Q&A: Logic in the Talmud
Logic in the Talmud
Question
I know you’ve dealt with this topic a great deal, but I’d appreciate a concise answer and references to sources.
Do you think there is logic and consistency in the Talmud, and if so, is the Talmud’s logic still valid today?
Thank you.
Answer
This is too general a question. Basic logic is universal, and of course it is valid in the Talmud as well. There are certain modes of thinking that characterize the Talmud, but they are not logic. The books on Talmudic logic in our series try to use modern logical tools to decipher Talmudic passages, and of course those tools are universal as well.
Discussion on Answer
Definitely available. For purchase on Amazon.
Why was the series (for the most part) written in English?
Sorry, my mistake.
Thank you. I’d be glad to understand more.
The structure of the Talmud does seem to be built on claims and conclusions, but many times it seems to conflict with logical necessity; sometimes it seems non-necessary, sometimes only possible, and sometimes it even seems outright the opposite, and so on. How can I understand the Talmud using my own tools? Also, how do you use modern logical tools, when they didn’t exist in their time, or at least there wasn’t awareness of them?
Thank you.
It does not conflict with logic, but arguments in everyday contexts are not logically necessary arguments. Some are analogies, generalizations, and the like. I can’t answer questions that are this general. The laws of logic are conceptualizations of modes of thinking that already existed beforehand, even before someone conceptualized them and turned them into a logical law (even before Aristotle, everyone knew that if all chairs are made of wood and this is a chair, then it is made of wood). Modern tools continue to conceptualize modes of thinking that existed earlier and were used even without explicit awareness of them.
Is it available to the public?
If not, why not?