[Avodah] Rav Elchanan Wasserman & Why People Sin

[Micha Berger via Avodah]

On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 06:16:59PM -0400, H Lampel via Avodah wrote:
:> You seem to be treating "modeh al ha-emes" as referring to a kind
:> justification that isn't a proof.

: I thought I was clear that I was taking it to be the same informal
: kind of proof as R. E. Wasserman's and R. Akiva's. The kind of proof
: not delineated in formal Aristotelian format, but clearly recognized
: and accepted by a healthy and unbiased mind.

Then I did understand you correctly.

When I say, "a kind justification that isn't a proof", I believe I mean
the same thing as your "informal kind of proof". To me, the word "proof"
implies formality. "Justification" is a general term for how we know
something is true. (From Plato's definition of knowledge: "a justified and
true belief.")

:> Whereas I see the Rambam as saying more like: this doesn't work as proof,
:> but if you already agree to the emes, look how nicely it works out.

: I did not see this in your previous remarks that characterized the
: "modeh-al-ha-emmess" as a formal proof/argument:

Because that's not what I am saying is the formal proof. I overused the
word "this", which led to confusion.

In addition "modeh al ha'ames" refers to a person, not an argument,
so you lost me on that bit. AISI, it refers to the person who accepted
the proof in 2:20, would find this point compelling. But since the point
he's making here is not a formal proof, he doesn't expect it to convince,
only to reinforce belief in those who already accepted the related proof.

: And I don't see how one can possibly interpret (MN 3:13 [not 3:15 as
: I mistakenly typed previously])  "And know that one of the
: strongest /proofs/ (min /ha-gedolah sheh-b'ra'ayos/) for Creation ex
: nihilo, for one who is /modeh al ha-ememmes/, is his understanding
: the /proof/ (/hu mah sheya'amod alav ha-mofase/)..." as meaning:

:> "this doesn't work as proof, but if you already agree to the
:> emes, look how nicely it works out."

You are taking a sentence that says "One of the greatest proofs for
creation for someone who accepts the truth is his understanding the
wonder..." He is discussing a ra'ayah that someone who already believes
would find compelling. Not a proof that would convince an unbiased
seeker.

Because I don't think the Rambam accepted that an informal justification
other than philosophical proof could be a sounds reason to embrace a
belief as true.

(I see you consistently double the "s" in "emess". Why? If the sav had
a dageish, it would be a tav, not "ss".)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             We are what we repeatedly do.
micha at aishdas.org        Thus excellence is not an event,
http://www.aishdas.org   but a habit.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Aristotle