[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 45 KB, 350x473, beckett1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3141000 No.3141000 [Reply] [Original]

>talking to someone online
>"read some Chomsky and get back to me."

>> No.3141177

bump

>> No.3141241

>conversing with someone
>APPEAL TO AUTHORITY

Fixed

>> No.3141280

>>3141241
>being well read in Chomsky is required for political discussions.
>You must read works from someone I like before you can attempt to talk about the subject.

Stop being a nigger.

>> No.3141365

It goes the other way as well. I was once having a conversation with someone about Manufacturing Consent when my friend overheard. He started to yell about Chomsky being an idiot and a self-hating jew and proceeded to leave. He's never read any Chomsky.

>> No.3141399

>>3141241
Let me quote you something from the big man himself:
MAN: Mr. Chomsky, I'm wondering what specific qualifications you have to be able to speak all around the country about world affairs?


None whatsoever. I mean, the qualifications that I have to speak on world affairs are exactly the same ones Henry Kissinger has, and Walt Ros-tow has, or anybody in the Political Science Department, professional historians?none, none that you don't have. The only difference is, I don't pretend to have qualifications, nor do I pretend that qualifications are needed. I mean, if somebody were to ask me to give a talk on quantum physics, I'd refuse?because I don't understand enough. But world affairs are trivial: there's nothing in the social sciences or history or whatever that is beyond the intellectual capacities of an ordinary fifteen-year-old. You have to do a little work, you have to do some reading, you have to be able to think, but there's nothing deep?if there are any theories around that require some special kind of training to understand, then they've been kept a carefully guarded secret.
In fact, I think the idea that you're supposed to have special qualifications to talk about world affairs is just another scam?it's kind of like Leninism [position that socialist revolution should be led by a "vanguard" party]: it's just another technique for making the population feel that they don't know anything, and they'd better just stay out of it and let us smart guys run it. In order to do that, what you pretend is that there's some esoteric discipline, and you've got to have some letters after your name before you can say anything about it. The fact is, that's a joke.

>> No.3141433

>>3141399
>if there are any theories around that require some special kind of training to understand, then they've been kept a carefully guarded secret.
Historiography is taught in second year history courses and above, and is particularly taught in 4th year undergraduate in British system and 1st and 2nd year Masters in US system.

Fuck off and cite more "newspapers" Noam.

>> No.3141441

>>3141365
Sounds like a fan of /lit/.

>> No.3142301

>>3141433
what's your argument? just more ad hominem?

>> No.3142350

>>3142301
It is a pretty simple fucking argument:
a) A system of knowledge exists covering a domain of human knowledge
b) A person attempts to produce knowledge outside this disciplinary discourse, and in fact violates central tenets of that discipline that even its regular critics do not dispute as useful

Noam conducts fringe-history.

>> No.3142544

>>3141000
you know whats more funny? i have never seen someone who was fan of harry potter or twilight saying such things online. till now it was only (from my experience) people who were talking about: bukowski, chomsky, updike, poe.

>> No.3143156

>>3141280
>>3141399
you fucking idiots, he wasn't disagreeing with OP

>> No.3143161

>>3141000

I would laugh, also. I would also end the discussion.

>Chomsky

Oh heavens.