Chomsky on Limits & Freedom (1977)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 сен 2023
- A short clip of Noam Chomsky discussing our rigid pre-programming and the limits of knowledge as conditions for the possibility of freedom and creativity. This comes from a 1977 interview with Bryan Magee in a series on Modern Philosophy called Men of Ideas.
#philosophy #chomsky #bryanmagee
That is incredibly profound and so well put in two phrases
Interesting stuff. Our flexibility and mental freedom depend on a rigid foundation, otherwise we'd be gelatin to our environment.
WOW!
Elegant and profound.
Chomsky.
Lacon of our time.
Noam Chomsky......way ahead of his time!
He was so young. Damn he looked good
OK GR000MER
He was 50
I don't know if it's "an alarming doctrine", but it isn't so new, and if you think a moment, it shouldn't be at all surprising. Were some of us thinking that our minds and ability to represent things with language were without limits? I think Chomsky's contribution has more to do with attempting to reveal just how language is structured - not with suggesting it is a limited representational system.
The only part i understood of this video is that noam chomsky used to be younger.
100% nailed it. Thanks
Bless you for this video.
But then Noam didn't take DMT, didn't spend much time dropping acid and expanding his mind. He didn't meditate for hours and days at a time stretching his inner consciousness. So his, and many other academics are sorely abused by the limitations of minds that have never been let off the leash.
No, he spent his time working at Universities introducing multidisciplinary academics in order to single-handedly found an entire school of linguistic and evolutionary philosophy in the space of one short lifetime, whilst writing scores of books on geopolitics. But yeah he'd have got a lot more done if he'd instead spent the 50 years off his tits on acid on the Gold Coast in flip flops getting his hair braided
Interesting.👍
So is he just saying our brains have evolved for a certain kind of communication?
I'm not sure why the other comments are wildin...
"wildin" haha this isn't a Lil' Bow Wow video. Guess I shouldn't be surprised to see this kind of debased ghett0speak on a video about a failed leftist philosopher like Chomsky. 😅
Good question
I would push back a bit with Chomsky's false dilemma of either we are rigidly confined to a preprogrammed way of thinking or we would merely reflect our environment. It is possible that our volition produces creativity ex nihilo.
Nailed
Interesting thought from a man I've grown rather vexed by.
You can communicate about stuff you dont know you just say everything it isnt
I think that was Kants argument
Both kunts.
I am reading Kant again. It definitely is a modern version Chomsky uses.
@@post-structuralist Interesting, as I once came to the same conclusion but assumed I got it from Kant. If the world outside was chaos, the representative world inside would also be chaos. Really thought that was Kant. The world inside is united because the world outside is united basically
@@Robinson8491 Intriguing way to put it, Kant's philosophy is almost like a static universe. You'll never get to the Ding An Sich, but that's okay. The show between your ears is where things really take place in order to have experience at all.
I think those before Kant thought of this also …
Chomsky has turned out to be wrong on nearly every structuralist point he’s ever espoused, which likely explains his seeming necessity to involve himself with political endeavours to maintain a semblance of a respectable legacy.
Could it be that like us all, he has grown and focused upon what is really important?
@@MultiBmorganNo.
Not even close.
Humans humanize
Modern slavery
This context is too vague to mean anything.
"context" ?
So bummed about the fact that Chomsky became a tankie.
What does tankie mean? I haven’t heard the term before, I would appreciate an explanation-if it is feasible for you.
Do you mean a communist? I expect he always has been, given his heritage.
@@dire-decadence "Tankie" is a term to describe Marxist-Leninist-Maoists (MLMs) who "brought the tanks in", as in instances like Tiananmen Square, to use authoritarian methods to break the populace into conformity with the vanguard Party. The commenter is probably suggesting that Noam Chompsky has acquiesced to many uses of state power from his older anarchistic leanings. Chompsky is certainly no MLM, so I think it's probably just a hyperbole to highlight the contrast between his older anti-state views to his current more friendly use of state power to try and balance the scales of capitalism for the working and impoverished classes. I'm not the person you replied to, but that's my best guess.
When did this happen?
Have kids, we need more of you.@@WanderingExistence
Almost everything Chomsky has said turned out wrong. He was right about Vietnam but thats about it.
I suppose, but if you read his books he does quite a good job at revealling injustices of developed states, particularly the US. Also does a pretty good job shining light on corporate media influence on people.
What was he wrong about I’m not that familiar with his work
He barely ever made a prediction about anything. No idea what you’re talking about. And I’m afraid you don’t know either.
Yes, I would love to know too, specifically where Chomsky’s generative grammar or hierarchies of languages went wrong.