Lets talk about Chomsky and his work in Linguistics, specifically his views on recursion and Everett's claims about Piraha lacking it. Is this true? Or are Chomsky's claims about Everett being a charlatan more true?
yeah
Regardless of what people say and regardless of my views Chomsky is a genius of our time
>>530011
lel thanks for your opinion
>>530031
What do you have to justify that other than he is very public with his views?
>>530040
Things like most cited living scholar?
>>530040
He is incredibly knowledgeable about international politics - not just current events, but the way nations, states, and figures play against each other in the real world. You can see it in the way he talks.
The same can be said about his talks on linguistics, the critical period, etc. While not ALL of his predictions come true, and while not *everything* he says may stand the test of time, I think it is obvious from hearing him speak that he is a mind-mindbogglingly insightful individual; I wish I had a fraction of his ability to see the shape of things
>>530059
I do think he is insanely brilliant. I disagree that the majority of the problems on earth are caused by american foreign policy as seems to be his view. Having said that, he would shit stomp me and most anyone in a debate on the topic. So I cant really say much. I guess i just disagree and dont have the right to challenge him on it.
>>530008
What is the consensus on his opinions on the Khmer Rouge and being an apologist for them? How does he and his supporters reconcile this? Not trying to defame him, genuinely curious
>>530059
He was also a genocide denier for quite some time, but I guess that doesn't matter.
>>530073
I'd blow this leftist faggot the fuck out. Pussies like Chomsky and his commie apologist fanboys aren't living in the real world.
>>530107
describe how it would go down.
>>530008
this is not an issue in linguistics. virtually every linguist is aware of everett because he gets press, but they're also aware that 1) he is the ONLY source on piraha, and 2) even if his data were accurate it wouldn't disprove universal grammar.
here's an academic linguistics paper that includes a discussion of the subject, if you're interested in getting your information from a reputable source instead of from anonymous internet memes.
http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~ycharles/papers/RecursiveMisrepresentationsLPY13.pdf
if you'd prefer something less reputable, take a look at this pop-sci 'debate' between everett and a dutch syntactician.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLrvfYVXakU
>>530117
Thank you for the sources. This is actually just what I am looking for.
>>530107
Oh my! What a huge brain and dick you have!
>>530115
I'd remind that cocksucker that it's a FACT that we are living in the safest and most prosperous time the world has ever seen and that in Soviet Russia or Cambodia him and his academic cunt friends would've been fucking purged. He'd probably blabber some garbage about muh Shah and muh Mujahadeen or some shit.
>>530129
Wanna see it?
>>530098
did he renounce this view? and do you have proof that that it did indeed happen? Not trying to start anything, I am just genuinely curious, someone linked me to the zundel trials earlier and i ended up reading quite a bit. not sure where to go from there
Nice
>>530147
Chomsky is and always was anti soviet. I don't know if you are trying to sound badass but you sound retarded.
>>530008
The Khmer Rogue did nothing wrong
t. Noam Chomsky
>>530390
There was no available public evidence that supported the claim about the khmer rouge genociding people, and as soon as there was i condemned it.
t. Noam Chomsky
>>530372
nevermind. apparently he "doesn't wanna talk about it"
https://chomsky.info/19920331/
>>530372
He back peddled saying that he never said it "didn't happened", just that he proved inaccuracies in the claims of it happening. Is anyone really surprised that professional whiner refuses to take any responsibility for his own actions?
