Jedi/Sith... light, dark?

@ Khaos

I love the pepsi/coke analogy, Khaos. I would like to point out, however, that, to continue your analogy, if one were to drink pepsi his or her entire life, without ever trying coke, it's true that that is not the end of the world. It is also true that that person would likely think that he/she is not "missing" anything. However, all those who prefer coke would likely think that the exclusive pepsi drinker is, in fact, missing something. Not that that particularly matters, but it will encourage the coke drinkers to try to tempt the pepsi drinker over to "their side"...not always, nothing is ever absolutely true, but you get what I'm saying (I hope). Also, I would hold that while exclusively drinking pepsi is a valid choice (I am a pepsi fan afterall), it is nothing if not naive if the choice is made "blind". If one does not partake of coke even once in his/her life, then "choosing" to drink exclusively pepsi isn't really a choice, is it. And even if you hold that it is, it, at the very least, isn't an informed choice. And I would hold that a choice made by liking one thing but never experiencing anything else, creates an opinion that is without value to anyone outside the "chooser".

As for the second post (the one right after the analogy post)...Words cannot express why one choice is superior to another. You cannot tell me why pepsi (for instance) is "better" than coke. You could never hope to describe or explain every aspect of what makes one "good" and the other "bad". Words will not sufficiently express what makes either choice worth making. Ultimately, it's the necessarily unspoken, the things that words cannot/do not address or define, that is where the true choice lies, and the true superiority of one choice over another. And that's another reason why no valid "choice" can be made without experiencing "both options"...

Your throw RC into the mix, and the whole thing just gets that much more complicated,

You drink Pepsi? :sick:

Wouldn't you want to try a nice glass of Coke? Mmm... it's so good! Come on, all your friends are doing it... you'll like it!

Besides, look how happy I am drinking Coke! Don't you want some of this happiness?

hahhahahahahahhahahahha

No thanks, Wescli, I've tried Coke, and I just don't like it.

Daniel L. wrote: @ V-Tog
If there is no dark side...than why do we need Jedi? We already have police and scientists. :dry:
If we're Jedi its because we have something others dont.
-If a criminal shoots two men and both fall but after a little one of them stands back up you know one of the men has something the other doesn't.
-If two men jump off a plain on lands safely on his feet but the other hits the ground like a ripe tomato you know one has something the other doesn't.
-If we already have police and scientist but we call ourselves "Jediist" there has to be something we have that other protectors and learners don't. What would that be?

Daniel...I have to say that to me all of that seems completely irrelevant to what I said :blush:

Who is to say that we need Jedi? I am not a Jedi in order that I can wage war on the 'dark side'. I am a Jedi because it feels like the right place and thing for me to be.

Here's a loose example...I spend much of my time partaking in classical-music based activities. Strangely enough, I don't do it because I think that pop music and pop-music lovers are evil. I do it because I love it and because it feels part of me - it is a path that I instinctively know that I should follow. Lots of classical musicians are known as 'musical snobs' - they consider themselves vastly superior to pop musicians. But of course, the truth is that neither is superior or better than the other, and in fact they complement each other in many ways.

The 'light' and 'dark' sides, or aspects, are the same, only rather than having relatively neutral names like 'classical' and 'pop', they have names which automatically make one sound positive and the other sound negative.

What I am saying is that each of us can look at the dark and say "that would indeed be negative for me" - but you have to assume that it works out positively for those who chose to follow it for any length of time. Being a Jedi might not be a path that would work for them - hence to them, Jedi is their 'dark' and Sith/Dark is 'light'.

You see what I mean?

Daniel L. wrote: If we're Jedi its because we have something others dont.

Not the way I see it. We're Jedi because we have chosen to follow a different path, not because we are fundamentally different to others. I don't believe myself to be special, or set apart, in any way.

Daniel L. wrote: -If we already have police and scientist but we call ourselves "Jediist" there has to be something we have that other protectors and learners don't. What would that be?

What you said comes over as implying that we are superior to police and scientists. Yes, some of us choose to be protectors and learners, at times. But we just protect and learn in different ways to police and scientists. Most of us are probably severely lacking in other areas that police and scientists far supersede us in.

I only drink coke with alcholol. For some reason ive never been offered a rum and pepsi.

Seriously...if you're mixing Rum...there's nothing in this universe better than Rum and MT Dew!! :woohoo:

Also, I would hold that while exclusively drinking pepsi is a valid choice (I am a pepsi fan afterall), it is n[othing if not naive if the choice is made "blind". If one does not partake of coke even once in his/her life, then "choosing" to drink exclusively pepsi isn't really a choice, is it. And even if you hold that it is, it, at the very least, isn't an informed choice. And I would hold that a choice made by liking one thing but never experiencing anything else, creates an opinion that is without value to anyone outside

Sure it is. The only thing that wouldn't be of value is there choice on coke. Still it does not lessen there knowledge or opinion on pepsi. If asked about coke they could simply say they've never tried it and that's something they would have to find out for themselves. If, they so choose.

Though personsly, I'm agaisnt uninformed choices as well. This isn't because there knowledge or opinion isn't valid though. Its just a pet peeve. Many scientists don't explore sciences outside there fields. Doesn't mean they dont know what there talking about or doing in there fields though. Doctors as well consult outside there soecialities for this very reason. They know what they dont know and are smart enough to get the opinion of someone who does. Doesn't lessen either doctor though. Noone can hold all that knowledge, nor, is it entirely practical too. This is applicable to many fields.

All it means is that your opinion outside your scope, especially in those fields, isn't all that valid. Informed ignorance (knowing what you don't know) is more practical then trying to know it all.

I'm ok with not knowing things. There's some stuff, that just doesn't interest me.

Years ago, I spent almost two years being a Bartender and there are few things I haven’t mixed together.

And I think I killed several brain cells in the process! Hahahahhahahahahahahha

@ Khaos

I'm ok with not knowing everything, there are some things I just don't want to know...beyond simple disinterest, I find the knowledge/experience truly repugnant...of course I wouldn't know that if I hadn't at least "looked into it"...

As for your doctor/scientist analogy...you should have stuck with soda...

See, doctors and scientists go to school for a great many years learning general practice and general theory before they choose a specialty...and some never do. So when they seek consultation outside their specialty it's not because they know nothing about it, it's because whatever the problem is is beyond the knowledge they have. Or because they want to pass the blame on to someone else...depending on the butcher (I mean doctor), or wizard (I mean scientist)...

So, they do, in fact, know something of their non-specialty fields, which makes them qualified to have an opinion about them as well as qualified to make a recommendation of who to listen to in that special field.

Khaos wrote: None of these are motivations. There emotions. And you've left out many. Anger can motivate, but is not the source in and of itself. I need a reason ti be angry. Similarly I don't desire for no reason. There is a definite what or who motivating it. Power is ambiguous and means nothing. Were much more specific in our goals,though arguably it could amount to the same thing. However we prefer tangible, specific, and quantifiable goals as the focal point of our passions.

As for regret......I cant say I have any. Seems like a waste of time. I would say it makes for a poor Sith who entertains regret.

I disagree that they are not motivations for people to follow a certain religious path, just because something is an emotion doesn't mean it doesn't drive people. People do desire for no reason, are angry for no reason, do regret for no reason, there might be something that triggered it but saying their is a reason to be happy or to be sad is being caught up in a deception. The sheer idea of enlightenment in spiritual terms, is to be beyond the sway of emotions, emotions like pleasure are delusions. The object of desire or pleasure means you become enslaved to it and to other people who control it. All religions teach enlightenment comes from carrying an inner core of truth, an eternal harmony. There might be a story why someone feels regret or anger, but there is never an excuse. They might be unfortunate not to have been educated that there is another way, but the search for a Dark Answer is a motivation- an energy, often negative energy, (regardless of what might have happened to catalyse it) is the problem in itself.

Power is not ambiguous, it is relative, but there is no grey definition of power. Power is a storehouse of energy, desiring power is desiring a leapfrog out of your current situation. This contrasts with those who follow Light, traditionally associated with patience and acceptance of improvement, betterment and strength in its right time. The Dark Path seems to be attractive, from what I understand, because it offers a shortcut, and a boost with dangers. The classic notion of selling one's soul to the devil is something seen in all Dark Paths in all religious traditions and mythologies. No one ever sold their soul to God.

Regret is not usually something we are personally aware that we carry, nor something we are typically able to consciously deal with let alone admit to an internet forum of strangers. Regretting that you aren't capable of patience, regretting that you aren't strong enough not to give in to your passions and short-term goals which are inevitably worldly distractions- these are things I tend to see in followers of a Dark Path.

I agree with you however that the motivations for following a Dark Path, are probably always complex and typically as foggy, obscure and unclear for the pursuant themselves as to anyone observing him.