[HANASHIR:1766] Re: political correct lyrics

[Judy Git <hillel...>]

To Leigh,

Thank you.  :o)

To Rich,

Regarding your issue of Epistemology - you've come to the right place here, as I
was a Philosophy major before I went into teaching.  When we take this belief 
that
we can't be said to "know" anything for sure to its extreme, we end up with
Sollipsism.  As a student, I went on that journey and didn't like the last stop
one little bit.  So, just for clarity, let me define what I meant by "know" in
this context.  I meant that Judaism does not hold that G-d is a human being or
built like a human being, but that references to the "arm" of G-d, etc. are
metaphorical.  Would anyone disagree with that?  Since we are discussing Jewish
liturgy and Jewish attitudes, I take these things as a given.  Besides, it does
seem very childish to me to visualize G-d as some kindly old giant sitting
somewhere on a cumulus nimbus cloud.

As for my putting down people who want to create politically correct lyrics, if
that's how I came across, I apologize.  I had not intended to put PEOPLE down,
merely to voice my opinion that the PRACTICE seems a bit silly to me - AND
unnecessary, even counterproductive.  I try to stay away from ad hominum
argumentation.

Judy

Rglauber (at) aol(dot)com wrote:

> In a message dated 98-11-13 11:30:39 EST, Judy writes...
>
> <<  I assume that once a kid graduates from pre-school he/she is wise enough
> to understand that when we say that we were created in the image of
>  G-d, this does NOT mean that G-d LOOKS like a human being.  When discussing
> this with students, I point out that holding this kind of pre-school
> understanding of
>  G-d leads us to ridiculous questions such as "What color eyes does G-d have?"
> It
>  ALSO leads us to fixate on G-d's gender.  We KNOW that G-d is all inclusive
> and not restricted to any one gender.  Do we really have to go into
> contortions by changing the language or our prayers to do this?? >>
>
> Judy, you've expressed yourself quite clearly on the topic, but I have a few
> problems with some of your points.  When you say "we KNOW that G-d is......"
> How do we know that?  The whole concept of G-d is so complex and so open to
> various interpretations, that it seems somewhat presumptuous to simply state
> that we KNOW it to be a certain way.  The whole field of epistemology concerns
> itself with the nature of how we "know" things, and to just say that we know
> it, doesn't really do it for me.  Granted, this isn't a philosophy listserv,
> but I just wanted to point out a question that I had with your analysis.
>
> Secondly, and somewhat more troubling...when you concluded by saying...
>
>  We ought to be intelligent enough and mature enough not to
> need to reassure ourselves by worrying about politically correct language.  We
> KNOW G-d is no more male than female in the same way that we KNOW He doesn't
> have blue eyes or brown eyes. ..
>
> You are providing a perfect example of what Joel was describing in his message
> of several days ago.  Namely to put down those who would earnestly seek to
> question the way language affects understanding.  What you are saying is that
> those "politically correct" people either lack intelligence or maturity or
> else they wouldn't be making these arguments
>
> I feel that both points of view have equal validity, and are deserving of
> equal respect.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Rich Glauber