Is the light and dark?

Avalon wrote: You've proven my point. But once again, thank you for playing. Toodles.

I thought you were done with this one? :laugh: .. you just cant resist yourself can you!
Good Jedi, always predictable. Toodles yourself! oh, until next time, right?

James wrote: Look, I'm not in favour of violent rape, I'm really not, but much like killing, once removed from all of our personal preferences and ideals, it's hard to prove it is evil.

So is non-violent rape ok? :silly: Just joking but you are right I think. The fact that it considered evil is a product of cognitive bias. Now that is not to say that this bias is a bad thing because sometimes these biases lead to more effective actions in any given situation, but taken in a pure context the idea that rape is universally evil seems unfounded.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: So is non-violent rape ok? :silly: Just joking but you are right I think. The fact that it considered evil is a product of cognitive bias. Now that is not to say that this bias is a bad thing because sometimes these biases lead to more effective actions in any given situation, but taken in a pure context the idea that rape is universally evil seems unfounded.

You know there is no thing such as pure context. Not possible thought can not be pure, always limited by the concepts of which one already has. Even the most open of minds is subject to this.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Avalon wrote: You've proven my point. But once again, thank you for playing. Toodles.

I thought you were done with this one? :laugh: .. you just cant resist yourself can you!
Good Jedi, always predictable. Toodles yourself! oh, until next time, right?

James wrote: Look, I'm not in favour of violent rape, I'm really not, but much like killing, once removed from all of our personal preferences and ideals, it's hard to prove it is evil.

So is non-violent rape ok? :silly: Just joking but you are right I think. The fact that it considered evil is a product of cognitive bias. Now that is not to say that this bias is a bad thing because sometimes these biases lead to more effective actions in any given situation, but taken in a pure context the idea that rape is universally evil seems unfounded.

If we put our hands into the fire for more than a few seconds, our skin will begin to burn. There is no evil in the fire.

But we are all smart enough to know we shouldn't be burning our hands.

I suppose you aren't really trying to make a case for rape, as much as you are trying to make a case against philosophical/moral absolutism. This distinction is important to put into perspective the reason why you keep insisting on discussing this subject that might be of a sensitive nature to others.

Evil to me is something along the lines of knowingly causing an experience of suffering to something against their will.... but of course there has to be some qualifications about that; along the lines of not doing every practical thing in ones power to avoid knowingly causing an experience of suffering to something against their will, and taking measures to assess the vulnerability of someone in situations where suffering might occur as a result of that interaction etc.

In which case, most of the time it is quite easy to apply that understanding of the term. Using compassion as the polar opposite of it then make sense. But there are measures of both things, and people employ small amounts of them every day in every corner of the globe.... but the larger measures of it really stand out and serve to define that persons intent and effort. A compassionate person, an evil person, a person who has evil thoughts or compassionate thoughts, and lots of other names for people who act evil or compassionate in small doses to try and exert each type of influence on others.

The parameter boils down to the objective physical condition of the entity in terms of pain or damage. And when we don't have a capacity to measure the impacts, then the subjective experience of the entity serves some measure of guide. Given most all of us share very similar biology, it is not hard to understand some basic moral parameters to avoid creating suffering but the problem is most people don't consider non-standard potentials... usually because they don't care enough.

So 'non-violent rape', how does one know its not violent! The physical damage could be internal (maybe they have a pre-existing medical condition!) or psychological, or heck even spiritual. Saying something is non-violent without being able to actually know is superficial and an attempt to justify it as a means of avoiding truth.

I've noticed several times people taking jabs at "We don't accept murder, rape, ect..."
That was my personal opinion on the subject and not a reflection on the temple but, if your in the temple and don't know that we don't accept that kind of behavior then you should have your membership revoked end of story.

second, Rickie I think you misunderstood what I was saying about anger. I wasn't saying that we cannot get anger or that it's unnatural to be anger obviously I get angry I got upset this afternoon when a co-worker just didn't show up for work because he was "busy." But, my point was like you said abusive in nature.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Avalon wrote: Honestly, I would say that any discussion on the moral ambiguity of rape and murder doesn't belong here, but I'm not a mod and it's not my decision to make. That said, if you really want to spend a thread commenting on how actions can be morally ambiguous, there are far better actions to choose from than rape or murder. I would ask in the future, you look to those other actions and not these extremes. Please, and thank you.

I can understand your reasons for saying this and I know that it can be a sensitive subject for some. However I don't think its right to ask that it not be discussed. Its really an attempt at censorship and while this place has certain rules on censored language it does not include the discussion of any subject such as this. Instead It would be better to ask simply that if these are discussed that they be discussed with the utmost attention to their sensitive nature.

ནའдհдཀ༑ནკ wrote: I would dare to argue this. After all, nearly all religious beginnings state that in the beginning there was only darkness. Light was brought into being and from that we were created. My interpretation of this is that we are beings of light, thus succumbing to the darkness is against our very existence.

I think this might be an equivocation in the term darkness. In one aspect you seem to use it in the context of the absence of light and later use it in the context of evil. Given the idea that this description is a poetic interpretation of the creation of the universe, wouldn't this mean that "The Force" one thing that would be considered eternal, is darkness itself? and from that light emerged? In this concept there is also the idea that the universe will return to The Force in heat death, so isn't darkness inevitable no matter how much we fight against it?

So I see a ton of new posts here so forgive me as I go through them and write to them more individually as I see the need.

Actually I would equate the darkness as the foundation of the force, however, "And it was without form and devoid of life." Thus life is derived from the light side of the force, not the dark. Its not that darkness itself is evil, but that it is a temptation that drives people to do evil things when the let themselves be seduced by it. Can we really control anything other than our own choices that we are presented with in life? Usually we don't even get to control what the choices will be just the choice we accept. For this reason, I could be persuaded to buy into destiny as a predetermined path has been laid out for us and we only have to live it the best way we can.

I believe the fight against dark is the honoring of life as a creation of the force. Without the light we would return to being devoid of live and without form. If we honor our ancestral struggle to continue life so that we can participate in it, then we should be honoring the light, as I see it.

Manu wrote: ནའдհдཀ༑ནკ,

Considering you accept the premise that energy is neither created nor destroyed, consider how light came from darkness.

Considering you equate darkness with evil, do you feel "more evil" when you turn off the lights at night to sleep?

Do you envision evil people as dark-skinned angry people who never laugh or love anyone?

I recommend reading up on Jung's Shadow, I find it a more fitting explanation for "darkness" and how to treat it. The ideals we build up are figures of light, and those cast the greatest shadows.

I consider that the force willed that there be life and there cannot be life in darkness. As I expressed in my prior text, the darkness is without form and devoid of life. I actually feel very comfortable sleeping in the light, I work nights. No I don't think skin color changes anything about a person. As the beginning force was darkness, yet still energy, it was transformed into light.

Ok. So you have your definition of darkness.

How does one "turn to the darkside"? Does it entail craving the end of life? Have you met such a person, or are we discussing hypotheticals?

Arisaig wrote:

Manu wrote:

Arisaig wrote:

Manu wrote: Arisaig, Kyrin...

Nobody cares :laugh:

Me either, im just getting tired of being called a hypocrite at every turn, despite evidence showing otherwise. I'm tired of this one man crusade against everything I post. I'm tired.

That should be proof enough that your method of dealing with it is ineffective. What are you going to do about it?

Defend myself, as I always have. A tired soldier is still a soldier, and a solider fights for what's right. I never move to attack, only to defend, as I always have. But being attacked for no reason, time and time again for no reason... sorta getting sick of it.

I'm a pleasant person, I really am. Fierce loyal to those that have earned my respect, will always be there for anyone who needs it. Always have been. I'm exhausted that my good name is getting attacked time and time again.

A Soldier will charge into combat not just defend. Can I just suggest that an attack against you personally is only an attack when you perceive it as such. If you know you're value that nothing anyone has to say about you personally is an attack against you. One of the main reasons we have issues in society in my opinion is because people are quick to take offense to something stated, whether or not it is intended for them or not. I have heard is too many times, "They are laughing at me." No they are laughing because they are enjoying the moment they are having, it has nothing to do about you.

Since this is a discussion of light and dark might I suggest that taking offense might be a lure towards the dark, it is an affront to life and happiness IMO. Just let it go, smile and the simple things and enjoy the life you have to live.

JLSpinner wrote: *Insert gentle nudge back to the subject.*

To me rape, legitimate rape, is inherently "evil". It is an utter violation of somebody else. Killing we would have to look at scenarios, intentions, etc. Was it self-defense, for example. But generally speaking murder would be "evil" as well.

Exactly. As per my following of the Potentium philosophy of the Force, this goes right along with it. Depending on the context, doing something evil to stop greater evil (self-defence from an attacker whose made it obvious that the attack would only end in death), is only necessary in those extreme circumstances. Even the law defends that view. If you see evil, end evil, and only do what could be considered evil to protect others and stop greater evil.[/quote]

JamesSand wrote:

To me rape, legitimate rape, is inherently "evil"

Jedi Believe

In the Force, and in the inherent worth of all life within it.

In the sanctity of the human person. We oppose the use of torture and cruel or unusual punishment, including the death penalty.

If Jedi believe it is not okay to utilize the death penalty then how can we even look into context here? Wouldn't we have to accept that if it were to take place it must be the will of the force and we should not object to it? Honestly this goes right back to my initial post of how can we state that people live as they want and do what they want when we have these beliefs posted on the home page?

On the other hand, this is where I would state that my personal beliefs are not in conjunction with the posted beliefs of Jedi. Does that mean that I am not and can not be Jedi? Or do I need to eat my questioning of this whole discussion topic because it has just been proven against me here?

Arisaig wrote: Really?

Oh.

Okay.

I'll just let my genes die out then.



Look, I'm not in favour of violent rape, I'm really not, but much like killing, once removed from all of our personal preferences and ideals, it's hard to prove it is evil.

Yes, it is used as a weapon for fear, control, and so on, but so is killing - but you were happy to say sometimes killing has to be considered.


I despise the "other animals do it, so it must be okay" sort of argument that people use, but hey, since morals are made up, I guess it's as good as any - Rape is rampant in a variety of species.
Even some you might be quite fond of.


It's worth noting, that for personal reasons, I have a fair passion on the subject of rape and I would happily give up my own sanity for the opportunity to make a few specific individuals suffer exquisitely - but I'll still argue that the act itself, without context, can't be blanketed as "evil", even if, on the balance of probabilities, most rapists you've met may very well be better off put down.

(fun fact: you probably don't know who the people you know are that are rapists. They look like everyone else)

first...how the hell is that a FUN fact? I do believe that any assault on another being is an act of evil, Murder, Rape, Burglary, Slavery, anything that insinuates that you are taking advantage of another, IMO, is an act against the LIVING FORCE. While I can accept that you have your own opinion, and that you believe it to be the truth that you know, I don't accept it now and am very wary that I could ever hear an argument to sway me from that train of thought.