Erinis wrote:
But not to convince them. Basically view attack as a really primitive way of them trying to initiate and hold an interaction... so don't reply in kind as a reaction.
nobody spoke about attack nor view of it, could you be more specific.
Whatever context requires 'defence', in defending the faith.
But I'm not suggesting there isn't a context where that approach might fail, rather as a general approach to an unspecified reason for defence... in such a way as to perhaps best represent the doctrine.
Otherwise all actions really depend on the circumstances, eg if they cannot prove something is wrong in attack, then it's not really an attack against that thing... but anger at their own failure being misdirected in the form of attack on the idea of the thing - which is why I mentioned the tendency of a failing attack will tend to end up personal because if they keep it up they've nowhere to go but race to the bottom. I think a good course of action for a Jedi to is try to help clarify as much as practicable what is being talked about, but it all depends on the circumstances and making the problem worse is both not a good outcome, nor not always a good course of action.
