VaEra 5767 -- The Torah of the Fundamental Attribution Error

This week, Moshe’s second attempt to rouse the Jewish people fails because the people are working so hard they barely have a chance to breathe. He then complains to God that he certainly will not be able to persuade Pharaoh to free the Jews. “Hen Bnei Yisrael Lo Shamu Elai, V’eikh Yishma’eni Paroh, v’ani Aral S’fataim – Behold B’nei Yisrael didn’t listen to me, how can it be that Pharaoh will listen to me, as I have lips that are aral (a phrase perhaps referring to physical deformity or a social speech impediment)?”

Rashi says that this is one of the ten Kal v’Chomer statements in the Torah. Actually, there are ten in TaNaKh: four in Torah, four in Navi, and two in Ketuvim, according to the midrash of Rabbi Yishmael in Bereishit Rabba (92:7). The existence of this enumerated category may be as new to you as it was to me. The ten plagues, ten commandments, thirteen attributes, those I knew – but the ten Kalin v’Hamurin? Even so, it is pretty catchy, and appealing to those logically minded, and so I’m thinking of proposing a modification to our family’s singing of Ehad Mi Yodea: “Asara Kal V’Homriya.” (After all, “Dibriyah” for the commandments is a little redundant given “shnei luhot haBrit.”)

Let’s look at Moshe’s Kal v’Chomer and compare it to the other nine that Rabbi Yishmael presents. A complete list of the other nine is below for those interested.

Moshe’s Kal v’Chomer is fundamentally problematic because it shouldn’t be a Kal v’Chomer. Moshe probably means it as a Kal v’Chomer, and there are at least three different ways to explain what is the Kal and what is the Chomer (see Rashi, Siftei Hachamim, and Ibn Ezra) but we immediately see that this doesn’t follow the structure. It’s therefore quite interesting that it even makes it into Rabbi Yishmael’s list, a point that the Anaf Yosef commentary to Midrash Rabba makes.

A classic Kal v’Chomer would go something like this: I tell you that I can’t lift 30 pounds, and so you would say that I am not very strong and I certainly can’t lift 40 pounds. More abstractly, if A is true about X, then B, which has even more of whatever characteristic made A true, must certainly be true about X. In other words, we use some fact that we know about X to make an attribution about X that we can then generalize.

But a Kal v’Chomer doesn’t work if there is some reason to hesitate before inferring an attribute from the fact. That is, if I tell you that I tried to lift 30 pounds today and couldn’t, and also that I have a fever today, you would be quite cautious about making the inference that I’m generally not strong and could not lift 40 pounds on a normal day. This is the situation in Moshe’s Kal v’Chomer. The Torah tells us that the Jewish people did not listen to Moshe because their spirits were so low from all the hard work. Moshe should therefore not attribute his inability to convince the Jewish people to his own character – thus further implying that he hasn’t a chance of persuading Pharaoh – but to the fact that they were working too hard. The failure to make proper attributions to situations, rather than to people, (just like Moshe did here) is known in social psychology as the Fundamental Attribution Error.

Moshe’s current Kal v’Chomer is noteworthy among the other nine in several ways. Let’s look at some patterns in the other nine to fully appreciate this.

First, in each of the nine, the parallelism and attribution of the Kal v’Chomer seem correct. For example, as Jeremiah says, one who can’t keep up with human runners can’t catch horses (#5); as Moshe later says, those who rebel under divine leadership probably rebel under sub-divine leadership (#4); as King David’s men say, when home is unsafe, the frontline will be more so (#6 and 7); and as Achashverosh say, those who kill under the king’s watch probably did even more damage in the lawless provinces (#10) etc. None of the other nine Kal v’Chomer statements have the obvious flaw found in Moshe’s Kal v’Chomer this week; in other words, none of the other nine exhibit the Fundamental Attribution Error.

Second, only one of these other Kal v’Chomer structures addresses any attributes of the speaker, and it does so l’Shevah, in praise of the speaker. This is the Kal v’Chomer of Joseph’s brothers, who make a Kal v’Chomer to defend themselves against Joseph’s charge that they stole from him: “If we refused to take the money you gave us, how could we steal from you?” All of the other instances address attributes of the listener or of a 3rd party. For example, Moshe makes a Kal v’Chomer on the behavior of the Jewish people, God does so on the halakha of Miriam’s leprosy, the prophets do so regarding the behavior of the people, King David’s men do so in examining the level of danger in which they find themselves, and Ahashverosh does so in discussing the extent of the Jewish military actions on Purim. While Moshe’s attributions to himself are not unique – Joseph’s brothers do so as well – in no other case does a Biblical character make a self-deprecating Kal v’Chomer

Third, of the nine, four are delivered by human beings trying to make an emphatic point in the course of conversation (Joseph’s brothers to their accusers; Moses to the people; David’s soldiers to David; Achashverosh to Esther). four are given in prophecy or general wisdom (Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and Proverbs). One is uttered by the Almighty (God to Moshe regarding Miriam). However, everyone of these nine is delivered to a human being – none are said to God. This Kal v’Chomer, and no other, is spoken to God.

To summarize, Moshe’s Kal v’Chomer in our parsha is unique in 3 dimensions. His is (a) the only Kal v’Chomer that loses its logical force due to an intervening factor -- the people’s fatigue --and makes the Fundamental Attribution Error; (b) the only Kal v’Chomer that makes negative attributions to the speaker; and c) the only Kal v’Chomer uttered to God.

What do we make of the fact that our greatest prophet utters the only self-doubting, Fundamental Attribution Error-ridden Kal v’Chomer in all of the TaNaKh, and, furthermore, does this in conversation with the Almighty?

Perhaps this is meant to illustrate to us just how hard it is for us to make accurate attributions and learn correct lessons from our experiences and observations. When we fail, it can be very difficult to know whether it was because we weren’t up to the challenge, or because some unknown external factor interfered. Moreover, even when we perceive that there was some external factor, as here, we may often wonder whether we might have failed anyway, even without that factor.

I think that we are often quite hard on ourselves and others (as I perhaps have been on Moshe) for making these sorts of errors, and for harboring such doubts. But I think that this is why the Torah shows us this incident as it does: so that we should realize that even the great and wise sometimes look back on their experiences and wonder what to make of them. Just as God was understanding with Moshe and helped him by including Aharon as a spokesman, Kal v’Chomer should we, who are not omniscient and all-mighty, go easy and ourselves and others when self-doubting ill-logic strikes us.

---------

The first Kal v’Chomer, Bereishit 44:8 – after Joseph’s brothers come see him in Egypt for the first time, he accuses his brothers of stealing his goblet. The brother’s respond and say, “Given that we returned the money that you gave to us, how could we steal from you?” That is, if a person does not hold onto money on which he or she has a claim, surely that person would not hold money on which (s)he has no claim.

The third Kal v’Chomer, BaMidbar 12:14 – God tells Moshe how to interact with Miriam during her leprosy saying “v’aviha yarok yarak b’faneha halo tikalem shivat yamim? Tisager shivat yamim mihutz lamaheneh.” That is, if the anger of an earthly parent would merit 7 days of impurity, surely the anger of Avinu sh’Bashamayim merits at least that much (apparently 14 days according to Breishit Rabba).

The fourth Kal v’Chomer, D’varim 31:27 – Moshe says to the Jewish people at the end of his life, “I know that you are rebellious and stiff-necked; you have rebelled against God during my life – and surely afterwards!” That is, those who rebel against God during the leadership of one who speaks directly with God will surely rebel in the absence of such a leader.

The fifth Kal’Chomer, Jeremiah 12:5 – the prophet describes the impending doom and feebleness of the Jewish people by saying, “If you get tired racing footmen, how do you expect to keep up with horses?”

The sixth Kal v’Chomer, Jeremiah 12:5 – Jeremiah’s prophecy continues, “if you feel danger in peaceful territory, how would you like the exposed heights of Jordan?”

The seventh Kal v’Chomer, Shmuel Alef, 23:3 – David encourages his men to accompany him to battle the Philistines in Ke’ilah. They respond, “We are afraid even here in Judea, how much more so if we go out to the battle in Ke’ilah.” This could be read one of two ways: if it is dangerous at home, how much more so in battle; or, if we are fearful people here at home, how much more so will we fear in battle.

The eighth Kal v’Chomer, Ezekiel 15:5 – Ezekiel brings the example of a grapevine, which isn’t much good as a building material – how much more so, he asks, if it is burnt?

The ninth Kal v’Chomer, Mishlei (Proverb) 11:31 – “Hen Tzadik Ba’aretz yishulam, af ki rasha v’hoteh – Behold the righteous is punished (Artscroll translation) on earth, certainly the wicked and sinners will be!”

The tenth Kal v’Chomer, Esther nine:12 – describing the carnage inflicted by the Jews against Haman’s men, Achashverosh says “In Shushan, the capital, the Jews have slain 500 men; imagine what they have done in the rest of the provinces!” (my translation based on the wooden Artscroll translation).