Q&A: Axioms and Values
Axioms and Values
Question
Hello Rabbi.. With your permission, I’d be glad if you could answer two questions:
- Is the world built on axioms?—I mean religions, worldviews, political outlooks, etc.
- Does the world necessarily rest on axioms?
- Is a world in which people rely on axioms a world that ends up in chaos, since each person has his own assumptions, along with general assumptions, etc.?
- If a person is the one who grants existence to the values he follows, then why should I believe in values that someone else creates? After all, values cannot be imposed on a particular person, since it depends on that person’s will to adhere to and aspire to a value.
I know the questions are a bit disorganized and not so logical; I’d be happy if you could straighten them out and answer.
Thanks in advance!
Answer
Hello Gil.
First, I have to say that if you send questions and expect an answer, the basic requirement is that you invest a little time in sharpening and clarifying what you mean. If you yourself say that the questions are illogical and disorganized, what stopped you from sitting down and organizing them a bit? I don’t think it makes sense that I should have to invest the time to understand, when I answer very many questioners and you’re the one who wants answers.
As for your two (?) questions.
- I didn’t understand. Give an example and clarify what the alternatives are between which you are hesitating.
- What is the difference between “built on” and “rests on”? I didn’t understand.
- I’ve discussed this at length in several places. It’s true that each person and each group constructs its own worldview, and that creates different “narratives.” Postmodernism claims that this is essential, and that every such system is arbitrary (because basic assumptions cannot be justified), and that indeed creates a mess and an intellectual vacuum. But if one sees this as a debate whose purpose is to arrive at the truth (as far as possible), I don’t see this as chaos in its negative sense. On the contrary, diverse points of view improve the discussion and help us move closer to the truth.
- I didn’t understand.
Discussion on Answer
1. Values are ethical axioms. Therefore one can always say that at the base of our value system lies a set of axioms (= values). From them we derive the proper forms of conduct.
The way to adopt such axioms is intuition (in this case, moral intuition). You don’t accept them because someone established them, but because they seem correct to you, and therefore it really doesn’t matter whether he is biased or not.
2. As for authority, that is a question about the source of morality’s validity. In my view, it is the will of God (see the fourth notebook, vol. 3). If there is a correct value, people can be compelled to act accordingly, though not always. If they truly and sincerely believe in another value, there is room to treat them with tolerance. See my article here:
Thanks for the comment. You answered part of what I asked in #3. I’ll try to summarize the rest of the questions that didn’t get an answer (the order of the questions changes a bit in this version):
1. For example—in politics—the axioms would be the values that stem from the regime found in country X. I’m asking: is there an alternative? That is, can I say that I do not accept a certain axiom because human beings are biased and subjective, or must one accept the axiom against his will because that’s what has become widespread in the world? What would cause me to accept the axiom, and would that necessarily be a matter of logic?
2. What is the authority that obligates a person to accept certain values, and can they be imposed on him?