[Avodah] Brisker methodology

[Micha Berger]

On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 07:12:18AM +0200, Joel Rich via Avodah wrote:
> Quantum physics explains more than Newtonian mechanics but still has gaps
> in its explanatory powers, should we look at Brisker methodology in the
> same way? (ie there's a next level to be discovered).

In QM, one doesn't know what the math represents. The various different
interpretations of QM, what reality leads to that math, are considered
philosophy, not science. Since they all produce the same equations for
bheavior, they cannot be experimentally distinguished. So -- not science.

Brisker Derekh is founded on the idea that the topic ends with its
own theory. There is not innate concept of baalus, baalus is *defined*
by the set of laws of qinyan, achrayus, geneivah, hefqer, etc...

It is, in that sense much like QM.

Which means that Rav Shimon Shkop already gave us a successor theory
to Brisker Lomdus, one which does connect lomdus to reality.

It also dealls with hitztarfus (how things combine), not only chiluqim.
And it is less boolean all-or-nothing than the way Brisk handles halachic
categories as chalos sheim.

While the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher may be the most important work of
hashkafah of the past 300 years (although I might be biased <grin>) the
rest of the book should be critical learning too.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 The thought of happiness that comes from outside
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   the person, brings him sadness. But realizing
Author: Widen Your Tent      the value of one's will and the freedom brought
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF    by uplifting its, brings great joy. - R' Kook