A Question for Jedi....

[CJ]

This comes from me being into Star Wars as a kid, and growing up with a "Jedi" ethic:

Beware the dark side
Beware anger, hate, fear
Don't be aggressive, use technique/knowledge etc for defence, but never attack
etc,etc,etc

I am sure there are better examples, but I cant think of any just now.

Anyway:

Is Jedi and the beliefs displayed within that religion with the Star Wars universe pertinent to you?
Or is it an old hockey religion with no relevance to this world?
Or is it a harmless piece of fun attached to 2 fingers waved to the establishment?

The poll will be multi option, but thoughts are welcome.

I have deliberately made the poll non-public but would be interested to read which options you went for (if you went for multile options) and why THAT particular combination.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Or is it an old hockey religion with no relevance to this world?

Whats it got to do with Hockey ? and why has my previous post vanished ? :)

edit: aha I see now, its a second thread cos CJ forgot the poll.....muppet! :)

[Lou]

l.....muppet! :)
Oi! That's Yoda!

[Lynn]

Interesting the reference to Unification and Scientology. Do you know there are literally thousands of what are know as 'New Religious Movements' around the world? ('new' as in teaching something that differs from 'traditional religions')

[Magic Hans]

The 'Force' principle is one that resonates with some of the eastern ideas of Chi/Ki (and all it's alternatives)

That of an energy force that is found in everything animate or not.

Having watched Star Wars again, and, catering for the sensationalism [in particular the combat and killing] that films are obliged to contain, the entire Jedi scheme seems very akin to religions such as Buddhism and Toaism.

I wonder where the inspiration came from?

Ian

[Dreadful Scathe]

Interesting the reference to Unification and Scientology. Do you know there are literally thousands of what are know as 'New Religious Movements' around the world? ('new' as in teaching something that differs from 'traditional religions')

'Traditional Religions' become less popular over time, with some exceptions of course. Paganism is a far less popular than it used to be, Christianity has seen a huge decrease over the last 100 years or so and the trend will only continue. Religions pop-up all the time of course, as you say - some may have the staying power, most will fade away. At the end of the day, people like to believe in something even if thats just destiny, fate or 'all kittens are cute' :)

Its interesting to note that jedism is another religion without a deity, which is more common than most people think. ;)

[CJ]

The 'Force' principle is one that resonates with some of the eastern ideas of Chi/Ki (and all it's alternatives)

That of an energy force that is found in everything animate or not.

Having watched Star Wars again, and, catering for the sensationalism [in particular the combat and killing] that films are obliged to contain, the entire Jedi scheme seems very akin to religions such as Buddhism and Toaism.

I wonder where the inspiration came from?

Ian

There is no denying that there is an enormous "eastern" philosophical input into the idea of Jedi, etc.

I don't know enough about the religions Hans mentions to start listing differences, but would be interested to know what you guys know...

[Pammy]

CJ, you are obviously not familiar with the term "biggie" :wink:

[Dreadful Scathe]

simply put : Taoism is a religion which developed in China in the 2nd century BCE, emphasizing the improvement of life through getting into touch with cosmic forces and thus achieving harmony with nature.

Which sounds pretty much like 'the force' to me :)

[CJ]

CJ, you are obviously not familiar with the term "biggie" :wink:

Am afraid not.... :blush:

[Lynn]

Christianity has seen a huge decrease over the last 100 years or so and the trend will only continue. Hmm, what statistics is that conclusion drawn from... there is a world beyond US and Europe you know! Not sure the exact statistics but I would say its been the opposite - on a global scale Christianity numerically has grown more in the last 100 years than ever in its history. The decline in numbers is a 'Western' world pattern - its a very different story in places like Africa.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Hmm, what statistics is that conclusion drawn from... there is a world beyond US and Europe you know! Not sure the exact statistics but I would say its been the opposite - on a global scale Christianity numerically has grown more in the last 100 years than ever in its history. The decline in numbers is a 'Western' world pattern - its a very different story in places like Africa.
indeed - i was thinking locally and from a Western point of view :) (even though I was replying to your post which did take a world view) Sorry about that :)

[Leo]

I believe that Jedi is the most sensible religion going. I am 100% non-believer in anything but if there is going to be a religion it should be to the ideals of the Jedi and not follow any idea as blatently ludicrouse as the existance of a god of any form!

Tosh

[drathzel]

I voted that we should find another way to teach morals etc!!! There are so many disputes between all religions that it tends to wipe out the beliefs that it teaches. Most if not all (please someone correct me if i am wrong) religions teach that killing a fellow human being is wrong but if you look at ow many deaths are caused by religious bickering no wonder we live in such a F***ed up world!

I am actually cutting my post short here because i could go on for ever as i feel very strongly!

Dx :hug:

[Magic Hans]

...many deaths are caused by religious bickering no wonder we live in such a F***ed up world!...

:yeah: :yeah:

Yes!! Dead right! What is it about religion that makes it such a powerful propaganda tool in conflict? I believe it is that it can draw very strongly on our emotions, and can promise us far more than anything mortal can.

Mankind, with its many faults, can be very resourceful. Religion has been used by war mongerers because it works. Does this make religion instrinsically bad? Some may argue that the West use democracy (or capitalism) in the same way; to achieve it's military objectives? [ .... methinks there is a debate there :D ]

The only religion that I know which might not have been used for conflict purposes is Buddhism [ ... but I don't know for sure] .... or Jainism: a fundementalist form of Buddhism that values all life as sacred. These people will (reputably) not go out at night for fear of treading on a worm, and wear a gauze over their mouth for fear of swallowing a fly.

..... oh yes .... and Quakerism (or would that be Quaker Christianity?)

One of the very few people in this world devoted to non-violence, Ghandi, would have urged the Jews in Germany to resist peacefully ... in the hope that such easy and simple mass slaughter would sicken their oppressors.

Would that have saved or wasted lives? No-one (without a time machine) could ever be 100% certain!

Ian

[Gadget]

What is it about religion that makes it such a powerful propaganda tool in conflict?
The problem is that Religion is a manor of explaining away the un-known. Since it's un-know, any concept or idea that can explain it is not able to be proven incorrect. Each of these ideas is a beleif system; people place their trust in it, beleive in what they are told is the way the world works, how it got here and how it's going to end.
All of these are different. If one exists, and you beleive it to be true, then all the rest are false. If they are false, then the people who beleive in them are deluded and you can feel (are) superior to them. Not only that, but you feel jutified in having no remorse or empathy for someone who is obviously living in a reality and world that is different from yours.

Easy to see how it could become a powerfull propaganda tool.

The moral teachings are part of society and the judicial/justice system: don't lawyers now have the same 'power' as preists did in their hay-day?

[Leo]

[QUOTE=Gadget]The problem is that Religion is a manor of explaining away the un-known.


Hmmm. Maybe this is why religion is a fading entity. Sience has explained almost all the unknowns and only a fool is led by fear in these times. I think now days people believe in what they are brought up believing.

Is blue really blue? Ask a colour blind person - maybe it's actualy red!?! You were just told that it's blue so that's what you believe.

I work with a devought cathlic who preaches such bull you wouldn't believe and he believes that every word of the bible is gospel truth. His parents and grand parents etc... are cathlic.
I say " what if your parents were muslim? " Would you still believe every word of the bible to be true?
He says I am ignarent for not believing.
I say he is totaly insecure for NEEDING TO BELIEVE.

And that is what i think religion is.... the need to believe in something.

God, Budda or Yoda, who cares i'm too insecure to argue with the masses. :devil:

[Bangers & Mash]

Hmmm. Maybe this is why religion is a fading entity. Sience has explained almost all the unknowns and only a fool is led by fear in these times.

Gonna have to chip in here Leo. I'm not particularly religious, but I can't help thinking that the more we learn through science the more inprobable our existence on this planet appears to be.

For example
1. If it weren't for the existence of the moon then the Earth would spin out of control instead of around one access
2. If the moon were slightly closer, the effect on the tides would be devastating and it would spiral in towards the Earth
3. if the moon were slightly further away, it would break orbit and the earth loses its stablising effect on the planet rotation
4. if it weren't for tectonic activity then the surface of the earth would be much the same as mars because of the natural circulation of gases, etc. that tectonic activity allows
5. if the earth were slightly closer to or further away from the sun, or the orbit were slightly more eccentric then we would all freeze or fry or both
6. if it weren't for the presence of jupiter in the solar system mopping up stray meteors etc, we would have been devastated by now.

In fact, if science tells us one thing it is that the odds against us being here are incredible.

[Bangers & Mash]

I voted that we should find another way to teach morals etc!!! There are so many disputes between all religions that it tends to wipe out the beliefs that it teaches. Most if not all (please someone correct me if i am wrong) religions teach that killing a fellow human being is wrong but if you look at ow many deaths are caused by religious bickering no wonder we live in such a F***ed up world!
:

Most religions all preach the same thing - be nice. Some religions appear to be a little more explicit - be nice to people with the same religion.

Unfortunately, religion and anti-religion are very powerful forces because they seem to appeal to a pack mentality and I would argue that that is our basic human instinct.

Whilst there are many people - religious, atheist, existentialist, etc - who do not succumb to this pack mentality when they put on their uniform; there are unfortunately people who do and if these people are in influential positions then we have a real problem.

These people form packs and then, fuelled by a feeling of power, attempt to assert their supremacy.

It is not the fault of religion, or even of non-religion. It is the fault of people!! Those that do it, and those that let it happen!

[David Franklin]

Gonna have to chip in here Leo. I'm not particularly religious, but I can't help thinking that the more we learn through science the more inprobable our existence on this planet appears to be.

For example
1. If it weren't for the existence of the moon then the Earth would spin out of control instead of around one access
2. If the moon were slightly closer, the effect on the tides would be devastating and it would spiral in towards the Earth
3. if the moon were slightly further away, it would break orbit and the earth loses its stablising effect on the planet rotation
4. if it weren't for tectonic activity then the surface of the earth would be much the same as mars because of the natural circulation of gases, etc. that tectonic activity allows
5. if the earth were slightly closer to or further away from the sun, or the orbit were slightly more eccentric then we would all freeze or fry or both
6. if it weren't for the presence of jupiter in the solar system mopping up stray meteors etc, we would have been devastated by now.
Do you have citations/references for the above? To the best of my knowledge 1 is false (I think we would tide lock to the sun), 2 and 3 are complete rubbish (the moon is in a stable orbit), 5 is only defensible on the "we don't really understand climate" front (i.e. the immediate change wouldn't be large, but if it caused runaway greenhouse gases...), and as for 6 - I think a common theory is that the moon was split from the earth by a catastrophic meteor impact - how much more devastation do you want? (And more recently, besides the dinosaurs, there is considerable evidence that a meteor impact killed 96% of life on Earth several hundred million years ago). I don't know enough about the plate tectonics one to comment.

Dave

[Gus]

One of the very few people in this world devoted to non-violence, Ghandi, would have urged the Jews in Germany to resist peacefully ... in the hope that such easy and simple mass slaughter would sicken their oppressors.Urrmmm but was there any mass resistance by the Jews? With the possible exception of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising in 1943 didnt most just end up being slaughtered anyway?

Maybe just my take on it ... but the Second world war wasnt fought on religous grounds ... it was fought on the age old reason ... for power. The Jew issue dates back to the Nazis rise to power where it was seen that Jews ... not as a religous group but as a complete socio-economic gorup ... held too much power and wealth. The trite comment that religion starts wars is a massive over-simplification ... it has generaly been the case that religion has been used as a differentiator ... a reason for which man can assert his authority/will over other men ... man's most grevious sin and the sin for which humanity will probably rub itself off the face of the Earth within the next 50 years...

[Bangers & Mash]

Do you have citations/references for the above? To the best of my knowledge 1 is false (I think we would tide lock to the sun), 2 and 3 are complete rubbish (the moon is in a stable orbit), 5 is only defensible on the "we don't really understand climate" front (i.e. the immediate change wouldn't be large, but if it caused runaway greenhouse gases...), and as for 6 - I think a common theory is that the moon was split from the earth by a catastrophic meteor impact - how much more devastation do you want? (And more recently, besides the dinosaurs, there is considerable evidence that a meteor impact killed 96% of life on Earth several hundred million years ago). I don't know enough about the plate tectonics one to comment.

Dave

1. Discovery Channel - the earth would not just rotate around one axis, but would become unstable (like a spinning top)
2/3 - Re read what I wrote Dave. I inferredthat the moon is in a stable orbit, but that a deviation could be devastating. According to the latest scientific measurements (Discovery) the moon is actually expanding its orbit very gradually
5. as for your comments about climate - we understand that venus is too hot and mars is too cold. what more evidence do you need for the proximity of the sun and its effect on life
6. correct. the moon was split from the earth. convenient since that stabilises the earth rotation around one axis (even if it does oscillate slightly) - otherwise we wouldn't be here. Discovery again mate.

Sorry, I'm one of these boring guys who works from home and watches Discovery with a particular interest in these topics.

None of these were "utter rubbish"

apology accepted :wink:

[David Franklin]

Sorry, I'm one of these boring guys who works from home and watches Discovery with a particular interest in these topics.

None of these were "utter rubbish"

apology accepted :wink:Sorry, but if your source is the Discovery channel... :rofl: There was a reason I was happy to state 2,3 as "utter rubbish" - I studied perturbation theory / orbital mechanics at university... By the way, there are understood meanings for 'slightly' when you discuss perturbations, and pushing Earth into Venus's orbit doesn't qualify...

Dave

[Bangers & Mash]

Sorry, but if your source is the Discovery channel... :rofl: There was a reason I was happy to state 2,3 as "utter rubbish" - I studied perturbation theory / orbital mechanics at university... By the way, there are understood meanings for 'slightly' when you discuss perturbations, and pushing Earth into Venus's orbit doesn't qualify...

Dave

well you could take a look at http://www.bol.ucla.edu for some of the latest theories.

I'm sorry. I wasn't thinking about your perturbations when I was talking about the incredible odds against life on Earth.

Please tell me oh masterful one - what would the effect be of an increase or decrease in the Earths orbit of let's say 1%? What would the effect be on the global temperature? and climate? would mammals still be able to survive? what are the extreme temperatures at which mammals can live? what about sustenance? uv radiation? temperature of the oceans? gravity? humidity?

Surely with your highly superior knowledge and derision for the Discovery Channel you will already have a 200 page thesis on this - including the chapter on "Where Einstein went wrong" and "Hawkins put right"
:yum:

[CJ]

Please tell me oh masterful one - what would the effect be of an increase or decrease in the Earths orbit of let's say 1%?

Q: How does one increase/decrease an orbit?!? :confused:

Isn't our orbit constantly in flux, anyway?!? Apparently we have lost a fraction of a second of our axis spin time (ie: length of a day) due to the tuetonic plate shifts which caused the Tsunami.

Oh, and guys?!!?!? Play nice!! :waycool:

[CJ]

Going back to the poll:

anyone want to venture which religion is the "right" one?!?!?! :eek:

[Bangers & Mash]

Going back to the poll:

anyone want to venture which religion is the "right" one?!?!?! :eek:

mine :waycool:

[Magic Hans]

.... errrrr ..... I think that astronomy and cosmology also creates conflict!!!!
:D:D:D:D

[ .... quickly checks to see if these are religions!!! :na: ]

Is strict use of punctuation a religion at all?

1. Thou must only use one exclamation mark per sentence.

2. Honour thy colon and apostrophe.

3. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours question mark.

[..... I can't seem to remember many more ...... or am I making it all up!! hehehe]

[Bangers & Mash]

.... errrrr ..... I think that astronomy and cosmology also creates conflict!!!!
:D:D:D:D

[ .... quickly checks to see if these are religions!!! :na: ]

Is strict use of punctuation a religion at all?

1. Thou must only use one exclamation mark per sentence.

2. Honour thy colon and apostrophe.

3. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours question mark.

[..... I can't seem to remember many more ...... or am I making it all up!! hehehe]


Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours ass!

Bit difficult when you're living in Amsterdam. and it is such a great ass :rofl:

Good call on the conflicts tho. Interesting how animate we can become when protecting our beliefs. Perhaps all wannabee world leaders should join a discussion forum and only those that don't get moderated should be allowed to take their post. :rofl:

[David Franklin]

well you could take a look at http://www.bol.ucla.edu for some of the latest theories.That gives me:


Bruin Online (BOL) is a collection of services that provides UCLA students, faculty, and staff with remote dial-up and on-campus access to the campus backbone network and the Internet.Could you provide a specific link?


I'm sorry. I wasn't thinking about your perturbations when I was talking about the incredible odds against life on Earth. Now, before you get all hot and bothered - the only things I said were "utter rubbish" were that

2. If the moon were slightly closer, the effect on the tides would be devastating and it would spiral in towards the Earth.
3. if the moon were slightly further away, it would break orbit and the earth loses its stablising effect on the planet rotation.Now the whole point of an orbit being stable is that small changes in the orbital parameters (i.e. nudge it a bit) produce small changes in the orbit. i.e. moving the moon slightly nearer/further would not cause it to 'spiral in' / 'break free' from the Earth. It would take a heck of a big change for that to happen (put it like this:- I'm certain you could set off every nuke on the planet on one side of the moon, every day for a hundred years, and it wouldn't be enough), but I'm sure life on Earth would end if it did.

As to the rest of it: I thought offhand, (because IIRC, Mercury is tidally locked to the sun) that Earth's axis would be locked to the sun in the absense of the moon. It appears you are right on this one. However, there are contrary opinions on the necessity of a stable axis - we are talking about an instability over the period of >100000 years, and many think life could evolve under these conditions.

As for the climate. As I said previously, the honest answer is "we don't know". A 1% change in the earth's orbit gives a 2% change in energy flux from the Sun. I think you can take use the black body radiation equations to guestimate the immediate effect on temperature, in which case T^4 is proportional to the energy flux (T in degrees Kelvin), so you'd get a 0.5% change in temperature (i.e. +/- 3 degrees C). Where it gets tricky is whether such a change would either trigger runaway hothouse due to greenhouse gases, or runaway ice age due to reduced albedo. Opinions certainly differ...

As to some of the other stuff: Currently mammals survive over a temperature range of well over 50 degrees C, so a 3 degree change is unlikely to be hugely significant. UV radiation changes by 2% (same as energy flux). Don't know about the effect on the oceans - any changes would take a lot longer to promulgate, and as you go deeper I think the internal heating of the earth's core affects things. Gravity is unaffected. Humidity might get changed a lot.

Dave

[Bangers & Mash]

well, I'm bored with that so back to the jedi thing.

I actually visited Anne Frank house this morning over here in Amsterdam and got a real feeling for what it was like during the occupation. All in the name of religion, power, superiority etc. It was actually quite overpowering to stand in the same rooms in which they hid in fear for so long and to actually see the original first diary. Indeed, Anne Frank's room even has her posters preserved under protective screens.

This girl died in a concentration camp just months before it was liberated and her diary of life in hiding before she and her family were captured was her legacy.

Her youthful insight and attitude is an incredible inspiration for all of us and many world and religious leaders could benefit from some of her thoughts.

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world."
Anne Frank

[Leo]

Gonna have to chip in here Leo. I'm not particularly religious, but I can't help thinking that the more we learn through science the more inprobable our existence on this planet appears to be.

For example
1. If it weren't for the existence of the moon then the Earth would spin out of control instead of around one access
2. If the moon were slightly closer, the effect on the tides would be devastating and it would spiral in towards the Earth
3. if the moon were slightly further away, it would break orbit and the earth loses its stablising effect on the planet rotation
4. if it weren't for tectonic activity then the surface of the earth would be much the same as mars because of the natural circulation of gases, etc. that tectonic activity allows
5. if the earth were slightly closer to or further away from the sun, or the orbit were slightly more eccentric then we would all freeze or fry or both
6. if it weren't for the presence of jupiter in the solar system mopping up stray meteors etc, we would have been devastated by now.

In fact, if science tells us one thing it is that the odds against us being here are incredible.


I believe my point is made and mearly strngthened by your facts.

[Dreadful Scathe]

In fact, if science tells us one thing it is that the odds against us being here are incredible.

So what ? The odds of getting a Royal Flush in poker is 1 in 650,000 but if I got it I wouldnt assume divine intervention because it was 'incredible' :)


Thats past tense anyway, the odds of us 'being here' is currently 100%, because we are ;).

[CJ]

So what ? The odds of getting a Royal Flush in poker is 1 in 650,000 but if I got it I wouldnt assume divine intervention because it was 'incredible' :)

Please treat this whole post as an aside:

DS, are your stats even close to the truth?!? On the last road trip, I won a whole game: 50,000 worth of chips on a clubs Royal Flush.

Coooel.

[David Franklin]

Please treat this whole post as an aside:

DS, are your stats even close to the truth?!?Odds are 1 in 649740. (649740 = 52!/(4 * 5! * 47!)).

Dave

[CJ]

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Thank you.

Coooooooooel. :waycool:

[CJ]

ANyway, back on topic...

A Q for jedi:

one hand or two?!?

[Dreadful Scathe]

I believe the stats are correct but only if you are delt that hand. Drawing extra cards would affect the odds :) i got them stats 'ere (http://www.pokerinformation.com/pokerodds.html)

[CJ]

deeeeeenied.

2 dealt cards, 5 community.

[David Franklin]

I believe the stats are correct but only if you are delt that hand. Drawing extra cards would affect the odds :) i got them stats 'ere (http://www.pokerinformation.com/pokerodds.html)Don't think the second set of values is correct for 7 cards - looks like the same info as for 5 cards (with the obvious reciprocal and conversion to %). My back of envelope calc says about 1:31000 for drawing a royal flush for 7 cards, but I wouldn't be surprised if I made a silly mistake...

Dave