4 ms·

>As for Chomsky - well, he's completely discredited to me after comparing his writings about Southeast Asia to spending significant amounts of time in SE Asia.

>As for Chomsky - well, he's completely discredited to me after comparing his writings about Southeast Asia to spending significant amounts of time in SE Asia. Also the ex-Communist countries. He's a relic from a dead age. Ad Hominem circumstantial. >Guaranteed perspective-changer. If I was a BP CEO I would have a different perspective on the oil spill, and If I was a Goldman&Sachs CEO I would have a different perspective on the economic crash. Perspectives are not arguments.

lionhearted 15y ago
> Ad Hominem circumstantial. Hey, welcome to Hacker News. This is your second comment, your first was, "Meanwhile, red necks scream in anger, teir took uor jobs!!" So, let me clue you in to the vibe here. First, we aim for a really high level of civility here. Second, standard throwing out of cliche is frowned upon - yeah, we get it. Nobody liked the bailouts and the BP oil spill was bad. But most importantly - here, we try to engage in thoughtful discussion instead of just throwing out words like "ad hominem" when an argument isn't ad hominem. I wrote a fairly long comment that Chomsky's writings about what the world was like were wrong, with specific examples of comparable Communist/non-Communist countries. And I outlined that I had a personal background in the matter. Anyways, my above comment said - 1. Chomsky advocated strongly for many communist regimes and against the USA plenty of times. 2. I believe that was a mistake, as evidenced by comparisons between Communism/non-Communism. Also, clearly, his predictions on South Vietnam and Cambodia were mistaken. Anyways, welcome to Hacker News. Please try to up the discussion level a little bit, this isn't like the rest of the internet.
- Hawramani 15y ago
  Mentioning a comment he made somewhere else to discredit him is clearly an ad hominem, even if your attack on Chomsky wasn't. Chomsky is wrong on a lot of things. That in no way makes him wrong about everything.
- aranazo 15y ago
  Ad Hominem? not quite. However you did trot out 3 of the 4 top straw-man attacks on Chomsky, namely he's hard left, supported the Khmer Rouge, and is rabidly Anti-American. You forgot to accuse him of anti-antisemitism.
run4yourlives 15y ago
It's hardly ad hominem when the guy makes a four paragraph argument explaining why he thinks Chomsky is wrong. Feel free to argue the point, if you want. Your second point is just mush.

lionhearted 15y ago

> Ad Hominem circumstantial. Hey, welcome to Hacker News. This is your second comment, your first was, "Meanwhile, red necks scream in anger, teir took uor jobs!!" So, let me clue you in to the vibe here. First, we aim for a really high level of civility here. Second, standard throwing out of cliche is frowned upon - yeah, we get it. Nobody liked the bailouts and the BP oil spill was bad. But most importantly - here, we try to engage in thoughtful discussion instead of just throwing out words like "ad hominem" when an argument isn't ad hominem. I wrote a fairly long comment that Chomsky's writings about what the world was like were wrong, with specific examples of comparable Communist/non-Communist countries. And I outlined that I had a personal background in the matter. Anyways, my above comment said - 1. Chomsky advocated strongly for many communist regimes and against the USA plenty of times. 2. I believe that was a mistake, as evidenced by comparisons between Communism/non-Communism. Also, clearly, his predictions on South Vietnam and Cambodia were mistaken. Anyways, welcome to Hacker News. Please try to up the discussion level a little bit, this isn't like the rest of the internet.

Hawramani 15y ago
Mentioning a comment he made somewhere else to discredit him is clearly an ad hominem, even if your attack on Chomsky wasn't. Chomsky is wrong on a lot of things. That in no way makes him wrong about everything.
aranazo 15y ago
Ad Hominem? not quite. However you did trot out 3 of the 4 top straw-man attacks on Chomsky, namely he's hard left, supported the Khmer Rouge, and is rabidly Anti-American. You forgot to accuse him of anti-antisemitism.

run4yourlives 15y ago

It's hardly ad hominem when the guy makes a four paragraph argument explaining why he thinks Chomsky is wrong. Feel free to argue the point, if you want. Your second point is just mush.