7 ms·

Adding this to my watch list! Chomsky really helped open my eyes about the world. I never understood how certain structures of power maintain control over socie

Adding this to my watch list! Chomsky really helped open my eyes about the world. I never understood how certain structures of power maintain control over society until I started listening to him. I’m so happy many of his talks are on YouTube.

bnbond 6y ago
Agreed. He’s a good entry point to that sort of critical theory. The Foucault Chomsky debate is on YouTube, though I find it very hard to follow.
- alecco 6y ago
  It’s very interesting how Foucault fans think he won. He only kept trying to move the point of the conversation to madness and how the powers that be used it. Perhaps it’s a good example of fanaticism vs old school reasoning. Chomsky didn’t “win” because the conversation was constantly derailed. It was a waste of time. Don’t try to reason or debate fanatics.
  - llamaz 6y ago
    I'm not a Foucault fan, and I used to hold the same opinion as you. But now I realise the exchange was, as you say, a "waste of time". Chomsky doesn't seem to have read up on the issues Foucault is talking about, and he admits as much in an interview on the topic, about how he was surprised that he could not find /any/ common ground from which to build a conversation with Foucault. This is more of a failure of communication on the part of French intellectuals, who use verbose language helps keep their radical tradition so insular. So... it's what you would expect an exchange between the analytic and continental philosophers to be like. Chomsky takes the enlightenment humanism tradition for granted, and assumes he can find common ground with Foucault there, but Foucault had been working in a tradition where the humanism vs anti-humanism debate (e.g. Althusser) was front and center. In fact, Foucault himself was on the anti-humanist side. (anti-humanism doesn't mean "evil", it's just an unfortunate tongue-in-cheek terminology). What you end up with is Foucault trying his best to introduce Chomsky to the basics of a core part of the French intellectual tradition, more-or-less unsuccessfully. What the debate highlights is the extent of the divide between continental philosophy and analytical philosophy. It doesn't make new ground.
alecco 6y ago
He was very inspiring. But he broke my heart when he supported Chavez unconditionally. Even if years later he retracted support for some journalist being jailed. Too little, too late. Be sure to check out Manufacturing Consent (90s) and his criticism of the raise of (Maoist) Posmodernism in academia (interviews and lectures from the 80s). Do it before it gets removed.
- maroonblazer 6y ago
  >his criticism of the raise of (Maoist) Posmodernism in academia (interviews and lectures from the 80s) Are there links you can recommend?
  - alecco 6y ago
    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chomsky+on+postmodernism https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chomsky+on+postmodernism The results are a good start. I read all this a long time ago so I don’t have a list of links. I’d stay on his work and opinions before 2000. The Documentary “Is the man who is tall happy” is easy to watch. His academic material is borderline incomprehensible. There was a Chomsky generator somewhere.
    - TaylorAlexander 6y ago
      You’re right about his academic work. I read one book with Chomsky cited as the author that was actually a transcription of some interviews of him. And then I read a book he wrote and it was a very different style! I find his speaking to be clear and easily digestible, while some of his writing can be very difficult to read.
- krapp 6y ago
  >and his criticism of the raise of (Maoist) Posmodernism in academia I'm sorry but in a country where people call Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton communists without a hint of irony I can't help but at roll my eyes at such a premise.
  - 6y ago

bnbond 6y ago

Agreed. He’s a good entry point to that sort of critical theory. The Foucault Chomsky debate is on YouTube, though I find it very hard to follow.

alecco 6y ago
It’s very interesting how Foucault fans think he won. He only kept trying to move the point of the conversation to madness and how the powers that be used it. Perhaps it’s a good example of fanaticism vs old school reasoning. Chomsky didn’t “win” because the conversation was constantly derailed. It was a waste of time. Don’t try to reason or debate fanatics.
- llamaz 6y ago
  I'm not a Foucault fan, and I used to hold the same opinion as you. But now I realise the exchange was, as you say, a "waste of time". Chomsky doesn't seem to have read up on the issues Foucault is talking about, and he admits as much in an interview on the topic, about how he was surprised that he could not find /any/ common ground from which to build a conversation with Foucault. This is more of a failure of communication on the part of French intellectuals, who use verbose language helps keep their radical tradition so insular. So... it's what you would expect an exchange between the analytic and continental philosophers to be like. Chomsky takes the enlightenment humanism tradition for granted, and assumes he can find common ground with Foucault there, but Foucault had been working in a tradition where the humanism vs anti-humanism debate (e.g. Althusser) was front and center. In fact, Foucault himself was on the anti-humanist side. (anti-humanism doesn't mean "evil", it's just an unfortunate tongue-in-cheek terminology). What you end up with is Foucault trying his best to introduce Chomsky to the basics of a core part of the French intellectual tradition, more-or-less unsuccessfully. What the debate highlights is the extent of the divide between continental philosophy and analytical philosophy. It doesn't make new ground.

alecco 6y ago

He was very inspiring. But he broke my heart when he supported Chavez unconditionally. Even if years later he retracted support for some journalist being jailed. Too little, too late. Be sure to check out Manufacturing Consent (90s) and his criticism of the raise of (Maoist) Posmodernism in academia (interviews and lectures from the 80s). Do it before it gets removed.

maroonblazer 6y ago
>his criticism of the raise of (Maoist) Posmodernism in academia (interviews and lectures from the 80s) Are there links you can recommend?
- alecco 6y ago
  https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chomsky+on+postmodernism https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chomsky+on+postmodernism The results are a good start. I read all this a long time ago so I don’t have a list of links. I’d stay on his work and opinions before 2000. The Documentary “Is the man who is tall happy” is easy to watch. His academic material is borderline incomprehensible. There was a Chomsky generator somewhere.
  - TaylorAlexander 6y ago
    You’re right about his academic work. I read one book with Chomsky cited as the author that was actually a transcription of some interviews of him. And then I read a book he wrote and it was a very different style! I find his speaking to be clear and easily digestible, while some of his writing can be very difficult to read.
krapp 6y ago
>and his criticism of the raise of (Maoist) Posmodernism in academia I'm sorry but in a country where people call Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton communists without a hint of irony I can't help but at roll my eyes at such a premise.
- 6y ago