I have a few principles that I try to stick with at all cost.  Part is because I think these are important in themselves, but also I believe that sticking with these basic principles  protects me from all pit-falls and unforeseen traps that life is full of. (1) Speaking the truth at all cost. (2) Not to touch that which does not belong to me. Not just not to steal, but not to have in my possession anything which does not belong tome according to "din Torah" the law of the Torah.  (3) To learn Mathematics, Physics and the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach, The reason for his last one i that is somehow how things have worked out for me. If I would have a Gemara Bava Metzia or Bava Batra, then I would be doing that. Whatever comes under the category of authentic Torah is the main thing. The emphasis is on the word "authentic".

 A lot of my dad's career was spent trying to avoid WWIII with Russia. First there was the U-2 project which was commissioned by Eisenhauer specifically because we did not know what was going on in the USSR. After they had the A Bomb, and then the H-Bomb, some people in the Eisenhauer administration [e.g sec. of the Navy] thought to strike a pre-emptive strike first. Thank God, Eisenhauer thought that was a dumb idea. But we still did not know what was going on there. Maybe they were preparing a first strike against the West? No one knew. The only way to find out was to go and look. ,We could not just ask them. Thus was born the U-2 project. [After my dad's creation of the camera, he went to invent a super sharp copy machine and marketed that for 5 years.] Then the USA needed his expertise in making infrared satellites -mainly for the same reason--to see what was going on there after the U-2 flights over the USSR were impossible.

After those satellites were launched, they got him to create a system of laser beam communication between satellites. Even though this last one is a major achievement, the reason for it was mundane--simply it was so the Soviets could not eavesdrop on our communications.  All this took the major portion of my dad's professional life.

Here is my dad working on the U-2 project

 I wish I could remember the page in Tractate Avoda Zara where the issue of "joining" comes up. I just recall that the issue had to do with the fact that gentiles are not commanded concerning joining [i.e  joining the name of Heaven with another.] An example is brought in the Gemara there of Gideon "A sword to God and to Gideon". There you see Gideon himself joining the name of Heaven with his own name This the Gemara concludes is forbidden to a Israeli but allowed for gentiles.

Why is that page important? Because of the Tosphot there that brings up the issue of Christianity   and I thought it is such an important Tophot that I asked my learning partner to skip what we were doing at the time and instead concentrate on that Tosphot.

From what I recall Tosphot seems to have three different approaches there.

 On one hand I can see the point of the South. We see in Exodus that there are certain laws that apply to Jewish slaves.  Later on in Deuteronomy we find other kinds of laws that apply to gentile slaves. As for Jewish slaves, they must be let go after 6 years. Gentile slaves are not to be let go of, but they can be if their master wants to set them free. But some of the most interesting points are made later in the books of Solomon. אי ארץ כשעבד ימלוך "Woe to the land when a slave rules." 

 It so happens I was outside and met on the street a Na Nach fellow. I mentioned during our conversation an idea that I thought to bring here.- that I see the path of the Gra as the backbone while Rav Nahman I see as filling in the flesh and bones of Torah thought. For to get to the authentic drive and intensity of Torah one needs the Gra. You can see this in any Litvak yeshiva where the love of Torah hits you in the face the second you walk in the door. But Rav Nahman fills in a lot of what is missing in that approach..  

 "Rule of law" I think is shorthand for England where there is this long standing tradition of listening to pieces of paper [or parchment] like the Magna Carta and the Provisions of Oxford.  I mean to say that countries that derive from England tend to take the law as written very seriously.  In most other countries without English influence, the laws are laws as long as they are convenient.

Many Western Values [Principles of morality] are different from principles of morality of Torah. So what is the relationship?  What makes this question difficult is Western Values change constantly. People think their values are those of Reason but if they change every ten years, then they are not.

Now "Torah values"  are manipulated constantly also. So unless you can come to some bedrock layer, of certainty, that also does not provide a solid basis.  

In the two great Litvak yeshivot which I attended, it was thought that the one important principle is to "learn Torah"  [meaning the Old Testament and the Gemara] because Torah itself will correct false opinions. 

However to me Musar [the mediaeval books of Morality] seems to be the best approach--a synthesis of Faith a Reason that was worked out in painstaking detail during the Middle Ages. 

I was at the sea again and it occurred to me to mention that you see this approach of deriving morality by faith and by reason in the Obligations of the Hearts, Saadia Gaon, Rambam. The first to do this was Philo but you can see that his efforts were somewhat naive. The later Mediaeval approach makes a lot more sense. Now I should add that later people like Kant, Hegel, Jacob Fries, Leonard Nelson Michael Huemer    do not look towards faith to discover morality at all but only towards reason.

But I can not see reason as being such a great guide alone. Try that and you can end up with sophisticated systems like Marxism.

[Just one well known example is slavery. But while I tend to see the point of the North to some degree I think the woke movement shows that the South was right.]