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"

[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"

Am afraid not....

[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

[Magic Hans]

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

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 ]

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.

[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