Woodchopper Revisited 41

the author of a law review article reading the same legal materials the judge considers will confront other views in a much more systematic way, since that author is under no obligation to write as though only one correct answer exists. Indeed, the goal of such an article may be precisely to explore the varying possible interpretations and to raise the questions, doubts, and uncertainties the judge strives either to resolve or to ignore. Like the judge, the posek may not see it as his job to defend his interpretive position against all plausible alternatives, especially if in the process he suggests doubt and uncertainty as to the correctness of his own pesak(ruling).'*

This suggestion— that there is a meaningful genre difference between the writing of poskim handing down rulings and that of halakhists engaged in a more general study of their subject— is offered here as a hypothesis; the question deserves further study. To the extent that there is something to the distinction, however, we might conclude that the primary responsibility for producing thorough and balanced analyses of alternative halakhic assumptions and positions rests not with the poskim but with the wider community of halakhic interpretation, just as it has been the task of scholars writing in law reviews to examine and criticize the reasoning of published judicial opinions. Such a community of halakhic“law review” scholarship does exist, especially with respect to bioethics.'”’” As long as the members of that community continue to write and publish— and there is little indication that they intend to stop doing so(!)— they will ensure the continuation of a healthy discourse in the field.

2. Our second question was the substantive one: how well do these analogies work, and do they solve the“problem of importance”? As I have indicated, this question may seem difficult to address, since it demands the sort of evaluative judgment that cannot be quantified. How, after all, do we measure objectively the degree of an argument’s persuasiveness? In fact, though, my question concerns not so much the persuasiveness of these analogies, the extent to which they persuade