tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post8029707100178540941..comments2024-03-29T09:14:53.583+00:00Comments on All That Is Solid ...: Chomsky on Poststructuralism and PostmodernismPhilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-19820340459313599972011-10-03T00:36:47.410+01:002011-10-03T00:36:47.410+01:00its ok buddy,
your books are important to you at ...its ok buddy,<br /><br />your books are important to you at least.<br /><br />Don't worry, sometimes other peoples work is just too difficult to understand, it dosen't mean your stupid.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-52992150633356318882011-01-22T13:37:57.489+00:002011-01-22T13:37:57.489+00:00Is there someone to whom this does not look like a...<i>Is there someone to whom this does not look like an elaborate justification of incuriosity?</i><br /><br />Me.Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03493440163559858462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-58780117606138473002011-01-20T16:35:44.892+00:002011-01-20T16:35:44.892+00:00I'm in total agreement with Khephra, and I par...I'm in total agreement with Khephra, and I particularly like the comment that the world would certainly be an even more terrible place if everyone thought alike. Chomsky must have one of the most dry personalities out there, and I have witnessed on several occasions what some of his most misleading and anti-intellectual sounding statements can do to those students who wish to emulate his every word and gesture. Chomsky certainly should know what 'cult-like' can look like, as I'm sure he has seen this in many of his own students over the years. I think the idea that something is irrelevant and dangerous if it doesn't remind one of one's self is in itself reckless. The notion that there is just plain good and bad scholarship is something we should push our students to move away from - it is astounding where inspiration for real thought can be begin...nOtoften (Barret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/01898076320432174685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-30728094713848396442011-01-18T13:16:06.742+00:002011-01-18T13:16:06.742+00:00PS: I think that Pierre Vidal-Naquet's comment...PS: I think that Pierre Vidal-Naquet's comments on Chomsky are useful too http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/VidalNaquet81b/ModernityBloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06354254639321208955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-12404679387546444402011-01-18T13:11:14.716+00:002011-01-18T13:11:14.716+00:00Chomsky the dissident?
Oh yeah, what a a laugh?
...Chomsky the dissident? <br /><br />Oh yeah, what a a laugh?<br /><br />Give me a break.<br /><br />Until comparatively recently he was worth millions, as the "Chomsky" brand.<br /><br />From memory, in one of his first jobs he was so much of a dissident that he received DoD funding.<br /><br />Phil, if you are going to examine Chomsky then best take account of Bob's posts on him.<br /><br />http://brockley.blogspot.com/search/label/ChomskyWatchModernityBloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06354254639321208955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-66233533196647794292011-01-18T02:40:58.030+00:002011-01-18T02:40:58.030+00:00Very intriguing document; cheers for sharing!
It...Very intriguing document; cheers for sharing! <br /><br />It seems to me as though Chomsky has created elaborate straw men: the critique isn't that he 'lacks' theory, but that it isn't made explicit, or has been found to be lacking - like dichotomizing, which his entire system depends on. So, in that light, expecting Chomsky to 'grok' poststructural critique would be like expecting George Bush to pander for GreenPeace. And since Chomsky hasn't really handled critique of his theories very well (e.g., a stubborn refusal to back away from weak theory, an inability to identify and acknowledge conceptual gaps, etc), his negative impressions of theory are hardly a surprise.<br /><br />Nevertheless, he does make some good arguments. But, sadly, he appears to argue towards a conceptual homology that I find rather fascistic. I'd hate to live in a world where everyone cognated the same. Moreover, authors write how they write, and what they 'mean' to say is far less relevant than what they say to the reader in the here and now. If, upon reading Derrida, he doesn't speak to you, try a different approach, or invest your energies elsewhere - he won't mind. ;)<br /><br />In my reading the core of his critique seems to speak to practicality: he doesn't seem to think theory has the same practical value as the work he does (which is similarly theory-laden, just without acknowledgment). On the one hand this is hypocritical, but on the other it's an uncommonly easy call for empirical validation: theory is irreducibly nested within action. If we need new actions, we need new theories. Prof. Chomsky can't see the forest for the trees.Khephrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00667887201214868716noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-20852762313218255772011-01-17T22:41:53.195+00:002011-01-17T22:41:53.195+00:00Is there someone to whom this does not look like a...Is there someone to whom this does not look like an elaborate justification of incuriosity?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com