Noam Chomsky talks about the passing of William F. Buckley

http://bit.ly/GydYv - Check out the rest of Chomsky's interview on Big Think. Chomsky was a guest on Buckley's "Firing Line" in 1969.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• noam
• chomsky
• william
• buckley
• big think
• bigthink

[Faboba]

@MrTreantHugger Being a linguist usually makes you a scientist though, doesn't it? I take the point that he 'doesn't perform experiments' but he's a theoretical linguist. I assume you'd be willing to say theoretical physicists count as scientists. As for Chomsky giving 'squeezejobs' - you're apparently better informed on that than I am - but he demolished Skinnerian behaviourism with a single book review, his reputation amongst linguists and psychologists is pretty secure.

[ptolemyauletesXII]

@nsshero What a moronic thing to say. You may or may not agree with Chomsky, but to dismiss a man who is clearly of great intellectual stature simply because his main occupation is not political is asinine. Would you close your ears to Socrates on any given topic because he did not have a degree in that topic? Do politicians need degrees in political science to enter politics? An intelligent, articulate, and very well read man is an intelligent, articulate and very well read man.

[forgottenbooks]

*political and economic ideas/philosophy.

[forgottenbooks]

Could someone explain to me Chomsky's political and economic? Labels nowadays are not only confusing but positively misleading.

I like Buckley for his language.

[lourak]

Chomsky speaks with palms up with a giving gesture - as if to say: "Take this offering of wisdom - from the lord your god". Boundless ego....

[lourak]

His sole meeting with Buckley was "of no particular significance as far as he was concerned". How graceful and good mannered of Chomsky! What in the world was the purpose of that comment - other than to serve as a testament of a monumental (and pathological) megalomania. Look closely and you'll see signs of this in almost every Chomsky discourse.

[alabaster30]

@ptolemyauletesXII Kind of like how Chomsky could have said some nice words about William F. Buckley when he passed. But he did not. He criticized a guy just because he was conservative.

[Allrightteam]

I'm at 2:20. What was the question again?

[oxygen69able]

I hope Buckley was cremated and our planet didn't have to consume his rotted evil.

[ErikPaulsonFan]

@marklemon75 Agreed. I don't appreciate it when people are disrespectful to the dead. Buckely was no Hitler or Stalin. Chomsky--though I admire his intellect--just comes across as a condescending prick the more I hear him speak his mind on personal matters.

[ledawg1138]

All I see is a sweater and floating pair of glasses, mumbling away.

[fLcGambit]

@MrTreantHugger for every claim Chomsky makes he has a facts to back it up. If your suggesting the facts Chomsky provides are either irrelevant or simply false is a different matter entirely. Indoctrination isn't really the right word to use, his goal isn't to make people subscribe to a certain ideology, but to look at factual evidence and make the best analysis possible. Obviously every human-being is fallible, but Chomsky's theories are widely considered to be quite impartial.