4 ms·

Hypocrisy is such a boring & irrelevant criticism in most contexts. His critical theory is much more important than his practice. He has to survive in the world

Hypocrisy is such a boring & irrelevant criticism in most contexts. His critical theory is much more important than his practice. He has to survive in the world that exists, not the one he wishes existed. There's really minimal value in such a symbolic gesture as rejecting a pension, and criticizing his ideas on such irrelevant grounds takes away from actually talking about the issues raised.

pm90 11y ago
This is a very good point, I have kind of accepted your point, but never thought of it explicitly this way. So now I wonder: Richard Stallman could probably have done a lot more for Software Freedom by living a less rigid life. Although, part of me is kinda glad that there is at least ONE person who does try to live like he does.
spriggan3 11y ago
> His critical theory is much more important than his practice. People should also do what they preach. And acknowledge their own bias and hypocrisy which Chomsky never does. He does like you, dismisses any criticism as "irrelevant" and that's why nobody can debate with Chomsky, there is no discussion.
- icebraining 11y ago
  People should also do what they preach. Why? If one is issuing mandates from a position of authority, I agree that following what one imposes on others is essential, but in intellectual discussion one should be free to argue a position and its opposite the next minute. Anything less is downright dangerous for the group and society as a whole. We can't depend on the half-dozen cranks that actually live their lives swimming against the tide to argue for everything that is truly different, nor should we trust their arguments just because they turn their crackpot theories into practice.
- hiddencost 11y ago
  It's an ad hominem, it's irrelevant. Engage with the theory if you want to a meaningful discussion. I'm not being dismissive because I don't want to deal with criticism, I'm being dismissive because it's not criticism of the content.
- lawnchair_larry 11y ago
  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

pm90 11y ago

This is a very good point, I have kind of accepted your point, but never thought of it explicitly this way. So now I wonder: Richard Stallman could probably have done a lot more for Software Freedom by living a less rigid life. Although, part of me is kinda glad that there is at least ONE person who does try to live like he does.

spriggan3 11y ago

> His critical theory is much more important than his practice. People should also do what they preach. And acknowledge their own bias and hypocrisy which Chomsky never does. He does like you, dismisses any criticism as "irrelevant" and that's why nobody can debate with Chomsky, there is no discussion.

icebraining 11y ago
People should also do what they preach. Why? If one is issuing mandates from a position of authority, I agree that following what one imposes on others is essential, but in intellectual discussion one should be free to argue a position and its opposite the next minute. Anything less is downright dangerous for the group and society as a whole. We can't depend on the half-dozen cranks that actually live their lives swimming against the tide to argue for everything that is truly different, nor should we trust their arguments just because they turn their crackpot theories into practice.
hiddencost 11y ago
It's an ad hominem, it's irrelevant. Engage with the theory if you want to a meaningful discussion. I'm not being dismissive because I don't want to deal with criticism, I'm being dismissive because it's not criticism of the content.
lawnchair_larry 11y ago
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy...

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]