4 ms·

Its a personal thing, I am not in a position to persuade anybody. I think that our present is explained by the context of the past, and that you can't understa

Its a personal thing, I am not in a position to persuade anybody. I think that our present is explained by the context of the past, and that you can't understand the present without looking at the past. Now the past is a complex thing that can't be reduced to some simple formula, I still believe that you can still learn out of it, because human nature didn't change to much throughout the ages. Our reality may be quite different from what it used to be, but we are not essentially different from our ancestors, so we can still learn from them (hope that helps). Our experience is similar to the experience of our ancestors, we are part of the same process - it may be distant, but it is still relevant (in my opinion), the accumulated experience of past generations is of great value (because we tend to repeat the mistakes of the past) I know that I did repeat the same statement several times with variations, but it is as far as I can get. Also: If something prevailed throughout time, against all odds, then that's pretty impressive to me.

throwawayjewish 9y ago
Thank you, that is an interesting way of putting it!
TangoTrotFox 9y ago
> "Also: If something prevailed throughout time, against all odds, then that's pretty impressive to me." This is dangerous logic, because you're not comparing it to anything. For instance one argument I've seen for the existence of a god was the fact that many constants and other seemingly 'magic numbers' of our universe are set just as is required to maintain life as we know it. The problem there is that assuming this is true, it's still meaningless since the only way we could ever come to observe this fact was if it was true. This observation is known as the anthropic principle [1]. Basically considering the merit or probability of something happening when you would be unable to observe it not happening is impossible. You could say you're comparing it against the failure of other groups, but this is probably somewhat disingenuous as I think it's reasonable to hypothesize that the oldest persistent ethnic group is likely some group within Africa neither you or I have ever heard of, and you'd probably be unlikely to praise their longevity and persistence in and of itself, even if it too was likely ripe with strife throughout time. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle
- bradfordarner 9y ago
  I'm not sure the Anthropic principle can be applied here. There is a broader data set than that which is relevant for that principle, based on my understanding. "Against all odds" would seem to be the key words here. There are countless other ethnic and religious groups that were integrated into the larger Muslim culture when Islam was first spreading. The same is the case for Christian Europe. In fact, the Romani people may be a good example of what we would expect to naturally happen to a dispersed and oppressed ethnic group. They have no singular culture, principles, or beliefs; they assumed most aspects of the surrounding culture's mode of life and beliefs. It isn't a stretch to call the survival of the Jewish people an unexplained historical exception. There are countless historians (Jewish and non-Jewish) who have researched and written on the topic. Or, am I misunderstanding the application of the Anthropic principle as you are applying it in this context?
  - TangoTrotFox 9y ago
    Who are you comparing Jews to? This is the point. I don't think there's any reasonable comparison. Judaism's pairing of extreme insularity with great economic success in most 'host nations' leaves them without any other group to compare against. Powerless minority groups are certainly not a reasonable comparison. Oppression and dispersion takes on a different meaning for those of means, even more so when the shared genetic lineage also happens to provide a substantially higher IQ than average for the vast majority of the group.
    - davemel37 9y ago
      I was taking you seriously until you wrote this, "Judaism's pairing of extreme insularity with great economic success" and this, "Oppression and dispersion takes on a different meaning for those of means" I really think there is an undertone to this perspective that is colored by a narrative that is false at best and possibly something much worse. I dont think there is any factual basis to claim Jews had great economic success or were of means outside of false narratives perpetuated by their enemies. Even if you can point to specific eras or individuals that had success, you certainly couldnt demonstrate it existed propritionately more so than others, or that it existed in all the periods where they were persecuted and oppressed...
davidf18 9y ago
Unique among religions and civilizations, Judaism mandated universal education though 6th grade for all males for reading, writing, "bible" and math 2000 years ago as the Romans were destroying The Jewish (animal sacrificial) Temple. Some of those students went to yeshivas (religious schools) afterwards studying Talmud [1] (a written rendition of The Oral Law by tradition given to Moses by God along with the five books of Moses). A very high priority "law" (mitzvah) in Judaism is that Jewish males are supposed to spend at least a little time each day learning Talmud. The Talmud is focused not so much on content but on process, on learning Jewish tradition and law though arguments among rabbis testing edge conditions (e.g., an object found overlapping both public and private property). In modern day, yeshiva students have taken the LSAT exam and have gone directly to law school without attending undergraduate education. I believe the unique early emphasis on education, "The Law" (Torah), and lifelong learning among males helped to hold the community together. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

throwawayjewish 9y ago

Thank you, that is an interesting way of putting it!

TangoTrotFox 9y ago

> "Also: If something prevailed throughout time, against all odds, then that's pretty impressive to me." This is dangerous logic, because you're not comparing it to anything. For instance one argument I've seen for the existence of a god was the fact that many constants and other seemingly 'magic numbers' of our universe are set just as is required to maintain life as we know it. The problem there is that assuming this is true, it's still meaningless since the only way we could ever come to observe this fact was if it was true. This observation is known as the anthropic principle [1]. Basically considering the merit or probability of something happening when you would be unable to observe it not happening is impossible. You could say you're comparing it against the failure of other groups, but this is probably somewhat disingenuous as I think it's reasonable to hypothesize that the oldest persistent ethnic group is likely some group within Africa neither you or I have ever heard of, and you'd probably be unlikely to praise their longevity and persistence in and of itself, even if it too was likely ripe with strife throughout time. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

bradfordarner 9y ago
I'm not sure the Anthropic principle can be applied here. There is a broader data set than that which is relevant for that principle, based on my understanding. "Against all odds" would seem to be the key words here. There are countless other ethnic and religious groups that were integrated into the larger Muslim culture when Islam was first spreading. The same is the case for Christian Europe. In fact, the Romani people may be a good example of what we would expect to naturally happen to a dispersed and oppressed ethnic group. They have no singular culture, principles, or beliefs; they assumed most aspects of the surrounding culture's mode of life and beliefs. It isn't a stretch to call the survival of the Jewish people an unexplained historical exception. There are countless historians (Jewish and non-Jewish) who have researched and written on the topic. Or, am I misunderstanding the application of the Anthropic principle as you are applying it in this context?
- TangoTrotFox 9y ago
  Who are you comparing Jews to? This is the point. I don't think there's any reasonable comparison. Judaism's pairing of extreme insularity with great economic success in most 'host nations' leaves them without any other group to compare against. Powerless minority groups are certainly not a reasonable comparison. Oppression and dispersion takes on a different meaning for those of means, even more so when the shared genetic lineage also happens to provide a substantially higher IQ than average for the vast majority of the group.
  - davemel37 9y ago
    I was taking you seriously until you wrote this, "Judaism's pairing of extreme insularity with great economic success" and this, "Oppression and dispersion takes on a different meaning for those of means" I really think there is an undertone to this perspective that is colored by a narrative that is false at best and possibly something much worse. I dont think there is any factual basis to claim Jews had great economic success or were of means outside of false narratives perpetuated by their enemies. Even if you can point to specific eras or individuals that had success, you certainly couldnt demonstrate it existed propritionately more so than others, or that it existed in all the periods where they were persecuted and oppressed...

davidf18 9y ago

Unique among religions and civilizations, Judaism mandated universal education though 6th grade for all males for reading, writing, "bible" and math 2000 years ago as the Romans were destroying The Jewish (animal sacrificial) Temple. Some of those students went to yeshivas (religious schools) afterwards studying Talmud [1] (a written rendition of The Oral Law by tradition given to Moses by God along with the five books of Moses). A very high priority "law" (mitzvah) in Judaism is that Jewish males are supposed to spend at least a little time each day learning Talmud. The Talmud is focused not so much on content but on process, on learning Jewish tradition and law though arguments among rabbis testing edge conditions (e.g., an object found overlapping both public and private property). In modern day, yeshiva students have taken the LSAT exam and have gone directly to law school without attending undergraduate education. I believe the unique early emphasis on education, "The Law" (Torah), and lifelong learning among males helped to hold the community together. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud