Who here likes Noam Chomsky?

I was referring to this Italgato

Sofia. I am convinced, after reading some of the posts on the entire spectrum of the politics Forum that a good many of the left-wingers wouldn't even begin to understand what Chomsky is saying.

In reality, Chomsky is probably the most influential figure in modern liguistics and probably in cognitive science as well but he thinks, as many intellectuals do, that his expertise in those areas automatically confers expertise in politics and foreign affairs.

It doesn't.


I really don't think that Chomsky knows that Marxism is dead and Socialism is dying.

"Many consider him an one-time brain turned show-boater".

Is this the result of a "Texas" education?

Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others. I tend towards a bit of anarchism, I think Noam ain't all bad. I also think Perception ain't all that bad, does that make me an optimistic anarchist?

Elitist rule. The concept infuriates me.
Why not just appoint a King?
GRRRRRR

Chomsky, IMO, asked important questions about VN and some other issues-- I just hated his answers.

No, the goal is to show that the current administration is made up of lying and murdering criminals. How's that for semantics.

I much prefer the idea of a benevolent dictatorship----with yours truly as the HMFWAIC!!!!!

I really don' t think Tartarin knows many people. People who are aware, at least.

If Tartarin can find any Vitas that match Judge Posner's, I would like to see them

Part of Posner's Curriculum Vitae

Education-

Yale AB 1959- summa cum laude- Phi Beta Kappa

Harvard University LLB 1962- Magna Cum Laude
PRESIDENT HARVARD LAW REVIEW

Honorary Law Degrees from the following

Syracuse- 1986

Duquesne- 1987

Georgetown- 1993

Yale- `1996

Pennsylvania- 1997

Northwestern - 2001


EXPERIENCE- UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL PROFESSOR OF LAW 1981- Present

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
CHIEF JUDGE - 1993-2000

Tartarin seems to be completely unaware of who Judge Posner is.

Even the most brilliant man in the world, William Jefferson Clinton, wasn't named as President of his Law Review at Yale.

But then, Tartarin doesn't have the slightest idea of what that means.

I know what my goal is, wolf. You have your goal and I have mine.

i bought a can of air freshner to lighten up this thread and then i realized the air freshener did not have supernatural powers.

Hey perception, Chomsky was a cunning linguist indeed...as for his politics, well...

Hello, LeftwingPitbull!
Welcome to A2K!
I like Noam Chomsky.

Me too, Msolga! I think some here are confusing Chomsky's work with his political opinions. His political opinions are always interesting, always challenging, and drive the Right crazy (which is fairly easy to do... and quite enjoyable!!)

I respect Noam. He is a very intelligent man with strong, but will-reasoned opinions. He is willing to challenge deeply held popular beliefs. Any society needs people like this.

He views are very strong, biting and often critical of the US government . However, they are always supported with an logical analysis of the facts.

I read a few of his current affairs-oriented political writings - didnt like it much, at all. Just too much rhetorics in there, and more than a bit of tunnel vision.

(On an aside - Italgato's last two weeks of posting must have instantly shot Posner up to the #1 spot of most mentioned references of A2K history, huh? Right up there with the Bible.)

Well, that's one vote for Posner for philosopher-king.


Apparently, it is gato's mission in life to change that -- for everyone.


Interesting observation. What exactly does it mean, gato? Please enlighten us.

Being president of the Law Review sure doesn't guarantee that one never becomes a jerk, a blowhard! You can find brilliant resumes in the pockets of people you wouldn't want your daughter to date, much less marry! So I don't know where Italgato is going with this. He has a taste for Posner, I don't. He thinks Posner is great, I don't. So, like, who cares?!

That you should ask-Joe From Chicago-

That you should ask!!

President of the Law Review of the best or second best Law School in the country!!!

Not bad.

What does it mean???

Well, according to the writer of the book, "Poisoned Ivy" ( one Eleanor Kurlow) quote:

P. 11

The Harvard Law Review has been the pinnacle of legal scholarship. among others, all of the following served as Presidents of the Review:

Supreme Court Justices Felix Frankfurter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia, Henry Friendly, Learned Hand, RICHARD POSNER, Thomas Swan, Dean Acheson, Elliott Richardson, Robert Taft, Archibald McLeish, Philip Graham, Derek Bok and Kingman Brewster.

Winning a position on the Review has been the law school equivalent of receiving a Phi Beta Kappa key. Winning the post as President has meant the being at the pinnacle of scholarship in the best Law Review in the United States."


I hope that helps those who do not know about the importance of the Harvard Law Review, Joe from Chicago, I am sure that you already know.

I have heard that Michigan's Law Review is also pretty good---Not great like Harvard, Yale or Chicago but pretty good.

The question that must be asked is the following:

Given that Noam Chomsky is the most brilliant linguist in the United States and also among the top scholars in cognitive science, does this also make him AUTOMATICALLY brilliant and a top scholar in Foreign Affairs.


Is there a carry over?

Does brilliance in one field mean you can comment brilliantly in other fields?

Does the highly gifted Barbar Striesand carry over her vocal gifts to her political commentary?

Is Paul Krugman an expert in legal matters?

Is Al Sharpton competent to critique military strategy?

Oftentimes, people who are experts in a field think that expertise makes them experts in other fields.

That is nonsense as an examination of some of the idiocies uttered by those traveling experts would clearly show.

Of Course, Noam Chomsky has a perfect right, some would say a reponsibility, to comment. Those who are discerning also have a right and perhaps a responsiblity to point out that he is commenting in fields for which he has no real expertise.

Tartarin is absolutely correct. Being President of HArvard Law Review wont guarantee that one won't become a jerk, etc.

That is why, when people pointed out to me that former President Clinton was a graduate of Yale Law School and attended Oxford, I said( in the Tartarin style), yes, but he is still a sexual harrasser, a liar and a narcissist.

You are quite right, Tartarin, no guarantee.

However, I would say that you would win more money betting on the eventual vocational and social success of Harvard Law Review Presidents than you would betting on the eventual vocational and social success of a typical denizen from Watts.