S/O Derache’ha Darchei No’am

amother

Sat, Feb 08 2020, 9:16 pm

In order not to derail the Discussion on the Daf thread with a very long response (and additional comments on this topic), I am replying to your comment here.

Quote:

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you, but what did you mean when you said that you are waiting with trepidation to learn the Nashim Mesechtot? What do people here mean when they say that they get down due to the thorny issues in the Gemara? What does it mean when people say that they need to take a deep breath before they learn certain subjects, as if it’s going to traumatize them? I will admit, I can sometimes be obtuse and simple-minded. Would you please explain what people mean by these expressions?

I think the answer to your question lies in understanding cognitive dissonance. From Simply Psychology: “Cognitive dissonance refers to a situation involving conflicting attitudes, beliefs or behaviors. This produces a feeling of mental discomfort leading to an alteration in one of the attitudes, beliefs or behaviors to reduce the discomfort and restore balance. For example, when people smoke (behavior) and they know that smoking causes cancer (cognition), they are in a state of cognitive dissonance.”

I think many frum people today are forced to live in a state of cognitive dissonance, when strongly held western beliefs (e.g. universal human rights, equality (not to be confused with identicalness) of men and women, anti-slavery, anti-prejudice and racism, etc.) with which we have grown up, seem to conflict with Torah attitudes and values. The normal course of action in a situation of cognitive dissonance is to alter one of the conflicting values so that all values will be in accord or to seek out new information that will change the understanding of one of the values. In the case of the Torah hashkafa and Halacha, those of us who are true believers are unable to alter the Torah or to Chas v’shalom deny any of its principles. Therefore, when it appears to conflict with a deeply held principle of our identity, we are forced to suffer extreme discomfort and distress unless we can find further information, which will help us resolve this discrepancy.

I think the mistake, which you are making is in assuming that questions and/or signs of distress and discomfort are meant chas v’shalom as disrespect towards the Torah/Hashem. To me they indicate just the opposite. That the questioner is aware of and distressed by the conflict between her inner core values and the Torah values, and cares enough to be hurt by it. For example, I am aware that Aristotle was a misogynist (and racist, etc,), and while I find it interesting that a renowned philosopher felt that way, I am not hurt by it, because I don’t really care about Aristotle. So I can just file it away as an interesting piece of information and move on. When the Torah (or Chachamim) say something or display an attitude that seems disparaging or demeaning towards women (or slaves, non-Jews, etc.) I care deeply - precisely because I so respect and value the Torah (and Chachamim). That’s why I find it so uncomfortable and/or hurtful. When I or others on the thread bring up questions or feelings of discomfort, no disrespect is meant. Quite the contrary. We ask (and we hurt) because we care and because we respect and value what we are learning.

With regard to your comment

Quote:

דרכיה דרכי נועם. The Torah is sweet and pleasant and that’s the feeling it should give to the one who learns it. It’s not thorny. And if it’s constantly seen as being thorny and making people uncomfortable, then something is wrong.

I think that that judging people on the basis of how well their feelings match with the principle of דרכיה דרכי נועם in all circumstances is unfair. Would you say to an young agunah, whose husband is missing for ten years or more and she is faced with living the rest of her life alone - that her pain is invalid, because דרכיה דרכי נועם׳? Or would you validate her pain and admire her faithfulness to Hashem and the Torah by remaining true to its values and following the Halacha despite the very painful circumstances it puts her in? I think that those of us who often feel the דרכיה דרכי נועם and taste the sweetness of Torah in many circumstances - but not always - should be judged positively on the basis of our continuing to keep Torah and Mitzvos and continuing to learn and grow in Avodas Hashem, despite feelings of pain and/or discomfort, rather than judged negatively on the basis of our emotions.

malki2

Mon, Feb 10 2020, 6:04 am

amother [ OP ] wrote:

Thank you.

As you can see, the poster to whom it was addressed has not responded, so I don’t know how she has taken it. I hope she can understand (as devarim hayotz’im min haleiv, nichnasim el haleiv) that no offense or disrespect is felt or intended.

Hi OP. I had read your post, and I have been spending some time thinking it over. I actually agree with much of what you have said, and I appreciate your thoughtfulness and your honesty. I have not responded yet because I feel that your post deserves more than a pecked-out response on my phone while driving to work (as I am doing right now). I want to write something up on my laptop when I have the time for it (perhaps tonight). This important discussion began because of a difference of worldviews which I believe still may exist (albeit not as a great chasm) and which I would like to take the time to properly address and iron out if possible. I was actually about to respond and acknowledge that I had read your post, but you beat me to it. 😊

amother

Mon, Feb 10 2020, 6:18 am

malki2 wrote:

Thank you for taking the time to think about it before responding at length. I agree that this is a sensitive topic, and words may unintentionally offend, if not carefully chosen. I do believe that we are all sincere here, and with care and respect, we can communicate in a way that will be thought-provoking and not offensive.

Respectfully,

Mustard

Aylat

Tue, Feb 11 2020, 2:36 am

malki2 wrote:

I also have been wanting to respond more fully but have a busy week and don't know when I'll get a block of time to sit down a computer and think how to formulate it. I really appreciate and identify with OP's post (hi Mustard!) and I am also looking forward to hearing your thoughts, Malki2.

Re the bolded - yes, that is very possible, but, I believe, not necessarily problematic. Chassidim and mitnagdim diverge on significant points of hashkafa, as do the Torah u'Madda and the yeshivish crowds. I think that each side emphasises an important and true value. Hashem is all-encompassing truth and as limited human beings we can each glimpse, and hopefully actualise, only one portion of it. The fact that we disagree, even vehemently, does not always mean that one of us is wrong. Note I am not endorsing relative truth or extreme subjectivity. There are views that are false.

Last edited by Aylat on Tue, Feb 11 2020, 2:41 am; edited 1 time in total

amother

Sat, May 09 2020, 9:44 pm

malki2 wrote:

No pressure - but if you can find the time, I would still love to hear your perspective on this issue. From what I can see, you are intelligent, knowledgeable, and no pushover. How do you deal with the cognitive dissonance (referenced above)? Or Do you really feel no cognitive dissonance, at all? If so, why is that?

As someone who grapples with this issue on a daily basis, I am open to hearing from anyone who has thought about this and can give me a different perspective and a positive outlook. Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Respectfully,

Edited to add: I am not the OP of the “Feeling resentful/guilty/confused” thread. It is coincidental (and I only noticed it after my comment here).

Aylat

Tue, May 12 2020, 2:47 am

I've been meaning to come back to this thread, thank you OP for bumping it up.

I want to talk primarily here about my cognitive dissonance and the unresolved questions I have with regards to science and Torah, since I have researched that topic more than the topic of women. I think that some of the issues are parallel and perspectives transferable.

Let's take as axiomatic that 1) there is such a thing as truth, 2) Hashem's Torah is true, 3) that there are additional ways to attempt to discover facts (the scientific method, my lived experience as a woman), and 4) that we expect different facts discovered from different sources to be compatible with each other.

Our struggle lies in axiom 4. There seem to be contradictions between reality as described by Torah and as described by science/experienced by me as a woman. How do I deal this? (For the purposes of this post I take for granted that there is a problem with 4 and will not go into the details because the post would be too long. Can be discussed in other post/thread if anyone wants.)

First option: nullify at least one of axioms 1, 2 or 3. Axiom 1 - I don't go for subjective truths. Scepticism as a philosophical stance seems to me pointless and leads nowhere. Axiom 2 is the basis of my life as an Orthodox Jew. I am convinced enough to live according to it and will not give up on it here. Axiom 3 is not something that makes sense for me to give up on. Scientific method seems to me very convincing (in general, different fields to different standards).

(To be continued in next post)

Aylat

Tue, May 12 2020, 3:02 am

Second option: modify axioms 2 or 3.

Modified axiom 2: Hashem's Torah is truth. Chazal were very great human beings, but not infallible. Statements by Chazal are not all min hashamayim and may be mistaken. Scientific knowledge has advanced. It is nothing negative about Chazal that they did not know modern cosmological theory or genetic biology. Rishonim and Acharonim (and possibly also Chazal) were influenced by the time and culture in which they lived. Only Moshe was aspeklaria meira; all other prophets perceived the word of Hashem through the mirror of their own personalities, kal vachomer non-prophets.

When confronted by a problem in 4, we can therefore say: this statement of Chazal seems to contradict science/modern understanding of women, because this statement of Chazal is not entirely correct.

Many frum people will reject this option, finding it incompatible with emunas chachamim. There is a strong school of thought that everything said in Chazal is absolute truth. I cite Rabbi Meiselman's book Torah, Chazal and Science as an example. However I spoke to my rav (a long-time talmid of R Soloveitchik) about this and he said that this was absolutely not Rav Soloveitchik's opinion. (Rabbi Meiselman disagrees, see the appendix in his book.) In other words, יש על מי לסמוך for this viewpoint, though the parameters have to be clarified. At this point, I have not asked my Rav about statements by Chazal relating to women, perhaps I should do so.

Aylat

Tue, May 12 2020, 3:19 am

Modified axiom 3: scientific method is a very powerful tool but decidedly not infallible. Contradictions between Chazal and science are due to science being mistaken. This view is held by those with emuna peshuta, but individuals with a relatively high level of secular education and scientific literacy find it very difficult to accept.
(I think the parallel to this argument for the women question is: we are not an aspeklaria meira and our perspective on gender roles is influenced by false ideologies in modern culture. Our perspective on some things may be mistaken, and when we perceive a contradiction it is because we are lacking a piece of the picture. OP, please give suggestions to refine this argument, I have not spent as much time thinking about it.)

I personally think this approach has some merit. To give background into my 'credentials' in this regard: I have a degree in chemistry, am a chemistry teacher, am in the middle of a Masters degree in History and Philosophy of Science, and read books on science for fun.

The two main arguments supporting this approach. A) The argument from history. B) Not all science was created equal. I will state them briefly since this is not the main topic of the thread. I can enlarge on it if anyone wants.

A) Genesis and Genes by Yoram Bogacz is an excellent book which delineates this argument. Science is constantly changing. Until halfway through the 20th century it was a scientific fact that the universe was eternal- for thousands of years Jews could not reconcile the first pasuk of Breishit with science. Then Big Bang Theory and all of a sudden science agreed that the universe had a starting moment in time.

B) Chemistry and cosmology do not have the same scientific method. Clinical medicine with randomised controlled trials is much more reliable than the speculations of evolutionary psychology.

Aylat

Tue, May 12 2020, 3:27 am

Third option: challenge axiom 4. There seem to be contradictions between Chazal and science/my experience as a woman, but that's only because I don’t understand one or both of them correctly. Really there is no contradiction. Sometimes this is denigrated as apologetics, but some of the time it may well be the case. As a general answer to the issue it is unsatisfactory because it says that I cannot and will not understand and so we have modified axiom 1. There may be truth, but I can never access or understand it. In an ultimate sense this may be true, but as an attitude it leads nowhere - it says I throw up my hands and give up. So I don't accept it as either an initial or blanket answer. Moreover, someone who adopts this attitude is really fooling themselves. It may be impossible to be sure of anything 100%, but I still live my life. I decide whether to live as a frum Jew, whether to trust my doctor, and so on. My limited intellectual faculties are good enough for me to make important decisions, and I will not completely abnegate them here.