חדש באתר: מיכי-בוט. עוזר חכם המאומן על כתבי הרב מיכאל אברהם.

Famous and knowledgeable

שו"תFamous and knowledgeable
שאל לפני 2 שנים

Good week, Rabbi.
When the Maimonides says in Part One, Chapter Two of the Teaching that good and evil, obscene and pleasant, are determined by the known and not the understood, does this in itself mean that all religious and faith-based decisions are merely a product of the known?
As Pascal says, "There is nothing in the world that is right for reasons that are logical. The accepted practice (like the famous ones) determines the rightness, that it has no other meaning than that it is agreed upon and accepted. This is the secret of its authority, and the tendency to place it on its own principle is its undoing."
And David Hume also seems to me to argue the same thing because of the irrationality of values. He testifies that their root is "from emotions." The question is what does he mean by emotions and do you agree with him about this and what do you think?
I'm really sorry for the interruption and thank you very much.


לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

השאר תגובה

0 Answers
מיכי צוות ענה לפני 2 שנים
I of course disagree. To me, morality is objective principles, and only their applications depend on circumstances. In column 457 I discussed the fact that moral principles are imposed even on God. Regarding the Maimonides' method, there are contradictions in it and I cannot say anything clear. I dealt with this in column 177 and see also the talkbacks there.

לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

השאר תגובה

Back to top button