The Jedi Philosophy

the better criticism would be not that the Jedi philosophy is meaningless because it is fiction, but because it is a gross generalization of several branches of eastern philosophical traditions

I don't think that's necessarily right either; you could claim something is dumbed down, or it could just as easily be seen as "stripped down to the essentials", in a positive, syncretic way.

I'm not saying having Star Wars with an overly complex jedi philosophy would be better, in fact I agree it is probably better stripped down. All I'm saying is that if one really wanted to have a go at it, that might be the best place to start.

I see whether a religion is old or new as having no bearing on its quality, just personally. I think they should be judged only on the merit of their ideas.

"There is no emotion, there is peace.
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity.
There is no chaos, there is harmony.
There is no death, there is the Force."

That is actually the Jedi Philosophy. "There is 'no why' is subtext of the Jedi Philosophy. It a difficult concept to understand and really, you can't fully understand it. Basically what I believe, is that the Jedi Philosophy is the mastery of your mind and emotions.

"Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion I gain strength.
Through strength I gain power.
Through power I gain victory.
Through victory my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me."

The Sith Philosophy is based strictly on passion and the attainment of power. Whereas the Jedi Philosophy believes in the mastery of the mind and emotions, the Sith Philosophy is based on 'the ends justify the means.'

Hope this helps . . .

It is really a bunch of Religions mixed up together.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
It is really a bunch of Religions mixed up together.

The same could be said of most religions.

srug

Some but not alot.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
It is really a bunch of Religions mixed up together.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
Some but not alot.

Generalize much?

And yes, a lot.

Originally posted by Digi
Is that happening here? It's the philosophy forum after all, not religion.

Also, there's a fallacy whose name I forget at work here, where you're implying that we should dismiss any ideas that come from "Jedi philosophy" simply because it's based on a fictional universe. To a non-religious person, both modern religions and Star Wars are equally man-made and fictitious, so the points they make are equal in their potential merit.

Kinda like shakya said, there's not much in Jedi that can't be found from other, non-fiction religions or creeds. That said, lightsabers make it way more badass. There's actually a LOT more to Jedi philosophy and its following than the OP suggests. it's a very interesting cultural phenomenon.

Noobslice.

Originally posted by Digi
Generalize much?

And yes, a lot.

Which ones?Most of Religons are base on God and not nature.But only some like the jedi one is base on nature.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
Which ones?Most of Religons are base on God and not nature.But only some like the jedi one is base on nature.

Oh then yes that is true.

What Kandy said. There's nothing about Nature in your original post that I replied to.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
You're responding to a post that is literally 6 years old.

Noobslice.

No no, he needed to feel rebuked 6 years later. He was due.

uhuh

Even Catholicism is made up of older religions, sorry but it is.

It is actly really old not of todays times.

It's all about the Sun God, The Sun of Righteousness.

Worship the Sun God for he is the Fun God
RA RA RA!

Originally posted by Deja~vu
It's all about the Sun God, The Sun of Righteousness.

Worship the Sun God for he is the Fun God
RA RA RA!

Originally posted by King Kandy
I see whether a religion is old or new as having no bearing on its quality, just personally. I think they should be judged only on the merit of their ideas.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I see whether a religion is old or new as having no bearing on its quality, just personally. I think they should be judged only on the merit of their ideas.

But surely the "merit" of claiming the unique truth of a particular creator being and worldview is undermined by other similar and/or identical preceding claims, no? I think it's more interrelated than you're suggesting.