From: sg04@ploni.gte.com (Yechezkal Shimon Gutfreund)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Tanya and Secular Knowledge
Date: 15 Oct 92 15:59:29 GMT
Reply-To: sgutfreund@gte.com
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham MA

|> In article <Bvz0AF.Bp@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
|> 
|> >In particular, I completely reject the idea that one can even hope to 
|> >understand Judaism properly without taking into account secular knowledge.
|> >Sanctity is no substitute for knowledge; as the American folk saying goes,

I realize that this is one of Herman's prize topics - and since
many have gone over this ground with him, I'm not sure there will
be much "convincing" done by further discussion via e-mail (a
media which I find is better suited for either arguments
or making soap-box speeches than for acheiving enlightenment or
consensus). 

Given that caveat, I still can't resist bringing up a few
points:

1. I believe it is wrong to view science as being something opposed
to Torah. G-d has created both, and both are channels for greater
comprehension of G-d's will. I.e. they are mutually enhancing.
A reductionist approach which tries to compartmentalize things
will only lead to less understanding of what G-d's will is
(since that is ultimately a holistic combination all of the above,
the rational elements of the soul, the soul's intellect, and
the non-rational elements of the soul).

2. Student's of the history of science are well aware of the
transitory nature of scientific theories. Science does not
grow by a gradual linear accumulation of knowledge, and new theories
do not neccessarily build on previous models. Science frequently
undergoes paradigm shifts where the new model completely replaces
the old. While one might still find the old theory in the textbooks,
it will be only a shell of the old form, now re-defined and re-understood
quite differently than it was originally.

Those who work at the PhD level of science are usually quite aware of
this. Indeed it is a great place to look for stunning thesis topics!
Some of the most seminal works in science have involved such paradigm
shifts. For those who this is unfamiliar I refer them to Thomas Kuhn's
classic work: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

3. Those scientist working at the cutting edge of a field are quite
aware of where the instability of scientific theory. What might
appear as dogma from the outside is usually underdstood to be much
less granite-solid from within. I can give you two examples:

Evolution: It is well known within biological circles that a major
problem is the lack of a mechanism for evolution
and mutation is a major weakness in Darwin's theory. In most of 
the other sciences a theory based on observation evidence alone
is viewed as significantly weaker than one that has well understood
mechanism that lends itself to reproduction by others researchers.
While mechanisms for evolution have been suggested, their has not
been any observed instances of naturally occuring creation of
viable new species in nature, nor is their a way to reproduce
such results in the laboratory.

Carbon-Dating: A major assumption in carbon dating is that the
production of C-14 has always been at the same rate it is today.
Most science relies on forward extrapolation. That is, I conduct
an experiment today, and you, tomorrow reproduce it in your
lab an confirm the result. In the case of C-14 dating we are backward
extrapolating to a time where we cannot conduct experiments.
The inherent weakness in backward extrapolation is known to those
in the field, but frequently down-played. 

For all of the above reasons, It should be quite clear that it
is quite mistaken to the theories of science at any given time
as dogma and use that to re-interpret Torah. The constant
evolution of science means that at any given point in time
science will be false with respect to (wrt) the science that
follows it. 

However Torah,(which literally means to teach), on contains
unchanging universal ethical teachings. It by definition is
truth since the value of its Truth does not vary wrt to time.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Yechezkal Shimon Gutfreund		 		  sgutfreund@gte.com
GTE Laboratories, Waltham MA			    harvard!bunny!sgutfreund
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish