Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

General discussions of interest to readers and fans of Harlan Ellison.

Moderator: Moderator

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby Ezra Lb. » Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:53 pm

Steve that's as well put as I have ever read!

The only thing I will add is that the situation being like it is, what the schools can do, must do, should do, is teach critical thinking and skepticism. This will inevitably undermine all the bullshit the students get everywhere else. That's how to compete.
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby Lori Koonce » Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:30 pm

*huggles*

I knew you'd pick up on that Mr. Evil. And I agree with Ezra, that was very well put!

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby FrankChurch » Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:32 pm

Teaching critical thinking is not mental colonialism, but the black lady thought that, that was my point.

----------------

In the video Chomsky makes the obvious point that money plays a lot in how science research is done. You have to have money to do critical research, but where the money comes from contours the scientist, about buys him or her off. You see this all the time with oil companies buying off scientists on climate change.

Follow the money. Even science can be conned.

User avatar
Lori Koonce
Posts: 3538
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: San Francisco California
Contact:

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby Lori Koonce » Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:36 pm

That may be true Frank. But without the facility to critically analize what is put before a person, how do you expect the masses to figure that out!

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby FrankChurch » Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:21 pm


User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby FrankChurch » Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:53 pm

Did you guys know that the ACLU is a conservative organization?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMjhuP2YlzE

He predicts the coming of the Tea Party right and shows how the inept democrats respond to it.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby FrankChurch » Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:47 pm

This is your Christmas present, folks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOcQi9PD740

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wlArQS_0bQ&NR=1

Look at all nine parts if you like. See, Noam can be quite funny. The Question and Answer stuff is always the best.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby Moderator » Mon Jan 04, 2010 8:01 am

FrankChurch wrote:Did you guys know that the ACLU is a conservative organization?



Of course it is. Protecting the rights of the individual against the government has traditionally been a cornerstone of conservative rhetoric.

Well. In theory. Yes. In practice? Not a chance.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby FrankChurch » Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:50 pm

Chomsky talks about an idiotic statement made by Margaret Mead, saying that Russian children were bad because they were swaddled. The reason she said that was because Russia was vetoing so many UN mandates at the time. The irony is that swaddling is actually good for babies and the US is the top vetoer of UN Mandates.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby FrankChurch » Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:44 pm

Shucks, I missed this one. Chomsky is asked about Hitchens and the new atheists. I like what he says here:

"I don't think it's worthwhile to review Hitchens. On "moral equivalence," to my knowledge the concept was concocted, or at least popularized, by Jeane Kirkpatrick, as a way of slandering anyone who dared to raise some objections to the murderous terrorist wars that she was helping to implement as Reagan's Secretary of State, and as an apologist for state terror and repression. It's a term of vulgar propaganda, which should be dismissed with contempt. The same is true of the analogies of the kind you mention.

I haven't been thrilled by the atheist movement. First, who is the audience? Is it religious extremists? Say right-wing evangelical Christians like George Bush (as you rightly point out)? Or is it very prominent Rabbis in Israel who call for visiting the judgment of Amalek on all Palestinians (total destruction, down to their animals)? Or is it the radical Islamic fundamentalists who have been Washington's most valued allies in the Middle East for 75 years (note that Bush's current trip to the Middle East celebrates two events: the 60th anniversary of the State of Israel, and the 75th anniversary of establishment of US-Saudi relations, each of which merits more comment)? If those are the intended audiences, the effort is plainly a waste of time. Is the audience atheists? Again a waste of time. Is it the grieving mother who consoles herself by thinking that she will see her dying child again in heaven? If so, only the most morally depraved will deliver solemn lectures to her about the falsity of her beliefs. Is it those who have religious affiliations and beliefs, but don't have to be reminded of what they knew as teenagers about the genocidal character of the Bible, the fact that biblical accounts are not literal truths, or that religion has often been the banner under which hideous crimes were carried out (the Crusades, for example)? Plainly not. The message is old hat, and irrelevant, at least for those whose religious affiliations are a way of finding some sort of community and mutual support in an atomized society lacking social bonds. Who, in fact, is the audience?

Furthermore, if it is to be even minimally serious, the "new atheism" should focus its concerns on the virulent secular religions of state worship, so well exemplified by those who laud huge atrocities like the invasion of Iraq, or cannot comprehend why they might have some concern when their own state, with their support, carries out some of its minor peccadilloes, like killing probably tens of thousands of poor Africans by destroying their main source of pharmaceutical supplies on a whim -- arguably more morally depraved than intentional killing, for reasons I've discussed elsewhere. In brief, to be minimally serious the "new atheism" should begin by looking in the mirror.

Without going on, I haven't found it thrilling, though condemnation of dangerous beliefs and great crimes is always in order.
"




NC

User avatar
Steve Evil
Posts: 3519
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:22 pm
Location: Some Cave in Kanata
Contact:

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby Steve Evil » Mon Jan 18, 2010 6:16 am

FrankChurch wrote: Is it the grieving mother who consoles herself by thinking that she will see her dying child again in heaven? If so, only the most morally depraved will deliver solemn lectures to her about the falsity of her beliefs.


Well, no one's forcing her to read the books, are they?

The quotation is squarely aimed at Hitchens, but hardly applies to Dawkins, who firmly opposed the Iraq war.

And isn't it rich for Chomsky to lecture others about preaching to the choir. . .

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby Ezra Lb. » Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:41 am

Do you suppose Chomsky has actually read any of the books? Or do you suppose he has reached that exalted and august state where he knows what people say without listening to them?

The audience for the books is "all of the above".

Fellow atheists who admire expression of important ideas. Religious believers who need to hear their irrrational beliefs rigorously challenged. People who are uncertain and torn between belief and unbelief. I wish I had had these books when I went through my period of struggle. You know there was a time when I thought I was the only one who had these thoughts. And that was frightening and painful. You know there are people who will read these books and know they're not alone.

Chomsky needs to come down off his pedestal.
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

diane bartels
Posts: 1255
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: CHICAGO IL

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby diane bartels » Mon Jan 18, 2010 1:07 pm

There is that damn attitude aetheists exhibit towards those who believe. Ezra,dear heart, what makes you believe I haven't RIGOROUSLY questioned my beliefs a longassed time before I heard of you or Hutchins or any other arrogant agnostic. And why in the name of all that is Holy should I have to keep questioning them. I mean, give a listen, try to understand the other person's viewpoint, yes sure naturally of course, the same thing I do with my Wiccan friends, my Jewish friends, etc. But hey they can share their belief without expecting me to question my faith. All they ask is my respect for theirs.
Why does your sharing your unbelief require me to go back to an arguement I had with myself and resolved 35 or better years ago. You do not use the world irrational to connote mystical, not factual in a physical sense. The connotation you use is naive, unthought out, plain stupid and ignorant. I scored a 141 on the Weschler when I was 15, did well enough on the LSAT to get into Chicago-Kent, where I graded onto the Law Review. Almost had an article published. My advisor, a former Navy defense lawyer and another person who happened to be a Cook County sitting criminal judge considered it original and well written. I did not graduate because my physical disabilities got much worse, and I discovered I do not have the ruthlessness to be a lawyer. Which pleased me no end, as i consider 80% of all lawyers profound pond scum. There is nothing stupid, ignorant uninformed or naive about me . I would appreciate you understand that just because I came to a different conclusion in the debate does not mean I am not your equal in it. It is your subliminal attitude toward my intellect and reasoning skill I resent, not your belief or lack thereof.
With apologies for my spelling skill, which always goes to hell when Im pissed, as well as the bragging, which I always find offensive in others and try not to do, Diane

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby FrankChurch » Mon Jan 18, 2010 2:48 pm

Chomsky has to read about a hundred books a week just to keep up. Doubt he has time to read those shitty books Ezra likes..lol

How can he be on a pedestal when he is marginalized?

Chomsky has zero ego, trust me. He is about as humble as they get.

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Frank's evil Noam Chomsky corner

Postby Ezra Lb. » Mon Jan 18, 2010 6:16 pm

Diane

Did the vehemence of your reaction prevent you from considering that maybe my statement wasn't intended for you? I have family members who honestly believe that the earth is six thousand years old and all the ills of the world are caused because some foolish woman talked to a snake and succumbed to its charms and bit into an apple. And although they accept the reality of global warming and environmental degredation they don't worry about it because Jesus is going to come back any old day now and wisk them all to glory.

Sorry but those beliefs are irrational. More than that, they are dangerous and destructive.

Instead of a conventional book tour, for the last few years Mr Hitchens has been traveling around debating Christian believers of all stripes on their own turf, many times at christian colleges and universities. For the first time in their lives many of these students are hearing a reasoned critique of their beliefs.

Is that really arrogant?

One of best friends in the world, friends since high school, is a Baptist minister. A liberal baptist minister (yes they do exist). One of those friends who, if they called you at three in the morning and asked you to come over no questions asked, you would do it. He's smarter then you and I put together. He has degrees out the butt and every school he's been to has asked to him to join the faculty, but he wants to minister to people not teach. He's compassionate and as close as is possible to what I guess would be the christian ideal.

And that still doesn't prove there's a god.
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest