A 600KiloBear posted:
“BS”D
My point in bringing up Rav Firer is that his Torah education and perspective is what enables him to understand whatever sources he uses to look up the information he needs to save Yiddishe neshomos. I know full well how he obtains this information. Anyone can obtain it nowadays online. I have a friend who is a professor in Ein Karem, and when I need advice he sends me right to the NIH website. I understand about 60% of it which is more than I need to know whether or not something I am eating is causing me some nuisance health problem. And that 60% is probably enough to pass med boards if I spent time learning it for every condition that a particular specialist needs to know.
On the other hand, Rav Firer is not a scientist who learns science so he can get a grant and perhaps find out how simian behavior mirrors human behavior, and then use that worthless information to prove that we are just animals chas vesholom. “
No, actually looking at the NIH website is not enough to help one pass the boards. (By the way, how do you think that the information gets to the NIH website? By the virtue of scientists, who are more than happy to share their information. In any event, it is the more specialized knowledge that one needs, and that is why Rav Firer (and others) actually take the time to talk to the scientists who do actually study these things full-time. He also understands that scientists do not “learn science so that we can get a grant”. You can learn all the science that you wish–that will not get you a grant–and it does not matter if you are affiliated with Brisk or Bar-Ilan. You get grants so that you can perform studies to obtain specific answers to specific questions. That usually means experimental studies. The reason for the grants is that the experiments cost money to perform. So we get grants to do science–not do science to get grants.
A number of those experiments have lead to amazing health advances. Your idea of scientists trying to prove that “men are just animals” is ridiculous. Do you really think that the average scientist spends 60+ hours/week in the laboratory for that? Why don’t you look at cancer survival rates from 20 years ago and today? The same goes for a number of(non-cancer)childrens’ diseases. This is the result of scientific investigation, of which you are so contemptuous. Perhaps this has not affected you personally–but every time anyone goes into a hospital and sees a child who has benefitted from one of the treatments that keep them alive, one should keep in mind that that treatment started in the laboratory of a scientist. A scientist who, in all probability, did not make any money by making it freely available. That is why we spend 60+ hours/week in the laboratory–for knowledge, not grant money.
Numerous examples upon request.