What is the force?

So like what is this place, or rather is the force really as in the movies like. Can you use it to influence or use telekinesis? Or what even is the force? I'm an atheist but I think there might be a sort of energy/force we don't know about yet and can't explain until later (like midiclorians in SW)

Some people say yes, I say I haven't seen it or any reason to believe it yet. For TotJO star wars is more of a shared experience and example of myth in our lives than a Bible. Check out the Doctrine or IP tabs to get a better idea of what we believe
Cheers

Welcome, Kazat0. I strongly recommend reading the FAQ.

That is a doozy of a question, there.

Prepare for many different answers.

The first answer: many people can manipulate/influence others, but The Force is not really involved, there. Anyone who tells you differently is, well, trying to manipulate you. The stance of the Temple, officially, is that while we draw inspiration from the Star Wars franchise, we do recognize it unambiguously as fiction. Telekinesis and other special mind powers are also not among what we purport to pursue or teach.

As to what the Force is? Well, again, the common stance is that it is something... Unknowable. One could engage in metaphor, like Obiwan when attempting to first explain it to Luke, but it' just that: a metaphor, not a solid, singular definition. I'm not aware of any believers in The Force who subscribe to the "midichlorians" school of thought.

For my own interpretation (interpretations really are the best you can expect), I view The Living Force, the connection between all living things, like magick. It does not work like it does in the movies, and more often than the new-age community will admit, attempts at it are going to have dubious success, at best. Then of course there is the Unifying Force, that something that surrounds and binds all of creation, from which all creation has sprung, and to which all life returns when they die. Just energy, in perpetual motion, back and forth. No soul to carry on in an afterlife, what individuality existed is gone once you've returned to the source. All that remains is in the memories of those we leave behind (so, you know, try not to be a dick).

so you believe in magick and but not force powers?

Well there's a difference between saying something biological lets you pick up an x-wing and believing in low magic. At the same time, a rose by any other name would be just as magical

I think he's actually saying they are one in the same. He was just saying they are less, spectacular i guess would be the right word. Correct me if I am wrong, but that's the way I read it.

Kelrax Lorcken wrote: .
...As to what the Force is? Well, again, the common stance is that it is something... Unknowable...

...For my own interpretation (interpretations really are the best you can expect), I view The Living Force, the connection between all living things, like magick. It does not work like it does in the movies...

So I find these statements contradictory and it seems you have done a disservice to the OPs question. You say the force is "unknowable" and yet in the next paragraph you go on to describe attributes of it. So if its unknowable how do you actually "know" anything about it? If its unknowable, then how do you know it does not work like it does in the movies?

He specified the GENERAL consensus is that it's unknowable. He then described HIS interpretation.

Deimos wrote: He specified the GENERAL consensus is that it's unknowable. He then described HIS interpretation.

Does it not follow that if something can be known about it then the general consensus (that it is unknowable) is wrong?

That depends on what you consider "known". I would attribute Kelrax's statements to more of a personal opinion rather something that is known as I define something as known if there is evidence for said claim.

Deimos wrote: That depends on what you consider "known". I would attribute Kelrax's statements to more of a personal opinion rather something that is known as I define something as known if there is evidence for said claim.

I think what you are referring to here is objective knowledge vs subjective knowledge. Objective knowledge can be verified while subjective knowledge (opinion as you say) generally cannot because it is a form of logical argumentation. But no matter what form the knowledge takes is still requires "knowing" and so the idea that the force is unknowable seems to not hold water. If its unknowable why study it? It begs the question as to how one knows its unknowable in the first place doesn't it?

Perhaps a more apt name would be obscure? Unknown rather than unknowable indicating that it can be understood but never fully? Just thinking out loud really.

VixensVengeance wrote: Objective knowledge can be verified while subjective knowledge (opinion as you say) generally cannot because it is a form of logical argumentation.

If I may nitpick, all of mathematics is exclusively logical argumentation with literally nothing else behind it whatsoever. It is arguably still one of the only things that can be verified, precisely because logical argumentation is all it takes. It is subjective in the sense that it takes subjects to compose it, but in that same sense everything else is also.


Anyway, to address (be it in an unsatisfactory manner) the OP, I'm curious about this part:

Kazat0 wrote: I think there might be a sort of energy/force we don't know about yet and can't explain until later (like midiclorians [sic] in SW)

Midichlorians in the fiction (assuming a canon that acknowledges the prequel films) have a profound impact on the bodies they reside in, and their environment anywhere from immediate surroundings and up to the entire galaxy. Simple blood tests that call for as little control as real world blood sugar tests can reveal not only their presence, but even their concentration.
It is not much of a concession to say that there may well be a number of forces we have taken no account of yet. If anything, it'd be more surprising to some of us if there were not. Do you believe there might be "a sort of energy/force we don't know about yet and can't explain until later" that has anything like that much influence on the world? If so, how could it have kept escaping our detection until now?

To keep the post from being overly critical of any notion of a Force, I think that if the term is to mean anything, we are better off not trying to use it to refer to some sort of magical power flowing through the universe. We know as much as we can know anything about nature that there is no such thing and we do nothing but look silly insisting that there is. Instead, I believe, we are better off focusing on the Force as a guiding principle perhaps, a metaphorical expression. If we must keep it at all, that is. Frankly, we raise more questions throwing the term around than we answer. It comes up and immediately requires clarification. Why we wouldn't instead just get on with saying what we mean and employ the fiction-derived term is a mystery of much similar caliber.

Thanks for the question K. Believe it or not we get this question a lot. As a modern day Jeddist - we have the right as humans to pick and choose what we call the Force. For some it God for some it’s the Force of their belief. The Force can be your choice in things in Real life. Some people come to be a Jeddist from all type of backgrounds - from different faiths. Some have a background in one and some in several. What is the Force? I can tell you to ME what is the Force I follow. I can tell you what I’ve learned and what I’ve experienced and that will only be the tip - of the iceberg. We believe in the inherit worth of all and some times that includes people’s religions and practices. Funny thing / a Jeddist is RARLEY in competition with anything. The ability to choose and to “sync” ourself is a gift each human can have. The Force isn’t one answer ... my answer ... or theirs ... that’s YOUR choice to make. I hope some time with a few different Jeddist here can show that there really isn’t a competition as far as definitions are concerned. If you ever need anything I’m always available to serve. May the Force be with you

If we were to describe the Force as a metaphor for the countless seen and unseen relationships and interactions between various natural phenomena, then we could postulate that it is indeed unknowable insofar as the whole of it cannot be grasped by any one person. There is so much we still ignore that “ineffable” is an apt term to describe it.

If we were to further describe the ways natural phenomena interact with each other as the “will of the Force”, then we could say that no phenomena outside of how the world already operates is possible.

Except we already know that we don’t know it all, that we cannot make any absolute conclusions. Whatever conclusions we draw come from “working knowledge”, and are useful insofar as they help describe and predict phenomena.

As human beings that are constantly engaged in drawing new connections between seemingly unrelated factors, we can grasp these connections in ways that are more useful to us (science, technology). That in itself is magical.

We can then conclude that things described as “magick” or “paranormal phenomena”, would be the result of people skilled at drawing and harnessing connections others are unable to, in a manner that renders them effective at impacting visible change in the world.

We cannot, however, conclude exactly what this phenomena can be, not what it cannot be, due to lack of evidence. However, as far as working knowledge goes, it is infinitely more within our skill set to use a magical box of wires and electrical impulses to send an email, than to attempt to make the contact directly through telepathy.

So don’t lose sleep over trying to develop unproven magical powers. There is a host of more known abilities that you can develop reliably, and that can aid in creating a huge impact in your life and for your world.

Gisteron wrote: If I may nitpick, all of mathematics is exclusively logical argumentation with literally nothing else behind it whatsoever. It is arguably still one of the only things that can be verified, precisely because logical argumentation is all it takes. It is subjective in the sense that it takes subjects to compose it, but in that same sense everything else is also.

Well yes but I would consider mathematics objective knowledge in this context. Something that is demonstrably and independently verifiable. However the experience of mathematics is a subjective one. For example I can take a 5 pound weight and put it on a scale and show it to be 5 pounds. Anyone can do this so its objective knowledge. However if a 5 year old child picks up the weight he may say its heavy. But if a weightlifter picks up that same weight he would say its light. The idea of heavy or light is subjective knowledge of the 5 pound weight in this case that can be logically argued from the individual perspective but the standardized measurement of mass by putting it on a scale is objective knowledge.


Beyond that I would agree that The Force can only be considered currently subjective knowledge that cant be verified objectively and thus must be relegated to the realm of speculation. Until objective evidence that can be independently verified of the existence of The force is found, it must be considered nothing more than metaphor. This is not to say that it cant exist out there somewhere as a real force that we have not yet discovered but until that happens we also cant just assert that it exhibits x y or z properties in any objective manner. We also cant assert that it is "unknowable", or even incapable of being fully understood.

VixensVengeance wrote:

Gisteron wrote: If I may nitpick, all of mathematics is exclusively logical argumentation with literally nothing else behind it whatsoever. It is arguably still one of the only things that can be verified, precisely because logical argumentation is all it takes. It is subjective in the sense that it takes subjects to compose it, but in that same sense everything else is also.

Well yes but I would consider mathematics objective knowledge in this context. Something that is demonstrably and independently verifiable. However the experience of mathematics is a subjective one. For example I can take a 5 pound weight and put it on a scale and show it to be 5 pounds. Anyone can do this so its objective knowledge. However if a 5 year old child picks up the weight he may say its heavy. But if a weightlifter picks up that same weight he would say its light. The idea of heavy or light is subjective knowledge of the 5 pound weight in this case that can be logically argued from the individual perspective but the standardized measurement of mass by putting it on a scale is objective knowledge.


Beyond that I would agree that The Force can only be considered currently subjective knowledge that cant be verified objectively and thus must be relegated to the realm of speculation. Until objective evidence that can be independently verified of the existence of The force is found, it must be considered nothing more than metaphor. This is not to say that it cant exist out there somewhere as a real force that we have not yet discovered but until that happens we also cant just assert that it exhibits x y or z properties in any objective manner. We also cant assert that it is "unknowable", or even incapable of being fully understood.

https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/Clergy/122816-does-faith-or-belief-need-evidence-to-exist

For my own part:
It’s the energy of the universe, in the way that science describes energy. It’s in everything, and is everything. It has no personal will, but has movement in line with the physics that dominate it (To clarify, I do not believe we fully understand those physics and may never fully understand them). I don’t believe the Force has it’s own “will” as described in the fiction. I believe the “will” is that of beings which we ascribe as being “Divine”. They are part of the Force (or perhaps on the outside of it? Depends on how you look at our universe ), but not the Force itself.

VixensVengeance wrote: I would consider mathematics objective knowledge in this context. Something that is demonstrably and independently verifiable. However the experience of mathematics is a subjective one. For example I can take a 5 pound weight and put it on a scale and show it to be 5 pounds.

The "pound" is not a mathematical construct, as far as I'm aware. Measuring the weight of a physical object is a scientific tool, not a mathematical one. Granted, one might say that the simple arithmetic it takes to compare a given weight with a reference weight (a.k.a. the "unit") to say that "this weight is five times as heavy as this arbitrary weight I have resolved to call the 'pound'" is provided for us by axiomatic fiat, but I would insist that making useful statements about the world around us is nevertheless the scientific enterprise, whereas mathematics is the study of logical consequences to systems of given or asserted inference rules and definitions. TL;DR: Just because there is a number in there somewhere doesn't make it maths...

That being said, your point - to which I agree, frankly - does not hinge upon it, I just took this for a permission to keep nitpicking some more :silly:

ahh thanks deimos makes sense so like the force could be considered low-level magick?