Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Why be "rational" and anti-huddling

Kisarita asks the following questions:

From whence the assumption that ALL rational people should agree with me?

Why the certainty in my lifestyle is the best, and yours are destructive?

Why are artificially "rationally" created "like minded" communities better than emotional tribal ones?

By what possible reasonable criteria do you define who is superior and who is inferior?

Bkitzur, why do so may ex-frum sound like born-again religious converts in their devotion to secularism?

Me thinks there is something very suprarational about that.

end quote.

It would also be useful for readers to read Kisarita's post "In defense of Emotions" at http://kisarita.blogspot.com/2009/06/in-defense-of-emotions.html .

My friend. Let me explain my position on this with an illustration ("men ken es farshtein mit a mashal" we can understand it with an analogy).

Judge Sotomayor was recently nominated for a Supreme Justice of the United States of America. As the procedure is with such high-impact life-time appointments by the President, The U.S. Senate questions the candidate about her judicial and even general socio-political beliefs. So the questions arises: why are we asking her what she thinks about Roe. v. Wade? Why should the actual opinion matter, as long as she is actually qualified for the position (experience-wise)? Would a Senator dare ask her how many times she brushes her teeth each day or her sexual intercourse frequency? Of course not! Would any politician inquire as to my judicial or political position? Of course not.

The difference here is that I am not a candidate for office of U.S. supreme court justice. In other words: I have not put myself out there in a position where my opinion should be relevant. If, for example, Judge Sotomayor were to be a dentist and she was nominated for administrator of the (theoretical) dentistry division of the Health Dep. then yes, it would matter somewhat whether how many times she brushes her teeth. If she is presenting herself as an expert on such matters and she is going to advise citizens on how frequently to brush their teeth, then --yes-- senators do have the right and responsibility to ascertain whether she indeed practices what she preaches. If she doesn't, there would be justified suspicion that she wouldn't be executing her job well.

How does all this relate to us?

Well, I did in fact grow up in a highly restrictive environment physically, emotionally and intellectually. If I am going to truly move on in life, then these issues do matter. It's not okay to shove them under the rug and say "let me live and let live". Clearly, if I have been told for 20 years that God created the world in six days, that Noah is the only one who survived the flood and that Moses received a revealed law code from God, it IS MY BUSINESS to set the record straight.

I totally denounce the non-judgemental-ism approach that many OTD's insist on. The Haredi movement is extremely judgemental. Why then, should I stand on the sideline and allow them to preach and advise their youth according to a system which I see as corrupt, incoherent, and illogical. If I am unable to engage successfully in a polemic on such topics, then my lifestyle and my offspring's are in jeopardy. I will never be able to gain the elusive stability that I am so wistfully yearning for. Therefore, I WILL judge my ex-community and say that their lifestyles are silly and I WILL explain why that is so.

This does not mean that I advocate forceful adherence to a code of law as they do. This is where the core American ideal of liberty creates a wide golf between us. I believe that reason should be engaged in and let the person then make an informed, wise decision on how to live. The Orthodox mostly adopt a Freudian defense mechanism of completely suppressing the "dangerous thoughts", denouncing them as heresy and shutting off any possibility of its members being able to extract themselves from their midst in a reasonable manner.

Life is a game of poker. The cards have been dealt and my hand sucks. What's worse is that the information so desperately needed to play this weak hand properly is being suppressed. Why should I be contain my sense of exasperation over how bad my hand is. I will speak up about it and tell the world how bad the cards are in Borough Park and how best to play the seven-deuce. By the way, for those who don't know, the best way to play 'em is to fold! But it's important to fold with style and that's where I come in. I am not imposing my beliefs on others. I am not saying that one "must" live in a particular way or believe or "not believe" any particular thing. I am simply getting a conversation off the ground. I am simply eager to discuss topics that were off-limits in my ex-community. I am eager to use research tools that were totally unheard of in the entire Ortho world from A to Z. In my biblical research I am suddenly encountering German, Christian scholars who have centuries ago employed sophisticated scientifically sound historical and linguistic tools to see the Hebrew Bible in a new light. This info has been completely withheld from me. I want to study it now. I want people to know it's out there.

If you still insist that a life devoid of education and truthful information is perhaps meaningful and advisable, then surely you should stop reading this post and I have nothing further to say in my defense. However, you've read til hear, so it seems to me that --consciously or not-- your instinct impels you to seek the truth and set the record straight.

I hope I explained my self well and good luck to everyone.

8 comments:

  1. Anonymous10:39 PM

    the funny thing about this post is that you allowed some emotion into it.

    anyway thanks for reading mine too.

    ki"s

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, I did. I never claim to be devoid of emotion. On the contrary, I am critical of OTD'd who claim or aspire to be purely rational and non-judgemental, as if everything has equal value. Populism is a good system of goverment, not for a personal belief system. When I look at lifestyles, cultures and religions, I do see one that is superior to others, I pursue it, adopt it as mine AND I take a subjective, emotional approach to that which has been validated by my reasoning faculties. That's the kind of approach I have to life: emotion and reason in a symbiotic relationship with emotion being the executor of reason's legislation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous6:12 AM

    That's where we differ... I believe that reason is the executor of emotion's legislation

    ReplyDelete
  5. gillian10:06 PM

    Jago, this is the first time I've seen your blog and don't know much about you. Just curious: how long is it since you've left the hasidic community? I ask because though I understand what you're saying in this post, I think it's a healthy sign when a person moves on and stops looking back so much. Of course, this can't happen right away, but if someone's still obsessed with issues from an old life years after she/he has embraced a new one, something's definitely off.

    ReplyDelete
  6. gillian, I left the hasidic world 10 years ago and have since moved on substantially. I am not stuck in my past in the literal sense. But my past does matter to me. It's absurd to suppose that one's childhood, adolescence and early adulthood can all be wiped out completely without a trace as a result of a decision to change course. It, unfortunately doesn't work that way. Therefore, I do make it a point to engage in polemics related to the Jewish and haredi worlds.

    ReplyDelete
  7. great post! keep them coming

    ReplyDelete