Subjective consistency
Hello. I think it is wrong to judge a person and sue them based on my starting points, even though I am a monist and think that I am right in my starting points and that others are wrong. For example, I think that the criticism of Kaplan’s people regarding the reform was not focused and correct enough, because after all, we all agree that given that the state is dictatorial or is heading in such a direction, it is legitimate to refuse, and therefore the attack should focus on the starting point that says that the state is indeed heading in such a direction.
A. Is this the right way?
on. I have an intuition that this is a bit strange. According to this, a person who murders people because he thinks it’s right, then my only honest criticism of him should be that it’s wrong to murder people and not about his actual murder, since his murder is a direct result of his beliefs.
It is clear that one judges a person only by his method. But there is a place to judge him for the way he formulated his method (if he did not examine and consider it seriously enough). See column 301.
And another note. Judgment can also be complex. For example, I am full of appreciation for ISIS and Hamas for their dedication and willingness to pay prices for their beliefs and values, and at the same time criticize them for their beliefs and values (within the limitations described above).
You have a huge, great, and fatal mistake. I wonder what you saw in this nonsense. I am grateful that 20 years ago I heard from the holy of holies of my teacher and rabbi, Rabbi Spieler, that it was a mistake (even of rabbis, as he put it) to speak in such terms as the self-sacrifice of these forced suicide bombers. Rather, it is the height of humiliation that exists in creation. I don't remember the exact definition he did give it, but I have grown up since then and it is not difficult to understand that "subhuman savages" A despicable, despicable, and wretched person who is willing to sacrifice his life for the most despicable, vile, and lowly desire in the world, which is their parasitic and infantile belief in receiving 70 virgins (to the extent that it has become a concept that is ridiculous among us, not to believe that this and nothing else underlies their expectation of reward for the murder that is not for the sake of it, that does not belong to the rule out of not for the sake of it, etc., because he kills and is killed). The person who is willing to murder and shed his blood for this, and the blood of the murdered, would this be called devotion? This is a castration of the concept at its most basic level, (it's about like discussing the street concept "you ate her"; is a digestion lesson required for a final blessing)
I just ask that before you type your answer in a moment like Mimria, think carefully before you type an answer for me, and don't answer like a fire on the coals, I will help you formulate a thought if you want, and it is that before every answer you write, test yourself in the following philosophical test, what would you say about a father who is willing to abandon what is dearest to him and that is to give up his beautiful home for prostitution so that he can please and seduce a woman to sleep with him, would you also say that you are full of appreciation for the prices that this father is willing to pay for his values (oh for that shame, those are his values) only you are full of criticism of him, or would you simply stand up and read out loud, "The king is naked and the father is despicable and the lowest of the low, a pedophile and every dictionary of curses that exists in the lexicon"
I'm literally shaking with excitement at the pathos in your words. But unfortunately, such pathos doesn't really work for me. If you're not willing to think beyond your stomach grumbling, there's no point in discussing it.
Aren't you ashamed to admit and say I was wrong, has this ever happened publicly? I don't even remember half of such a case, how can we believe you in your other posts that you tell the truth and your mouth and heart are equal, if when you don't have a substantive answer, you dismiss it with an inappropriate attack “stomach flutters” respect yourself and this stage of yours
For ’Ritz Katzvi + Gibor Kari’ Here is a quote from the Rabbi from column 303 (regarding knowledge and choice. Text highlighted in red) –
“After uploading the column, Phil sent a talkback that convinced me that I was wrong. Therefore, I added this section to the column and updated it”
For Zalmi, see there in the column after the red color the addition of blue color that returns from the red.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
