Over on his blog LakewoodYid is soliciting opinions on whether he should continue blogging (both posting and commenting) or not.
I find LakewoodYid fascinating. I grew up Conservative, lived most of my adult life largely in secular environments, and even as I returned to observance I kept a strongly rationalist attitude towards Judaism. LY comes from a completely different world. The science fiction editor John Campbell, who was active from approximately the 1930s to the 1960s used to challenge his writers 'Show me an alien who thinks as well as a man, but not like a man'. In Campbell's milieu, the word 'man' had the unrecognized adjectives 'white Enlightenment European' in front of it. The most successful authors to meet his requirements generally tended to steal lavishly from non-European cultures to formulate their aliens. LY serves this same purpose in my mind - he thinks as well as I do, but nothing like I do. If he reads this I know he will be sincerely sorry for the handicap of my upbringing.
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks talks about Judaism having a dual epistemology. Knowledge about the universe or Teva may be drawn from observation. In additions Jews have the Mesorah - the oral and written law. This is knowledge given by revelation.
Much of it may simply not be derivable from observation. Many modern orthodox Jews hold that these two source of knowledge are disjoint - the do not overlap and thus there are no conflicts between them. LY seems to hold that mesorah is primary - that when there are apparent contradictions between the two sources of knowledge we make no effort to reconcile - we simply follow the mesorah and ignore our observations of Teva. See his post Rambam - Ignore the evidence. Furthermore, LY is a classic example of a scholastic approach to knowledge. His perceived job is to mine the works of his predecessors to come to an insight on a problem. He modestly avoids chiddush. And he doesn't seem to seek factual data from the real world - I don't recall him ever citing a survey or referring to scientific data.
As far as LY's actual question of continuing to blog or not, I think it is clear that we don't have enough in common for my answer to be relevant to him. But I will draw on my well of non-mesorah knowledge and share a quote from Roger Zelazny This is the curse of the Buddha - you will never be the same as once you were. One more data point - I tell the pre-converts and early stage BTs I mentor to stay away from the J-Blogosphere until they are well grounded in a community. For someone without a lot of grounding, posters such as XGH and LY are too heady a brew. Four went to Pardes, but only Rabbi Akiva returned whole.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
As I've often pointed out, ignoring empirical facts is not consistent with rabbinic Judiasm. The proof is that we are required to use physicians who received their medical training from conventional medical schools and not from studying our mesorah. The main question is where the line should be drawn between empiricism and mesorah -- and there are a lot of practical ramifications.
Another interesting question, however, is why so much of the frum world (at least as represented by the blogosphere) seems to pretend that the above is not true.
If you don't mind a bit of cynicism, the dividing line seems to be that one should ignore inconvenient facts. Thus, don't ignore medicine, airlines, and electricity, but do ignore evolution, cosmology, anthropolgy, archeology, etc.
I suppose another way of putting it is to ignore the sciences while accepting technology.
What I think many folks find frustrating about this phenomenon is that they know that the mesorah is really sort of a Platonic ideal, not this unchanging monolith where what was, is and what is, was. As I posted on my blog this week, few people seem aware that the 100 kolot on rosh hashana effectively go back about 100 years in the sense of it being very widespread. There are many examples of practices and beliefs changing right under people's noses without many people a short time later even realizing it.
The phenomenon of rejecting science but accepting technology is very widespread. One notable example (and I am not comparing the communities) is how the al Qaedaniks used very modern means of communication, eg, the internet--all while being vehemently opposed to modernity, the West etc).
Part of the reason this can happen is that when people are ignorant about how science works they can in complete sincerity assume that science and technology are not fully integrated.
Welcome to the blogosphere, Larry. :)
'Part of the reason this can happen is that when people are ignorant about how science works they can in complete sincerity assume that science and technology are not fully integrated. '
True!
Coal and nuclear power plants are strong evidence for an old universe, but don't tell the biblical literalists that about the power for the computers they use to blog about how the earth is 6000 years old.
In one conversation with LY, somewhere on DovBear, I said (well, if I may say so myself) that the tradition of engaging, teaching and learning from the secular or non-Jewish world is clear throughout the Talmud, rishonim and acharonim. It is those who shun such engagement who are the innovators on Jewish tradition, not me.
A good, healthy, happy year to everyone!
"...the tradition of engaging, teaching and learning from the secular or non-Jewish world is clear throughout the Talmud, rishonim and acharonim.
Chochma ba Goyim ta'amin! Chochma ba Goyim ta'amin!
[Dances proudly like a little forest critter.]
For someone without a lot of grounding, posters such as XGH and LY are too heady a brew. Four went to Pardes, but only Rabbi Akiva returned whole.
Given that there is no requirement
for Goyim to convert, and that the deal with the Jews is just one deal (and other deals might be operative that we don't know about), and that there is additionally no requirement (that can't be convincingly counter-argued) to believe certain things, it could very well be said that adhering to the practices of a reasonable montheism is all that is needed. In that sense, both the Ger and Lakewoodyid are perhaps as Jewish as they will ever need to be. The Ger need not convert(although doing so is a good thing), and Lakewoodyid need not be right about factual data (although being so is a good thing).
On a personal level, I feel that LY should certainly continue blogging. Not only for his own development (consider it a form of study), but also to present a counter-voice. Without the zest of dissidence, the blog-olam stagnates, and none of us will learn as much.
He's a good man. Often one I disagree with, but nevertheless a good man. I relish his p.o.v.
Post a Comment