Saturday, 13 December 2014

Kuzari Principle is False – Admits Its Main Proponent

The alleged “Kuzari Principle” has been used by rabbi D. Gottlieb, , as “proof” of not only the Torah, but of Orthodox Rabbinic Judaism. Indeed, he has been using this argument in bringing  Jews to join Orthodoxy. However, when it appeared in written form, in a book he published called “Living up to the Truth”, it began to receive attention and scrutiny from academics and intellectuals who were more capable of demolishing Gottlieb's claims than were his more usual 18 year old victims.

One such critique came from a Mr Ephraim Rubin. Rubin's critique was so devastating, that Gottlieb was forced to admit that the entire Kuzari principle he was espousing for 20 years prior, is false!

Once again, I would like to express my appreciation to Ephraim Rubin for the care and effort he took to write this review. My only regret is that he did not spend more time on the Kuzari Principle. In fact, as it is formulated in the text he reviewed, it is false. A professor of classics pointed this out to me, and the necessary changes have been made in the new version.”

He magically claims that his new version is now somehow “correct”.

But let us just analyze what this startling admission really implies and demonstrates.
Firstly, it shows that what he has himself been saying for the majority of his orthodox rabbinic career is entirely false. This is not just a minor error, but the basis for his claims to Orthodoxy have been demolished.

Next, it reveals the psychological state of the fundamentalist and fanatic religious believer. A man can claim to have the truth, and convince many others that he has the truth, as long as he shows the facade of confidence in his own claims – no matter how false and egregious they may be. The argument for Orthodox Judaism is a prime example. But many other false beliefs can be disseminated in this way.

Third, it is not only the Ultra-Orthodox who grasp onto fallacies such as the Kuzari argument, but also modern, rational thinkers such as R' Moshe ben Chaim. Some people even claim that their entire religious beliefs rest on this [false] principle.

Fourth, we can derive another conclusion from this. If it takes someone 20 years to admit what he was teaching was wrong, how can anything else they teach be reliable? What if the proprietor of the Kuzari fallacy knew all along he was deceiving his audience (which is more than likely). The reason this came to light was that he was caught out by intellectuals in the public domain, including one of his own colleagues.

Fifth, Gottlieb then claims that he has made corrections to his formulation of the principle. But this has already been rebutted by the late Professor Mark Perakh.


Finally, the false nature of the Kuzari argument is so detrimental, that it in fact also “proves” other falsehoods, such as the Koran and Islam. Gottlieb writes:

A false story of a national revelation that creates a national religion will not be believed. Suppose a nation believes that its ancestors experienced a national revelation. Since such a story cannot be invented we have good reason to accept the story as true. For, if it were not true, it would not be believed!



Now there are many miracles that the Islamic Ummah – nation – claim to have occurred. Here are a list of them: http://www.discoveringislam.org/mohammad_miracles.htm

Since, according to Gottlieb, “if it were not true, it would not be believed!”
So the miracles of Muhammed (and his Koran) must therefore be true!
Thus Gottlieb has also proven Islam to be true!

In conclusion, when someone claims to hold the truth, one should avoid him, especially when he is caught in a lie.



No comments:

Post a Comment