[Avodah] Abiogenesis

[Micha Berger]

On Fri, Dec 28, 2007 at 04:20:50AM +0200, Michael Makovi wrote:
: My point is that I don't see why our ability to see the animal's
: reproduction makes a difference. If lice were invisible, then it'd
: make sense to say they are kosher. But lice are completely visible -
: it is only their reproduction that is invisible. And I see no logical
: reason why invisible reproduction should translate into
: as-if-spontaneous gneeration.

This is just a repetition of what you said earlier. I would need an
explanation of what you disagree with in my subsequent post.

I'm arguing that anything you can't see, doesn't count. Errors in the
squareness of your tefillin that are below our threshold. The theory
has nothing to do with biology in particular, this is just one instance.

: Plus, as I said, if Chazal saw lice eggs, then it means the eggs are
: NOT invisible...

Again, I see a repetion and no explanation of why you reject my response.

We have no indication they saw the eggs of tola'im; kinim are a different
thing. As for kinim, which comes up in hilkhos Shabbos and combing,
not kashrus of maggots, we have no reason to believe that they believed
all kinim were born the same way.

: Chazal honestly thought there were no eggs, and that spontaneous
: generation does in fact happen. Either way, the invisibility argument
: fails, and we are left with mamash true spontaneous generation.

Chazal's scientific belief is irrelevent if we are only using their
description of the observable reality regardless of their beliefs about
its truth. The science of invisible things is simply off topic; it's
only the experience, not the science. Drop all interest in ontological
truth and get on with life.

If no one ever saw a maggot egg with the naked eye, how do magots emerging
from meat have any different impact on my quest to perfect my soul and
come close to G-d whether the eggs are considered or not? My gut tells
me they come from the meat, and my brain knowing otherwise doesn't change
me nearly as much.

:> Simpler answer: Different bugs are born different ways. Even if they are
:> similar enough to share a name. (Which I don't think is true here,
:> anyway beitzei kinim vs tola'im).

: Simpler? How? To assume they meant two different things, even though
: they both said the same thing, is simpler? ...

Of course it is. If one speaks of "fish", "shellfish", "plankton",
or even "copepods", does one mean a single species?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A sick person never rejects a healing procedure
micha at aishdas.org        as "unbefitting." Why, then, do we care what
http://www.aishdas.org   other people think when dealing with spiritual
Fax: (270) 514-1507      matters?              - Rav Yisrael Salanter