Q&A: A Complete Philosophical Doctrine
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.
A Complete Philosophical Doctrine
Question
Hello Rabbi, I’ve seen several books that try to present a certain thinker’s “complete philosophical doctrine,” like a book about Philo published by Mossad Harav Kook, and I’d be glad to know from the Rabbi (since you’re also a philosopher) what the definition of such a “complete doctrine” is. Thank you!
Answer
I don’t know how to answer such a general question.
Discussion on Answer
Nothing here is defined. We’re left in exactly the same place we were before. This is just a question of definition: what do you define as a complete doctrine? Nothing “has to” answer anything. The question is what you define as complete, and that’s a personal question and, in my view, not really interesting.
Does a philosophical doctrine have to cover a certain field, or everything, in order to be considered complete? Does it have to answer all the questions that arise from that field or fields, or does it need to present a way of thinking for solving the problems (or both)? And so on… goals, basic conditions (for example consistency) — what are the basic conditions?