Thread: Noam Chomsky: A Linguistic Genius

Sabang

You wrote

“His Peers in academia encompass the whole political spectrum, and are probably mostly apolitical anyway.”

Since this was shown to be wrong, you changed your tune and wrote

Sorry, but academic praise or criticism of Chomsky is one of the least important measures of his relative importance that I can dream of.

So, first you claimed Chomsky’s views were legit because he is a respected scholar, now you say it does not matter if he is a respected scholar of not.

Changing your tune pretty significantly when faced with evidence.

You got more than a little Chomsky in you, don't you? Now I can see why you approve of his "methodology" of floating facts and selective memory.

^ Given the obvious premium you attach to the opinion of the incumbent right and centre 'academic establishment' over prominence in modern history, being voted the worlds most important Intellectual, published work, being the worlds most quoted living man and other such trivialities, one could almost jump to the conclusion that you are one yourself ajarn.

I'm afraid your attempts to trivialise Chomsky are as effective as a paramecium infiltrating an elephant stampede. In the process, you also make rather obvious your political leanings. But I'm sure you'll find an appreciative audience somewhere.

For me, this is boring. I know who will denigrate Chomsky, I know who will idolise Chomsky. They are both equally uninspiring viewpoints.

Compared to Chomsky, we are all ignorant

He is God

^ The great man would chop you off at the knees for that idolatry BF.

"Compared to Chomsky, we are all ignorant

He is God"

Is this brillant piece of logic intended to convince anyone of your position?

Heres a Chomsky quote that can be twisted any which way, so all and sundry can get some mileage from it-

"We are all hypocrites."

Originally Posted by sabang

Heres a Chomsky quote that can be twisted any which way, so all and sundry can get some mileage from it-

"We are all hypocrites."

This may be true, but some of us are bigger hypocrites than others, Chomsky by living a life that is totally at odds with what he preaches is pretty close to the top of the pile.

^

WTF?

What does George Bush have to do with Chomsky's research methodology, conclusions and lifestyle?

Jeez AA, maybe I overestimated you.

^

I see you have nothing to defend your position, and therefore you feel a need to attack me.

Ok, you have provided zero support for the methodology used by Chomsky to come to his conclusions, yet you are a true believer.

This is called filtering, you are taking in any evidence that supports your view Chomsky is "the Great Man" is what I think you called him and ignore all evidence to the contrary.

Keep believing, I understand. You are a leftist and having your prophet and ideals based on your prophet challenged is distressing.

Called cognitive dissonance, while your reasoning is obviously illogical, it is understandably and explainable.

Carry on

Originally Posted by Accidental Ajarn

yet you are a true believer.

I want to suck Chomsky cock, how is that for a true believer ?

Originally Posted by sabang

I was the vice Chairman of the National Party, Sydney branch, mid 1998-89. Google is your friend.

That would basically make you a communist

Originally Posted by Accidental Ajarn

Sabang

You seem an intelligent enough fellow, but it is obvious you are not that familiar with “academic” research. I don’t claim to be to most knowledgeable guy on the subject but I am qualified to teach the subject at the graduate level and have done so

Do you teach your students to use the same logical and informal fallacies, misrepresentation and ad hominem techniques that you employ on here?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

I'm still waiting for evidence Chomsky supports the US in any form what so ever.

He doesn't, he's a dissident, that's his job.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Basically, as been said before. Chomsky is for those pimple-faced teenagers out to change the world.

He is certainly a cause celebre' for them.
And for the 'true believers' of the Left, he is their Heavyweight.
Interestingly, the Far left doesn't like him much at all, but thats a different story.
But a lot of people who don't claim such credentials also can get a lot from reading Chomsky, for several different reasons.

I have mine, others their own. I recall saying that reading Chomsky is a good cure for myopia, politically speaking. Also that his politics are not my own- if you want my main critique of Chomsky, it is that he is better at asking questions than providing answers.

But he's invaluable.

Originally Posted by sabang

But he's invaluable.

Like a good pandemic that 'culls the herd'?

basically he is hated by a few because he always come to the logical conclusion that the US is at the source of many humanitarian violations,

the usual drones don't like to see their face in their mirror, and cry fool

^He is just another in a long line of Nattering Nabobs of Negativism...

“he's a dissident, that's his job.”

What does that mean?

Sure, it is easy to claim everything is shit, but what benchmarks does Chomsky use?

It is perfectly exceptable for a scholar to just think and use one’s intellect to come up with ideas, even radical ones. But until these ideas are tested, they are only hypotheses; Chomsky presents his unsubstantiated claims as truths and rejects any attempts to empirically test his claims.

He rejects the centuries old tradition of Western scientific logic based on evidence. He breaks all academic conventions when it comes to the use of evidence. He wants you to belief what he says just because he says it. There is no possible way Chomsky could come to the conclusions he does by using accepted academic methodology, and Chomsky already has the “answers” and therefore has to invent a way to “prove” his conclusions. Fools no one who is not blinded by irrational hatred of one’s political enemies.

So how is he any different, except he is an extremely talented linguist, than any bar stool expert whose answer to every issue is that everything sucks?

Sabang said let history decide, not his peers (but like Chomsky, he changed his view as first he claimed Chomsky was well respected by mainstream academia, yes I know he did not use the term mainstream but he claimed Chomsky had supporters all through academia, but changed his position when faced with evidence that could not be ignored). I am happy to do so, but of course Chomsky and his supporters will use selective memory and claim Chomsky did not say what he did.

Chomsky supported the Khmer Rouge.

The Khmer Rouge was one of the most murderous regimes which collapsed.

Chomsky supported the Soviet Union

The Soviet Union attempted to stay in power through the use of force and failed

Chomsky supported Mao and communism in China

China has turned its back on communism and have fully embraced market economic, although has not moved to democracy

China claimed America was going to turn Iraq into an American colony.

It appears tides are turning and an independent Iraq is asking the USA to leave as they are about ready to take it from here. Good news!

Chomsky predicted Islamic terrorist would become victorious.

While it is too early to be certain, most indications such as the lack of recent major terrorist attacks in the West and the decline of extremists in Iraq suggests the final outcome will be a marginalization of extreme Islamic terrorists.

Chomsky predicted Capitalism was doomed and would fail

In every place in the world where the rulers allow voters to choose governments, market economies has replaced non-market economics. Market economies (in various forms) are used by each and every one of the developed or growing economies of the world.

Chomsky claims the US is evil and fundamentally flawed.

The US, while having its ups and downs, is going strong and is on solid foundation

It does not appear Chomsky’s record of getting it right is very strong

Chomsky does not use accepted academic methodology and has been wrong in just about every prediction he has made?

But he still has believers?

Why?

Because our emotions often overpower our logical.

Chomsky plays on the worst of people’s emotions and uses hatred to spread irrationality.

With the amazing linguistic and writing skills he possesses, can you imagine how much good he could have done for the world if he would have dedicated his life to searching for the truth instead of devoting his life to spreading hatred, hypocrisy and falsehoods?

But I am sure our radicals on the board will not change their minds, after all, who needs evidence when one already knows the answer?

Chomsky supported the Khmer Rouge... Chomsky supported the Khmer Rouge... Chomsky supported the Soviet Union... Chomsky supported Mao and communism in China... Chomsky claims the US is evil and fundamentally flawed

Egregious codswallop. Those are completely untrue and unfounded statements.

Chomsky presents his unsubstantiated claims as truths and rejects any attempts to empirically test his claims

Righto, let's see some proof of the above then.