tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1097749014220347853.post1489153743593596645..comments2024-01-30T12:26:03.019-05:00Comments on The Blog of Garnel Ironheart: On SinaiMighty Garnel Ironhearthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09571194550300367249noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1097749014220347853.post-50344012497779003342011-06-15T23:43:40.963-04:002011-06-15T23:43:40.963-04:00The core question is: how does one know the truth?...The core question is: how does one know the truth? The world of science and rationalism states that this is through the sensory collection of data and the application of logic (with, perhaps, a basic acceptance of some limited a prioris). What the world of religion introduces is the possibility of other means by which to ascertain the truth or, perhaps more correctly, other elements in this process of determining truth. The most well known of these is what we may term faith -- really an argument that there is an additional intuitive feature within the human being that also can play a role in finding truth. Applying the word l'havdel to clearly distinguish Torah theory from that of the general religious world, we find such a concept in the words of the Kuzari who maintains that there was something in the soul of Avraham Avinu that led him to recognize God. A metaphysical sensory element, an inner intuition, the point is that there was and is, in many people, another perceptive faculty which can be and should be a factor in a search for truth, aside from what we can learn about truth from the rationalism of our senses and logic. <br /><br />But here is where the issue becomes interesting. The Kuzari also maintains that this additional faculty cannot violate logic -- and here is where Torah Judaism makes its unique mark. Religions in general, in arguing for faith, declare it to supplant rationalism and logic. Faith is perceived to be a different category. It is even expected that faith will contradict rationalism and that the sign of a true adherent of the Faith is the negation of the rational. Kuzari argues the opposite. This faculty of the soul to perceive certain aspects of truth must still join with logic and rationalism to find the truth. It is not an independent faculty to supplant thought as so many generic religious contend. It is another faculty that is to employed in the process, the complex process, of discovering the truth. <br /><br />This is really what Garnel is arguing. How do we know truth? Through the employment of various factors and elements that must intertwine and integrate within this objective of finding the truth. The Torah critique of the secularist is that he/she employs only a subset of the available factors and elements. What Garnel terms Scientism is really when the secularist takes this position as an a priori in itself, rejecting almost as a principle of faith that there is no other factors or elements that play a role in the search for truth. The secularist critique of the religious individual is specifically that he/she employs false elements and factors, even to the extent -- as evidenced by the articulation of such phrases as credo qui absurdum est, I believe because it is absurd -- of denying the very role of the real elements and factors of logic and rationalism. The Torah position is clearly against such a religious view but it does still run into conflict with the secularist because it does project other elements and factors. But the secularist is confused because, at the same time, the Torah declares the value of rationalism and logic. And this is precisely the complexity of Torah -- for it sees a multi-dimensional process in the acquisition of truth that clearly still greatly respects thought. This is why people can't make us out.<br /><br />Rabbi Ben HechtNishmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04237299801109329429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1097749014220347853.post-41017433424029950652011-06-14T16:41:13.056-04:002011-06-14T16:41:13.056-04:00Okay, so that all went way over my head- Back to p...Okay, so that all went way over my head- Back to picking out tomorrow's shade of pink lipgloss.....duh, duh, derp.....<br /><br />But seriously, are you a shrink? You really sounded like you know your stuff in my entry.AriSparkleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05353792696786575669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1097749014220347853.post-75184926067322642932011-06-14T11:33:28.492-04:002011-06-14T11:33:28.492-04:00Goodness me, there's a lot to disagree with he...Goodness me, there's a lot to disagree with here...I'll stick to a few points.<br /><br /><i>The first question is: is there a God? Well of course there is. Most atheists also don't realize it but they accept there is. The minute you say that there was a Big Bang you admit there must have been a First Cause that created it.</i><br />Nope, for a gazillion reasons: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/cosmological.html<br /><br /><i>It is well known that life as we know it today is the results of a lot of coincidences, freak chances and planets being at just the right distance from the Sun that they have to be.</i><br />Well, actually, the sun's eventually going to become so hot that everything's going to die.<br /><br />There's also a new book on this topic which I haven't accessed yet, but I'm dying to read: http://www.amazon.com/Fallacy-Fine-Tuning-Why-Universe-Designed/dp/1616144432<br /><br /><i>None of it to date has contradicted the Tanach's account</i><br />Sure, lots has. Easy examples: No global flood. No ever-turning swords to be found. I guess you can just interpret verses as "non-literal" or "non-natural" and then say nothing's been contradicted, but then you're the one cherry-picking evidence.<br /><br /><i>A short time after we have a population explosion in Biblical Canaan along with the introduction of pottery and other remnants showing a decidedly non-Caananite origin.</i><br />You've mentioned this before. Cite?<br /><br />Anyways, I seem to have a problem googling claims made about the historicity of various local people and events the Bible refers to, so I've decided to ask some people about some of the claims you made here (along with one someone else made to me).<br /><br />http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13914105#post13914105<br /><br />http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=7280301#post7280301Baruch Peltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13178212221463356386noreply@blogger.com