I was recently chatting with an Orthodox friend who argued that "there is nothing to lose" from being an Orthodox Jew. I respectfully disagreed. I think that there is a lot to gain, but also a ton to (potentially) lose. There are many reasons for an Orthodox Jew to critically consider their beliefs. Here's why:
1. Orthodox Jews spend well over an entire month each year abstaining from productive work (and depending on one's ideas of fun, that too)
2. Persecution
3. Inaccess to food and services can severely restrict travel options
4. Potentially wasting one's time praying to a wrong or nonexistent God, learning wrong or meaningless books
5. Being an Orthodox Jew can cost a ton of money
6. Restricted marriage options
I think that this list could go on, but the point is made. There are a crapload of reasons for Orthodox Jews to think critically about their beliefs. It's absolutely not a "nothing to lose" situation.
And you didn't even mention the part about what you have to do to get ready for Pesach.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair, I really think these are very superfictial things. I mean, most people do not use all free time productively. If anything, once a week, to be with family and trying to replenish oneselves cannot be matched by anthing. That is just how I feel. Nothing on your list is a real "gain" The only gain worth is is the gain of truth.
ReplyDeleteRegarding number 4 (learning wrong or meaningless books), even the biggest critic of TMS finds value in these subjects. Richard Friedman has written in his books (somewhere) the he enjoys the most to learn Rashi. Not every culture on earth can claim to have such a rich treasure trove of traditions recorded and passed down. If you would look at the text in their eyes, you would see how not "wrong' those books are.
HH,
ReplyDeleteNot to me. To me these things restrict me from doing what I want. I play guitar, (now) I blog, I enjoy driving and the movies. Not everyone replenishes themselves with a day of absolute rest.
Regarding number 4, I'm not saying that there is no value in them. I would say a few things:
1. OJ requires practitioners to learn them.
2. They may not be the "right" religion's sfarim
3. My time could better be spent reading other materials
4. I am not REF.
:-)
Cheers,
Skeptodox
HH,
ReplyDeleteHow can you say these things are superficial? Any restriction that’s not justified is just a plain assault on our freedom! Let alone rules that govern our every move and thought.
The saddest part is, that after most OJ’s think we are still stuck with the same lifestyle. Change is not always an option.
CF
ReplyDeleteI guess I come into it from a perspective on "sitting on the fence." Where these considerations, do not play a roll in my assesment. I.E. if it turns out Judaism was false, my time keeping shabbat, eating kosher, etc. was not that big of a time wasted. The greatest loss for me would have been not knowing the truth.
>3. My time could better be spent reading other materials.
So why dont you read other material? I don't think a healthy mind can ONLY have his book in a talmud all the time.
Question Safkanut, and it might have been answered by you above: Do you see value in these restrictions in and of themselves, or do you view them as just that, restrictions?
"I was recently chatting with an Orthodox friend who argued that "there is nothing to lose" from being an Orthodox Jew."
ReplyDeleteClearly he was not following the post's title. (Though I'd have added a comma after the first word of it and an exclamation point at the end.)
It's not the practical applications that matter most. The most troubling thing about orthodoxy is the mindset that shuns data and impericism and forces you to defend illogical beliefs, or stand idly by as others defend them, by methods that are clearly not honest.
ReplyDeleteBen Avuyah
ReplyDeleteI was thinking of responding, but I am not sure how. I mean, if you are orthodox, you have certain axioms in which data might not play a roll. Some atheists have axioms and that plays a roll too. But I think you have to be more specific when you say beliefs. Are you talking about God? TMS? or the ikkarim? Also, I don't think you can say their methods are not honost. they may not know better, or think more critically, but it does not make them technically dishonost.
HH,
ReplyDeleteI do see value in some of the restrictions (not all), however I still view them as restrictions of my will that should be thoughtfully considered before I adopt them.
Ben Avuyah,
Your comment reminds me of my recent post on OJ & cults.
Hyrax,
ReplyDeleteYour most recent comment deserves its own response. I think you are making the same mistake that XGH pointed out in his recent (not so well-titled) post on the "PoMo defense." Data plays a role in the formulation of all axioms. Methods are absolutely dishonest when they are only applied to one thing - and nothing else in life. Especially when the alternate "method" is ignoring evidence to the contrary. The only time people resort to responses like "we don't understand reality" or "data does not play a role" is when they are being intellectually dishonest! Do they use the same reasoning in any other part of their lives? How about other parts of religion that seem to hold up to the evidence? No! It only comes up when they are backed into a corner. Then, magically, evidence is unnecessary, we don't understand reality, and nothing can be understood, proven, or disproven. What a cop out.
I agree, but I think that is why I asked regarding which belief he was talking about. I dont think you can use a certain method and then see if it works with the question if God exists. Empricism is great, but its not going to play a roll in someones assesment if there is a God? They are on two different planes. I don't think that is a cop out, but just the nature of God. Regarding TMS I agree with you, and I have often complained to rabbis that when there is an archeological discovery that agrees with Nach, they jump for joy, but the same methodologies then used to find something against Nach, they say its all crap.
ReplyDelete