Well, this is interesting

I've posted below the text of a message by Rabbi Blau, which I've just seen. My understanding was that it was sent to all undergraduates. What I think interesting is how similar his argument about arguing in a respectful manner is to the arguments I've made about our rules for civil and thoughtful discourse, especially in our online community. My only quibble, perhaps, is his discussion about "both sides" and "both positions," since I would suggest that in matters of policy and politics, there are rarely just two sides (although the American two-party duopoly tends to encourage us to think this way). The political world is complex, at best, and serious inquiry and engagement more typically results in a multiplicity of views, proposals, and positions. Oh, and I'm not sure that I concur in his assessment of Plato, since I've often found Socrates to be something of, well, a sophist, and a sometimes-master of cheap rhetorical tricks, which can serve to bolster his opponent's arguments. But that's a debate for another time.

DISAGREEMENT FOR HEAVEN’S SAKE
By Rabbi Yosef Blau

Yeshiva students are known for not accepting professors’ statements automatically. This does not reflect their being contrarians but emerges from the methodology of their Talmudic studies. If one visits the Beit Hamedrash (study hall), particularly after being in the library, the noise level seems baffling. A crowded room is filled with pairs of students debating points vigorously. How do they manage to concentrate? Why all the argument?

The Babylonian Talmud (Kiddushin 30B) describes a teacher and pupil who study Torah together as entering as enemies and leaving with love for each other. This can be best understood in light of a story told in the Talmud (Baba Metzia 84A). Rabbi Yochanan is described as terribly distraught after the death of Reish Lakish. (The two names appear together many times in the Talmud, almost always in disagreement.) The rabbis sent Rabbi Yochanan’s closest disciple, Rabbi Elazar, in an attempt to console him. When Rabbi Yochanan started to teach, Rabbi Elazar immediately interjected that the earlier sources support Rabbi Yochanan’s interpretation and not that of Reish Lakish. Rabbi Yochanan responded: “your words are not consoling me nor are you replacing Reish Lakish. When I would teach, Reish Lakish would raise twenty-four objections and I would give twenty-four answers. From the give and take the truth would emerge. I do not need you to tell me that I am right.”

The rabbinic literature is filled with disputes. Our students are trained to understand the reasoning of both sides, including opinions that are rejected. In Plato’s dialogues, only Socrates’ views are taken seriously. In the Jewish tradition, however, both positions are accepted as valid even though only one can become the accepted religious norm.

As the pair in the Beit Hamedrash (study hall) debate they become part of a long tradition and they can tune out the din in the room. Being surrounded by others equally absorbed is indicative of their inclusion in this chain. The argument and debate is a reflection of friendship that is based on a mutual search for clarity and truth.

Our tradition also speaks of disagreements that are not for the sake of heaven, acknowledging that in reality there are many motives for people to be argumentative. The proper goal of debate is the search for greater clarity and a deeper understanding of truth. Argument is appropriate but only when the debate and disagreements occur in this spirit of mutual concern and respect.