tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post115211434660527750..comments2024-03-25T09:43:27.402-04:00Comments on Divrei Chaim: sticks and stones vs. the words of BilamChaim B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-1152123049871143642006-07-05T14:10:00.000-04:002006-07-05T14:10:00.000-04:00It seems to me that explaining how a text can hold...It seems to me that explaining how a text can hold X and not-X to be simultaneously true is different than explaining how a text can hold X true when logic/society/science/ etc. dictate Y to be true. Yes, taken to its logical extreme X and not-X being mutually exclusive is just a product of my Western trained logical pattern of thinking, but reducing everything to such relativistic terms makes debate and criticism meaningless.Chaim B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-1152122193293594562006-07-05T13:56:00.000-04:002006-07-05T13:56:00.000-04:00I think the first type of pshat you mentioned is r...I think the first type of pshat you mentioned is really just part of the second. The only reason why we feel the need to resolve apparent contradictions in the text is because of our notion that reality can't have contradiction in it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com