10.8.16
Visions
Visions. When I was part of the Mir yeshiva and also Shar Yashuv [another yeshiva in NY] the question of visions was treated thus -if the visionary is part of our group [or an associated group] then the visions are from the realm of holiness. If the guy having the visions is not part of our group, then the visions are from the Dark Side--the Sitra Achra. This is an enormously relevant question because all human groups have the need for a shaman--an inspired individual.
The best criteria are; (1) Humility. (2) If the visions predict something that does not come about.
The test of Humility will cancel out most visions and visionaries. The next test of predicting an event that does not come to pass will cancel out most of the rest. [Like the Zohar.]
The trouble then is to find reliable guidance. For that I suggest not going to visionaries and simply to learn and keep the Law of God. [That is the Law of Moses. For understanding the Law of Moses it is helpful to learn Musar the books of Ethics written during the Middle Ages which do the best job of making it clear. My idea of the best ones are the Obligation of the Heart and also the disciples of Reb Israel Salanter.]
You might notice this in all groups. They always assume visionaries that are part of their group or closely related groups are OK and everyone else is not.
This seems to me to be a serious problem from both sides. Especially accepting visionaries who just because they seem to have lifestyle which pleases us and seems to come from good sources that does not mean the vision is true.
The best criteria are; (1) Humility. (2) If the visions predict something that does not come about.
The test of Humility will cancel out most visions and visionaries. The next test of predicting an event that does not come to pass will cancel out most of the rest. [Like the Zohar.]
The trouble then is to find reliable guidance. For that I suggest not going to visionaries and simply to learn and keep the Law of God. [That is the Law of Moses. For understanding the Law of Moses it is helpful to learn Musar the books of Ethics written during the Middle Ages which do the best job of making it clear. My idea of the best ones are the Obligation of the Heart and also the disciples of Reb Israel Salanter.]
You might notice this in all groups. They always assume visionaries that are part of their group or closely related groups are OK and everyone else is not.
This seems to me to be a serious problem from both sides. Especially accepting visionaries who just because they seem to have lifestyle which pleases us and seems to come from good sources that does not mean the vision is true.
Ideas in Bava Metzia Ideas in Shas
The idea here is mainly that the Torah--the Law of God-is not temporary. That is the laws of God in the Five Books of Moses are meant to apply for all generations. And that makes it necessary to keep them and to do that we need to work out what each law requires.
That is the basic job of the Talmud. The Talmud does not claim divinity but it does depend on the idea of the "Background." That is that the laws of God are not dependent on individual interpretation but that they have an objective meaning.
[The trouble is those that claim to represent the Law. They tend to be liars and to be using the Law to get Money. The best thing is the separate the Law from Money. People that ask for money to learn Torah should be told to get a job and not use Torah to make money. Or they pretend to be doing some kind of public service.] Nowadays Torah has become a huge business and everyone keeps on lying about it as if this is permitted or desirable. And one that dares say that Torah and Money should be separate is considered a traitor to all those that want to use it for money.
The trouble is schizoid personalities that made rituals to be the one thing that could help when situations were troublesome. These half insane people got to define what Torah is about because of their extreme adherence to rituals
The idea here is mainly that the Torah--the Law of God-is not temporary. That is the laws of God in the Five Books of Moses are meant to apply for all generations. And that makes it necessary to keep them and to do that we need to work out what each law requires.
That is the basic job of the Talmud. The Talmud does not claim divinity but it does depend on the idea of the "Background." That is that the laws of God are not dependent on individual interpretation but that they have an objective meaning.
[The trouble is those that claim to represent the Law. They tend to be liars and to be using the Law to get Money. The best thing is the separate the Law from Money. People that ask for money to learn Torah should be told to get a job and not use Torah to make money. Or they pretend to be doing some kind of public service.] Nowadays Torah has become a huge business and everyone keeps on lying about it as if this is permitted or desirable. And one that dares say that Torah and Money should be separate is considered a traitor to all those that want to use it for money.
The trouble is schizoid personalities that made rituals to be the one thing that could help when situations were troublesome. These half insane people got to define what Torah is about because of their extreme adherence to rituals
9.8.16
Dalrock : I recommend taking any prospective wife hiking and time how long until she complains, feigns an injury, or quits. If she continues her great attitude, the second test is to repeat after engagement. Doing so, of course, will rule out any ladies of larger carriage, which of course is a bonus.
seeking for money and sex and power through the guise of holiness
One of the causes of the Enlightenment was people knew that there will always be people that hide their seeking for money and sex and power through the guise of holiness. That is how the church was in those days. The Enlightenment wanted to put a stop to using religion as a means for worldly power.
There is a similar problem in the Torah world. My recommendation is to separate Torah and Money. As we know anyway, true ordination stopped during the time of the Talmud. So anyone who claims to have ordination nowadays is by definition a fraud. The only person however that I know that spoke about this was Reb Nachman. For some reason, other religious leaders never brought this up, and in fact many were part of the scam. It is not my custom to bring up Reb Nachman here because that many make him into a deity. Still, that does not detract from the good things he said.
[People do associate him with the movement that the Gra put into excommunication even though he was really his own man.]
Though I have been recommending Litvak yeshivas on this blog, I am still aware of the drawbacks. One person mentioned to me a better idea of having a "Beit Midrash,(study hall)" not a yeshiva. A Beit Midrash is what it sounds like. A "study hall" for learning Gemara. No one gets paid to learn Gemara. And no one gets thrown out if they are learning Gemara. Simple. Just the opposite of modern day yeshivas where no one is there unless they are getting paid, and it is a private club for the rosh yeshiva and his friends, No real study of Gemara is allowed. [If you don't believe me just try to learn Gemara in any yeshiva that comes to ask you for money. You will see the reality behind the fiction.]
[A word of caution about Lithuanian yeshivas I think is in order even though the great ones like Ponovitch and Brisk and Merkaz HaRav are admirable. They learn Torah well and keep it well.
There is a similar problem in the Torah world. My recommendation is to separate Torah and Money. As we know anyway, true ordination stopped during the time of the Talmud. So anyone who claims to have ordination nowadays is by definition a fraud. The only person however that I know that spoke about this was Reb Nachman. For some reason, other religious leaders never brought this up, and in fact many were part of the scam. It is not my custom to bring up Reb Nachman here because that many make him into a deity. Still, that does not detract from the good things he said.
[People do associate him with the movement that the Gra put into excommunication even though he was really his own man.]
Though I have been recommending Litvak yeshivas on this blog, I am still aware of the drawbacks. One person mentioned to me a better idea of having a "Beit Midrash,(study hall)" not a yeshiva. A Beit Midrash is what it sounds like. A "study hall" for learning Gemara. No one gets paid to learn Gemara. And no one gets thrown out if they are learning Gemara. Simple. Just the opposite of modern day yeshivas where no one is there unless they are getting paid, and it is a private club for the rosh yeshiva and his friends, No real study of Gemara is allowed. [If you don't believe me just try to learn Gemara in any yeshiva that comes to ask you for money. You will see the reality behind the fiction.]
[A word of caution about Lithuanian yeshivas I think is in order even though the great ones like Ponovitch and Brisk and Merkaz HaRav are admirable. They learn Torah well and keep it well.
Mudsharking
black man, white woman
The ultimate and irreversible repudiation of one’s identity is to have children with someone of another race. This is a particularly stinging repudiation when done by a woman, and it is especially true in the context of the state-engineered genocidal assault on White nations, from aggressive desegregation in the United States to the massive importing of immigrants into European homelands. Fifty years ago in homogeneous places, a White woman who crossed racial lines may have been benevolently dismissed as a rare curiosity. Today, she is an unwitting tool in a global war on our people.
The ultimate and irreversible repudiation of one’s identity is to have children with someone of another race. This is a particularly stinging repudiation when done by a woman, and it is especially true in the context of the state-engineered genocidal assault on White nations, from aggressive desegregation in the United States to the massive importing of immigrants into European homelands. Fifty years ago in homogeneous places, a White woman who crossed racial lines may have been benevolently dismissed as a rare curiosity. Today, she is an unwitting tool in a global war on our people.
[The unspoken idea of Russia, is that the assaults on the white race is an attack on them.]
There is no spoon. There is no wife.
There is no spoon. There is no wife.
If you do decide to marry, you need her be ready to serve her needs by law, culture by command of religious leaders. You are not getting a wife. You are getting a legal, and financial and now religious liability. She knows and is proud of it.
Most young men looking to marry are looking first of all to lock down a woman for permanent, steady access to sex (they’re in for a MAJOR disappointment) and perhaps secondarily for a helpmeet (gonna get let down there too) or to have kids (which both the wife and the State will waste no time in reminding him constantly are theirs, NOT his).
The modern Western women brings a large wardrobe, shoe, handbag and accessory collection to the marriage, as well as an expensive, difficult-to-fix-car. She has a well-stamped passport and can tell you what restaurants in town provide the best cuisine, if she doesn’t come with an eating disorder that makes her look down on you. I refer specifically to the various schools of vegetarianism / ovo-/lacto-/pesco-/vegan, “dark vegan”/ fruitarian. Billy will be doing his own cooking in his own pots and pans, because those “will be contaminated with meat”. Needless to say too, she comes with that greatest of assets, a pre-stretched vagina, thinking that her “experience” makes for great bonding because “she knows herself”.
We live in a strange world where any young man who is responsible, industrious, saves money, morally upright, compassionate and caring is MARKED by female predators as a man to marry/ have a kid with/ divorce and strip him of everything he ever did in his life
[And to raise the kid she had with some Alpha Male. Cucked for life. That is forced to raise and support the offspring of some other man. ]
I was perfectly aware of this problem many years ago. My solution was to marry the daughter of the Lithuanian Rosh Yeshiva. בת תלמיד חכם. But that did not work very well.
[Reb Freifeld decided I was no good. And at the Mir I simply was out of my league. ]
It does not work though if the Rosh yeshiva is a fraud as many are nowadays. In Israel especially being the head of a yeshiva has noting to do wit Torah and everything to do wit money and power.
Therefore: there is no wife.
Religious leaders are the worst in this regard. They advice to men to be cuckold.
[A cuckold is the husband of an adulterous wife. In evolutionary biology, the term is also applied to males who are unwittingly investing parental effort in offspring that are not genetically their own.]
The cuckoo is famous for being brood parasites, laying their eggs in the nests of other species,
Thus the cuckold husband is raising the children of some Alpha Male.
Feminism nurtures every grievance, no matter how impossibly small, to ensure that feminists spend every day consumed with misery and anger. Moments of joyfulness are fleeting, and usually involve celebrating the harms done to men
If you do decide to marry, you need her be ready to serve her needs by law, culture by command of religious leaders. You are not getting a wife. You are getting a legal, and financial and now religious liability. She knows and is proud of it.
Most young men looking to marry are looking first of all to lock down a woman for permanent, steady access to sex (they’re in for a MAJOR disappointment) and perhaps secondarily for a helpmeet (gonna get let down there too) or to have kids (which both the wife and the State will waste no time in reminding him constantly are theirs, NOT his).
The modern Western women brings a large wardrobe, shoe, handbag and accessory collection to the marriage, as well as an expensive, difficult-to-fix-car. She has a well-stamped passport and can tell you what restaurants in town provide the best cuisine, if she doesn’t come with an eating disorder that makes her look down on you. I refer specifically to the various schools of vegetarianism / ovo-/lacto-/pesco-/vegan, “dark vegan”/ fruitarian. Billy will be doing his own cooking in his own pots and pans, because those “will be contaminated with meat”. Needless to say too, she comes with that greatest of assets, a pre-stretched vagina, thinking that her “experience” makes for great bonding because “she knows herself”.
We live in a strange world where any young man who is responsible, industrious, saves money, morally upright, compassionate and caring is MARKED by female predators as a man to marry/ have a kid with/ divorce and strip him of everything he ever did in his life
[And to raise the kid she had with some Alpha Male. Cucked for life. That is forced to raise and support the offspring of some other man. ]
I was perfectly aware of this problem many years ago. My solution was to marry the daughter of the Lithuanian Rosh Yeshiva. בת תלמיד חכם. But that did not work very well.
[Reb Freifeld decided I was no good. And at the Mir I simply was out of my league. ]
It does not work though if the Rosh yeshiva is a fraud as many are nowadays. In Israel especially being the head of a yeshiva has noting to do wit Torah and everything to do wit money and power.
Therefore: there is no wife.
Religious leaders are the worst in this regard. They advice to men to be cuckold.
[A cuckold is the husband of an adulterous wife. In evolutionary biology, the term is also applied to males who are unwittingly investing parental effort in offspring that are not genetically their own.]
The cuckoo is famous for being brood parasites, laying their eggs in the nests of other species,
Thus the cuckold husband is raising the children of some Alpha Male.
Feminism nurtures every grievance, no matter how impossibly small, to ensure that feminists spend every day consumed with misery and anger. Moments of joyfulness are fleeting, and usually involve celebrating the harms done to men
8.8.16
the religious are crazy
My opinion about Israel is that it is important, but hard to make it there. I don't write about it because I have nothing new to say. I cherish every minute I merited to be there. The people that are against the State of Israel are insane.
I had a great time when I was there and I felt what I could only describe as a tremendous spiritual light while there.
But what makes it so hard? I am really not sure. I think there was a kind of period of awakening when Bava Sali was alive. After that the עת רצון "time of grace" disappeared.
The best advice now is to learn the Oral and Written Law, and wait for God's grace to return.
We actually see in the Torah the major concern of God is to keep the Torah. Issues about Jewish identity or nationality do not come up there.
My major opinion about Israel is not based on Rav Kook. I never got into his books, though I briefly saw a few paragraphs on an I-phone my learning partner showed me.
My opinion is based on Reb Moshe Feinstein and Reb Aaron Kotler. Both said the same thing. דינא דמדינה דינא "the law of the country is the law." [Tractate Bava Batra chapter 3 חזקת הבתים]
That is neither saw it as some grand metaphysical goal to have a state. But neither did they consider it bad as Reb Joel did. That is it has the status of any legitimate country.They did not think nationalism is a substitute for keeping the Oral and Written Law.
But they did not see it as a bad thing. That is: the religious are crazy. The make a mitzvah out of being dirty anti-Semites. No better than Nazis. Rather it is a mitzvah to stay away from them.
I had a great time when I was there and I felt what I could only describe as a tremendous spiritual light while there.
But what makes it so hard? I am really not sure. I think there was a kind of period of awakening when Bava Sali was alive. After that the עת רצון "time of grace" disappeared.
The best advice now is to learn the Oral and Written Law, and wait for God's grace to return.
We actually see in the Torah the major concern of God is to keep the Torah. Issues about Jewish identity or nationality do not come up there.
My major opinion about Israel is not based on Rav Kook. I never got into his books, though I briefly saw a few paragraphs on an I-phone my learning partner showed me.
My opinion is based on Reb Moshe Feinstein and Reb Aaron Kotler. Both said the same thing. דינא דמדינה דינא "the law of the country is the law." [Tractate Bava Batra chapter 3 חזקת הבתים]
That is neither saw it as some grand metaphysical goal to have a state. But neither did they consider it bad as Reb Joel did. That is it has the status of any legitimate country.They did not think nationalism is a substitute for keeping the Oral and Written Law.
But they did not see it as a bad thing. That is: the religious are crazy. The make a mitzvah out of being dirty anti-Semites. No better than Nazis. Rather it is a mitzvah to stay away from them.
The גמרא does
give rules to how to decide a law. The trouble is these rules often conflict.
Going by the majority is one rule in rare places.
The גמרא does
give rules to how to decide a law. The trouble is these rules often conflict.
Going by the majority is one rule in rare places.
I have
mentioned some of these rules before in other essays. For example the list of
sages of the משנה has an order. רבי יוסי comes first then רבי יהודה etc.
A משנה with no name סתם משנה is considered the law. The trouble is often this conflicts.
For example money in a doubt חולקים is of the סתם משנה with no name. Therefore it should be the law. But in a ברייתא it is said in the name of
סומכוס against the חכמים so it is not the law except in one case where the
רמב''ם brings in a certain case.
Therefore it is best to have a session in the טור בית יוסף get a good idea in each place how the law is decided.
The main thing is not to ask anyone's opinion but to do the learning yourself so you know what the Torah requires of you. Or to go to a legitimate Litvak yeshiva and ask the Rosh Yeshiva
Therefore it is best to have a session in the טור בית יוסף get a good idea in each place how the law is decided.
The main thing is not to ask anyone's opinion but to do the learning yourself so you know what the Torah requires of you. Or to go to a legitimate Litvak yeshiva and ask the Rosh Yeshiva
Reb Chaim Chidushei HaRambam
I do not have a Reb Chaim Chidushei HaRambam But it occurred to me that Bava Metzia pg 14 would be a
good place to use his idea of "zvei dinim." Two laws.
That is you have a lender borrower and one who bought
one field from the borrower and then a later person. To Tosphot in the second
answer he holds the lender would have to go after the second field. The reason
would be because of zvei dinim. That is we know the lender can't go after sold
property when free property is viable {bnei horin} So when the second field is
sold and becomes the second sold property does ten lender collect from it
because the power of collecting from free or sold property is one law. Just
that there is an order to which one. Or is it two laws? If it is two laws then
a new law now applies to the second property and the lender would have to go
after the first field which preceded in its obligation.
It seems like a perfect place for this idea to apply! Anyone have a Reb Chaim to see if in fact he says something like this? א מציעא י''ד ע''ב would be a good place to use the idea of שני דינים של רב חיים הלווי
That is you have a מלווה לווה and one who bought one field from the borrower and then a second buyer . To תוספות in the second answer of אפותיקי he holds the lender would have to go after the second field. The only reason he goes after the first is because it has been made an אפותיקי. The other answer of תוספות that he goes after the first field because כבר חל שיעבודו עליו means he has collect his debt from the first field
The reason would be because of שני דינים. We know the lender can't go after sold property משועבדים when free property בני חורין is available. So when the second field is sold and becomes the second sold property, does the lender collect from it because the power of collecting from בני חורין or משועבדים is one law. Just that there is an order to which one. Or is it two laws? If it is two laws, then a new law a new חלות now applies to the second property and the lender would have to go after the first field which preceded in its obligation.בבא מציעא י''ד ע''ב יהיה מקום טוב להשתמש ברעיון של שני דינים של רב חיים הלווי
כלומר יש לך מלווה לווה ואחד שרכש שדה אחד מהלווה ולאחר מכן קונה שני. תוספות בתשובה השנייה של אפותיקי הוא מחזיק שהמלווה יצטרך ללכת אחרי השדה השני. הסיבה היחידה שהוא הולך אחרי הראשון היא כי זה כבר נעשה אפותיקי. התשובה האחרת של תוספות כי הוא גובה מן השדה הראשון כי כבר חל שיעבודו עליו לכן הוא גובה את חובו מן שדה הראשון. הסיבה תהיה בגלל שני דינים. אנחנו יודעים המלווה לא יכול לגבות נכס שנמכר (משועבדים) כאשר נכס חפשי (בני חורין) זמין. לכן, כאשר השדה השני נמכר לרוכש השני , המלווה מחויב לגבות ממנו בגלל הכוח של איסוף מבני חורין או משועבדים דין אחד. רק שיש סדר. או שזה שני חוקים? אם זה שני חוקים, אז דין החדש חל כעת חל על הנכס השני, והמלווה יצטרך לגבות משדה הראשון שקדם בחובה.
Space and Time
My own feeling about these things is kind of like Kant mentioned. That is I think as Kant did there are two levels. One is which space and time are real and that is clear in the kind of experiments we have that test General Relativity like GPS things that you find in taxis. The other level is Quantum Mechanics in which space and time do not exist until they are measured. This in fact seems like something Kant was aware of as noted by Dr Kelley Ross in California.
What is being measured in the two slit experiment does exist. If it did not there would be nothing to measure. But its character as a wave or particle depends on how you measure it-with one slit or two.
This is exactly how Kant described things in themselves-they exist but their existence is unconditioned reality. Their character is however half dependent on them and half dependent on the mind
These two levels of reality are helpful for me in my religious point of view based on the Old Testament (the Oral and Written Law). Often, I have to say some statement in the Old Testament is referring to this hidden level of reality, --not the phenomenal world. That is this world is conditioned reality while the hidden world is unconditioned reality.
I have on my own understood the Old Testament along these lines for years but did not write about it.
That is what you measure in Quantum Mechanics is expectation values just like you do when learning Probability Theory. That is the bracket notation in Quantum Mechanics is exactly the same thing as the expectation value in Probability. The ket vector is the original state and the bra vector is the final state and the observable is in the middle.
But don't talk to philosophers about any of this. They don't understand this stuff at all and either ignore it and think it is not relevant for metaphysics which they deny exists. Or they get it wrong.
[In plain English you have to have with QM either independent reality or locality. Since we know Locality because of Relativity therefore independent reality has to be thrown out. Simple as pie.]See this talk by Murray Gell-Mann
What is being measured in the two slit experiment does exist. If it did not there would be nothing to measure. But its character as a wave or particle depends on how you measure it-with one slit or two.
This is exactly how Kant described things in themselves-they exist but their existence is unconditioned reality. Their character is however half dependent on them and half dependent on the mind
These two levels of reality are helpful for me in my religious point of view based on the Old Testament (the Oral and Written Law). Often, I have to say some statement in the Old Testament is referring to this hidden level of reality, --not the phenomenal world. That is this world is conditioned reality while the hidden world is unconditioned reality.
I have on my own understood the Old Testament along these lines for years but did not write about it.
That is what you measure in Quantum Mechanics is expectation values just like you do when learning Probability Theory. That is the bracket notation in Quantum Mechanics is exactly the same thing as the expectation value in Probability. The ket vector is the original state and the bra vector is the final state and the observable is in the middle.
But don't talk to philosophers about any of this. They don't understand this stuff at all and either ignore it and think it is not relevant for metaphysics which they deny exists. Or they get it wrong.
[In plain English you have to have with QM either independent reality or locality. Since we know Locality because of Relativity therefore independent reality has to be thrown out. Simple as pie.]See this talk by Murray Gell-Mann
Temple Israel in Hollywood
I should mention that I had a Jewish education from about 5 years old and onward. The only interruption was after my bar mitzvah in Temple Israel in Hollywood. The pressures from school were building up, and there also was some kind of pressure about paying more money monthly to the Temple, and some kind of commitment in order to have my brother Keith "Bar Mitzvahed" there. So we quit the Temple, and when it came time for Keith's bar mitzvah we found a person from the Re-constructionist movement (Roth). [Kind of like Reform. In some ways more open, and in other ways more interested in tradition.] My parents also were undergoing, as usual, financial strain. My Dad was pretty sure after his project at TRW with satellites and lasers was finished- that he would be laid off so he quit before that.
He did not know it at the time but there was a person in the company that was stealing the secrets of American Technology and selling them to the KGB. That became a book and later a motion picture.
After High School it made sense to me to learn Gemara, so I went to NY to Shar Yashuv of Reb Freifeld, and after that to the Mir in NY. Both amazing yeshivas. The Mir was more interested in Reb Chaim Soloveitchik's kind of learning, and Shar Yashuv was more interested in the type of learning you can see in my two little books on Talmud--"calculating the sugia"
After High School it made sense to me to learn Gemara, so I went to NY to Shar Yashuv of Reb Freifeld, and after that to the Mir in NY. Both amazing yeshivas. The Mir was more interested in Reb Chaim Soloveitchik's kind of learning, and Shar Yashuv was more interested in the type of learning you can see in my two little books on Talmud--"calculating the sugia"
and delving into depth about what Tosphot means in his place.
[I should also mention that I was very interested at the time in learning the Tur, Beit Joseph. I mean the way law is derived from the Gemara. That was in fact my major motivation in going to yeshiva.]
Here are a few ideas I had in learning Talmud [Gemara] for those who might be interested.
[I should also mention that I was very interested at the time in learning the Tur, Beit Joseph. I mean the way law is derived from the Gemara. That was in fact my major motivation in going to yeshiva.]
Here are a few ideas I had in learning Talmud [Gemara] for those who might be interested.
[These books mainly reflect the kind of learning I was doing in Shar Yashuv.]
PS The only good yeshivas in those days were the Litvak yeshivas in NY (Mir, Chaim Berlin, Torah VeDaat) and Ponovitch in Bnei Brak and that still seems to be the case. [I have not seen or heard of any exception except perhaps Brisk in Jerusalem.]
Albert Einsten. Why people put him down when they have no idea of what he said or did is beyond me.
The papers in 1905 for Special Relativity and the one laying part of the foundations of Quantum Mechanics are well known.
But I wanted to add, that Einstein's greatness did not end there.
General Relativity was in around 1916 I think. And although he was criticized for later work still he had an effect on considering implications of Quantum Mechanics which no famous philosophers then or now did. Dr Kelly Ross puts it thus:
"In philosophy, failure to address the implications of Copenhagen Quantum Mechanics amounts to ... professional incompetence. At first, there was enthusiasm that Quantum Mechanics violated causality and thus refuted both Aristotelian and Kantian views of causality. This went along with a grave misreading and misunderstanding of Hume's evaluation of causality. Since causality as the laws of nature (as Hume understood it) is not in the least undermined, but only reinforced, by Quantum Mechanics, this particular fashion has rather died out.
Meanwhile, ..., most of Bohr's colleagues in physics, like Einstein, Schrödinger, and de Broglie, who, like Roger Penrose, viewed Realism as presupposed by all proper science, were horrified at this metaphysical implication of the Copenhagen Interpretation -- at a time when philosophers, like the Positivists, were busy eschewing metaphysics as beneath serious attention. The first reaction of the philosophers, then, was to pass over the whole business as of no concern. So, as I have noted elsewhere, while Einstein and Kurt Gödel were walking down to the Institute for Advanced Study arguing about Kant, Bertrand Russell found the whole business ridiculous. Philosophy has not done much better, or improved its attitude much, since then. "
Also Einstein's dream finding a way of connecting the four forces did result in combining three forces in the 1960's and later in String Theory in combining all four forces.
Why people put him down when they have no idea of what he said or did is beyond me.
But I wanted to add, that Einstein's greatness did not end there.
General Relativity was in around 1916 I think. And although he was criticized for later work still he had an effect on considering implications of Quantum Mechanics which no famous philosophers then or now did. Dr Kelly Ross puts it thus:
"In philosophy, failure to address the implications of Copenhagen Quantum Mechanics amounts to ... professional incompetence. At first, there was enthusiasm that Quantum Mechanics violated causality and thus refuted both Aristotelian and Kantian views of causality. This went along with a grave misreading and misunderstanding of Hume's evaluation of causality. Since causality as the laws of nature (as Hume understood it) is not in the least undermined, but only reinforced, by Quantum Mechanics, this particular fashion has rather died out.
Meanwhile, ..., most of Bohr's colleagues in physics, like Einstein, Schrödinger, and de Broglie, who, like Roger Penrose, viewed Realism as presupposed by all proper science, were horrified at this metaphysical implication of the Copenhagen Interpretation -- at a time when philosophers, like the Positivists, were busy eschewing metaphysics as beneath serious attention. The first reaction of the philosophers, then, was to pass over the whole business as of no concern. So, as I have noted elsewhere, while Einstein and Kurt Gödel were walking down to the Institute for Advanced Study arguing about Kant, Bertrand Russell found the whole business ridiculous. Philosophy has not done much better, or improved its attitude much, since then. "
Also Einstein's dream finding a way of connecting the four forces did result in combining three forces in the 1960's and later in String Theory in combining all four forces.
Why people put him down when they have no idea of what he said or did is beyond me.
7.8.16
Gra, Reb Israel Salanter and Rav Shach (I.e. Rav Elazar Menachem Shach)
The most important three people in the Torah world that did the best job of explaining the Torah for simple people were the Gra, Reb Israel Salanter and Rav Shach (I.e. Rav Elazar Menachem Shach).
I am not talking in terms of what baali teshva are looking for "spiritual trips." Rather I am referring to the basic need to explain what the Torah asks from us as simple plain Jews that need its set of values and hierarchy of values explained. Without these three people one could take the Torah to mean anything at all, and in fact that is exactly what baali teshuva do.
What each did was reveal an important aspect of Torah, The Gra: learning Torah. Reb Salanter: Midot good character traits. Rav Shach: How to learn.
In plain English what I am saying is that you learn from these three people three important things about Torah: (1) It is very important to learn Torah and avoid Bitul Torah. (2) To be a "mench" good character traits. (3) To learn Rav Shach's, Avi Ezri shows how to learn Torah.
I am not talking in terms of what baali teshva are looking for "spiritual trips." Rather I am referring to the basic need to explain what the Torah asks from us as simple plain Jews that need its set of values and hierarchy of values explained. Without these three people one could take the Torah to mean anything at all, and in fact that is exactly what baali teshuva do.
What each did was reveal an important aspect of Torah, The Gra: learning Torah. Reb Salanter: Midot good character traits. Rav Shach: How to learn.
In plain English what I am saying is that you learn from these three people three important things about Torah: (1) It is very important to learn Torah and avoid Bitul Torah. (2) To be a "mench" good character traits. (3) To learn Rav Shach's, Avi Ezri shows how to learn Torah.
Western women -what is wrong with them?
Here is a nice comment on Dalrock which seems to be pretty clear about the major difficulties that one finds with Western women. Just some background the beginning of his comment he is quoting another comment:
"If you take a shot with the wrong woman, your life could be over….
Your life will be over either way. You will lose the game if you never shoot in basketball.
Yeah, you may miss and turn it over. So what?
I tell you what.
– you’ll get thrown into jail for failing to pay court-ordered child support after losing your job; you’ll get anally raped while your wife gets railed by some alpha lout she found on Tinder, getting his rancid sperm shot into her various orifices
– you’ll be prevented from seeing your children; your slut of a wife will decide to cohabit with some alpha lout, who ends up molesting your children, and that bitch does nothing to stop it
– your passport will be revoked
– your gun permit will be revoked
– you’ll get registered as a sex offender due to a false accusation
– you’ll never find a decent job again
– your house and car will get taken away
But yeah, “so what”, right?"
[link to dalrock]
This seems to be a good argument to marry the rosh yeshiva's daughter if you ask me.
[link to dalrock]
This seems to be a good argument to marry the rosh yeshiva's daughter if you ask me.
Therefore the best piety is home piety. To learn at home Gemara and Musar and Rav Shach's Avi Ezri. Institution based piety seems to have major flaws.
I was in Shar Yashuv in NY and then in the Mir and in neither place was it very easy to get to meet women. In the Mir there were no official channels for dating. On one hand it was kind of frustrating. But on the other hand it made for a kind of environment where one is motivated to get married.
To meet a girl one usually had to wait until some shiduch was offered by the girl's parents. It was nothing like what is usual in Western Society. But who can say? I generally approve of places for opposites sexes to meet. The more strict approach seems to be too heavy handed to me.
That is I think the real reason for the enlightenment. I think at some-point, people got tired of religious leaders telling them what to do. Especially when it seemed clear those leaders themselves had no idea of the difference between right and wrong. And that situation I think has remained in place.
Recently I was looking at the trial of Joan of Arc, and it seems to me to reflect very well on exactly why the Enlightenment happened. People got sick and tired of religious authorities and princes acting in ways that were heavy handed, and unjust.
Therefore the best piety is home piety. To learn at home Gemara and Musar and Rav Shach's Avi Ezri. "Institution based piety" seems to have major flaws.
To meet a girl one usually had to wait until some shiduch was offered by the girl's parents. It was nothing like what is usual in Western Society. But who can say? I generally approve of places for opposites sexes to meet. The more strict approach seems to be too heavy handed to me.
That is I think the real reason for the enlightenment. I think at some-point, people got tired of religious leaders telling them what to do. Especially when it seemed clear those leaders themselves had no idea of the difference between right and wrong. And that situation I think has remained in place.
Recently I was looking at the trial of Joan of Arc, and it seems to me to reflect very well on exactly why the Enlightenment happened. People got sick and tired of religious authorities and princes acting in ways that were heavy handed, and unjust.
Therefore the best piety is home piety. To learn at home Gemara and Musar and Rav Shach's Avi Ezri. "Institution based piety" seems to have major flaws.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)