85-90% of the above discussion is why i’m an agnostic. i have neither the faith necessary to be religious nor the certainty necessary to deny a creator completely. it has the added advantage of keeping me out of almost all of the arguments between the former and the latter.
2 Likes
How high and how deep does the effect reach? The edge of the atmosphere? The core of the planet? Would it not be cheaper to create a 6" diameter Eruv, but say that the space outside the wire is actually inside it and visa versa?
2 Likes
I think that anyone who objects to $100,000 spent by a group of people of their own free will on something harmless, rather than on [insert deserving cause], should list their own non-essential expenses so that we can nitpick about the waste.
For example, how many World of Warcraft players are in the same area as that Eruv, and how much do they spend?
6 Likes
Isn’t agnosticism kinda orthogonal to theism/atheism, though? Like the good/evil axis to (a)theism’s lawful/chaotic?
Unless you’re taking the strongly agnostic position that not only do you not know, you can’t know, but isn’t that the same kind of faith position that you find so much effort?
1 Like
i don’t think effort is the right term for my inability to hold a level of faith necessary to believe in a religious position. of course my conception of what faith is and isn’t has been influenced by having been raised in a conservative denomination in the south before realizing i did not have the faith necessary to be a believer but faith does not require effort any more than being born a citizen of the u.s. requires effort. as for agnosticism representing a kind of faith, i regard it as more along the lines of recognizing that the existence or non-existence of god represents a kind of undecidable proposition analogous to godel’s concept of undecidable propositions in mathematics. theism and atheism require either a faith or a certainty i cannot find.
1 Like
It’s the Peter Principle at work. It’s inescapable, you see.
3 Likes
Whenever the clergy are involved in inspections of any sort, a healthy sucker tax is levied on the customer.
I assume it has a lot to do with the vast majority of NJ Transit busses and the like streaming out of the Lincoln Tunnel every day asking to be caught on a 1/4" aircraft cable hung at 15 feet.
The real irony is that the center of that chunk is the West Side Jewish Center at 34th and 9th.
file under: “Mental Gymnastics”
That’s ignosticism, which regards the fundamental argument between theists, atheists, and agnostics as moot because in order to have the argument you have to agree on a definition of “God.” Which no one does. One faction is talking about a bearded old man sitting on a cloud throwing lightning bolts, another faction is talking about an abstract sense of shared empathy, yet another is talking about an entire pantheon of colorfully attired soap opera characters with altogether too many arms.
And then there’s the additional layer of literalism vs metaphor: Is there really an actual gigantic old man on a cloud watching us and judging us and chucking lightning at us, or is that simply a useful guideline to play along with to help us behave towards each other?
Point is, arguing about the existence of God(s) is pointless until you agree on definitions.
1 Like
@everyone, can we just not mock religious belief?
Ironically, judaism (religion in general) is chock full of mockery for that which is not jewish (religious), so, as politely as is warranted, fuck no, “we” can not just not mock euphemism-for-rank-stupidity.
Not only is mockery of deeply held tenets offensive
Because “deeply held tenets” like stoning stubborn children to death, or insisting certain rape victims be killed while other rape victims should be legally compelled to marry their rapists, or that anyone who does not conform to said religious cult’s “deeply held tenets” is necessarily inferior are not offensive in the least, and should be immune to the mockery they bring on themselves.
on a practical level it betrays the process of understanding why they exist.
How’s that, exactly?
1 Like
You’re confusing Judaism with Christianity again, and being antisemitic to boot, especially with the statement of
That’s not a Jewish perspective at all on non-Jews. And we’re more likely to mock ourselves than non-Jews (safer that way).
6 Likes
The Talmud tract Chagigah 15b (written close to two thousand years ago), involves a discussion on ritual uncleanliness that features a hypothetical “sealed tower flying over the landscape” which has been quite handy in regards to modern discussions on airplanes 
3 Likes
Is mockery a good response to murdering children or blaming women for being raped? Is the problem that you think they believe dumb stuff or that murdering children is just plain wrong regardless of the reason?
My government wanted to introduce an islamophobic “barbaric culture practices” tipline. As if I should call a special tip-line to report an honor killing instead of calling the police to report a murder. Trying to justify making fun of customs behind a veil of “some people do bad things” is rationalizing, not rational.
7 Likes
This concept is not confined to Judaism, but is common to a number of mystical traditions. I’d cite George Herbert as an English exponent, but there are many others. Another religion which has a kind of similar idea and may co- or even ante-date Judaism is the religion of the Jains.
I am, however going to steer clear of any pop psychology on this one.
1 Like
Ties a knot in a tiny wire. “I declare myself to be on the outside.”
Really though. Atheist here who doesn’t understand why so many people have such a problem with this setup. It has no effect on any of our lives, and “the money could be better spent” is basically a Fully General Counterargument that people only use against things they don’t like for other reasons.
Also, as I understand it (very minimally), Judaism is a legalistic religion, based on a single body of divine law given to Moses at Mt. Sinai that scholars have argued over for millennia. “It is not in heaven” i.e. man, not God, gets to interpret the law. There are Talmudic stories where God performs miracles and speaks to tell arguing rabbis which side is right, but backs off when they remind him it’s not up to him.
11 Likes
If someone was carrying but a section of the wire was clipped and the circle was not complete, i.e the domains were not separated, do they have to carry the previously carried material back, or get some sort of punishment, pay a fine, or is this breach of the law ignored? What does the Talmudic law say about making reparations or correcting errors?
Also, how do they convene to repeal silly laws and replace them with more humane laws, like actually building an impenetrable stone wall around Manhattan, with a plexiglass dome, like they should have done hundreds of years ago?
Might be silly but at least they are paying for their affectation themselves instead of demanding the government pay for it.
A religion that likes to ask questions 
2 Likes
