Jewish philosophy -- Early works to 1800; Judaism -- Works to 1900; Philosophy, Medieval -- Early works to 1800
In comparing the objections raised against one theory with those raised
against the opposite theory, in order to decide in favour of the least
objectionable, we must not consider the number of the objections, but
the degree of improbability and of deviation from real facts [pointed
out by the objections]; for one objection may sometimes have more
weight than a thousand others. But the comparison cannot be trustworthy
unless the two theories be considered with the same interest, and if
you are predisposed in favour of one of them, be it on account of your
training or because of some advantage, you are too blind to see the
truth. For that which can be demonstrated you cannot reject, however
much you may be inclined against it; but in questions like those under
consideration you are apt to dispute [in consequence of your
inclination]. You will, however, be able to decide the question, as far
as necessary, if you free yourself from passions, ignore customs, and
follow only your reason. But many are the conditions which must be
fulfilled. First you must know your mental capacities and your natural
talents; you will find this out when you study all mathematical
sciences, and are well acquainted with Logic. Secondly, you must have a
thorough knowledge of Natural Science, that you may be able to
understand the nature of the objections. Thirdly, you must be morally
good. For if a person is voluptuous or passionate, and, loosening the
reins, allows his anger to pass the just limits, it makes no difference
whether he is so from nature or from habit, he will blunder and stumble
in his way, he will seek the theory which is in accordance with his
inclinations. I mention this lest you be deceived; for a person might
some day, by some objection which he raises, shake your belief in the
theory of the Creation, and then easily mislead you; you would then
adopt the theory [of the Eternity of the Universe] which is contrary to
the fundamental principles of our religion, and leads to “speaking
words that turn away from God.” You must rather have suspicion against
your own reason, and accept the theory taught by two prophets who have
bid the foundation for the existing order in the religious and social
relations of mankind. Only demonstrative proof should be able to make
you abandon the theory of the Creation; but such a proof does not exist
in Nature.
You will not find it strange that I introduce into this discussion
historical matter in support of the theory of the Creation, seeing that
Aristotle, the greatest philosopher, in his principal works, introduces
histories in support of the theory of the Eternity of the Universe. In
this regard we may justly quote the saying: “Should not our perfect Law
be as good as their gossip?” (B. T. Baba batra, 115 b). When he
supports his view by quoting Sabean stories, why should we not support
our view by that which Moses and Abraham said, and that which follows
from their words?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account