Spiritual "spaceship danger"So one of the greatest intellectual achievements in history - the landing on the moon - actually proves that humankind's intellect is "worthless and unreliable"! What a skewed (not to mention logically nonsensical) perspective!
This year marked an extraordinary event, the landing on the moon.
We can perceive two ideas from the moon landing: There formerly was scientific proof that it is not possible to land on the moon, since it was thought that it was impossible to achieve the necessary takeoff velocity without breaking or burning up the rocket, and the like. From this we see that mortal intellect is worthless and unreliable, given that whatever man thinks today may very well be proved erroneous tomorrow.
The article is not attributed, but its attitude - which essentially denigrates scientific discovery and achievement - is certainly in keeping with other positions of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, including his beliefs in geocentricity and young earth creationism.
Posts
12 comments:
Neat find. Very revealing.
This shows how anything can be twisted to conform to preconceived notoins.
It is also, unfortunatly, typical of frummy thinking on science.
"There formerly was scientific proof that it is not possible to land on the moon...From this we see that mortal intellect is worthless and unreliable..."
http://kabbalahmadda.blogspot.com/2009/02/did-rambam-fake-moon-landing.html
So Hilchos Yesodei Hatorah is worthless and unreliable? Well, I think so but I'm surprised that Chabad does too... ;)
>What a skewed (not to mention logically nonsensical) perspective
Well said. I guess Chachma B'Chabad, al Taamin. (So the acronym "Chabad" itself is a misnomer ;)
Thanks for that link, Happy. First, because it's quite amusing. Second, because I'm always on the lookout for interesting mp3 lectures (I've looked through most of the yutorah offerings and missed that one.)
I've heard anecdotes of frum people claiming the moon landings were a hoax due to the apparent contradiction with Rambam. I'd be interested at some point at seeing a written source of someone making the claim.
Incidentally, the Chabad article can't even get the date of the moon landings correct since it describes them as occurring in 1968 rather than 1969. Given that all the attention is about the anniversary of the landing, I have to wonder if this really is ignorance or simply grotesque sloppiness.
I suppose the moon landing would confirm that human intellect is worthless if Chabad had landed on the moon first. In the end, as far as manned missions to the moon goes, it's human intellect - 6; Chabad-- O.
"Evidence" of alleged "Apollo Moon Landings" (such as photographs, moving images, etc.) by NASA "astronauts", is quite suspicious and has been challenged.
See http://www.moonmovie.com/
MoonFaker videos,
http://www.empusa.co.uk/lunar/lunar1.htm
etc., etc.
“The spirit of G-d will rest upon him, a spirit of wisdom and understanding, a spirit of counsel and might, a spirit of knowledge and of the fear of G-d. He shall be inspired with fear of G-d, and he shall not judge with the sight of his eyes nor decide according to the hearing of his ears..."
(Isaiah 53:10)
...Right, and the earth is hollow, 9/11 was planned by the Mossad, the holocaust never happened..."
HUH?!
What has this red herring to do with the subject under discussion? Is this supposed to be mildly humorous?
["...a "red herring" is an answer, given in reply to a questioner, that goes beyond an innocent logical irrelevance. A "red herring" is a deliberate attempt to divert a process of enquiry by changing the subject. A "red herring" is a debating tactic that seeks desperately to divert a worthy opponent..."
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_(logical_fallacy)#Red_herring]
"You're a gullible fool if you believe in this tripe..."
Very revealing "comments". Straw-person fallacy combined with unprovoked, malicious, Ad hominem abusive! Wow.
"...The straw person, or straw man, or straw woman fallacy takes the form mischaracterizing someone else's position in a way that makes it weaker, false, or ridiculous...."
http://www.kspope.com/fallacies/fallacies.php
"...Ad hominem [or Ad Feminam] abusive (also called argumentum ad personam...) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing ... ostensible [alleged] character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Ad_hominem_abusive
How much (if any?) research has Frum Heretic done into this subject? Or does she simply regard it as matter of faith?
Does F.H's remark perhaps suggest that one who naively believes in NASA and other widespread propaganda ("tripe") is less likely to be a "gullible fool"?
Are concerns for truth and evidence; reasoned and researched hypotheses; sound, valid arguments; thoughtful questioning of he status quo; humility, Derech Eretz, polite expression; etc., priorities or goals of this blog?
Are some hypotheses more equal than others? Is "mortal intellect" really "worthless" here?
To enter into a debate regarding whether the moon landing occurred is to grant some respectability to the notion that it was a hoax. I don't waste my time on such frivolities. And yes, I have no problem with ad hominem attacks on conspiracy nuts that subscribe to such foolishness.
Nice post!
You have some sources for this - including his beliefs in geocentricity and young earth creationism. ?
Thanks
Source is in the post. http://www.chabadnews.us/Old%20Aricles/AT%2000013.htm
Post a Comment