192 Comments

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

"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
Apr 2, 2023·edited Apr 2, 2023

I have to be honest, not trying to be a “killjoy”, but I’m not sure I understand the idea of a post designed to mislead people (even if only briefly). Especially coming from a well-known expert on the animal kingdom, it is inevitable that some people will be “taken in” by such a post. So what’s the point? To make those people feel foolish? To make those who “get” the joke feel superior?

As it happens, I have always felt this way about “pranks” (and practical jokes) in general—and society’s acceptance thereof—which strike me as fundamentally mean-spirited in that they seem to serve no purpose but to amuse the prankster at the expense of those he embarrasses or makes to look/feel foolish.

Am I mistaken? Perhaps you can shed some light for me on their purpose/motivation/justification.

Expand full comment

Haha! Thanks for making me (and chazal) feel better for not realising it was a fake 😜

Expand full comment

THANKS. I FEEL LIKE A REAL FOOl FOR HAVING BEEN TAKEN IN, AND THE SCIENTISTS THAT i SENT THIS TO THINK YOU ARE A REAL FOOL. hOW EMBARASSING TO SEND THEM YOUR APRIL 1 ANNOUNCEMENT. i (AT LEAST) DO NOT EXPECT THIS FROM SUCH A RESPECTABLE SOURCE,

Expand full comment

I thought it was real because the frog species wasn't named "Mecharker Meiselmanus" or something like that.

Expand full comment

If you started to actually place yourselves in Chazal's situation, with the mindset that they had, the sense of Achrayus to get things accurate, and the context in which they were working, you might realize that the mistakes were not theirs.

It is only because you insist on sitting in the mindset of a 21st century amateur zoologist that you cannot fathom this and you look at comments like mine as closed-minded. Ironic, when you think about it.

Expand full comment

Ha! My previous post was just a post April 1 post but how did you feel about that? Keep up your serious work, I love it, even though I can't afford your new subscription rate. (Too bad that notice wasn't just an April 1 joke.)

Expand full comment

Thank you Harav Hagaon Slifkin for saving us from all the embarrassing mistakes of Chazal. You have all the best of Chazal without their foolishness. It's too bad you can't go back in time and correct them. We would have been saved a lot of embarrassment.

Expand full comment

Actually, in my opinion the fake dinosaur on the museum roof was even better than the strawberry.

Expand full comment

Chazal had yiras shamayim, humility, and great wisdom. I can't say the same about their critics.

Expand full comment

"There’s nothing naive or foolish in believing something false if it fully fits with everything else that you know about the world, and especially if it is presented by someone respected as an expert. "

What about people who still think covid vaccines are safe and effective? LOL

Expand full comment

Whether Chazal were correct about various physical phenomena is irrelevant regarding their true authority. Chazal have the power to create legal reality. You are allowed to kill lice on shabbos because Chazal say so. That their reasoning is based off of an incorrect understanding of the world is irrelevant. That we now know better does not mean it is forbidden to kill lice, because Chazal explicitly allow it. Similarly, Chazal's injunction against medicine on shabbos also stands despite modern industrial production of pharmaceuticals. One cannot fault Chazal for not knowing of developments that would occur over a thousand years after they died any more than we can fault Isaac Newton for believing in luminiferous aether or continuous matter. We may stand on the shoulders of giants, but we can still see farther than them.

Expand full comment

I was one of those people fooled. However, after hearing on a news program that a turtle that was supppsedly over 90 years old was able to fertilize eggs, nothing seemed beyond belief.

Expand full comment

"Still, it does appear that historically, people were generally more credulous."

The credulity quotient in the human species is a constant, only the subjects change. Have you seen what people believe today about transsexuals? Equality of races, sexes? Global Warming? Life on other planets? Or go back a few years - Communism? Transcendentalism? (I'm purposely skipping Covid, for everyone's sanity.) People, ESPECIALLY the non-religious, will believe in anything.

Expand full comment

Cute. Worked on me. Third category. Didn’think bout it for too long. What wenthru my mind was… Oh wow, but it must have been photographed elsewhere. That can’t actually be in the museum. It isn’t a zoo. Where would they keep it? What would they feed it? Of course, had I realized it was April 1… Ulai next year.

Expand full comment