<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16825" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Arial color=#000000 size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
PTSIZE="10"> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000
size=2>From: Micha Berger <A
href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org">micha@aishdas.org</A><BR>: I truly believe you
are not thinking logically here at all. Let's <BR>: say I, an adherent of Shitah
A, believe in dinosaurs -- not only that they <BR>: lived, but that they lived
millions of years ago. Let's say Ploni, an <BR>: adherent of Shitah B, believes
that I am an apikores. Let's say I also believe<BR>: in EvE. Does that mean that
I must now simultaneously believe that there <BR>: WERE dinosaurs and at the
same time must believe that there WERE NO <BR>: dinosaurs?! ...
[--TK]<BR><BR>>>That exactly what I'm saying! The resulting paradox means
that when B<BR>says that A's position is outside eilu va'eilu, A is compelled to
say<BR>that it's B's position that is outside. Because to accept that both
are<BR>true would be "not thinking logically here at all." <BR>.... EvE
says that<BR>both are divrei E-lokim Chaim. Both are true.
<< [--RMB]<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>>>>>></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>"Divrei Elokim Chayim" IMO means that even the wrong position has
something in it that is worthy of being studied. In practice it may
mean that we do not at present know for absolutely certain which of the two
opinions is correct. In some cases it also means that a
definitive conclusion cannot be reached until Moshiach comes. It does
not mean that two irreconcilable opposites are both true.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In Aristotelian logic there is something called the Principle of the
Excluded Middle. Basically it is the principle that something cannot
be both true and not-true at the same time, or that there is something in the
middle between true and not-true. (Of course there are areas where there
is a spectrum of possibilities, but we are talking about things that
simply CANNOT have a spectrum -- e.g., whether a person is a mamzer or not,
permitted to marry or not)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You keep defining "Eilu v'Eilu" as "both are true, even if opposite."
To me that is logically impossible. ("I can believe six impossible things before
breakfast," said the Red Queen. But I don't believe that's a mitzva,
before or after breakfast.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have already indicated that I don't believe you are defining EvE
correctly. I define it as "both have sources, both have reason, both have
merit" -- but not "both are true."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>However, it is possible that your definition of EvE and my definition are
both true -- IF your definition of EvE is correct. But, in that case, IF
your definition is correct -- then that would imply that my definition is
correct -- in which case your definition is wrong.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You know, I'm beginning to see your problem.....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
PTSIZE="10"><BR><B>--Toby Katz<BR>==========<BR><BR></FONT><FONT lang=0
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
PTSIZE="10"></B>--------------------</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
lang=0 face=Arial color=#000000 size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000
size=2><BR></FONT> </BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>