Sith Realist Resources

So, this whole process began because Rugadd asked if there were any Sith places to study here. I said no, and elizabeth suggested that might be useful. I decided that I know a thing or two about where to find the good Sith stuff, so I asked around if people would be interested in it. More than 5 people (which is a not-small percentage of the currently active population of TOTJO) have engaged with the idea.

So, that's why I'm posting this here. If people want to engage, they can... If not, then leave the thread. It's that simple. yeh?

In the end, Sithism and Jediism are not opposites. And, both can learn from the other. Manu, for example, has studied both Sithism and Jediism simultaneously.

What criticism?

Connor didn't citicize the Jedi code, he asked me if I could criticize it as much as the sith code, which of course I cannot, like every other follower of the jedi faith. Logic 101.


Why must you twist this conversation off-topic? I consider you assertion that I do not accept criticism a personal attack. I have not dismissed criticism as criticism hasn't been served. I simply stated the truth: jedi churches are not the best place to ask for crticism of jedi teachings, christian churches are not the best place to ask for criticism of jesus.

Asking a priest to criticize jesus is not quite the same thing as asking him questions about his faith, which is what you are compairing this discussion to, as if you were dealing with someone who's unaware of the manipulative techniques you are employing.

You are making some rather wild asssumptions and violating totjo's terms of use. Stop it.

Connor L. wrote: So, this whole process began because Rugadd asked if there were any Sith places to study here. I said no, and elizabeth suggested that might be useful. I decided that I know a thing or two about where to find the good Sith stuff, so I asked around if people would be interested in it. More than 5 people (which is a not-small percentage of the currently active population of TOTJO) have engaged with the idea.

So, that's why I'm posting this here. If people want to engage, they can... If not, then leave the thread. It's that simple. yeh?

In the end, Sithism and Jediism are not opposites. And, both can learn from the other. Manu, for example, has studied both Sithism and Jediism simultaneously.

I can tell he prefers one to the other.

I find, personally, that those who can honestly critique their own beliefs are the ones who are most well-adjusted and psychologically healthy.

If you can't take a hard look at the fallibility of your own belief system, then how can you see it with any perspective?

Are your beliefs not the end result of your observations and criticisms?

Like the food you choose to eat, the clothes you choose to wear, the people you choose to have relationships with, etc?

Criticizing your own beliefs is like criticizing your own taste for strawberries or your own love for your children. Not something I would classify as 'well adjusted' or 'psychologically healthy'.

ren wrote: I consider you assertion that I do not accept criticism a personal attack. I have not dismissed criticism as criticism hasn't been served. I simply stated the truth: jedi churches are not the best place to ask for crticism of jedi teachings, christian churches are not the best place to ask for criticism of jesus.

Asking a priest to criticize jesus is not quite the same thing as asking him questions about his faith, which is what you are compairing this discussion to, as if you were dealing with someone who's unaware of the manipulative techniques you are employing.

You are making some rather wild asssumptions and violating totjo's terms of use. Stop it.

It appears that you are also making assumptions. I am not *trying* to employ any manipulative techniques either, for the record.

I consider criticism of one’s own faith more valuable from supporters than from dissenters, as those who dissent are quick to latch on to emotional responses based on personal experience, while those who continue in a faith have usually worked through any “moments of crisis” that might have appeared in their lives. Which is why I prefered talking to Catholic priests directly, who were quick to offer criticism of their faith (not Jesus, but official Church stances) , and a reconciliation as well.

And yet, they'll never be perfect. Good beliefs should change over time as more information is learned. Flexibility is a sign of a healthy person.

I don't agree with what you've said. Let's take Christians, for example. If a Christian believes the Bible is literal, they're just wrong. There's no two ways about it. And, a "good" Christian would continue to examine their beliefs and see if there are issues with them. Perhaps they'd get a book and see what historians and theologians have to say. Perhaps they'd even find out that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who was interested in overthrowing the Roman rule at Jerusalem.

Being skeptical is the sign of intellect, and can lead to great wisdom.

A church's stance is not one's faith, much like the jedi code is not a totjo management policy...

I am not *trying* to employ any manipulative techniques either, for the record.

I never said you tried, I pointed out you did employ. I saw a strawman in there, and ad hominem at least, possibly more, can't really be arsed to look back :laugh:

ren wrote: A church's stance is not one's faith, much like the jedi code is not a totjo management policy...

Alright?

ren wrote: I never said you tried, I pointed out you did employ. I saw a strawman in there, and ad hominem at least, possibly more, can't really be arsed to look back :laugh:

Well let’s leave all the assumptions behind us then. I’ve got no beef with you.

I do find it laughable to imply that “good Jedi” never question their faith as part of the process of practicing it.

Connor L. wrote: And yet, they'll never be perfect. Good beliefs should change over time as more information is learned. Flexibility is a sign of a healthy person.

I don't agree with what you've said. Let's take Christians, for example. If a Christian believes the Bible is literal, they're just wrong. There's no two ways about it. And, a "good" Christian would continue to examine their beliefs and see if there are issues with them. Perhaps they'd get a book and see what historians and theologians have to say. Perhaps they'd even find out that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who was interested in overthrowing the Roman rule at Jerusalem.

Being skeptical is the sign of intellect, and can lead to great wisdom.

I think we use the word faith in very different ways. To me faith is the inevitable result of my entire lfe's thoughts (or those i can remember, or otherwise subconsciously affect me). To you it appears it is a form of imposition.

To me if a christian believes the bible is literal they're wrong. If they believe the bible is not literal they're wrong. If I thought any kind of christian was right (as opposed to wrong) i would be that kind of christian.

If I think something is wrong, it necessarily is something I do not believe in. I literally do the opposite of believing in it. The beliefs change, but the processes that lead to the beliefs do not.