Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Happy's avatar

Of course, the same applies to the so-called rationalists. Some secular academics told Natan there is no source for kollel, or that Torah doesn't protect, or that liberal atheist Jonathan Haidt is a good source for Judaism, or all sorts of other nonsense that he believes, and he credulously fell for it, hook, line, and sinker. Nowadays we are not as gullible, and we can easily debunk his obvious mistakes. Whatever mistakes Chazal made (if they did make mistakes), they are far less serious than these!

Expand full comment
Frankie's avatar

"Now, again, this does not mean that they were foolish... Their epistemology placed high regard to statements made by people of authority, and/or demanded a literal reading of texts, and there was little concern for scientific viability or empirical investigation."

I'm a little confused. Are you defending Chazal or knocking them? They're not foolish bit... they were gullible and didn't know how to do proper research?

Expand full comment
190 more comments...

No posts