful of how their action impacts others these things are not selfish when done with the right mindset.

For the second part, the aggressor is the one who STARTS the fight ( I can link the dictionary again if you do not believe me ) so no you are not the aggressor when you choose to finish the right. The only way to become the aggressor is if the enemy were to surrender and you were to keep attacking. As for excessive force, this is why we have things like the Geneva convention and various laws for the use of Force to define. Thus the attacker does not get to decide what is excessive.

Sorry hatter but I am expressing the meanings of those words correctly. The only way to not be an aggressor is no not engage in attack. As for selfishness if you truly feel you do nothing in your life that is selfish I consider that one of the most arrogant things one could ever say. You must be the second coming of christ. You embody the failing of the Jedi path in that statement, your refusal to accept the darkness inherent within you.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: Sorry hatter but I am expressing the meanings of those words correctly. The only way to not be an aggressor is no not engage in attack. As for selfishness if you truly feel you do nothing in your life that is selfish I consider that one of the most arrogant things one could ever say. You must be the second coming of christ. You embody the failing of the Jedi path in that statement, your refusal to accept the darkness inherent within you.

No you are not. I have shown how those acts are not selfish based on the definition of the word. So long as you keep how your act impacts others in mind when you are performing it, it is not selfish. Its literally done with regard to others do I need to define regard? Further the strawman you made is nice but overall pointless as I said no such things. I simply said none of the acts you mentioned are selfish via the definition of the word.

As for agressor:

aggressor http://www.dictionary.com/browse/aggressor
[uh-gres-er]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
a person, group, or nation that attacks first or initiates hostilities; an assailant or invader.


aggressor https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/aggressor
noun [ C ] US /əˈɡres·ər/
​
a person, group, or country that starts an argument, fight, or war by attacking first:
He claimed that he was just defending himself, and that the other guy was the aggressor.

Definition of aggressor in English:




aggressor https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/aggressor
NOUN

A person or country that attacks another first.

So no again no you are not properly using the word. If you cant accept the dictionary definitions provided there is little point in continuing to go back and forth as you insist on creating your own understanding of what a word means and ignoring the evidence show to the contrary

An aggressor is not the same as something being aggressive. It's the terminology used in combat 'arts'.... when peace is viewed as the baseline normal, a shift out of that is initiated by something using or incurring physical force to exert their will, against the targets will; that thing is the aggressor. It gets a bit more difficult to designate clearly when the nature of force is less physical; like cyber warfare, information warfare, economic warfare etc. The next iteration of aggressor and defender that I prefer to use is from airpower language, where two units of action are segregated into engaged and supporting. Any more then two units becomes a bit complex and then needs to start really being grouped

Moderation in all things.

:pinch: You miss the point. I'm not talking about a clinical term concerning a nations status. I'm not talking about aggressor, I'm talking about aggression. There is a difference...

hatter, in any case we can talk about your term aggressor I suppose. I guess my question then becomes, do you feel there is any situation or instance when being the aggressor is warranted?