What is the Force MkII

Alas there is no longer a way to see who moderates what part of the forum, there is no one in particular one can go and plea before for the reopening of an active thread locked for no reason whatsoever sometime during the night. Because I find it preposterous that what seems to be little more than someone's caprice be the reason the entire Temple must discontinue a discussion that is interesting at least to some, I am hereby taking the liberty to open a new thread, separate from the old, but with which I shall not at all pretend that it is a genuinely different one. This thread is, make no mistake, intended solely as a place to continue the old one, and I am happy to bear all consequences of the "impudence" I am indubitably displaying in daring to do this. Had there been someone I could go to and talk about why the old thread is locked and what it would take to reopen it, some more convenient way to resolve this, I would have tried so. There isn't. So here we are.

---

---

---

Adder wrote: I like this

"we can conceive of no radical separation between forming and being formed, and between substance and space and time…the universe is conceived as a continuum [in which] spatio-temporal events disclose themselves as "stresses" or "tensions" within the constitutive matrix…the cosmic matrix evolves in patterned flows…some flows hit upon configurations of intrinsic stability and thus survive, despite changes in their evolving environment…these we call systems."
~ Ervin Laszlo

I'm glad you like it. What does it mean to you? I am unfortunately lacking all of the context where Dr. Laszlo surely explains how he uses those terms that are no doubt technical terms and not just empty gibberish. Shy of that context, I'm afraid I barely understand at all what he could possibly be meaning by it which for me happens to hinder my enjoyment of it gravely. Do you know more? I understand that it was posted to provoke thought on the subject. We know now how you feel about it - you like it. So what do you think about it, then?

// Original Thread at https://templeofthejediorder.org/forum/open-discussions/122238-what-is-the-force

So long as this thread can remain civil, should be no issue with it. (I may be wrong, but we will see)

If you have questions about the moderation, the security team (managed by JLSpinner) would be happy to help. (I personally find it easiest to contact him via discord, as he doesn't need to log in to see it).

annnnnd continue. ;p

Gisteron wrote: Alas there is no longer a way to see who moderates what part of the forum, there is no one in particular one can go and plea before for the reopening of an active thread locked for no reason whatsoever sometime during the night. Because I find it preposterous that what seems to be little more than someone's caprice be the reason the entire Temple must discontinue a discussion that is interesting at least to some, I am hereby taking the liberty to open a new thread, separate from the old, but with which I shall not at all pretend that it is a genuinely different one. This thread is, make no mistake, intended solely as a place to continue the old one, and am happy to bear all consequences of the impudence I am indubitably displaying in daring to do this. Had there been someone I could go to and talk about why the old thread is locked and what it would take to reopen it, some more convenient way to resolve this, I would have tried so. There isn't. So here we are.

---

---

---

Adder wrote: I like this

"we can conceive of no radical separation between forming and being formed, and between substance and space and time…the universe is conceived as a continuum [in which] spatio-temporal events disclose themselves as "stresses" or "tensions" within the constitutive matrix…the cosmic matrix evolves in patterned flows…some flows hit upon configurations of intrinsic stability and thus survive, despite changes in their evolving environment…these we call systems."
~ Ervin Laszlo

I'm glad you like it. What does it mean to you? I am unfortunately lacking all of the context where Dr. Laszlo surely explains how he uses those terms that are no doubt technical terms and not just empty gibberish. Shy of that context, I'm afraid I barely understand at all what he could possibly be meaning by it which for me happens to hinder my enjoyment of it gravely. Do you know more? I understand that it was posted to provoke thought on the subject. We know now how you feel about it - you like it. So what do you think about it, then?

Not sure why the urgent interest from you and Kyrin in my thoughts on it.... as I've been painting walls in 100f all day and was reading system philosophy in my downtime... found that quote of interest, so posted. Feels good to have my opinion so needed But now I must sleep!
As to the rest of your thoughts, threads get locked so people can cool down and stalling threads are not let to spiral out of control. Locks are historically only short term, and so new threads will likely be merged with originals at a later date.

Oh, this is not personal, not for me anyway. It's just that with the quote isolated I can do nothing. As I said and as you are quoting me saying, shy of an elaborative context explaining what any of it means, it sounds like gibberish to me. I can't think anything of it. Since you posted it, I figured you may know more about what is being said there. It's not so much about the inner workings of your mind in particular as it is about what can be made of the quote generally.

Gisteron wrote: Oh, this is not personal, not for me anyway. It's just that with the quote isolated I can do nothing. As I said and as you are quoting me saying, shy of an elaborative context explaining what any of it means, it sounds like gibberish to me. I can't think anything of it. Since you posted it, I figured you may know more about what is being said there. It's not so much about the inner workings of your mind in particular as it is about what can be made of the quote generally.

It's ok to have nothing to say. I guess options for being in that predicament is to explore the internet for more information (I did give the authors name for example), or even not posting. If I had more to say I might have said it then, or later. It's also quite common for people to post content and wait to hear others opinions on it before sharing their own - so not to lead view of it.

I'm a big fan of the 'three blind men and the elephant' parable when it comes to exploring the Force.

Williamkaede wrote: I'm a big fan of the 'three blind men and the elephant' parable when it comes to exploring the Force.

This one? I quite like it, and basically agree with your statement. Blind men touching only single parts of a whole we cannot see.

That's the one. I think it's a great way of exploring The Force, and Campbellian themes.

Adder wrote: Not sure why the urgent interest from you and Kyrin in my thoughts on it.... as I've been painting walls in 100f all day and was reading system philosophy in my downtime... found that quote of interest, so posted. Feels good to have my opinion so needed But now I must sleep!
As to the rest of your thoughts, threads get locked so people can cool down and stalling threads are not let to spiral out of control. Locks are historically only short term, and so new threads will likely be merged with originals at a later date.

It seems the only one that got heated over this subject was you in that high temp paint project. And you over reacted and stretched the faithful use of your admin panel. I was baffled as to the post as well. It does seem a meaningless thing to post especially without an explanation or even an opinion from the poster. That's all I was asking for, a little clarity or insight into why you posted it. You accused me of derail but absent a context to tie your post into the rest of the thread I would conclude your post is the original derail. If you posted it why don't you want to discuss it?

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Adder wrote: Not sure why the urgent interest from you and Kyrin in my thoughts on it.... as I've been painting walls in 100f all day and was reading system philosophy in my downtime... found that quote of interest, so posted. Feels good to have my opinion so needed But now I must sleep!
As to the rest of your thoughts, threads get locked so people can cool down and stalling threads are not let to spiral out of control. Locks are historically only short term, and so new threads will likely be merged with originals at a later date.

It seems the only one that got heated over this subject was you in that high temp paint project. And you over reacted and stretched the faithful use of your admin panel. I was baffled as to the post as well. It does seem a meaningless thing to post especially without an explanation or even an opinion from the poster. That's all I was asking for, a little clarity or insight into why you posted it. You accused me of derail but absent a context to tie your post into the rest of the thread I would conclude your post is the original derail. If you posted it why don't you want to discuss it?

Ideas, not people....

Neither points-scoring or personal attacks are particularly Jedi traits, nor are they conducive to a good debating environment.

Arisaig wrote:
Ideas, not people....

Thee "Ideer", is the quote in question...

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Arisaig wrote:
Ideas, not people....

Thee "Ideer", is the quote in question...

Kyrin Wyldstar also wrote: You accused me of derail but absent a context to tie your post into the rest of the thread I would conclude your post is the original derail. If you posted it why don't you want to discuss it?

Avoid the use of the word "you". trust me, it really helps cut down on people reading posts as such...

Arisaig wrote:

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Arisaig wrote:
Ideas, not people....

Thee "Ideer", is the quote in question...

Kyrin Wyldstar also wrote: You accused me of derail but absent a context to tie your post into the rest of the thread I would conclude your post is the original derail. If you posted it why don't you want to discuss it?

Avoid the use of the word "you". trust me, it really helps cut down on people reading posts as such...

Oh sorry, hows this?


The party in question accused me of derail but absent a context to tie that party in questions post into the rest of the thread I would conclude the party in questions post is the original derail. If the party in question posted it why doesn't the party in question want to discuss it?

I think anyone here can look at the previous thread and see it was beautifully derailed. Words were thrown, and honestly, im surprised more wasn't done besides locking it.

But the first time someone decides to say that someone's post is 'cute' and 'meaningless'... well, that's a derailment.

Back on topic.

Arisaig wrote: I think anyone here can look at the previous thread and see it was beautifully derailed. Words were thrown, and honestly, im surprised more wasn't done besides locking it.

But the first time someone decides to say that someone's post is 'cute' and 'meaningless'... well, that's a derailment.

Back on topic.

Oh fake news from the alt left! I said the post was cute because it was cute. I never said the post was meaningless. I said the quote was meaningless in the context of the thread. and I asked for clarification. Please try and refrain from quote mining me. thanks a bunch! Can we move on now and actually discuss the quote?

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Arisaig wrote: I think anyone here can look at the previous thread and see it was beautifully derailed. Words were thrown, and honestly, im surprised more wasn't done besides locking it.

But the first time someone decides to say that someone's post is 'cute' and 'meaningless'... well, that's a derailment.

Back on topic.

Oh fake news from the alt left! I said the post was cute because it was cute. I never said the post was meaningless. I said the quote was meaningless in the context of the thread. and I asked for clarification. Please try and refrain from quote mining me. thanks a bunch! Can we move on now and actually discuss the quote?

"Yea that's cute. But quoting others incoherant ramblings is really meaningless. What does that mean to you and when you describe it be prepared to defend it."

What about this says the quote is the meaningless part? You said "quoting others... is really meaningless".

It seems this comes from a concept called Systems philosophy. It is based upon the Aristotelian explanation for the world view point with its encompassing notion that any whole is actually more than the sum of its parts. It is a process to remove the world from the superstitious beliefs in Magic and religion to be replaced with rational explanations for the workings of the world. Under this system the study of phenomenon takes on dual meanings, separating the objective fact from the experience of the fact.

So what I see out of this is that say we are driving down a road and we see a speed limit sign. The objective fact is that on this roadway there is an objective fact that the speed limit is X miles per hour. But my experience of this fact will be different than my passenger’s experience of this fact. I may experience a sense of rebellion at this thought or I may experience a sense of urgency to arrive at our destination and speed up. My passenger may experience anxiety at this fact or a sense of compliance and look around to see if there is a police officer watching us and have a wish to slow down.

My passenger and I can discuss each of these experiences that we have and explain to the other rationally our reasons for the experience. We may come to a compromise in our belief on how to act toward the fact or we may experience a difference of opinion. So in this sort of context “The Force” would not be the objective fact of the speed limit. “The Force” would be our experience of this fact and our interactions with each other surrounding this fact.

Williamkaede wrote: That's the one. I think it's a great way of exploring The Force, and Campbellian themes.

Why is it a great way of exploring the Force? You can be the blind man sure, or you can be one who sees. Or further, with technology extend that "sight" as we do today to see thay which cannot be even by those with perfect vision.

I think its a great way to make an excuse, but not explore anything.

Williamkaede wrote: I'm a big fan of the 'three blind men and the elephant' parable when it comes to exploring the Force.

Six blind elephants were discussing what men were like. After arguing they decided to find one and determine what it was like by direct experience. The first blind elephant felt the man and declared, 'Men are flat.' After the other blind elephants felt the man, they agreed.

Moral:

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature in itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning.
-Werner Heisenberg