This paper focuses on two elements of the Passover Seder ritual and their connection to Piagetian education theory. After outlining Piaget’s theory of genetic epistemology and its implications for education theory, it focuses on Sigel’s distancing theory, which touts question asking as a tool for presenting information to students. This paper arg…[Read more]

This paper focuses on two elements of the Passover Seder ritual and their connection to Piagetian education theory. After outlining Piaget’s theory of genetic epistemology and its implications for education theory, it focuses on Sigel’s distancing theory, which touts question asking as a tool for presenting information to students. This paper arg…[Read more]

This paper focuses on two elements of the Passover Seder ritual and their connection to Piagetian education theory. After outlining Piaget’s theory of genetic epistemology and its implications for education theory, it focuses on Sigel’s distancing theory, which touts question asking as a tool for presenting information to students. This paper arg…[Read more]

This paper focuses on two elements of the Passover Seder ritual and their connection to Piagetian education theory. After outlining Piaget’s theory of genetic epistemology and its implications for education theory, it focuses on Sigel’s distancing theory, which touts question asking as a tool for presenting information to students. This paper arg…[Read more]

Since H. Humbach’s Baktrische Sprachdenkmäler (Wiesbaden, 1966) the main etymological
proposal for Bactrian χϸονο ‘(calendar) year, (regnal) year’ has been A. Thierfelder’s suggestion of a loanword from Hellenistic Greek χρόνος ‘time’. In this article the plausibility of this etymology is re-examined, and it is further argued that it should b…[Read more]

Since H. Humbach’s Baktrische Sprachdenkmäler (Wiesbaden, 1966) the main etymological
proposal for Bactrian χϸονο ‘(calendar) year, (regnal) year’ has been A. Thierfelder’s suggestion of a loanword from Hellenistic Greek χρόνος ‘time’. In this article the plausibility of this etymology is re-examined, and it is further argued that it should b…[Read more]

Although the prohibition of avodah zarah (literally, “strange/foreign worship,” but more loosely translated as “idolatry”) is included in both the Torah’s 613 mitzvos for Jews and in the seven Noahide laws, many authorities maintain that the exact parameters of the prohibition differ when applied to Jews versus when applied to non-Jews. There is…[Read more]

Although the prohibition of avodah zarah (literally, “strange/foreign worship,” but more loosely translated as “idolatry”) is included in both the Torah’s 613 mitzvos for Jews and in the seven Noahide laws, many authorities maintain that the exact parameters of the prohibition differ when applied to Jews versus when applied to non-Jews. There is…[Read more]

Although the prohibition of avodah zarah (literally, “strange/foreign worship,” but more loosely translated as “idolatry”) is included in both the Torah’s 613 mitzvos for Jews and in the seven Noahide laws, many authorities maintain that the exact parameters of the prohibition differ when applied to Jews versus when applied to non-Jews. There is…[Read more]

Although the prohibition of avodah zarah (literally, “strange/foreign worship,” but more loosely translated as “idolatry”) is included in both the Torah’s 613 mitzvos for Jews and in the seven Noahide laws, many authorities maintain that the exact parameters of the prohibition differ when applied to Jews versus when applied to non-Jews. There is…[Read more]

Although the prohibition of avodah zarah (literally, “strange/foreign worship,” but more loosely translated as “idolatry”) is included in both the Torah’s 613 mitzvos for Jews and in the seven Noahide laws, many authorities maintain that the exact parameters of the prohibition differ when applied to Jews versus when applied to non-Jews. There is…[Read more]