This month's conversation:
Argument for the Sake of Heaven
How do we participate in constructive argumentation?
Download PDFA More Perfect Argument
Last January, President Barack Obama ended his final State of the Union address with an impassioned plea for civility. “The future we want… will only happen if we work together,” he said. And yet, mindful of our complex democracy and demography, he stressed that “a better politics doesn’t mean we have to agree on everything.”
Read MoreWhen Arguing, Remember the 49 vs. 49
As I hid quietly behind a few rows of students in my first Talmud class at Yeshivat Har-Etzion in 1993, our rabbi asked: “Who do you think is right, Abayeh or Rava?” Intimidated as any class of 18-year-olds would be, no one answered. He slammed his fist on the table and asked again in a louder voice. Still, no one answered. “You are all spineless chickens!” Then, he instructed us to argue back and forth until we could prove how both rabbis — though holding contradictory opinions — were right. I recall literally pulling a muscle in my brain as I attempted to comprehend contradictory truth and experience –– what I was to learn was the 49 vs. 49.
Read MoreListening for the Sake of Heaven, Post-Election
In the immediate aftermath of the election, we witnessed a tug-of-war around empathy among Jewish and general commentators in blue America. Many expressed bewilderment and shock: “How could we have not known half our country?” “What blinders have we worn?” “What failure of empathy — basic miscomprehension — brought us here?”
Read MoreSafety First? Trigger Warnings and Constructive Dialogue
Are trigger warnings helpful? Trigger warnings prevent those of us who are victims of trauma from being subjected to an associative emotional pain. Trigger warnings are not meant to be an excuse to disengage, but rather an opportunity for self-care. As I work with students, I have been debating when, how, and why to use trigger warnings — wanting to stay current with students and the changing environment on many campuses.
Read MoreNiSh’ma: Machlochet l’Shem Shamayim
On this page, we offer three takes on the talmudic verse exploring what constitutes a constructive argument. Our commentators, David Bilchitz, Rabbi Amitai Adler, and Rabbi Andrea London, consider the nature of how we disagree while remaining in community with one another.
Read MoreConsider and Converse: Constructive Argumentation
Sh’ma Now curates conversations on a single theme rooted in Jewish tradition and the contemporary moment. At the heart of this issue of Sh’ma Now is the theme of Machlochet L’Shem Shamayim:Argument for the Sake of Heaven. The perspectives shared in these pages are meant to be expansive — to inspire reflections on Judaism and possibility in ways you may not have considered before. They aim to hold discord. We hope that the richness and diversity of these essays will show you new perspectives that are personally meaningful and edifying.
Read More