What do you think?
Rate this book
Dignidade da Diferenca, A: Como Evitar o Choque de Civilizacoes
"A Dignidade da Diferença" é um apelo em favor da tolerância em uma era de radicalismos. Percebemos um claro e evidente perigo para a humanidade no aumento cada vez maior de tensões étnicas, nos embates entre as civilizações e no uso de justificativa s religiosas para a prática do terrorismo. Quase sempre as páginas da história têm sido manchadas pelo derramamento de sangue em nome de Deus. Junto com as armas de destruição em massa, também as atitudes religiosas radicais ameaçam a segurança vital na Terra. Neste nosso mundo interconectado devemos aprender a nos sentir engrandecidos, e não ameaçados pela diferença. Precisamos aprender a arte de dialogar da qual emerge a verdade, não como, nos diálogos socráticos, desmentindo a falsidade, mas , por meio do modo bem diferente, de permitir ao nosso mundo ser enriquecido pela presença de outros que pensam, agem e interpretam a realidade de maneira radicalmente oposta à nossa. Precisamos dar atenção ao particular, e não apenas ao universal. Quando as civilizações universais entram em choque, o mundo estremece e se perdem vidas. Há muitas culturas, civilizações e crenças, mas Deus nos deu um mundo somente para nele vivermos juntos e esse mundo se torna cada vez menor.
Paperback
First published January 1, 2002
72 people are currently reading
1530 people want to read
About the author
Jonathan Sacks
227 books444 followersRabbi Lord Jonathan Henry Sacks was the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth. His Hebrew name was Yaakov Zvi.
Serving as the chief rabbi in the United Kingdom from 1991 to 2013, Sacks gained fame both in the secular world and in Jewish circles. He was a sought-after voice on issues of war and peace, religious fundamentalism, ethics, and the relationship between science and religion, among other topics. Sacks wrote more than 20 books.
Rabbi Sacks died November 2020 after a short bout with cancer. He was 72.
Serving as the chief rabbi in the United Kingdom from 1991 to 2013, Sacks gained fame both in the secular world and in Jewish circles. He was a sought-after voice on issues of war and peace, religious fundamentalism, ethics, and the relationship between science and religion, among other topics. Sacks wrote more than 20 books.
Rabbi Sacks died November 2020 after a short bout with cancer. He was 72.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews
November 16, 2018
Summary: Great book. Interesting spun argument. This is difficult if you are not well read in philosophy and politics. However, it's beautifully written and in a way that still makes it approachable.
The conclusion I love: Forgiveness. True.
I loved this book for it's depth of research and expertly crafted argument. It does require that you be fairly well read in the areas of social and political philosophy really understand the full intensity of his argument.
p. 15: He questions: "One of the drivers of globalization is the revolution in information technology. Does this have an ethical dimension?"
P. 39: I love that he states: "Globalization is profoundly destabilizing." He then discusses all of the psychology of uncertainty and how people are so affected by it that it makes them even live shorter life spans. I love his acknowledgement of this.
P. 61 Tribalism vs. Universalism.... these are two options. I see a third emerging. He doesn't state this, but I almost feel he's implying it. This is reiterated on P. 73... " Perceived lack of control is stress-inducing and debilitating."
P. 76 Like this quote from Oscar Wilde " Oscar Wilde defined a cynic as one who knows the price of everything but the value of nothing."
P. 93 He discusses that Jewish law sees government as responsible for defense and the maintenance of social order.
P. 99 Here he discusses the disassociation between those that have resources and their responsibility to society. This is totally not discussed enough and the way it continues to get wider.
P. 107... Here is the only place where I'm not on the same page. I think these stats often forget that half the world was still fighting for civil rights.
P. 117, while brief this is a pretty good way of describing debt, the positive and negatives. The negatives in that it can be a form of control that people never come out from under. Without it, though there is no way to really grow opportunities for those that are not born into them.
P. 120 The highest form of aid is one that enables the individual to dispense with aid. This goes with his idea that education is key. It also makes sense in the context of the large argument he's making about how to avoid the clash of civilization.
P. 154 Here, he talks about trust and how the new economy does not foster this.
P. 180 forgiveness is key. he defines it really well here. It's not forgetting, it's refusing to allow the past to shadow the future.
The conclusion I love: Forgiveness. True.
I loved this book for it's depth of research and expertly crafted argument. It does require that you be fairly well read in the areas of social and political philosophy really understand the full intensity of his argument.
p. 15: He questions: "One of the drivers of globalization is the revolution in information technology. Does this have an ethical dimension?"
P. 39: I love that he states: "Globalization is profoundly destabilizing." He then discusses all of the psychology of uncertainty and how people are so affected by it that it makes them even live shorter life spans. I love his acknowledgement of this.
P. 61 Tribalism vs. Universalism.... these are two options. I see a third emerging. He doesn't state this, but I almost feel he's implying it. This is reiterated on P. 73... " Perceived lack of control is stress-inducing and debilitating."
P. 76 Like this quote from Oscar Wilde " Oscar Wilde defined a cynic as one who knows the price of everything but the value of nothing."
P. 93 He discusses that Jewish law sees government as responsible for defense and the maintenance of social order.
P. 99 Here he discusses the disassociation between those that have resources and their responsibility to society. This is totally not discussed enough and the way it continues to get wider.
P. 107... Here is the only place where I'm not on the same page. I think these stats often forget that half the world was still fighting for civil rights.
P. 117, while brief this is a pretty good way of describing debt, the positive and negatives. The negatives in that it can be a form of control that people never come out from under. Without it, though there is no way to really grow opportunities for those that are not born into them.
P. 120 The highest form of aid is one that enables the individual to dispense with aid. This goes with his idea that education is key. It also makes sense in the context of the large argument he's making about how to avoid the clash of civilization.
P. 154 Here, he talks about trust and how the new economy does not foster this.
P. 180 forgiveness is key. he defines it really well here. It's not forgetting, it's refusing to allow the past to shadow the future.
December 12, 2021
Outside the boundaries of what I usually read, but the book came highly recommended by someone whose opinions I value.
The author was the chief (orthodox) rabbi in the UK at the time he wrote the book, shortly after 9/11. Twenty years later, the book isn’t at all dated. Sentences are short and crisp; the writing is unusually lucid.
The key argument of the book is that diversity – biological, linguistic, cultural, religious – is a good thing. Unfettered capitalism and consumerism lead to inequality and diminish the dignity of large swaths of humanity. The solution is for different communities and civilizations to respect one another’s differences and not seek dominance. This is all rather anodyne, and the message didn’t strike me as that different from what HR departments advocate these days.
At the end, I found the book to be a nice package of familiar ideas. Nothing the author said gave me reason to believe that the “great religions” (his term) can really put the world on a better course.
The author was the chief (orthodox) rabbi in the UK at the time he wrote the book, shortly after 9/11. Twenty years later, the book isn’t at all dated. Sentences are short and crisp; the writing is unusually lucid.
The key argument of the book is that diversity – biological, linguistic, cultural, religious – is a good thing. Unfettered capitalism and consumerism lead to inequality and diminish the dignity of large swaths of humanity. The solution is for different communities and civilizations to respect one another’s differences and not seek dominance. This is all rather anodyne, and the message didn’t strike me as that different from what HR departments advocate these days.
At the end, I found the book to be a nice package of familiar ideas. Nothing the author said gave me reason to believe that the “great religions” (his term) can really put the world on a better course.
February 16, 2018
Everyone should read this book, and when I say everyone, I really mean EVERYONE!! Its message is so powerful and relevant in our troubled world.
I was awed by Rabbi Sacks' command not only of Jewish scripture, but also of Internationl Relations. He has the rare ability to make complex themes understandable for the general audience, and also of adding poetry to prose. This is a beautiful book!
Besides the wonderful writing, this book achieves something remarkable, it gives hope. Hope for a better future. It doesn't say it will be easy to obtain, but it makes a call to action, for us to engage with our world, to really listen to others, to find God in all things and, most importantly, to find God in the "other", in one who isn't like me. There is no message more powerful than that.
"The Dignity of Difference" is my favorite book of the year so far and one of my favorites ever. Definitely a must read!!!!
I was awed by Rabbi Sacks' command not only of Jewish scripture, but also of Internationl Relations. He has the rare ability to make complex themes understandable for the general audience, and also of adding poetry to prose. This is a beautiful book!
Besides the wonderful writing, this book achieves something remarkable, it gives hope. Hope for a better future. It doesn't say it will be easy to obtain, but it makes a call to action, for us to engage with our world, to really listen to others, to find God in all things and, most importantly, to find God in the "other", in one who isn't like me. There is no message more powerful than that.
"The Dignity of Difference" is my favorite book of the year so far and one of my favorites ever. Definitely a must read!!!!
January 1, 2019
Another great book from Rabbi Sacks. Much stronger in some chapters than others but a hell of a ride. I particularly like how he juxtaposes The Prisoners Dilemma from Game Theory with The Covenant from The Scriptures, correcting some erroneous assumptions about life and human nature- in Darwinian theories, Rand-type economics and macchiavelian political philosophies- bearing witness to the how and why of life. The chapter on forgiveness is marvellous and makes great use of the stories of Cain and Abel, Joseph etc; systematically going through the stages and conditions of forgiveness and reconciliation. From a Christian perspective, my main critique would be that Jonathan doesn't get our play of particular, universal and absolute. Vinoth Ramachandra and Richard Bauckham provide useful correctives. Sacks is a prophet and his work necessary, all round, though.
June 3, 2024
It’s a good book but took me two months to read because it requires a lot of chewing. I read a Jonathan Sacks essay in college about the importance of religious diversity and have had this book on my to-read list since. It was worth the wait.
One of the coolest parts of reading this book was the chance to hear a different religious perspective. Most of my theological reading is from a Christian point of view. Sacks, as a faithful Jew, offered unique insights from his unique background.
For instance, as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I’ve learned about covenants my whole life. The making and keeping of covenants means a great deal to me. I’ve always understood that a covenant is a two-way promise between God and an individual. We promise to follow God, He promises to bless us. Sacks offered me a new way to look at what covenants are, what they mean, and who I make them with. It didn’t replace or challenge my understanding of this bedrock religious principle but instead enhanced it with new insight. He said, “Political and economic relationships are contractual. They presuppose the coming together of self-interested parties, both of whom benefit from the exchange… Covenant is a bond, not of interest or advantage, but of belonging. Covenants are made when two or more people come together to create a ‘We’” (p. 149-151). In other words, a covenant with God is not simply a way to secure blessings of divine favor, but the means by which I establish a relationship with Him so that we may become closer. Again, not for the sake of an eternal reward but for the sake of an eternal relationship. How cool is that?
This lesson is a real life example of the main message of the book. We have so much to learn from people who are different. The world would NOT be better if everyone shared my religious, political, economic, and/or philosophical beliefs. I have too many blind spots that would go unchecked. It’s by being uncomfortable with discomfort, by embracing the stranger, by listening to the voice that is different from mine that I can grow the most.
Sacks argues that Plato was wrong in the belief that the world needed uniformity to achieve unity - it needs a respect for the dignity of difference. It reminds me of what Brene Brown talks about, it’s hard to hate people up close, so move in and get to know people who are different.
I want to be more like Sacks and his ability to hold seemingly dichotomous principles in one hand (which is, perhaps, the essence of finding dignity in difference). For instance he commends capitalism as the economic method that has created greater wealth and prosperity than any other yet invented by man. And yet as good as capitalism is at creating wealth, he points out it isn’t good at distributing wealth. The rich are getting richer - obscenely so - while the poor are getting poorer. So do we throw out capitalism for something else? No, we just acknowledge its limitations and look for something that can help compensate. A principle like “tzedakah.”
My understanding of tzedakah is that it’s a Hebrew word that sort of melds “justice” and “charity.” In English, if you work for me and I give you twenty dollars, that’s justice. If you don’t do anything for me and I give you twenty dollars, that’s charity. An act is either just or charitable but not both. Tzedakah on the other hand is the idea that I have a moral obligation to share my abundance with those in need. Tzedakah is both - it’s the just thing to do the charitable thing.
Think of how the world might be different if capitalistic communities embraced tzedakah. Corporations wouldn’t simply strive to make the maximum profit, they’d ensure the profit was created through sustainable means, shared in a way that rewarded virtues that benefited society, and looked out for “the poor, the widows, and the fatherless.”
Jonathan Sacks highlighted other important principles, things like creativity and education, conservation, conciliation (forgiveness), and the importance for all to have opportunities to contribute to society.
I’d highly recommend this book to anyone. It’s dense and academic, but in an increasingly divisive world, we need more Jonathan Sacks.
One of the coolest parts of reading this book was the chance to hear a different religious perspective. Most of my theological reading is from a Christian point of view. Sacks, as a faithful Jew, offered unique insights from his unique background.
For instance, as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I’ve learned about covenants my whole life. The making and keeping of covenants means a great deal to me. I’ve always understood that a covenant is a two-way promise between God and an individual. We promise to follow God, He promises to bless us. Sacks offered me a new way to look at what covenants are, what they mean, and who I make them with. It didn’t replace or challenge my understanding of this bedrock religious principle but instead enhanced it with new insight. He said, “Political and economic relationships are contractual. They presuppose the coming together of self-interested parties, both of whom benefit from the exchange… Covenant is a bond, not of interest or advantage, but of belonging. Covenants are made when two or more people come together to create a ‘We’” (p. 149-151). In other words, a covenant with God is not simply a way to secure blessings of divine favor, but the means by which I establish a relationship with Him so that we may become closer. Again, not for the sake of an eternal reward but for the sake of an eternal relationship. How cool is that?
This lesson is a real life example of the main message of the book. We have so much to learn from people who are different. The world would NOT be better if everyone shared my religious, political, economic, and/or philosophical beliefs. I have too many blind spots that would go unchecked. It’s by being uncomfortable with discomfort, by embracing the stranger, by listening to the voice that is different from mine that I can grow the most.
Sacks argues that Plato was wrong in the belief that the world needed uniformity to achieve unity - it needs a respect for the dignity of difference. It reminds me of what Brene Brown talks about, it’s hard to hate people up close, so move in and get to know people who are different.
I want to be more like Sacks and his ability to hold seemingly dichotomous principles in one hand (which is, perhaps, the essence of finding dignity in difference). For instance he commends capitalism as the economic method that has created greater wealth and prosperity than any other yet invented by man. And yet as good as capitalism is at creating wealth, he points out it isn’t good at distributing wealth. The rich are getting richer - obscenely so - while the poor are getting poorer. So do we throw out capitalism for something else? No, we just acknowledge its limitations and look for something that can help compensate. A principle like “tzedakah.”
My understanding of tzedakah is that it’s a Hebrew word that sort of melds “justice” and “charity.” In English, if you work for me and I give you twenty dollars, that’s justice. If you don’t do anything for me and I give you twenty dollars, that’s charity. An act is either just or charitable but not both. Tzedakah on the other hand is the idea that I have a moral obligation to share my abundance with those in need. Tzedakah is both - it’s the just thing to do the charitable thing.
Think of how the world might be different if capitalistic communities embraced tzedakah. Corporations wouldn’t simply strive to make the maximum profit, they’d ensure the profit was created through sustainable means, shared in a way that rewarded virtues that benefited society, and looked out for “the poor, the widows, and the fatherless.”
Jonathan Sacks highlighted other important principles, things like creativity and education, conservation, conciliation (forgiveness), and the importance for all to have opportunities to contribute to society.
I’d highly recommend this book to anyone. It’s dense and academic, but in an increasingly divisive world, we need more Jonathan Sacks.
November 1, 2024
(3 and 3 quarters to 4 stars)
October 10, 2010
If I were to live to 100 years, writing every day, I would not begin to write as eloquently or profoundly as Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks.
This book is his treatise on charting the straits between universalism and particularism - what he calls dignity of difference. He provides a compelling rationale for the notion that civilization represents the structured attempt to see the face of God in the other - the one who does not share my views - he rejects wholly any hint of relativism, but enjoins the reader to use the particularities of his or her own religious viewpoint to make the world a better place even for those people who disagree. In the course of his discussions, he points out profundities like the fact that forgiveness is a human rather than animal concept, that the very first murderer (Cain) had religious motives, and that while the initially most-successful contestant in the iterated prisoner's dilemma game was "tit-for-tat," subsequent analysis has shown that adding a quasi-random "forgiveness" element made it even more successful.
My impression of Rabbi Sacks' work and outlook is that he is a fundamentalist crusader - his crusade is the idea of ahavat hinam (baseless love) - and I hope to merit the blessing of living in a world which listens to teachings such as his.
Very, very highly recommended.
This book is his treatise on charting the straits between universalism and particularism - what he calls dignity of difference. He provides a compelling rationale for the notion that civilization represents the structured attempt to see the face of God in the other - the one who does not share my views - he rejects wholly any hint of relativism, but enjoins the reader to use the particularities of his or her own religious viewpoint to make the world a better place even for those people who disagree. In the course of his discussions, he points out profundities like the fact that forgiveness is a human rather than animal concept, that the very first murderer (Cain) had religious motives, and that while the initially most-successful contestant in the iterated prisoner's dilemma game was "tit-for-tat," subsequent analysis has shown that adding a quasi-random "forgiveness" element made it even more successful.
My impression of Rabbi Sacks' work and outlook is that he is a fundamentalist crusader - his crusade is the idea of ahavat hinam (baseless love) - and I hope to merit the blessing of living in a world which listens to teachings such as his.
Very, very highly recommended.
November 13, 2009
The Dignity of Difference is a fantastic, searching critique of inequality and anxiety in the face of human change. Rooted in the theology and philosophy of Orthodox Judaism, the text is not a polemic, nor an attempt to evangelize, but rather a strong articulation from one interested voice as to how religious belief might be a solution to our present global crises, rather than just cause. There are certainly things on which Sacks and I disagree (I don't, for example, believe oral cultures are less "civilized" than those that write things down), and moments where there's a large gap between theology/philosophy and practice (he has wonderful chapter on the subject of compassion in Judaic thought, for example, but I think there's a gaping silence there on the subject of present-day relations between Israel and Palestine). Nevertheless, there are wonderful ideas in these books, wonderful questions to ask of the market economy, wonderful hypotheses about human compassion to try out. I very much enjoyed this, and would love to have my students grapple with the wisdom (and weaknesses) within.
December 25, 2012
For the last year, I have devoured many books by Rabbi Sacks. This one is by far the most challenging intellectually. Most of the time Rabbi Sack's prose is so amazing and clear, I merely enjoy the masterful prose and drink in the words. In Dignity of Difference there are some rather dry philosophical explorations that cause the reader to puzzle over the meaning and struggle with concepts. It's highly worth reading and the slog through the middle is worth it for the tremendous, uplifting concluding chapter.
October 8, 2017
An amazing book with much food for thought. Rabbi Sacks asks us to see the face of God in people of faith, no matter what their religion. He addresses religous fundamentalism, the economic downturn, income disparity, the environmental crisis and more. Sacks quotes an amazing breadth of sources. While I don't always agree with his conclusions, I have to respect his thought processes. While the book has a universalist approach, Sacks tends to show how Judaism had it right all along.
April 7, 2012
Only 200 pages, but has a lot of powerful ideas. I thought the chapters about game theory's applications in the field of morality and economics and the chapter about "Exorcising Plato's Ghost" to be very relevant to current problems in the Western civilization.
I recommend it to anyone interested in the future of humanity
I recommend it to anyone interested in the future of humanity
April 16, 2016
The Dignity of Difference contains so much insight, I will keep this book in order to return it often for encouragement. I deliberately read this book over a span of time. It is not difficult to read. Rabbi Sacks is very clear in his premise.
We owe it to ourselves to broaden and deepen our knowledge and understanding of culture, both our own and the culture of others.
We owe it to ourselves to broaden and deepen our knowledge and understanding of culture, both our own and the culture of others.
August 24, 2016
I read this as part of a course I'm teaching, and found it to be inspiring and useful. But if you're expecting theology only, you'll be surprised, because the Rabbi is also an expert on globalization, economics, etc. The former chief rabbi of the United Kingdom, Rabbi Sacks is very involved in promoting inter-faith conversation and understanding.
January 24, 2021
This book has been on my “to read” list for far too long. It feels timely and yet it has always been and will probably most likely remain relevant. The ideals of living together peacefully, fully embracing diversity, should be taught in every religion and in institutions outside of religion. I would love to have been able to have a discussion with Jonathan Sacks who has now passed.
October 11, 2008
I am delighted to have met Rabbi Jonathan Sacks through this book. His theology and his views on religion and the world are incredible. We need more Jonathan Sacks in this life to combat the crises we are all presently engaged in at this time.
November 19, 2016
There are differences all over the world. There are different religions, values, behaviors, beliefs, cultures etc. Instead of seeing different as wrong, we need to see different as merely different and learn from the difference.
November 21, 2020
One of the best books I have read on society, culture and politics, still very relevant
March 21, 2021
An elegant exposition of liberal and pluralist traditions in Judaism, relating them to a moral core. Some chapters on specific topical issues are underdeveloped.
Read
January 5, 2021Review by Rabbi Dr Raymond Apple - see https://www.oztorah.com/2010/08/the-d...
British Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks is the most elegant English-language author on Judaism in the world today. He writes prolifically and has a wide readership among both Jews and non-Jews. His writings cover internal Jewish subjects and the wider human and global problems.
His book The Dignity Of Difference comes under the topic of global problems. Subtitled How to avoid the dash of civilisations, it argues that just as religious difference played a major role in the events of September 11, so religious differences can help towards world survival.
Where we used to say we needed to narrow the gap between religions and find more common ground, Sacks argues very persuasively that we need to learn to make space for difference, discovering that there is dignity in diversity under the over-arching authority of the one creator. It is this thought – diversity under the one God that turned this book into a far more controversial work than Sacks could have imagined.
In the first printing he stated that all religions have truth and God is higher than any one religion. He was severely taken to task by some Jews (note that his critics probably had not read the actual book but relied on media reports) who accused him of apikorsut (heresy).
It’s an interesting development, of course, to see a chief rabbi crowned with the improbable title of apikoros; though Sacks would not compare himself to the Rambam, Maimonides too had his fierce enemies who wanted his grave to bear the words: “Here lies a heretic.”
And as Rabbi Norman Solomons wrote in the Jewish Chronicle: “The recent attempt to ban a book by the chief rabbi, or to force him to rewrite passages, has a long, if shameful, history.”
Writing in the Jerusalem Post, Cohn Shindler remarked that Anglo-Jewry loves such theatrics. At different times, most of Britain’s chief rabbis have said or done controversial things (admittedly, some quite injudicious) and the community has divided between those who found themselves hugely entertained by the sight of a chief rabbi being metaphorically mauled and others whose instinctive thought was, in Shindler’s words: “To rally round their beloved chief rabbi.”
Accompanied by Dayan Ehrentreu of the London Beth Din, Sacks had a meeting with some of the critics and, while presumably not resiling from his general view, agreed to reword the controversial passages in the next issue of the book.
This has now been done, and what we read in the new edition accords ultimate truth to Judaism while not denying that there are insights in other religions and constantly insisting that the other faiths and their adherents must be accorded respect – a position reflecting that of Maimonides, who in a crucial (but often censored) passage in Hilchot Melachim says that Christianity and Islam are in error, but must be respected for bringing a monotheistic influence to bear on large segments of mankind.
The controversy has probably ensured that the book would sell very widely, but it would be a pity to allow the major call of the book to go unheeded.
Stressing that religion not only helps to create conflict but also to solve it, Sacks believes that there is a dignity in difference and a moral imperative to listen to one another.
He addresses views such as those which claim that differences are bound to lead to war and the best way is to impose one single absolute truth.
But there is more than one attempt to create a universal civilisation: what happens when universal civilisations meet and dash, as happened on September 11 when global capitalism and Islam confronted one another?
Sacks urges us to go back to the Bible, which begins with the general but then moves to the particular, from all mankind to one family. There is sameness, but there is also difference. The general and the particular – the theme is played out everywhere.
In the market economy, differences either lead people to fight or to trade. From fighting, both sides lose; from trading, both sides gain. There is complexity in every aspect of human experience; the biblical paradigm teaches that the options are not just universalism and tribalism, but also the dignity of difference.
People may question some of Sacks’ views on politics, science, economics or whatever. But the book is compelling reading, and apart from the theological controversy, it may prove to be one of the most stimulating and valuable analyses of how the world can get itself out of a frightening mess.
British Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks is the most elegant English-language author on Judaism in the world today. He writes prolifically and has a wide readership among both Jews and non-Jews. His writings cover internal Jewish subjects and the wider human and global problems.
His book The Dignity Of Difference comes under the topic of global problems. Subtitled How to avoid the dash of civilisations, it argues that just as religious difference played a major role in the events of September 11, so religious differences can help towards world survival.
Where we used to say we needed to narrow the gap between religions and find more common ground, Sacks argues very persuasively that we need to learn to make space for difference, discovering that there is dignity in diversity under the over-arching authority of the one creator. It is this thought – diversity under the one God that turned this book into a far more controversial work than Sacks could have imagined.
In the first printing he stated that all religions have truth and God is higher than any one religion. He was severely taken to task by some Jews (note that his critics probably had not read the actual book but relied on media reports) who accused him of apikorsut (heresy).
It’s an interesting development, of course, to see a chief rabbi crowned with the improbable title of apikoros; though Sacks would not compare himself to the Rambam, Maimonides too had his fierce enemies who wanted his grave to bear the words: “Here lies a heretic.”
And as Rabbi Norman Solomons wrote in the Jewish Chronicle: “The recent attempt to ban a book by the chief rabbi, or to force him to rewrite passages, has a long, if shameful, history.”
Writing in the Jerusalem Post, Cohn Shindler remarked that Anglo-Jewry loves such theatrics. At different times, most of Britain’s chief rabbis have said or done controversial things (admittedly, some quite injudicious) and the community has divided between those who found themselves hugely entertained by the sight of a chief rabbi being metaphorically mauled and others whose instinctive thought was, in Shindler’s words: “To rally round their beloved chief rabbi.”
Accompanied by Dayan Ehrentreu of the London Beth Din, Sacks had a meeting with some of the critics and, while presumably not resiling from his general view, agreed to reword the controversial passages in the next issue of the book.
This has now been done, and what we read in the new edition accords ultimate truth to Judaism while not denying that there are insights in other religions and constantly insisting that the other faiths and their adherents must be accorded respect – a position reflecting that of Maimonides, who in a crucial (but often censored) passage in Hilchot Melachim says that Christianity and Islam are in error, but must be respected for bringing a monotheistic influence to bear on large segments of mankind.
The controversy has probably ensured that the book would sell very widely, but it would be a pity to allow the major call of the book to go unheeded.
Stressing that religion not only helps to create conflict but also to solve it, Sacks believes that there is a dignity in difference and a moral imperative to listen to one another.
He addresses views such as those which claim that differences are bound to lead to war and the best way is to impose one single absolute truth.
But there is more than one attempt to create a universal civilisation: what happens when universal civilisations meet and dash, as happened on September 11 when global capitalism and Islam confronted one another?
Sacks urges us to go back to the Bible, which begins with the general but then moves to the particular, from all mankind to one family. There is sameness, but there is also difference. The general and the particular – the theme is played out everywhere.
In the market economy, differences either lead people to fight or to trade. From fighting, both sides lose; from trading, both sides gain. There is complexity in every aspect of human experience; the biblical paradigm teaches that the options are not just universalism and tribalism, but also the dignity of difference.
People may question some of Sacks’ views on politics, science, economics or whatever. But the book is compelling reading, and apart from the theological controversy, it may prove to be one of the most stimulating and valuable analyses of how the world can get itself out of a frightening mess.
January 31, 2020
This book is less one complete book than it is a set of essays on a wide range of topics- sometimes insightful, sometimes less so. Generally, I found the book to be most persuasive when it explains the appeal of traditional religion, less so when it sets out an independent argument for the way things ought to be. A few of the issues covered:
*The growth of religious fundamentalism. Rabbi Sacks writes: "The power of conservative religious movements has been precisely the fact that they represent protests against, rather than accommodations to, late modernity." In other words, right-wing religion is successful because it appeals to the dissatisfied; the satisfied by definition aren't going to be as motivated to switch religions or even to invest as heavily in their own.
*The value of religion generally. Why are religions so much more successful in attracting adherents than, say, philosophical systems with similar visions of the good life? Sacks points out that religions don't just have points of view, they "embody [their visions] in the life of the community. They make it vivid and substantial and prayer and ritual, in compelling narratives and collective acts of rededication." By contrast, a philosophy without ritual, or even a religious movement that lacks a lot of ritual, may not seem as "vivid and substantial" to some people. I completely agree; I grew up Reform and have moved towards a more ritual-oriented form of Judaism, and the reason I find traditional Judaism more appealing has less to do with ideology than the felt reality that the latter seems a bit more, well, "vivid."
*The value of religious diversity. Rabbi Sacks argues that the very fabric of creation supports diversity: just as God is glorified by the "astounding multiplicity" of the millions of species, and of the hundreds of human cultures and languages, the multiplicity of ways of approaching God are equally valuable. Sacks writes that "God has spoken to mankind in many languages through Judaism to Jews, Christianity to Christians, Islam to Muslims. But just as God is greater than any language, God is greater than any one way to relating to God." Makes sense to me- but maybe that's just because I am a non-haredi Jew. But what would Sacks say to the haredi Jew who says "But there's a difference- our revelation really happened and theirs is fictitious"? Or to the Christian or Muslim who argues that their way of relating to God presupposes the universality of their religion? I did not see how Sacks really addresses this tough issue.
*Economics. Rabbi Sacks correctly points out that Judaism has sought to steer a middle course between pure capitalism and socialism, by endorsing a market economy combined with mandatory charity. But is the view of Judaism relevant to a secular society? That is- should public policy reflect the voice of Torah, or should it follow the libertarian view that people can express their religious values with their own money rather than using the government to address poverty and related issues? Rabbi Sacks doesn't seem to me to focus on this issue, perhaps because he comes from a society where a generous welfare state is taken for granted to a greater extent than in the USA.
*Environmentalism. As Sacks suggests, there is quite a bit of justification for environmentalism in Jewish tradition. Sacks does address one strand of tradition that I was unaware of before reading this book: Jewish support for preserving endangered species. Sacks writes that according to the medieval sage Nachmanides, the Torah's prohibition of seizing a bird and its mother at the same time exists to prevent Jews from culling species to the point of extinction- a kind of early Endangered Species Act. Of course, translating Jewish environmental values into public policy is even more difficult than translating Jewish economic values into public policy, for the simple reason that environmental issues often involve not just values, but difficult factual questions that most nonscientists don't really understand. For example, I might have a rational opinion that global warming is caused by human activity, if I think there is a scientific consensus behind this view. But that doesn't mean that I know what policies will actually be effective in reducing global warming, let alone whether those policies are cost-justified.
*The growth of religious fundamentalism. Rabbi Sacks writes: "The power of conservative religious movements has been precisely the fact that they represent protests against, rather than accommodations to, late modernity." In other words, right-wing religion is successful because it appeals to the dissatisfied; the satisfied by definition aren't going to be as motivated to switch religions or even to invest as heavily in their own.
*The value of religion generally. Why are religions so much more successful in attracting adherents than, say, philosophical systems with similar visions of the good life? Sacks points out that religions don't just have points of view, they "embody [their visions] in the life of the community. They make it vivid and substantial and prayer and ritual, in compelling narratives and collective acts of rededication." By contrast, a philosophy without ritual, or even a religious movement that lacks a lot of ritual, may not seem as "vivid and substantial" to some people. I completely agree; I grew up Reform and have moved towards a more ritual-oriented form of Judaism, and the reason I find traditional Judaism more appealing has less to do with ideology than the felt reality that the latter seems a bit more, well, "vivid."
*The value of religious diversity. Rabbi Sacks argues that the very fabric of creation supports diversity: just as God is glorified by the "astounding multiplicity" of the millions of species, and of the hundreds of human cultures and languages, the multiplicity of ways of approaching God are equally valuable. Sacks writes that "God has spoken to mankind in many languages through Judaism to Jews, Christianity to Christians, Islam to Muslims. But just as God is greater than any language, God is greater than any one way to relating to God." Makes sense to me- but maybe that's just because I am a non-haredi Jew. But what would Sacks say to the haredi Jew who says "But there's a difference- our revelation really happened and theirs is fictitious"? Or to the Christian or Muslim who argues that their way of relating to God presupposes the universality of their religion? I did not see how Sacks really addresses this tough issue.
*Economics. Rabbi Sacks correctly points out that Judaism has sought to steer a middle course between pure capitalism and socialism, by endorsing a market economy combined with mandatory charity. But is the view of Judaism relevant to a secular society? That is- should public policy reflect the voice of Torah, or should it follow the libertarian view that people can express their religious values with their own money rather than using the government to address poverty and related issues? Rabbi Sacks doesn't seem to me to focus on this issue, perhaps because he comes from a society where a generous welfare state is taken for granted to a greater extent than in the USA.
*Environmentalism. As Sacks suggests, there is quite a bit of justification for environmentalism in Jewish tradition. Sacks does address one strand of tradition that I was unaware of before reading this book: Jewish support for preserving endangered species. Sacks writes that according to the medieval sage Nachmanides, the Torah's prohibition of seizing a bird and its mother at the same time exists to prevent Jews from culling species to the point of extinction- a kind of early Endangered Species Act. Of course, translating Jewish environmental values into public policy is even more difficult than translating Jewish economic values into public policy, for the simple reason that environmental issues often involve not just values, but difficult factual questions that most nonscientists don't really understand. For example, I might have a rational opinion that global warming is caused by human activity, if I think there is a scientific consensus behind this view. But that doesn't mean that I know what policies will actually be effective in reducing global warming, let alone whether those policies are cost-justified.
August 18, 2024
"Jonathan Swift's observation..'we have just enough religion to make us hate ona another but not enough to make us love one another'"
"Peace is a paradox. Many traditions praise it and decry conflict and war. Yet in war, even ordinary people become heroes. In the pursuit of peace, even heroes are often afraid to take the risk"
"It is precisely because we are not the same as individuals, nations or civilisations that our exchanges are non-zero-sum encounters"
"Meanwhile, politics in the West has become ever more procedural and managerial, concerned with delivering maximum public services at minimum cost while bypassing substantive moral questions about what kind of world we seek to collectively make"
"My argument is far more fundamental, namely that universalism is an inadequate response to tribalism"
"The three vignettes of Moses' life before he becomes leader of the israelites perfectly illustrate this. He intervenes, first to rescure an israelite from an egyptian, then israelite to fellow israelite, the the non-israelite daughters of Jethro from non-israelite shepherds.."
"Tribalism and its modern counterpart nationalism assumes there is one god for each nation. Universalism contends that there is one truth, one way, one creed - for all humanity. Neither does justice to the human other, the stranger who is not in my image but is nevertheless in gods image. Tribalism denies rights to the outsider. Universalism grants rights if and only if the outsider converts, conforms, assimilates, and thus ceases to be an outsider".
"What would faith be like? It would be like being secure in one's own home, yet moved by the beauty of foreign places, knowing that they are someone else's home, not mine, but still part of the glory of the world that is ours. It would be like being fluent in English, yet thrilled by the rhythms and resonances of an Italian sonnet one only partially understands"
"Whatever view of the nature and prehistory of mankind, we are not made for constant change at this ever-accelerating pace. Maimonides points out that 'man according to his nature is not capable of abandoning suddely all to which he was accustomed'".
"...subjects were exposed to electric shocks of increasing intensity. Some were provided with a button by which they could stop the experiment; others were given none. Those who had the button were able to endure far higher levels of shock than others."
"In a debate, one side wins, the other loses but both are the same as they were before. In a conversation, neither side loses and both are changed, because they now know what reality looks like from a different perspective."
"As Rabbi Bachya put it, 'The active participation of man in the creation of his own wealth is a sign of his spiritual greatness' ".
"Nothing is more effective in alleviating poverty than giving individuals the chance to create small businesses."
"Not only time, but place too, becomes commercialised. Civil society depends on environments where people meet, mix and form attachments that cut across barriers of class or ethnicity...There are fewer such environments.... More and more of our encounters are disembodied."
"Lewis gompertz, british jew, founder of the RSPCA"
"How long does it take for a carob tree to bear fruit?
Seventy years
And are you certain that you will live another seventy years?
I found carob trees in the world. As my forefathers planted them for me, so I too plant these for my children" - Honi
"Peace is a paradox. Many traditions praise it and decry conflict and war. Yet in war, even ordinary people become heroes. In the pursuit of peace, even heroes are often afraid to take the risk"
"It is precisely because we are not the same as individuals, nations or civilisations that our exchanges are non-zero-sum encounters"
"Meanwhile, politics in the West has become ever more procedural and managerial, concerned with delivering maximum public services at minimum cost while bypassing substantive moral questions about what kind of world we seek to collectively make"
"My argument is far more fundamental, namely that universalism is an inadequate response to tribalism"
"The three vignettes of Moses' life before he becomes leader of the israelites perfectly illustrate this. He intervenes, first to rescure an israelite from an egyptian, then israelite to fellow israelite, the the non-israelite daughters of Jethro from non-israelite shepherds.."
"Tribalism and its modern counterpart nationalism assumes there is one god for each nation. Universalism contends that there is one truth, one way, one creed - for all humanity. Neither does justice to the human other, the stranger who is not in my image but is nevertheless in gods image. Tribalism denies rights to the outsider. Universalism grants rights if and only if the outsider converts, conforms, assimilates, and thus ceases to be an outsider".
"What would faith be like? It would be like being secure in one's own home, yet moved by the beauty of foreign places, knowing that they are someone else's home, not mine, but still part of the glory of the world that is ours. It would be like being fluent in English, yet thrilled by the rhythms and resonances of an Italian sonnet one only partially understands"
"Whatever view of the nature and prehistory of mankind, we are not made for constant change at this ever-accelerating pace. Maimonides points out that 'man according to his nature is not capable of abandoning suddely all to which he was accustomed'".
"...subjects were exposed to electric shocks of increasing intensity. Some were provided with a button by which they could stop the experiment; others were given none. Those who had the button were able to endure far higher levels of shock than others."
"In a debate, one side wins, the other loses but both are the same as they were before. In a conversation, neither side loses and both are changed, because they now know what reality looks like from a different perspective."
"As Rabbi Bachya put it, 'The active participation of man in the creation of his own wealth is a sign of his spiritual greatness' ".
"Nothing is more effective in alleviating poverty than giving individuals the chance to create small businesses."
"Not only time, but place too, becomes commercialised. Civil society depends on environments where people meet, mix and form attachments that cut across barriers of class or ethnicity...There are fewer such environments.... More and more of our encounters are disembodied."
"Lewis gompertz, british jew, founder of the RSPCA"
"How long does it take for a carob tree to bear fruit?
Seventy years
And are you certain that you will live another seventy years?
I found carob trees in the world. As my forefathers planted them for me, so I too plant these for my children" - Honi
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 1, 2021
Reading Rabbi Jonathan Sack’s work this week was interesting and the book certainly contains wisdom for public leaders from a Jewish perspective. I appreciated how often he integrates the words of others in his writing to provide further food for thought and clarity. The most powerful chapter in this book for me was the chapter that explored education. The way he discusses the history of language and the proliferation of printed content provides a strong case for the support and funding of education as a central means of promoting understanding and violence de-escalation. Knowledge is powerful, and the ways that the Jewish faith has worked to preserve that and expand it is noteworthy and commendable. The value placed on intellect and the transferring of knowledge has sustained their religious and cultural practices throughout many difficult transitions and genocides.
The unity of God being found in the diversity of God’s creation is a compelling articulation of a truth that is found across many religious traditions. Oppression and violence continue to unmake the world, regardless of who uses them as a catalyst for change; seeing God in the other is part of the antidote to our destructive and hurtful ways. The idea of covenantal relationships is a helpful metaphor through which to explore how this might be possible.
At the very end of the book, there is a profound story about two people who carry stones, and how their perception of their load changes the way they value it. The meaning is explained that it is only by valuing our own religious tradition that we become able to value the tradition of another. This rings true for me. Understanding the complicated relationship I have with my own faith - the things I love about it and all my doubts and questions - allows me to extend that same grace in conversations and relationships that cross many different faith practices. Instead of seeing difference as a threat, it becomes a beautiful place to watch how someone else connects with the divine.
As a final point, there are parts of this book that I did struggle with - whilst I agree that individualism at times is taken too far, it is possible to value both individual freedoms and communal ones. His position that morality is disintegrating in society and this leads to our current issues is reductionist, simplistic, and incorrect. Values are not inherently tied to Judeo-Christo-Islamic western religious traditions. His lack of conversation around oppression and how this affects peace making efforts bothered me slightly also. It is common for calls for unity and peace to center on silencing the legitimate cries of those who are suffering. Peace making and truth telling must go hand in hand - at times I see this orientation in his writing and then in other moments I am left uncertain as to how far this commitment reaches. Peace-making across religious differences must also include us caring for the peace and safety of those within our own communities who suffer. Peace-making efforts must be rooted in the equalization of all, not the sustaining of hierarchies. Basic human rights require us to support marginalized communities and I don’t clearly see this solidarity in his writing. Tolerance cannot extend to harmful behavior, but must gently and persistently work towards justice.
The unity of God being found in the diversity of God’s creation is a compelling articulation of a truth that is found across many religious traditions. Oppression and violence continue to unmake the world, regardless of who uses them as a catalyst for change; seeing God in the other is part of the antidote to our destructive and hurtful ways. The idea of covenantal relationships is a helpful metaphor through which to explore how this might be possible.
At the very end of the book, there is a profound story about two people who carry stones, and how their perception of their load changes the way they value it. The meaning is explained that it is only by valuing our own religious tradition that we become able to value the tradition of another. This rings true for me. Understanding the complicated relationship I have with my own faith - the things I love about it and all my doubts and questions - allows me to extend that same grace in conversations and relationships that cross many different faith practices. Instead of seeing difference as a threat, it becomes a beautiful place to watch how someone else connects with the divine.
As a final point, there are parts of this book that I did struggle with - whilst I agree that individualism at times is taken too far, it is possible to value both individual freedoms and communal ones. His position that morality is disintegrating in society and this leads to our current issues is reductionist, simplistic, and incorrect. Values are not inherently tied to Judeo-Christo-Islamic western religious traditions. His lack of conversation around oppression and how this affects peace making efforts bothered me slightly also. It is common for calls for unity and peace to center on silencing the legitimate cries of those who are suffering. Peace making and truth telling must go hand in hand - at times I see this orientation in his writing and then in other moments I am left uncertain as to how far this commitment reaches. Peace-making across religious differences must also include us caring for the peace and safety of those within our own communities who suffer. Peace-making efforts must be rooted in the equalization of all, not the sustaining of hierarchies. Basic human rights require us to support marginalized communities and I don’t clearly see this solidarity in his writing. Tolerance cannot extend to harmful behavior, but must gently and persistently work towards justice.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 6, 2023
Possibly the most important book I’ve read. Sacks writes with an empathy and intelligence that feels rare in our current climate. Firstly this book generated great controversy in the first edition when he stated ‘In the course of history, God has spoken to mankind in many languages: through Judaism to Jews, Christianity to Christians, Islam to Muslims ... truth on earth is not, nor can it aspire to be, the whole truth ... in heaven there is truth, on earth there are truths. Therefore each culture has something to contribute."
You probably won’t find this quote in your edition of the book. Indeed, it is a radical perspective for the orthodox chief rabbi. However, thankfully this essential message of tolerance, understanding and truly empathising with other religions comes through in this book, even if he did ‘retract’ the statement.
Essentially, this is an extremely important book for the diversity of London, particularly. At a time now, in which hospitality against certain religions is strife. It also speaks to us personally about the situation happening now in Israel /Palestine. ‘The question is; is there a solution that would be acceptable to both sides? Both have long memories, Israelis of 2000 years of Jewish suffering and the existential need for Jews to have, somewhere on earth, a defensible space; Palestinians of displacement and loss, political impotence and economic hardship, of humiliating defeat. There are two narratives, neither of which make space for the other’
Some key quotes that will stick with me
P200 ‘there is nothing relativist about the idea of the dignity of difference. It is based on the radical transcendence of god from the created universe, with its astonishing diversity of life forms’
‘Can I recognise god’s image in someone who is not in my image, who’s language faith, ideals are different from mine?… can we create a paradigm shift through which we come to recognise that we are enlarged not diminished by distance, just as we are enlarged not diminished by the 6000 languages that exist trust, each with its unique sensibilities, art forms and literary expressions?’
It can be tough to read and take time but Everyone should read this book.
You probably won’t find this quote in your edition of the book. Indeed, it is a radical perspective for the orthodox chief rabbi. However, thankfully this essential message of tolerance, understanding and truly empathising with other religions comes through in this book, even if he did ‘retract’ the statement.
Essentially, this is an extremely important book for the diversity of London, particularly. At a time now, in which hospitality against certain religions is strife. It also speaks to us personally about the situation happening now in Israel /Palestine. ‘The question is; is there a solution that would be acceptable to both sides? Both have long memories, Israelis of 2000 years of Jewish suffering and the existential need for Jews to have, somewhere on earth, a defensible space; Palestinians of displacement and loss, political impotence and economic hardship, of humiliating defeat. There are two narratives, neither of which make space for the other’
Some key quotes that will stick with me
P200 ‘there is nothing relativist about the idea of the dignity of difference. It is based on the radical transcendence of god from the created universe, with its astonishing diversity of life forms’
‘Can I recognise god’s image in someone who is not in my image, who’s language faith, ideals are different from mine?… can we create a paradigm shift through which we come to recognise that we are enlarged not diminished by distance, just as we are enlarged not diminished by the 6000 languages that exist trust, each with its unique sensibilities, art forms and literary expressions?’
It can be tough to read and take time but Everyone should read this book.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 29, 2024
For some time I've been a fan of Rabbi Sacks from afar, hearing bits of his insights. But this was the first of his books I've read. I was a bit disappointed when I saw that this was a book on modern society and ideology, written in 2001. I expected it to be at least somewhat outdated, and have limited relevance to a world which has changed considerably in the intervening 23 years. But I was wrong.
Rabbi Sacks identifies the ideological elements of modernity, pointing out concerns and noting the trends which are likely to accelerate if left unchecked. He is incredibly prescient, highlighting emerging issues which have only become more pronounced in the present time. Most of the time, it sounds as if he is speaking right out of the present day.
Rabbi Sacks approaches his critiques with nuance, highlighting the balance society should strive to achieve, while identifying the negatives of veering too much to one side. He criticizes a soulless materialistic world governed by markets, while also maintaining that the market is the best way to promote freedom and increase prosperity for the majority of the world's citizens.
Though he is writing as an Orthodox Jewish Rabbi, his central argument is that there is value in diversity and difference - amongst religions, cultures, politics, and the environment. Rabbi Sacks argues that we are enriched rather than harmed, by these differences. I found his perspective refreshing and illustrative of his general approach, lying between those who deny the presence of any difference, and those who see others that differ with them as a threat which need correction.
Some other themes Rabbi Sacks touches on are: the dangers of both socialism and laissez faire capitalism, materialistic consumption and its impact on the environment, philosophical underpinnings which deny difference (Plato's error), the value of religion to provide meaning and dignity in an otherwise mechanistic account of reality, the ethics of cooperation, the decline of valuing religion, community, and family life, and the associated rise of loneliness.
Rabbi Sacks is an excellent and moving writer, and there were many selections I highlighted which I found compelling. I'll end off with quoting one:
"Every technological civilization faces two opposing dangers.
One is the hubris that says: we have godlike powers, therefore let us take the place of God. The other is the fear that says: in the name of God, let us not use these godlike powers at all. Both are wrong. Each technological advance carries with it the possibility of diminishing or enhancing human dignity. What matters is how we use it. The way to use it is in covenant with God, honouring His image that is mankind."
Rabbi Sacks identifies the ideological elements of modernity, pointing out concerns and noting the trends which are likely to accelerate if left unchecked. He is incredibly prescient, highlighting emerging issues which have only become more pronounced in the present time. Most of the time, it sounds as if he is speaking right out of the present day.
Rabbi Sacks approaches his critiques with nuance, highlighting the balance society should strive to achieve, while identifying the negatives of veering too much to one side. He criticizes a soulless materialistic world governed by markets, while also maintaining that the market is the best way to promote freedom and increase prosperity for the majority of the world's citizens.
Though he is writing as an Orthodox Jewish Rabbi, his central argument is that there is value in diversity and difference - amongst religions, cultures, politics, and the environment. Rabbi Sacks argues that we are enriched rather than harmed, by these differences. I found his perspective refreshing and illustrative of his general approach, lying between those who deny the presence of any difference, and those who see others that differ with them as a threat which need correction.
Some other themes Rabbi Sacks touches on are: the dangers of both socialism and laissez faire capitalism, materialistic consumption and its impact on the environment, philosophical underpinnings which deny difference (Plato's error), the value of religion to provide meaning and dignity in an otherwise mechanistic account of reality, the ethics of cooperation, the decline of valuing religion, community, and family life, and the associated rise of loneliness.
Rabbi Sacks is an excellent and moving writer, and there were many selections I highlighted which I found compelling. I'll end off with quoting one:
"Every technological civilization faces two opposing dangers.
One is the hubris that says: we have godlike powers, therefore let us take the place of God. The other is the fear that says: in the name of God, let us not use these godlike powers at all. Both are wrong. Each technological advance carries with it the possibility of diminishing or enhancing human dignity. What matters is how we use it. The way to use it is in covenant with God, honouring His image that is mankind."
January 7, 2024
I found this book on a shelf at synagogue, and picked it up out of curiosity. As it turns out, the book belongs to a friend of mine, and happens to be the first printing of the book which was later edited to tone down some of the more controversial passages. I would be curious to read a later edition to understand what changes were made. This book was almost a reiteration of my undergraduate curriculum. It combines political philosophy, economics, environmental awareness, international relations, and game theory to understand how diversity affects globalization with an added twist of Jewish wisdom. Rabbi Sacks sees the covenant of Judaism as the fundamental lens through which we can better understand one another and bring peace to the world. He writes that "understanding the particularity of what matters to us is the best way of coming to appreciate what matters to others." It is through his faith in Judaism that he can be in relationship with others, meeting them where they are, rather than hoping they would change or align with his way of thinking. Knowing that his Judaism is meaningful to him, he can better engage in a dialogue with a person of a different faith. Our sole path of avoiding the clash of civilizations is through an enhanced responsibility of the world's religious communities to build relationships, and offer the courage to have faith in light of all the challenges facing humanity in the modern world.
April 24, 2020
O Rav Jonathan Sacks possui um conhecimento e uma clareza de raciocínio muito raros. O livro aborda os principais aspectos de um mundo globalizado, desde a tecnologia de informação, até os grandes mercados e richas entre países, sempre com uma visão mais humanista. Excelente, como tudo que ele escreve.
April 25, 2023
Sacks brings an important perspective to a discussion around contention - that we need each other. It is a semi-religious view of today's polarization. As a follower of Jesus, it resonated with me.
I have resolved to treat everyone, especially with those who think and believe differently with dignity and respect. I resolve to listen better. I think Sacks for new ways of thinking about this.
I have resolved to treat everyone, especially with those who think and believe differently with dignity and respect. I resolve to listen better. I think Sacks for new ways of thinking about this.
June 15, 2023
Do not buy the kindle version of this book! The kindle version is the worst rendition of any book I’ve ever seen, at least a third of it completely illegible. What I could read of it was very good, but it’s impossibly frustrating to piece together his full discussion from the collection of indecipherable hieroglyphs that attempt to pass for the printed word here.
September 8, 2025
this book oscillates between being a 20/10 on some parts to being a 7.5/10 on others.
There's dignity in difference! Too much of the assumption of both major world religions (Islam and Christianity) is that we need to remove differences for a better world. Jonathan Sacks takes on this assumption and shatters it.
There's dignity in difference! Too much of the assumption of both major world religions (Islam and Christianity) is that we need to remove differences for a better world. Jonathan Sacks takes on this assumption and shatters it.
December 20, 2025
Got about 40 pages in before I called it quits. The ideas may be interesting but his sources are stale and his writing is so formulaic that I couldn't focus on the ideas anymore. Also out of 90+ sources that he cited, the vast majority are white men. Only 2 were women. The Dignity of Whatnow? Also didn't appreciate his demeanor towards Muslims, esp Palestinians.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews