Avram in MD

Patur Aval Assur,

we can also do things for the same non-benefit reason Hashem does things for, even if we don’t know what it is.

I would go a bit further than that and say that we are driven to do things for the same non-benefit reason Hashem does things for, even if we don’t know what it is. Not just that we can do things for those reasons.

My response to that is that it might be true that there are reasons that transcend benefit, but you haven’t given a reason why someone should do something for such a reason.

Your question is a non sequitur. You are asking me to describe a non-benefit reason in terms of a benefit reason. If, however, we are motivated to act because we are created b’tzelem Elokim, then “why” is irrelevant anyway. The relevant question becomes, “why would you not”?

Joseph,

Avram: Is comparing the positives of each okay?

Why not? I even personally don’t have a problem with comparing the negatives of each; I just objected to lashon hara against the frum Jews of Baltimore themselves.

As for your other questions, I don’t think anyone would argue with the fact that Brooklyn’s Jewish infrastructure is far more extensive than any other frum community’s in the U.S.

cherrybim,

Interesting; I came to the defense of Brooklyn in response and after we were attacked by akuperma as per his post shown below:

I will try to make myself more clear. If you want to say that Baltimore is an undesirable location because of crime, lack of frum political representation, lack of busing for Yeshiva students or whatever, I have no problem with that. We can agree or disagree, debate it, and at the end of the day, we’d both be right about some things and wrong about some things. Those topics (crime, politics) are all that akuperma wrote about New York. You, however, went much further than that and said that there is sinas chinam and lashon hora in Baltimore, which is a strike at the frum Jews who live there, not just the place itself. That’s what I am objecting to.

The Goq,

if that is proven true that will assuage the criminals err protesters

Unfortunately, the level of trust in the police is so low, it will probably inflame the situation even more with the police being accused of a cover up.

zahavasdad,

Do two wrongs make a right?

DaasYochid,

I understand and agree, but I think popa_bar_abba was directing this thread specifically to those who are interested in seeking common ground. He’s directing the others here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/if-this-is-what-weve-been-waiting-2000-years-for/page/2#post-566799 🙂

owl,

The only proof is that a man started this foolish thread.

1. Are we definitely sure that Patur Aval Assur is a man?

2. If this thread is so foolish, why are you taking it so seriously?

Patur Aval Assur,

My answer to that is that you are correct, male children are not ????, being that the liturgy says that ??? is ???? and as per the gemara in Yevamos, unmarried men are not ???.

So that would mean, according to your OP logic, that unmarried men are better than married men. And what is the difference between a married man and an unmarried man? Why, what a horrible thing to say about women, Patur Aval Assur!! 🙂

Joseph,

Ok, I can accept that. For what purpose did you make the extension in your original post at all, however?

Joseph,

I just asked that question without taking a position since I wasn’t sure which is the proper path.

A disingenuous response. You didn’t ask a question, you made a statement:

The same question can more or less be asked about every baal teshuva.

scared driver delight,

But to suggest a safe speed along a street has no point?

I think the yellow signs are primarily intended for short distance situations where the ability to enforce is limited and the speed reduction is temporary. It’s different from a straight thoroughfare.

So, if I understand your argument correctly, a “suggested” speed of 25/35mph is appropriate for Coney Island Ave, but ticketing/fining people is inappropriate unless they are really flying? If you feel that there is a reasonable speed that is in excess of the limit, then why would you consider the limit to be a “great suggestion”?

lesschumras,

First, the caregivers are forbidden to disclose any information ( HIPAA rules ) about their medical care

I don’t think a mamin was intending to poll the caregivers.

and ,second, perhaps Mr Sasoon, the only person legally allowed to disclose any information, would prefer to protect their privacy

This is possible, and if so, nobody would have any information. I don’t think a mamin was intending to invade their privacy in any case.

scared driver delight,

a speed limit of 35 mph on a side street isn’t so unreasonable. Getting a ticket for going above that is unreasonable.

Wait, what?

Are you contending that it is unreasonable to enforce speed limits?

Avrom in MD-you misread the OP. He said you get a ticket for going above, not that that’s what the limit is.

The OP wrote:

equipped with a camera taking pictures of speeding vehicles going over 35 mph and fining them.

For that sentence to make any sense, the speed limit would have to be 35mph. I do not believe I misread anything.

147,

like we Australian Jews

Australian?

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/schlissel-challah#post-565374

Depends on the building in question?

Patur Aval Assur,

In your quotation below, the text in bold are my clarifications based on how I understand you.

In short, the criteria are that it has to be something that has a non-benefit related reason to follow it but doesn’t have a benefit related reason to follow it.

So to shorten your question, you are asking us to provide a reason for doing anything that is unrelated to benefit.

The best answer I can come up with is this:

We humans are ephemeral and limited, therefore it is possible for us to receive benefit that makes us longer lasting and stronger. It makes sense, therefore, for human beings to act for their benefit, and we call this sense “reasons” for acting.

Since G-d is eternal and omnipotent, it is nonsensical to state that He can receive benefit. Yet, we know that He does things, so He must have reasons that are unrelated to benefit. We are incapable of knowing these reasons due to our own limitations.

So why would a human being do something if not for benefit? It doesn’t really make sense to us, and your conundrum would stand, except for one thing: human beings were created b’tzelem Elokim. Therefore, there is a spark from Hashem inside each one of us. So even though we cannot articulate it with the earthly definition of “reasons” that you seek, if all “benefit” reasons for an act are stripped away, we are still left with the reason that Hashem does things. What is that reason? Ask Hashem. But it’s within us, whether we can articulate it or not.

Patur Aval Assur,

Not necessarily. I am rejecting the way you are explaining altruism, because according to you, altruism is just the best benefit. Hence altruism is really benefitism.

It seems to me that you are rejecting your own definition of the way I explain things, not mine. I hold that benefit has value even if it is not personal. You reject this.

Not in terms of good and bad.

What are your arbitrary definitions of good and bad for the purposes of this debate? Because it would seem that according to your rules, good and bad shouldn’t exist at all.

You have a closed set of assumptions in this discussion that preclude any explanations for established human behaviors, and by your own admission they do not reflect the reality of the world. So what is the purpose of this debate?

Patur Aval Assur,

(This is assuming it has value to us. If not then there is no reason to do it.)

Nope, I reject this parenthetical, because it contradicts what you were willing to accept above (that you don’t know what the value is).

So you are agreeing that the reason to do something is that it is valuable, as opposed to simply because it is the ???.

What is the ??? if not the ultimate value of an act?

So do you also agree to the point that follows from that, namely that someone who saves someone is no better than someone who kills someone, since they are both simply pursuing value?

No, because one value can be better or worse than another.

Patur Aval Assur,

You are saying either that there is value, or that even though there is no value one should still refrain from killing (I’m not sure which one you are saying).

I’m saying there is value – although there is no guarantee that a human can see or understand that value.

or else carefully delineate what the value is, which I feel you have not done as of yet.

This is an unreasonable constraint, and is why I previously said that your conundrum was artificial.

I agree with you that both human beings and animals would only want to do things that are valuable. The difference between them is that animals are capable of seeing an action as valuable only if they understand what the value is for them (your demand). This is why I keep relating your arguments to the animal perspective. Humans, on the other hand, do not have this constraint. Hashem can tell us that an act has value, and we can believe Him and do it, even if we have no understanding of what the value is.

Patur Aval Assur,

I am reframing it because if it is not personal then there is no reason to do it.

Yes indeed, that is the axis of our disagreement.

Any number of reasons. E.g. you like money so you want to steal. Or you are jealous of someone so you want to kill him. Etc. Etc.

I would argue that the vast majority of people who do stuff like that do not A) Discover what their purpose in life is, and B) Consciously reject it.

Note that my point is not so much that there should be nothing stopping you from killing or stealing inasmuch as it is that you shouldn’t think that you’re a good person for giving up the stealing and killing, since you are only giving it up because you are getting something even better.

That’s balderdash (feel free to quote me on your report cards thread – emoticon).

A person who’s anger flares up, but refrains from killing because he thinks it’s wrong through reciprocal “golden rule” reasoning is better than a person who refrains simply because he’s afraid of getting jailed or executed, even though both are refraining in order to “get something better.” Why? Because once the police are removed from the equation, the former person would kill, while the latter would continue to refrain. We could probably derive some circumstance which would remove the inhibition from the latter guy too. The point that our sages are trying to make is that the ideal for us is to elevate our reasoning to the point where nothing can remove the inhibition to sin. With an animal this is impossible, but Judaism posits that this is possible for human beings.

At the end of the day, you are absolutely right in your reasoning … from the point of view of an animal. Animals are motivated purely by their perception of what is beneficial to them. Most humans are too, but we have the potential to elevate ourselves beyond this reasoning, because we were created b’tzelem Elokim, Who created the universe even though there was no “benefit” to Him. But it’s a waste of breath to try and explain this to an animal, because how could you describe colors to someone who was born completely blind? It would make no sense.

Patur Aval Assur,

So then you will have to say that God can command whatever he wants, even if it is against inherent morality. And then DaasYochid might tell you that you just said kefira.

Absolutely G-d can command whatever He wants. The universe and morality are not independent of G-d, however, so to say that G-d goes against inherent morality makes no sense.

Patur Aval Assur,

So you are saying that Avraham did it for a benefit. Which means you are agreeing with me.

Not exactly. Avraham Aveinu saw no benefits to the akeida. He was already promised everything he wanted, and Hashem now was asking him to give up the vehicle of that promise. And this wasn’t something like sacrificing Yitzchak to save someone else, or stop an asteroid from hitting the Earth, or even to make a public kiddush Hashem (they were alone on the mountain) or anything else where a benefit could be derived, either for himself or anyone else. All Avraham knew was that Hashem had asked him to do this. Avraham trusted in Hashem – that he wasn’t capricious.

How is that the same as doing something for a benefit?

That even within your system where the ultimate benefit is the good feeling of fulfilling your purpose, a good person is no better off than a terrorist.

I think you do not understand my “system”.

Hashem created a dynamic universe that is affected by action. He created two categories to describe the effects of any action: good and bad. He created human beings who have the power to consciously choose what actions to take. He also created for humans a two-category system that parallels his good and bad categories: truth and falsehood. He created within human beings an innate sense of responsibility to seek the truth and reject falsehood – that is why Adam and Chava were accountable for their choice in the garden. Adam and Chava ate from the tree of knowledge of good and bad, and therefore ingested their own system of good and bad that is fundamentally independent from the system of truth and falsehood and Hashem’s good and bad. This muddied our ability to discern truth and falsehood, because we can confuse it with our own sense of good and bad. So our good feelings have nothing to do with whether an act is beneficial (true) or not. Whether we align our feelings with truth and falsehood is up to us, but it doesn’t change our responsibility.

So why would/should we do what Hashem wants simply because it is the truth? Because that is how we were created. It shouldn’t even be a question, and only is because of the disalignment between our human sense of good and bad and Hashem’s.

Health,

That’s why I said it needs to be done on a personal level. I used to teach Fire & Safety including CPR courses.

So you are saying that there are resources out there to help a person develop personalized family action plans?

Btw, what do you do if your smoke detector went off at 3 am???

That’s actually happened to me – very scary to wake up to. The alarm went off in a room that we were not climate controlling at the time. I flew out of bed to the room (probably not the best idea), while my wife went to wake the kids. I felt the door, it was cool to the touch, and I went in. No fire. Whew! I think that high concentrations of water droplets (it was foggy outside) may have disrupted the ionized current enough to trip the alarm.

Patur Aval Assur,

In your first paragraph, what is the benefit if not the pleasure?

A person may not know what the benefit of his action is.

In your second paragraph, you don’t explain what the benefit of following the command was.

That’s right! There was no apparent benefit to him whatsoever. Hashem had already promised everything to Avraham that he could have possibly wanted, specifically through Yitzchak, but then Hashem requested him (??? ???) to bring Yizchak as an offering. Avraham did it simply because Hashem asked him to, because he believed that if Hashem asked it, there was benefit to it.

My point from the terrorist is that as long as you think you are fulfilling your purpose, you have the same “good feeling” regardless of whether you fulfilled your actual purpose. (This is based on your assumption that the terrorist feels good.)

So, what’s the question?

Health,

Are we really helping ourselves? E/O is offering Fire Safety courses. If it’s not done on a personal level, it’s only for show! Why do we – when something like this happens, put on a show? We should make real change, not just superficial change.

I don’t think people are intentionally putting on a show. Aside from tidbits like installing smoke detectors, safe usage practices with electronics, matches, and other flammable household items, and the things you learn in elementary school such as stop/drop/roll, feeling doors for heat before opening them, staying low in smoke and covering your face, etc. I think many (myself included) are at a loss about how to do more.

I want to develop a family fire plan and practice it through routine family fire drills, but in a real fire, conditions and actions needed to escape could vary widely based on where the fire is, what started it, etc. How do I obtain the knowledge necessary to put together the best possible fire plan based on this complexity?