The difference in the education method affected the children's opinion about the heroes in fantasy stories that included improbable events that happened thanks to magic or without reference to magic. Secular children were more inclined than religious children to judge the protagonist in such fantastic stories as fictional
It is difficult for young children to differentiate between fact and fiction after being exposed to religion. This is according to a study published in the journal Cognitive Science.
The researchers presented 65 five- and six-year-old children attending public and religious schools with three types of stories - religious, fantastic and realistic - to determine if they could identify the fictional elements of the narrative. "We all grew up on the stories of Cinderella, Tom Sawyer, George Washington and Rosa Parks (the study was conducted in the USA) but we know how to differentiate between fictional heroes like Cinderella and Tom Sawyer and people who lived in reality like Washington and Parks." The question they asked themselves is whether there is Difference in the degree of trust in fantastic details between the different education systems according to the degree of religiosity.
The researchers discovered that when children were presented with stories that include events that are usually impossible but took place thanks to divine intervention, students exposed to religion did not appreciate that details in Cinderella-style fantasy stories, such as talking animals, are fiction.
The conclusions of the study led the researchers to the conclusion that exposure to religious ideas and in particular to miracle stories has an effect on the ability to differentiate between truth and fiction, not only in religious stories but also in fantasy stories. The religious children were more inclined to accept impossible things despite their incompatibility with reality.
The distinction between reality and fiction
In both studies, the children were questioned about the status of the protagonist embedded in three different types of stories. In realistic stories that include only ordinary events, all the children, regardless of their family background and the type of education they receive, claimed that the hero was a real person. In religious stories that included impossible events caused by divine intervention, their opinion of the hero's status changed sharply according to exposure to religion: children who went to church or attended a religious school, or both, judged the hero in religious stories to be a real person, while secular children without such exposure To religion, the heroes in the religious stories were judged as fiction.
The difference in the education method also affected the children's opinion of the heroes in fantasy stories that included improbable events, which occurred thanks to magic (Study 1) or without reference to magic (Study 2). Secular children were more inclined than religious children to judge the protagonist in such fantastic stories as fictional.
The results indicate that exposure to religious ideas has a powerful effect on the children's differentiation between reality and fiction, not only in religious stories but also in any fantastic stories.
In Israel, as we know, the stories of the Tanakh are learned from a young age. Most likely, if the research was conducted here, then even secular children would believe in fantasy stories.
156 תגובות
Ephraim
I'm sorry, but due to your cognitive performance in the past, you have been put on the list of directives of the General Staff by a higher local power and you are no longer entitled to receive comments from me. This is a recorded message.
AA
There is a difference between talking about logic within a certain context such as game theory and what is outside the box and those who try to impose scientific findings on Torah texts. When people talk about game theory, they understand that they are talking within a certain context in which the rules they set are valid and they understand that there is a difference between the world within this context and reality. Outside the box, he created a context for himself in which he plays with adapting scientific findings to religious texts, but the thing he refuses to understand is the disconnect between the thing and reality.
There is a difference between speaking a certain language within a certain context, and between thinking that the language and the context have a hold on reality.
When you take a context disconnected from reality and impose it on reality and treat it as if it is true you are left with one big error.
Even if I now waste a week of my time explaining to him why the things he writes are wrong regarding the world of reality, he will still continue to insist that his findings are valid and that his religious text is full of scientific findings.
What exactly is he supposed to be called after this, when he continues to use the wrong kind of logic where a certain kind of logic is supposed to be used?
So yes, I'm wrong for not giving him the benefit of the doubt and bothering to waste this week, admitting guilt. But yes, I think that those who try to find scientific references in Torah texts or twist the Torah text or another religious source to fit a scientific theory are stupid, and if you insist that there is another option then the word to describe it is delusional.
No matter how much you want to twist it, you cannot consistently claim that some text is both eternal and unchangeable absolute truth, and amenable to various varying interpretations that are also true. I'm sorry if you can't understand it. This is super simple logic. (And I say logic here and not logic because you use the word logic in a different meaning than people usually use it)
And again regarding your repeated criticism of the article. You cannot judge by what you read here if the article does not meet a scientific standard. To do this you have to read the article itself. Here you have only a presentation of the information at the level of popular science. Coming out of this with conclusions about the flaw in the article and that the author of the article is just trying to verify his world view is not effective. If you are interested in criticizing the article you must go to the article and read what exactly is written in it and not criticize it based on what is written here.
Miracles
You have already been answered for me. Apart from that, in my eyes, my father does not like that we talk about religious matters on the website and I quite agree with him, that's why I rejected your questions on the subject in the past.
I am still waiting to hear from you if you accept the conclusion that the existence or non-existence of a Creator cannot be proven *scientifically*.
"You have to believe in reincarnation to claim such a thing and believe in it... is there a situation where you have repented?"
Not Ephraim, I did not repent, in all I explained to the miracles the point of view of you believers.
Miracles,
Why don't you call yourself an atheist? Do you believe which entity created us? the universe?
If so you surprise me, please explain.
A.A. = skeptic = chesty - the man only came to provoke.
Raphael
You did not answer me.
A.A.
Do you want to answer my questions or continue with personal attacks?
I didn't say anything against Raphael - I was talking about the strapping scoundrel who calls himself Ephraim. Read the comments to find out why.
Oh .. and I don't call myself an atheist. That really doesn't describe me.
Again - want to answer my questions? you are welcome?
There is no reason to wonder why, the world is full of petty and evil people, finding someone who understands the importance of the site and not just for the purpose of inserting his press release tomorrow morning is probably an impossible task. It has nothing to do with the 'systematic line', it is the same as all other scientific sites in the world. Only in England, for example, there are foundations like WELCOME and there is also a website that is funded by no less than 30 universities and ten foundations. There, the editor's salary is not considered a war crime.
It should not be at the level of Science and Nature but at the level of their news channels.
Wd
Let's first say what you don't call such people
(stupid or unintelligent) All I wanted to say was a. That in order to understand what a person is saying (to understand, not necessarily to agree) you need to understand the basis of the logic that no, and that means freeing yourself mentally. The "Jewish interpretive" form of logic is very important to the interpretation of the Torah, if Jews were to interpret in a mathematical way, for example, we would look like the DHASH (for example, an eye for an eye and the law of "the woman of Japheth Tavar") The luck is that Jewish logic is based on God giving to humans (good In fact, rabbis do not exaggerate the right to interpret the Torah according to several rules Game theory is not logical because it is based on people always striving to maximize profit or they always act in an optimal way. What outside the box did is to interpret scientific theories the result is really amusing The Torah according to the Torah logic and left the science as it is so that you cannot say about its claim that it is illogical as my father said without understanding the The Torah logic. As I will say about a philosophical essay without knowing anything about philosophy. By the way, like Yariv and Raphael's discussion about the soul, Yariv claimed that it is an article in a newspaper about philosophy that examines a question with philosophical tools because science cannot yet give They have an answer because brain research is not developed enough. If you ask a neuroscientist he will say "there is no definitive scientific answer yet but in my opinion...". The second thing I wanted to say is that there is an advantage in knowing in depth many forms of logic (including religious ones)
Your answer shows that you are not really trying to understand the basis of logic, you need to understand that interpretation is the basis of religion. And religion should be understood according to religious logic. By the way, the constitution of countries also works according to somewhat similar logic, they do not change it by "adding amendments", the court is supposed to interpret it according to the intention of the legislator and in practice interprets according to the period.
my father
It's not difficult for me at all. On the contrary, I constantly try to reject them and not talk about religious matters, but they don't let up. If you don't want me to comment anymore on your site just say.
rival
Yes .. the problem is that the belief in the next world was invented to justify the suffering in this world. This is a false and cruel belief designed to support the religious establishment. The basis for this belief was absolute zero. I am shocked that people still believe this nonsense.
wd
Pay attention - I'm complimenting you now. I compare you to Jesus:
Jesus was the first great apostate who broke God's laws. And decided to make up his own rules because that's how he felt like it.
Then people like you came - and destroyed the Jewish home.
And I ask you: what is the point of laws, if we can constantly change them?
I'm sure you would be happy to live in a world without rules, like some free anarchist.
But if you had studied history then you would have been able to understand that you would not have survived in such a world even for a month.
AA
There is no such thing as "other logic" (the women will probably disagree with me... but hey, they're women 🙂 🙂 )
There is 'reason' and there is 'irrationality'. There is no such thing as 'other logic'.
What's more, all the problems arise when you start interpreting the law in a different way to adapt it to 'current needs'
or 'current trend' or 'what's in fashion at the moment' or 'this is how my mood tells me is right for me now'.
rival
"The evil one who lives here will pay well after his death or in another incarnation." –
You have to believe in reincarnation to claim such a thing and believe in it..
Is it possible that you have repented? 🙂
Miracles
"I showed you that in the real world there is no reward and punishment - there is good and bad for it, and evil and good for it." –
You didn't show anything.
All you did was babble. as usual.
A boy with a head tumor the size of an egg?
Mutations. contingency.
not like that?
After all, you yourself claimed that everything is accidental and there is no hand of God in the matter.
So what's up with this "good and bad for him" nonsense?
Rafael gives the impression of a good person, and I don't think he's bad.
M. Rothschild is a good person and I am sure that he is good in his life as well.
I know good people and not bad for them.
You, on the other hand, give the impression of a good person but resentful and very bad for you. So to throw from here that the good are bad?
An egotistical, immoral argument and rambling nonsense.
Avi Blizenovski
Why is your site that claims to be a scientific site not at the level of Science or Nature? 🙂
You'll probably say that because you don't have writers... And you don't have sponsors….
But you had writers…. Where did they go?
And why does no one want to subsidize this blog?
Have you ever wondered why? 🙂
"I showed you that in the real world there is no reward and punishment - there is good and bad for it, and evil and good for it"
Miracles, they claim that reward and punishment is mainly after death (heaven and hell).
The evil one who lives here well will pay after his death or in another incarnation.
Raphael
Pay attention - even now you are not my business. I asked you many questions - but you don't answer my questions. You say that without free choice there is no reward and punishment. I showed you that in the real world there is no reward and punishment - there is good and bad for him, and evil and good for him.
What is your response?
Rafael, I see you are having a hard time here. Maybe move the debate to a religious site? Where no one will oppose any idea you come up with?
Miracles why are you so angry today? We have already elaborated and explained what I said about the religion of science in detail. Notice how you react now just like a religious fanatic. Soon you will declare jihad on us.
Ephraim
You forgot Alan Turing, the loathsome gay.
You are such trash…..
Raphael
Show me one claim in this entire discussion that supports your "science is religion" claim. Do we require you to substantiate your evidence? Oh yo yo! !!!!
You say something, and when it is addressed, and you are shown that you said nonsense, you squirm like an eel.
I'll say it again - the only method to explore the world is to look, think and test, and that's called science. Religion is the opposite - God exists, and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot.
AA
So let's say I'm flowing with defining your different types of logic. How exactly do you call using the wrong kind of logic where a certain kind of logic is supposed to be used?
Also in my opinion there is nothing wrong with a dynamic system of rules that can be changed, it should be that way.
The point is that this is exactly the opposite of that.
You cannot say on the one hand that this is the word of God and it is holy, fixed, true forever and ever and unchangeable, and at the same time say oh well then we actually got it wrong and now we do get it right time and time and time again.
Like, you can do that but it shows that your first claim is bullshit.
Rival, watch for 2 replies to you that were sent and still don't appear.
rival
These experiments are referenced in the article I sent. This is not scientific proof that everything is brain.
Raphael
They did not turn science into a religion.
Rather, they try to appropriate science and culture for themselves, and for this they adapt to themselves a fanatical and religious fervor in order to succeed in this. Of course they fail and everyone can see it. And only for this reason that they do not succeed in this, they begin to lose their tempers and lose their sense of self and begin all kinds of mud-slinging that only puts them in an even worse place than they were in to begin with.
They belong to a small group that has neither an arm nor a leg in science nor in culture. That's why you won't find them there either. You will find them in the same line of "science" people like Chomsky and "culture" people like Hanin Zoavi.
to Wd
Regarding what you wrote about politicians
There is nothing wrong with that in my opinion
Just like when they abolished slavery in the USA they said it was against the constitution which says that all people are equal even though it is clear that this is not what the legislator meant since most of them owned slaves themselves. But this way you can both progress morally/thoughtfully and not hurt feelings about the founding fathers. Religions also do this and this A welcome procedure
Raphael,
Certainly they are, they show in many experiments that there is a clear connection between the electrical activity in the brain and the observed response.
to the opponent
You think that if they build a computer sophisticated enough to simulate the human brain completely down to the last cell. Will a fully human consciousness emerge? (And not just a dime of consciousness, which means that this computer should be given full human rights, including voting). I personally don't think so, but we have to wait patiently until then, and it's impossible to give a definitive scientific answer like you do
rival
OK, so there are differences of opinion among the scientists. But even the scientists who firmly claim that everything comes from the brain cannot back up this claim in any experimental/scientific way.
Raphael,
I read, this is his personal opinion and it has no experimental/scientific backing, most neuroscientists do not agree with him.
(See, for example, the lectures of Prof. Idan Segev, who firmly claims that everything stems from the mind only)
Raphael there are also many things from Greek mythology that once seemed impossible and today they say that with the help of technology they are possible or there are things similar to them that are possible
Yariv read this -
http://odyssey.org.il/209313
The soul never dies, it simply does not exist.
Everything is created in the brain, and only there.
Two groups were formed here, each of which conducts the discussion according to a different logic. And that's why they find it difficult to even understand each other (in a brother not to reach an agreement) this does not show the stupidity of any of the parties. What I'm trying to say is that you can't say something about something that doesn't make sense. It can be said that he does not comply with the laws of a certain logic. For example, according to scientific logic, if a mathematical formula is tested on 100 or 1000 numbers, it is considered correct, and according to mathematical logic, this is not enough. And on the other hand, geometry with five dimensions is considered scientifically illogical.
Game theory didn't make sense to me until I understood its logic (mathematical logic based on an axiom that doesn't matter if it's true just as it doesn't matter if there are no more than three dimensions). If you study halacha without trying to understand its logic, it will probably seem illogical. On the other hand, it is important to understand the advantages and limitations of each form of logic. Scientific logic is the most effective to understand how the world works and while a scientist is working he must not involve religious thinking. And on the other hand, it is scientifically impossible to say whether there is or is not God. Professor Steinitz wrote a philosophy book about the existence of God and he is considered an expert in philosophy, so I assume that he made sure to work according to the logic of philosophy (I am not here to say that there is a God) I just want to explain that a different logic certainly does not show stupidity. Aristotle was not a stupid person but he did not work according to scientific logic, he said that the best way to understand the world is only through thought and not the senses (experiments)
If anything, the thing that develops the brain the most is learning as many ways of thinking as possible. As someone who was in a religious education, I have the advantage of additional ways of thinking (especially the thinking of the Gemara).
Albenzo, it seems to me that both you and the others understand exactly what I meant when I said that there are scientists who treat science like a religion. There is no point in saying too much.
Regarding the resurrection, I emphasized that the Creator does not need the DNA to do the resurrection, but that once upon a time this thing was not understood at all and was considered imaginary. Today is no longer imaginary. Suddenly one realizes that the body can be reconstructed from the remains of a bone left over from the dead body (search "hazel bone" on Google). Regarding the scar - there will be no scars for those who will be resurrected, nor any other disease or deformity. Regarding thoughts of love, etc. - it is no longer a body but a soul. The soul never dies but will be re-clothed in a resurrected body for resurrection.
Raphael,
Science has no agenda. Science is a method of discovering answers to questions. That's all. nothing less and nothing more. If you would agree to check for a moment what religion is, you would find that religion is bound by a narrative - in the case of Judaism it is the Torah and the rest of the scriptures - which is a text or collection of ideas that is "absolute truth" and it dictates how the religion should be practiced. Laws, commandments, beliefs, etc. Science simply has no religious narrative. If you want to say "some people treat science with the same fervor (positively or negatively) as religious fanatics treat their religion", then say that. If you use the word "religion", at least be able to stand behind your words and explain what exactly is religious in science.
And I don't know how to break this to you, but there is no trace of information about the appendectomy scar in your dna. There is no information about the memory of the first love, about the beliefs and passions, about the age, about the fact that you devoted years and years to training to become the world champion in the high jump. With her hair you can at most (in the most imaginative scenarios) produce a replica of a person as it was the moment the egg met the sperm. Not even once he is born, because fetal development is not in the dna (ie, if your mother smoked and drank during pregnancy and as a result you were born with a defect, it will not be in your dna, or if you were played classical music and Einstein tapes for children and turned out to be a genius, It's not either).
Raphael,
"Regarding the resurrection of the dead, this subject was once puzzling and not understood at all. Today, thanks to the discovery of DNA, we know that, at least on a theoretical level, it is possible to take a hair from a dead person and build a whole body from it."
When you take a hair and create a whole person from it (which will probably be possible in the future, in my opinion) you will not revive the dead person, but only create a physical copy of his body, it will not be the same person with all his memories and personality, it will be a completely different person like a twin brother of the deceased
The idea of the resurrection is absolutely ridiculous, it won't happen.
to wd
Outside the box really not a stupid person. On the contrary, he seems to me to be a very intelligent person. What's more, he doesn't work according to scientific logic (I personally don't agree with anything he said)
Crush the box: I think you didn't understand Hawking, he was talking about a formula that explained everything but also predicted
This means that you will be able to calculate with her what will happen, and this cannot be done with the Torah
A theory is considered scientific only if it can predict something and thus can be contradicted.
for miracles Everything you said about the difference between science and religion is true. What Raphael said is that some people turn science into a religion, that is, they don't act like you said. I think it's more correct to say turning atheism into a religion. (They defend it in a religious way, believing that they hold the absolute truth. They feel the need to convince everyone in an almost missionary way. In short, all the sick evils of most religion)
Albanzo and miracles
Of course there is no point now in defining what religion is and examining one by one whether science for those people is a religion as defined. I mean that those people adopted the extreme religious fervor that exists in certain religions in order to reject any idea that goes against their agenda and to fight those who think differently.
Regarding the resurrection of the dead, this subject was once puzzling and not understood at all today thanks to the discovery of DNA we know that at least on a theoretical level it is possible to take a hair from a dead person and build a whole body from it.
Another idea that until recently was puzzling and incomprehensible is the account that the person will give after his death and in which he will be shown the entire course of his life. Today this thing is more understandable when we see that every place is networked with cameras and every movement is recorded including phone calls and surfing the Internet. And don't make the mistake of thinking that I am saying that the Creator needs the dna to revive the dead or the cameras to show him everything he has done, but these are things that prove that this is possible and is no longer puzzling and imaginary.
outside the box
Now you really talked nonsense. There is no way that a change in place A moves to a distant place B at high speed at the speed of light 🙂 You don't understand what you're talking about so much that you look ridiculous 🙂
And the resurrection? what are you talking about
Out of the box,
I am very sorry to hear that you do not understand quantum mechanics and the non-local correlations that exist in it. It's a shame for me, but it doesn't mean that a person in Tel Aviv will give a hit and a person in Jerusalem will grab it after 0 time. In fact, there is a simple mathematical proof that this is impossible.
Raphael,
Do you know what religion is? I mean, when you say that for some people science is a religion, what do you mean? Let's start with you defining what religion is and then together we can see if science is religion (for some people)?
Raphael
Science is a structured and critical way of looking at the world. When two scientists disagree - there is a certain way to reach an agreement and both sides will agree on the result. Of course, scientists are people and you can show unpleasant wars at times.
Science does not impose opinions and does not take ownership of people's happiness.
Science adapts itself to observations and not the other way around.
Really, really not a religion!
youth
Outside the box is he one of those who are wrong in understanding science or those who are wrong in understanding the Torah?
Out of the box I understood. This is your innovation. We have no ability to innovate such things. We must always rely on the words of our masters. Ask your rabbi. Successfully.
I will give you examples that were "delusional" and clearly unscientific only decades ago that the Torah spoke of. A. On this website they brought an article about quantum theory and one of the opinions is that if a person moves his hand to hit Tel Aviv. In Jerusalem, a person will be hit without a time difference. In a positive way, it can be said that if a person prays for another person at the end of the world, it immediately affects another person. At the other end of the globe.. it was scientifically delusional a few decades ago and today it is a little less delusional. The reason for this is the continuation of further revelation of A-loka by revealing the innermost aspects of the Torah. Another illusory eyes that today is talked about as possible in the future. And that is eternal life. The sea is no longer so illusory from a scientific point of view... the reason for this is that the Torah's preoccupation with matters of redemption and Christ causes this to be revealed even within the boundaries of the world... not only eternal life is possible from a scientifically logical point of view... even the resurrection of the dead is seen as a possibility... after all, a few decades ago these ideas were illusory completely. Not to mention the Rambam who writes at the end of his book The Strong Hand more than eight hundred years ago. At that time, from a scientific point of view, the probability that such a situation would exist was completely illusory. That the good in the future will be many. Delicacies are found as dirt. Something that is possible in the near future when all human work will be replaced by robot machines The technology is green and developed.. see books by famous scientists about the future that awaits us and this is not considered illusory today. And for the future Maimonides writes Don't be jealous, don't be a competition.. and the thing that is heard today by some people of delusional science is that the same Rambam writes that it will be the whole world's business to know God.
Out of the box
When you translate it into simple politics it sounds like a politician who didn't quite like some of the laws in the statute book and wanted to change/update some laws and then looked for an excuse that would be accepted by people as to why his new laws were already in their statute book, so they wouldn't object.
Raphael The initial general connection between the Torah and everything in the world is written simply in a hazal article. Astekal Kudsha Brich is in Oriyata and created a maiden.. After all that the Almighty created in his world.. He created for his honor. And you have nothing that is not implied in the Torah.. In prayer we say that the one who renews his goodness every day is always an act of Genesis. That is, the entire creation without exception is renewed from nothing Lish in every moment in permanence. And how does the Creator do this.. It's just a matter of luck. In the Torah the Kabbalah conceived against him.. the demand is and she conceived it day and night. And a lot of thinking about it day and night. So much for a bit of the simplicity in the Torah and more in depth. Rabbi Akiva's well-known article. Everything that a scholar would innovate was given to Moses at Sinai. We learn from this that in the teachings of Moses there is learning material that enables new discovery. which we have not yet discovered.. but it is given somewhere in the Torah of Moses.. Rabbi Akiva said this while he was ruling on every thorn in the Torah. The word of God who created the world in ten articles. It turns out that when a person learns and differs from the Torah, God is different against him, meaning that the Creator speaks a speech, this brings a new continuation to the world that was not revealed in the world before. This continuation is expressed in its effect on the entire world. For this is the word of God and as at the time of the creation of the world, the world was created by speech. Thus a renewal of the Torah brings about a new creation within the boundaries of the world to invent something.. it must be in the Torah in any form, a hint or a secret. So if there is an idea in the Torah, then this idea is also in the Torah. If there is one atom at the end of the universe, it is also somewhere in the Torah Man had some kind of ability to discover this within the laws of nature that were created in the days of Genesis.
Miracles The problem is that some of you have turned science into a religion. You have an agenda. You are preachers. You dismiss anyone who thinks otherwise. And notice that I wrote "some of you".
A.A.
I completely agree with walking death.
AA
We don't think all believers are stupid. We think that those who try to find scientific references in the Torah texts or twist the Torah text or another religious source to fit a scientific theory are stupid. (Well, that's what I think, I can't really speak for everyone here, but there are probably others who think like me on this issue)
You cannot judge by what you read here if the article does not meet a scientific standard. To do this you have to read the article itself. Here you have only a presentation of the information at the level of popular science. Coming out of this with conclusions about the flaw in the article and that the author of the article is just trying to verify his world view is not effective. Personally, I am not interested enough in the topic to read the article, but if it were and I wanted to criticize it, I would go to the article and read what exactly is written in it and not criticize it based on what is written here.
May you be blessed with a lot of happiness.
No - he is a free man.
is he religious .. the grandson
out of the box
My grandson speaks more sense than you. He is two years old.
Outside the box, I already gave you an answer that captures both the age of the universe and evolution. No need to repeat things.
I would appreciate it if you clarified where you got the connection between electric circuits and eggs and the Torah. Also that you indicate the source of sages regarding the height of the person.
rival
If I understood correctly about Raphael when he says that there is no field of science that does not correspond to the Torah, I would like to know what he thinks about the age of the world. or about evolution. I think that's where we disagree
Now to continue the fantasy you recruit Leonardo da Vinci
As Raphael (Raphael!) pointed out, at some point, your thinking outside the box confused height with volume..
Beyond that, if there is no argument or proof that can lead you to admit a mistake, there is really no point in the discussion.
Eitan regarding the fact that nothing will indeed change my faith in the Torah, you are right.. I agree with you.. regarding the calculation of the cubit.. look for Leonardo da Vinci's painting (if I am not mistaken) the height of a person is also measured by the addition of his hands raised up. i.e. its full length. As an animal's tail is added to its length
..and as the tail of the seed is added to its length. Likewise, when the hides are raised, an extra cubit is added to the length. And in addition, when it comes to a forearm, its length is, according to an average determination, close to 48 cm. But the meaning in the present case is that the forearm is a natural forearm, that is, in relation to the human body. When it comes to the difference in the seed, which is in the ratio of eighty-five thousand, there is room for a certain inaccuracy even among scientists They have exactly the same length for all the men in the world and also regarding the measurements it is difficult to say that for all the women the size is the same so the ratio will be approximately.
Regarding your reference to the amount of sperm that entered the box...perhaps I did not explain myself properly when I explained that as in the scientific formulas the same letters are used and sometimes the letters express different values, and this depends on the topic at hand. That's how it is in our Torah ..gave it up because it's the way it is in the Torah, so this principle continues in the world of science as well. Not everything that is written in the Torah is thrown on every topic.. That's why the many seeds that entered the box. Not including Noah and his wife (I have no power to explain why this is so) i.e. Noah's six sons and their wives. Belongs to the concept of six in one. Regarding the birth rate of the Israelites in Egypt.
Outside the box - can you please indicate where this sage comes from that a person occupies an area of a cubit by a cubit and a height of five cubits?
a box
450000 \ 85000 = 5.3
A cubit is equal to about half a meter (if we go towards you, 45 cm according to the interpretations of the shortest length).
The person you are thinking of is about 2.4-2.6 meters tall (and again, several sperms entered the box..)
This is of course a worthless calculation.. but if you try to introduce math into your arguments, you have to deal with the consequences..
What protects a sperm cell from the vaginal acids (and not the egg acids) is the seminal fluid in which the sperm cells swim and it is alkaline.
Also, the sperm does not "enter" the egg. He only injects genetic material and then degenerates.
You can go on but I doubt if there is any argument whatsoever that will undermine your belief that the Bible contains all the scientific writings that have ever been written or will be written.
The rest of the people will see an almost childish desperation to make the Bible more than it is even at the price of written rape.
Of course, if you do this, at the very least you must be accurate in the facts..
Such a level of arguments allows me to find scientific proofs also in the New Testament, in the writings of Buddha and in some of the "Harry Potter" books
I'm curious by the way, where do you get these images from? Did you think of them alone or is there some rabbi who delivers these science lessons in the style of Amnon Yitzchak?
By the way, where did you get all this? Did you think it yourself or did you read it somewhere?
Outside the box, even Raphael who is supposed to be on your side rejects what you wrote completely.
By the way, why don't you correct your username, didn't you notice that you added an unnecessary H to the name?
Because we are in an age where most websites and articles have a clear religious agenda - it is only fair that secular websites will start to present a clear atheistic and anti-theistic agenda.
It's enough to be beautiful and deal with "we don't want to be like them"...
It's time to fight.
And those who come here with claims about an agenda - should look at the religious sites first.
Strong
Regarding the ark, according to the Sages, a person occupies an area of a cubit by a cubit and a height of five cubits, the volume is 1 times 1 times 5, a total of 5. The structure of the box is 300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits, a total of 30×50×300=450000. In Wikipedia it is written that the egg is large 85000 times the seed Let's divide the size of the box For 85000, it is a miracle that the man grew up. Another detail is the sperm as a whole, and the substance that protects it is the ovum . Two belong to the head and one to the tail. Like the sons of Noah .. two received a blessing there and in Japheth. And one swearing.. hot.. to continue explaining outside the box... by the way, in order to see outside the box you do have to use your imagination. Because the imagination is the one that takes us out of bounds.. note by the way.. about the creation of the world it is said that the Creator looked at the Torah and created the world
Strong
Glad to read a comment. which is not a password. With content and a serious attitude...thank you
Strong
Distinguish between "not out of reason" and not out of scientific reason
Scientific logic is not the only one there is. It is important to use it when dealing with science but not necessarily in other fields
For example, mathematics is based on a different logic and so is philosophy.
Ethical and moral questions are not solved scientifically
Nor should faith be resolved according to scientific axioms
a box
Your interpretation is pitiful in its desperation to rape the parallel between biblical story and scientific knowledge.
If we play this desperate game, we can say that unlike an egg cell that receives only one sperm (more than one sperm means abnormal chromosomal load and the death of the zygote), in the ark, Noah's entire family entered and not just one person.
In addition, many pairs of animals entered the same box (egg), which may degenerate a believer into forbidden acts with animals.
According to this distorted image, after the time of pregnancy in the ark (a month and a week? Maybe because of an excess chromosomal load there was an early miscarriage?) a new creature was supposed to come out containing the entire Noah family, however, whoever entered, simply left... a bit like a seed leaving the egg When he's tired..
What's more, the motif of the dove that goes out to look for dry land and returns with an olive leaf, describes in a very elegant and precise way the course of fetal development in the third trimester.
The luck of this nation is that the absolute majority of its religious population does not fall into such abysses of desperation to justify the relevance of their faith and simply believe out of faith and not out of logic.
Outside the box, there is no doubt that your imagination is working overtime.
crush into a box
I don't think you understood Hawking
He talked about a formula that would not only explain everything in retrospect. This is not wisdom. A formula should also allow for prediction. If you think this is also possible with the help of gematria from the Torah, there is no need to demonstrate
Thinking outside the box always seems delusional.. to those fixed in the box.. but I thought your response would be more complex than a password without content.
Unfortunately, I had to be brief here and bring only a few comparisons of the Torah equation ..and in short regarding the formation of the child, the box is, in terms of an egg, all the seeds want to enter it. But as soon as the first seed property prevented all the other seeds from entering Noah's ark, as soon as the family entered the ark, the ark was closed. When all the other people also wanted to enter the ark. The inventions of the box in water for a period of months corresponding to the time of pregnancy.. come out of the box..
I hope outside the box is laughing
You are just amazing.
My God, what a pile of gibberish.
Out of the box - where did you get all this???? Are you from the same village of Skepani???
Between the time of Adam and Noah the situation was such that the divine abundance was given in comparison between those who follow the positive path and those who follow the opposite path suitable for the energy transmitted in an alternating current.. It remains now to bring more precision a comparison between the structure of the rectifier after the transformer that was discussed in general. Noah is the one who is directly connected to the alignment and in it is included the important part of the alignment since he was righteous in his ranks .. and the Torah says about him and Noah found favor in the eyes of God Noah enters the ark that is above the waves for a period of time and comes out of the ark and sees a "new world" as the Sages say it is amazing to discover that the word diode d = 4 j = 10 and e = 6 in total equals 5 and since the rectifier has two diodes in one direction, it also comes out 28 + 28 = 28 The word Noah = 58 but there are 28 dyads whose direction is opposite and their sum is also 2, therefore the opposite disease comes out Chen. Immediately at the same time there is the acceptance that it is Avraham (as stated in the chapters of Avot, chapter 58 Mishna XNUMX) who received the reward of all to Abraham our father were born Two sons parallel to each other Ishmael and Yitzchak.. first Ishmael corresponding to the receiving plate and then Yitzchak against the second plate. It is amazing to see that the system continues until the giving of the Torah "big voice and not Ysaf" until Erich von Daniken tries to prove that it is huge speakers and on the day of the turn it is said In the eyes of all Israel, the equivalent of visual sight. However, the order in which the technology developed was first hearing and then sight...
"2). Secular children were more inclined than religious children to judge the hero in such fantastic stories as fictional."
A. How much more is it?
B. It sounds like the task was borderline for age and that even secular children got it wrong and it's not even clear how much less
On the other hand, it is written that all the seculars recognized the religious story as fiction, which is already a bit puzzling
In any case, nothing can be concluded about other ages
third. Avi. In Israel, many parents also tell about the tooth fairy. I'm sure it has more of an impact on identifying a fantasy story. Still zero effect after age 7
I will go on
The traditional rectifier is built in this way... four diodes where two of them are oriented in one direction and the other two are oriented in the opposite direction with between them a conductor and a resistor on which there will be a voltage drop and a capacitor which receives and stores and stops over time the voltage drop on the resistor.. on the sides of two plates parallel to each other.. (In order to see exactly how the rectifier is built, you only need to search Google for a drawing of a rectifier) The capacitor will cause the voltage to be constant and above the zero level... so far for the comparison. As we said at the beginning, first you need to. Transformer..
And now the formula and the plan from which the idea is drawn into the world.. First we are told in the Torah.. in the beginning of Bara a-Lakim about the reality of an infinite Creator without limits above and beyond human perception. These people are called by the Sages by the name of presidents or heads due to their being elevated from the people and primary to the divine revelation. The role of these presidents is to continue to bring down the divine revelation to the rest of the world according to the ability of the other human beings.. These presidents are considered transformers. That is why in our language In the language of the Torah, the letters Nashiya also form the word transformer. The transformer is also made up of two parts The current and the tension and induces the current with a weaker power on the other part so that the power will match the world. In the story of the Torah there is the first Adam who stands before the revelation of an infinite God in heaven that until this day as stated in the Torah there was no creation who stood before this revelation.. Of course after Adam sinned A disconnection is created between the unconnected and the world.. (as there is in a transformer disconnection between the two coils) The inspiration generation after generation since Adam
experience response
Out of the box,
Okay, you described to me what an electric rectifier does, where is your reference that this is written in the Torah?
For miracles first. and then to the opponent.
Miracles
You are right, the Torah is a true doctrine that reveals and exposes man's shortcomings and also reveals our virtues. It does not ignore the reality... but it seems to me that you are talking about a different morality in which there are mitzvah wars.. that is, wars made by God's commandments or sacrifices and the like. Unfortunately, I think that A. this is not the place to discuss this in depth.. and B. it is not my purpose to clash during the three-week period when it is clear to me that you will not agree with me...
and to the opponent
Before I explain the existence of the aligner and the creation of the child. I should preface that as in the formulas there are basic principles... like for example the letter E symbolizes the concept of energy. But in energy there are several types of energy, etc. therefore the letter E will mark the rules of the eyes of energy. The same goes for the letter M, mass, H, height, V, tension, and much more.. Sometimes it turns out that the letters in different formulas will be the same but denote different topics. But the identity of the role of the letter will be according to the role assigned to it. There are also fixed axioms.
Rival All this comes in the introduction to the formula of the creation of the world and all that was present and will be in the world. There are also rules about how to refer to writing. For example, there are 13 measurements that the Torah requires. etc.. Let's start with the rectifier...
The function of a rectifier is to take alternating current (represented in the oscilloscope in the form of a changing wave) and bring it to a state that this wave will be positive and sometimes negative and sometimes positive in addition. A more advanced stage of the rectifier is to bring the wave to a state where there will be no variation, i.e. without ups and downs. And actually the rectifier turns out that its role is divided into two. Step one is turning the negative wave into a positive one and the second is determining that the flow is constant in strength without variation in the conductor. Another thing that exists before the rectifier is the transformer whose role is to receive a tremendous amount of energy and adjust it to a strength that matches the data of the receiving device.
for w.d
I don't mind the subject of the articles my father brings
It bothers me that even though the site is serious
The article does not meet a scientific standard. The question of the research in itself is legitimate, but a deeper reading shows that the researcher really wants to reach a certain danger for reasons of worldview. A scientist should not do this and a scientific website should not publish the same job of this length to filter articles that do not meet the standard. If the article was serious it would have been about a larger group including more ages (to measure if the effect persists) and detailing the size of the difference in percentages. And finally he also brings up some alternative explanations (and maybe refutes them) for example maybe religious children yearn for at least fantasy literature. But it seems that what really interests the researcher is to verify his worldview and get a title
This was a response to "outside the box".
"The Torah is the formula of the universe, it will reveal to us in its own unique way... both about the structure of the rectifier... and about the way the child was formed... and if I managed to arouse your curiosity... I would be happy to explain it"
Yes, I would really appreciate it if you could explain this - where is it written in the Torah about the structure of the electrical rectifier and the formation of the child?
And you can also not believe in God without thinking that those who believe are stupid or necessarily destroying the world
It is also possible to respect the faith of other people, even with many religions not mentioning it, you don't have to turn atheists into a religion
One can believe in Elekim even without thinking that he clothed the Torah with scientific secrets.
It may be possible to twist the Torah text so that it explains any scientific theory. To me personally it seems unnecessary, and it can also be done with Tolkien's writings. If your faith is based on such things you are in trouble because tomorrow there could be a new scientific theory that will replace the big bang now you will have to explain how it fits into the Torah? It's really unnecessary
Nissim I want to judge you to the hilt and that is why I say that your blasphemy about our holy Torah stems solely from your ignorance. If you were privileged to study Torah, you would not talk like that.
For "outside the box" I have heard many explanations in my life about how one can find scientific theories in the Torah and it was never convincing and sometimes also twisted scientific facts for nothing. Like the claim in the Zohar that the world is round. Maybe it's true, but also according to tradition the book was written in the days of the Second Temple (researchers claim that in the days of the buildings) in any case after a Greek philosopher had already long calculated the circumference of the earth
Out of the box
It was one big Huawei hoax regardless of reality
AA
I don't see how to say that any person said anything that the person in question said is considered to be speaking for him.
What does it matter if people who believe are happier (what's more, I'm not sure if that's even true), this is about the truth, and not a happiness competition.
outside the box
The Torah is full of violence, immorality, lies and mistakes.
Maybe you will step out of the box and start thinking? Maybe the Torah is just a collection of folktales mixed with a bit of history?
A.A.
I read what you wrote. I will give you an example. based on the conclusion of one of the greatest scientists of our generation, Stephen Hawking. He claims (perhaps not exactly in his words) that there should be a formula in the world that would be suitable for explaining the structure of the universe to the simplest person as well as to the most intelligent. In my opinion this formula exists. And the one who wrote it is the same one. who designed and created the world. And this is the Torah. Because within it is the simple understanding of the world for a child. And up to the deepest layers of the occult. The sequence of the worlds.. and everyone has an inner understanding according to their ability to know... so it will inevitably be said.. that everything they find or discover includes in science, etc. will be included in this formula. That is, the Torah. I will give some examples. which are in the same story. but refer to two different things in science. The one that created the child. And the second is the basic structure of an electric rectifier that is in front of every electric device. The similarity in both cases. He... that both are at the beginning of the system, that is, the baby at the beginning of its formation. and the rectifier before starting the direct current to suit the device. According to the explanation I gave, it would be reasonable that if the Torah is the formula of the universe, it will reveal to us in its own unique way... both about the structure of the alignment... and also about the way the child was formed... and all this will be at the beginning of the Torah story. Because in front of the rectifier there is an alternating current and before creating the generator there is the male at one end and the female at one end. So the Torah formula will be referred to precisely at the end of the first chapter and at the beginning of the second chapter. In order to notice the wonder in this formula, you have to get out of the box we are fixed in... and if I managed to arouse your curiosity a. A. I would be happy to explain it
Maybe there is a proof for God, but it is not a scientific proof (Cartes wrote philosophical proofs on the matter, but philosophy is not something I understand)
There is no experiment that can be done to disprove its existence
It does not say whether or not there is a God or a Supreme Being. This means that it cannot be treated scientifically.
I don't think it's good that you speak for Raphael and I'm not sure what he thinks about it
Personally I have met many very intelligent people if very strong faith even phantasms. What I do know is that many studies have found that religious people are happier so I'm not sure it's that smart to be an atheist :-)
A.A.
"I personally don't think there's any point in this discussion. I don't think anyone will ever be able to prove that God exists. Or disprove his existence."
Maybe you should talk to Raphael about it, he's sure he has proof of God's existence.
youth
Those who say that there is a contradiction between science and the Torah usually do so after certain people use the things written in the Torah to make empirical claims about the world that we see are not true.
Perhaps the situation would be better if the believers who are constantly wrong in their understanding of the Torah would improve their understanding so that they would make claims that are hidden by the findings and evidence that we measure in our world.
What do you think might improve this problem?
To say that there is an infinite power responsible for this great creation of the universe means nothing so it is hard to take it seriously.
My life experience makes me feel that something I believe is true is also not exactly an argument that can be taken seriously. A person's belief in a thing does not make it true.
AA
If I remember correctly, the article does not say that atheists are more intelligent than religious people, but that the more intelligent a person is, the more likely he is to be an atheist. A difference that may seem small to you, but it is a significant difference.
Raphael
So what if on this site they deal with it a lot? (By the way, this is not true at all, but it doesn't matter)
This site is not scientists.
If you have a complaint with Abbi about the number of times he chooses to present articles that deal with topics you are sensitive to, then you are welcome to contact him about it.
Keep in mind that my father has an agenda and he does not deny it, so it is unlikely that you will get what you want.
If this agenda bothers you, it's your choice what to do about it. You don't have to enter any article here or read any comment here, you choose to do so. You can also do what you are already doing and comment and complain about things you don't like, or do something else, a whole world of choices before you.
Father, I just read an article you brought two years ago that also claims that atheists are more intelligent than religious people. I can only tell you that you can until tomorrow make fun of people like outside the box but you are no better than them at anything. You can continue to dream of a world where everyone thinks like you but know that it will be a very bad world. Most of all you remind me of some rabbis I have met of the darker type
The religious women I argue with - are not at all willing to read books about atheism or evolution and do not agree to watch even one video on the subject.
So even if they have a tendency towards high intelligence, there is a blocking block related to their faith.
And there are some religious people who do engage in science, but they also often block themselves from any engagement in very well-established fields that contradict their faith.
Many believers trust rabbis to such an extent - if he tells them that the world of science claims X, then they will not go and check if the world of science really claims this, but will claim it and be 100% sure of it, just because the rabbi said so.
My father, there is nothing wrong with the explanation that Raphael believes in. This is an excellent solution that allows him to continue to believe in the things that are important to him and still engage in science in a free manner. Father accept even if you are sure that your beliefs are excellent (atheism). This does not mean that everyone must or that it is best for everyone to think this way. What is really important is that scientists maintain scientific thinking freed from any previous belief. without aiming for the result in advance. Exactly the opposite of the research you presented, which you also must admit has many flaws and that the title only adds to the article a pseudo-scientific and worldview-oriented aura.
I personally do not think there is any point in this discussion. I don't think anyone will ever be able to prove that God exists. or disprove its existence. (At least not in a scientific way, maybe with the help of philosophy, but I'm not out of the box, I understand philosophy, and philosophers' arguments don't really convince me) There is no experiment that can prove this, and therefore faith is not a scientific thing. I personally believe from the fusion of my deep feeling.
Whoever does not feel that way, I respect him and also expect him to respect me. Raphael and "outside the box" present different approaches. The explanation that Raphael brings is known and if it helps him to solve the question, I respect that. Regarding outside the box, science consists entirely of theories, you can pretend that science will change them. But it doesn't seem like that will happen. They are based on many experiments that there is no other way to explain them. In any case, Judaism has never interpreted the Torah exactly as a language and there is no reason to do so where it runs counter to contemporary science.
Personally, I don't think God tried to teach us science with the help of the Torah (otherwise He does it much better, apparently He wanted us to discover science on our own) therefore everything written in the Torah is first of all to teach a spiritual message. Therefore I will not fall off my feet if the world was created in 7 days or not. But I will try to understand the message. Therefore there can be no slap in the face of science
Raphael
It is indeed fortunate that they reveal to us that the world was created with everything in it.. but again this is the distinction between the religion of Israel in the scientific theories. Therefore, to begin with, the basis of thinking is different. And one of the foundations of our faith is that Moshe is true and his teachings are true. This foundation stands against every hypothesis (theory) of this or that scientist that contradicts what is written in the Torah. But this does not mean not to do scientific experiments and study the laws of nature and the like. For everything that God created for His glory He created
Father, why does this have no meaning? This is what we believe and science cannot contradict it.
Those who say that there is a contradiction between science and the Torah - usually, they are wrong either in their understanding of the science or in their understanding of the Torah. It's OK. It is allowed to make mistakes...
Parashat Berishit is a parashah about which it is explicitly said and decided in Halacha and appears in the Rambam's writings, that it is a "secret", that is, a very great simplification of a very deep subject. To tell the truth, there is a rather interesting parallel between Parashat Creation and the Big Bang. The fact that everything begins with the appearance of light , and it is not an ordinary light - it is a light that after that disappears to him and will be revealed only for the future to come (Rashi. It is indeed discovered today), the fact that first of all a climate that allows for a state of accumulation begins to form liquid of water, then life begins first from the sea, etc.
But the story does not come to tell things as they are, it does not deal with details, but comes to convey some kind of message.
The general message is that the world was created slowly, patiently, calmly. And that God invested in us, for us. And there are other messages.
Sometimes the understanding of evolution is wrong. That evolution came to put us in the same line as the monkey, to say that we are essentially animals, that selfishness is what advanced humanity, and we are all selfish. Therefore it is against the message of the religion.
But no - evolution proves that in the end moral behavior causes better results. Altruism won. And wins to this day. It's actually a moral statement. Therefore, this does not contradict the saying that "he who loves justice will find a life of blessing and peace".
What are we saying altogether?
Something that can be considered! That there is an infinite power responsible for this great creation of the universe. By the way, we are part of that infinite power. An important part of the universe. And we are like him - turning the world out of chaos into something built for perfection: slowly, patiently, and calmly. And do it for other people.
Why all the suffering and all the evil? So that we build the good in ourselves. May the world start from scratch - and reach perfection. A perfection so great - that it will be worth the suffering we went through along the way. to compensate him. May you be comforted. And anyone who has contributed in his life to the advancement of the world - we will resurrect him with our own hands, when the technology will be in our hands, so that he can enjoy the fruits of his labor.
This is the vision of the prophets.
And from my personal experience I think it is true: because I have seen in my life how moral behavior, somehow, goes better with life for me: starting with the feeling, and ending with many things that worked out almost surprisingly. So apparently, the world is planned! Without it contradicting evolution, and randomness.
But I definitely understand - someone whose life experience makes him feel the complete opposite.
So it has no meaning
My father, it is true that you can say that too. So what?
Raphael, according to this logic it can be said that the world was created five minutes ago with all our memories. It has no limit.
For example, according to the big bang, the distance of the stars and galaxies from each other is supposed to be slowing down, but lately with the latest discoveries, it is discovered that actually the distance of the stars and galaxies from each other is accelerating, so the previous theory needs to be changed based on the data. It turns out that the theories are not scientific truth. and they are limited according to the amount of data available to the scientists. And the wonder is that they stick to the theories as absolute truth.
to the opponent
In science there are two ways, one is experimental science built on experiments and established facts. And there is theoretical science. Evolution and the Big Bang both belong to the theoretical realm. And in this area there are inconsistencies.. I would appreciate it if you carefully read what I wrote before and see that there is no contradiction
Out of the box,
Aren't you contradicting yourself a bit? A moment ago you said that "according to the Torah the world was created only 5775 years ago and no more", something that science as we know completely contradicts, so why do you claim that science does not contradict the Torah?
Here you yourself brought a clear contradiction between science and Torah.
Out of the box
Of course you are right. But the world was created old. So for example the first person. He was created as a 20-year-old man. If you brought a doctor or a scientist to examine him and say how old he is then he would bring you scientific evidence that he was born 20 years ago and developed from a baby to a man. From this you will learn about everything.
To Raphael Shalom. The theory of the creation of the universe billions of years ago, etc., contradicts the Torah because according to the Halacha we count the time of the creation of the world by writing bills and the like. And the determination of time is significant to the point of disqualifying the bill. And since the Torah is true Torah, therefore the date is also accurate. Therefore, according to the Torah, the world was created only 5775 years ago and no more.
Correction - if it does not contradict the Torah.
"Science does not contradict the Torah"
Outside the box, if this is indeed the case, then how do you explain that the majority of religious people, including those who write here, insist that the theory of evolution is not true? If it doesn't contradict science, then what are they clamoring for?
Thank you for the support. and my father I also agree with you.. Indeed there are sciences that do not contradict the Torah of Israel. And there are sciences that stand in contradiction. The great wonder is that some of those belong to the theoretical field. Built on real probability. subject to further intellectual reasoning and theory. Even the big bang and the creation of the universe is anchored in several scientific theories. But there are no contradictions in experimental data. Therefore, one of them is mathematics... To begin with, the Torah starts from a fundamentally different point of view than science. And it is the existence of a creator without limit and purpose. Above all intellectual achievement of a creature between philosophical achievement and achievement in scientific research. That's why in this field there is no comparison..Religion is built on religious foundations above reason. As the Rambam brings.. and faith is not measured by scientific tools. Therefore, to begin with, the given state of science and faith do not follow the same path. Therefore, it also does not belong that there should be any line of incompatibility between them. And most of these arguments are idle arguments. Science does not contradict the Torah. Apart from that, in many matters the Torah is based on science. One example of saying that desecrating Shabbat is a very serious matter in the Torah of Israel. And with all of this, the rabbi will cancel his opinion on the doctor and she will be the one to determine whether to desecrate the Sabbath or not. another example . Turning electricity off and on on Shabbat is based on a scientific determination of the characteristics of the flow of electric current in the electric circuit. And there are many examples.. and as I said the contradictions between science and writing in the Torah of Israel exist precisely in the theoretical field. After all, science also knows from its experience that new discoveries can cause a change in theories. Like for example the source of water on earth. There is a theory that says that the water ran out of the outer limits of the solar system. And only in recent years has it come up with new postcards.
Raphael,
So please explain to me why there is no contradiction because I don't remember hearing an explanation of the matter from you.
I remember that you and your friend keep insisting that evolution is not true.
Rival this topic has already been mined extensively on this site and many other places. There is no contradiction.
Raphael, you can reiterate, but the theory of evolution contradicts the words of Genesis.
WD on this site deal with it a lot. And this article is proof of that.
Yariv, you are the one who is wrong in that you think that religion and faith are one and the same thing. There are people and rabbis who see almost everything scientific as heresy, as you said.
Personally, as a person of faith, I am not in favor of any rabbi's approval of what to believe, but I think that both sides lose from this form of discussion.
For example, although the placebo effect is known to science and is known to be so powerful that it can destroy an entire study, if a doctor tells you to shut things up and imagine a white light that passes through your body and heals, you will say that he is a charlatan and go to war against him, even though it is no less healing sometimes or increases the effectiveness of medicines
Raphael
Most scientists don't bother with it at all.
WD is right - it all depends on the interpretation. There are scientists with an agenda that all they want is to show that there is a contradiction and of course their interpretation is the true one. Who really cares about science - not dealing with interpretations that fit his world view, but trying to discover the truth.
Rival, I repeat and emphasize - no field of scientific activity contradicts religion.
Raphael
This is true, but it very much depends on the type of interpretation given to religion. Equally in some interpretations it is absolutely not true.
To Kobe the first responder
You can equally ask why history and literature are taught. Not everything that doesn't help make money is unnecessary. Judaism is a heritage of your people and every nation learns about its heritage. These lessons enrich the Hebrew language (Hebrew from different periods) and mainly teach a different way of thinking that develops new parts of your brain. Studies of different forms of importance (scientific, mathematical, literary, religious...) contribute a lot to the student, especially when he will encounter new things and will need mental flexibility. Today, children are not able to open any chapter in your book and understand what is written in it. It's sad regardless of whether there is a God
Raphael, you are wrong and misleading, almost all fields of science contradict religion:
The theory of evolution, geology, astronomy... there is not even one scientific field that aligns with religion and the Torah.
Father, no field of scientific pursuit contradicts religion.
Did you notice the description of this person's educational background? Do you think religious education is difficult?
I'm sure you won't bring articles about the benefits of religious people (it's easier to be assertive)
Better coping with grief and faster return to function
Effect of prayer on healing (you can say until tomorrow that it's a placebo and you may be right, but it doesn't matter that it helps healing even for people who don't believe, science doesn't know how to explain this, nor the placebo effect, maybe one day they'll be able to explain it. Until then, if you're sick It will really help you to pray :-)
Out of the box
Is that what you wanted to be called?
Yaakov Hild was born in Soviet Monkatesh, the eldest of four brothers, during a time that was not easy from a Jewish point of view. There was no Jewish school in the town even though there were about 1956 Jewish families there and the last synagogue was closed in XNUMX. There was nothing to speak of learning Torah and most of the Jews were engaged in manual labor. Fortunately for him, his father was a rooted Jew and served as one of the leaders of the local community and therefore, Jacob received most of his Torah education at home.
"On Saturdays" he says, "we had to come up with excuses why not to come to school and on Yom Kippur we would "get sick" regularly", he notes with a smile.
Already from a young age, Jacob excelled in his studies, especially in mathematics and physics, and even won first place in several national competitions. When everyone in the class tried to solve exercises appropriate to their level, he was already several levels above. "On the way to the synagogue" he recounts that time, "it was forbidden to talk about Torah so we talked about mathematics."
After high school, he continued to study mathematics at the University of Moscow, which was then considered one of the best institutions in the world. "It was a miracle that I was accepted at all," he says, "the academy during Stalin's time was closed to Jews, but only the mathematics department was open to admit Jews... about a third of the department were Jews, but it was forbidden to have social contact with them. I would travel every day by train to a Jewish family in Moscow in order to To put on a tefillin and put a little kosher food in, that's why I did most of my studies on the road with summaries from a friend."
All this did not prevent Yaakov Friedman from completing his first and second degree with honors. Along the way, he also managed to serve as an officer in the Red Army on the reserve reserve standard as a programmer of anti-aircraft missiles. There were many Jews there, most of whom knew nothing about their Judaism."
He started getting to know Chabad, the Hasidism to which he belongs, even then. "The Chabad followers were the only ones who still kept the embers of Judaism there," says Professor Friedman.
A significant turning point in his life happened in 1971. Due to American pressure, the gates of Russia were opened and it was possible for some Jews to emigrate from it. "For me and my family the address was clear - the Land of Israel!" He helped his parents rebuild the family in Rishon Lezion and turned to sacred studies at the Kfar Chabad yeshiva, where he found a path he loved in the service of God. Many gaps thanks to a smart and dedicated membership and high self-motivation.
Under the guidance of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, he began studying for a doctorate in mathematics at Tel Aviv University and at the same time began teaching mathematics. In the Yom Kippur War, he was recruited into the artillery after a shortened apprenticeship, after nine months he returned to work on his doctorate in pure mathematics. "It turned out to me that there was another doctoral student working on a similar topic and he even progressed one step further. Later we connected with each other and I proved to him that the solution he arrived at was wrong so we started working on the topic together. After that another problem was presented to us by the doctoral supervisors. A problem that became clear to us later which was defined as intractable. Week after week we decomposed the problem, the idea was to develop new methods for calculation, in fact, a new mathematical language that could be used to describe it Each phenomenon in physical terms, and this by describing subsystems in a systematic way. Finally, we presented the results at a conference at the Hebrew University, where the main activity was concentrated in mathematics in Israel. I then received an offer to teach at the University of California, since the professor who declared that the problem was intractable was from there and they wanted me to advance this topic with them."
At first Jacob did not understand why the Lubavitcher Rebbe encouraged him to stay at the academy, but later he received an explanation from Prof. Barnover (of Ben Gurion University), who also received a similar answer when he asked the Rebbe. The Rebbe justified this for two reasons:
One, not to make the time spent in academic studies unnecessary.
And the second, when the Messiah comes, everyone will want to know the name and there needs to be scientists who can explain in a scientific and understandable way to the Gentiles the unity of creation and the hand of God in our world.
There is no doubt that Prof. Friedman was committed to this not easy task, which also led him, among other things, to focus today on physics, a field in which he is considered an authoritative expert, even though he did not study it formally.
Prof. Friedman currently teaches mathematics and physics at the School of Technology, and even managed to be rector for one term, which he did not like too much due to the many administrative aspects. Prof. Friedman currently serves as the head of the research authority at the Higher School of Technology in Jerusalem. And in addition, he also teaches Hasidic classes, and is also a full-time father...
"I prefer to focus on discovering the Creator and not on fighting disbelief in Him." Professor Friedman says, and adds: "Several months ago I received an email from a secular man who lives in North Tel Aviv who was a participant in the fight against Chabad in the neighborhood. He met my son-in-law who told him that if he had questions about Torah and science he could contact me because I work in physics . We met over a cup of tea and I explained to him that everything is not exactly as he thinks, the next day I learned that he, who was one of the leaders of the struggle, did not sign the petition against Chabad, so I must have done something about it..."
There are religious scientists in all fields who simply do not think that science can contradict religion at all (including archaeologists who have the biggest problem when the findings contradict the Tanach) but this "research" claims to damage the so-called scientific thinking of those who have a religious education to the point that they no longer distinguish between imagination and reality
Did someone say there are no religious scientists?
There are occupations that do not contradict religion, mathematics is certainly one of them.
We have a Nobel Prize winner who grew up in a religious education
continued to be religious
But nothing will interfere with the prejudices of people like Avi Blizovsky
Every little inaccuracy bothers you but you completely ignore the flaws in the research you brought because it fits your worldview
"Outside the box" brought up an interesting point and immediately everyone attacked it. I personally don't think there is any effect, certainly not after the age of six. What I know is that throughout history a lot of religious scientists or who only received a religious education made a huge contribution to science, among them Newton Galileo (Einstein was also not an atheist as is commonly thought, he said he believed in God in the style of Spinoza's writings)
Everyone can believe what they want, the problem starts when they think that everyone should believe like them. It is true that it is very common among religious people but also among atheists
Say, "outside the box", do you have it the most liar?
This is a rather unknown mathematician. I don't know him personally, so I can't vouch for his qualities, but there are a few things that stand out: his only affiliation is the Heart Institute in Jerusalem, which is an institute for combining technological studies with Jewish studies. Not one of the most respected or respected academic institutions. He published 50 publications in 40 years. A very small amount. I picked a few at random and checked how many citations they had: they all had between 2 and 4, where of course that includes self-citations (you write a follow-up to an article you wrote last year, and cite yourself). Maybe in the coming days I'll look a bit at his articles, because some of them are in similar fields to mine (in recent years he writes mainly about relationships).
All in all, this is a fairly unknown mathematician, who teaches at an unknown institution (which does not deal with mathematics or physics at all, but an institution for Jewish studies and "technology studies", such as engineering), who in recent years has begun to write several articles on physics. But because he is also ultra-Orthodox, then you allow yourself to lie and make him the next Einstein minimum multiplied by 10, in order to show all these atheists that ultra-Orthodox society is not stuck in the 16th century.
Nissim, please explain
Avi . You can Google Torah and Mathematics - Professor Friedman's story... and about the relationship between imagination and reality. I am not entering into an argument. Because no benefit came out of it. But many things that exist today only three decades ago were considered science fiction. For example, who will read today the stories of Isaac Asimov with all his greatness in science fiction literature. He will see how limited his technological vision was.. An
Out of the box
Your response contradicts itself…..
Outside the box, blurring the difference between reality and imagination is not thinking outside the box, it is simply a lie. And lying will not help these students do anything important in their adulthood. As for Friedman: A. I've never heard his name. I don't know what kind of new physics this is about, and in general the Nobel scientific committees never leak the identity of the future prize recipients or those who were considered and did not finally receive.
Sorry for my ignorance. After all, we are talking about children. And all in all, the conclusion can be that the religious children's imagination is more abstract. and less fixed. Perhaps they are actually more suitable to be the scientists of the future. Because the great scientists who changed the map of the world of science were precisely those who thought outside the fixed box. And activated their sense of imagination. It is possible that these children at a young age have their sense of imagination developed from children who are not religious. And when they grow up they are the ones who will change the scientific map in the world. Those who are determined with limited imagination at a very young age. already closed in their thinking pattern
Which is really funny. It is that this week there is a scientist named Jacob Friedman. The candidate to win the Nobel Prize. in the new physics. I would be very happy if on this site they gather courage and see its full picture.
Avichai
It has nothing to do with Judaism or Christianity. In total, there must have been about 4 more children from religious education who did not answer correctly
What is certain is that no one can claim a difference in children who are two years older
or two years younger (almost all children at the age of 4 will not answer correctly)
BSD
Every religion is different.
They dealt with the religions that are there more. Not in Judaism (if anything, it's null in the XNUMXs, obviously).
A lot of great scientists were educated and many were also believers
Many studies have actually found the benefits of faith
I have been reading the site for a long time and every time there is something related to religion, scientific thinking is replaced by emotions
The reactions are shocking
When atheism becomes a religion, it is no longer superior in anything
Surely the first thing to be destroyed is scientific thinking
There are many believing/religious scientists who separate faith from research. Some atheists apparently fail to do this
This is one of the non-serious studies I have read (65 subjects without details of the size of the difference) It is quite clear that the researcher is influenced by previous opinions
my father
1. So what? Is that why she doesn't exist in reality?
2. Compressing the earth to a singular point is not in the domain of quantum theory.
3. Science proves again and again that many things we once thought were imaginations happen by invention.
my father
1 so what?
2 Compressing the earth to a size that passes through the hole of a needle is not quantum theory
3 Science proves to us again and again that what we thought was imaginary happens all the time
In religious people who have undergone religious brainwashing from a young age, the rational part of the brain is simply knocked out, it stops functioning.
Unfortunately, I have seen this among many believers.
Raphael, quantum theory does not hold in the macro world.
I hope they checked religious schools of all religions in the US...
And I wish they would continue with this kind of research.
In my opinion, they will find that the feelings of the majority of the religious/believers are also fundamentally flawed. Bury empathy and conscience.
Most religious and religious people are very, very irrational. But not only their logic is flawed, but mostly their emotions. Their natural empathy and natural conscience are buried deep in the ground.
And those whose emotions and logic are not damaged, are the ones who simply choose to ignore all the religious parts that in their eyes represent extreme backwardness and horrific evil. This ability to ignore is also something wonderful that I learned from religiosity.
If children who have not had a dangerous exposure to religion were asked if it is possible to pass through two openings at the same time or if it is possible to pass the entire earth through the eye of a needle, what would their answer be?
It was more serious to say what the percentage difference was
It is not clear whether this is a difference of 3% or 40%
Besides, this kind of research is very sensitive to being misled by the researcher's opinions
I'm not sure how representative a study of 66 children is of anything.
http://www.facebook.com/StopChildBibleAbuse
I had a 4 in my Tanach and Tashba classes, to this day I don't understand why the children are forced to learn this rubbish.
And they are being tested for graduation.