New answers tagged

4

Some of the disagreements in earlier answers seem to stem from different understandings of peer review. From the definition stated in the question, it seems totally reasonable to think of disagreements in the mishna and gemarah, or in the rishonim, achronim, and later works, as constituting peer review. Those who disagree are typically "people with similar ...


4

More than 50% of mishnayos have multiple tanaim disagreeing. That's peer review. R' Meir says something, R' Yehuda reviews it and says something else. When nobody disagrees explicitly, the assumption is they reviewed it and agreed (הלכה כסתם משנה). It's exactly the same in the Gemara.


3

Just being published in the Talmud is a form of Peer Review. Not everything that Rabbi Akiva ever said has been written & published, only the things that his peers felt were valuable. And everyone who publishes a Sefer gets an Haskamah / approbation from their mentors & peers. Jews have been practicing peer review for millennia.


0

I think that both Aristotle and Maimonides relied on the science of their day which was wrong in many ways. Yet, the Rambam, unlike his predecessors, did not believe in the efficacy of astrology. In Yesodei Torah, I do not think the Rambam literally believe that beings exist in these inanimate balls of hydrogen and helium gas. I recognize that he only knew ...


1

Possibly Hashem turned the sundial itself 10 degrees and caused the shadow to move that way


2

I think this is another Rabbinical source which promotes the idea of a flat earth: The Holy One, blessed be He, raised up all the waters of creation and set half of them in the firmament and half in the Ocean; it is surprising! It is thus written: The river of God is full of water. The firmament is similar to a pool [reservoir] and above the pool is a ...


Top 50 recent answers are included