Hello Rabbi
Hello Rabbi:
A. First of all, thank you for the lessons in critical thinking. I didn’t understand why you don’t accept slippery slope arguments. I agree that in a world where everyone thinks coldly, this argument has no place, but not in the case of leading a community.
on. Regarding the trilogy, just a note. Everyone raved about the second book, in my opinion the third book is much more revolutionary and significant, isn’t it?
third. Is there a chance you will do a series for people who have already studied Gemara in the past on ways to study Gemara, questions about Gemara, etc.?
thanks
A. It’s not that I don’t accept such arguments. I didn’t say that anywhere. What I said was that it’s important to distinguish between arguments on the merits of the matter and slippery slope arguments. People don’t make a point of distinguishing between policy arguments and halakhic arguments, and that flattens the discourse. It’s true that I tend to greatly reduce the weight of slippery slope arguments.
B. I think so too.
C. I don’t know. I’m not sure there’s a demand for it either.
A. I meant the second level. Don't you accept it because the harm most of the time is greater than the benefit because of arguments like this?
C. We will spread the word, I believe many will join…
This is mainly because such an argument instructs us to do something wrong now to prevent future harm. It is mortgaging the present for the benefit of the future. Now you are certainly doing something wrong so that in the future something problematic will not happen. No doubt excludes certainty. Therefore, the burden of proof is on the one who claims that it should be done.
If I see that there is a demand, I will consider it.
+1 regarding the Gemara series.
I'm afraid that when everyone thinks ice-cold thinking, the fear of a slippery slope increases, because the nature of ice is to be slippery 🙂
Best regards, Volan Ski
I am also adding one to the request for the Gemara series.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
