What is the Force

@omhu,

Yes I agree about what you are saying. Our personal understandings should not be a point of contention but they will still evolve into that because of various reasons. That was not the focus of my question though. My focus was WHY it is so subjective to each of us? In order for a thing to exist it must have attributes. And at least some of those attributes can be agreed upon objectively. For example we can all agree that fire is hot and that it burns paper. So why can we not do this when it comes to The Force? If it is actually an object that can be observed and studied then it must possess some common attribute that all can agree upon. I don't buy this assertion that its just so big it cant be conceived of in this way. That has never been demonstrated to be true and so I do not accept it.

So given these ideas what I'm looking for is either that common attribute we can all agree upon is associated with The Force or if we cant do this, that possibly that we could actually agree that The Force is not an object to be observed by an observer at all because it does not actually exist. Instead it is the act of subject (each of us as conscious beings) actually observing ourselves (subject) in the act of experience. That The Force is simply the construct of experience we all create for ourselves subjectively but has no counterpart in objective reality.

The common attribute should at least be that the Force is a ubiquitous metaphysical power which is the underlying/fundamental nature of the universe.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: So my question is how do we get past this and find that thing that connects us instead of separates us?

Sounds like that is the drive for sameness, rather then the acceptance of difference that is causing those conflicts you mention.... and a human behavioural problem. The concept of the Force could be said to be a deeper unification of spiritual or psychological essence beyond culture and more in line with biology IMO. Morals being associated to the balance of individual (body, mind), community (spirit, purpose, identity) and environment in terms of 'health' etc.

ren wrote: The common attribute should at least be that the Force is a ubiquitous metaphysical power which is the underlying/fundamental nature of the universe.

This is interesting but ultimately not specific enough. I would hesitate to call The Force Ubiquitous. I'm just not convinced it could be classified as omnipresent. Also Metaphysical proposes a problem as it defines itself in various aspects including existence as well as abstract idea. And the idea of power is vague. How is power defined in this instance? Finally if it is abstract in nature, how is it an underlying aspect of the universe?

This is what I am curious about. Why do you put so much emphasis on personal understanding that is irrelevant to global understanding? Is it not these very sorts of personal understandings that cause conflict, destruction, wars? We have seen this countless times in the past. The Christians have a different personal understanding than the Muslims and war is the result.

Kyrin,

I see it from a different view...Muslim is a group of people, Christians are a group of people, TOTJO is a group of people. A group of people cannot have a personal understanding.They share an understanding, but in the end, some will not agree with the whole and conflict starts. Conflict continues when one group wants to inflict their beliefs of other groups.So not only within a group there is conflict, it continues by promoting conflict with other groups. We have seen this throughout history with the most noted conflict being the Crusades. Even within the Christian ranks, there was conflict between the different factions.

As long as I have my beliefs and I respect your right to your beliefs, where does conflict start? Global understanding? That is an unobtainable notion in my experience. The world cannot even agree to the sanctity of life, but I wish it were so.

Phortis Nespin wrote: As long as I have my beliefs and I respect your right to your beliefs, where does conflict start? Global understanding? That is an unobtainable notion in my experience. The world cannot even agree to the sanctity of life, but I wish it were so.

How does one draw the line? Muslim nations are infamous for marrying off girls (as in prepubescent children) to much older men, and if I must be tolerant, I have to accept that is OK because it is their culture and I have to respect that. As belief invariably spills over in to all aspects of life (politics, ethics, etc.) wouldn’t it at least be easier if we leveled the field by applying standard, predictable rules (i.e. science) for analyzing and discussing these big questions that impact our lives? I of course understand that our particular experience of reality is always going to be unique, but if we are able to at least talk to each other in the same language, with the same rules, would be not be able to better get along and move forward to greater understanding?

"I really don't understand what this 'water' is you keep trying to describe. I don't see it and nothing you tell me is convincing me it even exists!" said one fish to the other.

Proteus wrote: "I really don't understand what this 'water' is you keep trying to describe. I don't see it and nothing you tell me is convincing me it even exists!" said one fish to the other.

Lol that's an absolutely horrible analogy. It's like saying you dont believe air exists. Easy to disprove.

Phortis Nespin wrote:
Kyrin,

I see it from a different view...Muslim is a group of people, Christians are a group of people, TOTJO is a group of people. A group of people cannot have a personal understanding.They share an understanding, but in the end, some will not agree with the whole and conflict starts. Conflict continues when one group wants to inflict their beliefs of other groups.So not only within a group there is conflict, it continues by promoting conflict with other groups. We have seen this throughout history with the most noted conflict being the Crusades. Even within the Christian ranks, there was conflict between the different factions.

As long as I have my beliefs and I respect your right to your beliefs, where does conflict start? Global understanding? That is an unobtainable notion in my experience. The world cannot even agree to the sanctity of life, but I wish it were so.

I don't think I could have said it any better than manu. What happens when your beliefs violently conflict with anothers beliefs. As a Jedi is it not your very charter to improve the lives of others any way you can? So what happens when anothers belief to slaughter jedi in the name of his God conflicts with your belief that you have a right to exist?

That is the good thing about communication, it can be civil amid disagreement.