The Force powers as we know them

Adder wrote: In seriousness though, old labels for things tend to bring baggage IMO, which is counter-productive to me beyond referencing out of my system.

Sure! I get that. However, any new label is going to carry baggage with it already as well. If you go around saying you're a "force healer" and explain what that means, some people are going to balk at the idea of trying to make fiction real. These are not new labels, they're taking stuff from an almost 50 year old science fantasy franchise and slapping it on an even older concept...

Adder wrote: If not because many names might be for different reasons, some of which might have import into the question of why would Jediism use its own names.
Yes perhaps the different names developed in isolation (ie ignorance of others) or used unique labels just to distinguish themselves, and could be instead shared. But perhaps the meanings are actually nuanced to mean slightly different things, or perhaps the labelling represents the doorway (which is designed to be entered) rather than what is revealed within - which might represent the particular avenue of approach that could be unique to the traditions techniques and culture rather than the shared revealed thing itself. Especially if the label is trying to work with ineffability
And also a lot of really old stuff seems to have been distorted as translations and cultures evolved, so what they are said to mean might not actually be quite what they originally meant!

The emphasis is my own addition. If that's the case then you haven't put a new label on an old practice, you've developed a new practice that has its own name. And that is perfectly fine, but it's not the same thing. Trying to rename a 5,000 year old tradition smacks of...misappropriation, for me. Now, if you were to develop your own system, perhaps taking bits and pieces from many different practices and then call it "force healing" or whatever that's great and more power to you! It is also okay to tell people you simply use different terminology, but the practice is essentially the same (other than what personal habits or techniques you may have formed during training). I don't like when people put new names for something that has an ancient and time-honored tradition attached to it. It bothers me. It's like when Wiccans claim to follow practices that have been handed down through the ages...no, you're not following the exact tradition and practices from 5,000 years ago (or whatever they claim), you have taken bits and pieces from several or many different traditions and melded them together, added some of your own stuff, and then created a new practice through that synthesis. I don't claim to be following the same practices, traditions, and beliefs of the ancient Greeks. I worship the same Gods and utilize some ancient ways and practices (inasmuch as I can due to lost records and the fact that people didn't always write down the specifics of their religious practices) but I don't claim to be following the same tradition exactly. I take a modern interpretation of them and add my own "flavor" to it.

Basically, if you "rename" something you aren't practicing the same thing. You've created a new system for practicing. However similar it may be to the old one it is based upon, it is not the same. Names are powerful things.

Adder wrote: But moreso to me labels are useful if they carry forward the language and symbology that is associated with it... and in the context of a skill, then that context IMO is the particular training used to acquire it, use of it, or to a lesser extent some other variation of how it might be valued in acquiring or applying - not comparative or referential to other similar systems like might be if using other systems labels. And for me, my Jediism tries to learn from the past but build for the future, so it's all about building systems which work (or might work) and that then defines the labels which work best.

Yes, but that's different from telling other people "well that's just a force ghost" or "that's force healing that you're doing there." Now, if you want to believe privately that it all comes from the force, that's fine, but telling others that their dead loved one who they sometimes see or communicate with is a "force ghost" is neither necessary or helpful, nor is it respectful.

Adder wrote: To the other question, just a bit of extra sensory perception (ie sensing what I seemingly shouldn't be able to sense), and some precognition from dreams (rare and seemingly associated with loss of life). For the later it's important for 'hits' to be too specific to be imagined, in things like time, place and activity, and as a result of that I've found that they tend to occur not too far into the future (short range precog) if not at the same time (ESP). Given those conditions, I've discounted a ton of kewl experiences, but the imagination is so powerful when it gives peak integrated experiences there can be way too much to possibly parse into any framework beyond rich hallucination... as asserting truth or otherwise seems a waste of time as our faculties are not powerful or reliable enough. Such that with my conditions it makes repeatability seemingly impossible so far for me.

One of the first steps in learning to use those natural (or latent) abilities is learning how to distinguish from normal thoughts and urges and psychic "hits." Sounds like you've already learned how to distinguish between them, so that's good.

Oh that's pretty awesome! And yea, it can be hard to distinguish the line between "normal" intuition and something more than that. I'm not even 100% certain that I have the abilities I listed, but I'm fairly sure.

That's awesome that you're a Reiki master! I'll definitely shoot you a message sometime. Probably in a minute when I'm done with this reply...haha