How long would you last in yeshiva?
toichen
posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
arguing the meaning of texts. During those 10 hours he will be
frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an argument is
conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not reflect on
him personally. A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
By way of comparison I note that on this forum the majority of
criticisms be they criticisms of ideas or movements, are taken out of
context and brought down to the personal level.
Judging by what occurs here,if a yeshiva serves no other purpose other
than teaching a young man how to keep an argument focused and to the
point, I would believe that that accomplishment justifies the
yeshiva's existence.
toichen
Binyamin Dissen
:>I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
:>posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
:>The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
:>arguing the meaning of texts. During those 10 hours he will be
:>frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
:>premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
:>The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an argument is
:>conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not reflect on
:>him personally. A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
:>quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
:>By way of comparison I note that on this forum the majority of
:>criticisms be they criticisms of ideas or movements, are taken out of
:>context and brought down to the personal level.
Perhaps that explains the defensiveness of the R/C.
Most of the O have gone to Yeshiva and know how to discuss concepts.
Something to think about.
[ snipped ]
--
Binyamin Dissen <bdi...@netvision.net.il>
Binyamin Dissen <bdi...@dissensoftware.com>
http://www.dissensoftware.com
Eliyahu
"Binyamin Dissen" <post...@dissensoftware.com> wrote in message
news:caktjt4bcvj2r554s...@4ax.com...
> On 1 Jul 2001 02:59:43 GMT toi...@my-deja.com (toichen) wrote:
>
> :>I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
> :>posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
> :>The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
> :>arguing the meaning of texts. During those 10 hours he will be
> :>frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
> :>premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
> :>The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an argument is
> :>conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not reflect on
> :>him personally. A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
> :>quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
>
> :>By way of comparison I note that on this forum the majority of
> :>criticisms be they criticisms of ideas or movements, are taken out of
> :>context and brought down to the personal level.
>
> Perhaps that explains the defensiveness of the R/C.
>
> Most of the O have gone to Yeshiva and know how to discuss concepts.
>
some posters (O included) fail to differentiate between attacking an idea
and attacking the person holding the idea. It's easy to slide from "your
idea is foolish" (or incorrect) to "you are a fool", and to insult the
person rather than show why his opinion is incorrect or to refute it.
Unfortunately, turning a reasoned argument into a personal attack usually
has the side-effect of making the target dig his heels in and shut out any
possibility of change. For example, if I show you why a program you're
writing is likely to crash, we would end up discussing the problem and how
to correct it. OTOH, if I tell you you're incompetent for writing it that
way, your probably response will be to defend yourself, and the problem with
the program will be pushed to the side. This is what frequently happens in
Usenet -- we confuse the idea and the person holding the idea, forgetting
that they are not the same thing.
--
Eliyahu Rooff
www.geocities.com/Area51/Underworld/8096/HomePage.htm
RSG Rollcall http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/rooffe.htm
Adelle Stavis
"toichen" <toi...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:dd1c0ee8.01063...@posting.google.com...
> I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
> posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
> The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
> arguing the meaning of texts. During those 10 hours he will be
> frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
> premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
> The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an argument is
> conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not reflect on
> him personally. A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
> quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
> By way of comparison I note that on this forum the majority of
> criticisms be they criticisms of ideas or movements, are taken out of
> context and brought down to the personal level.
> than teaching a young man how to keep an argument focused and to the
> point, I would believe that that accomplishment justifies the
> yeshiva's existence.
> toichen
That's pre-supposing we would want to.
It's also oblivious to the fact that those of us who went to law school (and
there are many of us here) went through the same experience in college and
law school (and for some of us, Yeshiva day school and/ or High school).
It's also dismissive of those who are otherwise logically inclined, and have
in fact argued on the facts and context, and not from simply the emotional.
Adelle
Dan Kimmel
>
> :>I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
> :>posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
> :>The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
> :>arguing the meaning of texts. During those 10 hours he will be
> :>frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
> :>premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
> :>The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an argument is
> :>conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not reflect on
> :>him personally. A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
> :>quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
>
> :>By way of comparison I note that on this forum the majority of
> :>criticisms be they criticisms of ideas or movements, are taken out of
> :>context and brought down to the personal level.
>
> Perhaps that explains the defensiveness of the R/C.
>
> Most of the O have gone to Yeshiva and know how to discuss concepts.
>
> Something to think about.
But then what would explain the defensiveness of so many of the O Jews
posting here? Were they bad students?
Indeed, something to think about.
Yitzchak Moran
>
> I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
> posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
> The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
> arguing the meaning of texts. During those 10 hours he will be
> frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
> premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
> The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an argument is
> conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not reflect on
> him personally. A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
> quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
When I was young? Probably not very well. Now? Probably just fine.
On the flip side, how would a yeshiva student do while getting a computer
science degree, where one is expected to do 4 or so hours of lectures,
additional hours of sectional studies, about 5-10 additional hours of
individual study of theory, and (easily) 40 hours of hands on programming,
circuit design, or other practical application per week for several years?
From the time I was 14 until I was about, say, 23 or 24, I probably spent
between four and ten hours a day, every day, geeking out. I was doing
something I loved, and it absorbed me totally.
*Now* I study Torah and raise my family. That's where my interests are
at this time. The world needs yeshiva students, computer nerds, farmers,
janitors, eminent Torah scholars, UNIX wizards, and lots of other folks.
--
Yitzchak Moran | "...for what reason was the School of Hillel entitled
Professional Dad | to have the law determined according to their rulings?
from the Home Office | Because they were kindly and humble, and because they
dou...@earthlink.net | studied their own rulings and those of Shammai..."
Binyamin Dissen
:>toichen wrote:
:>> I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
:>> posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
:>> The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
:>> arguing the meaning of texts. During those 10 hours he will be
:>> frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
:>> premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
:>> The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an argument is
:>> conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not reflect on
:>> him personally. A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
:>> quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
:>
:>When I was young? Probably not very well. Now? Probably just fine.
:>On the flip side, how would a yeshiva student do while getting a computer
:>science degree, where one is expected to do 4 or so hours of lectures,
:>additional hours of sectional studies, about 5-10 additional hours of
:>individual study of theory, and (easily) 40 hours of hands on programming,
:>circuit design, or other practical application per week for several years?
Not at all difficult.
Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke.
I wondered why people had to cram or work that hard for a few course with a
mere five hours lecture each. No heavy preparation was required nor intensive
review.
Most Yeshiva guys I new had no problem handling an overload at college.
Henry Goodman
"Eliyahu" <lro...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tjujtlh...@corp.supernews.com...
It happens with programs as well. Many programmers do not like their code
being subject to detailed scrutiny by others. Regrettable
--
Henry Goodman
henry....@virgin.net
Yitzchak Moran
>
> Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke.
Um, could you perhaps rephrase this? Since "the load" varies from college
to college and major to major pretty significantly, and since there is
probably also some variance in "the load" at different Yeshivot, I don't
think making a blanket statement of that sort is really reasonable.
Jonathan J. Baker
>"toichen" <toi...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>> I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
Well, there are one or who I think *did* go to law school, but may not
be currently practicing, who *do* confuse idea and person.
--
Jonathan Baker | It's almost time ta muze
jjb...@panix.com | about the Destruction.
Web page <http://www.panix.com/~jjbaker>
Naomi Gayle Rivkis
And I would say that if a yeshiva spends a great deal of time
humiliating children -- and high schoolers, who are certainly of
yeshiva age, are still children, as has been pointed out to me loudly
by several people who don't like it that I would allow them to go into
the military on their own decision at 17 -- just to teach him to stay
focused, there is no justification for its existence, as I have seen
the same goal accomplished successfully by far more progressive
schools which use hands-on teaching techniques which allow the
children to choose their projects, then hold them responsible for
follow-through.
-Naomi
Joseph Hertzlinger
>I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
>posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
>The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
>arguing the meaning of texts. During those 10 hours he will be
>frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
>premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions
>etc. etc. The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an
>argument is conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not
>reflect on him personally. A bachur who takes arguments personally
>will very quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
Does that mean if someone disagrees with a revered sage or prophet in
Jewish tradition, that does not mean he is accusing said sage etc. of
being a liar and it is an invalid argument to accuse him of accusing
the sage of being a liar?
Dan Kimmel
news:9holbv$ki3$1...@panix6.panix.com...
And then there are those who launch personal attacks couched in terms of
attacking movements and then act all innocent when they are called on it.
Binyamin Dissen
:>Binyamin Dissen wrote:
:>> Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke.
:>Um, could you perhaps rephrase this? Since "the load" varies from college
:>to college and major to major pretty significantly, and since there is
:>probably also some variance in "the load" at different Yeshivot, I don't
:>think making a blanket statement of that sort is really reasonable.
For Yeshiva, I refer to Charedi black-hat type Yeshivas.
I did not have the money to go to big name colleges, so I don't have enough
personal data on that.
Your typical (post-high-school) Charedi Yeshiva load is several hours of
preparation for the lecture, the lecture (perhaps two hours) and a good six
hours of review. Plus several hours of other studies. DAILY. If you do not
properly prepare or review you will not be able to keep up. You get "vacation"
between Yom Kippur and Rosh Chodesh Cheshvan, Nissan and Av.
If one does not go to "high school" in a Charedi Yeshiva one will find it
difficult to be able to handle the load in the Yeshiva.
In your US typical Charedi Yeshiva your secular studies might be 3-1/2 hours a
day four days a week. Very limited homework. I do not know any Yeshiva guys
who had problems going to any secular college.
Even my brother A"H who went to law school and passed the NY bar on his first
try said that law school was not that difficult compared to Yeshiva.
Micha Berger
: :>> Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke.
...
: For Yeshiva, I refer to Charedi black-hat type Yeshivas.
Having attended a wide variety, from YU and hesder to Yeshivish to yiddish
speaking, I can tell you the load doesn't differ much.
The only real distinction in style or substance of the learning itself
is that in the more mod-O places, people more consistantly take notes.
-mi
Yitzchak Moran
>
> On 2 Jul 2001 00:12:16 GMT Yitzchak Moran <dou...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> :>Binyamin Dissen wrote:
>
> :>> Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke.
>
> :>Um, could you perhaps rephrase this? Since "the load" varies from college
> :>to college and major to major pretty significantly, and since there is
> :>probably also some variance in "the load" at different Yeshivot, I don't
> :>think making a blanket statement of that sort is really reasonable.
>
> For Yeshiva, I refer to Charedi black-hat type Yeshivas.
>
> I did not have the money to go to big name colleges, so I don't have enough
> personal data on that.
Okay, given that, don't you think it's unreasonable to refer to all
college course loads, at every college and in every major, as a "joke?"
(And thereby imply by extension that every degree anyone has ever
attained is a "joke?") I would never presume to refer to the level
of hard science instruction that folks receive at a black-hat Yeshiva
as a "joke," since I have no data on it.
> Your typical (post-high-school) Charedi Yeshiva load is several hours of
> preparation for the lecture, the lecture (perhaps two hours) and a good six
> hours of review. Plus several hours of other studies. DAILY. If you do not
> properly prepare or review you will not be able to keep up. You get "vacation"
> between Yom Kippur and Rosh Chodesh Cheshvan, Nissan and Av.
As a Freshman at the University of California (Santa Cruz), as an engineering
major, I took 15 units. This worked out to about 12 hours of lecture per week,
or about 2+ hours per day, in Chemistry, Physics, and Calculus. There was an
additional "section" (i.e., smaller discussion group) each week, about two
hours per class, or approx. another hour per day. In addition, prep work
was necessary (reading) *before* lectures, and homework was required *after*
each lecture (usually several hours per lecture). Each 5-unit course
session was only ten weeks long, usually with at least two mid-terms and
a final. Additionally, there were Physics and Chemistry labs, 3 hours
per week each, plus weekly lab write-ups that were graded.
On a ten week schedule, with major tests about every 3.5 weeks in three
different courses of study, plus homework and labs, if you fell behind at
all, you were in deep trouble. Plus, I was working 20 hours per week.
And this was Freshman year. Take it from me: it got more complex, not less.
Frankly, degree-of-difficulty wise, I don't see a whole lot of difference.
Can you see why I thought your calling this sort of thing a "joke" to be,
well, a bit unfair? The area of study is, obviously, completely different,
but "the load" is still pretty heavy in either case.
> If one does not go to "high school" in a Charedi Yeshiva one will find it
> difficult to be able to handle the load in the Yeshiva.
>
> In your US typical Charedi Yeshiva your secular studies might be 3-1/2 hours a
> day four days a week. Very limited homework. I do not know any Yeshiva guys
> who had problems going to any secular college.
How about BTs who went to Yeshiva after going to a tough "secular" University?
What's there take on the reverse situation?
> Even my brother A"H who went to law school and passed the NY bar on his first
> try said that law school was not that difficult compared to Yeshiva.
If law school was "not that different," then obviously law school, at least,
could not be described as "a joke." Will you concede that there are almost
certainly other "secular" degrees (e.g., medicine, engineering, etc.) that
could not be accurately described as "a joke?"
My point here, Binyamin, is that you made a blanket statement that many
could find, well, insulting. You note that you don't have complete data.
You also note that at least one secular course load (for law school) was
comparable. Don't you think you might want to reconsider your calling
the post-secondary education of a large percentage of Jews a "joke?"
med...@shore.net
> Binyamin Dissen wrote:
>>
>> Even my brother A"H who went to law school and passed the NY bar on his first
>> try said that law school was not that difficult compared to Yeshiva.
>
> If law school was "not that different," then obviously law school, at least,
> could not be described as "a joke." Will you concede that there are almost
> certainly other "secular" degrees (e.g., medicine, engineering, etc.) that
> could not be accurately described as "a joke?"
In your urgency to find fault with what Binyamin said, you read
"not that difficult" as "not that different" and proceeded from there.
> My point here, Binyamin, is that you made a blanket statement that many
> could find, well, insulting. You note that you don't have complete data.
> You also note that at least one secular course load (for law school) was
> comparable. Don't you think you might want to reconsider your calling
> the post-secondary education of a large percentage of Jews a "joke?"
He did not say "post-secondary education" of some Jews is a "joke". He
said that the workload, compared to a Yeshiva, is a "joke". I can
certainly believe it. I got my BS in Computer Science from UIUC - one
of the best schools in the country for the subject. I goofed off all
4 years, in addition to working full time. Granted, "goofing off" and
the work were mostly computer-related, but the workload for the courses
*was* a joke.
Jonathan J. Baker
>> Even my brother A"H who went to law school and passed the NY bar on his first
>> try said that law school was not that difficult compared to Yeshiva.
>If law school was "not that different," then obviously law school, at least,
>could not be described as "a joke." Will you concede that there are almost
>certainly other "secular" degrees (e.g., medicine, engineering, etc.) that
>could not be accurately described as "a joke?"
A friend who did both (after Princeton) said that law school was much
like yeshiva, only without the soul.
Yitzchak Moran
>
> Yitzchak Moran <dou...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > Binyamin Dissen wrote:
> >>
> >> Even my brother A"H who went to law school and passed the NY bar on his first
> >> try said that law school was not that difficult compared to Yeshiva.
> >
> > If law school was "not that different," then obviously law school, at least,
> > could not be described as "a joke." Will you concede that there are almost
> > certainly other "secular" degrees (e.g., medicine, engineering, etc.) that
> > could not be accurately described as "a joke?"
>
> In your urgency to find fault with what Binyamin said, you read
> "not that difficult" as "not that different" and proceeded from there.
Um, no. Binyamin said, "Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in
college is a joke." That's the point from which I proceeded. And I
have no urgency to find fault with anyone. The generally low volume
of my posts should show that, as well as my general reluctance to
point fingers.
> > My point here, Binyamin, is that you made a blanket statement that many
> > could find, well, insulting. You note that you don't have complete data.
> > You also note that at least one secular course load (for law school) was
> > comparable. Don't you think you might want to reconsider your calling
> > the post-secondary education of a large percentage of Jews a "joke?"
>
> He did not say "post-secondary education" of some Jews is a "joke". He
> said that the workload, compared to a Yeshiva, is a "joke".
Again, he said, "Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college
is a joke." "College" is post-secondary, at least as I familiar with
educational terms. My understanding is that, in the U.S., K-8 is "primary"
school, and 9-12 is "secondary" school. Binyamin said "college." Most
people generally don't descriminate between graduate and under-graduate
studies when referring to "college," although often people mean only
undergraduate studies as college. Binyamin didn't specify, so I used
the more inclusive term ("post-secondary"), although I am perfectly
open to having the term more closely defined.
Since a large percentage of Jews are college educated *without* being
Yeshiva educated, by stating that "compared with the load in a Yeshiva
the load in college is a joke," I felt, very strongly, that Binyamin
was making a blanket statement that could easily be construed as an
insult by a large number of people (myself included).
> I can
> certainly believe it. I got my BS in Computer Science from UIUC - one
> of the best schools in the country for the subject. I goofed off all
> 4 years, in addition to working full time. Granted, "goofing off" and
> the work were mostly computer-related, but the workload for the courses
> *was* a joke.
And that wasn't the case for me. I believe that it's reasonable to assume
that it wasn't the case for a significant number of people. Don't you?
Binyamin Dissen
:>Binyamin Dissen wrote:
:>> On 2 Jul 2001 00:12:16 GMT Yitzchak Moran <dou...@earthlink.net> wrote:
:>> :>Binyamin Dissen wrote:
:>> :>> Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke.
:>> :>Um, could you perhaps rephrase this? Since "the load" varies from college
:>> :>to college and major to major pretty significantly, and since there is
:>> :>probably also some variance in "the load" at different Yeshivot, I don't
:>> :>think making a blanket statement of that sort is really reasonable.
:>> For Yeshiva, I refer to Charedi black-hat type Yeshivas.
:>> I did not have the money to go to big name colleges, so I don't have enough
:>> personal data on that.
:>Okay, given that, don't you think it's unreasonable to refer to all
:>college course loads, at every college and in every major, as a "joke?"
I gave my experience.
:>(And thereby imply by extension that every degree anyone has ever
:>attained is a "joke?")
I fail to see the connection. I gave a comparison, not an absolute statement.
:> I would never presume to refer to the level
:>of hard science instruction that folks receive at a black-hat Yeshiva
:>as a "joke," since I have no data on it.
Do not see the connection.
:>> Your typical (post-high-school) Charedi Yeshiva load is several hours of
:>> preparation for the lecture, the lecture (perhaps two hours) and a good six
:>> hours of review. Plus several hours of other studies. DAILY. If you do not
:>> properly prepare or review you will not be able to keep up. You get "vacation"
:>> between Yom Kippur and Rosh Chodesh Cheshvan, Nissan and Av.
:>As a Freshman at the University of California (Santa Cruz), as an engineering
:>major, I took 15 units. This worked out to about 12 hours of lecture per week,
:>or about 2+ hours per day, in Chemistry, Physics, and Calculus.
When I took hard science course, I, in general, really didn't need to go to
the lectures. The books covered almost all of the material. I didn't have to
look for the Rishonim and Achronim.
:> There was an
:>additional "section" (i.e., smaller discussion group) each week, about two
:>hours per class, or approx. another hour per day.
What for?
:> In addition, prep work
:>was necessary (reading) *before* lectures, and homework was required *after*
:>each lecture (usually several hours per lecture).
Again, what for?
:> Each 5-unit course
:>session was only ten weeks long, usually with at least two mid-terms and
:>a final. Additionally, there were Physics and Chemistry labs, 3 hours
:>per week each, plus weekly lab write-ups that were graded.
I skipped the labs if I could. Attendance was required and there was not much
of a payoff in credit hours.
:>On a ten week schedule, with major tests about every 3.5 weeks in three
:>different courses of study, plus homework and labs, if you fell behind at
:>all, you were in deep trouble. Plus, I was working 20 hours per week.
20 hours of free time a week. Wow.
:>And this was Freshman year. Take it from me: it got more complex, not less.
I do not understand why you needed all this extra time.
One of the major benefits of a Yeshiva education is that you learn HOW TO
LEARN.
:>Frankly, degree-of-difficulty wise, I don't see a whole lot of difference.
I don't understand why you needed all the time.
What information was not available from the texts.
:>Can you see why I thought your calling this sort of thing a "joke" to be,
:>well, a bit unfair? The area of study is, obviously, completely different,
:>but "the load" is still pretty heavy in either case.
Do you have the Yeshiva frame of reference?
:>> If one does not go to "high school" in a Charedi Yeshiva one will find it
:>> difficult to be able to handle the load in the Yeshiva.
:>> In your US typical Charedi Yeshiva your secular studies might be 3-1/2 hours a
:>> day four days a week. Very limited homework. I do not know any Yeshiva guys
:>> who had problems going to any secular college.
:>How about BTs who went to Yeshiva after going to a tough "secular" University?
How many go right to a black hat Yeshiva? I doubt that any do.
They have to spend quite a bit of time to learn how to learn.
:>What's there take on the reverse situation?
It ain't easy.
:>> Even my brother A"H who went to law school and passed the NY bar on his first
:>> try said that law school was not that difficult compared to Yeshiva.
:>If law school was "not that different," then obviously law school, at least,
:>could not be described as "a joke." Will you concede that there are almost
:>certainly other "secular" degrees (e.g., medicine, engineering, etc.) that
:>could not be accurately described as "a joke?"
Mr. Medved has already addressed your misreading.
:>My point here, Binyamin, is that you made a blanket statement that many
:>could find, well, insulting. You note that you don't have complete data.
I don't know why it would be considered insulting.
:>You also note that at least one secular course load (for law school) was
:>comparable.
Didn't.
:> Don't you think you might want to reconsider your calling
:>the post-secondary education of a large percentage of Jews a "joke?"
I never made that statement. I made the statement that required study in
college is a joke compared to a Yeshiva. I did not make an absolute statement
about college courses.
I never said anything about a college education.
Abe Kohen
"Yitzchak Moran" <dou...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:9hqnga$4kl$1...@condor.nj.org...
> As a Freshman at the University of California (Santa Cruz), as an
engineering
> major, I took 15 units. This worked out to about 12 hours of lecture per
week,
> or about 2+ hours per day, in Chemistry, Physics, and Calculus. There was
an
> additional "section" (i.e., smaller discussion group) each week, about two
> hours per class, or approx. another hour per day. In addition, prep work
> was necessary (reading) *before* lectures, and homework was required
*after*
> each lecture (usually several hours per lecture). Each 5-unit course
> session was only ten weeks long, usually with at least two mid-terms and
> a final. Additionally, there were Physics and Chemistry labs, 3 hours
> per week each, plus weekly lab write-ups that were graded.
>
> On a ten week schedule, with major tests about every 3.5 weeks in three
> different courses of study, plus homework and labs, if you fell behind at
> all, you were in deep trouble. Plus, I was working 20 hours per week.
>
> And this was Freshman year. Take it from me: it got more complex, not
less.
>
I certainly do NOT want to, nor mean to offend you, but Santa Cruz is the
ultimate party school, with abundant natural beauty, mucho drinko, and
unless things have changed, NO GRADES. Well, the last part is just like
yeshiva.
But I hear it produces top notch programmers.
Abe
July 2, 2001 6:43 pm EDT
med...@shore.net
> med...@shore.net wrote:
>>
>> Yitzchak Moran <dou...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> > Binyamin Dissen wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Even my brother A"H who went to law school and passed the NY bar on his first
>> >> try said that law school was not that difficult compared to Yeshiva.
>> >
>> > If law school was "not that different," then obviously law school, at least,
>> > could not be described as "a joke." Will you concede that there are almost
>> > certainly other "secular" degrees (e.g., medicine, engineering, etc.) that
>> > could not be accurately described as "a joke?"
>>
>> In your urgency to find fault with what Binyamin said, you read
>> "not that difficult" as "not that different" and proceeded from there.
>
> Um, no. Binyamin said, "Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in
> college is a joke." That's the point from which I proceeded. And I
> have no urgency to find fault with anyone. The generally low volume
> of my posts should show that, as well as my general reluctance to
> point fingers.
Binyamin wrote "not that difficult". You responded as if he wrote
"not that different" - and you even put those words in quotes. Why
did you quote what Binyamin did not write?
>> He did not say "post-secondary education" of some Jews is a "joke". He
>> said that the workload, compared to a Yeshiva, is a "joke".
>
> Again, he said, "Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college
> is a joke." "College" is post-secondary, at least as I familiar with
> educational terms. My understanding is that, in the U.S., K-8 is "primary"
> school, and 9-12 is "secondary" school. Binyamin said "college." Most
> people generally don't descriminate between graduate and under-graduate
> studies when referring to "college," although often people mean only
> undergraduate studies as college. Binyamin didn't specify, so I used
> the more inclusive term ("post-secondary"), although I am perfectly
> open to having the term more closely defined.
1. "Post-secondary education of some Jews, compared to Yeshiva, is a joke"
That's what you claimed he wrote.
2. "The workload during some Jews' post-secondary education, compared to a
yeshiva, is a joke"
That's what Binyamin wrote.
You *really* think that the two statements are equivalent?
> Since a large percentage of Jews are college educated *without* being
> Yeshiva educated, by stating that "compared with the load in a Yeshiva
> the load in college is a joke," I felt, very strongly, that Binyamin
> was making a blanket statement that could easily be construed as an
> insult by a large number of people (myself included).
You don't see the difference between "the workload, compared to Yeshiva's,
is a joke" and "the education, compared to Yeshiva's, is a joke"?
>> I can
>> certainly believe it. I got my BS in Computer Science from UIUC - one
>> of the best schools in the country for the subject. I goofed off all
>> 4 years, in addition to working full time. Granted, "goofing off" and
>> the work were mostly computer-related, but the workload for the courses
>> *was* a joke.
>
> And that wasn't the case for me. I believe that it's reasonable to assume
> that it wasn't the case for a significant number of people. Don't you?
UIUC is one of the best schools in the subject in the country. The
workload was a joke for me. I *know* a Yeshiva workload would not
leave me any time for work or for goofing off, I knew some Yeshiva
students who hardly had time to breathe. They were at least as smart
as I was. You draw your own conclusions.
Menachem Mavet
> I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
> posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
> The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
> arguing the meaning of texts.
The average student in a secular academic field will spend 10 hours or
more in a day arguing over the meaning of texts and more, including
observations of the real world and results of experiments.
> During those 10 hours he will be
> frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
> premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
Ever been to a doctoral dissertation defense? Same stuff happens to
students at secular universities, and not just for the relatively
ceremonial dissertation defense.
> The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an argument is
> conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not reflect on
> him personally.
<toggle cynicism on>
Sure
<toggle cynicism off>
Sorry, Yeshiva folk are humans, just like everybody else, and intellectuals,
in particular, are highly competitve creatures. My experience has been
that while a few people conduct arguments "purely on an intellectual plane,"
most use a weak argument by someone else as an opportunity to "demolish"
a potential competitor. In most cases, the stakes aren't very high, it's
more a pyschological satisfaction of showing that you are cometent and the
other person isn't, but in some cases there are more material rewards.
> A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
> quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
Foretunately in secular studies, one can lean by oneself.
> By way of comparison I note that on this forum the majority of
> criticisms be they criticisms of ideas or movements, are taken out of
> context and brought down to the personal level.
This is because most of ther critcisms I have read _are_ personal, or the
personal attact is implied, very cleverly, I maight add, and, believe me, I am
a master of passive-agressive neurotic tactics, so I can spot them in
an instant.
> Judging by what occurs here,if a yeshiva serves no other purpose other
> than teaching a young man how to keep an argument focused and to the
> point, I would believe that that accomplishment justifies the
> yeshiva's existence.
Why go to a yeshiva and learn religious superstition when you can attend a
secular university, learn the same skills, _and_ learn a profession that
will allow one to earn a productive living?
> toichen
Menachem
Menachem Mavet
> Yitzchak Moran <dou...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > Binyamin Dissen wrote:
> >>
> >> Even my brother A"H who went to law school and passed the NY bar on his first
> >> try said that law school was not that difficult compared to Yeshiva.
> >
Your brtoher may have been a genius, and the workload may have been
irrelevant in his case. In my case, I scored in the 99th percentile in
the various standarsized tests (SAT, GRE, LSAT, etc.) despite the fact that
I belw off large parts of my assignments in class. Even at that, I
still worked pretty hard in college.
> > If law school was "not that different," then obviously law school, at least,
> > could not be described as "a joke." Will you concede that there are almost
> > certainly other "secular" degrees (e.g., medicine, engineering, etc.) that
> > could not be accurately described as "a joke?"
> > My point here, Binyamin, is that you made a blanket statement that many
> > could find, well, insulting. You note that you don't have complete data.
> > You also note that at least one secular course load (for law school) was
> > comparable. Don't you think you might want to reconsider your calling
> > the post-secondary education of a large percentage of Jews a "joke?"
The rule of thumb at my college, as explained to me by a professor was
that for every hour of lecture, the figured on 4-5 hours of outside
indepent work (reading, researching, writing papers.) a 3-credit course
involved 4 hours per week of lectures. Students typically took 4
3-credit classes during a semester. Result: 20-24 hours per week per course,
80-96 hours per week total work. Science classes had an additional 3 hours
per week lab session. (That was a structured lab session, as opposed to the
many long nights we pulled doing other projects related to course work.)
But even the humanities and social-science and arts types had to pull long
hours if they expected grades good enough to get into gradaute school, even
a second-rate graduate school.
I won't even talk about graduate school. All that work, plus one does slave
labor for one's advisor.
Sure, some students could good off and still get by, for all I know
that happens in Yeshiva, some kid with photgraphic memory can memorize the
texts and the set-piece arguments over them. If I were that kid, I wouldn't let
my teachers know of the talent, for they'd just pile more work on me.
So foir all you know, there are lots of yeshiva kids who goof off plenty.
Menachem
>
> He did not say "post-secondary education" of some Jews is a "joke". He
> said that the workload, compared to a Yeshiva, is a "joke". I can
> certainly believe it. I got my BS in Computer Science from UIUC - one
> of the best schools in the country for the subject. I goofed off all
> 4 years, in addition to working full time. Granted, "goofing off" and
> the work were mostly computer-related, but the workload for the courses
> *was* a joke.
You just thought you were "googing off." That stuff _was_ your workload. :)
Yitzchak Moran
>
> "Yitzchak Moran" <dou...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:9hqnga$4kl$1...@condor.nj.org...
> > As a Freshman at the University of California (Santa Cruz), as an
> engineering
> > major, I took 15 units.
>
> ultimate party school, with abundant natural beauty, mucho drinko, and
> unless things have changed, NO GRADES. Well, the last part is just like
> yeshiva.
Naw; Humbolt State is the Ultimate Party School (tm). Chico State is also
no slouch. In Santa Cruz, they get stoned and take mushrooms.
> But I hear it produces top notch programmers.
Also, marine biologists, astronomers, and musicians.
Yitzchak Moran
not something I want to do, because I believe that I will start behaving
in a manner that I view is inappropriate, and will start addressing
personalities, rather than issues. Since this is something I try very
hard to avoid here, I'm just going to shut my fool self up.
I will only say two things in closing:
o) I believe, very strongly, that to use a word like "joke" when referring
to someone's education, work load, course load, or most any other
situation, is inflammatory. I think we should avoid it.
o) I am sorry I mis-read Binyamin's statement about his brother's law
school experience. My apologies.
Yitzchak
--
Yitzchak Moran
>
> Yitzchak Moran <dou...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > Um, no. Binyamin said, "Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in
> > college is a joke." That's the point from which I proceeded. And I
> > have no urgency to find fault with anyone. The generally low volume
> > of my posts should show that, as well as my general reluctance to
> > point fingers.
>
> Binyamin wrote "not that difficult". You responded as if he wrote
> "not that different" - and you even put those words in quotes. Why
> did you quote what Binyamin did not write?
Because I made a mistake. My apologies to both Binyamin, you, and anyone
in the group that I irritated through my mis-reading.
However. That does not change the fact that the main point is, he said,
"Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke," and
that that is, when he has by his own admission little to no experience
with college, a blanket statement that is almost certain to be inaccurate
to some degree and, in my opinion, insulting to some.
Again, turn it around: how would folks at Yeshiva feel if I used a
dismissive term like "joke" to describe part of their experience? This
is why I am careful not to use terms like that. I do not say things
like, "the amount of hard science they teach you at Yeshiva is a joke,"
or "the amount of work that Reform rabbis have to do at their seminary
is, compared to YU, a joke," or any such. (Please note: I have no
data in either case, and am not positing either of these statements
as a truth.) I would appreciate the same consideration. That's all
I'm asking.
> >> He did not say "post-secondary education" of some Jews is a "joke". He
> >> said that the workload, compared to a Yeshiva, is a "joke".
> >
> > Again, he said, "Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college
> > is a joke." "College" is post-secondary, at least as I familiar with
> > educational terms. My understanding is that, in the U.S., K-8 is "primary"
> > school, and 9-12 is "secondary" school. Binyamin said "college." Most
> > people generally don't descriminate between graduate and under-graduate
> > studies when referring to "college," although often people mean only
> > undergraduate studies as college. Binyamin didn't specify, so I used
> > the more inclusive term ("post-secondary"), although I am perfectly
> > open to having the term more closely defined.
>
> 1. "Post-secondary education of some Jews, compared to Yeshiva, is a joke"
>
> That's what you claimed he wrote.
If that's how you read it, I apologize. No. That's *not* what I'm saying.
What I'm claiming one *can infer* from what he wrote is, "The load of work
required by some Jews to attain their post-secondary education is, compared
to that experienced in Yeshiva, a joke." Which I feel is easy to take as
an insult.
> 2. "The workload during some Jews' post-secondary education, compared to a
> yeshiva, is a joke"
>
> That's what Binyamin wrote.
That's *not* what Binyamin wrote. What Binyamin wrote was, "Compared with
the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke." I would posit that
using the word "joke" at all to describe someone's experiences can only be
an incitement. Aren't we all supposed to avoid language like this?
> > And that wasn't the case for me. I believe that it's reasonable to assume
> > that it wasn't the case for a significant number of people. Don't you?
>
> UIUC is one of the best schools in the subject in the country. The
> workload was a joke for me. I *know* a Yeshiva workload would not
> leave me any time for work or for goofing off, I knew some Yeshiva
> students who hardly had time to breathe. They were at least as smart
> as I was. You draw your own conclusions.
So you are one data point; I am another. I worked like a dog for five years
to get my degree; you didn't. In my opinion, we should no more assume that
everyone is on your end of the spectrum than we should that everyone is on
my end of the spectrum. Indeed, I would expect some people who are lousy
Yeshiva students to be excellent Computer Science students, and vice-versa.
Just one more thing: my lack of attendence at a Yeshiva has absolutely
nothing to do with whether or not I believe one can get a good education
there. I quite simply never had the opportunity to attend, given that
I was a Catholic at the time, and all. Just so you know.
meirm...@erols.com
Moran <dou...@earthlink.net> posted:
> Most
>people generally don't descriminate between graduate and under-graduate
>studies when referring to "college," although often people mean only
>undergraduate studies as college.
At U of C, I atttended the College of the University of Chicago. That
was for undergraduates. After that was some graduate school. I
assumed all schools were like that, but I really don't know.
Does Boston College have graduate schools within Boston College for
example. I know they have a law school, but I forget exactly what
it's called, and I never knew how it was organized. Antioch College,
etc.
Baltimore Hebrew College changed its name to Baltimore Hebrew
University some time after it got accreditation to award graduate
degrees. I am not saying the course work is easy, but the school is
so small, the name bothers me a little.
mei...@QQQerols.com If you email me, please let me know whether
remove the QQQ or not you are posting the same letter.
toichen
> What's there take on the reverse situation?
The vast majority of BT's find yeshiva exceptionally difficult, I say
this from learning with them. I remember in particular 1 BT who was an
absolute wiz in the secular world, he would travel the world simply by
accepting invitations to talk at various universities and when he
dumped it all and came to yeshiva he was very very weak, it took him
more than 10 years to achieve a modicum of success.
toichen
Binyamin Dissen
:>med...@shore.net wrote:
:>> Yitzchak Moran <dou...@earthlink.net> wrote:
:>> > Um, no. Binyamin said, "Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in
:>> > college is a joke." That's the point from which I proceeded. And I
:>> > have no urgency to find fault with anyone. The generally low volume
:>> > of my posts should show that, as well as my general reluctance to
:>> > point fingers.
:>> Binyamin wrote "not that difficult". You responded as if he wrote
:>> "not that different" - and you even put those words in quotes. Why
:>> did you quote what Binyamin did not write?
:>Because I made a mistake. My apologies to both Binyamin, you, and anyone
:>in the group that I irritated through my mis-reading.
No problem.
I am sure it was an honest mistake.
:>However. That does not change the fact that the main point is, he said,
:>"Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke," and
:>that that is, when he has by his own admission little to no experience
:>with college, a blanket statement that is almost certain to be inaccurate
:>to some degree and, in my opinion, insulting to some.
I have not been to the ivy league, but I know people who went there.
I have been to several Yeshivas.
I don't know why this would be insulting to "people". It might be insulting to
the college administrators, but I fail to see why a student would be insulted.
:>Again, turn it around: how would folks at Yeshiva feel if I used a
:>dismissive term like "joke" to describe part of their experience?
If you used the term to refer to the workload, I and anyone who went to
Yeshiva would be ROTFL.
:> This
:>is why I am careful not to use terms like that. I do not say things
:>like, "the amount of hard science they teach you at Yeshiva is a joke,"
It would be compared with the better prep schools. You might get an hour a
days, four days a week, with little lab time.
:>or "the amount of work that Reform rabbis have to do at their seminary
:>is, compared to YU, a joke," or any such.
Clears throat.
Err, no comment.
:> (Please note: I have no
:>data in either case, and am not positing either of these statements
:>as a truth.) I would appreciate the same consideration. That's all
:>I'm asking.
I do have some data. Not all data, but some data.
:>> >> He did not say "post-secondary education" of some Jews is a "joke". He
:>> >> said that the workload, compared to a Yeshiva, is a "joke".
:>> > Again, he said, "Compared with the load in a Yeshiva the load in college
:>> > is a joke." "College" is post-secondary, at least as I familiar with
:>> > educational terms. My understanding is that, in the U.S., K-8 is "primary"
:>> > school, and 9-12 is "secondary" school. Binyamin said "college." Most
:>> > people generally don't descriminate between graduate and under-graduate
:>> > studies when referring to "college," although often people mean only
:>> > undergraduate studies as college. Binyamin didn't specify, so I used
:>> > the more inclusive term ("post-secondary"), although I am perfectly
:>> > open to having the term more closely defined.
:>> 1. "Post-secondary education of some Jews, compared to Yeshiva, is a joke"
:>> That's what you claimed he wrote.
:>If that's how you read it, I apologize. No. That's *not* what I'm saying.
:>What I'm claiming one *can infer* from what he wrote is, "The load of work
:>required by some Jews to attain their post-secondary education is, compared
:>to that experienced in Yeshiva, a joke." Which I feel is easy to take as
:>an insult.
Why?
Take a look at the material required to get Smicha at a good Yeshiva.
Take a look at the material required to get thru one year at a good Yeshiva.
:>> 2. "The workload during some Jews' post-secondary education, compared to a
:>> yeshiva, is a joke"
:>> That's what Binyamin wrote.
:>That's *not* what Binyamin wrote. What Binyamin wrote was, "Compared with
:>the load in a Yeshiva the load in college is a joke." I would posit that
:>using the word "joke" at all to describe someone's experiences can only be
:>an incitement. Aren't we all supposed to avoid language like this?
I do not see the incitement. And none was intended.
It is not the students fault if the load is small.
[ snipped ]
Steven Goldfarb
>The vast majority of BT's find yeshiva exceptionally difficult, I say
>this from learning with them. I remember in particular 1 BT who was an
>absolute wiz in the secular world, he would travel the world simply by
>accepting invitations to talk at various universities and when he
>dumped it all and came to yeshiva he was very very weak, it took him
>more than 10 years to achieve a modicum of success.
My experience was different -- I graduated early from high school (in
January) and then spent the next few months at Ner Israel in Baltimore.
They put me in a class with other non-lifers - kids from varied
backgrounds. I was bored out of my mind. They still took English high
school classes - since I was done I had to just sit in the dorm room and
wait. The yeshiva classes were way to easy - I was getting 100% on every
test. Doesn't mean I'm so smart, it means the classes were too easy for
me. I asked my rebbe and one of the higher-up rebbes to let me go into a
more difficult class, but they refused - they were afraid it'd be too hard
and I'd become frustrated, they said. No, no - I told them - I like to be
challenged. If it's too easy I'll be frustrated. No, not yet, they said.
So there I was, sitting on my butt half the day with nothing to do,
knowing every answer to every question the rebbe asked (not that I knew it
before - I was just able to read the parsha, in the case of our Chumash
lessons, and know what the heck it said) The Gemara class was perhaps a
little harder, but not much. (of course as I said I wasn't in the
"hard-core" class, the Rebbe would translate for us as he went through it,
although you did indeed start to catch on pretty quickly)
So, for the record -- if those guys at Ner Israel had been a bit more
attentive to my needs as a student, they might have had me. I was
seriously considering going back there in the fall rather than going to
University. But I didn't, and the rest is history :-)
--sg
>toichen
--
---------------------------------------
Steve Goldfarb Eppur si muove
s...@stevegoldfarb.com (and still, it moves)
http://stevegoldfarb.com/ - Galileo
Jonathan J. Baker
That's like what happened to someone I know. He was doing very well in
Regular Talmud in about 9th grade, and wanted to move into Special Talmud
(9 periods/week instead of 5), with his teacher's support. The admin-
istration said he was on the edge, and there was another kid on the edge,
and then bingo, the other kid got in (who had family money connections to
the school) while this guy was left out. Now he's the poster child for
"studying Darwin leads to atheism." Although, he hasn't given up com-
pletely on observance.
I don't know if it was cause-and-effect, or if they saw that he wasn't
going to be serious about O-style Judaism later in life. But I have to
figure that this kind of thing - discouraging a kid who's clearly
capable from getting all the Talmud he can on the part of an O school -
had something to do with it.
By the way, this kind of leading-one-on was not just done in the Talmud
department - I had a similar experience in math.
toichen
Wrt a sage you are correct, however one may not argue with a prophecy
as it is the direct word of God.
toichen
toichen
> toi...@my-deja.com (toichen) wrote in message news:<dd1c0ee8.01063...@posting.google.com>...
> > I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
> > posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
> > The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
> > arguing the meaning of texts.
>
> The average student in a secular academic field will spend 10 hours or
> more in a day arguing over the meaning of texts and more, including
> observations of the real world and results of experiments.
Having been in a college enviroment I can say that the above is not
true, at least in my experience.
> > During those 10 hours he will be
> > frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
> > premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
>
> Ever been to a doctoral dissertation defense? Same stuff happens to
> students at secular universities, and not just for the relatively
> ceremonial dissertation defense.
That's a one time occurence, I am talking about what happens every
day.
> > The first lesson a bachur learns in yeshiva is that an argument is
> > conducted purely on the intellectual plane, and does not reflect on
> > him personally.
>
> <toggle cynicism on>
> Sure
> <toggle cynicism off>
Step into any yeshiva and see for yourself.
> Why go to a yeshiva and learn religious superstition when you can attend a
> secular university, learn the same skills, _and_ learn a profession that
> will allow one to earn a productive living?
>
> > toichen
>
> Menachem
Obviously you and I have different ideas of yeshiva, I am too lazy to
defend my position.
toichen
animzmirot
<meirm...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:qfg1kt43qh4l9pjnd...@4ax.com...
A college means a 4 year institution with no graduate
programs. They offer a bachelors degree, but no advanced
degrees. A university contains colleges (you attend Harvard
College at Harvard University) but gives out both a
bachelors degree and advanced degrees. If you get an
advanced degree from a university, it has the University
name on it (my PhD is from Harvard University). If you get
an undergraduate degree from a University, and they have
colleges (not all universities have colleges) you get a
BA/BS from Harvard College. This is based on the British
university system, where one attends colleges within a
university. So you can attend Magdalene College at Oxford
University.
Does this help? So, Baltimore Hebrew College (where I took
many excellent classes in my youth) became a University once
they began to offer graduate degrees, as you noted. And
that's exactly what they should be, now. :-) Size isn't the
issue here, the type of coursework and degrees offered is
the issue.
Marjorie, former University professor :-)
Shaineleah
It seems to me that load is a function of how interested you are in
what you're studying and does not depend on the field of study itself.
Load also depends to some degree on your teachers.
Shaineleah
Shaineleah
> > than teaching a young man how to keep an argument focused and to the
> > point, I would believe that that accomplishment justifies the
> > yeshiva's existence.
>
>
> Why go to a yeshiva and learn religious superstition when you can attend a
> secular university, learn the same skills, _and_ learn a profession that
> will allow one to earn a productive living?
Well that would certainly depend on your definition of "productive living".
Shaineleah.
animzmirot
> I certainly do NOT want to, nor mean to offend you, but
Santa Cruz is the
> ultimate party school, with abundant natural beauty, mucho
drinko, and
> unless things have changed, NO GRADES. Well, the last part
is just like
> yeshiva.
And apparently your information hasn't been updated in many
years. Santa Cruz used to be known as a party school, and
probably still has its fair share of partiers, as does every
college. But Santa Cruz also has the one of (or even the)
top physics department in the country right now, it's comp
sci department is excellent, and it has a very good
reputation. As for the no grades, that was changed several
years ago, and now grades are indeed part of the program.
I have absolutely no relationship whatsoever to UC Santa
Cruz other than the hope that one of my children might be
lucky enough to attend. It's a heck of a great place to go
to school. And indeed produces top notch programmers and
well as UI designers.
Marjorie
animzmirot
stuff happens to
> > students at secular universities, and not just for the
relatively
> > ceremonial dissertation defense.
>
> That's a one time occurence, I am talking about what
happens every
> day.
>
Excuse me? A one time occurrence? I believe you might be
unfamiliar with the amount of work (and stress) that goes
into a disseration defense. It is NOT a one day affair. Nor
a one week affair. It can take YEARS to get your
dissertation in good enough shape for your advisor to even
considering hearing your defense. I think perhaps your
understanding of this event is limited. Do you have a
doctorate? Have you done a defense?
I think Yitzach Moran had the right idea. The Yeshiva
Bochers are never going to believe that people who attended
secular universities every did any work, never mind worked
hard. The secular attendees are going to feel exasperated
that the YB's don't get the amount of effort they put into
their educations. It's a stalemate that is only going to
produce more hard feelings. So I'm done, too.
Marjorie
Abe Kohen
"animzmirot" <animz...@home.com> wrote in message
news:kGo07.148904$%i7.100...@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com...
> >
> > I certainly do NOT want to, nor mean to offend you, but
> Santa Cruz is the
> > ultimate party school, with abundant natural beauty, mucho
> drinko, and
> > unless things have changed, NO GRADES. Well, the last part
> is just like
> > yeshiva.
>
> And apparently your information hasn't been updated in many
> years. Santa Cruz used to be known as a party school, and
> probably still has its fair share of partiers, as does every
> college. But Santa Cruz also has the one of (or even the)
> top physics department in the country right now, it's comp
> sci department is excellent, and it has a very good
> reputation. As for the no grades, that was changed several
> years ago, and now grades are indeed part of the program.
Yes in Fall 1997 students were given an option of receiving letter grades.
Students can still continue to opt for Pass / No Record with a narrative
evaluation. I believe Yitzhak Moran attended prior to 1997.
Wonder what kind of Jewish life is available to UC SC students?
Abe
July 3, 2001 3:43 pm EDT
Z
<toi...@my-deja.com> writes
>> How about BTs who went to Yeshiva after going to a tough "secular" University?
>> What's there take on the reverse situation?
>
--
Z
Jonathan J. Baker
>jher...@ix.netcom.com (Joseph Hertzlinger) wrote
In which case,
: The Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson of Lubavitch, issued a call that
: "The time of our Redemption has arrived!" and "Moshiach is on his way!"
: The Rebbe stressed that he is saying this as a prophecy, and asks us all
: to prepare ourselves for the Redemption, through increasing acts of good-
: ness and kindness.
: Let us all heed the Rebbe's call.
BAC...@vms.huji.ac.il
>From: "animzmirot" <animz...@home.com>
>Subject:Re: How long would you last in yeshiva?
>Date: 3 Jul 2001 19:07:06 GMT
>Message-ID:<HLo07.148914$%i7.100...@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com>
>> > Ever been to a doctoral dissertation defense? Same
>stuff happens to
>> > students at secular universities, and not just for the
>relatively
>> > ceremonial dissertation defense.
>>
>> That's a one time occurence, I am talking about what
>happens every
>> day.
>>
>
>Excuse me? A one time occurrence? I believe you might be
>unfamiliar with the amount of work (and stress) that goes
>into a disseration defense. It is NOT a one day affair. Nor
>a one week affair. It can take YEARS to get your
>dissertation in good enough shape for your advisor to even
Apart from teaching med students, I also teach doctoral students
in clinical pharmacy. Most of them spend a few days at most in
preparing for their dissertation orals.
I have been at both yeshiva and academia [Apart from medicine
I also have a PhD in physiology]. There's no comparison: yeshiva
is MUCH MORE rigorous than medicine or graduate school.
[only residency is more tiring but that's because you work 36 hours
straight)
>considering hearing your defense. I think perhaps your
>understanding of this event is limited. Do you have a
>doctorate? Have you done a defense?
>
>I think Yitzach Moran had the right idea. The Yeshiva
>Bochers are never going to believe that people who attended
>secular universities every did any work, never mind worked
>hard. The secular attendees are going to feel exasperated
>that the YB's don't get the amount of effort they put into
>their educations. It's a stalemate that is only going to
>produce more hard feelings. So I'm done, too.
>
>Marjorie
Josh
Yitzchak Moran
>
> Yes in Fall 1997 students were given an option of receiving letter grades.
> Students can still continue to opt for Pass / No Record with a narrative
> evaluation. I believe Yitzhak Moran attended prior to 1997.
>
> Wonder what kind of Jewish life is available to UC SC students?
Okay, bear in mind two things:
o) I graduated in 1986, so some of my info is out of date
o) I was not Jewish when I was there
There is a Jewish student group there that publishes a magazine ("Tikkun," I
believe) annually. There is a very large reform temple, a very small
Conservative shul, and a very new Chabad shul (I ran into one of the folks
from it at Safeway there one evening a few months ago). Every dining hall
has at least one vegetarian entree per meal, although of course the pans
that they are cooked in are *not* heckshered after being used for the
other dishes. (They are stainless steel pans that are run through a
high temperature dish machine, but observant folks would consider them
treif.) Also salad bars. One of the colleges (Kresge) has cooperative
apartments, some of which every year are vegetarian. Other colleges
have apartments as well, non-co-op, but they are newer, and I'm not
sure what the deal is with them.
Santa Cruz has several organic food markets, is close to the home of
Odwalla juices, has a large vegetarian-only population, and some vegetarian
restaurants (and most non-veggie restaurants serve vegetarian food).
For whatever reason, there seem to be a lot of Jewish students at UCSC,
and Jews in Santa Cruz. I have no idea why. The last five women I dated
before I met my wife (remember: I was a gentile at the time) were Jewish.
Lisa might have more data, but she lived outside of town (Boulder Creek,
I think), and might not have gone into town much. I dunno.
Yitzchak Moran
Ba'al teshuvah. Generally used to describe a secular Jew who has become
frum, or a less-observant Jew who has become frum.
animzmirot
>
> Wonder what kind of Jewish life is available to UC SC
students?
I believe that they are part of the greater San Jose Hillel,
which is amazingly going strong, with something like 600
active members. They may have their own Hillel as well, but
they take part in the greater San Jose Hillel activities as
far as I know. There are several shuls in Santa Cruz and a
very active Jewish community. Yitzhak and I both know quite
a few people there who are amazingly committed and active
Jews (and quite hippy-dippy as well!) so I imagine that
there is a big welcome for students to join in. I do
believe, however, that men are required to have pony tails.
:-)
Marjorie
Micha Berger
:> What is a BT?
: Ba'al teshuvah. Generally used to describe a secular Jew who has become
: frum, or a less-observant Jew who has become frum.
Who, technically, is NOT a "ba'al teshuvah".
The term as coined referred to someone who was once more observant then
sinned and repented. Not someone whose life, like the ideal, was a
constant progress toward greater religiosity. No matter how far their
personal trek was.
-mi
--
Micha Berger When you come to a place of darkness,
mi...@aishdas.org you do not chase out the darkness with a broom.
http://www.aishdas.org You light a candle.
(973) 916-0287 - R' Yekusiel Halberstam of Klausenberg zt"l
Henry Goodman
"animzmirot" <animz...@home.com> wrote in message
news:iBo07.148896$%i7.100...@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com...
The British system is slightly different from how you describe it. Some
Universities, e.g. Cambridge, Oxford, London have colleges and are known as
'collegiate'; others, mostly of more recent foundation such as Liverpool or
Manchester do not. In all cases, degrees, including bachelor degrees are
given by the University. Both undergraduates and graduates attend a
college but get their degrees, and most tuition, from the University. Any
institution in Britain called a College which is not part of a University,
e.g. teacher's training college, is of lower status and can only give
diplomas of various sorts, not degrees.
BTW Magdalene College is at Cambridge. The college you are thinking of at
Oxford is Magdalen.
--
Henry Goodman
henry....@virgin.net
Abe Kohen
<BAC...@vms.HUJI.AC.IL> wrote in message news:9hthb3$vu4$1...@condor.nj.org...
Yes, but doesn't it depend on which area one gets a PhD in? It seems that in
the hard sciences, since the area of study is difficult and since the
university did some rigorous screening up front, the dissertation prep would
seem easy. But in some of the more soft areas, where some of the materials
taught require wearing knee-deep boots, and the screening up front is most
often not present, the dissertation prep might be quite laborious and
difficult, since there never is a real right answer, but rather the whims of
the committee have to be satisfied.
As for Yeshiva learning, and I'm talking UO mesivta in Boro Park, it was too
easy, at least for me. And this was before I learned real Hebrew.
Abe
July 3, 2001 7:34 pm EDT
BAC...@vms.huji.ac.il
ROTFL !
That reminds me of what PhD stands for: "piled high and deep" :-)
>often not present, the dissertation prep might be quite laborious and
>difficult, since there never is a real right answer, but rather the whims of
>the committee have to be satisfied.
ROTFLMAO ! "Nisht togedacht" as you say in Yiddish
>
>As for Yeshiva learning, and I'm talking UO mesivta in Boro Park, it was too
>easy, at least for me. And this was before I learned real Hebrew.
>
>Abe
>July 3, 2001 7:34 pm EDT
Josh
Jay Lapidus
current experience, at least a year. Year two may will probably be
coming up.
Jay S. Lapidus http://jlapidus.tripod.com
"I don't care what denomination you belong to,
as long as you're ashamed of it."
- Rabbi Yitz Greenberg
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
> posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
> The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
> frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
> premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
Let me give a personal anecdotal example. This happened _40_ years
ago yet is still fresh in my mind as if it happened yesterday.
My chavrusa and I were studying a certain text. At one place in the
text, I realized that what was said appeared to violate a certain
halachic principle. I asked my chavrusa.
He apparently had never heard of that principle. He proceded to
upbrade me, in terms toichen mentions, for such "foolishness". I
still recall the last thing he said "Foon der yereach g'shosen"
- "shot from the moon". Shrugging my shoulders, we returned to
the text.
Imagine my delight, when the author, at that point, mentioned that
what was said appeared to violate a certain halachic principle and
proceded to explain why it didn't.
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to be happy always! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
May Eliyahu Chayim ben Sarah Henna (Eliot Shimoff) have a refuah Shlaima.
P.S. I don't recall the author or the text, but I _do_ recall the
halachic principle, _and_ my chavrusa's name.
Menachem Mavet
> >
> > Apart from teaching med students, I also teach doctoral students
> > in clinical pharmacy. Most of them spend a few days at most in
> > preparing for their dissertation orals.
> >
> > I have been at both yeshiva and academia [Apart from medicine
> > I also have a PhD in physiology]. There's no comparison: yeshiva
> > is MUCH MORE rigorous than medicine or graduate school.
> > [only residency is more tiring but that's because you work 36 hours
> > straight)
>
> Yes, but doesn't it depend on which area one gets a PhD in? It seems that in
> the hard sciences, since the area of study is difficult and since the
> university did some rigorous screening up front, the dissertation prep would
> seem easy. But in some of the more soft areas, where some of the materials
> taught require wearing knee-deep boots, and the screening up front is most
> often not present,
What makes you think that the non-scientific academic fields are
less rigorous than the sciences? And that there is no up-front
screening? Anyway, if there is upfront screening, that might explain
why the students are able to pass their exams with apparently so little
effort. The exam is just something that the candidate needs to pass
in order to continue, there is no incentive for the student to waste
time in preparation in order to get a perfect score.
> the dissertation prep might be quite laborious and
> difficult, since there never is a real right answer, but rather the whims of
> the committee have to be satisfied.
Oh? In my experience, in the sciences there is rarely a "real" "right" answer --
in many cases the data are so ambiguous that there are multiple explanations,
and if you want to get the degree, you satisfy the whims of the committee..
>
Herman Rubin
Menachem Mavet <dr_m...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>"Abe Kohen" <abek...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<tk4lrft...@corp.supernews.com>...
>> > Apart from teaching med students, I also teach doctoral students
>> > in clinical pharmacy. Most of them spend a few days at most in
>> > preparing for their dissertation orals.
>> > I have been at both yeshiva and academia [Apart from medicine
>> > I also have a PhD in physiology]. There's no comparison: yeshiva
>> > is MUCH MORE rigorous than medicine or graduate school.
>> > [only residency is more tiring but that's because you work 36 hours
>> > straight)
It may be more difficult, but the mathematical, and I believe
also the scientific, meaning does not have that connotation.
For example, special relativity is rigorous, but that does not
make it particularly difficult.
>> Yes, but doesn't it depend on which area one gets a PhD in? It seems that in
>> the hard sciences, since the area of study is difficult and since the
>> university did some rigorous screening up front, the dissertation prep would
>> seem easy.
The area of study is not that difficult; it takes a certain
amount of native ability and some preparation, which could be
achieved at a much lower age if it were attempted to teach it.
As for screening, it is impossible for a university to do a
decent job of screening the applicants. I have been on the
committees in three universities. The better programs test
them on understanding, not memorization, and it is not on
opinion, but on what is the actual situation.
But in some of the more soft areas, where some of the materials
>> taught require wearing knee-deep boots, and the screening up front is most
>> often not present,
>What makes you think that the non-scientific academic fields are
>less rigorous than the sciences? And that there is no up-front
>screening? Anyway, if there is upfront screening, that might explain
>why the students are able to pass their exams with apparently so little
>effort. The exam is just something that the candidate needs to pass
>in order to continue, there is no incentive for the student to waste
>time in preparation in order to get a perfect score.
This is the case in the sciences. In mathematics and
statistics, for a good examination, passing is typically
around 50%. The best information about outside candidates
are those from India, where First Class is 60%, Second
Class is 50%, and Pass is 33%.
>> the dissertation prep might be quite laborious and
>> difficult, since there never is a real right answer, but rather the whims of
>> the committee have to be satisfied.
>Oh? In my experience, in the sciences there is rarely a "real" "right" answer --
>in many cases the data are so ambiguous that there are multiple explanations,
>and if you want to get the degree, you satisfy the whims of the committee..
I have been on some committees in the softer sciences.
It is not that difficult. In the "social sciences", it
can be the case. But I was once on a committee in
psychology, where the psychology members were willing to
accept the thesis as a statistical analysis, but had the
student eliminate the conclusions from the thesis.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
Menachem Mavet
> > > Ever been to a doctoral dissertation defense? Same
> stuff happens to
> > > students at secular universities, and not just for the
> relatively
> > > ceremonial dissertation defense.
> >
> > That's a one time occurence, I am talking about what
> happens every
> > day.
> >
>
> Excuse me? A one time occurrence? I believe you might be
> unfamiliar with the amount of work (and stress) that goes
> into a disseration defense. It is NOT a one day affair. Nor
> a one week affair. It can take YEARS to get your
> dissertation in good enough shape for your advisor to even
> considering hearing your defense. I think perhaps your
> understanding of this event is limited. Do you have a
> doctorate? Have you done a defense?
I agree. First, you don't go into the defense until your advisor (and maybe
a few other trusted mebers of your committee) think your work is good
enough to pass. This means that one can submit multiple drafts of
the dissertation for comment and criticism before the actual defense.
Then, of course, the course work consists of writing term papers, which get
critiqued, and sometimes require revisions. Then there are candidacy exams
which can be written or oral. (True, some schools make this more of an
ordeal than others.)
Furthermore, even after the degree is granted, a secular scholar can expect
to spend an entire career having his scholarly work examined and critiqued.
We all know the meaning of the words "peer review." This also occurs
even more frequently on an informal basis. (In fact I just returned
from a meeting with some colleagues where we spent several hours picking
over the technical content of part of a document.)
So don't tell me that yeshiva is somehow unique in its rigor.
(Not talking bout your comments, Majorie, rather the ones that
inspired your post.)
Menachem
Abe Kohen
"Menachem Mavet" <dr_m...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:7476996c.01070...@posting.google.com...
> "Abe Kohen" <abek...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<tk4lrft...@corp.supernews.com>...
>
> > >
> > > Apart from teaching med students, I also teach doctoral students
> > > in clinical pharmacy. Most of them spend a few days at most in
> > > preparing for their dissertation orals.
> > >
> > > I have been at both yeshiva and academia [Apart from medicine
> > > I also have a PhD in physiology]. There's no comparison: yeshiva
> > > is MUCH MORE rigorous than medicine or graduate school.
> > > [only residency is more tiring but that's because you work 36 hours
> > > straight)
> >
> > Yes, but doesn't it depend on which area one gets a PhD in? It seems
that in
> > the hard sciences, since the area of study is difficult and since the
> > university did some rigorous screening up front, the dissertation prep
would
> > seem easy. But in some of the more soft areas, where some of the
materials
> > taught require wearing knee-deep boots, and the screening up front is
most
> > often not present,
>
> What makes you think that the non-scientific academic fields are
> less rigorous than the sciences? And that there is no up-front
> screening?
Well, my wife and I have both taken a number of non-scientific classes. My
wife "earned" a MS in Education, to satify the ridiculous beaureaucratic
requirements of the Board of Ed. I always make sure to wear knee-deep boots
in those classes and seminars.
Talmud teaches you to think clearly, while these Education classes teach you
the fuzzy latest fad.
Talmud sharpens your thinking process.
Abe
July 5, 2001 5:15 pm EDT
Menachem Mavet
> In <dd1c0ee8.01070...@posting.google.com> toi...@my-deja.com (toichen) writes:
>
> >The vast majority of BT's find yeshiva exceptionally difficult, I say
> >this from learning with them. I remember in particular 1 BT who was an
> >absolute wiz in the secular world, he would travel the world simply by
> >accepting invitations to talk at various universities and when he
> >dumped it all and came to yeshiva he was very very weak, it took him
> >more than 10 years to achieve a modicum of success.
>
> My experience was different -- I graduated early from high school (in
> January) and then spent the next few months at Ner Israel in Baltimore.
.... the Rebbe would translate for us as he went through it,
> although you did indeed start to catch on pretty quickly)
>
Steve hit the nail on the head when he mentioned that in the easy
class the
rebbe **translated***.
On the basis of my admittedly limited experience learning gemara, the
reason why yeshiva training **might** be "harder" than secular study
has nothing to do with the intrinsic difficulty of the material.
Rather its
because the source texts are designed bo be as "user-hostile" as
possible,
and if you haven't been studying this stuff since it was beaten into
you as
a kid, you're going to find it difficlut to master if you study in the
traditional manner. Using a traditional edition of the geamra is kind
of
like trying to write a Windows application using punch cards and
programming
in machine language.
In the first place, the Gemara is written in a wierd mixture of Hebrew
and
Aramaic. I've studied some sections that start out in perfectly plain
Mishnaic Hebrew (which can be pretty easily figured out by someone who
knows modern Hebrew) that at some point in the middle of the Gemara
morph
into wierd Aramaic technical (as in legal) jargon. Sure, when you
read along
with the teacher, he explains everything as you go along, and if
you're paying
attention, it all makes sense. However, if you're expected to master
the material as a homework assignment, you'll be spending hours
getting nowhere.
Unless, of course, you started learning in Aramaic when you were 8
years old.
In addition to the fact that the material is written in a wierd
mixture of
foriegn languages, even if you have a literal translation, it doesn't
help,
becuase the text itself is more like somebody's lecture notes, it is
very
abbreviated and assumes the reader has a lot of "inside" knowledge
about
the material being discussed. Again, a teacher helps, learning it on
your
own is an invitation to frustration (at least at first.)
OK, the text is so obscure, in fact, that there are commentaries that
are
necessary to read and understand in order to understand the meaning of
the
Gemara itself. The most common of these is Rashi. Now Rashi's
commentary is written in Hebrew which is pretty clear, except that it
is
printed in a perfectly worthless (in my humble opinion) typeface
called
"Rashi Script." This means that even a person who knows Hebrew is
stumped
unless they spend time to learn the Rashi script. Which, of course,
is another thing that 8-year old kids learn in Day Schools, but which,
again, in my humble opinion, is a complete waste of time.
So here you have a text written in a mixture of two unusual foreign
languages,
written obscurely, and with necessary commentary printed in an
illegible
typeface, and you wonder why students who come from secular
univeristies who study in commonly used languages one at a time, and
who value clear
exposition of ideas find such study difficult?
Meanchem
meirm...@erols.com
dr_m...@my-deja.com (Menachem Mavet) posted:
>toi...@my-deja.com (toichen) wrote in message news:<dd1c0ee8.01063...@posting.google.com>...
>> I have frequently wondered, given the obvious sensitivities of some
>> posters here, how long they would hold out in a yeshiva atmosphere.
>> The average bachur in a yeshiva spends approximately 10 hours a day
>> arguing the meaning of texts.
>
>The average student in a secular academic field will spend 10 hours or
>more in a day arguing over the meaning of texts and more, including
>observations of the real world and results of experiments.
>
This certainly wasn't my experience at the University of Chicago.
IIRC we had 16 hours of class a week, during which there was a
combination of lecture and discussion (the ratio depending on the
subject matter). I never saw anyone told he was positing a foolish
position, nor do I recall that anyone was told his arguments were
false or invalid. People were midwestern polite, even the ones not
from the midwest. After that people spent very much time reading,
and a small amount of time discussing things with others.
>
>> During those 10 hours he will be
>> frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
>> premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
>
>Ever been to a doctoral dissertation defense? Same stuff happens to
That is a one-time occurrence, less than a day. Later in this thread
you start talking about the years spent writing it, but that's not
what you reference here. People don't get criticized when they are
working on their thesis, only when they seek advice from someone. No
one I knew was afraid of being blasted at meetings with their thesis
advisor. They were only afraid that criticism, no matter how politely
(or rudely) delivered, would mean they had to do a lot more work.
>students at secular universities, and not just for the relatively
>ceremonial dissertation defense.
...
>
>> A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
>> quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
>
>Foretunately in secular studies, one can lean by oneself.
>
And they very often do. So who is it they spend 10 hours a day
arguing with? Regardless of numbers, any time they spend learning
alone is not time spend arguing or having his arguments criticized.
>
>> toichen
>
>Menachem
mei...@QQQerols.com If you email me, please let me know whether
remove the QQQ or not you are posting the same letter.
meirm...@erols.com
<abek...@yahoo.com> posted:
>
>Talmud teaches you to think clearly, while these Education classes teach you
>the fuzzy latest fad.
Not Education, but I heard on NPR again the phrase "verbal violence".
I don't know how people tolerate garbling the language to make a point
they could make with "verbal abuse". I think they want to call up a
stronger image than is really there, but they'll just degrade the
meaning of "violence".
(Earlier I posted about the list of 4 kinds of violence, 2 or 3 or
which weren't. One other was "emotional violence".)
>Talmud sharpens your thinking process.
>
>Abe
>July 5, 2001 5:15 pm EDT
mei...@QQQerols.com If you email me, please let me know whether
Eliyahu
<meirm...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:sgfakt04snpidd1me...@4ax.com...
> In soc.culture.jewish.moderated on 6 Jul 2001 01:43:45 GMT "Abe Kohen"
> <abek...@yahoo.com> posted:
>
> >
> >Talmud teaches you to think clearly, while these Education classes teach
you
> >the fuzzy latest fad.
>
> Not Education, but I heard on NPR again the phrase "verbal violence".
> I don't know how people tolerate garbling the language to make a point
> they could make with "verbal abuse". I think they want to call up a
> stronger image than is really there, but they'll just degrade the
> meaning of "violence".
>
> (Earlier I posted about the list of 4 kinds of violence, 2 or 3 or
> which weren't. One other was "emotional violence".)
>
"right" to go through life without ever experiencing anything unpleasant. As
you point out, by overstating their case, they diminish the real meaning and
impact of the words they misuse.
--
Eliyahu Rooff
www.geocities.com/Area51/Underworld/8096/HomePage.htm
RSG Rollcall http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/rooffe.htm
Menachem Mavet
> In soc.culture.jewish.moderated on 3 Jul 2001 00:59:59 GMT
> dr_m...@my-deja.com (Menachem Mavet) posted:
>
> >toi...@my-deja.com (toichen) wrote in message news:<dd1c0ee8.01063...@posting.google.com>...
> >
> IIRC we had 16 hours of class a week, during which there was a
> combination of lecture and discussion (the ratio depending on the
> subject matter). I never saw anyone told he was positing a foolish
> position, nor do I recall that anyone was told his arguments were
> false or invalid. People were midwestern polite, even the ones not
> from the midwest. After that people spent very much time reading,
> and a small amount of time discussing things with others.
Maybe that's becuase:
1) Nobody held foolish positions, or presented false or invalid
arguments.
2) Perhaps the teacher privately informed the student of possible problems.
After all, why humiliate someone in front of the rest of the class?
3) That's right, I remember doing a lot of reading, I tuned out the
classroom discussions, they were dominated my one or two loudmouths who
may or may not have presented valid arguments, and who would be very
politely guided by the professor to where the professor wanted to go.
Personally, I was way to shy and sensitive to get involved in such
public discussions. I presented my arguments privately in papers and exams,
and I can assure everyone here that the professor was quite conscientious
about pointing out my foolish positions and invalid arguments. However,
he or she was always (well, almost always) polite and respectful in doing
so.
4) The University of Chicago is overrated.
> >
> >> During those 10 hours he will be
> >> frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
> >> premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
> >
> >Ever been to a doctoral dissertation defense? Same stuff happens to
>
> That is a one-time occurrence, less than a day. Later in this thread
> you start talking about the years spent writing it, but that's not
> what you reference here. People don't get criticized when they are
> working on their thesis, only when they seek advice from someone.
Yes, but any doctoral candidate with sense will bounce their ideas off of the
committee at all stages of the work, from proposing the research, to
interpretation of what has been found, to the preliminary drafts of the text.
Then, we spend a lifetime academic career submitting our work to peer-reviewed
journals, where our work is constantly criticized, and you can be sure
that before the work is submitted to the journal, we bounce stuff off of
colleagues for informal peer review.
However, much as I'm interested in revealing my little slice of "the truth,"
I don't think that learning "the truth" is worth being the recipient of
psychological abuse, which is my interpretation of the "yeshiva way," as
described by the people on this list who have studied there.
>No
> one I knew was afraid of being blasted at meetings with their thesis
> advisor. They were only afraid that criticism, no matter how politely
> (or rudely) delivered, would mean they had to do a lot more work.
And what would be the difference between that and what happens to some poor
schlub at a yeshiva who gets criticized by the rebbe or a fellow
student?
After all, doctoral students have some feeling for their ideas and will react
emtionally if the ideas get attacked.
>
> >students at secular universities, and not just for the relatively
> >ceremonial dissertation defense.
> ...
> >
> >> A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
> >> quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
> >
> >Foretunately in secular studies, one can lean by oneself.
> >
> And they very often do. So who is it they spend 10 hours a day
> arguing with? Regardless of numbers, any time they spend learning
> alone is not time spend arguing or having his arguments criticized.
> >
I fail to see why one needs to spend 10 hours a day arguing and being
criticized in order to learn. And I am put off by the intensity that
I see in Yeshiva people (even about non-yeshiva type things). Nothing in the
world is so important that one needs to stress oneself so.
Meanchem
Menachem Mavet
> In soc.culture.jewish.moderated on 6 Jul 2001 01:43:45 GMT "Abe Kohen"
> <abek...@yahoo.com> posted:
>
> >
> >Talmud teaches you to think clearly, while these Education classes teach you
> >the fuzzy latest fad.
>
Not so fast. I've never been so eager to immerse myself in Talmud
becuase the
few eamples I've studied seem like pages of fuzzy, pointless
argumentation
over trivial issues. If any "clear thinking" is involved, it is that
of
the student, who is forced to make up his own meaning (or more likely
memorize the meaning that Rashi has made up.)
> Not Education, but I heard on NPR again the phrase "verbal violence".
> I don't know how people tolerate garbling the language to make a point
> they could make with "verbal abuse". I think they want to call up a
> stronger image than is really there, but they'll just degrade the
> meaning of "violence".
>
Well, if you believe that the neagatve effects of psychotrauma are as
serious as those of physical injury, I suppose that using the term
"verbal violence" is justified. In fact, psychotrauma can have more
profound and long-range negative effects on a person than many simple
physical injuries. This may explain why the Torah literature is full
of halachot and commentary regarding the miztvot of "forbidden
speeech."
The Chofetz Chayim, after all, didn't write a treatise about all they
ways Jews
are forbidden to physically attack each other, and R' Zeleig Pliskin
didn't write an English version calld "Guard thy Fists."
> (Earlier I posted about the list of 4 kinds of violence, 2 or 3 or
> which weren't. One other was "emotional violence".)
>
> >Talmud sharpens your thinking process.
Yep, you've got to think clearly to make any sense of it, the
text itself sure isn't clear about anyhting. (Though I do like
some of the aggadah.)
> >
Meanchem
meirm...@erols.com
dr_m...@my-deja.com (Menachem Mavet) posted:
>meirm...@erols.com wrote in message news:<sgfakt04snpidd1me...@4ax.com>...
>>
>> Not Education, but I heard on NPR again the phrase "verbal violence".
>> I don't know how people tolerate garbling the language to make a point
>> they could make with "verbal abuse". I think they want to call up a
>> stronger image than is really there, but they'll just degrade the
>> meaning of "violence".
>>
>
>Well, if you believe that the neagatve effects of psychotrauma are as
>serious as those of physical injury, I suppose that using the term
>"verbal violence" is justified.
So if the negative effects of being raped are as serious as having
acid thrown in one's eyes and being blinded for life** or vice versa,
then it's justifed to to call rape an act of thowing acid and
blinding, or vice versa, as applicable?
Verbal abuse doesn't have the chief characteristic of violence:
violence.
** as with Victor Riesel.
> In fact, psychotrauma can have more
>profound and long-range negative effects on a person than many simple
>physical injuries. This may explain why the Torah literature is full
>of halachot and commentary regarding the miztvot of "forbidden
>speeech."
I hope you don't think I said otherwise. But that's why the Lord gave
us phrases like "as bad as", "worse than", and "have more profound and
long-range negative effects on a person".
Aha. By stronger image, I meant that I think they want to call up an
image that includes both verbal abuse and violence. The sum of the
two seems to me to be stronger than either one alone.
>The Chofetz Chayim, after all, didn't write a treatise about all they
>ways Jews
>are forbidden to physically attack each other, and R' Zeleig Pliskin
>didn't write an English version calld "Guard thy Fists."
>
As I said, I wasn't saying anything about which did more harm. (The
ranges of harm done overlap.) I just said that verbal and emotional
abuse are not violence.
>Meanchem
meirm...@erols.com
dr_m...@my-deja.com (Menachem Mavet) posted:
>meirm...@erols.com wrote in message news:<79eakts5bl3c30sgv...@4ax.com>...
>> In soc.culture.jewish.moderated on 3 Jul 2001 00:59:59 GMT
>> dr_m...@my-deja.com (Menachem Mavet) posted:
>>
>> >toi...@my-deja.com (toichen) wrote in message news:<dd1c0ee8.01063...@posting.google.com>...
>> >
>> This certainly wasn't my experience at the University of Chicago.
>> IIRC we had 16 hours of class a week, during which there was a
>> combination of lecture and discussion (the ratio depending on the
>> subject matter). I never saw anyone told he was positing a foolish
>> position, nor do I recall that anyone was told his arguments were
>> false or invalid. People were midwestern polite, even the ones not
>> from the midwest. After that people spent very much time reading,
>> and a small amount of time discussing things with others.
>
>Maybe that's becuase:
>
>1) Nobody held foolish positions, or presented false or invalid
> arguments.
I doubt that. But maybe.
>2) Perhaps the teacher privately informed the student of possible problems.
> After all, why humiliate someone in front of the rest of the class?
Maybe so, but my point was that it doesn't match yeshiva as Toichen
described it. Nor does it match secular universities as you described
them.
>3) That's right, I remember doing a lot of reading, I tuned out the
> classroom discussions, they were dominated my one or two loudmouths who
> may or may not have presented valid arguments, and who would be very
> politely guided by the professor to where the professor wanted to go.
Politely? I thought they were treated "rudely", and that that was the
similarity to yeshiva.
> Personally, I was way to shy and sensitive to get involved in such
> public discussions. I presented my arguments privately in papers and exams,
> and I can assure everyone here that the professor was quite conscientious
> about pointing out my foolish positions and invalid arguments. However,
> he or she was always (well, almost always) polite and respectful in doing
> so.
>
>4) The University of Chicago is overrated.
>
I didn't think anything I said referred to anyone's rating of the
school.
>> >
>> >> During those 10 hours he will be
>> >> frequently told that his arguments are false, invalid, that his
>> >> premises are mistaken, that he is positing foolish positions etc. etc.
>> >
>> >Ever been to a doctoral dissertation defense? Same stuff happens to
>>
>> That is a one-time occurrence, less than a day. Later in this thread
>> you start talking about the years spent writing it, but that's not
>> what you reference here. People don't get criticized when they are
>> working on their thesis, only when they seek advice from someone.
>
>Yes, but any doctoral candidate with sense will bounce their ideas off of the
>committee at all stages of the work, from proposing the research, to
>interpretation of what has been found, to the preliminary drafts of the text.
And are their responses "rude"? BTW, midwest polite was a take-off
on Minnesota Nice. I don't know what all schools are like. What
school are you referring to?
>Then, we spend a lifetime academic career submitting our work to peer-reviewed
>journals, where our work is constantly criticized, and you can be sure
>that before the work is submitted to the journal, we bounce stuff off of
>colleagues for informal peer review.
And are they "rude"? Is the formal peer-reviewing "rude"? We were
comparing those who went to O yeshiva with those who went to a secular
college and were posting here. I wonder how many articles have been
submitted to reviewed journals by the second group of people.
>However, much as I'm interested in revealing my little slice of "the truth,"
>I don't think that learning "the truth" is worth being the recipient of
>psychological abuse, which is my interpretation of the "yeshiva way," as
But I thought you said secular universities were just as "bad". Then
I said that mine wasn't.
>described by the people on this list who have studied there.
As I said before, I've spent almost no time at Yeshiva. I spend about
an hour at one with a friend, and I learn some with my rabbi both in
ways that might be like a lecture and something like chavrusa style,
and with other rabbis like my Baltimore rabbi. I saw no rudeness on
these occasions, except one answer that wasn't up to my sweet
standards, when I asked a question which contained a flawed basic
premise.
>>No
>> one I knew was afraid of being blasted at meetings with their thesis
>> advisor. They were only afraid that criticism, no matter how politely
>> (or rudely) delivered, would mean they had to do a lot more work.
>
>And what would be the difference between that and what happens to some poor
>schlub at a yeshiva who gets criticized by the rebbe or a fellow
>student?
I don't know. I was only saying they were nice at my school.
>After all, doctoral students have some feeling for their ideas and will react
>emtionally if the ideas get attacked.
>
Like I said, everyone I knew who was writing a thesis was afraid of
having to do more work.** Maybe if someone had found flaws or
omissions in the work of one of my friends, and then been rude to him,
I would have heard about it.
**Although they all wanted to do a proper job. I'm sure it is a defeat
for someone if he thinks his paper covers all the bases and the
advisor says something is missing. But being told one's paper is
incomplete isn't the same as being told one's premise is foolish, or
false or invalid. I don't think that happened very often, even
tactfully. In a yeshiva there are so many separate discussions each
day and so many separate ideas and arguments that can be wrong, and
arguments are made on the spot rather than after days of thought about
a given issue. Practically every sentence in yeshiva provides an
opportunity.
>> >students at secular universities, and not just for the relatively
>> >ceremonial dissertation defense.
>> ...
>> >
>> >> A bachur who takes arguments personally will very
>> >> quickly find himself without a chavrusa.
>> >
>> >Foretunately in secular studies, one can lean by oneself.
>> >
>> And they very often do. So who is it they spend 10 hours a day
>> arguing with? Regardless of numbers, any time they spend learning
>> alone is not time spend arguing or having his arguments criticized.
>> >
>
>I fail to see why one needs to spend 10 hours a day arguing and being
>criticized in order to learn.
Neither do I but my understanding of your previous post is that you
said those in secular universities did do 10 hours arguing and a lot
of the getting criticized. Didn't you tell Toichen that they shared
that feature with yeshivas?
>....
>Meanchem
Jordi Sod
Studying Talmud may very well sharpen one's thinking. Still,
unless one wishes to delve in halachic matters -- and not
everybody is, particularly nowadays -- many of the subjects
treated hold little interest for most people. I read
Adin Steinsaltz's _Essential Talmud_ and found it
extremely informative. It sure conveys the depth and
breadth of the Talmud. Still, it left me doubtful I would
realy want to do the enormous investment I'd need in order
to become competent in it.
I believe the aggadah still remains very relevant, but
as far as the halacha goes, it might be enough for most of
us to have a good idea how the Talmud _works_, rather than
plowing through it for years on end. REading books _about_
the Talmud, haggadic anthologies, etc. provides many rewards
for those of us unable or unwilling to make the necessary
investement. For those who have done a large enough
investment to feel confortable with it, or who feel closer
to God by studying it, I congratulate them and wish them
happy sailing in the sea of Talmud.
Talmud sharpens your thinking. Solving equations sharpens
your thinking. Reading Shakespeare's complete works too.
Given the limited amount of time available, and
the sheer difficulty of the Talmud, I wonder if for
most of us it's the best way to spend our time.
For those who are not religious or traditional, much of
its appeal is just not there.
>
> > >
>
>
> Meanchem
Jordi,
just a secular Jew.
Z
meirm...@erols.com writes
>In soc.culture.jewish.moderated on 9 Jul 2001 22:34:44 GMT
>dr_m...@my-deja.com (Menachem Mavet) posted:
>
>4ax.com>...
>>>
>>> Not Education, but I heard on NPR again the phrase "verbal violence".
>>> I don't know how people tolerate garbling the language to make a point
>>> they could make with "verbal abuse". I think they want to call up a
>>> stronger image than is really there, but they'll just degrade the
>>> meaning of "violence".
>>>
>>
>>Well, if you believe that the neagatve effects of psychotrauma are as
>>serious as those of physical injury, I suppose that using the term
>>"verbal violence" is justified.
>
>So if the negative effects of being raped are as serious as having
>acid thrown in one's eyes and being blinded for life** or vice versa,
>then it's justifed to to call rape an act of thowing acid and
>blinding, or vice versa, as applicable?
>
>Verbal abuse doesn't have the chief characteristic of violence:
>violence.
--
z