Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Tolerance Does Not Mean Agreement

I am a physicist by training and predilection and a programmer by necessity.  One thing that means is that when I am confronted with a conflict between truth and beauty, I embark on a mission to accomplish two things:
  1. Accept the truth.
  2. Alter my perception to beauty to correspond to what is true.
For example, there were those who feel that irrational numbers (number that cannot be expressed as the ratio of two integers) are ugly.  This group includes the Pythagoreans of the ancient world, who are said to have drowned  Hippasus for having used their theorem to prove their existence.  It also certain members of the Indiana state legislature who introduced bill #246 into the 1897 Indiana General Assembly to legislate that π should equal exactly 3. Those folks, and others of their ilk, are bound and determined to alter truth until it matches their perception of beauty.

I find that us truth seekers are by and large a pretty tolerant group.  That is, my attitude toward those those who seek beauty lies somewhere on the spectrum between funny and sad; depending on the issue.  Believing that irrational numbers don't exist is rather funny.  Believing that smoking cigarettes won't lead to heart disease and cancer is sad.  I do not go around evangelizing the existence of irrational numbers nor the increased mortality of cigarette smokers.  However, if asked by one of them about π or smoking, I will answer them straight.  I will tell them that they are wrong.  I will not say "Well, according to my beliefs, π is irrational and smoking is bad for your health."  Because it's not my beliefs; it's the facts.  I don't consider them less human nor less created in the Divine Image; I just consider them mistaken.  That's how truth works.

The beauty-seekers, on the other hand, are exceedingly intolerant; the drowning of Hippasus just being one in a long history of tragic events when the beauty seekers gain control.  It really has to be that way.  Once you are in the business of redefining truth to match your idea of beauty, your only option is to do away with the truth seekers.  After all, truth seekers just don't have the option to ignore the facts, so they are not going to be able to agree that your concept of beauty is not truth.  Moreover, they will not be able to "agree to disagree"; because that also would not be true.

That is how I came to be a practicing, believing Orthodox Jew.  Orthodox Judaism looks to the one, immutable Torah (teaching) that was given to us on Mount Sinai over 3,000 years ago in a one time only event of public revelation to an entire nation.  All other religions and isms are simply the collected agreement of a group of people; a consensus and shared vision of beauty.  Sometimes funny, sometimes sad, sometimes even accidentally right; but never true.

The beauty seekers have, of course, even attempted to co-opt the word "tolerance" to mean "you have to agree with us".  I, being on the side of truth, will continue to use the word in its true meaning.  As long as you persist in your belief that π equals 3, and even if you get a Supreme Court decision to support you, I shall not try to convince you of your folly.  Unless you ask, then I'll happily help you to find where you have erred.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...
Post a Comment
Read more

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aru...
Post a Comment
Read more