Intergalactic Summit

Defined:

-Will
The mental faculty by which one deliberately chooses or decides upon a course of action: championed freedom of will against a doctrine of predetermination.

-Spir·i·tu·al·i·ty (spr-ch-l-t)
The state, quality, manner, or fact of being spiritual.

The basic definition of these two concepts should be understood before covering anymore ground on this topic of Will vs Spirituality. As you can see one can be spiritual and lack Will. One can also have a strong inner will and not be spiritual.

A spiritualist may say that human will is weak in contrast to the will of any deity. Thus subjecting oneself to the will of said host is part of faith and should not be resisted. However I proclaim that any deity interested in the future of its believer would be interested in protecting the strength of inner will.

I notice in my travels across the cosmos a complacency in the followers of religious customs regarding their proactive influence over their emediate suroundings. It is not until things are finally at their worst that a majority of these 'believers' will make physical changes to their enviornment to protect their own futures.

Many cases of these followers turn out bad in that the spirituality they have cultivated under the blanket of peace has weakened their inner will and the metaphysical religion they have adopted turns on their interest to take positive action on the physical plane of existence. Their proactive movements are percieved as a threat by the doctrines of religion they have adopted to appease their thirst for godly knowledge though they never understood the source of which their spirituality sprung.

I write this in response to countless Amarrian pilots displeased by their spiritual leaders and the weakening resolve of their religious heads. It is a common site within Empirial order that the closer the warrior classes get to enlightenment and/or awareness within their spiritual spectrum the closer they walk into the shadows of betrayal and deceit following orders from currupt clerics and narrow minded priests.

Even a loyalist of the Amarr Empire from birth can atest to this fact.

I give this as an explanation but I remind you it is no excuse for slavery.

A warrior who is seasoned in battle and has fought will develope respect for the enemy. Any seasoned warrior who does not respect his or her enemy is destined to fall to underestimation and poor foresite. As this warrior traverses the world of battle and tactical adaptation their inner will strengthens and their pride grows in light of victories and accomplishments on the battlefield. The battlefield is the only place an Amarr can hone their will with the church so currupt at this point.

After time the warrior in thoughts and actions may serve his or her benifactors in every way; Through, faith, action and belief. But their inner will is still stronger than that of their own leadership. As a result the institution designed to subjegate and enslave turns on its own protectorate.

For this reason the elders of the Amarr are driven into seclusion and wise ones will hide their success from their comrads knowing such strength is an eyesore in the eyes of their peers. Peers who either lack the comprehension of self and spirit to develope their own inner will, or simply wish to see the will of God as the only force in power.

Unfortunately a nation of weak willed hive minds praying to a God that endorses said behavior and lack of initiative is not going to produce a moral society. On the surface with enough structure it can appear to be under the guidance of a just God but God created man to exalt his works on the physical plane. Thus a weak willed man is the same as a spiritually deprived soul since the two aspects meet on the thin veil of spiritual and physical.

In a society dedicated to the subjegation of oneself for the glory of God, observing God's lack of physical action in light of slavery is a difficult concept to process. This is because life and death are but blinks of the eye to God who sees a mans existence out of time and place void of pride and personal ambition. It is hard to understand what will is if one has never implimented it in ones own life as a fighter does daily to stay breathing: To affect the change and be the tool for a better tomorrow rather than expecting God to make it for you. The slave holder is always on the verge of spiritual insanity and relgious chaos. Believing in the creators will while defacing his creations at the same time is truly the most tormenting occupation I can imagine.

What is it with people writing ridiculously long posts? I tried to read this, failed to find a point and felt like 3 minutes of my life had been stolen from me.

Further to the point, never argue with anyone that will use 'god' as a fall back position. You will never convince them of anything.

You Amarrians can be real weird sometimes.

Cpt. Ephasianos,

first, giving the dictonary definitions of words and then assuming that they have thus been defined sufficiently is somewhat problematic. Your definition of 'spirituality' says about nothing but how you arrive at a noun from an adjective by adding the suffix '-ity.' In that case you should have at least given the definition of 'spiritual' as well.

In your last post here, you're giving the full list of possible meaning of words as listed in the dictionaries. This is more confusing than anything, for one has to search for the appropriate meanings in the lists to be even remotely able to see along which lines you are thinking when giving what seems to be your conclusions from the given definitions.

I will only deal with your last post for now, as I don't see any merit in countering your attack on a straw man that you were launching in your first one. Everyone with a basic knowledge of Amarrian religion knows that it does not embrace that kind of "complacency [...] regarding their proactive influence over their emediate suroundings". The Amarrian religion is not only a religion of thought and word, but always was and is a religion of righteous action. But enough of your straw man and unto what seems to be meant as a deductive argument.

If one looks at the dictionary definitions you give and tries to construct with them a valid argument for what seems to be your conclusion it would look like the following or at least me trying it arrived at the following:

P1: If one doesn't 'show consideration or appreciation' (sense 3 of 'respect') of ones enemy, one will underestimate the enemy.
P2: Underestimating ones enemy is folly (sense 3a of 'insanity').
-
C: Therefore "Not respecting your enemy is insanity."

Cpt. Sepherim already pointed out that one doesn't need to show consideration or appreciation of the whole enemy to not underestimate him or her, but one need only need to take into consideration what he is capable of doing. That doesn't translate into respect for the person of the enemy as a whole. You need to defend premise 1 against his attack on it. You failed to do so, so far.

Then you are singling out a certain segment of the full meaning of 'respect' here. So even if your argument would hold true, it would only be true that one has to respect ones enemy in a certain, quite constrained sense of 'respect'. So, even if you get this defense up your argument does ring quite hollow given the lean meaning of 'respect' you employ here.

So, three words of advice to you: First, put some effort into coming up with sufficient definitions for the purpose you have in mind. Second, in regard to that, please stop simply quoting dictionary definitions. Third, get your facts about the Amarrian religion straight if you want to have the semblance of trying to engage in intellectual discourse.

Faithfully,
N. Mithra

If you do not like something about your society, change it, not betray it with violence.

No matter how you justify bringing destruction upon your former friends and family, you are still in the wrong.

What its typical its the peculiar quality of a fool to perceive the faults of others and to forget his own.

"In the persuit of wrong doing one steps away from God."

Law, is a state i think we all prefer. so much easier when things go as they are ment to do... but things are not allways ment to go as they are intended, Chaos is a natural state in the universe, simply put it, if everything were Law, there would be no evolution...

Sir Tiberoius

Your ways in perfecting yourself, has nothing to do with natural evolution, thats enhancement, and i fail to see what that have to do with chaos... irrelevant !

Secondly, lets asume that what you claim is true that there is law to everything, or some bigger "law" behind it, then there isnt any chaos at all, and you have just made the very word without meaning... highly unlikly

When something is, and then it mutates into something else, its code its programming dident intend for this to happen, yet it did, you cant predict the unpredictable, thats one of the definitions of chaos, ewen here if we were to asume that on a higher grand level, there was design that predicted this, the very existance of choas, would indicate that this design is subject to chaos in it self... i find this more probable

We can reason and presume, that there will be chaos, since it have been and is, a on going part of evolution... just couse we can predict that there will be a event. that wont be according to how it should be, dont mean we know when, how and in what way... chaos is part of a pattern, and that pattern is in itself subject to chaos, so yes you can predict that there will be an unpredictable event, unless of course, the universe suddenly started to work excactly as things are soposed to...