tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post2373211734026952163..comments2023-10-30T08:40:59.016-04:00Comments on Wolfish Musings: How Can They Say Science Is Wrong?BrooklynWolfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-58709381183629632002011-12-14T19:53:08.384-05:002011-12-14T19:53:08.384-05:00The old frumteens site is still available here:
h...The old frumteens site is still available here:<br /><br />http://classic.frumteens.com/<br /><br />If you have a question on something there, submit it to the new website:<br /><br />http://www.jewswithquestions.com/yonihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05735651718451471700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-60395173138130786892011-12-12T04:19:35.749-05:002011-12-12T04:19:35.749-05:00"You may find out that this "stupid"..."You may find out that this "stupid" position was also held by the Maharal and the Ramchal. And, as a matter of fact, they both show that there is ample proof of this concept in Chazal."<br /><br />True, it was held by Maharal and Ramchal. But they were the first to apply this approach to scientific statements of Chazal. There is no precedent in the Rishonim for it. And it is very difficult to take it seriously as the real meaning of Chazal's words.Zecharianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-39037991286649148222011-12-07T20:45:45.286-05:002011-12-07T20:45:45.286-05:00For decades that fellow Goldberg has been plugging...For decades that fellow Goldberg has been plugging his Geocentric idea http://wolfishmusings.blogspot.com/2007/10/geocentrism-jewish-press-readers-let.html<br /><br />And he seems to be still at it!<br />http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/811/geo2a.jpg/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-33753364200499986482011-12-06T16:51:09.394-05:002011-12-06T16:51:09.394-05:00Wolf conveniently did not quote the evidence provi...<i>Wolf conveniently did not quote the evidence provided even on the website that he excerpted from. </i><br /><br />I don't know what "evidence" you believe I left out.<br /><br />The main point of my post was that if you take the approach of the Rabbis Shapiro (that Chazal were talking about some "other" reality than the one that scientists observe as the basis of their statements), then you can't use Chazal's statements to say that science is wrong.<br /><br />I'm not aware that there was any refutation to that point on the JWQ page. If so, please point it out to me.<br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />The WolfBrooklynWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-65218994484170700952011-12-06T16:35:44.029-05:002011-12-06T16:35:44.029-05:00Give me a break! Mini excerpts of philosophical po...Give me a break! Mini excerpts of philosophical positions were quoted here. Wolf says there is scant evidence of it in Chazal. Is that true? Why don't you ask what the source is. <br /><br />You may find out that this "stupid" position was also held by the Maharal and the Ramchal. And, as a matter of fact, they both show that there is ample proof of this concept in Chazal.<br /><br />Wolf conveniently did not quote the evidence provided even on the website that he excerpted from. <br /><br />You want to comment on it? Go ahead. But if you want to understand, you should ask.<br /><br />It is people such as yourself that create straw men due to their lack of understanding of the positions they are disagreeing with.<br /><br />What you are doing is not commenting. You are gossiping. You are talking about things you know nothing about. You have a chance to really find the truth and you say you don't need to.<br /><br />That is hwy you and your kind are considered laughing stocks in the Yeshiva world. Ignorance to you is bliss.Laughsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-42449651240070109902011-12-06T08:27:34.623-05:002011-12-06T08:27:34.623-05:00<< why don't you ask the Rabbis Shapiro ...<< why don't you ask the Rabbis Shapiro about all of this instead of just writing about them behind their backs?>><br /><br />Ask them what, exactly?<br /><br />While it makes sense to debate someone’s views with them directly, those views were directly quoted here. People of normal intelligence can read a position and comment on it.<br />The idea that no one can legitimately form a dissenting opinion without having a rabbi “explain” to them why they’re mistaken is an idea that lives in today’s yeshivas (because, like other ideas, there’s no one to challenge it)---but it’s not doing too well in the real world.jrsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-61467998837417812982011-12-05T15:18:13.920-05:002011-12-05T15:18:13.920-05:00Ah, why don't you ask the Rabbis Shapiro about...Ah, why don't you ask the Rabbis Shapiro about all of this instead of just writing about them behind their backs? They both seem to be alive, well, and accessible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-43704237752086243962011-12-05T10:25:19.285-05:002011-12-05T10:25:19.285-05:00Zach put it best, & most succinctly:
<< ...Zach put it best, & most succinctly:<br /><< This totally meaningless statement has zero intellectual value regardless of the modern spin (GUI) Shapiro futilely attempts to impart to it. >><br /><br />Rabbi Shapiro’s “explanation” is one of those statements that’s really just a string of words that SEEM to say something thoughtful & substantial---but which actually mean nothing, like the ’scientific’ exposition in some sci-fi films.<br />To wit: there is a ‘real’ world---i.e. Chazal’s World---which, given the countless references to these things, apparently has virtually all the same animals, plants, weather conditions, human emotions, political events & countries as, uh, Earth 1 (the scientists' domain)---differing only in those details about which Chazal made statements that disagree with science?<br />Could a theory be any more stupid?<br /><br />Many among the current generation of rabbonim & roshei yeshiva have [very relatively] better language skills, & also integrate contemporary buzzwords, phrases & even pop-culture references into their speeches. These superficial nods to modernity are far from being indicative of any real intellectual or cultural sophistication on the parts of those rabbis. <br /><br />They may be very good people, fine men, intelligent, well-meaning and sincere. But broadly educated, intellectually curious & truly open-minded, they are most definitely not.jrsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-64412107959079270392011-11-25T15:32:13.046-05:002011-11-25T15:32:13.046-05:00"Spiritualizing" an argument is the mode..."Spiritualizing" an argument is the modern method of dealing with the advances of science. The Christians use it to prove that Mary was a virgin, despite clear texts that she had many children, and to reconcile different versions of the same story. However, how can a witness establish the truth of a matter if we are referring to spiritual truths? I can promise to pay you $100 and when you come to collect, i will say that I meant a spiritual $100. <br /><br />Why does the argument ad absurdem work? Because, what it does effectively is redefine truth. Truth is no longer the opposite of falsity. It is the definitive. Thus, we can reduce this argument to a logical fallacy, very similar to the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. <br /><br />Angus is a true Scotsman from Glasgow for 5 generations and he eats sugar on his porridge. No true Scotsman eats sugar on his porridge. At this point, I can go one of two directions.<br /><br />A) The second fact is false, disproven by the first.<br />B) The first fact is false, disproven by the second. This simply redefines the generally accepted meaning of "true". Thus, nothing is true, for when it is proven untrue, we simply redefine "true".<br /><br />This is essentially the argument that the Rabbis are making.rebeljewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-51401929885907768922011-11-24T12:21:40.563-05:002011-11-24T12:21:40.563-05:00Yossi, perfect example. Clearly halacha is based o...Yossi, perfect example. Clearly halacha is based on this metaphysical world where the volume of an olive is equal to the surface area of a shiurim card * the thickness of a piece of matza.<br /><br />Apparently women in this metaphysical world are also incapable of learning Torah.ItcheSruliknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-15681202410692834262011-11-22T21:45:29.476-05:002011-11-22T21:45:29.476-05:00So at the end of the discussion you actually have ...<i>So at the end of the discussion you actually have no objection to what these rabbis are saying, and Chazal has no objection to what the scientists are saying.</i><br /><br />So, you think the Rabbis Shapiro will say that, based on the observable evidence, the universe is more than 5772 years old, evolution is true, etc.?<br /><br />The WolfBrooklynWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-59009077688154408712011-11-22T21:44:01.712-05:002011-11-22T21:44:01.712-05:00Joel,
My point wasn't that science is, someho...Joel,<br /><br />My point wasn't that science is, somehow, infallable. Of course it's not. <br /><br />My point is that if the Rabbis Shapiro are discussing some metaphysical reality rather than the observable universe, then how can they say that science is wrong when it describes that observable universe.<br /><br />The WolfBrooklynWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-68112152446812747942011-11-22T21:25:15.271-05:002011-11-22T21:25:15.271-05:00The question; how can science be wrong?, is offens...The question; how can science be wrong?, is offensive. What is "science"?. Merely the teachings and speculations of men. "science" is always changing. A better question would be, when is "science" right?Joel Goldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-35863189202664604882011-11-22T20:44:24.777-05:002011-11-22T20:44:24.777-05:00The post is about science, not about whether or no...<b>The post is about science, not about whether or not the Talmud is authentically Jewish or not.</b><br /><br />I understand that and I was simply telling you that the real Torah (Pentateuch) does not (and will not) contradict science. <br /><br />Statements from the Talmud, on the other hand, do and will.<br /><br />This is why I said that I do not understand why such a reasonable person as yourself would even try to comment on this issue !??<br /><br />Talmud and all of its derivative works is ridden with circular logic and other problems that result in statements like Mr. Slifkin and Mr. Shapiro make. Not to mention that Talmud by all accounts is way too outdated compared to what we know now, both science and pentateuch wise.<br /><br />So unless you are trying to rationalize RELIGIOUS beliefs ( not facts) then I see no reason why would you even consider rasing this discussion about the bats and such.<br /><br />I do apologize if I sounded unclear in my first post. I had no intention to hijack your blog post.<br /><br />P.S. All above aside, I do agree with you completely that statements of those crazy rabbis are indeed totally incomprehensible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-3765111232121730142011-11-22T12:06:57.596-05:002011-11-22T12:06:57.596-05:00His question is:
You wrote:
"the Rabbis Sha...His question is:<br /><br />You wrote:<br /><br />"the Rabbis Shapiro have ceded the argument to the scientists vis-a-vis the observable universe."<br /><br />But the Rabbis Shapiro are saying there never was an argument vis-a-vis the observable universe! Who says there is? Or ever was? They are not saying that your entire debate was never a debate. If the scientists prove something, it is proven. Nobody disagrees. Not even Chazal because like you say: <br /><br />"science (which concerns itself with physical, observable"<br /><br />So at the end of the discussion you actually have no objection to what these rabbis are saying, and Chazal has no objection to what the scientists are saying.Guestnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-40364602088185051452011-11-22T11:23:55.936-05:002011-11-22T11:23:55.936-05:00Averich,
I'm not sure I understand what your ...Averich,<br /><br />I'm not sure I understand what your question is. Can you please re-state/elaborate?<br /><br />Thanks.<br /><br />The WolfBrooklynWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-89703642507828354852011-11-22T11:21:56.462-05:002011-11-22T11:21:56.462-05:00Alexander,
Please... don't turn this into a p...Alexander,<br /><br />Please... don't turn this into a platform for your particular point of view. If you want to discuss something on the topic of the post, then fine. The post is about science, not about whether or not the Talmud is authentically Jewish or not.<br /><br />Please keep the discussion on topic. <br /><br />The WolfBrooklynWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-89835851868180960292011-11-22T08:22:14.140-05:002011-11-22T08:22:14.140-05:00Wolf,
I live in Bayswater, Rabbi (Yaakov) Shapiro...Wolf,<br /><br />I live in Bayswater, Rabbi (Yaakov) Shapiro's neighborhood. If you have a question for him, you should ask him. There is no doubt you will get a good answer. You would not be the first one to ask him questions. If you don't want to reveal your real identity, you can send a question to his Shul's website. www.Baismedrash.com , or to his Q&A website, Judasim.Eu.Com<br /><br />Until then, maybe you can answer my question on your post. I don't know what exactly your issue is. Why would it matter if we can't say the scientists were wrong about the observable universe? Why would we need to say that?<br /><br />)On this topic, you should see these lectures, especially #3, which addresses your topic head-on:)<br /><br />http://www.baismedrash.com/2010/07/cosmology-101/Avreichnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-27835621922899742562011-11-22T02:14:01.046-05:002011-11-22T02:14:01.046-05:00Wolf,
Are you seriously contemplating this silly ...Wolf,<br /><br />Are you seriously contemplating this silly nonsense ?<br /><br />Do you not understand that the real Torah (Pentateuch) and what most Jews know as Torah are completely different things ?!?<br /><br />Do you not understand that if not for Talmud, we all'd be living it up in the Land of Israel in peace and serenity ?!?<br /><br />I mean, for the love of God...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-86119803936833979942011-11-21T08:13:04.499-05:002011-11-21T08:13:04.499-05:00Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro is the nephew of Rabbi Moshe ...Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro is the nephew of Rabbi Moshe Shapiro, and brother-in-law of Rabbi Elya Ber Wachtfogel, Rosh Yeshiva of South Fallsberg. The three have the same Hashkofo, hence the identical approach.Franknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-69332868314003033152011-11-18T08:22:32.486-05:002011-11-18T08:22:32.486-05:00Well, since 96% of the "matter" of the u...Well, since 96% of the "matter" of the universe is made of dark energy and dark matter, it is certainly possible that can be a parallel 'real' world out there. throw in a sprinkling of quantum physics, and you can start a new religion !!gntesslernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-85512538766114347622011-11-17T23:06:43.177-05:002011-11-17T23:06:43.177-05:00Do you really want the Haredim to say that science...Do you really want the Haredim to say that science is wrong? <br /><br />Perhaps Judaism would be better off if they confined their more odd ideas to the metaphysical world...Woodrow/Conservadoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07859037579609012882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-46932708364354546062011-11-17T22:44:58.479-05:002011-11-17T22:44:58.479-05:00to follow this line of thinking would lead one to ...to follow this line of thinking would lead one to conclude that Orthodox Judaism is based on nonsense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-72581241646282951262011-11-17T17:27:52.353-05:002011-11-17T17:27:52.353-05:00He can apply it to charedim, but i feel he looks s...<i>He can apply it to charedim, but i feel he looks silly by dismissing or ignoring arguments using his logic on the validity of the torah and orthodox rabbnic judaism as we (and he) know it and practice it. </i><br /><br />@Ksil - He hasn't ever dismissed them, to my knowledge. And he hasn't entirely ignored them either; on a few occasions he's mentioned briefly that there are very serious challenges on fundamental issues. What do you want/expect from him? To provide lame answers, or to announce that Judaism is bogus? Either one would fatally cripple his ability to help Orthodox Jews be a little more rational.Davenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-9125269353141000142011-11-17T16:45:31.491-05:002011-11-17T16:45:31.491-05:00It was a site that received a fair amount of atten...It was a site that received a fair amount of attention in the J-blogosphere a few years ago. I don't know how popular it is now.<br /><br />I'm not a regular reader, but I do check in from time to time.<br /><br />Just out of curiosity, what does this have to do the my argument?<br /><br />The WolfBrooklynWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.com