Q&A: Truth and Not Stable
Truth and Not Stable.
Question
Have a good week, Rabbi.
Two questions came to me while reading Truth and Not Stable on the Sabbath.
A. You explained that every logical-analytic argument is question-begging. If so, then what is question-begging in the negative sense of a logical fallacy?
B. You explained that empiricism replaced rationalism in light of its emptiness, but empiricism too is not really valid, since in practice our sensory knowledge is very limited and not well founded. So I didn’t understand why not resolve the dispute by combining empiricism and rationalism. After all, to the best of my knowledge, that is how, say, physics works: mathematics, which is a purely logical branch, is used as a tool by physicists who examine factual empirical phenomena. Why not use analytic tools within empiricism in order to test which empirical discovery is more or less correct?
Answer
I understand that in your view one may interrupt Truth and Not Stable out of respect? (Otherwise, how are you raising questions in the middle of Truth and Not Stable?)
A. Question-begging in its negative sense is an argument that assumes a premise that is itself disputed and then derives from it that very same conclusion. If you take a premise that your interlocutor accepts, and prove the conclusion from it, that too is question-begging—but then it is a useful and good argument. This is not a matter of a logical fallacy but of a rhetorical mistake (a worthless argument). “Abraham and the hat” is a worthless argument, because the question-begging there is blatant.
B. Physics does not work that way. It is true that mathematics is a purely logical branch, but physicists use mathematics only as a language for describing their facts and theories. They do not infer conclusions from mathematical premises; rather, they take their physical-empirical insights and give them mathematical dress.
And indeed, empiricism too is empty, and I explained that there. I also suggested what I think is the correct alternative (what is called rationalism is really non-sensory observation, that is, a kind of empiricism).