Discussion about discussion

More
08 May 2019 15:02 #338215 by Williamkaede
Dark Jedi were defined in the Bane trilogy as Jedi who'd left the Order and started acting in their own interest. They aren't Sith, as that's an Order on its own. Dark Jedi are quite often tools of the Sith.

Passion, authenticity, power, victory.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
08 May 2019 15:09 #338216 by Kyrin Wyldstar

Williamkaede wrote: Dark Jedi were defined in the Bane trilogy as Jedi who'd left the Order and started acting in their own interest. They aren't Sith, as that's an Order on its own. Dark Jedi are quite often tools of the Sith.


Yes, according to a fictional universe.

This guns for hire, even if we're just dancing in the dark.
My Journals: Kyrin-Wyldstar

Associate Degree of Divinity - Earned July, 2017
Apprenticed to: Alan, Senan, Mendalicious
Tribute to Senan: My Friend

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
09 May 2019 14:35 #338262 by Williamkaede
A fictional universe that's inspired the basis of a philosophy and a religion that is affecting lives worldwide.

The point remains - the Sith are an ideology and Order onto themselves, and not merely just what you call a Jedi who isn't part of an Order. In the wider community those Jedi are simply called Independent Jedi.

However, Dark Jedi is a framework in the development at the Force Academy's Dark Aspect, as the Sith members are now more active in their own spaces such as Order of the Sith.

Passion, authenticity, power, victory.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
09 May 2019 14:44 - 09 May 2019 14:45 #338264 by ZealotX
Replied by ZealotX on topic Discussion about discussion

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: @Zealot, Who is using the term Dark Jedi? I for one find the term oxymoronic. I would agree with you whole heartedly that Dark Jedi is not a thing, the term in that case would be Sith, I agree. Actually Jedi does not refer to an order, it refers to a philosophy. TotJO refers to an order. There are many orders with differing Jedi all possessing individual philosophies. (Of course this is beyond the fiction and in real life. I don’t live my life according to a fictional Sci Fi movie and so I see no need to quote fictional “Jedi Cannon” as a basis to justify my position.)

I have never said anyone should accept my views of what it means to be a Jedi. And in fact the difference is that I invite anyone to challenge them, debate them, and tear them apart! So thank you for this reply, I encourage such things when it comes to my belief systems and I believe it is a service to do such things so I appreciate you caring enough to take the time. One of the differences I do see in my personal views vs this other believer you refer to is that mine are a worldview based on subjective opinion and as such not subject to empirical evidence as the other one that is contradictory to actual provable history. There is a big difference there. So in my case I do not need peer reviewed evidence because I’m not claiming anything contrary to accepted evidence.

As for coming to “your” site, I fail to see why you would disqualify me in that way? My views conform to the doctrine here just as much as anyone’s. I have written about this in my IP journals while I was studying here. I believe it is in the interpretation that you are finding issue with my views. I interpret the doctrine in a different way than you may. Does that make mine wrong and yours right? If so I would like to know how? There are no “alternate definitions” being used here, possibly only differing interpretations. You say I want to remove falsehood in others. Well once again you take a limited view of my thoughts. Instead think in broader terms. I want to remove falsehood in ALL, including me. I challenge you to take up that sword with me just as I have done with others. That is why I am here!

So I am a Jedi, albeit one not to your liking. But what makes my philosophy wrong vs just not to your taste?


Actually, Jedi, to you, doesn't refer to an order. Originally it absolutely was (and is) an Order. So it makes no sense, to me, to dispute the original definition of the word. And what are we disputing it with? You do realize, do you not, that at some point, someone initiated the idea that Jedi was going to be a philosophy that "THEY" so named. You must also realize that this "messiah figure" was then followed by a group of people who accepted this idea which then, for them, established it. You have, by your own witness, joined into that establishment which was absolutely and undoubtedly inspired by a fictional universe because that's where the name Jedi was taken. Am I accurate so far?

www.jediliving.com/365jedi/tag/jedi-philosophy/

You stated

There are many orders with differing Jedi all possessing individual philosophies.


And? Does this legitimize a single one of them? Were there not more than 30,000 denominations of Christianity?

Jesus used a fictional story (whether he believed it or not) to inspire a new generation of followers based on the idea of love and how one should express it (of course there were other teachings as well). And his disciples were followed by others who were followed by others and many of them began to possess individual philosophies. So I'm trying to ascertain what makes you so different from the people who you are (also - as I accept your supposition of self inclusion) trying to remove falsehood from. Surely, the very term "Jedi" is a falsehood because it has fictional origins. It has only become REAL to you because you agree with some part of the philosophy but you, at the same time, admit that differing philosophies exist under the same banner so how is this different from a Christian disavowing other Christians with more militant views, Muslims disavowing other Muslims, etc.? Everyone has a fictional story that they are inspired by and that helps them believe. And surely you believe enough to say that I am wrong.

Actually Jedi does not refer to an order, it refers to a philosophy.


No, that's how you choose to refer to it. So what is it that makes it legitimate? How does one go about legitimizing their own system of beliefs? Does it merely have to catch on or "go viral"?

I used the term "dark Jedi" because you alluded to me not accepting a "wider range" of what Jedi means (in your opinion) after I said I didn't understand those who didn't care or protect others.

ren wrote: Care and protection are aspects of the light path only... And highly subjective.

Adder: Because if the dark Jedi path etc criticize the light Jedi path then I guess the criticism can go both ways and we end up where it all goes around in circles. Since its not why light folk are here, they leave. So I'm not sure going into a discussion about the natures of different Jedi paths is really relevant.... but rather why I've been saying it fundamentally depends on what the site is trying to achieve. If its conflict among differing Jedi paths because there are Jedi paths which create conflict, then it will be either conflict or empty of other Jedi paths.


Hence... "dark Jedi". And yes, certain things you say remind me of Bane, but that's not me trying to insult you. But if you don't want me to think of you or your path as "dark" or "dark Jedi" then feel free to say exactly what you believe yourself to be. Bane was a complex character with seemingly very reasonable motives for seeking to obtain power. It is where the light and dark paths split where I disagree with him and why he became a threat to the Jedi. And yes... that is the fictional universe but the the fictional universe which created the sole singular definition of the word Jedi before anyone else came along (people who I don't know or recognize) and proposed to change that. Who are these people and why should I accept their proposal? And fictional or not, it wasn't the fictional aspects of Bane that made him a threat. It was his real choices and motivations; things which also exist in our non-fictional world. Therefore, real people who go down the same path, are not simply fictional opponents but possibly real ones. Note: I said possibly. Same potential for possibilities that existed when the fictional Jedi Council allowed Anakin's membership. He was a threat even then but they simply didn't realize it and were arrogant enough to have dropped their guard.

Of course this is beyond the fiction and in real life. I don’t live my life according to a fictional Sci Fi movie and so I see no need to quote fictional “Jedi Cannon” as a basis to justify my position.


Again... I could say the same thing about the other poster who created further connections in his real life depiction of world history. But because he thought it up this was a "falsehood" to you that you had to seek to remove. But someone else thought up your "real life" understanding which you use to serve as a basis of justifying your position. This shows me that you're willing to embrace THAT person's view and even build on it. But why are others different? Why wasn't the original person that came up with your Jedi philosophy not the author of a "falsehood" that simply went viral? And if, not saying it is or isn't, that original "real life" Jedi philosophy is built from a synthesis of other religions or philosophies then does this mean you agree with all of those religions? Or do you allow the author to cherry pick? And if cherry picking is okay then it must be okay when Christians do it, and Muslims do it, and it must be okay when a Jedi does it from historical events.

As for coming to “your” site, I fail to see why you would disqualify me in that way? My views conform to the doctrine here just as much as anyone’s. I have written about this in my IP journals while I was studying here. I believe it is in the interpretation that you are finding issue with my views. I interpret the doctrine in a different way than you may. Does that make mine wrong and yours right?


10. Jedi serve in many ways. Each action performed, no matter the scale, influences the world. With this in mind Jedi perform each action with peace, caring, love, compassion and humility. So it is that each Jedi improves the world with each deed they perform.

ren wrote: Care and protection are aspects of the light path only... And highly subjective.


11. Jedi are mindful of their thoughts. We recognize the beauty in others and we provide help to those who come seeking it. Through our benevolent actions we strengthen not only ourselves but also our communities. Jedi act without prejudice.
(the doctrines page has typos on it. Carlos? Maybe someone can take care of that)

12. Jedi believe that love and compassion are central to their lives. We must love and care for each other as we must love and care for ourselves; by doing this we envelop all life in the positivity of our actions and thoughts. We are providers and beacons of hope.

13. Jedi cultivate empathy. We try to view things from another’s perspective making us sensitive listeners. We provide the confidence people need when talking through their difficulties and we share our learning with those who would benefit. We do this to help create a more harmonious society.

14. Jedi are guardians of peace. We believe in helping all those that are in need, in whatever form, to the best of our ability. We recognize that sometimes providing help requires courage in the face of adversity but understand that conflict is resolved through peace, understanding and harmony.

16. Jedi make a commitment to their cause and to humanity. Our ideals, philosophies, and practices define the belief of Jediism and we take action on this path for self-improvement and to help others. We are both the witnesses and protectors of the Jedi way by the practice of our convictions.

Of course why would I think you disagree with any of the above? Perhaps because

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

ZealotX wrote: For anyone who wants to be a Jedi but doesn't care about others and doesn't seek to protect others... I just don't understand that person. Perhaps it is the age we live in as they say chivalry is dead. Not to me.


I found this comment quite fascinating. I would venture to say that you have an incredibly limited view of what it means to be a jedi. This is not to say your definition is bad but that you are dismissing the wider range of meaning and thus discounting others definition of what it means. You seem to want to protect others from themselves in this conversation. I and others seek to protect them from falsehood in their lives. I see the second position to be much more productive in the end. It is the catalyst for growth.


this response to "caring about others" which multiple teachings of our doctrine is dedicated to, shows disagreement with the very idea as being a "limited view" of what it means to be a Jedi. So it is not a tremendous leap for me to go from "Jedi that doesn't care or protect" to what Ren said, to what Adder said, to me then talking about dark Jedi. If you do care and do desire to protect but it, for you, manifests in a different way that might give rise to conflict, provocation, possibly (per interpretation) attack then I fail to see how this is far removed from Sith philosophy because I agree with the Sith not wanting to be chained but where we disagree is the HOW. The how is the path and the path can be light, dark, or somewhere in between. But again... I was reacting to your reaction to me talking about "caring about others". If you actually do care then why not care when it comes to an OP's desire to close the thread they started? And maybe, just maybe, they felt it got out of hand for a reason other than being overwhelmed by so much "caring".

What's not to my taste isn't really you. I probably play devil's advocate more than anyone you know. What's distasteful to me is the end result and if I can see the pathway to getting to a negative end result then I feel like others should be wise enough to see that pathway too and seek to avoid it. If not, then, to me, that IS the dark side. Personally, I like you and you have to understand that my words are not specifically aimed at you or anyone specifically. But I understand, from many "online battles", how easy it is to take something personal or see someone else as making specific reference to you or something you said or did. This is why I urge caution, even on the "open discussion" forum.
Last edit: 09 May 2019 14:45 by ZealotX.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
09 May 2019 14:50 #338265 by Kyrin Wyldstar

Williamkaede wrote: A fictional universe that's inspired the basis of a philosophy and a religion that is affecting lives worldwide.

The point remains - the Sith are an ideology and Order onto themselves, and not merely just what you call a Jedi who isn't part of an Order. In the wider community those Jedi are simply called Independent Jedi.

However, Dark Jedi is a framework in the development at the Force Academy's Dark Aspect, as the Sith members are now more active in their own spaces such as Order of the Sith.



I think you have misinterpreted the flow of this conversation. If the fictional universe inspired the basis for a philosophy then why not talk about where the philosophy is now instead of trying to superimpose the fiction onto reality? Have I ever said anywhere that Sith are just Ronin Jedi?? I dont believe this nor have I ever said this. As for dark Jedi, good for the force academy, but once again, not something we are discussing here. People can call themselves whatever silly thing they want. What gives it meaning is the worldview behind it. If you want to call yourself a Dark Jedi and then run around with light sabers and quote fictional movie cannon then I find your approach to reality as unstable at best and thus not worth my time.

This guns for hire, even if we're just dancing in the dark.
My Journals: Kyrin-Wyldstar

Associate Degree of Divinity - Earned July, 2017
Apprenticed to: Alan, Senan, Mendalicious
Tribute to Senan: My Friend

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
09 May 2019 18:51 #338276 by ZealotX
Replied by ZealotX on topic Discussion about discussion

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Williamkaede wrote: A fictional universe that's inspired the basis of a philosophy and a religion that is affecting lives worldwide.

The point remains - the Sith are an ideology and Order onto themselves, and not merely just what you call a Jedi who isn't part of an Order. In the wider community those Jedi are simply called Independent Jedi.

However, Dark Jedi is a framework in the development at the Force Academy's Dark Aspect, as the Sith members are now more active in their own spaces such as Order of the Sith.



I think you have misinterpreted the flow of this conversation. If the fictional universe inspired the basis for a philosophy then why not talk about where the philosophy is now instead of trying to superimpose the fiction onto reality? Have I ever said anywhere that Sith are just Ronin Jedi?? I dont believe this nor have I ever said this. As for dark Jedi, good for the force academy, but once again, not something we are discussing here. People can call themselves whatever silly thing they want. What gives it meaning is the worldview behind it. If you want to call yourself a Dark Jedi and then run around with light sabers and quote fictional movie cannon then I find your approach to reality as unstable at best and thus not worth my time.


wait... so are you suggesting that the fictional parts that inspire a Jedi's world view are not completely relevant? Or are you saying that the use of fiction as a prop in order to help produce a reality of philosophical ideas is okay?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 May 2019 17:05 - 10 May 2019 17:07 #338315 by Kyrin Wyldstar

ZealotX wrote: Actually, Jedi, to you, doesn't refer to an order. Originally it absolutely was (and is) an Order. So it makes no sense, to me, to dispute the original definition of the word. And what are we disputing it with? You do realize, do you not, that at some point, someone initiated the idea that Jedi was going to be a philosophy that "THEY" so named. You must also realize that this "messiah figure" was then followed by a group of people who accepted this idea which then, for them, established it. You have, by your own witness, joined into that establishment which was absolutely and undoubtedly inspired by a fictional universe because that's where the name Jedi was taken. Am I accurate so far?


Well you are sort of accurate, lol. Actually the term Jedi was taken from a Japanese word, Jidaigeki, meaning Samurai period drama. In its original form it was a made up word to depict a fictional member of an imaginary monastic order of Knights with supernatural abilities. In this original form “A Jedi” (singular) was an individual, but “The Jedi” (plural) could refer to an order – a singular body in this fictional universe. So in this fictional form it could mean both. However translating that to real life those terms do not hold up because there is no such thing as a singular “Jedi Order” with a singular set of principles and the members of these “orders” do not have supernatural abilities. So it comes down to the fact that the term has been many things to many people and no version of it is less valid than another. However, for the sake of progress, I shall concede the point that Jedi is an order.



ZealotX wrote: So I'm trying to ascertain what makes you so different from the people who you are (also - as I accept your supposition of self inclusion) trying to remove falsehood from.


I am not the one trying to segregate me, you are! You are the one that is saying I’m an outsider here by coming to “your” order, you are the one trying to characterize me as “dark Jedi”. You are also the one who claims that I am not Jedi because my focus is not service. But I am actually not different from anyone else here. You even admit to my claim of self-inclusion. I’m on a search just like anyone. In this context I must ask you, why do YOU find me so different?

I don’t pretend to be something I am not and so yes I would agree that outside the context of this place the term Jedi is a falsehood. At this point it becomes a matter of interpretation of the underlying philosophy instead of the letter of that philosophy the term Jedi implies that becomes critical. This is a place of syncretism, something frowned upon in the fictional universe. So once again we see the real diverging from its fictional counterpart. This is not a place of people that all believe the same thing and are united under one banner. It is a place of individuals all on different paths but in search of similar things.

As for legitimizing that search, well that’s up to each of us as individuals. And so that choice to remain and be subject to critical analysis of ourselves through our peers or not becomes the key. Those that leave because of some perceived slight or sense of victimhood or outrage at a “policy” are also not strong enough to face their own fears and biases. That’s ok, not many of us are capable of acknowledging and working with our own darkness. Like the cave that Luke entered, those things we find repulsive in our lives are only reflections of weakness in ourselves. In this I can only hope they come to a stronger place in their lives in the future. This is the journey!





ZealotX wrote: I used the term "dark Jedi" because you alluded to me not accepting a "wider range" of what Jedi means (in your opinion) after I said I didn't understand those who didn't care or protect others.

Hence... "dark Jedi". And yes, certain things you say remind me of Bane, but that's not me trying to insult you. But if you don't want me to think of you or your path as "dark" or "dark Jedi" then feel free to say exactly what you believe yourself to be



First off, what Ren or Adder wrote are not my thoughts and so you can’t just attribute that to me. I also know very little about Bane so I can’t comment there, nor am I, or would I be, insulted by that, so no worries there. But once again I’m seeing this need to try and quantify real life through a fictional paradigm. I would like to ask you a very real question.

Do you believe that real life Sith, that is people in real life that practice Sith philosophy, just as you practice Jedi philosophy, are evil and need to be destroyed? Are they a threat to you or your way of life?

Or are you just characterizing anyone that you may be opposed to or come against in some context under the umbrella term Sith? As a Jedi in this context does their opposition to you automatically make them evil or under the influence of the dark side of the Force? Do you actually think that the world is so black and white in dichotomies of absolute good and evil? Were the Nazi foot soldiers in WWII evil and the US forces on the side of Good or were they all just men and women fighting for a country they believed in? Were we the “good guys” or the “bad guys” when we invaded Iraq?

I have never said I don’t care for or protect others. I believe the most I have said is that it is not a focus of mine. You should also understand the real life Sith path, (one I have studied a bit) is one of the most compassionate paths I have ever encountered. Is that surprising to you? I hope that in light of some of these comments you are coming to realize that quoting fictional aspects of a dichotomy of absolute good and evil in a sci fi movie has no relevance whatsoever on real life or who we are as humans beings.




ZealotX wrote: Again... I could say the same thing about the other poster who created further connections in his real life depiction of world history. But because he thought it up this was a "falsehood" to you that you had to seek to remove. But someone else thought up your "real life" understanding which you use to serve as a basis of justifying your position. This shows me that you're willing to embrace THAT person's view and even build on it. But why are others different?


I don’t build my worldview off the work of others. I build it off of my own experience in consideration of the work of others. This means when I encounter such works I immediately consider not only its strong points but its flaws in a critical manner. Upon this evaluation I may or may not take from it specific components and incorporate them into my worldview. Of course leaving them always subject to critical critique. That is the difference.

I reject every form of religion equally, including Jediism. The difference is that I do the work, I don’t assume and I don’t believe and I don’t take for granted anything and then use that as a basis to create something that is comfortable just because that’s the way I want it to work. I follow critical thinking methods and seek truth no matter how painful in might be. I don’t cherry pick a fantasy world by inventing a new historical record or believing some ancient book is the literal word of a God and then pretending that’s the way things are just because it’s more fun that way or a way to remove myself from reality or feel special in some way. Are we not all here in a search for truth? If we are not I have no idea why this place exists. And if it does exist for that reason, why should I or anyone else ever entertain an obviously and easily debunked fantasy just to indulge someone’s delusion? That is not compassion, that is enabling.



ZealotX wrote: Several quotes from doctrine (see above)

Of course why would I think you disagree with any of the above? Perhaps because

this response to "caring about others" which multiple teachings of our doctrine is dedicated to, shows disagreement with the very idea as being a "limited view" of what it means to be a Jedi. So it is not a tremendous leap for me to go from "Jedi that doesn't care or protect" to what Ren said, to what Adder said, to me then talking about dark Jedi. If you do care and do desire to protect but it, for you, manifests in a different way that might give rise to conflict, provocation, possibly (per interpretation) attack then I fail to see how this is far removed from Sith philosophy because I agree with the Sith not wanting to be chained but where we disagree is the HOW. The how is the path and the path can be light, dark, or somewhere in between. But again... I was reacting to your reaction to me talking about "caring about others". If you actually do care then why not care when it comes to an OP's desire to close the thread they started? And maybe, just maybe, they felt it got out of hand for a reason other than being overwhelmed by so much "caring".

What's not to my taste isn't really you. I probably play devil's advocate more than anyone you know. What's distasteful to me is the end result and if I can see the pathway to getting to a negative end result then I feel like others should be wise enough to see that pathway too and seek to avoid it. If not, then, to me, that IS the dark side. Personally, I like you and you have to understand that my words are not specifically aimed at you or anyone specifically. But I understand, from many "online battles", how easy it is to take something personal or see someone else as making specific reference to you or something you said or did. This is why I urge caution, even on the "open discussion" forum.



As a Jedi and in consideration of the doctrine you have posted, I believe:
• Jedi do serve in many ways but just because you can’t understand my ways do not make them invalid.
• Peace is a relative term, if you envelop yourself in the chaos of self-deception you are only fooling yourself into a false peace
• To truly care for someone you must be willing to be honest with them and say things that hurt them instead of placating their delusions to spare their feelings
• These ideas are why these concepts are “so subjective” as Ren says.
• Help does not come in enabling another in delusion, it comes in helping them face themselves and the world honestly. This is true empathy.
• The most benevolent thing you can do for another is help them to face and experience their pain so they can deal with it. This builds strength
• No act of creation does not come without an act of destruction. We must tear down who we are to become something we are not yet. This is not prejudice, it is a pure act of love.
• There is beauty in everything, even absolute evil, as it is pure, something we will never be.
• The greatest acts of compassion can also seem to be the cruelest of acts. Pulling the plug on your dying grandmother to end her suffering may seem cruel to some but it is actually the height of compassion. To keep her alive a few more weeks so you can be with her, even though she is in incredible pain, is a selfish act.
• It is not enough to provide confidence to others. It is better to teach them confidence in themselves. Challenge is an effective way to do this.
• Harmony is a misnomer. This was a weakness of the fictional Jedi and is what caused their downfall. (to actually use a bit of the fiction you are so fond of lol) Peace is not a static position and neither is balance, It is a cycle of both conflict and cooperation, victory and defeat. This is different than failure however. Failure only comes in declining to act.
• And finally, I can’t help everyone, I can only help those that are willing to do the work. The rest must be sacrificed to their own ends. I have no time for self-perpetuating victims. This is a component of self-care that we all must acknowledge. It allows for the most effective effort towards those we can help. We must be willing to allow the weak to fall away for the betterment of the rest. This is only natural.


This is how I interpret the components of the doctrine you posted here. I know you will probably take exception to many of them but this is my philosophy of Jedi and it is my worldview based on my experience and examination of reality as it stands right now.

The reason I opposed the closing of the thread can be found in this philosophy. It is a victim’s way out. If you don’t like what is being said then don’t read it and if you can’t accept some of the comments then don’t reply, but let others discuss it. Instead the demand it be closed is a self-attention grab in a claim of persecution that is just not valid. It only serves the ego and that’s why I opposed it.

Let me just finish by saying I have no problems with you playing devils advocate. I welcome the opportunity in fact. I hope this discourse can bring us to a better understanding of not only ourselves but of each other as it takes our search to a deeper level for each of us.

This guns for hire, even if we're just dancing in the dark.
My Journals: Kyrin-Wyldstar

Associate Degree of Divinity - Earned July, 2017
Apprenticed to: Alan, Senan, Mendalicious
Tribute to Senan: My Friend
Last edit: 10 May 2019 17:07 by Kyrin Wyldstar.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 May 2019 18:04 #338317 by Kyrin Wyldstar

ZealotX wrote:
wait... so are you suggesting that the fictional parts that inspire a Jedi's world view are not completely relevant? Or are you saying that the use of fiction as a prop in order to help produce a reality of philosophical ideas is okay?



I believe that mythology was created by ancients as a means to explain not only the physical world but also the human condition. And as such it can be used as a means to characterize those things. However I also think that the Jedi religion got this backwards. The mythology was created first and them mapped to reality instead of the other way around. So I think if Jediism is to evolve it is going to have to move further and further from the mythology until the mythology is completely irrelevant.

Movie Sith and Jedi have no correlation to real life and thus have no explanatory power concerning reality. The only thing that does have the power is the underlying preexisting mythologies that already existed and were used to create these larger than life caricatures. The problem currently lies in the fact that many Jedi focus on the surreal of this backwards paradigm and not the real in an effort to escape what they perceive as a less than fulfilling existence. As a result a veneer of fantasy is laid over their real lives, (such as false historical records), and this allows them to avoid the pain of actual reality that they should otherwise be dealing with.

This guns for hire, even if we're just dancing in the dark.
My Journals: Kyrin-Wyldstar

Associate Degree of Divinity - Earned July, 2017
Apprenticed to: Alan, Senan, Mendalicious
Tribute to Senan: My Friend

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 May 2019 18:37 #338321 by Carlos.Martinez3
I believe that mythology was created by ancients as a means to explain not only the physical world but also the human condition. And as such it can be used as a means to characterize those things. However I also think that the Jedi religion got this backwards. The mythology was created first and them mapped to reality instead of the other way around. So I think if Jediism is to evolve it is going to have to move further and further from the mythology until the mythology is completely irrelevant.

Joseph Campbell said the very same flow when he says the myths are important then is asked do you believe in religion - his answer is - no - I have experience. Upset the wife soo much we still to this day talk about that meaning.
The way I’m reading it this is a level. We are all at different levels, in a lot of things in life- religion especially and philosophy. During our discussions, wouldn’t it be wise to make room for different levels? To factor that in or just bash others for being in aware or unseasoned as we hope they are?! I meant truthfully , you ain’t gotta do anything you don’t want to... but for the OP - isn’t the structure of our discussions just as important as our subject ?

Contact The Clergy
Pastor of Temple of the Jedi Order
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The Block
Build, not tear down.
Nosce te ipsum / Cerca trova

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 May 2019 19:18 #338325 by Kyrin Wyldstar

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: The way I’m reading it this is a level. We are all at different levels, in a lot of things in life- religion especially and philosophy. During our discussions, wouldn’t it be wise to make room for different levels? To factor that in or just bash others for being in aware or unseasoned as we hope they are?! I meant truthfully , you ain’t gotta do anything you don’t want to... but for the OP - isn’t the structure of our discussions just as important as our subject ?


A very good point here. Yes I do believe its important to make room for different, I would not say levels, but maybe understandings? Many interpretations can be different yet equally as relevant to a discussion, especially when it comes to religion or philosophy. I'm reminded of a recent series of talks between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris. Some of the most intelligent, enlightening and delightful talks I have ever had the pleasure of watching. One took the side of the need for mythology (religion) in our lives and the other took the opposite side. It was an amazing discourse that really taught me new ways to look at such things. Of course they were live and face to face. So I wonder what suggestions you have in a medium such as this to approach similar sorts of discussions that may help them be more productive and avoid the trap of offending without intent?

This guns for hire, even if we're just dancing in the dark.
My Journals: Kyrin-Wyldstar

Associate Degree of Divinity - Earned July, 2017
Apprenticed to: Alan, Senan, Mendalicious
Tribute to Senan: My Friend
The following user(s) said Thank You: Carlos.Martinez3

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: KobosBrick