[Avodah] Avodah] reasons for torah loopholes in dinei

[David Riceman]

Me:
>> you need to think harder about what constitutes "damage".
>>     
RCL:
>
> I am not sure I understand this statement.  Value is at the heart of the
> assessment of damages <snip>
It's easier to understand "hezek she'eino nikkar lav shmaih hezek" 
literally.  You haven't damaged the object by making it tamei (see H. 
Hovel UMazik 7:1); you have damaged the owner's ability to use the 
object (admittedly this presumes the Rambam's opinion that tumah is a 
legal status rather than a physical status).  Here's another example: as 
I understand it (and I know almost nothing about common law so please 
correct me if I'm wrong) if someone slanders me I can sue him for the 
damage he's done to my reputation.  In halacha no such resort exists.  
He hasn't damaged me; he's damaged my relationship with others.

Rather than postulating the existence of multiple markets (which would 
be subject to arbitrage) I think it's easier to postulate that there's a 
preliminary step before assessing damage: determining whether damage 
occurred.

David Riceman