Apprentice & Knight Standards

So (just to tie this up if I may), was there anything in the end that invalidated the things Akkarin was sharing about his views on the processes of cultivating wisdom among an apprenticeship then (since it's been explained that he wasn't talking about teaching wisdom in the first place)?

While reading back through this thread, I'm mostly seeing everyone saying things that more or less support exactly what he was pointing out in his own way, including everything you pointed out in response to my last post, Triss.

Trisskar wrote: Oh interesting Aqua! These are definitely categories I would not have normally considered. Probably because being a Jedi to me isn't religious...at all haha

I remember awhile back it was mentioned that the clergy was working on ways to re-name some of their more.....catholic-y terminology.....If you could get creative (and have a bit of fun with it) What sort of renaming would you consider? Clergy could be....Preisthood or Whills? haha something like that....Fun adaptions are healthy!

Signs of mental burdens in others

I found particularly interesting. Mainly because it can be quite a touchy and sensitive topic. Not very many people like to have their health related faults pointed out and discussed in a class like manner haha

How would you go about teaching this without risk of offending?

Thank you Triss. :blush: Ehm.. I am not allowed to teach here, so I do not have to worry about that for a long wile.. :laugh: As for those who do teach, I have heard more than ones from various of Jedi that a Knight must have the strength to be vulnerable in order to be a Knight, so I assume that Apprentices and Teaching Masters will have some sort of way to work trough it without offending, I assume they will understand it is not meant as an offence at some point. :blink:

Lowering the risks of unhappy situations, the lesson concept do not spesifically aim on problems of an spesific individual. So it should have minimum chances to offend someone.

Wow, it always amazes me how fast these threads grow!

Carlos: The hope is that ... that focus of "I'm here to show you where your wrong" vanishes in me ... my own focus...

Yes, exactly! I don't want my opinion to simply be parroted by my Apprentice because that wouldn't be a display of true learning or true application of practice. I can try to provide them with the knowledge and skills I believe are "good," but it is always up to them to learn in their own way and apply in their own way.

Akkarin: Knowledge itself is stale; it's a tool box wherein some tools are useful in some contexts, even for finding where wisdom arises, but some knowledge is entirely the wrong tool for the wrong job. Knowledge in and of itself does not foster empathy, does not foster compassion, it doesn't make one brave or cowardly and knowledge is, to be blunt, often wrong. An accumulation of knowledge can itself be an impediment to wisdom, especially when one becomes proud of the amount of knowledge one has amassed. A drawer of diplomas doesn't guarantee wisdom.

So what is "wisdom?"

We end up in a position where we're talking about something that's so ephemeral that it can't be defined -- which is okay, in a sense, humans have been working on definitions of it for thousands of years, it'd be pretty silly to presume that we've got it right from the get-go. And we can't necessarily lay out an exact path for wisdom, either, true enough. If I teach my "path to wisdom," it will only be what I think wisdom is, and frankly I'm relatively certain I'm not all that wise a person in the first place, so whatever definition I provide will no-doubt be wrong.

That said, isn't it possible to recognize wisdom when we see it? If I think about figures throughout history who might be considered "wise," at least in some measure, or "good," at least in-so-far as anyone can be "good," it strikes me that a correlation exists between knowledge and their wisdom or goodness. The rhetorical statement that "knowledge itself is stale" doesn't ring true, for me, exactly. Though I do love the toolbox metaphor because it's simple and effective.

I have a toolbox. It is empty. As I go through life I occasionally add things to it (often things that other people believe it's important for me to have). Sometimes I get swindled by someone who sells me a tool that's worthless (or dangerous) and sometimes I encounter tools too big for my toolbox, or which I don't have the understanding to use without hurting myself. But I continue to build my toolbox because that's what life is, really. I run into situations that need certain tools, and I do the best that I can with what I have.

It seems to me that wisdom isn't purely an acquisition of numerous tools, but (using our metaphor) is more akin to being able to have all your tools organized in your shed (so you can locate them easily) and actually knowing how to use them in the first place (however the metaphor fails me, here, because in reality "wisdom" also includes things like knowing when the tools should be used, it includes an understanding that a tool used even for "good" purposes can lead to harm. In some ways, too, wisdom might be like the electricity that makes the power-tools run, some tools can't even be used effectively unless someone is "wise." Things get complicated). Nor do I necessarily need a huge range of tools to be effective in life. I can do a heck of a lot with just a flat-head screwdriver. Eventually, however, that screwdriver will run up against tasks that it simply can't handle, and when that happens I better begin adding tools to my toolbox which will help me solve my problem.

So, looking at what I said above, I feel that I agree fully with the statement "A drawer of diplomas doesn't guarantee wisdom." It absolutely doesn't -- no amount of purely accumulated knowledge will be effective at fostering wisdom, and it doesn't even mean that someone is living with Arete -- excellence in life is far more than knowing things (or even being an expert in multiple things). And, yes, someone with a lot of knowledge in their toolbox might begin to think that they're better than other people, or that the tools in their toolbox are the bestest ever tools for all occasions. Having an expansive and orderly toolbox aren't going

"Knowledge in and of itself does not foster empathy, does not foster compassion, it doesn't make one brave or cowardly" is another statement that mostly makes sense to me. Knowledge can't make someone be empathetic or compassionate. However, it does seem like exposure to facts can increase the likelihood that someone might be moved to feel a sense of empathy? Moreover, having broad and deep stores of knowledge can help place a person within their global context, better. So, here I agree with "Wisdom is contextual, but is always the meeting point between the knowledge one has access to and how it can be employed to that point where the mind meets the heart." Yes, wisdom is contextual, and it is also reliant upon some form of knowledge (very often a form of direct experiential knowledge). "Knowing," as they say, "isn't the same as doing."

But if what we're really trying to do is get people to explore empathy and compassion, how do we go about that? See, I don't think wisdom is actually the most important thing to worry about (specifically because it does need to arise on a case-by-case basis out of an individual's own self-awareness -- which includes internalized knowledge). I think that what we, as teachers, need to concern ourselves with is the creation of a space where people can learn to think broadly, deeply, and with compassion (and then act in ways that make the world better). As I mentioned to Carlos, earlier, this doesn't mean that people have to think exactly the same way I do, but it does mean that they will - of their own volition - choose not to do things which are harmful to themselves, the people around them, or the ecosystem of which they are a part. And this is where the practice of being a Jedi comes in, because while Jedi are philosophers we are not merely philosophers -- we live and breathe our philosophy and aim to practice it as a consistent part of our existence. I can't teach wisdom but I can teach someone the historical facts surrounding the segregation and exploitation of indigenous populations. I can teach climate science as a moral philosophy (we all need our climate to be stable or we all suffer). I can teach communication skills that are proven to be effective at reducing confrontation and harm. I can teach cognitive techniques, which have been shown through studies to help reduce anxiety and depression. I can actually teach quite a few amazing things which, in themselves, won't create wisdom, but which may lead my students to view the world in new ways and behave in a manner conducive to their own well-being and the well-being of everything around them.

In the above, I agree with Twigga's point that it is possible to be introduced to things in such a way that wisdom is fostered. Not taught, per se, but given an environment where it might have a better chance of growing.

---
[hr]

Now, for a brief interlude by Dr. David Bohm.

“The point is that we have all sorts of assumptions, not only about politics or economics or religion, but also about what we think an individual should do, or what life is all about, and so forth.

[...]

On the whole, you could say that if you are defending your opinions, you are not serious. Likewise, if you are trying to avoid something unpleasant inside of yourself, that is also not being serious. A great deal of our whole life is not serious. And society teaches you that. It teaches you not to be very serious – that there are all sorts of incoherent things, and there is nothing that can be done about it, and that you will only stir yourself up uselessly by being serious. But in a dialogue you have to be serious. It is not a dialogue if you are not – not in the way I’m using the word. There is a story about Freud when he had cancer of the mouth. Somebody came up to him and wanted to talk to him about a point in psychology. The person said, “Perhaps I’d better not talk to you, because you’ve got this cancer which is very serious. You may not want to talk about this.” Freud’s answer was, “This cancer may be fatal, but it’s not serious.” And actually, of course, it was just a lot of cells growing. I think a great deal of what goes on in society could be described that way – that it may well be fatal, but it’s not serious.”

---
[hr]

Continuing....

On Aqua's points: I think the seminary training is very valuable. Not all Knight's need to be members of the clergy, the separation is probably a good thing, but I think that going through the training (even if the final oath never takes place) is a really positive idea. There's a lot in the program that's valuable.

Trisskar: Which is kind of how I view Jedi Standards, a form of art slowly being built up, torn down, and re-tried in order to develop a stronger future

I love the idea of Jedi training as art -- and the practice of Jediism as art as well. I think that the urge to create and build is something we absolute can foster here. Perhaps better than in many other movements, even, because of the source of our aesthetic ideal is, itself, a work of art! Very exciting.

Proteus wrote: So (just to tie this up if I may), was there anything in the end that invalidated the things Akkarin was sharing about his views on the processes of cultivating wisdom among an apprenticeship then (since it's been explained that he wasn't talking about teaching wisdom in the first place)?

While reading back through this thread, I'm mostly seeing everyone saying things that more or less support exactly what he was pointing out in his own way, including everything you pointed out in response to my last post, Triss.

If we are all agreeing to the same thing, and drawing up similar conclusions........What exactly are you wanting me to admit to? You are quite focused on trying to prove my actions wrong and his right and/or valid. Pushing very hard for a specific answer that I am afraid i cant give you.

He came into this thread with authority of what must be done and discounted the use of Knowledge as a toolbox of lesser use without providing methods of how one would cultivate wisdom only that it MUST be done in that way.

I do not feel I was wrong in my responses. So....what do you want from me?

Edit: And do we need to take this too PM? Because you seem quite insistant to keeping off topic based on my actions rather than adding to the conversation....Id very much rather keep these personal assaults to a minimum or at least in private

I haven't read this whole thread. Apologies. I'd like to offer a suggestion:

http://jediliving.com/jedicircle.html
http://californiajedi.org/real-life-training/knighthood-standards/

^ Standard examples

This is our doctrine:
https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/doctrine-of-the-order

How can we take that and make what was mentioned above?

Rosalyn J wrote: I haven't read this whole thread. Apologies. I'd like to offer a suggestion:

http://jediliving.com/jedicircle.html
http://californiajedi.org/real-life-training/knighthood-standards/

^ Standard examples

This is our doctrine:
https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/doctrine-of-the-order

How can we take that and make what was mentioned above?

Hey Ros!!! I'll try and work up some ideas later! Work just called...they want me in at 4am >_< soooooo im going to TRY and get some sleep while the kids are out of the house with Mindas >_<

Keep up with the great ideas guys!

Now I have read it and this is what I was able to glean:



Let me know if I missed anything and keep the ideas flowing.

Because I lead clergy, I'll send Aqua's ideas up to synod and have something worked out that can be submitted to the IP. Aqua if you want to help work on those let me know

Isn't the standard of our Knights how capable of being wise they are?

Alexandre Orion wrote: Isn't the standard of our Knights how capable of being wise they are?

Could you please elaborate? I'm not sure I get what you mean

Rosalyn J wrote:

Alexandre Orion wrote: Isn't the standard of our Knights how capable of being wise they are?

Could you please elaborate? I'm not sure I get what you mean

Maybe I'm making the quote up, but I remember someone around here saying knights aren't made so much as revealed. Wisdom is as wisdom does, so while I might not know all the secret handshakes, you guys judge people to be ready or not and I'm sure maturity and wisdom is a huge part of it.
The IP seems like a nice "toolbox" of knowledge to start with, but isn't the apprenticeship all about developing and exercising virtue? (S/o to Locksley for casually tossing in my favourite idea: Arete) If I become a knight, I don't want it on a technicality for checking all the boxes off. Challenge me at least to not just "pass" but to achieve excellence.