I don't understand Chomsky's reaction here, can an

>>8100017
>samharris.org

>>8100024
It's an exchange between the two.

What's not to understand?

>>8100041
Why is he being so rude and dismissive? I genuinely don't understand his use of language in that way.

Chomsky's gone senile

>>8100114
I mean, it's Sam Harris, the most annoying man in atheism. His entire point on intention is stupid and worthy of being rude to, and dismissed. "Bombing people is terrible, but hey they were done in good intentions (even though we knew about the possible consequences and we didnt really have enough evidence to carry it out but hey)". Seriously you have to be dense to believe this.

Secondly all Noam knew about Harris for is his book in which he misrepresented Chomsky's views. Harris' insists on speaking with him. Obviously Chomsky is going to get annoyed.

[I CANT TAKE MY EYES OFF YOU]

>>8100017
What I understood from this exchange is that Harris thinks intentions can be used to rate different actions on a moral scale, whereas the point by Chomsky is that these non-measurable intentions do not matter at all as everyone has sincere benign intentions (hitler, japan, etc) and thus the questions about intention are not relevant.
From that moment there were only accusations.