As a listener of TOE, you can now enjoy full digital access to The Economist and all it has to offer. Get a 20% off discount by visiting: www.economist.com/toe
Voidisyinyang Voidisyinyang Aristotle was a third rate philosopher wrong on just about everything he could not answer Parmenides and his rational monism so he basically said denounced him. He could not understand Plato’s dialectic and dialogue , so he went into monologues . This psychopath had no respect for due diligence. Without proof he claimed that Persians and women were inferior. He indoctrinated Alexander into burning down the city of Persepolis burning women and children, luckily Alexander came to realize that he had been fooled and married his officers to Persian women.please don’t compare Chomsky to the psychopath Aristotle
@@arunjetli7909 "Reviewing a variety of political systems, Aristotle concluded that this system was the best - or perhaps the least bad - form of government. But he recognized a flaw: The great mass of the poor could use their voting power to take the property of the rich, which would be unfair. Madison and Aristotle arrived at opposite solutions: Aristotle advised reducing inequality, by what we would regard as welfare state measures. Madison felt that the answer was to reduce democracy." chomsky.info/20140107/ I said he's "More like" Aristotle than Plato. I didn't say I agreed with Aristotle or Plato. I agree with the PreSocratics.
Voidisyinyang Voidisyinyang I like Noam so I did not want to think of him as Aristotle I do strongly disagree Noam on many issues such as Kashmir about which he knows nothing and comments on an old habit of a white men like Hegel Kant and JS. Mill. . Somehow they feel that they will solve the problems of us as we must be primitive. Rule one is do not comment about which you know nothing .any I have been his fan
Noam Chomsky is a treasure and a gift to mankind. He is immensely humble and generous with his great intellect. There is no intellectual to match the breadth of his understanding in the world we live in at present. What is very valuable is how he can explain difficult concepts in a way where most people will be able to understand them. God bless this great mind💗💖💟😊😺
It's simply amazing that Chomsky at 91, is still reaching out and is accessible to the youth. The most influential intellectual alive in the western hemisphere, is still a icon of resistance, hope and truth for all (EWNS hemispheres)
Yes same age as me. Time gives you a better insight every day. Gods are for fools but I'm not going to state the obvious the Noah story should give you an idea.
@@EtcEtcAndEtc i see where you're coming from. i don't think (weird) is the proper word tho . Maybe, (playing the absent advocate ➡️the interviewers) they might thought he changed his beliefs regarding God.
I appreciate these young folks reaching out to Noam. I appreciate Noam for his patience in regards to the questions. As a long time follower of NC you must have patience to ingest, digest and understand the truth and brilliance of Noam. And then you have to listen again. Then you get.
"When examining Comrade Chomsky, like other radicals, it is important to not only examine what he says (though what he says is often wrong), but what he is not saying. Utopian revolutionaries butchered millions of people in the 1900s, and the United States of America, a creature of the Enlightenment, did the heavy lifting to stop them before the socialist cancer killed human civilization in its entirety. Now that the evils of socialism have become manifest, all Chomsky can provide is nihilism. But the genius of Chomsky’s nihilism resides in this- his ability to combine cynicism and idealism to argue that everything that exists deserves to be destroyed. The idealism - Chomsky’s vague notion of anarchism - functions as an impossible standard to condemn the West- no matter how much good we do, since we can always to better, we’re bad. That’s all it is; it is not a program, and Chomsky has been more than willing to support dictatorships when they are against free enterprise and/or the United States. The cynicism steps in when Chomsky implies that everything is equally bad, as if the crimes of the United States are comparable, if not worse, than those of Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, and Mao’s China. The goal is not self-affirmation, but self-destruction, and Chomsky’s meeting with the Party of God (the Hezb’Allah) symbolizes everything this man is about. If no model of the revolutionary future exists, then revolution *is* destructive suicide and nothing else.,
"I can't say it or my animals will race to the exterior exit." His pet dogs apparently make quite a commotion (as can be heard in the background of previous interviews) at the mere suggestion that he's going out to play with them, which he said he does daily.
People who have had dogs, or at least some kinds of dogs know that even the mention of the word “walk” will send them running to the door waiting for you to take them out. They respond to it and are always listening.
Peter, it's amazing that you got to speak to this man and he didn't berate you. He calmly answered what he thought would be interesting to your viewers and almost completely avoided your questions which I appreciate greatly. He is an incredible man.
I was in awe as he effortlessly batted away questions on " God" as empty words and unanswerable as the definitions have never been elucidated . A strange interview - I got the mental picture of a couple of scrappy dogs barking around a majestic but aging Lion who casually walked on.
As an atheist ! UNITY THROUGH DIVERSITY ! is as paradoxical and incorrect as ! GOD IS LOVE ! .. Libtard vs Creatards... Chomsky is extremely libtarded, hence he's a numero uno Uber-Lib academic.... Liberal wastage is the liberal way, be it righty neo-lib or lefty uber-lib.
@@Herr2Cents .. No mate, Americans are extremely confused by their extremist programming... Chomsky is full of paradox and confusion. He has pushed confusion all his life, as he is a wishy-washy Lib lecturer of the Left... As someone trained in computer science I also consider Chomsky's contribution hugely overrated... I put him on par with your devout creatard Christain apologists, as a British atheist. If you can't see Chomsky is a CONFUSION MERCHANT of The Left you are confused... more, More, MORE, new, New, NEW, growth Growth, GROWTH.... The Libtardian Way.... Cancerous.
@Pat M agreed. Another product of the system spewing system garbage. It does not take much to come to some of his conclusions. This makes me very concerned at how very obtuse the masse really are. If he is a wise man, then I am a guru!!
This man is such a good and generous person, off-the-scale industrious as far as individual workload goes. I believe he stands apart from the world of public intellectuals because what he is most interested in is talking with as many folks as possible as long as they, like him, are seekers of truth. It's unbelievable how much he's done with his time on planet Earth. Irreplaceable. But he and, now, with the death of David Graeber, I have gone back to finish my degree...He is very easy to reach and it's amazing how alive he is at 92 years old.
@@sheilamacdougal9948 lol, a pointless and inaccurate comment. Chomsky is admirable for the reason that he is a good human being. That's a rare thing in the world of renown.
@@stephenwallace8782 Yeah, was he a "good human being" when he wrote that France's leading Holocaust denier was not anti-Semitic but just "an apolitical liberal" who had been publishing his "findings"? Or when he denied that the Pol Pot regime was committing genocide, and obscenely tried to impugn the credibility of escaping refugees? Or when "libertarian" Chomsky used his influence to induce the editors of an encyclopedia to excise passages by linguist Gregory Sampson that referred to these notorious incidents? Or when Chomsky wrote that arch terrorist and head of the fanatical Hezbollah, Nasrallah, was a "serious person" and had presented convincing arguments why Hezbollah should retain its fabulously armed militia within Lebanon (prompting liberal Lebanese to express shock and dismay)? Or when Chomsky has repeatedly written that the terrorist Hamas and Iran have long been seeking peace, but are victims of U.S.-Israeli intransigeance? Or when he repeatedly blamed the U.S. for the Cold War and denied that the Soviet Union was responsible for any aggression or threats to other countries? Or when Chomsky wrote a ludicrous apology for the criminal Serbian regime's actions in Kosovo, denied or minimised the genocidal acts of Serb forces in Bosnia and Kosovo, and blamed NATO and the U.S. for the conflicts? But I agree that a hero-worshipper, uneducated by his own admission, will be ignorant of these and many other of his cult-leader's interventions, or their significance.
@Martin Rudling One thing's for sure. YOU'll never know anything. Alternatively you could go back to school and try to finish your education. You may need to finish high school first. But I'm sure it's much more comfortable wallowing in your miserable bigotry and blaming the Jews for all your problems.
poor Chomsky so patient with these two nitwits. He's used to it; I don't think he minds lol. I've been watching twits ask this guy terrible questions for longer than the hosts have been alive. You have to appreciate that he is a linguist first and foremost. He knows the actual meanings of words people use. it confuses him when people misuse words because he only knows them in their most accurate sense. I do really love the hosts they are adorable, they have a long way to go but i like the direction they are heading. God bless you Chomps, never die, my prophet of truth.
FYI, I showed your comment to Chomsky via email (that he was patient with nitwits / he's used to it / these were terrible questions) and he responded "Crazy. The troll culture is a nuisance. " Hope that helps. - Curt PS: Here's a link: i.imgur.com/NRumRvH.png
@@TheoriesofEverything LOL um...did you include the entire message or did you just send him the negative parts in hopes your misleading context would garner sympathy? Cause it sure looks like you have got this far: "poor Chomsky so patient with these two nitwits. He's used to it; " and then neglected the rest. That would be utterly embarrassing for you if that was the case...that would make YOU the very thing Chomsky despises. I stand by by statement. You two have a long way to go but you are on the right path...keep it up. Don't worry you only look like idiots when talking to Chomsky, don't worry most people do anyway...geez a little sensitive are we? LOL. Cancel culture is a real issue, we must remember that if we believe in free speech it means that we believe that people we hate have the right to say anything they want. now please send this to him as a follow up, as well as my entire first message i'd love another reply.
@@MrJanes-cl5sj The conversation was fine. They asked several interesting and important questions. The interviewers were serious, respectful, and engaged. I don't see where the vitriol is coming from. Take a deep breath.
vidéo name of Noam Chomsky is barzeev -> Bar-Zeev, meaning "Ze'ev's son", is a form of the Hebrew Ze'ev, which means "wolf", the 'kinnui' ("secular equivalent") of Benjamin (Genesis 49.27). Bar is the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew Ben ("son"). so the son of the wolf
I'm so glad I discovered this channel! What AMAZING guests and content! I'm putting this time mark here so I can come back to it and write it down later. A great way of explaining what's wrong with Neoliberalism. 28:07 I can't wait to see the final project!
I'm not sure I want to live in a world without Noam Chomsky. His scope of knowledge and understanding,on many subjects, is unparalleled compared to any one else alive. And he delivers it seriously, with no bullshit.
yes, genius is a lot of work. Since the early 1960s his friends and acquaintances were amazed how much he read, subscribing to 100s journals, newspapers, from the NY Times to the most obscure, while keeping up in his and related academic fields.
Not really. Perhaps you walked in with all the same assumptions he relied on in the last half hour. There was very little explanation of any of his conclusions. He exhibited the heart of a teacher early; not so much later. Maybe three hours would be more appropriate for the scope of topics.
@Joseph Henderson Of course he's critical of America. Observe the behavior over the last 244 years. How many atrocities need to be committed, by the people who own the United States, before a day(s) of atonement is forced on them? Observe the four major crises under which we presently suffer. To call Chomsky gutless is ignorant. He's one of the lone intellectuals of importance who points out the inequities and the inevitable, cyclical failures of a capitalist system that doesn't work for most people. Additionally, he does criticize communism, regularly. Maybe you just can't hear the words. He's actually courageous, if you care to think about it. A professor at MIT, critical of a system that actively recruits and receives funding from private capitalists and the military industrial complex, the recruits MIT's talent to join the greed-fest. How many can do that without losing their jobs, or worse? Answer = no one. You most probably are barking up the wrong tree.
I've yet to hear Chomsky speak at any length on poetry, art, architecture, mathematics, physics, continental thought, medicine and many other subjects. In fact, usually international affairs, esp. US foreign policy, and linguistics.
@@tomasmccauley569 Democracy in business works great for the majority. The tyrant is functionally indistinguishable in outcome to the minority, whether you have 1 tyrant or hundreds.
@@tomasmccauley569 You said one tyrannical CEO can't run it all (assuming you were speaking for Chomsky). Which is demonstrably incorrect. I was pointing out that in a democracy you'd still have people making wild accusations of tyranny, even with checks and balances, just as done with single owner models when the minority feels like they are not getting their wants met. The result would look the same. Some people happy, while others not so much. Just as you would need good reasons to get rid of democracy where it already exists, you would need good reasons to establish democracy where it doesn't. Calling business owners tyrants does not make for that good reason. (yes I am aware that is not the entirety of Chomsky's arguments). Keep in mind that I have not made any distinctions in the different models of employee owned companies. I was talking in generalities as that is what I was responding to.
@@tomasmccauley569 I am aware of the model, its accomplishments and its criticisms. It being the best example is subjective, not a position others would hold. Again I was not advocating any particular model. I was illustrating the nonsense of the 'tyrannical' argument as you will find that sentiment even in cooperatives. I am sure it wouldn't be too difficult to find it in those that are employees of Mondragon, but not allowed to be a member of the cooperative. Good luck finding any model that doesn't give way to feelings of oppression in some set of it's constituents.
Brett Anthony That’s pretty profound ... so ... are you saying that religion is a belief system we created in order to fool ourselves into justifying whatever we want to do? A loophole around natural moral law? I like where that idea takes us.
To judge an interview it comes mainly back to what you new info. you got from it at the end and I got alot out of it and many like me did as well and that's a sign of a great interview, keep it up guys!.
Excellent video ! .. doesn't matter If we agree or not with Chomsky, in part or totally, the point here is to listen and try to understand. Thanks a lot !
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
Nails it again, if through disappointingly naive (though verbose) interviewersw who - like most desperate over-thinkers who seem to fall far short of capably grasping reality - ask (themselves) far too many of the wrong questions. It's comical, but on that note: hats off to his gentle, patient, humble handling, which he manages to execute despite incredible forthrightness. What a guy! And still so sharp despite such advanced years. A great example of what sustained activity can do for the quality of ageing human lives.
almost every single question asked by the two interviewers is laden with obvious landmine terms with immense baggage used to the highest length of ambiguity to imply an intellect that is sadly lacking. I am unsure if the intent here was to get an intellectual celebrity like Chomsky to 'trip him up' with some sorry gotcha question. Aside from the anecdotal stories of Chomsky, this interview is utterly pointless. If someone were to edit this to be a single talk given by Chomsky it would be greatly improved. I am only annoyed whenever Glinos opens his mouth and spews inanity just to try to 'word salad' Chomsky. His responses generally address the question only in pointing out to the interviewer either what they SHOULD have asked, or to explain the concept behind the words they vacuously speak. The only unarguable aspect of this channel is it's name. How could they possibly have gotten Chomsky to agree to this?
"When examining Comrade Chomsky, like other radicals, it is important to not only examine what he says (though what he says is often wrong), but what he is not saying. Utopian revolutionaries butchered millions of people in the 1900s, and the United States of America, a creature of the Enlightenment, did the heavy lifting to stop them before the socialist cancer killed human civilization in its entirety. Now that the evils of socialism have become manifest, all Chomsky can provide is nihilism. But the genius of Chomsky’s nihilism resides in this- his ability to combine cynicism and idealism to argue that everything that exists deserves to be destroyed. The idealism - Chomsky’s vague notion of anarchism - functions as an impossible standard to condemn the West- no matter how much good we do, since we can always to better, we’re bad. That’s all it is; it is not a program, and Chomsky has been more than willing to support dictatorships when they are against free enterprise and/or the United States. The cynicism steps in when Chomsky implies that everything is equally bad, as if the crimes of the United States are comparable, if not worse, than those of Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, and Mao’s China. The goal is not self-affirmation, but self-destruction, and Chomsky’s meeting with the Party of God (the Hezb’Allah) symbolizes everything this man is about. If no model of the revolutionary future exists, then revolution *is* destructive suicide and nothing else." ...
Chomsky is probably one of the last living wise men on Earth. In India, he would be called a "Baba", a name of veneration for his wisdom. In Native American culture, he would be considered a Wisdom Keeper or an Elder. It's so sad know that we're witnessing the extinction of this breed of men.
"Having a job is placing yourself under the control of an autocrat, worse than Stalin". Really? I have had unpleasant work relationships with several companies, but none had the authority to send me to a gulag! Chomsky should have been asked what system he advocates which has no autocrats.
I think he's being hyperbolic just to challenge the automatic assumption work good. I don't like invoking murderous dictators but it's pretty common in arguememts. Later on he kinda defends America as not having gulags 🤷♂️
To paraphrase Pankaj Mishra that my most dominating thought of any day at any given time is one that of absolute ignorance, that I am an absolute ignorant. By reading and listening to people like Professor Chomsky and others, not only that feeling bites harder but it also lessens the ignorance.
"Having a job means placing yourself under the rule of an autocratic ruler....that Stalin couldn't have dreamed of." Fucking genius. And of course apt.
I was impressed by the intelligence of the young guys, of course they're from Canada where there is a modicum of real education. Great interview. I always appreciate Chomsky's clarity, historical context and linguistic discernment. The double-speak of a term like "libertarian" is indeed stunning.
14:50 holds the greatest Quote I have ever heard Noam utter. It is Backed up with such raw common sense and delivered with plain speak. "....and then I did get an insight, religion is based around the idea that God is an idiot." Fucking BRILLIANT. I LOVE THIS MAN!!!!
Very stimulating, I must say. His view of God is ...live and let live.. if it helps people, so be it. I like that perspective. In the absence of reductive materialism being able to explain anything in the nature of true reality, it's presumptuous for normal humans to conceive anything beyond. Which doesn't mean that there isn't anything beyond, but for us living in this illusory real world , we need a working model and for arriving at the right moral guides and principles, the man made principles masquerading as the edicts of God doesn't help. They are observed in breach.. Chomsky's recommendation is to be free thinkers and be able to arrive at a consensus on what are the best principles for the most good for most people.. that should workable, right ?
@Leo Clark hey Leo. The problem is that you are throwing thebbaby out with the bath water. You have convinced yourself that you have achieved clarity on these issues. The truth often lies between camps. The fact that the sjw politically correct crowd is making a mess of things does not discredit the leftist movement, just as Nazis don't discredit the conservatives. Check out John Haidt and his book "The Righteous Mind" to see how your comment appears to be more ideological than truly truth seeking
Snowdenbleep Give me an example of these “crazy SJWs” or whatever causing an actual tangible problem... Meanwhile you got the right wing who is literally trending to annihilate human existence by the end of the century... Meanwhile the SJ-DUBYA’s are... Being mean to people who say some pretty questionable things? Yeah, not exactly equivalent. Like at all. No
Leo Clark Buddy... read a fucking book or something. Do you get all of your political information from twitter, or something? Every single point you’ve made is the most tired bullshit cliche from the “anti-SJW” crowd (yknow, the guys who essentially popularized the alt right... yknow that modern white supremacist movement? Oh, I’m sorry, they prefer the term “identitarian”). Like, I don’t even believe you in your claim to know Chomsky. If you knew Chomsky, you would know that at least 70% of your comment is based in flat out lies that the imperialist war machine would be just tickled pink to see you swallow whole - like you’ve done - so good job on that one bud, really. Way to take a stand; supporting the worlds most powerful imperial force in history and all. Christ.
I would loved to have heard untethered conversations with Chomsky and the late Dr. Alan Watts. These two speak endlessly while changing subjects seamlessly.
As a long term admirer of NC, I sincerely thank you guys for this interview. NC is one of my personal heroes... and I've seen and read a LOT of his interviews and books. And he rarely talks about religion. And believe me... I've seen hundreds of his lectures and interviews. Well done!!
“With disdain I will throw my gauntlet full in the face of the world, and see the collapse of this pygmy giant whose fall will not stifle my ardour. Then will I wander god-like and victorious through the ruins of the world. and, giving my words an active force, I will feel equal to the Creator." “Thus heaven I’ve forfeited, I know it full well. My soul, once true to God, Is chosen for hell.” A portion of Karl Marx’s poems, a hero of Noam Chomsky.
You, on the other hand, are still afraid of an imaginary, cruel God-Monster. Eternal hell! You have forfeited all out of fear. Your monster does not exist. Do something useful, fearful slave!
Out of all things you could criticize Marx for, you choose the subject of one poem? I don't see anything wrong with someone writing an edgy poem about their desire for omnipotent power/destruction, nor do I see anything inherently wrong with rejecting religion. Plenty of religious texts are about the desire for power, and religion is, among other things, a socially acceptable way to express that desire by projecting it onto whatever god-like being you choose to believe in.
Sam Harris, phD in neurosticen. Collector of skins, edgy is one thing, obsessed is another. Engels described Marx as, “the monster possessed by ten thousand devils." Here is another ditty Marx wrote, “To thee my verses, unbridled and daring, Shall mount, O Satan, king of the banquet. Away with thy sprinkling, O priest, and thy droning. For never shall Satan, O priest, stand behind thee. Thy breath, O Satan, my verses inspires, When from my bosom the gods I defy. Of kings pontifical, of kings inhuman: Thine is the lightning that sets minds to shaking. O soul that wanderest far from the straight way, Satan is merciful. See Heloisa! Like the whirlwind spreading its wings, He passes, O people, Satan the great! Hail, of reason the great Vindicator! Sacred to thee shall rise incense and vows! Thou hast the god of the priest disenthroned.”
What l like most of eminent Prof.Chomsky is his free,democratic spirit and realistic vision about people and society!He always focuses on actions rather than on beliefs or declarations..and it s great from a wide world famous linguist!Thanks for awesome interview!
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
It is difficult to speak of God without having had an intuitive or mystical experience. Max Planck claimed that what we posit of matter points to consciousness, as does Erwin Schrodinger. Getting over monotheism is quite different from mystical apperception and s theory of matter as light.
It may be obvious to many of you. But if you're a bit slow, like me, in grasping Chomsky's insights, the nature of his perspective: he's obviously very well informed about what has happened. But the key to understanding much of his thinking is to see things like a child. Resisting the conditioning influence of societies on one's consciousness. To resist/examine the assumptions imposed/foisted on you by all your institutions. Avoiding prejudices and biases of our narrow tribalisms. To measure everything against the unadulterated mind/person. Taking the promises and aspirations of our guiding documents and ideas at face value. Reasserting them. Taking as your base the human being with his/her human rights. It is difficult to find an 'educator' of any kind who is untouched by the conditioning of the world. It can be disorienting to hear someone who is not speaking from a faulty premise or a hidden agenda. Which I would argue is almost the most important question about any person in such a position. What's underneath it all if we dig down? "What 'business' are we in anyway?" We may come to it like a former prisoner or a person with a kind of ptsd, back to a land that is safe, with loving friends, where enemies and intrigue do not abound. In need of re-calibration.
Great interview... A complete different line of questions and I was very curious about his views on the abstract as opposed to politics and power. Thanks
thank you for the nice diverse interview, lots of topics were discussed in this one hour. will you make another interview with him? if so , as you are asking him casually,(I felt after all he talks with us as his children or grand children who always ask for his advice) how does he look at himself? how does he puts his ego on check ? considering that he is one of the best intellectuals on earth, yet he is so considerate and humble. how could he achieve this level ? is he proud of himself, in terms of feeling superior may be, because of what he achieves? please ask him if you can ,thanx
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
I'm really curious about why a man like Chomsky, who very obviously knows there's far more to the mind and consciousness that we can analyse and articulate on our own, would have no interest in weed or psychedelics, that obviously change something in the way you perceive and think. It seems he likes sticking to things that can be proven (even though he seemed to find the idea of archetypes interesting), I'd really love to see a somewhat in depth discussion of this. What is it that stopped Chomsky from wanting to experience something that can't be called real in the realm of science, when it's obvious the realm of science is limited? I'm sure he has a shit tonne of ideas that are out of the box that he either refuses to think about or puts on the side due to their unprovability.
The media abandoned their search for truth in search of a better world long ago, and have abandoned Chomsky in kind. I do wish the interview was a bit more focused, but at least someone is doing the work of keeping Chomsky on the airwaves.
Since we are little children we get accustomed to believe that what is in our minds is true, the fact that we have something in our minds makes believe it is true and it's not. Those " aha" moments we come about every once in a while happen because the mind gets out of the way and we see with something else. Having something in your mind and holding it as fact is a process that happen only in the mind and it is like writing something in a blackboard when it comes to proveability they are both the same, seing something written in a wall or having it in our mind is the absolute same, just a mark in a blank space. Mind don't deal with facts, but speculation and ideas
I love the interview and the many more recent ones in the past 5 years but Jesus dudes in his 90s its crazy how he has the GRIT to stay up to date everything until his end date.
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
The most interesting part of this to me was at 31:41: Having a job is a severe attack on human rights and dignity, and pointing out that 19th century workers and the Republican Party tended to view wage labor as temporary slavery till you had the chance to become free again. I don't agree with a lot of Chomsky's politics, but I love how he gets us to question contemporary conventional thinking in ways you don't hear very often.
So correct having a job is soul destroying person works all their lives to survive instead of doing what they prefer to do it is important to work but not in the style of this rat race for that reason Scandinavians trying to reduce working days to 4 rather than 5 so person has some more freedom for themselves.
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
The title is misleading: His words about "having a job" around mins. 33 or 34 are probably the most valuable of all the interview. Is there any reason why you don't see it?
I told my supervisor (he and I have a great working relationship) about Noam Chomsky tonight. I can’t wait till he comes back from his day off with an altered viewpoint on the world. Noam Chomsky is not an idol but a beacon from the 20th century for brilliant thought which should not be lost. My hope is we have those who can maintain and grow on this type of grounded, commonsensical and genius thinking.
Check in at 24 mins for Prof Chomsky on the founding of the Neo-Liberal Programme, the Establishment's response to the ideals ("anarchy") of the Sixties.
Chomsky comes to the conclusion that “religion is based on the assumption that God is an idiot” because his grandfather broke Talmudic law and smoked on Passover. This is the most ludicrous conclusion to come to. Maybe his grandfather was senile, or perhaps he knew exactly what he was doing and was breaking the law-like many people, even Orthodox people, do when it comes to this or that specific rule, and most often with smoking, since they can't stop themselves-and Chomsky’s father just explained it to him with a dismissive response because he didn’t want to get too much into it with his 10 year old son who was seeing something he shouldn’t have seen. To come to the conclusion that “religion is based on the assumption that God is an idiot” because one Jewish man did something one night is absurd. He’s been saying this for decades and it never made any sense.
What makes less sense? Is that magical person in the sky is followed by many. That one guy...you know....this guy with a so-called Jesus name. Who apparently came from years ago? It's kind of the same thing!
@Jeff Driscoll Excellently argued. I am most impressed, especially, with your attention to detail and the examples you provided to make your point with.
The literal twinkle in Noam's eye as he tells a story from childhood that marginally influenced his life and stunned his young interviewers into silence might have told you that he was speaking ironically, humorously and very thoughtfully. Did you listen to anything he said before telling the story? Nope.
Prashant Trivedi said that mythology is "My Truth". God is divine, is perfection, is "golden ratio", is perfect fractality, is perfect heart beat of a human being that give immunity to sickness.
This guy is so smart and knowledgeable. Sometimes, it's possible to believe that everyone is relatively close to each other, in terms of intellect. Then you listen to a genuine genius and you know that there is a stark difference between the average and the extreme. But it's not just about being smart, being moral is more substantial. Being smart and moral is best...
Noam is an atheist, wowsers; what does Noam, an expert on language, hypothesize on the origin of language? Language is innate to humans, I agree as Chomsky states, but it didnt proceed from them; brains need to be taught. Who taught humans? Aliens? Close. How about the God of the Hebrews!
I HOLD ON TO MY FIRMLY TO MY RESPECT FOR CHOMSKY'S INTEGRITY AS AN INTELLECTUAL, TO SAY THAT, I FIND HIM EXCESSIVE/SUPERFICIAL AT CERTAIN INTERVALS. I BELIEF, THAT AN INTELLECTUAL SHOULD NOT ONLY BE A CRITIC OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM AND ITS PRESIDENTS, BUT AS WELL A CRITIC OF THE ''SOCIETY'' THAT PRODUCES OR TOLERATES THOSE SYSTEMS AND PRESIDENTS.
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
This interview was excellent! Oddly enough, I at first thought the questions were weak. Yet, the interviewers got extremely interesting answers from Mr. Chomsky. And the ‘different’ questions had Chomsky talking about different things than he usually does. So maybe I have to re-examine what makes a good question.
Chomsky is like the common sense guy talking to two people about Tarot readings. “Professor Chomsky, What do you think about Tarot readings”. Answer “I think it’s dumb” next question please. “What about free will?” Answer “I can lift my finger. If this is caused by a billion year old causality relationship chain we have no way of knowing so it is silly to think about it”. Next question….
They get an interview with Noam Chomsky and the first thing they ask is if he watches Rick and Morty...wow. I couldn't have come up with something more stupid if I tried for a 1000 years.
You need more nuanced social skills. In context, it was clearly meant as a joke. They think of Noam as a serious intellectual and hit him with that question obviously tongue in cheek.
I don't know who Rick and Morty are, but I felt the question was in the spirit of an impulse of affection. Chomsky did not seem to mind. He replied in kind, about his dog.
EQUALITY IS THE MASTERY " KNOW THYSELF . . . " STUDY SELF - ACTUALITY I AM WONDERFULL LIKE WE ALL ARE D.O.B PROOF 100% COALITION REMEMBER " NO MAN IS AN ISLAND " WITH " EACH ONE TEACH ONE " AWARENESS !
I see why libertarians got really spicy about this interview. 41:06 James Buchanan quote 41:26 "the economy should be designed to accord with according to human nature." Human nature according to Buchanan? 41:34 "Human natures is such that each persons highest ideal is to live ruling a world of slaves"
If I (as a primitive plebeian, in comparison to Mr. Chomsky) find some of the questions ridiculous, I wonder what he thinks of it. He's probably used to it.
Tell your heart to stop beating. there goes your free will. we are 95% unconscious and 5 % conscious. On an evolutionary ladder human species are toddler's that's why we are not allowed to make the most important decisions like when to die or heal ourselves with our thoughts. Free will is determined by consciousness and of that we have so little.
"The material world keeps changing as we understand more. So the question whether something transcends the material world is just a way of saying we don't know how to incorporate it within our intelligible theories." (paragraph 252) " Matter, on the contrary, is not an existent thing, but is being in the form of a universal, or in the form of a Notion. Reason which is still instinctive makes this correct distinction, without being aware that just by testing the law on all sensuous being, it gets rid of the merely sensuous being of the law, and when it interprets the moments of the law as 'matters', their essential nature has become for Reason a universal, and as such is expressed as a non-sensuous thing of sense, as an incorporeal and yet objective being." Hegel Phenomenology of Spirit (Miller; pg 154)
The way he speaks about having a job as being a severe attack on human dignity is such a taboo statement. It's absurd how the majority of us spend our entire lives doing something we loathe. The fact it's such a commonplace idea that we should all have jobs which are completely pointless except for making money for some shareholders and be happy about it is a perfect example of just how much creativity we lack as a species. Furthermore, the fact the working class considered jobs 'wage slavery' during the industrial revolution, and a couple of generations later that line of thinking is almost completely erased from their culture, is fascinating and scary at the same time.
Put him in a chair w Douglas Murray and see what happens. I used to be such a big fan of Chomsky b since then focused on the flaws of his arguments. I still support many of his views about education b his opinions about the US and politics only focuses on a narrow band. It's just stale confirmation bias as far as im concerned.
@Sam Rich71 - I am a Dutchman and I entirely agree with you. But I am not anti-American! Best wishes to all American women and men, who are decent working people!
@Sam Rich71 i used to think it was the truth and there is still some validity in his arguments but as i got older and more aware of other views and facts i realised that his views were rather onesided and narrowminded. It comes with getting older and accumulating more knowledge.
25:58 Curt somebody interrupts Chomsky to make an obtuse remark, obviously not following anything that is being said (although there is nothing complicated or profound about it).
@@viclimited9081 For the most part that's probably true. However, denying obvious reality sometimes requires a degree of complication - I wouldn't call it profundity - and Chomsky has occasionally been good at that. For instance, when he was trying to deny or minimise the genocidal massacres by Pol Pot, he went to great length to impugn the motives and credibility of escaping refugees who reported on the atrocities. Obscene certainly, thus dickheaded in the extreme in your more technical terminology, yet somewhat complicated. Similarly, after denying that Holocaust-denial was anti-Semitic, and after claiming that France's leading Holocaust-denier was just "an apolitical liberal" and not anti-Semitic, Chomsky went to some length to argue that Holocaust denial in some imagined world might not be anti-Semitic. Dickheaded and also quite stupid, certainly, but having a degree of complication. Similarly for his attempts to present Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran as peace-loving victims of U.S. and Israeli aggression, although admittedly the method he relies on there is primarily lying and ignoring inconvenient facts, the same method he has employed in blaming the U.S for the Cold War. But I'm in general agreement that Chomsky's standard blaming of the democracies and especially the U.S. for every problem or conflict in which they are remotely implicated is typically both simple-minded and dickheaded.
An idea about education, and it is a continuation of my comment about the farce of Neuralink. Much of language is an embedded description of geometry of the Classical motion of physical bodies. Teaching language with an emphasis of these aspects of definition might help ground the math of unconscious physics process (an aspect of Thinking Fast) in structure function definitions. When unpacking the true meaning of "attitude" or "course correction," the fractal nature of NLP reveals itself. In this age of Thinguistics, we forget that the mindset of a person and the physical alignment and orientation, as well as the dot product and feedback mechanism of a person/animal are the same mathematically, and this is clear from a study of nonverbal communication in animals, as well as pre and extra verbal communication in people. And why Postman noted the defeat of talking head state TV by fast cut American style broadcasting historically and internationally.
As a listener of TOE, you can now enjoy full digital access to The Economist and all it has to offer. Get a 20% off discount by visiting: www.economist.com/toe
Nah thnx
"Hundreds of billions of dollars are spent every year to control the public mind." ~ Noam Chomsky
Noam finally looks like Plato. It's just make sense.
Chomsky is more like Aristotle - read his book "For the Common Good." Plato was a liar about Pythagoras.
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 phisically looks more like Plato...
Voidisyinyang Voidisyinyang Aristotle was a third rate philosopher wrong on just about everything he could not answer Parmenides and his rational monism so he basically said denounced him. He could not understand Plato’s dialectic and dialogue , so he went into monologues . This psychopath had no respect for due diligence. Without proof he claimed that Persians and women were inferior. He indoctrinated Alexander into burning down the city of Persepolis burning women and children, luckily Alexander came to realize that he had been fooled and married his officers to Persian women.please don’t compare Chomsky to the psychopath Aristotle
@@arunjetli7909 "Reviewing a variety of political systems, Aristotle concluded that this system was the best - or perhaps the least bad - form of government. But he recognized a flaw: The great mass of the poor could use their voting power to take the property of the rich, which would be unfair. Madison and Aristotle arrived at opposite solutions: Aristotle advised reducing inequality, by what we would regard as welfare state measures. Madison felt that the answer was to reduce democracy." chomsky.info/20140107/ I said he's "More like" Aristotle than Plato. I didn't say I agreed with Aristotle or Plato. I agree with the PreSocratics.
Voidisyinyang Voidisyinyang I like Noam so I did not want to think of him as Aristotle I do strongly disagree Noam on many issues such as Kashmir about which he knows nothing and comments on an old habit of a white men like Hegel Kant and JS. Mill. . Somehow they feel that they will solve the problems of us as we must be primitive. Rule one is do not comment about which you know nothing .any I have been his fan
Noam Chomsky is a treasure and a gift to mankind. He is immensely humble and generous with his great intellect. There is no intellectual to match the breadth of his understanding in the world we live in at present. What is very valuable is how he can explain difficult concepts in a way where most people will be able to understand them. God bless this great mind💗💖💟😊😺
When you understand something really well, it’s easier to explain it in layman terms
It's simply amazing that Chomsky at 91, is still reaching out and is accessible to the youth. The most influential intellectual alive in the western hemisphere, is still a icon of resistance, hope and truth for all (EWNS hemispheres)
Yes same age as me. Time gives you a better insight every day. Gods are for fools but I'm not going to state the obvious the Noah story should give you an idea.
для всех бывает только смерть. остальное по усилиям вашим.
@@douglaskay9959 The wisdom of this world is folly before God.
Chomsky is trying his hardest to respect these guys and their weird questions.
They didn't ask anything weird.
@@hxd3620 They asked a load of questions that they clearly hadn't thought about for more than ten seconds.
@@hxd3620 "do you take an agnostic view when it comes to 'God'"... Haven't they heard of Noam Chomsky before?
@@EtcEtcAndEtc i see where you're coming from. i don't think (weird) is the proper word tho . Maybe, (playing the absent advocate ➡️the interviewers) they might thought he changed his beliefs regarding God.
very hard to get noam out of his shell on metaphysics...they got shortchanged there lol
Really frightening to see the voice of reason growing old.
The real Gandalf!!
He's earned his rest.
If he wanted to he could use his free will to avoid growing old... oh bugger, time doesn't respect will.
The voice of reason is eternally youthful and free of fear
Don't be afraid. Inform yourself, pass on knowledge, find others.
I have followed him for over 4 decades. May the Creator bless you. You have remained honest and true to yourself!
🤲🏽❤🤲🏽🎊
I appreciate these young folks reaching out to Noam. I appreciate Noam for his patience in regards to the questions. As a long time follower of NC you must have patience to ingest, digest and understand the truth and brilliance of Noam. And then you have to listen again. Then you get.
"When examining Comrade Chomsky, like other radicals, it is important to not only examine what he says (though what he says is often wrong), but what he is not saying. Utopian revolutionaries butchered millions of people in the 1900s, and the United States of America, a creature of the Enlightenment, did the heavy lifting to stop them before the socialist cancer killed human civilization in its entirety. Now that the evils of socialism have become manifest, all Chomsky can provide is nihilism. But the genius of Chomsky’s nihilism resides in this- his ability to combine cynicism and idealism to argue that everything that exists deserves to be destroyed. The idealism - Chomsky’s vague notion of anarchism - functions as an impossible standard to condemn the West- no matter how much good we do, since we can always to better, we’re bad. That’s all it is; it is not a program, and Chomsky has been more than willing to support dictatorships when they are against free enterprise and/or the United States. The cynicism steps in when Chomsky implies that everything is equally bad, as if the crimes of the United States are comparable, if not worse, than those of Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, and Mao’s China. The goal is not self-affirmation, but self-destruction, and Chomsky’s meeting with the Party of God (the Hezb’Allah) symbolizes everything this man is about. If no model of the revolutionary future exists, then revolution *is* destructive suicide and nothing else.,
@@carmelaalbanese124 Who are you quoting?
It’s appreciated that you appreciate and have shown your appreciation.
I'm guessing the answer to the opening riddle is: "go out for a walk".
"I can't say it or my animals will race to the exterior exit." His pet dogs apparently make quite a commotion (as can be heard in the background of previous interviews) at the mere suggestion that he's going out to play with them, which he said he does daily.
People who have had dogs, or at least some kinds of dogs know that even the mention of the word “walk” will send them running to the door waiting for you to take them out. They respond to it and are always listening.
Oooooh as a non dog owner i was actually kinda huh 😂
Peter, it's amazing that you got to speak to this man and he didn't berate you. He calmly answered what he thought would be interesting to your viewers and almost completely avoided your questions which I appreciate greatly. He is an incredible man.
Dr Choamsky should have hung up on those 2 clowns!
I was in awe as he effortlessly batted away questions on " God" as empty words and unanswerable as the definitions have never been elucidated . A strange interview - I got the mental picture of a couple of scrappy dogs barking around a majestic but aging Lion who casually walked on.
Noam Chomsky has earned the right to say..."I told you so".
......
As an atheist ! UNITY THROUGH DIVERSITY ! is as paradoxical and incorrect as ! GOD IS LOVE ! .. Libtard vs Creatards... Chomsky is extremely libtarded, hence he's a numero uno Uber-Lib academic.... Liberal wastage is the liberal way, be it righty neo-lib or lefty uber-lib.
@@PrivateSi I sense your confused.
Why? Because he called Lenin a “right winger”?
@@Herr2Cents .. No mate, Americans are extremely confused by their extremist programming... Chomsky is full of paradox and confusion. He has pushed confusion all his life, as he is a wishy-washy Lib lecturer of the Left... As someone trained in computer science I also consider Chomsky's contribution hugely overrated... I put him on par with your devout creatard Christain apologists, as a British atheist. If you can't see Chomsky is a CONFUSION MERCHANT of The Left you are confused... more, More, MORE, new, New, NEW, growth Growth, GROWTH.... The Libtardian Way.... Cancerous.
I could listen to Noam for hours and not feel time passing at all, a wise man indeed.❤
Wow, nice.
Yea but he can put you to sleep with his monotone. i struggled to keep my eyes open but i made it to the end 😂
drew smu Cool! SMU 👍
@@thechessman21able speed up audio. Sounds good at 1.5x.
@Pat M agreed. Another product of the system spewing system garbage.
It does not take much to come to some of his conclusions.
This makes me very concerned at how very obtuse the masse really are.
If he is a wise man, then I am a guru!!
“I’m probably the only person you’ve ever spoken to who’s never used marijuana”
Ya but every one from venezuela... And outside... All we want to know is this..... Is someone going to drill venus for oil 🤪😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😅😅🍿
And they say you need drugs to be brilliant
Oh!
"...who's never used marijuana"
Ahaa!
Global-agenda-marijuana.
notice that he didn't say psychedelics.
If one person believes the unbelievable it's called insanity. If it's lots of people it's called Religion.
This man is such a good and generous person, off-the-scale industrious as far as individual workload goes.
I believe he stands apart from the world of public intellectuals because what he is most interested in is talking with as many folks as possible as long as they, like him, are seekers of truth. It's unbelievable how much he's done with his time on planet Earth. Irreplaceable.
But he and, now, with the death of David Graeber, I have gone back to finish my degree...He is very easy to reach and it's amazing how alive he is at 92 years old.
Maybe when you do finish your degree, you'll be able to begin the process of thinking for yourself instead of cult-like hero-worship.
@@sheilamacdougal9948 lol, a pointless and inaccurate comment. Chomsky is admirable for the reason that he is a good human being. That's a rare thing in the world of renown.
@@stephenwallace8782 Yeah, was he a "good human being" when he wrote that France's leading Holocaust denier was not anti-Semitic but just "an apolitical liberal" who had been publishing his "findings"? Or when he denied that the Pol Pot regime was committing genocide, and obscenely tried to impugn the credibility of escaping refugees? Or when "libertarian" Chomsky used his influence to induce the editors of an encyclopedia to excise passages by linguist Gregory Sampson that referred to these notorious incidents? Or when Chomsky wrote that arch terrorist and head of the fanatical Hezbollah, Nasrallah, was a "serious person" and had presented convincing arguments why Hezbollah should retain its fabulously armed militia within Lebanon (prompting liberal Lebanese to express shock and dismay)? Or when Chomsky has repeatedly written that the terrorist Hamas and Iran have long been seeking peace, but are victims of U.S.-Israeli intransigeance? Or when he repeatedly blamed the U.S. for the Cold War and denied that the Soviet Union was responsible for any aggression or threats to other countries? Or when Chomsky wrote a ludicrous apology for the criminal Serbian regime's actions in Kosovo, denied or minimised the genocidal acts of Serb forces in Bosnia and Kosovo, and blamed NATO and the U.S. for the conflicts? But I agree that a hero-worshipper, uneducated by his own admission, will be ignorant of these and many other of his cult-leader's interventions, or their significance.
@Martin Rudling One thing's for sure. YOU'll never know anything. Alternatively you could go back to school and try to finish your education. You may need to finish high school first. But I'm sure it's much more comfortable wallowing in your miserable bigotry and blaming the Jews for all your problems.
@@sheilamacdougal9948 Maybe if you actually had a point people wouldn't think you were an idiot.
poor Chomsky so patient with these two nitwits. He's used to it; I don't think he minds lol. I've been watching twits ask this guy terrible questions for longer than the hosts have been alive. You have to appreciate that he is a linguist first and foremost. He knows the actual meanings of words people use. it confuses him when people misuse words because he only knows them in their most accurate sense.
I do really love the hosts they are adorable, they have a long way to go but i like the direction they are heading.
God bless you Chomps, never die, my prophet of truth.
FYI, I showed your comment to Chomsky via email (that he was patient with nitwits / he's used to it / these were terrible questions) and he responded "Crazy. The troll culture is a nuisance.
" Hope that helps. - Curt PS: Here's a link: i.imgur.com/NRumRvH.png
@@TheoriesofEverything LOL um...did you include the entire message or did you just send him the negative parts in hopes your misleading context would garner sympathy? Cause it sure looks like you have got this far: "poor Chomsky so patient with these two nitwits. He's used to it; " and then neglected the rest.
That would be utterly embarrassing for you if that was the case...that would make YOU the very thing Chomsky despises.
I stand by by statement. You two have a long way to go but you are on the right path...keep it up. Don't worry you only look like idiots when talking to Chomsky, don't worry most people do anyway...geez a little sensitive are we? LOL.
Cancel culture is a real issue, we must remember that if we believe in free speech it means that we believe that people we hate have the right to say anything they want.
now please send this to him as a follow up, as well as my entire first message i'd love another reply.
@@MrJanes-cl5sj The conversation was fine. They asked several interesting and important questions. The interviewers were serious, respectful, and engaged. I don't see where the vitriol is coming from. Take a deep breath.
@@MrJanes-cl5sj I sent him a longer quote, as well as the TH-cam link directly. Feel free to email him yourself. - Curt
@@TheoriesofEverything I do , thank you.
vidéo name of Noam Chomsky is barzeev -> Bar-Zeev, meaning "Ze'ev's son", is a form of the Hebrew Ze'ev, which means "wolf", the 'kinnui' ("secular equivalent") of Benjamin (Genesis 49.27). Bar is the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew Ben ("son"). so
the son of the wolf
Interesting footnote. Thanks.
i was wondering about that! thank u.
but does he call himself like that or what, this is interesting
Thank you. I had just noticed the screen name and wondered what that meant.
Thanks for the comment.
I'm so glad I discovered this channel! What AMAZING guests and content! I'm putting this time mark here so I can come back to it and write it down later. A great way of explaining what's wrong with Neoliberalism. 28:07
I can't wait to see the final project!
Glad to see Noam still going strong in his '90s!
Curt's thinking face (furled brow) makes him look perpetually pissed off.
Agreed.
I'm not sure I want to live in a world without Noam Chomsky. His scope of knowledge and understanding,on many subjects, is unparalleled compared to any one else alive. And he delivers it seriously, with no bullshit.
yes, genius is a lot of work. Since the early 1960s his friends and acquaintances were amazed how much he read, subscribing to 100s journals, newspapers, from the NY Times to the most obscure, while keeping up in his and related academic fields.
Not really. Perhaps you walked in with all the same assumptions he relied on in the last half hour. There was very little explanation of any of his conclusions. He exhibited the heart of a teacher early; not so much later. Maybe three hours would be more appropriate for the scope of topics.
@Joseph Henderson you claim delusion, without facts. Hmmm, I'll stick with Noam Chomsky.
@Joseph Henderson Jesus man would you get your facts straight before flooding the comments section with this.
@Joseph Henderson Of course he's critical of America. Observe the behavior over the last 244 years. How many atrocities need to be committed, by the people who own the United States, before a day(s) of atonement is forced on them? Observe the four major crises under which we presently suffer.
To call Chomsky gutless is ignorant. He's one of the lone intellectuals of importance who points out the inequities and the inevitable, cyclical failures of a capitalist system that doesn't work for most people. Additionally, he does criticize communism, regularly. Maybe you just can't hear the words. He's actually courageous, if you care to think about it. A professor at MIT, critical of a system that actively recruits and receives funding from private capitalists and the military industrial complex, the recruits MIT's talent to join the greed-fest. How many can do that without losing their jobs, or worse? Answer = no one. You most probably are barking up the wrong tree.
Noam Chomsky, a great humanitarian and maybe the last universal mind!
I've yet to hear Chomsky speak at any length on poetry, art, architecture, mathematics, physics, continental thought, medicine and many other subjects. In fact, usually international affairs, esp. US foreign policy, and linguistics.
@@garetgrossman539 - You would be surprised! Just watch the many interviews over many, many years!
@@tomasmccauley569 Democracy in business works great for the majority. The tyrant is functionally indistinguishable in outcome to the minority, whether you have 1 tyrant or hundreds.
@@tomasmccauley569 You said one tyrannical CEO can't run it all (assuming you were speaking for Chomsky). Which is demonstrably incorrect. I was pointing out that in a democracy you'd still have people making wild accusations of tyranny, even with checks and balances, just as done with single owner models when the minority feels like they are not getting their wants met. The result would look the same. Some people happy, while others not so much. Just as you would need good reasons to get rid of democracy where it already exists, you would need good reasons to establish democracy where it doesn't. Calling business owners tyrants does not make for that good reason. (yes I am aware that is not the entirety of Chomsky's arguments). Keep in mind that I have not made any distinctions in the different models of employee owned companies. I was talking in generalities as that is what I was responding to.
@@tomasmccauley569 I am aware of the model, its accomplishments and its criticisms. It being the best example is subjective, not a position others would hold. Again I was not advocating any particular model. I was illustrating the nonsense of the 'tyrannical' argument as you will find that sentiment even in cooperatives. I am sure it wouldn't be too difficult to find it in those that are employees of Mondragon, but not allowed to be a member of the cooperative. Good luck finding any model that doesn't give way to feelings of oppression in some set of it's constituents.
"Religion is based on the assumption that God is an idiot".
Noam Chomsky
Yes, I liked that one too....
Yeah its good, but its a quote that so many will take the wrong way and totally misquote.
The idiot is always your dishonest "self". Not God.
@@anthonybrett True. its such a good line...sharp AF.
Brett Anthony That’s pretty profound ... so ... are you saying that religion is a belief system we created in order to fool ourselves into justifying whatever we want to do? A loophole around natural moral law? I like where that idea takes us.
I laughed so hard I had to stop the video! Kinda sums it up, doesn't it?
To judge an interview it comes mainly back to what you new info. you got from it at the end and I got alot out of it and many like me did as well and that's a sign of a great interview, keep it up guys!.
U
Soo mmuuuchh wisdom.
Thanks for the love and hopefully you enjoy some of the other podcasts on the channel as well. - Curt
Excellent video ! .. doesn't matter If we agree or not with Chomsky, in part or totally, the point here is to listen and try to understand. Thanks a lot !
Thank you for the great interview
If alien life told me “send us your best” and I was in charge of the decision, I’d send Chomsky for sure.
"But what if that's God??" These guys need to examine the Philosophy of language
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
@@TheoriesofEverything I am too late then. I had a question but never mind
Nails it again, if through disappointingly naive (though verbose) interviewersw who - like most desperate over-thinkers who seem to fall far short of capably grasping reality - ask (themselves) far too many of the wrong questions. It's comical, but on that note: hats off to his gentle, patient, humble handling, which he manages to execute despite incredible forthrightness. What a guy! And still so sharp despite such advanced years. A great example of what sustained activity can do for the quality of ageing human lives.
almost every single question asked by the two interviewers is laden with obvious landmine terms with immense baggage used to the highest length of ambiguity to imply an intellect that is sadly lacking. I am unsure if the intent here was to get an intellectual celebrity like Chomsky to 'trip him up' with some sorry gotcha question. Aside from the anecdotal stories of Chomsky, this interview is utterly pointless. If someone were to edit this to be a single talk given by Chomsky it would be greatly improved. I am only annoyed whenever Glinos opens his mouth and spews inanity just to try to 'word salad' Chomsky. His responses generally address the question only in pointing out to the interviewer either what they SHOULD have asked, or to explain the concept behind the words they vacuously speak. The only unarguable aspect of this channel is it's name. How could they possibly have gotten Chomsky to agree to this?
Chomsky agrees to speak to anyone that asks
I agree. I was just about to write my own comment about what blank slates these two are.
"When examining Comrade Chomsky, like other radicals, it is important to not only examine what he says (though what he says is often wrong), but what he is not saying. Utopian revolutionaries butchered millions of people in the 1900s, and the United States of America, a creature of the Enlightenment, did the heavy lifting to stop them before the socialist cancer killed human civilization in its entirety. Now that the evils of socialism have become manifest, all Chomsky can provide is nihilism. But the genius of Chomsky’s nihilism resides in this- his ability to combine cynicism and idealism to argue that everything that exists deserves to be destroyed. The idealism - Chomsky’s vague notion of anarchism - functions as an impossible standard to condemn the West- no matter how much good we do, since we can always to better, we’re bad. That’s all it is; it is not a program, and Chomsky has been more than willing to support dictatorships when they are against free enterprise and/or the United States. The cynicism steps in when Chomsky implies that everything is equally bad, as if the crimes of the United States are comparable, if not worse, than those of Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, and Mao’s China. The goal is not self-affirmation, but self-destruction, and Chomsky’s meeting with the Party of God (the Hezb’Allah) symbolizes everything this man is about. If no model of the revolutionary future exists, then revolution *is* destructive suicide and nothing else." ...
thank you for the interview
Chomsky is probably one of the last living wise men on Earth. In India, he would be called a "Baba", a name of veneration for his wisdom. In Native American culture, he would be considered a Wisdom Keeper or an Elder. It's so sad know that we're witnessing the extinction of this breed of men.
Robert Wolf (marxist economist)
"Having a job is placing yourself under the control of an autocrat, worse than Stalin". Really? I have had unpleasant work relationships with several companies, but none had the authority to send me to a gulag! Chomsky should have been asked what system he advocates which has no autocrats.
He wants an anarchistic form of government. If it don’t benefit the masses, overthrow it.
I think he's being hyperbolic just to challenge the automatic assumption work good. I don't like invoking murderous dictators but it's pretty common in arguememts. Later on he kinda defends America as not having gulags 🤷♂️
To paraphrase Pankaj Mishra that my most dominating thought of any day at any given time is one that of absolute ignorance, that I am an absolute ignorant. By reading and listening to people like Professor Chomsky and others, not only that feeling bites harder but it also lessens the ignorance.
Who needs to go to university while Chomsky is still with us.
"Having a job means placing yourself under the rule of an autocratic ruler....that Stalin couldn't have dreamed of." Fucking genius. And of course apt.
I was impressed by the intelligence of the young guys, of course they're from Canada where there is a modicum of real education. Great interview. I always appreciate Chomsky's clarity, historical context and linguistic discernment. The double-speak of a term like "libertarian" is indeed stunning.
14:50 holds the greatest Quote I have ever heard Noam utter. It is Backed up with such raw common sense and delivered with plain speak. "....and then I did get an insight, religion is based around the idea that God is an idiot." Fucking BRILLIANT. I LOVE THIS MAN!!!!
Very stimulating, I must say.
His view of God is ...live and let live.. if it helps people, so be it. I like that perspective. In the absence of reductive materialism being able to explain anything in the nature of true reality, it's presumptuous for normal humans to conceive anything beyond. Which doesn't mean that there isn't anything beyond, but for us living in this illusory real world , we need a working model and for arriving at the right moral guides and principles, the man made principles masquerading as the edicts of God doesn't help. They are observed in breach.. Chomsky's recommendation is to be free thinkers and be able to arrive at a consensus on what are the best principles for the most good for most people.. that should workable, right ?
@Leo Clark hey Leo. The problem is that you are throwing thebbaby out with the bath water. You have convinced yourself that you have achieved clarity on these issues. The truth often lies between camps. The fact that the sjw politically correct crowd is making a mess of things does not discredit the leftist movement, just as Nazis don't discredit the conservatives. Check out John Haidt and his book "The Righteous Mind" to see how your comment appears to be more ideological than truly truth seeking
Snowdenbleep Give me an example of these “crazy SJWs” or whatever causing an actual tangible problem...
Meanwhile you got the right wing who is literally trending to annihilate human existence by the end of the century...
Meanwhile the SJ-DUBYA’s are...
Being mean to people who say some pretty questionable things?
Yeah, not exactly equivalent. Like at all.
No
Leo Clark Buddy... read a fucking book or something. Do you get all of your political information from twitter, or something? Every single point you’ve made is the most tired bullshit cliche from the “anti-SJW” crowd (yknow, the guys who essentially popularized the alt right... yknow that modern white supremacist movement? Oh, I’m sorry, they prefer the term “identitarian”).
Like, I don’t even believe you in your claim to know Chomsky. If you knew Chomsky, you would know that at least 70% of your comment is based in flat out lies that the imperialist war machine would be just tickled pink to see you swallow whole - like you’ve done - so good job on that one bud, really. Way to take a stand; supporting the worlds most powerful imperial force in history and all.
Christ.
@Leo Clark You just posted CRINGE
@Leo Clark Yes
I would loved to have heard untethered conversations with Chomsky and the late Dr. Alan Watts. These two speak endlessly while changing subjects seamlessly.
As a long term admirer of NC, I sincerely thank you guys for this interview. NC is one of my personal heroes... and I've seen and read a LOT of his interviews and books. And he rarely talks about religion. And believe me... I've seen hundreds of his lectures and interviews. Well done!!
His answer to the question about religion helped to explain to me why I believe in God but don't belong to a religion.
great video.
“With disdain I will throw my gauntlet full in the face of the world,
and see the collapse of this pygmy giant whose fall will not stifle my ardour.
Then will I wander god-like and victorious through the ruins of the world.
and, giving my words an active force, I will feel equal to the Creator."
“Thus heaven I’ve forfeited,
I know it full well.
My soul, once true to God,
Is chosen for hell.”
A portion of Karl Marx’s poems, a hero of Noam Chomsky.
You, on the other hand, are still afraid of an imaginary, cruel God-Monster. Eternal hell! You have forfeited all out of fear. Your monster does not exist. Do something useful, fearful slave!
Out of all things you could criticize Marx for, you choose the subject of one poem? I don't see anything wrong with someone writing an edgy poem about their desire for omnipotent power/destruction, nor do I see anything inherently wrong with rejecting religion. Plenty of religious texts are about the desire for power, and religion is, among other things, a socially acceptable way to express that desire by projecting it onto whatever god-like being you choose to believe in.
stonetrouble why would I fear a loving father? You have been taught the false sectarian god.
Sam Harris, phD in neurosticen. Collector of skins, edgy is one thing, obsessed is another. Engels described Marx as, “the monster possessed by ten thousand devils." Here is another ditty Marx wrote,
“To thee my verses, unbridled and daring, Shall mount, O Satan, king of the banquet. Away with thy sprinkling, O priest, and thy droning. For never shall Satan, O priest, stand behind thee. Thy breath, O Satan, my verses inspires, When from my bosom the gods I defy. Of kings pontifical, of kings inhuman: Thine is the lightning that sets minds to shaking. O soul that wanderest far from the straight way, Satan is merciful. See Heloisa! Like the whirlwind spreading its wings, He passes, O people, Satan the great! Hail, of reason the great Vindicator! Sacred to thee shall rise incense and vows! Thou hast the god of the priest disenthroned.”
What l like most of eminent Prof.Chomsky is his free,democratic spirit and realistic vision about people and society!He always focuses on actions rather than on beliefs or declarations..and it s great from a wide world famous linguist!Thanks for awesome interview!
great teacher, I could listen to him for hours on.
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
I love Chomsky because no matter how stupid the questions are I always learn something from him.
It is difficult to speak of God without having had an intuitive or mystical experience. Max Planck claimed that what we posit of matter points to consciousness, as does Erwin Schrodinger. Getting over monotheism is quite different from mystical apperception and s theory of matter as light.
It may be obvious to many of you. But if you're a bit slow, like me, in grasping Chomsky's insights, the nature of his perspective: he's obviously very well informed about what has happened. But the key to understanding much of his thinking is to see things like a child. Resisting the conditioning influence of societies on one's consciousness. To resist/examine the assumptions imposed/foisted on you by all your institutions. Avoiding prejudices and biases of our narrow tribalisms. To measure everything against the unadulterated mind/person. Taking the promises and aspirations of our guiding documents and ideas at face value. Reasserting them. Taking as your base the human being with his/her human rights. It is difficult to find an 'educator' of any kind who is untouched by the conditioning of the world. It can be disorienting to hear someone who is not speaking from a faulty premise or a hidden agenda. Which I would argue is almost the most important question about any person in such a position. What's underneath it all if we dig down? "What 'business' are we in anyway?" We may come to it like a former prisoner or a person with a kind of ptsd, back to a land that is safe, with loving friends, where enemies and intrigue do not abound. In need of re-calibration.
Great interview... A complete different line of questions and I was very curious about his views on the abstract as opposed to politics and power. Thanks
Consciousness is fully explained in Bhagavad Gita chap 2 Gita is not 'religion' It is knowledge
thank you for the nice diverse interview, lots of topics were discussed in this one hour.
will you make another interview with him?
if so , as you are asking him casually,(I felt after all he talks with us as his children or grand children who always ask for his advice) how does he look at himself? how does he puts his ego on check ? considering that he is one of the best intellectuals on earth, yet he is so considerate and humble. how could he achieve this level ? is he proud of himself, in terms of feeling superior may be, because of what he achieves?
please ask him if you can ,thanx
Noam Chomsky Thankyou for year's and year's of education. Love you.
This is the best noam interview I've heard in quite a while. good work. disappointed he hasn't indulged in cannabis. never too late!
Squirrels don't pay rent and the experts are baffled.
Great interview guys, thanks. Thank you always to Noam for his insightful thinking.
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
@@TheoriesofEverything I just to Dr Chomsky to cancel that interview. Since this one was a farce!
Both of you are silly but you are the worse Curt!
I'm really curious about why a man like Chomsky, who very obviously knows there's far more to the mind and consciousness that we can analyse and articulate on our own, would have no interest in weed or psychedelics, that obviously change something in the way you perceive and think. It seems he likes sticking to things that can be proven (even though he seemed to find the idea of archetypes interesting), I'd really love to see a somewhat in depth discussion of this. What is it that stopped Chomsky from wanting to experience something that can't be called real in the realm of science, when it's obvious the realm of science is limited? I'm sure he has a shit tonne of ideas that are out of the box that he either refuses to think about or puts on the side due to their unprovability.
@Goth “Jedi Master Engineer” Bosch simple minded answers talking about wisdom are a nice touch of irony
Why are such low level ignoramuses questioning such a great intellect . Like it's a fetish or notch on the board etc . GOD bless Noam Chomsky
The media abandoned their search for truth in search of a better world long ago, and have abandoned Chomsky in kind. I do wish the interview was a bit more focused, but at least someone is doing the work of keeping Chomsky on the airwaves.
Since we are little children we get accustomed to believe that what is in our minds is true, the fact that we have something in our minds makes believe it is true and it's not. Those " aha" moments we come about every once in a while happen because the mind gets out of the way and we see with something else. Having something in your mind and holding it as fact is a process that happen only in the mind and it is like writing something in a blackboard when it comes to proveability they are both the same, seing something written in a wall or having it in our mind is the absolute same, just a mark in a blank space. Mind don't deal with facts, but speculation and ideas
I love the interview and the many more recent ones in the past 5 years but Jesus dudes in his 90s its crazy how he has the GRIT to stay up to date everything until his end date.
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
Noam is one of the most interesting speakers of the 20th -21st centuries.
Very good interview, you asked him a lot of questions I've never heard him answer before.
The most interesting part of this to me was at 31:41: Having a job is a severe attack on human rights and dignity, and pointing out that 19th century workers and the Republican Party tended to view wage labor as temporary slavery till you had the chance to become free again. I don't agree with a lot of Chomsky's politics, but I love how he gets us to question contemporary conventional thinking in ways you don't hear very often.
Or maybe it's just the grumblings of an old anarchist crackpot that he is
So correct having a job is soul destroying person works all their lives to survive instead of doing what they prefer to do it is important to work but not in the style of this rat race for that reason Scandinavians trying to reduce working days to 4 rather than 5 so person has some more freedom for themselves.
Thank you for typing a guide on what Chomsky is talking about, extremely helpful
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
The title is misleading: His words about "having a job" around mins. 33 or 34 are probably the most valuable of all the interview. Is there any reason why you don't see it?
at the beginning, was he going to say "go outside"? guess that would make his dogs go crazy?
yes, i think any dog owner would agree.
I imagine he was going to say that he walks. That's usually the pup trigger word.
John Tavers
Thanks, I missed the joke
I told my supervisor (he and I have a great working relationship) about Noam Chomsky tonight. I can’t wait till he comes back from his day off with an altered viewpoint on the world. Noam Chomsky is not an idol but a beacon from the 20th century for brilliant thought which should not be lost. My hope is we have those who can maintain and grow on this type of grounded, commonsensical and genius thinking.
Check in at 24 mins for Prof Chomsky on the founding of the Neo-Liberal Programme, the Establishment's response to the ideals ("anarchy") of the Sixties.
Asking Noam Chomsky if he watches Rick and Morty is a moment of all time.
Damn look at all this books I wanna have my own house and day so I can have my own library and still write books
OMG!! He COMPLETELY ignore the Gulags. He lives only in his head 🤣😂
Chomsky comes to the conclusion that “religion is based on the assumption that God is an idiot” because his grandfather broke Talmudic law and smoked on Passover. This is the most ludicrous conclusion to come to.
Maybe his grandfather was senile, or perhaps he knew exactly what he was doing and was breaking the law-like many people, even Orthodox people, do when it comes to this or that specific rule, and most often with smoking, since they can't stop themselves-and Chomsky’s father just explained it to him with a dismissive response because he didn’t want to get too much into it with his 10 year old son who was seeing something he shouldn’t have seen.
To come to the conclusion that “religion is based on the assumption that God is an idiot” because one Jewish man did something one night is absurd. He’s been saying this for decades and it never made any sense.
What makes less sense? Is that magical person in the sky is followed by many. That one guy...you know....this guy with a so-called Jesus name. Who apparently came from years ago? It's kind of the same thing!
@@TheTimbo911 Huh?
@Jeff Driscoll Excellently argued. I am most impressed, especially, with your attention to detail and the examples you provided to make your point with.
@Jeff Driscoll Oh, no. I'm very well aware that you're unable to argue. I was simply exposing you for it.
The literal twinkle in Noam's eye as he tells a story from childhood that marginally influenced his life and stunned his young interviewers into silence might have told you that he was speaking ironically, humorously and very thoughtfully. Did you listen to anything he said before telling the story? Nope.
Prashant Trivedi said that mythology is "My Truth". God is divine, is perfection, is "golden ratio", is perfect fractality, is perfect heart beat of a human being that give immunity to sickness.
This guy is so smart and knowledgeable. Sometimes, it's possible to believe that everyone is relatively close to each other, in terms of intellect. Then you listen to a genuine genius and you know that there is a stark difference between the average and the extreme. But it's not just about being smart, being moral is more substantial. Being smart and moral is best...
Noam is an atheist, wowsers; what does Noam, an expert on language, hypothesize on the origin of language? Language is innate to humans, I agree as Chomsky states, but it didnt proceed from them; brains need to be taught. Who taught humans? Aliens? Close. How about the God of the Hebrews!
respect for categorizing the video
Not gonna lie, was about to leave this video after the first question. Then I stayed, now I wish I had left.
why?
I HOLD ON TO MY FIRMLY TO MY RESPECT FOR CHOMSKY'S INTEGRITY AS AN INTELLECTUAL, TO SAY THAT, I FIND HIM EXCESSIVE/SUPERFICIAL AT CERTAIN INTERVALS. I BELIEF, THAT AN INTELLECTUAL SHOULD NOT ONLY BE A CRITIC OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM AND ITS PRESIDENTS, BUT AS WELL A CRITIC OF THE ''SOCIETY'' THAT PRODUCES OR TOLERATES THOSE SYSTEMS AND PRESIDENTS.
Well done. Excellent interview!
I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt
This interview was excellent! Oddly enough, I at first thought the questions were weak. Yet, the interviewers got extremely interesting answers from Mr. Chomsky. And the ‘different’ questions had Chomsky talking about different things than he usually does. So maybe I have to re-examine what makes a good question.
Respect.
Chomsky is like the common sense guy talking to two people about Tarot readings. “Professor Chomsky, What do you think about Tarot readings”. Answer “I think it’s dumb” next question please. “What about free will?” Answer “I can lift my finger. If this is caused by a billion year old causality relationship chain we have no way of knowing so it is silly to think about it”. Next question….
They get an interview with Noam Chomsky and the first thing they ask is if he watches Rick and Morty...wow. I couldn't have come up with something more stupid if I tried for a 1000 years.
You need more nuanced social skills. In context, it was clearly meant as a joke. They think of Noam as a serious intellectual and hit him with that question obviously tongue in cheek.
You need to watch Rick & Morty!
I don't know who Rick and Morty are, but I felt the question was in the spirit of an impulse of affection. Chomsky did not seem to mind. He replied in kind, about his dog.
EQUALITY IS THE MASTERY
" KNOW THYSELF . . . "
STUDY SELF - ACTUALITY
I AM
WONDERFULL LIKE WE ALL
ARE D.O.B PROOF 100%
COALITION
REMEMBER
" NO MAN IS AN ISLAND "
WITH
" EACH ONE TEACH ONE "
AWARENESS !
I see why libertarians got really spicy about this interview.
41:06
James Buchanan quote 41:26 "the economy should be designed to accord with according to human nature." Human nature according to Buchanan?
41:34
"Human natures is such that each persons highest ideal is to live ruling a world of slaves"
If I (as a primitive plebeian, in comparison to Mr. Chomsky) find some of the questions ridiculous, I wonder what he thinks of it.
He's probably used to it.
A great wise man. Respect!
The search for the truth...Chomsky hits the nail on the head.
Tell your heart to stop beating. there goes your free will. we are 95% unconscious and 5 % conscious. On an evolutionary ladder human species are toddler's that's why we are not allowed to make the most important decisions like when to die or heal ourselves with our thoughts. Free will is determined by consciousness and of that we have so little.
"The material world keeps changing as we understand more. So the question whether something transcends the material world is just a way of saying we don't know how to incorporate it within our intelligible theories."
(paragraph 252) " Matter, on the contrary, is not an existent thing, but is being in the form of a universal, or in the form of a Notion. Reason which is still instinctive makes this correct distinction, without being aware that just by testing the law on all sensuous being, it gets rid of the merely sensuous being of the law, and when it interprets the moments of the law as 'matters', their essential nature has become for Reason a universal, and as such is expressed as a non-sensuous thing of sense, as an incorporeal and yet objective being." Hegel Phenomenology of Spirit (Miller; pg 154)
Now, we need to hear from Karl Marx on the subject of materialism.
At one point he mentions 'Pascal, in "The City of God,"' ... Makes you want to hug him in his gradual aging-out.
This is a very good interview.
The way he speaks about having a job as being a severe attack on human dignity is such a taboo statement. It's absurd how the majority of us spend our entire lives doing something we loathe. The fact it's such a commonplace idea that we should all have jobs which are completely pointless except for making money for some shareholders and be happy about it is a perfect example of just how much creativity we lack as a species. Furthermore, the fact the working class considered jobs 'wage slavery' during the industrial revolution, and a couple of generations later that line of thinking is almost completely erased from their culture, is fascinating and scary at the same time.
Put him in a chair w Douglas Murray and see what happens. I used to be such a big fan of Chomsky b since then focused on the flaws of his arguments. I still support many of his views about education b his opinions about the US and politics only focuses on a narrow band. It's just stale confirmation bias as far as im concerned.
@Sam Rich71 - I am a Dutchman and I entirely agree with you. But I am not anti-American! Best wishes to all American women and men, who are decent working people!
@Sam Rich71 i used to think it was the truth and there is still some validity in his arguments but as i got older and more aware of other views and facts i realised that his views were rather onesided and narrowminded. It comes with getting older and accumulating more knowledge.
Great interview
25:58 Curt somebody interrupts Chomsky to make an obtuse remark, obviously not following anything that is being said (although there is nothing complicated or profound about it).
Chomsky has the patience of a saint.
@@moesypittounikos Chomsky loves publicity, and especially the hero worship by people like the interviewers, and yourself.
.....dick heads are rarely complicated or profound.
@@viclimited9081 For the most part that's probably true. However, denying obvious reality sometimes requires a degree of complication - I wouldn't call it profundity - and Chomsky has occasionally been good at that. For instance, when he was trying to deny or minimise the genocidal massacres by Pol Pot, he went to great length to impugn the motives and credibility of escaping refugees who reported on the atrocities. Obscene certainly, thus dickheaded in the extreme in your more technical terminology, yet somewhat complicated. Similarly, after denying that Holocaust-denial was anti-Semitic, and after claiming that France's leading Holocaust-denier was just "an apolitical liberal" and not anti-Semitic, Chomsky went to some length to argue that Holocaust denial in some imagined world might not be anti-Semitic. Dickheaded and also quite stupid, certainly, but having a degree of complication. Similarly for his attempts to present Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran as peace-loving victims of U.S. and Israeli aggression, although admittedly the method he relies on there is primarily lying and ignoring inconvenient facts, the same method he has employed in blaming the U.S for the Cold War. But I'm in general agreement that Chomsky's standard blaming of the democracies and especially the U.S. for every problem or conflict in which they are remotely implicated is typically both simple-minded and dickheaded.
@@sheilamacdougal9948 .....more stories of things that never happened - by people who were never there.....yawn.
may he live forever ....
Such gems - "having a job is placing yourself under the control of an autocrat, worse than Stalin". Beautiful.
With the option of getting another job or starting your own company. Hardly comparable.
An idea about education, and it is a continuation of my comment about the farce of Neuralink. Much of language is an embedded description of geometry of the Classical motion of physical bodies. Teaching language with an emphasis of these aspects of definition might help ground the math of unconscious physics process (an aspect of Thinking Fast) in structure function definitions. When unpacking the true meaning of "attitude" or "course correction," the fractal nature of NLP reveals itself. In this age of Thinguistics, we forget that the mindset of a person and the physical alignment and orientation, as well as the dot product and feedback mechanism of a person/animal are the same mathematically, and this is clear from a study of nonverbal communication in animals, as well as pre and extra verbal communication in people. And why Postman noted the defeat of talking head state TV by fast cut American style broadcasting historically and internationally.
Great questions, guys!