/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10773855]

wait is he a kantian!?

[Anonymous No.10773865]

>>10773855
Actualy, Donald Trump is a kantian.

[Anonymous No.10773875]

No, he's an innatist.

[Anonymous No.10773888]

>>10773865
More like a cant even

[Anonymous No.10774060]

T H U L E

[Anonymous No.10774196]

>>10773865
How old are you?
>I'm eternal

[Anonymous No.10774214]

This is the first thing I fucking wondered while reading about Chomsky for the first time because it's so obviously a recapitulation of the Kantian transcendentalism vs. Lockean radical empiricism thing and I searched high and low and couldn't find ANY mention of Chomsky being a Kantian or talking about Kant or anything, but then I found this one day by chance

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LqUA7W9wfg

At some point in this, Magee says "So... you're basically doing a Kant thing, right?" and Chomsky goes
>UHH.. UM... ERH... UH.. I MEAN, I'VE ALWAYS.. ERM.. YOU SHOULD CHECK OUT THE CAMBRIDGE NEOPLATONISTS, DUDE!
revealing once and for all that Chomsky has never read Kant or even enough philosophy to know what Kant is or what Kant is about

Chomsky is the most worthless idiot of all time

[Anonymous No.10774223]

>>10774214
>the most worthless idiot of all time
- some faggot on /lit/

[Anonymous No.10774250]

>>10774214
>Chomsky is the most worthless idiot of all time
T. Brainlet

[Anonymous No.10774332]

>>10773855
Chomsky is an updated enlightenment rationalist. He's said this explicitly numerous times and all his linguistics reflects it. He believes in innate structures in the mind that are activated during maturation by limited amounts of experience, and preaches a universal human nature through evolutionary heritage (with a saltationist, quasi-creationist twist).

[Anonymous No.10774343]

He is a moral universalist, which comes from Kant originally.

[Anonymous No.10774357]

>>10773865
yes he's also a time traveller as well. from the past though. and he can conjure rabbits out of his hair.

[Anonymous No.10774973]

>>10774214
Fuck off, he's just saying he was influenced by British neoplatonists instead of Kant. Kant didn't sprung up out of nowhere with his ideas, the concept that experiences conform to the mind structures existed before the 18th century in some form.

[Anonymous No.10775246]

>>10774214
It should be obvious to anyone who basically verbatim falls into the exact descriptions put forward by Thomas Sowell, who's main schtick is to continuously assert things in long, low, drawn out mono-tone in way where he avoids stepping people through the logic and evidence behind what he says AND utterly refuses to play with the ideas or merits of another side to the argument.

Chomsky is the most famous and popular case of sophistry I think we have ever seen on the planet.

[Anonymous No.10775612]

>>10774343
>moral universalism
>comes from Kant

[Anonymous No.10776457]

>>10775246
>AND utterly refuses to play with the ideas or merits of another side to the argument.

Most of the time this is justified due to how often the other side misrepresents or misunderstands him.

[Anonymous No.10776602]

>>10773888
Yaaaas queen #Slay

[Anonymous No.10776620]

>>10774214
For sure he's read Kant because when you search around for Kant + Chomsky you can find reference to lectures he did ON KANT.

WHY he will never acknowledge or talk about Kant is beyond me. It is also suspicious that he never talks about philosophers AFTER Kant! He talks in depth about every philosophy up to Hume. But not a single one after Kant. And yet he is familiar with Herder's language philosophy and Humboldt's political philosophy, so he has at least studied into this era.

[Anonymous No.10776702]

>>10774214
>Chomsky is the most worthless idiot of all time
that would actually be me