I met a guy call Russell in Wild Oats Market in South Beach. He was talking to some Chabad bochrim, he had some Jewish knowledge. He said that he believes that for an atheist to do a kind deed is a higher level than for a religious person to do such a deed. Now, first of all, who is he, Russell, for him to have such a belief? Also, I did not point out to him that there is no such thing as an atheist, only an agnostic, because as much as I cannot prove to you that there is a G-d in the world, you cannot prove to me that there is not. As well, I did point out to him that in Jewish thought the opposite is true, that is, he who is commanded and does is greater than he who is not commanded and does. He could not hear this because he was too caught up in himself. I tried to explain that the person who is commanded actually has to get over himself to fulfill the command and that is a lot harder than just doing something because you feel like it. What he did want to know was if such an idea was written or Talmudic, and, it being of Talmudic origin it must have been argued out by a bunch of rabbis before being decided. Now, first of all, this is a philosophical idea, an expression of truth, not a halacha that is decided one way or another for certain reasons and according to a set of rules. As well, the rabbis who discussed, and continue to discuss Talmudic ideas are interested in truth and the oral tradition, not in what they themselves feel is correct, should be, could be. My only issue with Russell, in truth, is that he could not recognize that he had come to a lofty sounding conclusion, an interesting intellectual idea, without examining the other side of the story. Why does that point in particular bother me? Because I was like that too, until I came to Israel and heard the other side of the story. "I could have become religious if I had wanted to." A surprisingly common claim, when pressed. The funny thing is that it is said so easily and is so entirely false. A secular Jew could only ever become religious if he is exposed to the other side in all it's depth and reality, this does not happen.
I heard another idea regarding oral tradition, that is that it is unreliable. Amongst the Jews, the oral tradition remained alive for hundreds of years and was of central importance to the nation. That it was (and is) alive meant that it found expression in generation. At one point the general principles of the oral tradition were in danger of being lost and were therefore written. But, take a look, the written Torah is impossible to understand without the oral tradition, and the written version of the oral tradition is impossible to understand without a teacher.