PBA: You may have a point but we are not discussing Slifkin as an individual (at least, we shouldn’t be). We are discussing the Hashkafic movement that he epitomizes. Thus, defects in his formulation of the Hashkafa do not delegitimize what super-rationalism actually is.
Actually, I was discussing him as a person. That certainly could explain our differences. I’m not precisely sure how this discussion started, and it’s hard to track it due to some moderator moving it, but I think it had to do with Slifkin speaking at HIR despite his not being a Baptist singer. Then, ROB said that the opposition to Slifkin was political, but ultimately seems to have backed down from that since he couldn’t explain what side benefits there were besides for discrediting the ideas in question which is the per se definition of apolitical. But meanwhile, Ben Levi started hitting at Slifkin directly to show that there are good reasons to be opposed to his ideas. Thus, the question at hand was Slifkin’s own ideas, rather than those of others in his “camp”.
But as it happens, your recent characterization is not how I read the rest of the rationalists either. They seem to quite conclusively determine that singular rishonim are correct based on their understanding of the world. It seems the height of arrogance to machria between rishonim, on the assumption that everything they observe about the world is correct.
And my point was that Ikkarei Emunah are not the place for glib points to be made.
Ok. I’m not sure I agree, but I’ll consider it.