ATTN: COUNCIL; Updated Doctrine Proposal

I'm not certain changing the wording in the doctrine is what will fix much so much as changing how we treat the idea of the doctrine in the first place.

The reason I say this is because we all know we're not going to get a contradiction-free wording - it might even be concerning if we did. On top of that, using the doctrine as a christian uses bible verses has always been one of many other sources of ongoing conflict between people in many social situations, essentially bringing out the very thing we already have here - people leaving. No matter how relevant one thinks they can make the doctrine, I don't believe that conflict will go away unless we re-examine how we look at the doctrine in general before we even think about touching it. It's the mindset one has about the purpose and nature of it that manifests what we do with the words in it once we do read it.

Does that make sense?

Your right , an update won’t fix people problems... I don’t think it ever has. Change come from inside - sometimes influenced but most of the time from the individual- not the words on a screen or on the page.
This place is built on self reflective and self paced ideas- any drama we find here can easily be found to the root of the problem... I know any problem I had here was totally a me thing... kinna like the Force - with or without me - it’s still gunna be there.

I may or may not be out of line, I've been with the community for awhile, but have only recently been really diving into everything and don't have much of a rank here. But I feel like I need to chime in.

There's a lot of talk about - should we, shouldn't we? I know when I came to this community years ago, everything was exciting and there seemed to be a lot of really interesting conversations, thought provoking, challenging. I really enjoyed it.

I've come back, and though I want to continue my journey, I've been finding a lot of... political sounding debate (political in this organization sense, not politics of a country), and some voices who seem to be purposefully attempting to start fights as opposed to creating a thought provoking atmosphere that is moving towards helping people gain new insights. I've also found a lot of discontent with the current state of affairs. What this all tells me is that something is broken, and change needs to happen.

Is the problem the docrtine? Maybe, maybe not. We can obviously debate if the doctrine is the problem, but I think there can be some recognition that there is a problem, somewhere.

What I know is that sometimes, by creating external change, we challenge ourselves to create internal change. When you have an alcoholic, you don't say to them, "Hey, we want you to stop drinking. If you think about it, you'll know it's best for you" and expect them to suddenly change their habits. No, what you usually do is change their environment, whether it's preventing them access to alcohol at home, or going to the full extent of putting them into rehab. By changing the external, we give them the opportunity to change internally.

I say this all to make the point that, perhaps the doctrine is not the problem, but perhaps by updating it, we can better come to realize what the challenges actually are, as a community we can come together and move towards the change that I hear so many people crying out for. Instead of stagnation, perhaps we as a community should attempt to make a change, and perhaps this won't be perfect, but instead of just throwing out the possibility, why don't we make a real effort on this?

The other thing is, sometimes starting fresh allows new insights that weren't there previously. Perhaps starting fresh here will allow everyone here to usher in a new era of insights and movements toward being a "Jedi". I think that this discussion has brought some extremely insightful conversations to learn from and I've been thouroughly enjoying seeing people bring up new ideas and counter concepts and coming together to create something, even if we know there will likely be imperfections on the path.

Seems almost nobody follows the one we have now, so...

I think most people believe they themselves follow it while people around them think that they don't, due to differences in belief in how to treat it. Then we get comments like the one above, and people replying over feeling offended somehow.

Is what I'm getting at becoming any more evident at this point?

Let's talk about how an update can help move things forward.

The Jedi Compass. The document was a piece done in 2013. FA took that document and turned it into a 7 Course program that my students (although a very small number) are having A LOT of fun exploring. The document was also used to prop up the book (also called the Jedi Compass), and on Facebook I've watched a couple of study-groups form around it and show some real growth. Previously, most of them just relied solely on the Jedi Path book and the Jedi Code you can find laying around the community in various places. Jedi Federation, who use to just ask questions about people's lives to determine who would and wouldn't become a Jedi, has recently begun using the Jedi Compass to focus their board questions in order to help determine if someone truly understands the Jedi Path.

At the time this document surfaced, there was a lot of inner-order conflict. Believe it or not, the Jedi Compass helped reduce some of that conflict- because it demonstrated that there IS a baseline for what all of the different Jedi Orders at the time believed.

You say "I don't think", but what I'm hearing is: "I don't want change." I have yet to hear a single argument from anyone that wants to maintain a two document system that could really support a two document system.

But just in case you want to say the same about what I've said- then I'll provide you with a couple of articles that support my "Two Documents is too much, let's choose one and stick with it"

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/conquering-cyber-overload/201102/flooding-your-brain-s-engine-how-you-can-have-too-much-good

https://slate.com/technology/2013/06/how-people-read-online-why-you-wont-finish-this-article.html

^ And yes, I read through all of these two articles (you'll get it if you read the second one ). The current two document model has too much overlap and makes it a lot easier to just not read through thoroughly. One document will reduce this problem.

Now, I've given it some considerable thought, and I have to admit that if the previous mass edit was done based on the idea of simplifying and not actually looking at the principles behind each line, I'd prefer to wait on a serious take of how to edit with those concepts in mind.

I can defend the lines in the proposed "Principles of Jediism" (again not married to the name if someone has a better name!). Can you all do the same courtesy and cite the lines in each document to illustrate how either the two document system, the 21 Maxims or the 16 Teachings are the best system to go with? Because truly, if there is going to be a real defense of the current incarnation of the doctrine, or even one of the documents that are present to win out, it should be on their foundation alone- not upon the idea of "but this is tradition".

My point here is that there's no need to change anything that can't demonstrably be proven broken.

My point here is that there's no need to change anything that can't demonstrably be proven broken.

As there is (as far as I know) no set standard for Jediism, it's also pretty hard to prove it works....

I can defend the lines in the proposed "Principles of Jediism" (again not married to the name if someone has a better name!). Can you all do the same courtesy and cite the lines in each document to illustrate how either the two document system, the 21 Maxims or the 16 Teachings are the best system to go with? Because truly, if there is going to be a real defense of the current incarnation of the doctrine, or even one of the documents that are present to win out, it should be on their foundation alone- not upon the idea of "but this is tradition".

The idea of canning "two documents" in favour of a "single document" I believe is sound (I have a bit of another thought on that, but unless someone else brings it up first, I see no reason to go down that path)

I'm really on board for a nice straight forward plan-on-a-page sort of thing that encompasses what Jediism is, and is enough to start playing the game (like those "reference" cards you often get in board games - not the full rules, but enough to get you started and keep you going.

This still doesn't address what the basic principles should be, but apparently we want baby steps.

Fun fact with these things is that sometimes less is more - ie less people is better. If you (or a small team) comes up with a 99% solution, the rest will probably go along with it if it passes some basic robustness tests - if you come up with half a plan, you'll spend the next forever arguing over the second half.

@Steamboat The fact that so few hold loyalty to it (even as just reference material), IMO, is evidence it’s broken.

@James I hope you’re still considering pulling out a pot of tea ^^

I've worked 40 of the last 48 hours.

I think I put the kettle on half a dozen times, but honestly, I can barely form a sentence, much less remember if I put the kettle on, or approach distilling the key defining characteristics of the Jedi path....

It occurs to me that I don't think I've ever read the Jedi Compass. Is it available in hardcopy somehow?