|
|
Blog Feeds
Anti-Empire
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland |
Noam Chomsky on Language Reassessed international |
education |
other press
 Sunday February 07, 2010 19:08 by John Cornford
 Chris Knight examines Noam Chomsky’s ‘scientific’ fairy tales about language and its origins Prof Chris Knight of the Radical Anthropology Group really sticks the boot into Chomsky. He weighs Chomskys credentials in the balance and finds then wanting. Full text at link. Many in that Delhi audience still seemed puzzled. Why was Chomsky so ambivalent? Was he, perhaps, holding something back? His two temptations seemed to pull him in opposite directions. He would invoke Rousseau, Marx and other great revolutionary thinkers as sources of political inspiration. Yet would any of these figures have shared his difficulties in connecting politics with science? Rousseau’s 1762 treatise, The social contract, was both scholarly and incendiary. Marx intended his Capital to change the world. Is science itself not revolutionary? Why should the pursuit of truth - scientific truth about language, for example - require different methods or pull in a different direction from the pursuit of social equality and justice? |
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (6 of 6)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6The powers that be use Fallacies, cheap rhetoric and emotive language to persuade. These aspects of particular USES of language are well known. Noam chomsky studied the theory of language itself at a more fundamental level. They are not quite the same thing.
This is just an excuse to have a cheap go at a distinguished but elderly man who in his time has contributed a great amount to science and to furthering our awareness of the misuse of political power. He was and still is a man of principle.
He deserves much better than this. Kudos Noam!
I have not formed an opinion on this article but I admire Chomsky for his political activities. Just as I admire Chris Knight who is also a great class struggle activist. Chris lost his job due to his activities during the G20 Summit in London last year.
More info about Chris at: http://www.chrisknight.co.uk/
Chris in Tophat
Let's also not forget Chomsky's great essay/talk on 'Language and Freedom' available in Chomsky on Anarchism or at the link below.
A PDF of the talk (with an introduction to it) is available here:
http://www.chomsky.info/books/state02.pdf
A audio of a related talk is available here:
http://www.almanews.unibo.it/04_05/chomeibl/video/chmsk...1.ram
Great article. Chomsky is an enigma all right. Is his LAD theory not a case of 'biology making the argument for anarchism' i.e., without the imposition of society/the state/institutions etc., the human being would flourish - language is not learned, it is innate and we are all born with the full 'code' for perfect, and 'natural', language production - it is 'society' that imposes upon/restricts overall 'free' human development, and explains 'Orwell's Problem'. An asocial explanation too far methinks.
I am surprised that the article makes no reference to Engels' "The Part played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man" by way of explaining the role of social relations in the development/evolution of humankind and (by necessary extension), language.
In other writings by Chris Knight he certainly references Engels on Ape to Man. You can find more articles here: http://www.radicalanthropologygroup.org/new/RAG_Home.html
Many of Chris Knights articles and books are available online at:
http://www.chrisknight.co.uk/publications/
Is how humble he is and how he doesn't always try to engage in these pissing contests to show how great he is. He's always willing to entertain criticism. Thats special for an academic of his standing. Sorry to see that it's not such a common trait. Not even on indy comments sections.