Chomsky

Because he has proven himself someone to take seriously, unlike his haters.

Explain why he shouldn't be taken seriously

>>2410300
Gotta appreciate when someone calls things by the factually correct descriptions against prevailing buzzwords.

Probably because he's a world respected genius and academic, random guy on 4chan.

>>2410300
He puts "libertarians" on suicide watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NajQTN9qhXg

>>2411798
>Probably because he's a world respected genius and academic

Hes like a Fight Club poster in that hes just a meme prop retarded college cunts use to virtue signal their retarded unsure and pathetic identity to others

>>2410404
He drops words like human nature or free will like they mean anything

>>2411809

>Bah Koch brothers are so evil!

>[accepts check from daddy soros]

NC: Maybe you’ll discover something in your research on this topic, but my feeling is that the Transcendentalist movement, which was mostly intellectuals, may have had some influence on individualist anarchism, but didn’t connect, to my knowledge, in any significant fashion with the working class popular movements, which much more resemble the anarchism of Bakunin, Kropotkin, the Spanish revolutionaries and others.

>>2411815
If you can't see why Noam Chomsky and Fight Club are on completely different levels then I can't help you.

>>2411819
Hey man, do dogs have certain tendencies of behavior that differ from cats and lizards? Humans have their own predictable tendencies of behavior as well.There is such thing as human nature, you can't see the forest through the trees.

Because he is a major figure in linguistics, well respected by academia, and is a profound thinker.

>>2411832
>If you can't see why Noam Chomsky and Fight Club are on completely different levels then I can't help you.

>post what amounts to "ugh, I cant even"

not an argument. Chomsky is a blithering idiot old cuck whos out of date. He still thinks hes the "edgy cage shaker" for bending over backwards to shill for islam since its a brown people religion and is such a coward he runs away from fucking Sam Harris and went on a tirade about how bad the "new atheist" are because they dare go after some barbaric third worlders. Hes a typical aging liberal oikophibic douche.

He built his career on literal plagiarism of de Saussure, and the placement of his students / cult of personality along with his outspoken (read: easy, lcm trend-baiting) views have cemented his position as an idol of academia.

Nonetheless he's certainly a very adept linguist and has been one of the greatest modern builders of the field, but his 'breakthroughs' were mostly taking previous work and rebranding it, or simply describing things that had been taken for granted but never given proper attention from the discipline.

Chomskyites are utter shit though, seems like everyone wants to be a linguist now because they think it's a platform to spout their ideologies, like philosophy students but with less intellectual rigor.

>>2411858
Have you ever actually read anything by Chomsky?

Indeed, have you ever actually read a book?

>>2411858
Do you seriously expect to agree with any well respected academic on any issue? I don't agree with those views of Chomsky as well, that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve respect and some degree of admiration.

It was not "I can't even" it was honestly telling you that if you can't wrap your head around that concept, you're too far gone to get through to.

>>2411858
Every issue*

>>2411867

>have you ever read chomsky?

Have you ever had your retarded sophomore meme beliefs challenged? Stop being a passive aggressive little twink faggot and form an argument.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgTX-c8aJ4c

>>2411877
I'm not arguing in support of Chomsky, or even challenging what you're saying. I'm simply asking have you ever actually read any of his books?

>>2410300
He exposes many uncomfortable truths that amerilards don't like to hear or talk about.

My problem with him is he is like Michael Moore or Bernie sanders. Controlled opposition only slightly more left than the center-left elites that don't advocate for real change. Just the illusion of it.

>>2411858
He fucking destroyed Sam Harris on a fucking email exchange. You have to be shitting me if you think Ben Stiller is in any way intelligent. All he does is say "muh Islam is bad because terrorism" without thinking as to why recent Islamic terrorism may have developed. Hardly an argument.

>>2411882
>I'm not arguing in support of Chomsky, or even challenging what you're saying.

you clearly are and are backing out of it now after I called you out on not only that, but also your inability to articulate your actual meme prop beliefs since youre a conviction less worm.

Are you really going to try and pretend you were just simply asking me about how familiar I am with his writings when you post some pissy comment about if I have ever read a book? This only furthers my case of the type of retarded college kid who thinks he can name drop Noam Chomsky and that they are "intellectual" youre just another faggot in a sea of faggots anon.

>>2411893
If you think Sanders is or was controlled opposition, you haven't kept up with current events or read wiki. He was hated by the establishment and sabotaged.

>>2411898
Not him but you could at least lie and say yes, you're embarrassing yourself right now by trying to worm out of it. inb4 you throw a barrage of insults at me

>>2411895
>He fucking destroyed Sam Harris on a fucking email exchange.

No he didnt. He called him a racist because he dared criticize something other than White christian middle class americans.

>>2411910
You didn't actually read the emails, did you?

>>2410300
Nobody really cares about Noam Chomsky anymore. He was hot shit like twenty years ago, not he really isn't that prominent.

>>2411899
>Fight the establishment!
>Oops I lost, vote for the establishment!
>Thanks for the money, goys, I'm gonna buy myself a new lake house.

>>2411905
>you're embarrassing yourself right now by trying to worm out of it

How am I "worming out" of it by inviting this little exchange and having to drag you into it? Does your little pea brain really only capable of throwing the exact same insult back at me when it isnt relevant? And are you also so fucking stupid that you complain about me insulting others when you are doing the exact same shit?

>>2411930
Do you really think this is an effective tactic? What you're doing? Like I said, embarrassing. Accuse me of samefag all you want, I don't care.

>>2411899
>He was hated by the establishment and sabotaged.

He was hated because he was a fucking idiot, not because he was rouge. The real reason anyone really hated him is because they knew he had NO chance of beating Trump, an actual wild card outsider.

Sanders shilled for Hillary like the good cuck he is and then lost in a debate to Ted Cruz. What a pathetic faggot.

>>2411938

ok cool

now post an argument.

>>2411944
You first.

>>2411919

>WAAAAA! They are poor victims of circumstance there was never any war in the middle east ever until the evil americans bombed them so you cant notice any horrible things of their religion!

Im sure this shit is impressive to little bird brains, but its fucking retarded.

>>2411926
Not to mention most of his previous fans who were into anti-globalization movement are now cheerleaders for globalism.

The resistance to corporate capitalism now comes from the right, Chomsky means nothing nowadays.

>>2411898
Have you read any of Chomsky's books?

>>2411956
>The resistance to corporate capitalism now comes from the right

You really think Trump is resisting corporatism? Have you been paying attention at all? Just because his opponent was corporate doesn't mean he wasn't also. They're just slightly different strains who are appealing to different demographics.

>>2411949

I already posted my ideas that Chomsky is an idiot and is mostly just used as a prop for 20 year olds in the same way as a Fight club poster. Then all you could do is make passive aggressive insults about my intelligence because you are unable to articulate any actual counter argument.

>>2411955
Ah, I was right.

>>2411955
Not even that guy, but the topic of the emails was totally different from what you are talking about

>>2411965
That's not an argument, sweetheart, that's you throwing shit around, the "barrage of insults" that I previously referenced. Nobody takes that seriously. Like I said, embarrassing.

File: 1487599956135.jpg (1MB, 1400x1000px)

1MB, 1400x1000px

>>2411963
>They're just slightly different strains who are appealing to different demographics.

Is that why the entire establishment is against Trump while they were shilling non stop for clinton?

>>2411973
>That's not an argument

yes it is. Youre just a very stupid person and are getting angry at me because you arent able to form an actual thought. You use passive aggression to try and hide this lol

>>2411975
>the entire establishment is against Trump

Is that why the stock market is booming? Maybe it's some kind of false flag conspiracy.

>>2411963
>corporatism
REEEEEE corporatism is different from corpocracy!!!!! We do not have corporatism in America! We have corpocracy!

>>2411967
>but the topic of the emails was totally different from what you are talking about

No it wasnt since Noam LITERALLY talked about how 9/11 isnt that bad because middle eastern countries are bombed and they are all just victims of circumstance blah blah blah

File: 1462889763218.png (282KB, 852x554px)

282KB, 852x554px

>>2411985
>yes it is

That is so funny.

>>2411985
Your standards are hideously low.

>>2411988

>The "stock market" backed Trump so he could make it go up

Theres no way Chomsky fags are actually this retarded.

>>2411997
Who are you quoting?

>>2411963
Trump electors want him to resist corporatism, the fact that he won't do it will just radicalize them more.

>>2411993
>>2411996

>still hasnt given any counter argument

So far, all you have is a band wagon fallacy and playing right into the cliche of the faggy liberal college student retard. You probably have never and will never sexually satisfy a woman

>>2412005
Jesus are you for real right now? This has to be b8, nobody is this lacking in self-awareness right?

>>2411942
Between him, Trump, and Hillary he was the only one with a net positive approval rating. If anything Hillary was the only candidate that could've lost to Trump. The only reason he lost was because the democratic party had already decided that it was her turn™ back in 2011 when Hillary's right hand woman became the DNC chair.

>>2411992
Is he wrong?

Relatively speaking 9/11 isn't that bad. It's still bad, but there are worse things happening right now that get a smidgen of the attention.

>>2412012

>still no argument

Its funny because the MOMENT anyone says anything ill of meme chomsky, you shitpost your own thread into the dirt lol.

you think the "stock market" backed Trump or whatever

>>2412005
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMJXN9l_ee8

>>2412013
>The only reason he lost was because the democratic party had already decided that it was her turn™

they sent out a few anti-bernie emails. If he couldnt survive that while Trump survived way worse, then he is pathetic. Just let if go you fucking goober. Hes a retard pussy and thats why retarded pussies liked him so much.

>>2411992
The main issue was over the bombing of that pharmaceutical factory in Sudan by Clinton, and how much intent matters in moral evaluations, but I guess that part was too complicated for you.

>>2412018
My thread? I thought it was your thread. In any case, you continue to impress.

>>2412020

>posting a 3 min video because youre butthurt at others because youre too stupid to voice your own opinion

wow, chomsky fanboys are so smart!

>>2412029

ummm? >>2411877

hello?

File: 1465672508672.jpg (19KB, 500x375px)

19KB, 500x375px

>>2412029
mmmmmmmmhhhhhhmmmmmmmm

das it mane bring it all on mmmmmmhhhhhhmmm gimme dose (you)s

>>2412024

>bring up that exact thing

>IT MUST BE TOO COMPLICATED FOR YOU, HUH?!

Are you retarded? And if anything, its too complicated for Chomsky since he didnt understand it at all and thought Clinton accidentally killing people in collateral damage is worse if not just as bad as terrorist intentionally killing thousands of people

All this shit aside, islam is still a shitty barbaric religion and Chomsky still shills for it because hes a typical old liberal cuck whos too much of a coward to criticize brown people because he still thinks Racism is a big thing.

>>2412033

>a video about chomsky vs a random comedy sketch

lol youre not only mad, but really really stupid

>>2412039
>its too complicated for Chomsky since he didnt understand it at all and thought Clinton accidentally killing people in collateral damage is worse if not just as bad as terrorist intentionally killing thousands of people
Not what he said, try again

>>2412049
>Not what he said

yes he did.

File: why-havent-you-converted-to-islam-anon-11578980.png (52KB, 500x612px)

52KB, 500x612px

>>2412039
>2017
>Not being a muslim or at least an Islam symphathizer
Looks like we got a brainlet here, everyone

>>2412049

Seriously though, he literally said that. You are defending Chomsky when you dont even understand the basic concepts he is shilling.

Thanks again for proving my point about only dumb kids liking chomsky

>>2412055

>not being an islamic national socialist

whom'st've'ed do you think youre speaking to?

>>2412052
Nope. He said if you bomb a drug factory and people die because they can't get the drugs it produced that they need, you are morally responsible for those deaths because they were a reasonably foreseeable consequence.

It's okay. Eventually, with practice, you too can learn to read.

>>2412045
>>because youre too stupid to voice your own opinion

also this whole calling everyone idiots (and somehow thinking that's an argument) and backpedaling schtick is getting boring, I think this shit thread is already ruined beyond repair so there's not much left of value here

I hereby give you permission to throw out the last word, for posterity's sake

>>2412061

No, he said intention doesnt matter. haha you dont even understand your own prop beliefs

>>2412065
>I think this shit thread is already ruined beyond repair

yeah, because you had a shit fit and ruined it because someone challenged your beliefs :)

>>2412067
You are wrong. That is what Harris said he said, but Chomsky explicitly denied it. You are making a fool of yourself

>>2412077
>You are wrong.

No Im not. He literally said Clintons intentions in that bombing didnt matter. According to chomsky, its all the same shit because people died.


And once again, who gives a shit about this when the real topic is that chmosky is a cowardly islamshill because he doenst want to be called a "racist" because he still thinks in the 1960s

>>2412061
So he hated bill Clinton?

>>2412060
salaam alaykum, sadiq.

>>2412092
He said it didn't matter that his intentions were good if he could reasonably foresee that his actions would lead to those deaths. He wasn't saying intentions don't matter, but rather that Harris' argument that ONLY intentions matter is retarded.

I don't even care about Noam Chomsky, I just really hate Sam Harris and think he made a fool of himself in that exchange. I couldn't care less about the rest of this shit you're ranting about.

>>2412108
Yes

>>2411956
>The resistance to corporate capitalism now comes from the right
lol

>>2411823

Excellent argument, here's your reply!

>>2411815

>virtue signal

basement dweller desperate to appear intelligent detected

File: 1453791288617.jpg (53KB, 828x766px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 828x766px

>>2412180

Yeah dude, don't you see how President Trump is sticking it to those globalists by cutting them nice fat tax breaks for not participating in the world market?

>>2412092
>And once again, who gives a shit about this when the real topic is that chmosky is a cowardly islamshill because he doenst want to be called a "racist" because he still thinks in the 1960s
Can you prove any of this in any definitive way?

>>2412022

>way worse

Being an outsider candidate in the outsider-loving GOP on a change year with like 9 other mouthbreathers to sponge up each other's votes? You're right, that sounds pretty tough. I would hate to have to debate such luminaries as Chris Christie, Jeb Bush and Ben Carson.

>>2410300
>Why does anyone in academia take anything this guy says seriously?

He almost single-handedly destroyed behaviorism.

Okay, so it's obvious that OP is a massive idiot incapable of forming any sort of sound premise on which to base an argument. 4chan in general and especially /his/ is ripe for this kind of bullshit. I'm personally tired of wading through it hoping to see a thread that's interesting and not just a lazy copy of a lazy bait post for the 100th time.

What is a better community on the internet for discussion of philosophy that doesn't take itself too seriously?

>>2411824
God it's like an SJW got a hold of a thesaurus and a random word generator of historical events.

>>2411885
No he uses hyperbolic language and thinks that America is just genocide all the way down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCkPW3hxWns

>>2412371
Reddit

>>2410300
Chomsky is correct about a lot of things... if you prescribe to the libertarian socialist idea that states should base their foreign policy on morality and equate the actions of a country to that of an individual person.

The thing is that large states, especially superpowers like the US/USSR/EU, tend to operate based on realpolitik where they seek to find the quickest and most pragmatic way to their goal. That's where some of Chomsky's aruements and comparisons tend to fall apart, especially when he downplays Soviet/Cuban involvement in funding their own genocidal regimes.

>>2413064
>if you prescribe to the libertarian socialist
You really shouldn't as it is a paradox.

>>2411955
>>2411930
>hasn't read the Chomsky/Harris emails
>hasnt read Chomsky's books

are we sure this idiot anon can even read?

>>2412180
the best way to resist corporate capitalism is to cut regulations and give them all cushy white house jobs. i think marx wrote about it.

>>2413064
maybe they shouldn't base their actions on morality but maybe they shouldn't base their actions on retarded "I'll finance these nun-rapists so the perfidious red doesn't get a foothold" or "I'll do a coup d'etat cause banana pickers want to be treated like human beings and support a government that commits a genocide" premises either

Really dissapointed to read his reaction to the Cambodian Genocide by the Khmer Rouge

>>2413185
That's assuming that they choose to ignore the flaws of said nun-rapists and dictators rather than supporting them knowing that the very nature of the regimes would work to contain the spread of revolutionary, Soviet alligned communism, which it did in all cases but one (Cuba).

He claimed that Bengal once had the most books per capita than anywhere in the world. Is this true?

>>2410300
Because he is a rather prominent linguist who's done quite a lot of important work in the field even though his political commentary often seems to suffer from the same problems as the critique of his academic work. That is; constant misinterpretation, intentional or not, of what was originally said and meant.

>>2411975
>Is that why the entire establishment is against Trump
The entire establishment is against Trump because he's a moron with clear conflicts of interest he has no intention of resolving and with absolutely no previous experience which would prepare him for the kind of responsibility he now has. American's traded a corrupt establishment for another one, now led by an idiot.

I'm fucking amazed that Americans are so stupid that they think Trump stands for some kind of meaningful change. You should have risen up and crushed your government years ago, and instead you go and do this?

But you know, just keep telling yourself that you're under attack from man eating foes from Iraq and cuddle up next to Putin as he sets the world aflame. Stay a passive consumer of obvious lies and bullshit and expect a presidential candidate to fix your problems for you as he muzzles dissent. Isn't that just way easier than actually trying to do something about the problems?

>>2414179
It's not stupidity, its anger among rural voters who've seen their opportunities fall by the wayside as a result of deindustrialization. Same reason Brexit happened.

>>2414346
Thinking that Trump can or will fix that, or that it will be an improvement if he does, is a sign of stupidity.

>>2410300
The idea that Chomsky hates the US isn't true. He's stated before that he thinks it's the best country in the world and that the EU is much more undemocratic. However, he's highly critical of American foreign and domestic policy.

>>2414361
Then that's it, he's burning as the worst president we ever had. He was the one that put everyone there by playing into all of that.

>>2414087
His entire work in cognitive science and linguistics has been completely disproven and abandoned.

>>2411798
Linguistically he's a genius but politically he hasn't moved past edgy college sophmore

>>2411877
I hope that wasn't you in the video my guy

>>2411985
Not an argument

>>2415724
Not true. It has not been disproven nor entirely abandoned, though newer linguistic research tends to lead away from Chomsky's ideas. And frankly, some of his models (universal grammar, etc) are still basically 'true', but That doesn't mean much, and is certainly nothing negative.

FWIW, much of Einstein's work is now falling apart in light (kek) of quantum theory. Still holds true for visible light, as far as we know, but it's looking pretty shaky...

>>2416327
>universal grammar
The thing with this, as well as many of his other theories, is partly that Chomsky's studies focuses on similarities between languages and in particular what is common for all languages, and that people seemingly don't understand this. When Chomsky said that reflectivity was a fundamental characteristic of humanity, for example, he wasn't saying that all human languages will exhibit it, but that all humans are able to learn a language that does.

>>2411893
Your problem with him is clearly that you don't know what his arguments really are.

>>2411898
>>2411930
K, confirmed for not ever having read any Chomsky. Thanks, move along.

>>2416339
That's my point. There is no literal universal grammar (never an argument of Chomsky, but some people understand the term this way). But Chomsky's main thrust was that all mentally sound humans have (i.e. are born with) the ability to understand proper grammar in whatever language(s) they speak. Chomsky successfully upended the idea of linguistic tabula rasa for infants. Where he goes after that is more open to debate. However, if you want to think of it in another way, Skinner and Piaget are EVEN MORE WRONG with their pure environmental/behavioural approach to development. But none of them are really 'wrong', that's just how scientific research works.

It makes sense that the brain is hard-wired is to pick up languages, but this is probably a combination of factors. I gravitate towards Lakoff myself.

>>2416346

>its a leftist offers nothing other than a childish "you dont understand me MAANN!" tier response episode

There is a lot of confusion as to Chomsky's contributions to linguistics. They have not been disproved or debunked or however you want to word it, they are still the mainstream approach to syntax. Universal Grammar is virtually universally accepted among formal linguists, even among many of Chomsky's most ardent detractors.

>>2411815
>le ebin virtue signalling meme
epik meme dood XDD!!!!

>>2411823
>muh George Soros

File: costanza doge.jpg (18KB, 469x469px)

18KB, 469x469px

>>2411877
>Have you ever had your retarded sophomore meme beliefs challenged? Stop being a passive aggressive little twink faggot and form an argument.

>>2411815
"virtue signalling" is just /pol/'s new buzzword for anything that isn't "kill da jews and niggers and faggots!"

>>2411858
There's so many /pol/ buzzwords in there I couldn't even find an argument!

>>2410300
He's more serious than all the rampant conservacuck and msm propaganda.

File: the-target-of-preventive-war-must-have-several-characteristics-it-must-be-virtu-403x403-nk41re.jpg (22KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 403x403px

https://youtu.be/BPMCIG0y-RQ

>>2416428
still not an argument, and I'm not a leftist.

>>2416518
The point of departure is more over if this is a 'hard-wired' specific region (or set of regions, as is more often the case in most brain functions) in the brain, or just the collective abilities of the mighty human brain.

We know that apes use both visual (ass displays, chest thumping, etc) and non-visual communication (hoots, screams, grunts, etc). It is very very likely that our earlier hominid cousins and ancestors used aural communication. Most mammals do.

To what degree these various hominids might have had language we simply will not ever know. Neanderthals probably had a rudimentary system of vocalizations, if not exactly a language (or maybe they did have language too!). Neanderthals probably did not have the same range of phonemes as us, though. I was reading recently that Neanderthals also likely had poor or no facial communication. That is, their giant brows, noses and facial musculature prevented them from the kind of emotions and expressions humans can make just by raising or furrowing brows, frowning, smiling, etc. Nonetheless, they had 'society'. There are cave etchings in Spain a hundred thousand years than humans, and they knew how to sew and make flutes and shit, so probably they did communicate.

To get back on topic, the point is that if they could, it seems reasonable to believe humans are even 'more advanced'. There is almost certainly a collection of brain structures that very conveniently facilitate the acquisition and use of language. Humans are expert at recognizing patterns. It's why we developed mathematics or music, for example.