Jedi/Sith... light, dark?

I'd tried to form a personal interpretation on it from the outset, and to do so ended up just looking at my own learning's together with the central (for want of a better word) myth (Star Wars) and how I saw the nature of Force. I considered the nature of the Force to be generally enlightened existence, and thus concepts such as evil seem simply not valid.

Theres a roadmap to deconstruct my thoughts haha :L

This way the Sith in the movies just look like power addicts; simply suffering from addiction to power and since addictions tend to change priorities in a persons life and can change the way they act - they became desensitized to others feelings (personal power) and developed craving for more of it. This was just taken to an extreme in the movies because of the superdoopa Force powers.

To use the titles/names/culture says we might want to take something from that fictional universe to use for effect, otherwise its just another new age spiritualism - but feeding on Star Wars fans. So for me the root difference is the Codes, and since working on finding power in ones own emotions is empowering our more basic imperatives from within the subconscious, it made sense that focusing effort into empowering the subconscious might empower the more primal parts of the brain from our animal heritage.

Too much focus on that might indeed change the way we think and act to a more selfish modality. It seems plausible to imagine these becoming so distorted in the fictional context of the movies where so much 'Force' power is available that it ends up turning them evil. In the real world where we do not have bolts of lightning and levitation abilities, it would depend on the persons character and will as to how they train and choose to act.

Luckily I get to skip the whole judgement of a person's benefit or hazard in terms of whether they align to Jedi or Sith, and just know them for their actual actions, the same as the way I'd like to be known.

That's about it basically, with the core premise seeming valid to me with Force Realism. Beyond that core, I look to other pieces of humanities experiences to build up a body of relevant thought and practises which might generate progress and align to the culture.

So what of the dark side to me then? The immediate implication of what I've said is that it is superior by being more powerful, but I think its more of a specialization which can leave other areas lacking. That sort of fits into the Star Wars universe fiction as well. Simply put its another path to self awareness and self empowerment, like the Jedi, but with a different and more narrow focus and thus most likely different outcomes.

To get this understanding I firstly required a working definition the language used, as terms such as emotion and passion cannot remain generic, or mean the same thing as each other - not if I wanted the Codes to be more useful. I've posted before my thoughts on how I use these terms specifically.

Fortunately this approach also does void many aspects of the fiction which don't seem relevant to realism, mostly that of the portrayal of the Sith since they were antagonists and there is simply no useful need for conflict unless perhaps it is used as a training tool with consenting participants using rules which shape the training intention.

Hey Sith, don't turn around....

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

Khaos, try mixing your alcohol with Pepsi. Mixes better.

The exbartender in me asks where you drink Khaos... lol...

All of the bars in my area have Pepsi on their guns... So, unless you specifically requests "coke from a bottle", you get Pepsi....

I actually prefer rum and coke, not Pepsi.... Prolly the pirate in me....

Do a side-by-side comparison..

As far as the topic of the thread, in my opinion, its choice.....

Its how you define the object, and whether you feel it encapsulates you and your ideas...

It was mentioned that the road to beingva Sith was complicated... So is the road to a Jedi....

Its why we all hold slightly different ideas of what they are....

And as to light and dark, there is only light.... for even in the blackest of black places, there is such a miniscule amount it may seem dark, but with the right set of eyes, say "night vision", the ambientlight provides enough to see...

There's just less of the light...

And, please, someone earlier said something about truth, and fact being real and not merely opinion...

Please, lets opens thread, and we cannot debate it there...

Hitler was used... I love using Hitler....

He was a "bad" man, who did "bad" things, by my definition....

However, to his followers, he was not a bad man, nor were his actions considered wrong by his followers...

And had he won the war, we would have been talking about the "evil allies", and how they tried to stop his "holy mission"....

In my opinion, life is subjective... Its personal, and, the things we "judge", are defined by this judgement....




Oh, Abyss?

First public warning for trolling....

PM in your inbox in a bit....

Interesting view Jestor, only light...hmmm...

I'm amused by people's tendencies to "jump" right to Hitler as the "ultimate expression of evil"...what about Pol Pot?...he killed a few million...what about Manson?...he manipulated other "innocents" into killing so he didn't "have" to...what about John Wayne Gacy (and several other serial killers)?...he (they) victimized "innocents" before killing them (in often brutal ways)...Why does Hitler get the "popularity" when there's so much "evil" to choose from?

probably because hitler influence and affected whole nations...in fact a whole world...whereas the others only influenced a single country or part of it at best...but yes there are many others that dwelled within the dark and chose to stay there....of course light and dark are subjective...light and dark to me differ from light and dark to manson or hitler etc...

V-Tog wrote: Something about the association of the words 'light' and 'dark', with 'Jedi' and 'Sith' feels wrong to me...
I find that I ask myself...what do 'light' and 'dark' actually mean?
What in their meaning are we associating with Jedi and Sith?
...
Many Sith seem to happily refer to themselves as 'dark', but is their path not their own personal light, where life and growth take place?
Similarly, we here are Jedi, but is everything in our lives healthy and fruitful?
...
Perhaps some would disagree, I just find that unless someone is purposefully trying to hurt themselves, their personal path must be their 'light' and the opposing paths of others would be their 'dark'
...
So to a Sith, who is to say that Jedi are not dark?
And more importantly, who is to say that they are wrong?

In my Jedi studies I have come across some interesting features of context in the Star Wars canon from which the Jedi religion originates. I post here to texts from the Star Wars wikia.

Counter to millennia of Jedi teachings, the followers of Potentium claimed that there was no inherent evil in viewing the Force. They claimed that what others called the light side of the Force was actually just the Force itself, which was inherently good. This was backed up by the fact that Ashla, the ancient name of the Force, came later to describe the light side. What others therefore called the dark side was a perversion of the Force, twisted by those who used it.
Believers of Potentium said that the potential for light and dark sides resided in the user, not the Force itself,[1] and that the Jedi are merely afraid to explore the full potential of the Force.[2] They also thought that the Jedi Masters refused to believe in the Potentium view because it would mean the Jedi were not needed to fight evil, for evil would not exist. And since there was no dark side, there were no dark side actions or Force techniques; in effect any action, good or evil, could be performed without risk as long as the intent was not evil.

And this pertains specifically to you followers of Dark Aspect and/or Sith:

"Only power is real, and the only real power is the power to destroy. Existence is fleeting. Destruction is eternal."
―Cronal on the One Truth

The Way of the Dark, or simply the Dark, was the name used by the Sorcerers of Rhand to describe their view of the universe, which was unrelated to the Force. This Way of the Dark belief didn't just deny the existence of the Light side of the Force, it stated that the Force itself, both Light and Dark side, was irrelevant in scope compared to the Dark. This system stated that entropy and destruction was the universal constant that all things worked towards, going so far as to call it the "will of the universe". In the absence of life was the void, the foundation of truth, which to the Sorcerers became known as the One Truth. The Dark set being against being, star against star. It was the hidden energy of the cosmos. The greatest power of the Dark known to the Rhandites was the ability of Darksight. Darksight was the ability to create the future by looking at all the possible outcomes and choosing the one that suited the user best, though the outcome was not guaranteed. Part of its success was determined by the user's alignment with the Dark. Only through destruction could one ally themselves with the Way of the Dark.

But "Potentium" doesn't sound as cool as "Jedi"...

And, as far as the Sith go, there will always be iconoclasts who "need" to set themselves in opposition to the "main stream", but that doesn't make them "evil". It is actually a very good thing. It's how we learn and grow. Our views cannot be expanded without being challenged, or strengthened without being opposed.

I think Ashla sounds even cooler

Are you saying that the Sith are good for the Jedi?