5 ms·

Uh, didn't he criticise scientific epistemologies in relation to so-called scientism? I read briefly about some of his remarks on the matter, and he just seemed

by xk_id 14y ago

Uh, didn't he criticise scientific epistemologies in relation to so-called scientism? I read briefly about some of his remarks on the matter, and he just seemed like most of his fellow sociologists: ignorant of the relevance of science to sanity, probably caused by not having been trained in physico-mathematical rigour.

mtraven 14y ago
That might win the prize for most ignorant comment ever on HN. While you can level a number of criticisms at Chomsky, lack of mathematical rigor is not one of them. I would assume people here were If anything, Chomsky is guilty of over-reliance on mathematical formalism in his linguistics.
- xk_id 14y ago
  well, there is absolutely nothing wrong with conjecturing, when one presents it as such. Thanks for making a case against what I said, I may give Chomsky a second chance. Edit: by the way, I'm a bit suspicious of your phrasing in "mathematical formalism in his linguistics". Mathematical verbalism does not qualify as sane. I know a case of a person who does speak as a mathematician (very convincing!), even uses mathematics in his expositions, yet he is completely insane and what he says makes no sense whatsoever. I can share a recording of one of his lectures if you wish, but unfortunately he speaks in Romanian.
  - CR45H 14y ago
    Your description of this "mathematician" intrigues me. And, since I happen to speak Romanian, I would love to have a link to one of his lectures. Thanks! However, I agree with "mtraven" that you should not be leveling this kind of accusation until you have read Chomsky's work.
    - xk_id 14y ago
      Duly noted! The lecture is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-30t8pSd7s0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-30t8pSd7s0.
      - CR45H 14y ago
        Thanks... The video was hilarious but the dude is truly insane. I assure you that, whether you agree or disagree with him, Chomsky has absolutely nothing in common with this guy. Wow! If any other Romanian is reading this, check out that video. After a couple minutes you won't know whether you should laugh or you should cry.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
roguecoder 14y ago
He made a distinction between describing something well enough to correctly predict its behavior and understanding the common mechanisms leading to those behaviors. He then critiqued science for focusing exclusively on correct predictions, without also searching for insight into the underlying order. The problem with science focused exclusively on correct predictions is that it encodes implicit assumptions, and if the surrounding conditions change the previous evidence is no longer valid. It also has a tendency to lead people to think they are observing some final and universal Truth, when really they are just observing a system that is in a relatively stable equilibrium.
- xk_id 14y ago
  Thanks for your contribution. But, regarding the first paragraph, I need to ask – are you sure? I cannot sense the distinction you describe. As for the second paragraph, I completely do not understand what it means.
  - flyinRyan 14y ago
    For the second paragraph: Imagine a man warped out of the past somewhere into the future. His clothes look funny and any interaction he makes with people draws an odd response. Some give him money, some people say "no thank you" for some reason, and so on. He can test this, he can see that nearly everyone behaves this way. So he assumes this is simply how people here behave. Later on, something happens that forces him to wear clothes like everyone else is wearing. And how people react to him changes completely. All his testing proved that people react one certain way, but he didn't understand why so he didn't realize what his testing had showed was actually just a small subset of the actual behavior and was actually an extremely rare case.
    - xk_id 14y ago
      I really like your comment, and I really wish to reply with a video with a Louie CK stand-up comedy piece about a lion and a giraffe. But I'm not sure if I can post the link here. Edit: oh well, what the heck, maybe mods can delete this if it's inappropriate. http://www.putlocker.com/file/718CD52BD479CE4A# http://www.putlocker.com/file/718CD52BD479CE4A#, the joke is at minute 2:00!

by xk_id 14y ago

mtraven 14y ago

That might win the prize for most ignorant comment ever on HN. While you can level a number of criticisms at Chomsky, lack of mathematical rigor is not one of them. I would assume people here were If anything, Chomsky is guilty of over-reliance on mathematical formalism in his linguistics.

xk_id 14y ago
well, there is absolutely nothing wrong with conjecturing, when one presents it as such. Thanks for making a case against what I said, I may give Chomsky a second chance. Edit: by the way, I'm a bit suspicious of your phrasing in "mathematical formalism in his linguistics". Mathematical verbalism does not qualify as sane. I know a case of a person who does speak as a mathematician (very convincing!), even uses mathematics in his expositions, yet he is completely insane and what he says makes no sense whatsoever. I can share a recording of one of his lectures if you wish, but unfortunately he speaks in Romanian.
- CR45H 14y ago
  Your description of this "mathematician" intrigues me. And, since I happen to speak Romanian, I would love to have a link to one of his lectures. Thanks! However, I agree with "mtraven" that you should not be leveling this kind of accusation until you have read Chomsky's work.
  - xk_id 14y ago
    Duly noted! The lecture is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-30t8pSd7s0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-30t8pSd7s0.
    - CR45H 14y ago
      Thanks... The video was hilarious but the dude is truly insane. I assure you that, whether you agree or disagree with him, Chomsky has absolutely nothing in common with this guy. Wow! If any other Romanian is reading this, check out that video. After a couple minutes you won't know whether you should laugh or you should cry.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

roguecoder 14y ago

He made a distinction between describing something well enough to correctly predict its behavior and understanding the common mechanisms leading to those behaviors. He then critiqued science for focusing exclusively on correct predictions, without also searching for insight into the underlying order. The problem with science focused exclusively on correct predictions is that it encodes implicit assumptions, and if the surrounding conditions change the previous evidence is no longer valid. It also has a tendency to lead people to think they are observing some final and universal Truth, when really they are just observing a system that is in a relatively stable equilibrium.

xk_id 14y ago
Thanks for your contribution. But, regarding the first paragraph, I need to ask – are you sure? I cannot sense the distinction you describe. As for the second paragraph, I completely do not understand what it means.
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  For the second paragraph: Imagine a man warped out of the past somewhere into the future. His clothes look funny and any interaction he makes with people draws an odd response. Some give him money, some people say "no thank you" for some reason, and so on. He can test this, he can see that nearly everyone behaves this way. So he assumes this is simply how people here behave. Later on, something happens that forces him to wear clothes like everyone else is wearing. And how people react to him changes completely. All his testing proved that people react one certain way, but he didn't understand why so he didn't realize what his testing had showed was actually just a small subset of the actual behavior and was actually an extremely rare case.
  - xk_id 14y ago
    I really like your comment, and I really wish to reply with a video with a Louie CK stand-up comedy piece about a lion and a giraffe. But I'm not sure if I can post the link here. Edit: oh well, what the heck, maybe mods can delete this if it's inappropriate. http://www.putlocker.com/file/718CD52BD479CE4A# http://www.putlocker.com/file/718CD52BD479CE4A#, the joke is at minute 2:00!