[Avodah] Rav Elchanan Wasserman & Why People Sin

Micha Berger via Avodah avodah at lists.aishdas.org
Tue May 26 12:25:12 PDT 2015


On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 01:19:53PM -0400, Kaganoff wrote:
: > How do you know that (in a flat space) two parallel lines never meet? If
: > you're like me, you pictured it in your head. Even though infinite lines
: > don't exist in the real world. (Nor, does it turn out, does flat space.)
: 
: 
: Actually non-euclidean geometry is an excellent example. We cannot say with
: absolute certainty that two parallel lines will never meet or that there is
: only one line that goes through a particular point that is parallel to
: another line, as there is a well developed body of literature on
: non-Euclidean geometry (such as Riemannian Geometry).

Well, if we know the curvature of the space we're dealing with, we know
which Geometry to use. And only one is correct for that particular
space.

:> Did you figure out that oppression was evil by logical proof, or by a
:> combination of imagination and empathy?
: 
: Calling anything "evil is not meant to be logical but rather to pull at an
: audiences' heartstrings. Evil is neither logical nor illogical. Nor can one
: "prove" that the Nazis are evil and that circumcision is not.

I disagree with your reisha. Evil is an objectively meaningful predicate.
Yahadus wouldn't work is evil were subjective.

As for your seifa... that's kind of my point: there are truths that can
be justified even when they are not amenable to formal proofs.

: However, that is a red herring. Again, emotions are not proof. Feelings are
: neither true nor false.

Although the notion that John is feeling happy at 2:55pm EST May
26, 2015 is either true or false. Or some fuzzy state in between.
It is a predicate, even if it needn't be a boolean predicate.

All three of these comments are interrelated:

Euclidean geometry is the only accurate description of flat space. Not
every space, but flat space.

People may disagree about what is evil, and Nazis may be able to fool
themselves about what the word means, but HQBH did create a concept of
good that has an objective definition. Even if -- again -- we cannot
find it via proof.

: > My favorite example is answering the question, "Do elephants have hair?"
: > A logical/verbal approach would be...
: > How it is more likely the question jogged your memory of elephants
: > you saw, or saw pictures of...

: That is a proveable thesis. One could prove either way whether or not
: elephants have hair. Unlike the two earlier examples.

As I said in the first paragraph, before the first ellipses. However,
in practice, people aren't likely to use proofs to reach the conclusion.
We justify our belief that elephants have hair in a different way.

: As for whether one could prove the existence or non-existance of God, I
: don't have time now to start that discussion.

But my whole point is that proof isn't the only grounds for justifying
knowledge!

...
: > Anyway, that's how I understood REW. R' Elchanan argues that on an
: > informal level, the idea that the universe had to have a Creator is
: > as obvious as a Euclidean postulate or the injustice of oppression.

: I believe that such an explanation is disrespectful to REW. I am assuming
: that REW believed what he wrote and wrote down clearly what he believed as
: opposed to assuming that REW believes one thing and wrote another.

Um... That /is/ what Rav Elchanan wrote. I'm arguing that he is being
misread because they think that REW invoking the notion of knowledge
(as opposed to belief) is equivalent to his invoking the notion of proof.

Instead, he invokes the synthetic a priori, of the self-evident, or
whatever your theory of justification is of R' Aqiva's answer to
the atheist or that letters aren't the product of ink spilled on paper.

AISI, REW is saying that humans know there is a G-d, without his saying
anything about the possibility of proving it. And that people then go about
creating proofs for His non-Existence or Deism, to hide from that
knowledge. Or, to be more loyal to his original wording -- because they took
shochad to buy into a proof against the obvious.

He might be saying that at some level, that knowledge lingers, no matter
how much someone buries it under layers of counter-proof and convincing
themselves. But I don't see that in REW either.

Quoting:
    Now, of course, we shouldn't be astonished that so many great
    philosophers had difficulty believing that the world was created
    by a Purposeful Creator. Their minds were surely great, but their
    desire to gain benefit from the pleasures of this world overcame their
    ability to think straight. Such a powerful bias can divert a person's
    mind to the point that he can say two plus two does not equal four...

After my signature, I'll quote Qovetz Maamariv par 5-7 from a translation
provided by Pirchei Shoshanim. You'll notice it's nothing like the
Rambam's attempt to formally prove an Argument from Design in Moreh
sec. II.

Really, all he says is that monotheism woul be self-evident if people
didn't want to escape its implications on their lifestyle. Not proven,
self-evident, and not that those who argue against it are less than
fully convinced of their atheism (or Deism, or polytheism).

:> To not believe in G-d requires a formal proof, which one's negios then
:> determine if they find it sound or specious,  and whether they accept
:> the postulates on which it's built.

: To believe and to not believe in God can be pulled off without formal
: proofs.

: However, it is intellectually dishonest to state that one has an arguement
: for God's existance and than say that we are not talking about formal
: proofs when a counterarguement is made.

Not "argument", any more than your acceptance of Euclidean (or Reimann)
postulates are based on argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_justification#Theories_of_justification
and http://www.iep.utm.edu/epistemo/#H3
may be clearer than I have been.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight,
micha at aishdas.org        and he wants to sleep well that night too."
http://www.aishdas.org         - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok
Fax: (270) 514-1507


   5. If you ponder it, however, you shall find that the belief that the
   Holy One, blessed by He, created the world is self-understood by any
   intelligent being -- unless a person is a complete imbecile. And there
   is no need for any [knowledge of] philosophy to grasp this principle.

   The author of the Duties of the Heart (Shaar HaYichud 6) thus wrote:

     There are people who say that the world came into existence by
     chance, without a Creator who caused it and formed it. I wonder
     how any rational being in a normal state of mind can entertain
     such a notion. If one holding such a opinion would hear a person
     expressing a similar view in regard to a water-wheel that revolves
     in order to irrigate a portion of a field or garden -- and were to
     say that he thinks it had been set up without any intention on the
     part of a mechanic who labored to put it together and adjust it,
     using all his tools to obtain this useful result -- the hearer would
     wonder, be exceedingly astonished, and think the man who made such
     a statement extremely foolish. He would promptly charge him with
     lying, and would reject his assertion.

     Now, if such a statement is rejected in regard to a small and
     insignificant wheel, the fashioning of which requires but little
     contrivance and which serves for the improvement of but a small
     portion of the earth, how can anyone permit himself to harbor
     such a thought concerning the immense sphere that emcompasses the
     whole earth with all the creatures on it; which exhibits a wisdom
     so great that the minds of all living creatures, the intellects of
     all rational mortals, cannot comprehend it; which is appointed for
     the benefit of the whole earth and all its inhabitants – how
     can one say that it came into existence without a wise and mighty
     designer purposing and conceiving it? Whatever takes place without
     purpose shows, as is well known, no trace of wisdom or power.

     Do you not realize that if ink were poured out accidentally on a
     blank sheet of paper, it would be impossible that proper writing
     should result, legible lines such as are written with a pen? If a
     person brought us a fair copy of script that could only have been
     written with a pen, and said that ink had been spilt on paper
     and these written characters have come of themselves, we would
     charge him to his face with falsehood, for we would feel certain
     that this result could not have happened without an intelligent
     person's purposeful action to produce it. Since this appears
     to us an impossibility in the case of characters whose form is
     conventional, how can one assert that something far finer in its
     art, and which manifests in its fashioning a subtlety infinitely
     beyond our comprehension, could have happened without the purpose,
     power and wisdom of a wise and mighty designer?

   How could anyone say that the universe came into existence on its own,
   seeing that everywhere we look we see signs of such inconceivably
   profound wisdom? How wondrous is the wisdom and design in the human
   body, how wondrous the arrangement of its limbs and organs, as all
   doctors and surgeons attest. How is it possible to say, with regard
   to such a wondrous machine, that it came into existence on its own
   without a purposeful designer? If anyone would claim that a watch
   had just come into existence on its own, he would be considered insane.

   We see this in the Midrash (Midrash Temurah in Midrash Aggadot
   Bereshit):

     An athiest came to Rebbi Akiva. "Who created the world?", he
     queried. R. Akiva answered, "The Holy One, blessed be He." The
     athiest replied, "Show me proof." R. Akiva said, "Come back to me
     tomorrow and I shall prove it to you."

     When the man returned the following day, R. Akiva began by asking,
     "What is that you are wearing?""A piece of clothing,"the athiest
     replied."And who made it?" R. Akiva continued. "The weaver", he
     replied. "Show me proof", R. Akiva demanded. "But how can I show you
     proof if it isn't already obvious to you that it is the work of the
     weaver?!"

     With this R. Akiva said, "Have you not heard what your own lips have
     spoken? Isn't it obvious to you that the Holy One has created this
     world? Doesn't the clothing testify to the weaver; the house and the
     door to a builder and a carpenter? Just so does the world testity to
     the One who made it."

   Imagine a human being born with a fully developed intellect. We can't
   imagine his great astonishment upon seeing, suddenly, the heavens and
   their hosts, the earth and all that is upon it. What would this man's
   answer be to our question: Did the world that he is seeing now for the
   first time come into existence on its own, without any conscious
   intent, or is it the work of a wise Creator? Behold, without a doubt,
   after contemplating for a moment, he would respond that all this was
   made with wondrous wisdom and extremely subtle order (fine-tuning).

   [We find this concept expressed in any number places in our classical
   literature.] The Psalmist said, "The heavens declare the glory of
   G-d"(Psalms 19:2). [According the Duties of the Heart 2:5] this is also
   the meaning of Job's words when he declared, "From my flesh, I will see
   G-d!"(Job 19:26) [The Psalmist saw proof of G-d's existence in the
   magnitude of the universe. Job was saying that the very fact that
   something as wonderful as his body could exist demonstrates that it is
   the work of a wise Creator.]

   In view of all this it is therefore extremely puzzling, a great enigma:
   How could some of the greatest philosophers who ever lived have
   concluded that the world was brought into existence by chance?

   6. The resolution of this enigma can be found in the Torah. The Torah
   reveals something profound about human psychology when it commands, "Do
   not take bribes, for bribery blinds the eyes of the wise!" (Deuteronomy
   16:19).

   What is bribery? In legal terms, the smallest amount necessary to
   constitute a bribe is a "shaveh prutah"(not much more than a penny),
   similar to the minimum amount needed [for a court] to find a person
   guilty of stealing or of taking interest. This negative commandment, to
   never take a bribe, is directed not only at a judge, but at every man,
   even the wisest of men, even the most righteous, even Moses himself.
   Yes, if it could be imagined, even if Moses would take the tiniest
   bribe, a prutah, his perception of reality would be distorted; he would
   be incapable of bringing forth a just ruling.

   At first sight, this is nothing short of amazing. Can we imagine Moses
   or Aaron twisting the law and judging falsely merely for the sake of
   receiving such miniscule benefit? But the Torah itself testifies to the
   possibility, and "the testimony of G-d is trustworthy" (Psalms 19:8).

   We must therefore say that it is a psychological law: A person's will
   or desire [to gain some benefit] influences his mind [his ability to
   think straight]. Of course, it depends how strong the desire and how
   resolute the mind. A small desire will not exert much influence on a
   great mind, whereas on a lesser mind it will. A powerful desire [for
   gain] will exert even more influence. One thing is certain: no matter
   how miniscule, a desire for gain will always have some affect. Even the
   tiniest desire can cause the greatest mind to waver a fraction.

   This is exemplified in the Talmud (Ketuvot 105b):

     Rebbi Yishmael bar Yossi had a land tenant who used to bring him
     fruits from his [R. Yishmael's] orchard every Friday before Shabbat.
     Once, he came on a Thursday. R. Yishmael asked him: "What's changed
     this week?" "I have a court case this week", he answered."Since I
     was coming to town anyway, I thought I would bring you your
     fruits."R. Yishmael refused to take the fruits [even though they
     were his]. "I am disqualified from judging your case."Two [other]
     rabbis sat and began to hear the land tenant's case. R. Yishmael sat
     [on the sidelines] watching. At every turn in the discussion, R.
     Yishmael felt himself wanting to give advice to his land tenant. "If
     only he would say this now... if only he would say this..."After the
     case was decided, he exclaimed, "O that the spirit of those who take
     bribes would explode! I refused to take what was rightfully mine
     [and I still couldn't help being biased and wanting to see him come
     out winning]. How much more those who actually take what it is not
     theirs!

   It is known that the sages [of the Talmud] were angelic in terms of
   their expanded consciousness and saintly character. We nevertheless see
   that the smallest degree of bias could cause them to incline away from
   the truth. How much more so the rest of us who are sunken in the
   desires of this world! The desire for gain literally bribes us, saying,
   "Hey, look, the world is free to do with as you please!"How powerful
   this bias is! How easily it distorts our perception and blinds us! For
   when a person has "bought into"a certain bias, he is incapable of
   recognizing any truth that flies in the face of that bias. As far as
   that truth is concerned, he might just as well be in a drunken stupor.
   He doesn't recognize its existence.

   Now, of course, we shouldn't be astonished that so many great
   philosophers had difficulty believing that the world was created by a
   Purposeful Creator. Their minds were surely great, but their desire to
   gain benefit from the pleasures of this world overcame their ability to
   think straight. Such a powerful bias can divert a person's mind to the
   point that he can say two plus two does not equal four, but five. A
   person cannot judge whether something is true unless his mind is free
   from any distorting influence vis a vis the thing he wishes to judge.
   On the contrary, if recognizing a particular truth in any way
   contradicts a bias that a person has bought into, no amount of
   intellect, even the intellect of a great person, can remove or overcome
   that bias.

   7. We learn from this that the foundations of true faith are simple and
   unquestionable for anyone who isn't an idiot. It is simply impossible
   to doubt their veracity. This is only true, however, on the condition
   that one does not allow oneself to be bribed. One must be disinterested
   in and free from the desires and allures of this world, and his own
   personal desires [for gain].

   If so, the root of God-denial lies not in the distortion of the
   intellect in and of itself. It lies in the heart, i.e., in one's desire
   to gain benefit [from this world], which distorts and blinds the
   intellect.

   It is clear now why the Torah commands, "Do not stray after your
   hearts..." (Deuteronomy 15:39), concerning which the sages commented,
   "Do not follow after the heart's desire to deny G-d"(Sifri Shlach
   15:70). A person is obligated to subdue and sublimate his desires [for
   personal gain], because this is the only way his intellect will be free
   of any blinding influence! He will then automatically recognize the
   truth of the existence of a Creator. This is what Rebbi Akiva meant
   when he said that the world attests to the Holy One, blessed be He, who
   created it.

   God-denial really has no place in a person's mind. Its place, if man
   allows it to exist there, is the heart; in a person's desire for gain.
   And if one would be careful not to allow his desires to overcome him,
   he could never come to deny G-d's existence or atttribute reality to
   any form of idolatry. It is a sign that one's desires have grown out of
   proportion if one is incapable of understanding this simple truth.

   And the commandment to believe in G-d? It is a commandment not to allow
   one's desires to overcome his intellect so that he will automatically
   come to believe. In other words, there is no need to struggle to
   believe. One must simply remove the obstacles that stand in the way of
   believing. It will then come naturally, of itself...



More information about the Avodah mailing list