Holy shit, Sam Harris and Chomsky engaging in supreme banter: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-limits-of-discourse

File: 12 KB, 687x293, ss+(2015-05-02+at+01.17.19).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri May 1 19:18:49 2015 No.6482361 [Reply] [Original]

Holy shit, Sam Harris and Chomsky engaging in supreme banter:

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-limits-of-discourse

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 19:24:03 2015 No.6482382 >>6482361 It's actually hilarious that Harris considered himself an equal of Chomsky

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 19:27:39 2015 No.6482397 File: 27 KB, 621x200, Capture.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Based Chomsky; doesn't even sign off

Anonymous Fri May 1 19:27:47 2015 No.6482398

>>6482382
Harris is pretty cool, IDK why people keep getting upset over him.
Anyone who actually saw him speak would realize he is the embodiment of kindness and sincerity.
If you think some of his ideas are wrong, that's fine, but he doesn't deserve one bit of hostility.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 19:38:01 2015 No.6482439 >>6482398 Trust me, he sounds to anyone with a decent education in philosophy how creationists sound to geologists. I don't doubt his sincerity but he is an ignoramus.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 19:40:13 2015 No.6482450 "Why are you for death penalty? well becasue Sam Harris is alive." sniffs and wipes nose https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifpIw3EK7-A

Anonymous Fri May 1 19:43:46 2015 No.6482465

>>6482451
>I'm not well-versed in either man's work but it sure seems like Harris is a whiny cunt who can't hold up his end of the argument. Chomsky was a bit grumpy but I imagine he's sick of dealing with people like Harris who are trying to build a reputation by arguing with old men.

Posted this in the other thread...

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 19:46:22 2015 No.6482477 File: 96 KB, 374x393, 1418683249564.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >you will never be smart enough to engage in high power level bantz

Anonymous Fri May 1 19:48:04 2015 No.6482485

>>6482465
He made accusations about chomsky without knowing his work, took a vague YouTube video as a credible source for being criticised by him.

I think chomsky has every right to be annoyed. If Harris had actually studied him enough to know what his actual stance is and not gone gung-ho into criticisms, this whole conversation wouldn't happen.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:14:16 2015 No.6482582 >>6482477 go to bed, Sam Harris

Anonymous Fri May 1 20:25:56 2015 No.6482619

Sam Harris seems insane in this conversation.
Congrats to Chomsky who had the patience to answer to such a lost cause, in his position i wouldn't even care about answering Harris he is deluded and trying to trap someone with warped and delirious narratives.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:38:07 2015 No.6482658 >>6482619 Yeah, seriously, he quoted 1 line out of context and pretended it was the entirety of the book.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:40:31 2015 No.6482666 >>6482439 Why should I trust you? If your "decent" education isn't graduate work then you still have only a students grasp.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:43:18 2015 No.6482674 Holy shit this is happening for real?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:45:10 2015 No.6482683 I don't know who Sam Harris is but reading that made me feel embarrassed for him.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:49:22 2015 No.6482697 >If we were to publish it, I would strongly urge you to edit what you have already written lmao Sam you are so insanely cocky you think Chomsky's the one coming off like an ass in this conversation

Anonymous Fri May 1 20:52:05 2015 No.6482709
File: 36 KB, 200x276, 200px-Anthony_Ludovici.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Chomsky isn't an essentialist, he flat out refuses to accept the biological reality of race and all the certitudes which that leads to, and should thus be disregarded.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:52:26 2015 No.6482711 >>6482666 It is

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:53:12 2015 No.6482716 Sort of sad to see Chomsky succumb to his emotions and lose an argument against Sam Harris of all people. Younger Chomsky could have taken him.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:56:13 2015 No.6482724 >>6482709 this some lame-ass bait

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:58:45 2015 No.6482735 >>6482724 by calling out the bait you have in fact been baited

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 20:59:12 2015 No.6482736 >>6482735 whatever floats your boat honey

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:03:24 2015 No.6482752 >Noam — >I’m afraid I won’t take the bait Sam Harris confirmed for shitposting on /lit/

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:08:07 2015 No.6482770 >>6482716 Is it a loss though? Sometimes the only winning move is not to play.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:10:48 2015 No.6482780 I love that this whole thing happened because Sam was mad that Chomsky might have called him a "religious fanatic for the state" in an offhand answer that was mostly about Hitchens and Chomsky has clearly forgotten ever took place.

>>	Baby Breeder !HItLer.Uws Fri May 1 21:12:39 2015 No.6482785 >>6482711 >I will never have a real job

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:13:39 2015 No.6482792 >>6482752 >he made the obvious 4chan joke

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:19:22 2015 No.6482812 >>6482792 >implying you're not impressed that I read this Fremdscham shitfest to the bottom where this quote is

Anonymous Fri May 1 21:33:08 2015 No.6482848

>>6482361
anyone who doesn't see how btfo harris gets is a retard.
>>6482619
>>6482465
this, it's harris' knowledge that he will post that shit to make himself seem important to people who don't get it that causes him to not retreat and for the conversation to not get anywhere. chomsky is a fucking saint to deal with this level of bullshit.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:36:03 2015 No.6482860 >>6482716 >>6482724

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:38:07 2015 No.6482865 I liked Sam Harris before I took a intro to Philosophy course. The guy is poking at Chomsky to try and gain some attention; hopefully Chomsky ignores him and doesn't give him the beating he is asking for.

Anonymous Fri May 1 21:38:31 2015 No.6482866
File: 12 KB, 400x226, 1427173562253.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>My claim is that there are right and wrong answers to moral questions, just as there are right and wrong answers to questions of physics

>Just as there is no such thing as Christian physics or Muslim Algebra, we will see that there is no such thing as Christian or Muslim morality.

>Despite our perennial bad behavior, our moral progress seems to me unmistakable.

Based Sam Harris

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:40:12 2015 No.6482874 File: 35 KB, 605x328, 130108_richard_nixon_ap_328.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6482866 pSHHHHH LOL Please tell me this guy actually made these statements, that shit is almost too good to have been made up.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:41:20 2015 No.6482878 >>6482865 He just did. Those last two back and forths are just sad. The kind of thing I could imagine happening on here with both the Harris posts being replied to with a plethora of BTFOs and helium inhaling Pepes

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:42:02 2015 No.6482881 File: 231 KB, 1028x1500, hunter.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6482866 >This guy believes 'barbarians' are less moral than fat shitty 21st century americans lmfao

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:42:46 2015 No.6482883 >>6482874 They're all in the Moral Landscape.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:44:03 2015 No.6482887 >>6482866 But there is such a thing as Jewish physics.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:48:32 2015 No.6482898 >>6482866 Someone really needs to explain what's wrong with this.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:49:09 2015 No.6482901 File: 29 KB, 675x218, attentionwhore.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] The real victim here is Chomsky's precious time that he has left was wasted.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:49:36 2015 No.6482903 >>6482866 How does he go about establishing a universal and objective moral standard?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:52:15 2015 No.6482919 >>6482697 He is actually.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 21:52:49 2015 No.6482921 >>6482903 he just yells SCIENCE!!!! in a really loud voice

Anonymous Fri May 1 22:00:56 2015 No.6482939

>>6482901
Nah, this thing will garner attention. It's the academic equivalent of a recorded spat between Kanye and Kendrick. And with people reading this, it'll illuminate how Harris should not be taken seriously when it comes to morality to a wide audience

Anonymous Fri May 1 22:02:37 2015 No.6482945

>>6482866
>we will see that there is no such thing as Christian or Muslim morality.

This is only true if you ignore descriptive ethics. It's like saying 'There is no such thing as Aztec morality, because they sacrificed people' or 'There is no such thing as Ptolemaic cosmology, because the earth orbits the sun.'

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:03:19 2015 No.6482946 >>6482898 Lmao

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:04:13 2015 No.6482949 >>6482939 Anyone who took Harris seriously before is probably too dumb to draw that conclusion.

Anonymous Fri May 1 22:06:05 2015 No.6482951

>>6482898
There is a good number of illogical irrational errors with what he states.

First and foremost, the idea of erecting a moralism that transcends cultural and geographical longitudes is laughable, especially one that is used as a means of justification and the like.

Even reading the Greeks gives way to a basic understanding of why separating ideas embedded in reference and ideas embedded in morals/ethics/the-like is silly at best.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:07:56 2015 No.6482955 >>6482939 No body within academia takes Harris seriously as is. He is an entertainer above all else.

Anonymous Fri May 1 22:10:15 2015 No.6482960

>>6482866
Physics just explain the world, why do i get the feeling that he thinks it does something else?
Morals are human abstractions of the mind and is therefore (like everything else, to be fair) without value, you could measure why we think things are moral, but that doesn't mean shit.

Anonymous Fri May 1 22:12:07 2015 No.6482964

>>6482946
Thank you.
>>6482951
>the idea of erecting a moralism that transcends cultural and geographical longitudes is laughable

Why do people always do this? Just because the way morality is expressed changes depending on where you go doesn't mean that the moral principles themselves are different.

He wants to get at what's eternal about it and not what's specific to every individual case, without talking about the execution of such an endeavor we can say it's a perfectly fine approach and it doesn't need justification to be undertaken - the results will justify themselves.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:12:47 2015 No.6482965 >>6482951 >reading the Greeks when we have neuroscience

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:19:05 2015 No.6482977 >>6482964 Yet he is pro torture.

Anonymous Fri May 1 22:20:07 2015 No.6482980

>>6482964
To the point you're making, how would that be any different than a christian making the claim that since it (Christianity) bears semblance to other religions we should all be christian?

creating a universal standard of morality is laughable because of what this anon >>6482960
previously stated. The way I see it, morality is not tangible and cannot be objective without creating some sort of 1984-type technocratic dictatorship with thought control. Essentially, /pol/'s nightmare.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:20:32 2015 No.6482981 Sam Harris received a B.A. in Philosophy from Stanford. He is more qualified to speak on philosophy than 99% of /lit/. He's also a master of jiu-jitsu and ninjitsu. Talk shit at your own risk.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:21:10 2015 No.6482982 >>6482397 Fucking destroyed Ham Sarris confirmed for destroyed

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:21:36 2015 No.6482984 >>6482666 Why should you be trusted? You talk him up like a marketer. He's a clown.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:22:17 2015 No.6482988 >>6482977 >>6482980 Okay, I thought his project was only descriptive. I guess I should actually read him before speaking about him.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:22:27 2015 No.6482990 >>6482981 kek I'll go ahead and risk it. >muh academic qualifications

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:22:39 2015 No.6482992 >>6482981 If that bitch attacks me he gon get sued

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:23:58 2015 No.6482994 >>6482981 Wait, he's this 'philosophical figure' and he only has a fucking BA?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:25:33 2015 No.6482998 >>6482398 He literally ignores historical context with regards to everything. He's a complete simpleton.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:28:35 2015 No.6483007 >>6482919 Shut up, Sammy.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:30:22 2015 No.6483011 >>6482988 Probably, but it's also /not/ recommended that you spend your time actually reading Harris.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:34:33 2015 No.6483019 >>6482981 I would put my entire life savings against Harris in a philosophy banter match with any anon with just passing knowledge of philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:45:46 2015 No.6483040 http://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/comments/34khfx/transcripts_of_emails_exchanged_between_harris/ Top. Fucking. Kek

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:52:40 2015 No.6483067 >>6482981 A BA in Phil means jackshit, even from Stanford.

Anonymous Fri May 1 22:53:37 2015 No.6483074

Chomsky writes responses to every and all (e-)mail sent to him, provided they're actually earnest. This is a man that let Michel Gondry make audio and video recorded sessions with him so he could make an animated film out of them. My point is, Harris proves how much of a giant fucking blowhard he is by actually wearing out this man's patience. He's the know-it-all High School intellectual captain of the debate team trying to make a name for himself by "beating" a distinguished university professor.

>>6483040
Good Lord that's cringey.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:53:48 2015 No.6483075 >>6483040 really shows the different demographics of the web, doesn't it? 4chan may be a bunch of insufferable twats but redditors are so used to being shot down intellectually that they consider harris being btfo a win, just because they can relate

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:54:22 2015 No.6483077 >>6483040 not a big reddit fan, but that is fucking r/samharris that they aren't completely slobbering over his dick is a surprise (and a sign they can see sam got btfo)

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:54:24 2015 No.6483078 >>6483040 Jesus... those comments are amazing... I never thought Reddit was REALLY that much cringe.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:55:02 2015 No.6483081 >>6482981 There are people that take degree programs from reputable universities and receive their degrees with knowledge of the field in question. Harris has demonstrated he is not one of these persons.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:57:01 2015 No.6483086 >>6482382 I think it's funny that people esteem chomsky rather

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:58:52 2015 No.6483093 >>6483077 Yeh, I went intentionally on the sam harris sub to see if people would actually defend him. Everywhere else I checked are 'rekt' comments and smug pics of chomsky

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 22:59:32 2015 No.6483095 >>6483086 Of course you do, Sam.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:03:13 2015 No.6483101 >>6483086 Sam, we told you to leave.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:04:27 2015 No.6483106 >>6483095 I've read plenty of chomsky but he's not that great if you were born cynical like me. All he does is fill in the story you already knew with facts that fit your existing impressions. And I don't like Sam, I just think both are overrated

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:06:11 2015 No.6483112 >>6483106 i agree but at least with chomsky you can fill in the dots and not sound like a high school anarchist

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:06:34 2015 No.6483113 >>6482981 studying martial arts that specialize in damaging articulations is a very poor idea in modern society, I would consider that anyone who learns that has very poor judgement.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:06:46 2015 No.6483114 >>6483101 Evik trol m7

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:09:02 2015 No.6483119 >>6483112 No you definitely sound like a high schooler if you walk around esteeming chomsky. Or maybe a college junior who is totally made aware now that Obama is not a leftist. In any case he's not a typical subject of "mature" thought.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:09:05 2015 No.6483120 File: 46 KB, 457x700, 63MoTO4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] You niggers who know who Chomsky is need to come to /leftypol

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:09:36 2015 No.6483123 >>6482716 are you fucking illiterate?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:10:54 2015 No.6483126 Christ, this thread is garbage. Content-less circlejerking.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:11:16 2015 No.6483128 >>6482785 baby breeder is a real job in some places

Anonymous Fri May 1 23:12:26 2015 No.6483133

>>6482898

There can't be an objective moral standard. For that to be the case, there would have to be some kind of all-powerful and irrevocable central authority to impose it—which there isn't. Our Reason faculty doesn't signify the existence of something that's transcendent. God doesn't exist, of course (le fedora). And Society is comprised of fallible human beings.

Moral values depend, first and foremost, on the historical and cultural context in which they arise. And, furthermore, they rely on the use of language. They do not originate in something that transcends us. Instead, they are created by us. In other words, moral values are derived from the human intellect. And they must either be imposed through force by a human agent, or agreed upon by a collective body (with some minor variations).

Such values, then, which are derived from our intellect—a faculty which may be influenced by various factors (either internal or external)—do not transcend certain historical-cultural barriers. Thus, they cannot be universally applied. And Sam Harris is a retard.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:12:59 2015 No.6483134 >>6483086 Sorry for holding the 8th most cited intellectual in the world with esteem

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:13:16 2015 No.6483136 >>6483126 why don't you make a better one?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:14:05 2015 No.6483139 >>6483136 Why would I make another thread about this when /lit/ clearly doesn't have the ability to engage with it aside from circlejerking?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:15:18 2015 No.6483146 >>6482903 >um, w-well, heh heh...

Anonymous Fri May 1 23:15:23 2015 No.6483147

>And I agree that I am litigating all points (all real, as far as we have so far determined) in a “plodding and accusatory way.” That is, of course, a necessity in responding to quite serious published accusations that are all demonstrably false, and as I have reviewed, false in a most interesting way: namely, you issue lectures condemning others for ignoring “basic questions” that they have discussed for years, in my case decades, whereas you have refused to address them and apparently do not even allow yourself to understand them. That’s impressive.
KKEEKK. Chomsky is based

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:15:30 2015 No.6483149 >>6483134 Don't be so passive aggressive dude

Anonymous Fri May 1 23:17:07 2015 No.6483151

>>6483133
>For that to be the case, there would have to be some kind of all-powerful and irrevocable central authority to impose it
How is that?
>Such values...do not transcend certain historical-cultural barriers.
Don't they? There seems to be a large base of agreement on certain moral values between many, many people and societies. If I were to walk up to a random child on the street and stab them to death just for the fun of it, don't you think a large segment of societies throughout history would condemn it?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:17:49 2015 No.6483153 >>6483149 Are you new to 4chan?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:17:55 2015 No.6483154 >>6483133 even if there were an all powerful authority to impose morality it doesn't necessarily follow that there would be one objective morality.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:18:36 2015 No.6483156 >>6483119 did you miss the part where i agreed with chomsky being overrated? or is your own immaturity blinding you and making you think i was attacking you and calling you a high-schooler?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:22:52 2015 No.6483164 File: 120 KB, 456x337, Gaddaf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Chomsky is wrong about some things, but Harris is an intellectual midget.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:28:06 2015 No.6483181 >>6483147 How is it possible that one man can wreck another so completely?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:33:04 2015 No.6483193 >>6483156 No you're just flipping out over nothing calm down

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:33:07 2015 No.6483194 Chomsky can be a serious cunt and I imagine he's fucking intolerable on a personal level because of how much smoke has collected up his ass over the years, but Harris got BTFO on this one

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:36:21 2015 No.6483207 >>6483106 >all he does is give you facts about things you just instinctively knew how is that bad in any way? are you saying we shouldn't make medicine because people know how to chew the right treebark?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:38:22 2015 No.6483213 >>6483193 i 'flipped out' because you attacked me and are now backstepping, probably after realizing how you misread my post but you are forgiven

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:38:29 2015 No.6483215 >>6483151 Not if you were rich or of high stature, no.

Anonymous Fri May 1 23:39:14 2015 No.6483219

>>6483151
It depends, if he wasn't from your european country it was more than okay for millenia. If some dude misbehaved it was right to rape his wife. Stoning for the adulterers and chopping hand for the kleptomaniacs.
If anything this last 100 years have had the weirdest morality so far. I personally like it, but I was born under this system after all.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:39:30 2015 No.6483221 >>6483147 What a fucking joy to read

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:42:34 2015 No.6483231 >>6483151 You are aware that samurais would literally kill innocent people to test their swords, right?

Anonymous Fri May 1 23:43:26 2015 No.6483234

>>6483147
What do you do after this if you're Harris? I remeber getting into discussions that went way over my head in HS and eventually someone had a perfect reference, or explained something in a way I had no way out; I eventually learned to recognize my mistakes and even not getting into dumb arguments without reasons, but for a while it was the most shameful thing in the world.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:43:40 2015 No.6483236 >>6483213 I don't even know what you're talking about you're not that important

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:44:41 2015 No.6483239 >>6483207 If you think that argument is convincing then you're not very smart

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:45:08 2015 No.6483241 >>6482439 >decent education in philosophy Is there anything more useless? Sam is highly intelligent, and educated in areas that actually matter. I don't think I've ever not enjoyed anything he has written.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:48:58 2015 No.6483250 File: 26 KB, 261x400, 9780140447477.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483241 you could literally pick up one highly regarded philosophical text and refute everything sam harris has ever said (with a book over 100 years old)

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:49:04 2015 No.6483252 >>6483234 To be honest, his best option would be to pretend like someone hacked his e-mail.

Anonymous Fri May 1 23:49:42 2015 No.6483255

>>6483241
>Sam is highly intelligent
cept people are saying the opposite

>educated
yes he has an education
his phd thesis is shit tier tho lol

>in areas that matter
demonstrate how neuroscience matters
demonstrate how philosophy doesn't matter
to do the first u gotta do philosophy
fuck off cancer

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:50:17 2015 No.6483257 >>6483241 Worst bait in the history of /lit/.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:50:28 2015 No.6483258 >>6483236 >you definitely sound like a high schooler...Or maybe a college junior who is totally made aware now that Obama is not a leftist

Anonymous Fri May 1 23:50:39 2015 No.6483261

If you wanna discuss more leftist politics such as on the subjects of communism, anarchism socialism ext I suggest you check out /leftypol/ (shameful plug) since you guys can't talk about politics any more, and /pol/ is not they best place to talk about such matters without being called anti white or a Jew.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:52:11 2015 No.6483266 File: 40 KB, 500x500, millia_rage kai.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483252 >I'm so sorry mister Chomsky, it seems my little cousin got in my computer. I'm deeply sorry that he wasted your time

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:52:26 2015 No.6483268 File: 1.03 MB, 256x199, yup.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483120 >>6483120 >>6483120

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:53:24 2015 No.6483271 >>6483266 Honestly though, how amazing wouldn't that be?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:55:28 2015 No.6483275 >>6483258 I wasn't talking about you. Like literally stop pretending you're the subject of things because you're super irrelevant to myself and this thread

>>	Anonymous Fri May 1 23:57:24 2015 No.6483284 >>6483241 go to bed sam

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 00:01:38 2015 No.6483301 >>6483255 >his phd thesis is shit tier tho lol You don't sound like an authority on this.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 00:02:46 2015 No.6483305 File: 16 KB, 600x600, 1428632458030.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483241

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 00:04:19 2015 No.6483316 File: 7 KB, 161x213, thumbsup.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483261 Prolly a good idea as /lit/ has banned political discussion. Head over to double-chins guise.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 00:04:51 2015 No.6483319 File: 32 KB, 400x462, 1424235467303.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483241 I'm glad you're "enjoying" his work.

Anonymous Sat May 2 00:25:38 2015 No.6483390

I don't understand the hate towards Sam Harris. He has transcended the philosophical and science barrier and found within logic and empiricism that there is a way to derive morality, a perceived social construct, into a concrete scientifically founded existence. It may be hard to grasp, and it may take patience and time, but when you understand what I wrote you'll see how smart I am.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 00:26:53 2015 No.6483394 >>6483390 YOU CAN'T KNOW NUFFIN YOU CAN'T KNOW NUFFIN

>>	Totally not Sam Harris Sat May 2 00:29:30 2015 No.6483406 >>6483390 I meant to say Sam Harris instead of 'I'. Stupid autocorrect. >>6483394 Chomsky?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 00:29:34 2015 No.6483408 >>6483390 put effort into your bait

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 00:30:40 2015 No.6483410 File: 515 KB, 800x1018, touken_ranbu yamato-no-kami_yasusada nurko-kun.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483390 I like you a lot anon.

>>	Totally not Sam Harris Sat May 2 00:30:49 2015 No.6483411 >>6483408 Its late you fucking nigger

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 00:37:19 2015 No.6483425 wordy intellectual discourse makes me uncomfortable

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 00:50:01 2015 No.6483448 File: 737 KB, 117x186, 1420778758781.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Damn Sam Harris tries so hard and is still fucking retarded. Its really sad the more you think about it.

Anonymous Sat May 2 00:59:40 2015 No.6483471

jesus christ sam harris comes across as such a melodramatic whiny fuccboi in that correspondence

chomsky is notoriously difficult (anytime you disagree with him he pretty much immediately accuses you of willfully ignoring facts and being impossible to talk to) but at least he doesn't come across as a fucking baby bitch.

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:02:04 2015 No.6483474

Holy shit, this is making me ill. I'm high as fuck and reading these emails is killing me.

It's like any other /lit/ discussion, only that they write extremely "well" as in passive-agressive politeness all the way through. "You're misreading me, sir", "no, you're misreading me, I'm afraid", yadda yadda. I read a couple from both and quit, this is extremely annoying to read.

You can see Chomsky wiping the floor with that faggot Harris and I'm not even a Chomsky fan myself. Harris is atrocious, a true ignorant by all means, a really true ignorant whose existence lightens the burden of all the ordinary ignorants of the world. It's not like he can't lose, only that he just wouldn't even be able to tell if he ever lost an argument so far he is up his own ass.

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:03:51 2015 No.6483477

I think Harris meant this convo to show how he discusses heavy topics with the great minds of our era or something like that, but it feels as if they are both trying to insult each other (which will obviously happen when you start a conversation with accusations) and besides being childish overall, Harris doesn't come up on top.

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:14:08 2015 No.6483483

>>6483448
The way he writes in those emails is too much, he's like a "precocious" teenager who actually isn't smart but has a one-up on most people insomuch as he "cares about intellectual matters" (lel). If only he had the self awareness to realize he an ain't shit nigga, he would stop bugging poor old Chomsky who is gonna croak any minute and who shouldn't be dealing with this shit in his final hours.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:14:55 2015 No.6483484 >>6482485 This. As soon as Harris admitted he'd only read one of Chomsky's works I knew who was the winner in this exchange.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:15:53 2015 No.6483485 File: 83 KB, 338x450, foucault56.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Foucault will have destroyed both of anuses.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:16:36 2015 No.6483486 >>6482780 It's twice as funny because, like all atheists, Harris is in fact a slave of the state.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:22:05 2015 No.6483491 >>6483019 >A fool and his money are soon parted.

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:28:13 2015 No.6483496

>>6483485
Remember that at some point Lacan and Derrida were people interviewed by the media who discussed topics that "well read" people should consider. Now Harris is some kind of standard and Chomsky looks like a deep sage. Life sucks, born in the wrong generation, and so on.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:32:11 2015 No.6483501 >Chomsky fanboys >Praising a man who literally denied the Cambodian genocide because it conflicted with his disproven philosophical/political ideals you are disgusting

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:33:49 2015 No.6483503

I'm very happy that the day of my birthday, the 27th, was when Harris completely renounced any chance of winning
>commenting on how nice it is discussing not face to face
>ignoring the mention that under his criteria japanesse quasi genocide was okay.
>recognizing that Chomsky might have been talking about Hitchens
>sheepishly asking some random crap to make this look as less of a competition
beautiful, glorious.

>>6483501
you haven't even seen the cool movie about Chomsky, he dealt with that decades ago.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:33:55 2015 No.6483504 >>6483486 Eh there are plenty of anti-statist atheists If you're just talking about the "new atheists" like Harris and Hitchens then yeah, they really do become huge apologetics for state violence.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:36:07 2015 No.6483508 File: 27 KB, 460x276, Sam-Harris-008.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Do you think Harris will ever stop being a retard, bros? Or is he too far down the rabbit hole and he'll have to be this way his whole life because it sells?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:36:24 2015 No.6483509 >>6483496 lewronggeneration :^)

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:39:47 2015 No.6483514

>>6483508
Someone already said this itt: Harris acts as a precocious child, he lives that way. Everyone looks at him and remember one work he did long ago that was okay for its time but has aged poorly. Chomsky was the same thing, but with the years he turned from a failed academic to a political analyst. He isn't too good at that either (is too quick to accept sources he likes, keeps refering to outdated material, has made too many mistakes through his career, his more pragmatic ideas aren't well formed or even based on history, etc) but he at least matured from his "I'm the future, I'm inventing a new movement" stage he had.

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:40:17 2015 No.6483517

>>6483508

Blind and rabid support for the State is one of the hardest viewpoints to change, because it's so deeply ingrained in every aspect of modern culture.

Most people don't have any genuine understanding of anti-interventionist and anti-Statist arguments and most people don't WANT to have any genuine understanding, because then they'd actually have to consider viewpoints radically different from their own.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:41:08 2015 No.6483519 >>6483509 yes, I mentioned that in the post. do I need to always say inb4 for you?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:43:27 2015 No.6483523 >>6483503 >Zealously defends an obviously corrupt Cambodian government because "lel American Imperialism" >Irrefutable evidence comes out that a genocide did, indeed, occur >"Ooops, sorry guys, silly me, teehee" Yeah, nah, he can go fuck himself.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:43:52 2015 No.6483524 >I have a question that I would like you to ponder for at least 5 seconds before responding to this email: Is it possible for you to enter into a discussion on these topics with me in the spirit of genuine curiosity and goodwill? SUCH AN ATOMIC BITCH

>>	Motoko !!Nvhr3UlfD8o Sat May 2 01:44:39 2015 No.6483526 File: 30 KB, 500x500, 1421241248374.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] https://twitter.com/SamHarrisOrg/status/594369453418131456

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:45:40 2015 No.6483528 >>6483526 literally dying over here

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:47:43 2015 No.6483529 >>6483526 OMFG THIS GUY he's like an undergrad know-it-all

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:48:06 2015 No.6483530 >>6483485 hehehehe

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:49:02 2015 No.6483532 >>6483485 by giving them aids

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:50:57 2015 No.6483534 >>6483086 go to bed, sam

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:51:40 2015 No.6483535

>>6483524
>Noam —

>I’m sorry to say that I have now lost hope that we can communicate effectively in this medium. Rather than explore these issues with genuine interest and civility, you seem committed to litigating all points (both real and imagined) in the most plodding and accusatory way. And so, to my amazement, I find that the only conversation you and I are likely to ever have has grown too tedious to continue.
FUCKING CRY BABY

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:52:15 2015 No.6483537 >Sam plays coy, Noam acts like a dick There is no honour to be found here.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:52:39 2015 No.6483539 >>6482981 >He's also a master of jiu-jitsu and ninjitsu a master of "martial" arts? That says a lot about him.

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:54:14 2015 No.6483542

>>6483535
>I’ll put aside your apologetics for the crimes for which you and I share responsibility, which, frankly, I find quite shocking, particularly on the part of someone who feels entitled to deliver moral lectures.

>And I’ll also put aside your interesting feeling that you see no challenge when your accusations are refuted point by point, along with a demonstration that you are the one who refuses to address the “basic questions” that you charge me with ignoring, even after you have learned that I had dealt with them quite specifically before you wrote, and in fact for decades.

So this is like an MC battle for political figures?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:54:28 2015 No.6483543 >>6483539 This is true. With the possible exception of genuine masters, people who learn marital arts tend to overwhelmingly be dicks.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:55:04 2015 No.6483545 File: 69 KB, 460x444, i can pass for eighteen.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >libtard prime vs athiest miscavige lmao nah

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:55:43 2015 No.6483546
File: 1.37 MB, 320x240, yoooooooooooooo.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6483542
>You and I probably share a million readers who would have found a genuine conversation between us extremely useful. And I trust that they will be disappointed by our failure to produce one, as I am. However, if publishing this exchange helps anyone to better communicate about these topics in the future, our time won’t have been entirely wasted.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 01:56:31 2015 No.6483547 Sam Harris is completely right on almost everything, he just needs more time in the oven. Just give him a few more years and he'll be a fine right-wing intellectual.

Anonymous Sat May 2 01:58:32 2015 No.6483551

>>6483543
Ninjitsu isn't a martial art, or maybe it can be qualified as one, but still is fucking dead. The new ninjitsu dojos in the USA are nothing but a bunch of McDojos to take away your money.

Sam Harris is supposed to be a good philosopher or someone who is well read.
That says A LOT about him.

>>	ֆ Life ain't nothin' but a fat(...) Sat May 2 02:03:40 2015 No.6483557 >>6482361 Holy shit two irrelevant morons are doing irrelevant moron shit! Sound the sirens!!!!!

Anonymous Sat May 2 02:04:14 2015 No.6483558

>>6483151
Without a universal goal or standard we can not have right, wrong or morality. We do not know which direction is good, we have no compass - only opinions.

A large group of people sharing an opinion or being conditioned to share it does not make it objective. The fact that most humans lack the instinct to kill children and condemn the few who do does not mean it is objectively wrong to kill children, for all we know the objective goal of the universe could be to rid the world of children or say, create suffering. In that case it would a holy deed. What you're claiming is logically similar to cats declaring water sprays objectively morally wrong because they find them distasteful. Seems like a fine reason if you're a cat but alas cats are limited, as are we.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:17:12 2015 No.6483571 File: 37 KB, 400x320, 1405923814890.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483526 >this damage control my sides are in orbit.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:21:17 2015 No.6483576 >>6483542 Yes, debates between 'intellectuals' are just glorified rap battles

Anonymous Sat May 2 02:23:54 2015 No.6483580

>>6483542
debates are nothing but a contest on who leaves the other dude as an idiot
Just read about the enndless debates between those greeks. Nothing is clarified, just the opponent ends up as an idiot who everyone laughs at.
Sam Harris is still an idiot.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:26:50 2015 No.6483585 File: 81 KB, 1198x570, NoamChomsky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483501

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:27:34 2015 No.6483586 I was a Harris tard but more and more he's starting to look like a shallow idiot for me. I never really read any philosophy, what/who should I look in to?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:28:52 2015 No.6483589 >>6483586 GREEKS R E E K S

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:29:27 2015 No.6483591 >>6483586 the greeks I'm serious. All modern philosophers base their ideas on them. And then you can read about eastern philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:30:23 2015 No.6483594 >>6483586 the greeks are a meme for a reason.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:31:27 2015 No.6483597 If Harris passes for a 'public intellectual' nowadays, then this is the passing of the torch moment except that the torch is extinguished

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:35:03 2015 No.6483602 File: 323 KB, 290x240, zizek tongue.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483597 Jade Smith is an intellectual too, so as John Green and maybe Snoop Dogg. Only Zizek can save us, and he dislike that he's called a public intellectual.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:35:27 2015 No.6483603 >>6483589 >>6483591 >>6483594 Yeah I hear this meme a lot. Can I get away with reading an introduction to Greek philosophy?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:37:26 2015 No.6483605 >>6483603 no you fucking faggot /lit/ is always right Read books made by those greeks, not those shitty introductions /lit/ is always right

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:39:09 2015 No.6483608 >>6483602 I don't mind Zizek. A dangerous clown as he call it himself. But its the sign of the times we live in that those other dimwits can pass as intellectuals

Anonymous Sat May 2 02:40:33 2015 No.6483611

>>6483215
>>6483231
>samurais
>Muh evil rich people
So as examples you seriously choose two exceptions to the rule? A rigorously dogmatic warrior caste notorious for elevating death and violence into an aesthetic pursuit, and oligarchs and aristocrats whose status and culture encourages opression, apathy and accumulation of power? These are two cultures that in the service of ideology condition people to suppress their capacity for cognitive empathy, an innate, empirically demonstrable human faculty, that is crucial for the development of morality. Not even the anon you replied to, but you turds aren't even trying to have a serious discussion

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:40:37 2015 No.6483612 File: 31 KB, 250x251, 1428693151915.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483602 >that comment Zizek makes about Harris

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:41:12 2015 No.6483613 >>6483608 He's a pop intellectual. Like the Black Science Man or Carl Sagan. Thanks to him, many people now are interested in philosophy. I don't think Zizek is a dimwit.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:41:25 2015 No.6483614 >>6483261 >/leftypol/ I just checked it out and it's trash. it's full of idiots talking about how Stalin is great and how SJWs are shit. Also theres no theory.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 02:56:40 2015 No.6483632 >>6483134 >the market has spoken.

Anonymous Sat May 2 03:00:49 2015 No.6483640

Chomsky just lists a bunch of facts. Facticism.

You can't derive morality from descriptions of reality. You just can't.

I can only imagine Chomsky's emotions when he played how the debate would go out in his head. The fear of not only losing it, but his life's work washed away in front of Harris' scientific account of virtue. I would be angry too.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 03:07:03 2015 No.6483644 >>6483614 Well, at least they got it half right.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 04:28:55 2015 No.6483753 >>6482709 There are actual essentialists on /lit/. Oh wow.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 04:36:37 2015 No.6483761 >>6482361 Chomsky is absolutely right but he's being a complete asshole about it. Not very productive, but fun to read I guess. I agreed with everything Harris said about the conversation itself, if not anything he said in it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 04:40:43 2015 No.6483765 >>6483640 Read Kant you illiterate ape

Anonymous Sat May 2 04:50:02 2015 No.6483784

>>6482898
Because the universe doesn't house prescriptive facts and even if it did, we'd have no way to access said facts. Material objects don't stand in ethical relations to each other and everything else is just baseless conjecture based on feelings and social context. The cat is on the mat but even God almighty himself if he decided to come down to Earth just this once couldn't claim once and for all whether said cat _should _ be on the mat or not in an epistemically foolproof manner.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 04:54:07 2015 No.6483792 >>6483543 > marital arts kek, I am now imaging a Victorian gentleman reading a book with chapters like "How to Intimately Stimulate your Wife, or, Sensuality for the Longevity of Marriage"

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 04:57:41 2015 No.6483794 >let’s chalk some of this up to the well-understood problem of email The enactment of Godwins law on Chomsky's part, contrary to how it is usually used, was actually necessary.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 04:59:17 2015 No.6483796 File: 41 KB, 560x375, 1394955178448.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6482361 it's apparently obvious how much Chomsky lays down the law. This wasn't even a debate, more like an adult telling his "edgy" son to shut the fuck up.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 05:00:41 2015 No.6483797 File: 83 KB, 594x480, 1391384074865.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6483640 >listing facts >disregard it as factism

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 05:17:33 2015 No.6483810 >>6483765 Never heard of that one. If its old I'm not reading it.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 05:24:19 2015 No.6483817 >>6483483 You've described it perfectly. That's exactly the same impression I got.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 05:33:16 2015 No.6483825 i have never read either and will not pretend to. you are all faggots.

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 05:37:29 2015 No.6483827 >>6483825 Tell me lit does not need to heavily regulated.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 05:38:17 2015 No.6483828 >>6483614 Actual stalinists (and authoritarians in general) are a minority, it's mostly a meme. The hate for feminism is irrational and mostly stems from a fear of looking like "SJWs" though

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 05:38:29 2015 No.6483829 >>6483827 *be

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 05:41:07 2015 No.6483833 >>6483827 I think we should just ban anyone who isn't fluent in French and Latin.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 05:41:10 2015 No.6483835 >>6482898 Because moral realism is retarded.

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 05:41:54 2015 No.6483837 >>6483833 No, I do think that is not the correct plan of action.

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 05:43:43 2015 No.6483841 >>6483837 *I do not think that is the correct plan of action.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 05:43:52 2015 No.6483842 >>6483496 >Remember that at some point Lacan and Derrida were people interviewed by the media who discussed topics that "well read" people should consider. Yes, it was disgusting. Nobody cares what those charlatans thought.

Anonymous Sat May 2 06:01:32 2015 No.6483885

I just read the whole thing, and top fucking kek, I've never seen someone getting owned as much as Harris was.

In fact, there was no argument to begin with, it was more like Chomsky was hopelessly trying to educate Harris, but from the first stance Chom states the details about the case in question, Harris retorts and gets caught up in "hurr I wrote something about you, pls give me my deserved respect, pls stop rekking me"-truly pathetic. Also, Chomsky has done such an amazing job in not being dismissive and condescending(rightfully) to Harris, I've seen well-read people do that to know-it-all D-Kruger ridden individuals and it's easy to fall in that bait, but if it shows anything, it's that Chomsky is as wise as he can get, also patient and really knows his shit.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 06:23:41 2015 No.6483943 >>6483496 >Remember that at some point Lacan and Derrida were people interviewed by the media who discussed topics that "well read" people should consider. truly a time of horror

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 06:25:11 2015 No.6483946 >>6483523 >defends an obviously corrupt Cambodian government prove it faggot

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 06:29:38 2015 No.6483958 >>6483086 You might not agree with him on anything, but it's pretty much the objective truth that he is a brilliant intellectual and academic in several fields

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 06:46:19 2015 No.6484004 >>6482382 He is. And I mean that not to elevate Harris, but to bring down Chomsky.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 07:29:43 2015 No.6484084 I thought Harris was a scientist. If he genuinely believes moral facts exist, then why doesn't construct an experiment to test them? Build a morality-measuring device and start testing hypotheses.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 07:30:32 2015 No.6484087 >>6484084 >muh funding :(

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 07:35:18 2015 No.6484094 Harris is a charlatan

Anonymous Sat May 2 07:44:42 2015 No.6484111

Just in case anyone was reading the /lit/ and plebbit comments instead of the actual exchange on Harris' site, read the latter immediately. Chomsky has some hilarious putdowns. The only thing I simply do not understand is why Harris rather than Chomsky would be the one to post this. Reverse psychology?:
>However, if you want to do it, I won't object
heheheh

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 07:49:01 2015 No.6484119 >>6484111 because the whole point was that harris wouldn't back down so his legions think he "won" against a "serious" person. it's all theatre for fanboys

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 07:51:17 2015 No.6484121 >>6484084 Its bullshit used to defend a public image, which is what he is. He earns money through writing books which defend his public image, which is of an "enlightening" pedant.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:01:02 2015 No.6484141 >>6482666 You sound like a total fool.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:04:27 2015 No.6484148 >>6482981 If you knew anything about academia you'd know that BA in philosophy means fucking nothing

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:06:08 2015 No.6484151 Who is the "god-intoxicated psychopath" Chomsky refers to?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:09:15 2015 No.6484157 >>6484151 Bush I think, could be wrong

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:10:54 2015 No.6484159 >>6483149 Fuck you you fucking idiot

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:12:43 2015 No.6484165 >>6483241 cheapest bait I've ever seen

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:16:40 2015 No.6484177 >>6483523 You realize you are a piece of shit, right?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:21:07 2015 No.6484187 >>6483837 Then you are a fool

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:23:37 2015 No.6484193 >>6484177 Find one, ONE, instance of mass murder perpetrated by non-westerners in the 20th century that Chomsky did not defend. From Pot to Rwanda and Srebrenica he is always on the side of mass murder.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:26:05 2015 No.6484201 >>6484193 it's not about defending, it's about being nuanced, that's the whole crux of the debate, this gott mit uns bullshit

Anonymous Sat May 2 08:30:58 2015 No.6484215

>>6484201
>it's about being nuanced

Yeah and the US invades places to bring them freedom and democracy!

If you actually believe that, you have fallen victim to cheap rhetorical tricks. Distracted by the shiny veneer. Want nuance? Look below the surface.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 08:32:03 2015 No.6484219 >>6484215 you can't read you must leave this board until this is part of your skillset

Anonymous Sat May 2 08:37:41 2015 No.6484233

>>6484219
Apparently I am making myself difficult to understand. Let's put this in simpler terms:

The ideas presented to you as nuanced, are in fact not. They are black and white, one-sided (and always to the same side). If you were capable of a more substantial analysis, you would have figured this out on your own. Presenting decidedly un-nuanced ideas and analyses as if they were nuanced is simply a trick to convince gullible idiots (such as yourself).

Anonymous Sat May 2 08:51:27 2015 No.6484261

>>6483885

Except, what Harris understands from the start, and Chomsky does not, is that he simply wants a blogpost that can do the social media rounds to sell his books and make him a name for the circlejerk best of the year blogs.

Chomsky seemingly still somehow believes that the old Enlightenment intellectual rules of discourse has survived into the 21st century.

Nobody who reads Harris is going to actually read that wall of text. They will get some Twitter or TED blurb, and therefore, no matter how pathetic Harris comes off, he got exactly what he intended.

twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 08:54:39 2015 No.6484265

>>6484261
>Chomsky seemingly still somehow believes that the old Enlightenment intellectual rules of discourse has survived into the 21st century.
I am pretty sure Chomsky hates Cartesianism/ German Idealism,
if that is what you are referring to.

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 08:55:53 2015 No.6484267 >>6484187 I am not knowing that to be true, and I have no reason to absorb the statement.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 10:24:42 2015 No.6484525 So we're all in agreement that Chomsky got well and truly btfo by one of this century's greatest thinkers

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 10:57:46 2015 No.6484644 >>6484525 >Harris the Tipper, Patron Saint of Edgy Male Teens Everywhere. >>6482361 >Harris the Master, Shows How It's Done. >10/10 troll thread.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 11:05:40 2015 No.6484682 In the time Chomsky wasted on this arrogant kid he could have made a start on Kaufmann's Nietzsche. Priorities, Chomsky, priorities. Learn when to and when not to answer your mail. Still time left.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 11:08:11 2015 No.6484691 >>6484233 >sam is love sam is life

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 11:08:35 2015 No.6484694 >>6484233 What facts are presented to him and how do you know?

Anonymous Sat May 2 11:18:26 2015 No.6484723
File: 128 KB, 810x1195, hitch 22.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>How dare you, I repeat: how *DARE* you defend Islamofascist tyranny via your unsubstantiated attacks on the character of my good friend Sam Harris and thereby bolster the frothings of religious extremists, this celestial North Korea!

Anonymous Sat May 2 11:55:17 2015 No.6484862

Harris gets destroyed but is too stupid to recognize it, so he posts it online. Embarrassing.

Also, what's with all his whining about Chomsky not giving enough moral weight to intentions? Even if Chomsky didn't have a response to that (and he did), I thought Harris was some kind of utilitarian, or at any rate thinks the well-being of conscious creatures is all that matters, morally. So how are differing intentions supposed to matter so much on his view if the they actions lead to the same amount of well-being increase or decrease?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 12:02:44 2015 No.6484883 >>6484193 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_killings_of_1965%E2%80%9366

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 12:22:02 2015 No.6484965 >>6483086 Ffs Sam put down the keyboard

Anonymous Sat May 2 12:27:33 2015 No.6484987 [DELETED]

>I am happy to answer your question. What would I say about al-Qaeda (or any other group) if it destroyed half the pharmaceutical supplies in the U.S.? It would depend on what they intended to do.

I can't believe /lit/ hates Harris so much that they would actually defend this horseshit just to spite him.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 12:29:38 2015 No.6484993 >>6484987 Do you mean Chomsky? That quote is from Harris.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 12:30:54 2015 No.6484996 Very rare to see a debate where both contestants lose (I'm not into modern politics) Harris in subject matter and Chomsky in basic human decency.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 12:39:08 2015 No.6485017 >>6484996 >basic human decency You're an idiot

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 12:42:18 2015 No.6485026 >>6482382 >It's actually hilarious that Harris considered himself an equal of Chomsky Only because Harris is far superior.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 12:50:14 2015 No.6485052 >>6484151 I think its an expression either Harris or Hitchens used and Chomsky is using against him.

Anonymous Sat May 2 12:57:35 2015 No.6485072

>>6484996
Not a fan of either but
>hi Noam, herd you dont wanna talk to me? but it would be good for the readers. lets clear up misconceptions.
>all i know of you is that you misquote me. so we can talk privately if we properly reference each other from now on.
>nononono Noam lets make it public. here's where i might have misquoted you.
>here IS where you misquoted me. how about you properly address it? have I done the same to you?
>whoa Noam this is too confusing. let me be as obtuse and ignorant as possible now. hopefully you are a good man what i've received so far leads me to believe otherwise! :)
how would you feel?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 12:58:50 2015 No.6485077 >>6485052 Yeah but he refers to God-directed smiting, and neither of those guys are religious in that way.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 13:00:11 2015 No.6485085 >>6485077 I took it as mocking the idea of absolute ethics that justify some actions and others not, but I read it last night and I don't remember at what point he used the line.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 13:01:16 2015 No.6485088 >>6485072 Exactly, it reached a point in which Chomsky was an old guy bullying s dumb kid.

Anonymous Sat May 2 13:07:51 2015 No.6485109

>>6485085
No, he repeatedly asks Harris whether he knows who the biggest God-assisted murderer of the millennium is. None of the New Atheists are murderers themselves. Bush seems the best possibility so far. Any other ideas?

>>6485088
I think being dumb is offensive, especially if you're choosing to consult with major intellectual figures instead of your more immediate teachers who could school the offensiveness out of you. He's wasting an important man's time. And the only reason he feels qualified to do so is because he has a legion of fans.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 13:10:36 2015 No.6485119 >>6482382 Well, does he consider himself so?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 13:12:01 2015 No.6485124 Here's a tl:dr for the exchange: Chomsky is correct but a dismissive asshole, and Harris is an uninformed idiot but is congenial and seems interested in genuine debate

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 13:12:19 2015 No.6485125 >>6484682 underrated post.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 13:13:50 2015 No.6485127 >>6485124 see >>6485072 and >>6484261 Harris isn't as innocent as his cordial demeanor makes him out to seem.

Anonymous Sat May 2 13:28:23 2015 No.6485161

>>6485017
Likewise I am curious about your mental faculties if you think you can get in to namecalling with a propagator of human decency.

>>6485072
Rather than that we are all losers because this is a saddening (potential) insight to the life of Noam Chomsky.We have to assume that there is a reason for his hostile attitude and that reason most likely is that he spends his time dealing with bs correspondence like this on a "daily" basis.
Obviously if I were Noam Chomsky I would feel and act the exact way that he did. The answer is: Don't put yourself in that position.
Because nothing of value could come out of this. Just a few people trading "you're an idiot" with each other on the internet.

Anonymous Sat May 2 13:53:31 2015 No.6485231

>>6485161
He's annoyed and dismissive because harris: criticised chomsky without having made the effort to understand him, claimed chomsky talked shit about him though he didn't, claims moral superiority, gets disproved and refuses to acknowledge it, spread ideas about morality that Chomsky finds monstrous.

And what is being picked out is that Chomsky wasn't friendly enough.

Think for two seconds

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 13:55:00 2015 No.6485238 Is this what it sounds like when dove's cry?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:25:23 2015 No.6485316 >>6484723 Embarrassing

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:32:09 2015 No.6485332 >>6483526 If he had just humbled himself and admitted to getting destroyed he'd at least earn /some/ respect, as opposed to being the intellectual child he is.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:33:51 2015 No.6485337 >>6483640 >actually dismissing facts as not good enough >"yes everything you said is 100% correct but it's not convenient to my position so it's wrong" No

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:34:51 2015 No.6485341 >>6483833 Latin is just for plebs and Catholics though.

Anonymous Sat May 2 14:40:11 2015 No.6485357

>>6484201

>being nuanced about mass murder

This is absurd. There is NO grey area about mass murder to anyone who isn't a piece of shit.

Chomsky goes out of his way to defend atrocious acts of violence because they happen to be committed by anti-capitalists.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:41:01 2015 No.6485360 >>6485357 You have literally /no/ idea what you're talking about, you human scum.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:43:04 2015 No.6485370 >>6485360 Oh, I'm sorry I disagree with you that genocide is wrong. I surely am a TERRIBLE person, my Lord Socialist Comrade Master. Please don't send me to the gulag.

Anonymous Sat May 2 14:51:51 2015 No.6485400

>>6485357
Correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't read Chomsky), but based off of this correspondence it seems that he isn't defending the existence of such atrocious acts, but rather he is trying to provide an explanation for their existence as the product of American foreign policy that also regards human life as a mere obstacle to the betterment of the state.

In fact, he seems to be saying that these policies are even more unethical than mass murders because at least the murders imply their victims are human agents that are in direct opposition to the motivating ideology, whereas the policy treats human life as collateral damage of another end goal, or as 'ants that are crushed without a second thought while we walk along a path' (or however Chomsky framed it). The former at least recognizes the agency (or dignity?) of the victims, whereas the latter does not, and that is what Chomsky is arguing is bad. However, he never outright defends the murderous acts themselves, seeing as they are, you know, murderous.

Maybe a Chomskyfag can expand on this, or correct any misinterpretations.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:52:15 2015 No.6485403 >>6485357 citation needed

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:53:44 2015 No.6485409 >>6485370 >>6485360

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:55:04 2015 No.6485414 "Please, people -- neither Chomsky nor I "won" that debate. The horror was that it couldn't even begin." -Sam Harris on twitter

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:56:14 2015 No.6485419 >>6485400 >>6485403 >>6485409 >America is bad so it's okay for everyone else to be bad Left-wing foreign police in a nutshell. God, you people are disgusting.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:57:02 2015 No.6485423 >>6485419 that's one groovy citation

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 14:58:10 2015 No.6485428 >>6485414 He randomly sent him an email. What is this about it beginning or not beginning?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 14:58:41 2015 No.6485431 >>6485419 You didn't read what I wrote >>6485400

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 14:59:23 2015 No.6485435 >>6485124 Mr. Harris was undergoing damage control. For a second I actually thought it was a thread on 4chan.

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 15:01:02 2015 No.6485441 >>6484996 >basic human decency Are you one of these people who thinks they "debate" by just calling other people out on their lack of moral fiber? Disgusting. This is the oldest trick in the book.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:02:11 2015 No.6485444 Sam Harris is too normal. He doesn't really have any moral imagination... he has this weird urge to justify the status quo that I don't understand given his views in nonpolitical matters.

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:05:19 2015 No.6485453

Harris looks like an idiot. He expects Chomsky to take his nonsensical and impossible thought experiments seriously but he doesn't once responding adequately to any of Chomsky's questions about the actual event he's haranguing him about. Chomsky's rightly dismissive attitude, as usual, only adds to his glory, the comedy of the exchange, and Harris' butthurt that he'll never be as important or intelligent as the perhaps the most dedicated activist in American history.

twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 15:10:16 2015 No.6485466

>>6485453
I question how much of an activist Chomsky is.
He is essentially a posturing linguist/ intellectual,
but perhaps very good at debating and interviews.
It is funny that he criticises Zizek in such an off hand way,
when he does essentially the same thing.
Linguistics is just as "useless" as continental philosophy,
neither are actually useless,
but if continental philosophy is propped up to be that,
then why not Linguistics?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:12:49 2015 No.6485473 >>6482450 This is why Zizek is the man

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:13:43 2015 No.6485476 >>6485473 yeh, this. because he's likeable. not because he actually has anything to say

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:15:55 2015 No.6485484 >>6485476 He's likeable and has things to say, actually.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:18:34 2015 No.6485489 >>6485484 give one example of something specific he's contributed to philosophy

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:20:28 2015 No.6485493 >>6485489 PURE IDEOLOGY

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:20:43 2015 No.6485494

>>6485400
>he is trying to provide an explanation for their existence as the product of American foreign policy that also regards human life as a mere obstacle to the betterment of the state.
>9/11 being the product of American anything
Please tell me Chomsky doesn't actually think this? The symbolism of the attack is obviously a reaction to the US but the important parts are not. Devout Islam is more deadly to other Islamists than it is to Westerners, the latter do not "produce" it at all.

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:23:38 2015 No.6485501
File: 155 KB, 1024x576, Noam Chomsky.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Grandpa Chomsky is too far above Harris to be having this discussion.

>The idea of publishing personal correspondence is pretty weird, a strange form of exhibitionism – whatever the content. Personally, I can’t imagine doing it. However, if you want to do it, I won’t object.

Noamy is the only person who, focusing his studies on humanities, is respected -somehow- by Krauss

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:30:58 2015 No.6485523

>>6485501
Is there are surefire way to avoid getting the Chomsky chubby slouch look, even if you're 86? When I saw the youtube vid Harris linked to I was disappointed. Does Chomsky exercise?

>A sedentary life is the real sin against the Holy Spirit. Only those thoughts that come by walking have any value.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:33:38 2015 No.6485532 >>6485523 My grandpa was /fit/ as fuck his whole life, but from his 80s onwards he began to be like that too.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:33:54 2015 No.6485533 >>6485523 >Does Chomsky exercise? Nah, he just spend his whole day reading and writing. You can't write over 100 books and have time to do regular exercise. Pick your battles.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:37:44 2015 No.6485542 >You and I probably share a million readers Hah

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:38:38 2015 No.6485546 >>6485493 that was Althusser. Most of Zizek's philosophy is unoriginal. His obsession with Lacanian psychoanalysis on the other hand, is wholly him.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:38:58 2015 No.6485548 >>6485523 He does Muay Thai

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:39:33 2015 No.6485550

>>6485533
>You can't write over 100 books and have time to do 1 hour of exercise each day
Sure you can, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche were famous for their long walks, and they were some of the best writers of their centuries, something we're not sure Chomsky will be labelled in centuries to come.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:39:47 2015 No.6485552 >>6485546 Oh yeah I was just jesting

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:39:51 2015 No.6485553
File: 2 KB, 300x57, rildo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Noma Chomsky vs. Bachem Macuno was way better & much sexier.

Fo rildo.

'But the other Democratic candidates have been hammering her...'
'Hammering? The squabbling the MSM tries to make so much of between Democratic candidates is only polite jostling among individuals well aware that they may eventually share a ticket. This fair-mindedness will cease to exist in the general election season. Every misrepresentation of her policies, her past, her marriage, her sexuality, her business involvements, her donor alliances, her husband's Presidency--of which I am no great admirer--will obscure the candidate you have been so early in falling in love with. They will bury her.' He turned his attention to the task at hand. 'Now Cassandra, start lapping Desiree's pussy like a St. Bernard that hasn't seen his dogbowl on a while, and get that ass up in the air while you're doing it. You sweet bitches are going to see me lay so much pipe tonight, I'm going to owe plumbers union dues by the time I'm done.'

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:40:38 2015 No.6485555 >>6485489 Yeah totally, just let me take a quick survey of the whole field. I'll get back to you once the thread dies.

>>	twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 15:41:48 2015 No.6485560 >>6485523 Develop a habit of standing upright, keeping a stern face. Always stand while reading. Stride, do not walk. If you ever concede to doing some thing, it is not because that some thing was impossible, it was because you conceded.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:41:53 2015 No.6485561 >>6485550 >something we're not sure Chomsky will be labelled in centuries to come. His studies in linguistic will last centuries, his political activities may stop being relevant soon after his death.

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:43:30 2015 No.6485564
File: 11 KB, 500x500, 1386766098678.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

This thread really enunciates how /lit/ is just a bunch of contrarian pseudo-intellectuals.

The whole thread is literally one huge ad hominem, and no one has even begun to discuss the actual content of the e-mail exchange.

It's really funny, and sad at the same time, because I actually like this board.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:43:55 2015 No.6485565 >>6485550 They didn't write 100 books, respond to thousands upon thousands of emails and give thousands of talks

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:45:35 2015 No.6485573 >>6485564 >I hate ad hominems >no one's talking about the content of the discussion >you guys all suck Well done, retard

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:45:55 2015 No.6485577 >>6482397 >Sam Harris tl;dr: Sam Harris based all his criticism on Chomsky based on memes

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:46:48 2015 No.6485581 File: 239 KB, 960x1280, eupppsh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] https://twitter.com/SamHarrisOrg/status/594369453418131456

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:46:54 2015 No.6485583 >>6485564 see >>6482951 >>6483133 >>6485400 >>6485494

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:47:57 2015 No.6485587 >>6482866 > everything I say is right someone must shop his face on that maymay

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:48:25 2015 No.6485588

>>6485564
Hypocritical moron. Everyone that posts this image seems to be a buffoon.

Read this >>6485072
The email doesn't need to be discussed for the same reason Noam didn't discuss anything with Harris. Read the email yourself moron, you are the cancer on this board with your hypocritical moralising.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:48:36 2015 No.6485590 kekerrific. thanks m8

twinshia !b2E8KBMQGk Sat May 2 15:48:40 2015 No.6485591

>>6485564
You realise the hypocrisy of your post,
yes?
You could begin the actual "analysis" of said conversation,
that being said,
we were simply talking on surface level about 2 celebrities which are related to literature,
which is in no way wrong.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:51:25 2015 No.6485600 >>6483106 I'm not a huge fan of Chomsky either. I mean his position on language and race (one is essential, the other isn't) is kind of incommensurable. But he's still a great thinker, a hard worker, and leagues more important than Samsung Harris.

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:53:07 2015 No.6485611

>>6485573
>>6485588
>>6485591
Name-calling isn't ad hominem, but nice try though.

As for Chomsky and Sam Harris, there is only 1 major difference between them.

Chomsky thinks that U.S foreign policy is more morally unethical than Islamic terrorism, and as such, Chomsky thinks U.S and Western foreign policy is a direct cause of said Islamic terrorism. In other words, he, as with most liberals these day see islamic terrorists as freedom fighters within the paradigm, akin to liberation theologists in Latin-America during the mid to late 20th century.

Sam Harris on the other does not think it's as simple as that, and I have heard him agree with both Chomsky and other liberals on occasion, he thinks they are missing the picture, and I agree, they are missing the picture somewhat.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:55:29 2015 No.6485620 >>6485611 >Chomsky thinks that U.S foreign policy is more morally unethical than Islamic terrorism False.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 15:56:42 2015 No.6485626 >>6485620 Really? I've never ever even heard him speak against it, I've only ever heard him speak about it as a semantic tool to deride U.S foreign policy.

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:57:57 2015 No.6485631

>Not realizing Sam is the current shining beacon of well reasoned western intellect in a dark time of politically correct pandering to Islam/SJW/out-of-control-leftism.

All you cucks need to grow up and realize Harris is trying to apply philosophy to pertinent real world scenarios, not intellectual masturbation.

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:58:58 2015 No.6485638

What are you saying, you fucking shit?! I agree that I am litigating all points (all real, as far as we have so far determined) in a “plodding and accusatory way.” That is, of course, a necessity in responding to quite serious accusations that are all demonstrably false, and as I have reviewed, false in a most interesting way: namely, you issue lectures condemning others for ignoring “basic questions” that they have discussed in many posts, in my case many threads, whereas you have refused to address them and apparently do not even allow yourself to understand them. That’s impressive.

Anonymous Sat May 2 15:59:46 2015 No.6485642

>>6485626
>I've never ever even heard him speak against it, I've only ever heard him speak about it as a semantic tool to deride U.S foreign policy.

He takes the evil of terrorism as a given. His perspective is what its causes might be, and how to mitigate those causes.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 16:01:41 2015 No.6485656 >>6485642 I agree with Chomsky that U.S foreign policy is shit, but I do not accept his thesis that Islamists bomb Shia mosques and vice versa because of U.S presence in the Middle-East. That seems retarded.

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:02:55 2015 No.6485660
File: 146 KB, 501x355, noamscope.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>Hey Sam do you see people as a means to an end or not?
>kek you're not going to answer that, welp I'm just going to keep asking.
>Still going.
>Oh thank God, he finally just gave up.

Sam, it's time to just admit defeat.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 16:05:09 2015 No.6485667 >>6483425 me too anon, me too

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 16:05:41 2015 No.6485672 >>6485660 Of course he sees people as a means to an end, and so does Chomsky. If Chomsky had a guarantee that his anarcho-syndicalist utopia would be made tomorrow, he would gladly support executing several unwilling capitalists and power-elites.

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:06:35 2015 No.6485674

>>6485656
>I agree with Chomsky that U.S foreign policy is shit, but I do not accept his thesis that Islamists bomb Shia mosques and vice versa because of U.S presence in the Middle-East.
>That seems retarded.

I don't think he actually presents that as a thesis, though. He might point to these sectarian divisions as resulting from the arbitrary borders drawn by the west, and the generations of resentment created by west-installed regimes. though.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 16:09:26 2015 No.6485680 >>6485674 Indeed, he doesn't explicitly say that, but the point I'm trying to make is that Chomsky views the U.S as the real 'terrorist', and everything else is just commentary to him, regardless of what anyone says.

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:13:21 2015 No.6485693

>>6485680
Well, he's an American encouraging Americans to take a look at American policies. Presumably if he was in another culture he would be a gadfly there, and his fellows would be saying he should look at the other guys more critically.

Chomsky points out the lie of the "liberal media." When Harris or Ann Coulter come out with a new book, they are put on TV to hawk it. When's the last time Noam Chomsky was on TV?

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:15:11 2015 No.6485699

>>6485564
I feel what you're saying, but I know that I'm not knowledgable about the subject of the bombing in the Clinton aera to take a position (probably because I'm European).

I also don't know Harris actual view on morality well enough, I just know that it's sciency and many think it's bs.

I liked a conversation I saw be him, though, about that we ought to be more cautious of how the Qu'ran is a written down motivator to act in a way which is not en par with our society - which we shouldn't Islamize.

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:16:08 2015 No.6485700

>>6485693
>When Harris or Ann Coulter come out with a new book, they are put on TV to hawk it. When's the last time Noam Chomsky was on TV?

This is clearly a different point though. And besides, do you really think Chomsky gets no air-time? I mean he's been at it for 50 years, and as far as I know, he's not a poor guy.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 16:20:22 2015 No.6485713 I didn't know Chomsky could be so based. Anyone know of any other writings of his that he BTFO of his opponent as much as this did?

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:20:52 2015 No.6485715

>>6485611
>Chomsky thinks that U.S foreign policy is more morally unethical than Islamic terrorism
Like I said you are the cancer on this board with your hypocritical moralising. If you actually read the email yourself you would know why this is false and why there is nothing to discuss about the "exchange" between these two figures.

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:21:10 2015 No.6485716

>>6485699
>I feel what you're saying, but I know that I'm not knowledgable about the subject of the bombing in the Clinton aera to take a position (probably because I'm European).

I don't want to summarize it--a lot of his talks on this subject are available for free on iTunes--but the general tenor, as I recall, was that the bombings made things worse for the civilians.

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:24:24 2015 No.6485735

>>6485700
>This is clearly a different point though. And besides, do you really think Chomsky gets no air-time? I mean he's been at it for 50 years, and as far as I know, he's not a poor guy.

All I'm saying is that I don't recall seeing him on TV, but when conservative writers come out with books, they make the circuit.

Not giving Chomsky a voice beyond the lecture circuit helps to preserve the illusion that President Obama or the Clintons or most of the democratic party is 'liberal,' when they are really centrists contending with a GOP that has moved to the far right.

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:25:15 2015 No.6485738

>>6485638
As you know (apologies for the accuracy ;) ), I described 9/11 as a “horrendous crime” committed with “wickedness and awesome cruelty.” In the case of al-Shifa, I said nothing of the sort. I described it as an atrocity, as it clearly is, and merely stated the unquestionable facts. There is no “moral equivalence,” the term that has been regularly used, since Jeane Kirkpatrick, to try to undercut critical analysis of the state one defends.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 16:25:51 2015 No.6485743 >>6485713 >I didn't know Chomsky could be so based. Anyone know of any other writings of his that he BTFO of his opponent as much as this did? Google 'TWEAKING HARD IN A MOTEL ROOM WITH NOAM CHOMSKY.'

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 16:28:09 2015 No.6485751 >>6485735 Maybe because that's past him for 40 years https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9S1CiGPX2Q

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:28:29 2015 No.6485753

>>6485713
>Anyone know of any other writings of his that he BTFO of his opponent as much as this did?
Noam Chomsky:
SYNTACTIC STRUCTURES (Mouton, 1957)
>With this book Chomsky struck a fatal blow at the behaviorist tradition of Skinner and others that research should be focused solely on external, measurable stimuli and responses, and not to abstract mental entities. At the same time Chomsky reacted to structural linguistics that was content with describing and classifying languages. Chomsky extended the idea of formal systems to linguistics by using the logical formalism to express the grammar of a language.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 16:53:57 2015 No.6485843 >>6485751 >Maybe because that's past him for 40 years I'm not sure what you mean, but it still seems curious to me that America's preeminent liberal intellectual wouldn't be found anywhere in the alleged liberal media.

Anonymous Sat May 2 16:54:43 2015 No.6485848

>>6485751
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9S1CiGPX2Q [Embed]

>For Chomsky, human nature is rooted in universal grammar, and his belief that humans are “hard-wired” to learn language. Foucault argued, as he always has, that universal human nature is a crock of shit. But many fans don’t know of the behind-the-scenes shenanigans before and during the debate. Namely, that Foucault was paid in hash and harassed to wear a wig during the debate.
>So, aside from offering Foucault hashish for part of his payment, Elder tried repeatedly to get Foucault to wear a bright red wig while debating Chomsky. Throughout the debate “Elders kept poking Foucault under the table, pointing to the red wig on his lap, and whispering, ‘put it on, put it on.'”
>As for the “large chunk of hashish,” that he received as partial payment, Foucault brought it back home where he and “his Parisian friends would jokingly refer to [it] as ‘Chomsky Hash.'”
>Chomsky has since been a vocal critic of Foucault. Chomsky attacked Foucault’s work on “regimes of truth” and argued that Foucault “wildly exaggerates.”
>His impression of the 1971 debate isn’t much better, Miller notes. “He struck my as completely amoral,” said Chomsky. “I’d never met anyone who was so totally amoral.”
Chomsky can't into Nietzsche.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 16:59:45 2015 No.6485873 >>6485843 1. his material is too nuanced and unpatriotic for the average TV news viewer 2. most of the media is a mouthpiece for the Democrats, and they'd rather focus on a common enemy than split votes in their own wing.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 17:00:10 2015 No.6485874 >>6485848 Wasn't Foucault's big innovation in philosophy intellectualizing going to bathhouses and not telling his sex partners he was HIV positive?

Anonymous Sat May 2 17:04:12 2015 No.6485887

>>6485873
>1. his material is too nuanced and unpatriotic for the average TV news viewer

That may be true, and also explains why the cartoonishly simplistic right wing writers get so much camera time.

>2. most of the media is a mouthpiece for the Democrats, and they'd rather focus on a common enemy than split votes in their own wing

I don't believe that the media is much of a mouthpiece for the democrats, or that the media has been giving as much airtime to criticism of all the GOP candidates together as it has to Hillary Clinton. But I would agree that they don't give any airtime to the actual left, whatever the reason.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 17:05:27 2015 No.6485894 >>6485874 That was almost as much a slander as Nietzsche's alleged syphilis and nazi affiliation. Not that Foucault is an honest Nietzschean but at least he took the tools into politics a subject which Nietzsche was mostly silent on.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 17:16:44 2015 No.6485947 >>6485555 i'll take that as an uppity admission of defeat

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 17:17:51 2015 No.6485950 >>6485894 Foucault didn't deliberately infect unwitting partners in bathhouses?

Anonymous Sat May 2 18:38:43 2015 No.6486300

>>6485626
That's because he's an American speaking mostly to Americans. And, at least in theory, Americans can have some fairly direct influence over American policy and so are partly responsible for its actions. It's important that they know what their government does in their name and try to make it do less terrible things. But Americans don't generally have much influence over the policies of jihadists, not to mention the fact that practically nobody in the US doubts that what jihadists do is terrible, and that their terrible acts are already given plenty of attention in the media.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 18:40:00 2015 No.6486304 >>6482361 >Holy shit, Sam Harris and X engaging in supreme banter: How could X sink so low?!

>>	Anonymous Sat May 2 20:46:15 2015 No.6486752 >>6485466 You're worse at being a tripfag than anyone else is at being what they are, so you can fuck right off

>>	Anonymous Sun May 3 00:50:47 2015 No.6487441 Sam Harris tries to promote himself using Chomsky and winds up splashing in his own piss. Total ownership: Chomsky.

>>	Anonymous Sun May 3 01:25:46 2015 No.6487514 I thought Sam Harris was cool before this...

>>	Anonymous Sun May 3 02:49:34 2015 No.6487705 He doesn't argue very well, but Sam Harris sure can sing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZyjSuOrRBw

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature