Based**

Rabbi Amnon Yitzhak often invites him to lecture, and there is an element here of “tell me who your friends are and I’ll tell you who you are”…
See one example out of many here…

Also the way he talks about Religious Zionism… ridiculous claims combined with the kind of stupidity one is used to seeing from his host, the great outreach rabbi and enlightener of Israel’s affairs.

(About Religious Zionism in another video)

That’s not Dov Berkovitz, the son of Rabbi Eliezer. It’s someone else. His foolish arrogance already shows that the man is an idiot and has no clue what he’s talking about.

I’m pretty sure you’re talking about two different people.

There is Rabbi Dov Berkovitz, author of “The Existential Daf,” head of the Talmud Chai study hall, and I think that’s the one Rabbi Michi was referring to. And there is the Rabbi Dov Berkovitz the questioner was referring to, who is Haredi, and has this website: https://scop6096.wixsite.com/scop.

Here is a transcript from the first minute and a half of the video. My impression is that we are dealing with an exceptional genius, deep and erudite.
I saw that there is an institute, “The Institute for Philosophy and History of Sciences and Ideas.” I still didn’t know the connection of this [a few unclear words], but I saw the courses there and I said, wait a second, what is going on here?! Until now I know that all day long they admire science and academia and do brainwashing, “manufacturers of certainty,” and here there are all kinds of courses that turn science into dust and ashes. There they teach how to criticize science. I said wow, such a thing—I’m the first one going there, and that’s also how I got to quantum physics. Why did I get to quantum physics? Because quantum physics actually caused a revolution, and we have no idea what a revolution it is; it refuted the five foundations of all science. Refuted them. And since those five foundations relied on the four thought-structures of Protestant Christianity, it also in effect refuted those four thought-structures. What exactly “refutation” means is also not simple. That too, if there is time, we will discuss. Which five foundations of modern science? Therefore really I am so, I am so [unclear]—not that I started studying there in any serious way, somebody brought me some book and in about two days that was it, I sat then with the head of the Institute for Philosophy and History of Sciences and Ideas, and he said to me, I see that you know it so well, how long did it take you? I said to him, it took me the intersession break, it took me two days, I went over the book. Two days, that’s all?? How can that be. I said to him, if you had spent your whole life immersed in Talmudic topics, you would see that all this quantum physics is no more than newspaper level. Two hours are enough to go over this whole story. But that is the reason why I specifically attached myself to this matter of quantum physics. Because quantum physics refuted all the foundations of science.

A little more from later on. I highly recommend listening; enjoyment guaranteed. Reminiscent of Einav Gand Galili.

This is objectivity—everyone knows the concept “objective,” that science is objective. The moment a person looks, does an experiment, in the laboratory, it becomes holy of holies, like, if you will excuse the comparison, the Torah of Moses our teacher. There is nothing beyond it, it is absolute absolute. Quantum physics showed—it’s all a bluff! There is no such thing as objective. Oh, I do an experiment? The experiment depends on which parameters you put into the experiment! (Rabbi Amnon Yitzhak remarks: Exactly!) I’ll put in different parameters and the experiment will show me the opposite. There is no such thing anymore as objectivity. I get the results according to what I decide in advance the results will be. According to that I determine the foundations of how to check, and that’s it. Consequently there are no laws of nature anymore either. The concept of laws of nature—after quantum physics—even the laws of nature have passed from the world.

I still don’t get it… he really does seem full of knowledge, but somehow despite that he talks in a way that looks like what it looks like… how does that happen? I don’t know what to make of it and how to relate to what he says, because in the end, as I already said, the man has very broad knowledge and he’s not just talking out of thin air… he brings names and explains (even if the explanation isn’t much).

He is full of popularized and superficial knowledge of talking “about” science, and bizarre verbiage from the very last of the crazies. It is hard to suppose he knows how to solve even the smallest exercise (that would take him a bit more than two hours). Just names and slogans. But to give him his due—the guy is absolutely hilarious. A delight to the ears.

Actually, from looking at his site it appears I was mistaken about him and he knows more than just popular science. So I don’t know what is going on here and I join the questioner.

Nowadays any idiot can get familiar with concepts and names (a little Wikipedia and you’re all set). The question is whether you really understand the subject.

Here and there I listen to things of his. He really seems like he’s making stuff up. Maybe he has a photographic memory, but his ability to abstract and analyze is not high. By the way, on the site there they bring a “professor” who was impressed by some idea of his about quantum theory, and then it turns out he is actually a professor of criminology… and he too is a bluffer himself (what does criminology have to do with physics?)

We are dealing with a genius the like of which we have never seen. Learned all of quantum theory from zero in two days. And I thought that 5 six-credit courses in one semester was hard.

Rabbi Michi? Can we hear an explanation from you for this phenomenon?
How does it happen that a person full of knowledge explains that everyone else is stupid?
There are many who disparage science, but they have no real clue what the arguments and the content are there…
Here there is someone who knows a lot and claims what he claims.
Maybe he is right after all? And if not, then how is that possible?

I haven’t seen the full extent of his knowledge, but maybe that’s because I haven’t heard enough of him. A few minutes were enough for me to understand that we’re dealing with an arrogant idiot who doesn’t understand what he’s talking about. The few minutes I heard were also nonsense in terms of content, not just empty boastful talk. How does that happen? Easily. Sometimes specifically the fact that a person reads quite a bit gives him the feeling that he already understands everything. For someone who hasn’t read, that is of course less likely.

With all due respect to all the honored rabbis, it דווקא seems that in science he does understand. The claims in the video posted here are the aggregate of claims raised by empiricists, positivists, and postmodernists against science: that theories beg the question, that things are not certain on an absolute level beyond all doubt, that scientists know how things work and give that names but not why, that forces like gravity have never been observed by any human being, etc. The question is why he does not raise the same objections against his knowledge regarding religion..

Likewise, it is a shame that he did not read the monumental book Truth and Unstable by the mara d’atra.

He says that all this happened because of quantum theory, which proved that everything is a bluff. Meaning, not pure philosophical objections, and therefore he does not direct them against other bodies of knowledge. And therefore these are empty words that do not even raise a challenge.

It is evident from your responses that you are deeply afraid that your whole grip on science is collapsing in the face of the truth, simply because Rabbi Berkovitz’s worldview, may he live long, is different from yours. Clearly you would not dare stand opposite him in a substantive discussion.
Certainly the slanders written here are not relevant at all, to speak this way about a rabbi who also has endorsements from the leading rabbis of the generation for his Torah words, and, on a different plane, praise for his solutions from professors with Nobel Prizes, which anyone who wants can see.
Whoever reviled his mouth before a Torah scholar would do better to repent before the Day of Judgment.
Thanks,
Ori

Ori, your response clearly reveals your burning passion for apple cake with a cinnamon aroma.
Thanks,
Yeshay

Is this “comedy” for Rosh Hashanah?
For anyone interested in expanding and hearing Rabbi Berkovitz’s claims, may he live long, in writing—for example about quanta and the scientific worldview—and not just looking at videos and doing behavioral analysis based on his manner of speaking :(and not posting jokes that wouldn’t even make it onto a fluff website)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0wf6hTiIxsvWUhKTk50RFIyWTA/view?resourcekey=0-LQIjZ-Ct0bn76R4bWQckzQ
Happy New Year

Owner of the forum, Miki or whatever your name is, you are thoroughly wicked.

‘Dvir’ (I’m not really addressing you, but only the ‘issue’),

With your permission, I will analyze the occurrence here,

A. You saw a man on the internet and felt uncomfortable with what he was saying, as you described,
B. A feeling arose in you that you disagree with the direction in which he is taking things, and disagree with his conclusions.
C. You decided that you want to ignore him and not engage with him (in the sense of forming a connection)—that is, not deal with his claims.
D. You feel that it would be logically dishonest to throw him out without some justification.
E. That specific justification would be proof that this man is not scientific, and thus one could dismiss everything that comes out of his mouth with contempt (incidentally, this is not logically necessary; he could be unscientific in one particular statement of his, but logically you would still not have exempted yourself from dealing with his claims on various topics; rather, it would merely be a psychological justification so that you feel comfortable with your contempt for him).
F. You did not find an absolute logical flaw in his words,
G. You turned to the great learned doctor, who also will not waste his time finding this man’s scientific errors, but he can provide you with a statement, like a living judge who cuts life for every living thing: he will come and decide for you and for the whole forum who is speaking nonsense and who is speaking seriously and whose words should be taken into account.
H. And now you can return to your uncritical way of life, one that neither knows how nor is able to conduct a dialogue with itself and decide in a logical, considered, and mature manner whether it wants to listen to / deal with the person in front of it or not, and you can resort again to the great doctor the next time you do not wish to activate your own critical faculty.

Or, in another formulation, instead of all this foolish analysis:

Dvir, are you incapable of exercising critical judgment by your own powers, and are you actually asking another person to use his critical sense in order to decide for you whether so-and-so is someone worth listening to? What does that teach about the value of your learning? If the honorable Rabbi, master of this hostelry, had lavished praise on the man, in that case would you have gone to listen to him with great attentiveness? Doesn’t that sound like a joke to you?

It’s nice, it’s like asking rabbis for “spiritual” and “holy” certification on certain rabbis/scholars, recommendations as to whether their words are aligned with our beliefs and the like,
it is really a nice anecdote for an article depicting how the worship of rationalism is a religion in every respect… the scholar will come and declare whether this thing is aligned with “our” “path”… give it kosher certification, and so on.

I ask your forgiveness for latching onto you with my words; in my heart I have no address ‘to you,’ but to the issue I saw here. I hope you received my words as an observer from the side and in good spirit.

In this context, I would like to express my appreciation and thanks to Rabbi Michi for his work.

The truth is that we are dealing with a multi-disciplinary autodidact genius who definitely knows what he is talking about. The rabbi was for many years in contact with important scientists in many fields, including Yakir Aharonov in the area of quantum physics.

I protest the disgrace of the Torah scholar Rabbi Dov Berkovitz of blessed memory.