5 ms·

>> Anybody who criticizes <<idea>> is either stupid or afraid. Even if it is true, do you really think that's a good argument? Why don't you point out how thi

by dmm 17y ago

>> Anybody who criticizes <<idea>> is either stupid or afraid. Even if it is true, do you really think that's a good argument? Why don't you point out how this article shows Chomsky to be stupid or afraid.

ThomPete 17y ago
First of don't strawman me. Don't write stuff I didn't write. Second of all the attack on Post Modernism is what is wrong the entire thing. How can you attack Post Modernism for pointing out some obvious flaws in the way we approach frames of reference. That's like blaming the compiler for giving you errors just because you would like what ever you write to be possible.
ThomPete 17y ago
"As for the "deconstruction" that is carried out (also mentioned in the debate), I can't comment, because most of it seems to me gibberish. But if this is just another sign of my incapacity to recognize profundities, the course to follow is clear: just restate the results to me in plain words that I can understand, and show why they are different from, or better than, what others had been doing long before and and have continued to do since without three-syllable words, incoherent sentences, inflated rhetoric that (to me, at least) is largely meaningless, etc. That will cure my deficiencies --- of course, if they are curable; maybe they aren't, a possibility to which I'll return. " This is the level of the writing. He don't understand deconstruction so he don't like it. That is what is wrong with most critique of postmodernism. Further more it's not just french philosophers. Thomas Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyrabend are not exactly french. All he do is showing how ignorant he is on what he speaks. But that do expalain the level of his other writing.
- jibiki 17y ago
  I think you need to understand the context of Chomsky's remarks. He is responding to people who criticize him because he doesn't work within a "theoretical" framework, and his activism isn't properly informed by postmodern understanding. I have heard people criticize universal grammar as being, essentially, a Colonialist theory, which attempts to assimilate languages into a Eurocentric framework. That is the sort of BS he is replying to. Chomsky is not saying, "postmodernists are stupid and should stop doing philosophy," rather, he is saying, "you want me to do things in a certain way, so explain why."
  - ThomPete 17y ago
    "I have heard people criticize universal grammar as being, essentially, a Colonialist theory, which attempts to assimilate languages into a Eurocentric framework." What is the BS part then formulation or the theory?

by dmm 17y ago

ThomPete 17y ago

First of don't strawman me. Don't write stuff I didn't write. Second of all the attack on Post Modernism is what is wrong the entire thing. How can you attack Post Modernism for pointing out some obvious flaws in the way we approach frames of reference. That's like blaming the compiler for giving you errors just because you would like what ever you write to be possible.

ThomPete 17y ago

"As for the "deconstruction" that is carried out (also mentioned in the debate), I can't comment, because most of it seems to me gibberish. But if this is just another sign of my incapacity to recognize profundities, the course to follow is clear: just restate the results to me in plain words that I can understand, and show why they are different from, or better than, what others had been doing long before and and have continued to do since without three-syllable words, incoherent sentences, inflated rhetoric that (to me, at least) is largely meaningless, etc. That will cure my deficiencies --- of course, if they are curable; maybe they aren't, a possibility to which I'll return. " This is the level of the writing. He don't understand deconstruction so he don't like it. That is what is wrong with most critique of postmodernism. Further more it's not just french philosophers. Thomas Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyrabend are not exactly french. All he do is showing how ignorant he is on what he speaks. But that do expalain the level of his other writing.

jibiki 17y ago
I think you need to understand the context of Chomsky's remarks. He is responding to people who criticize him because he doesn't work within a "theoretical" framework, and his activism isn't properly informed by postmodern understanding. I have heard people criticize universal grammar as being, essentially, a Colonialist theory, which attempts to assimilate languages into a Eurocentric framework. That is the sort of BS he is replying to. Chomsky is not saying, "postmodernists are stupid and should stop doing philosophy," rather, he is saying, "you want me to do things in a certain way, so explain why."
- ThomPete 17y ago
  "I have heard people criticize universal grammar as being, essentially, a Colonialist theory, which attempts to assimilate languages into a Eurocentric framework." What is the BS part then formulation or the theory?