Noam Chomsky: God, Morality, & Consciousness

[@TheoriesofEverything]

As a listener of TOE, you can now enjoy full digital access to The Economist and all it has to offer. Get a 20% off discount by visiting: www.economist.com/toe

[@TheJonnyEnglish]

Nah thnx

[@mariamkarjiker301]

Noam Chomsky is a treasure and a gift to mankind. He is immensely humble and generous with his great intellect. There is no intellectual to match the breadth of his understanding in the world we live in at present. What is very valuable is how he can explain difficult concepts in a way where most people will be able to understand them. God bless this great mind💗💖💟😊😺

[@TheJonnyEnglish]

When you understand something really well, it’s easier to explain it in layman terms

[@MosesRabuka]

"Hundreds of billions of dollars are spent every year to control the public mind." ~ Noam Chomsky

[@marcsalzman8082]

Truer words have never been spoken - to use a world-worn weary cliche... I really like this Curt Jaimungal fellow.... He led an excellent interview with Dr. Kevin Knuth that I really listened to the other day...Dr. Knuth I was more familiar with. Curt was thoughtful, thorough mostly, a different caliber when exploring Paranormal/ UFO/ Crypto-whatevers Material.. George Knapp is excellent too, but in a very different way. As it should be.

[@NoahBodze]

Chomsky got his financial cut of your mind.

[@alejandroangeles8587]

Noam finally looks like Plato. It's just make sense.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

Chomsky is more like Aristotle - read his book "For the Common Good." Plato was a liar about Pythagoras.

[@alejandroangeles8587]

@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 phisically looks more like Plato...

[@arunjetli7909]

Voidisyinyang Voidisyinyang Aristotle was a third rate philosopher wrong on just about everything he could not answer Parmenides and his rational monism so he basically said denounced him. He could not understand Plato’s dialectic and dialogue , so he went into monologues . This psychopath had no respect for due diligence. Without proof he claimed that Persians and women were inferior. He indoctrinated Alexander into burning down the city of Persepolis burning women and children, luckily Alexander came to realize that he had been fooled and married his officers to Persian women.please don’t compare Chomsky to the psychopath Aristotle

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

@@arunjetli7909 "Reviewing a variety of political systems, Aristotle concluded that this system was the best - or perhaps the least bad - form of government. But he recognized a flaw: The great mass of the poor could use their voting power to take the property of the rich, which would be unfair. Madison and Aristotle arrived at opposite solutions: Aristotle advised reducing inequality, by what we would regard as welfare state measures. Madison felt that the answer was to reduce democracy." chomsky.info/20140107/ I said he's "More like" Aristotle than Plato. I didn't say I agreed with Aristotle or Plato. I agree with the PreSocratics.

[@arunjetli7909]

Voidisyinyang Voidisyinyang I like Noam so I did not want to think of him as Aristotle I do strongly disagree Noam on many issues such as Kashmir about which he knows nothing and comments on an old habit of a white men like Hegel Kant and JS. Mill. . Somehow they feel that they will solve the problems of us as we must be primitive. Rule one is do not comment about which you know nothing .any I have been his fan

[@asmahamidullah9571]

I have followed him for over 4 decades. May the Creator bless you. You have remained honest and true to yourself! 🤲🏽❤🤲🏽🎊

[@AudioPervert1]

It's simply amazing that Chomsky at 91, is still reaching out and is accessible to the youth. The most influential intellectual alive in the western hemisphere, is still a icon of resistance, hope and truth for all (EWNS hemispheres)

[@douglaskay9959]

Yes same age as me. Time gives you a better insight every day. Gods are for fools but I'm not going to state the obvious the Noah story should give you an idea.

[@rocantenrocanten4150]

для всех бывает только смерть. остальное по усилиям вашим.

[@MrHammerkop]

@@douglaskay9959 The wisdom of this world is folly before God.

[@davecampbell7493]

Really frightening to see the voice of reason growing old.

[@encompasschange4700]

The real Gandalf!!

[@joefondu]

He's earned his rest.

[@tinymcgoo1195]

If he wanted to he could use his free will to avoid growing old... oh bugger, time doesn't respect will.

[@BernieHollandMusic]

The voice of reason is eternally youthful and free of fear

[@EclecticSceptic]

Don't be afraid. Inform yourself, pass on knowledge, find others.

[@brentwinfield5713]

I appreciate these young folks reaching out to Noam. I appreciate Noam for his patience in regards to the questions. As a long time follower of NC you must have patience to ingest, digest and understand the truth and brilliance of Noam. And then you have to listen again. Then you get.

[@carmelaalbanese124]

"When examining Comrade Chomsky, like other radicals, it is important to not only examine what he says (though what he says is often wrong), but what he is not saying. Utopian revolutionaries butchered millions of people in the 1900s, and the United States of America, a creature of the Enlightenment, did the heavy lifting to stop them before the socialist cancer killed human civilization in its entirety. Now that the evils of socialism have become manifest, all Chomsky can provide is nihilism. But the genius of Chomsky’s nihilism resides in this- his ability to combine cynicism and idealism to argue that everything that exists deserves to be destroyed. The idealism - Chomsky’s vague notion of anarchism - functions as an impossible standard to condemn the West- no matter how much good we do, since we can always to better, we’re bad. That’s all it is; it is not a program, and Chomsky has been more than willing to support dictatorships when they are against free enterprise and/or the United States. The cynicism steps in when Chomsky implies that everything is equally bad, as if the crimes of the United States are comparable, if not worse, than those of Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, and Mao’s China. The goal is not self-affirmation, but self-destruction, and Chomsky’s meeting with the Party of God (the Hezb’Allah) symbolizes everything this man is about. If no model of the revolutionary future exists, then revolution *is* destructive suicide and nothing else.,

[@kiwitrainguy]

@@carmelaalbanese124 Who are you quoting?

[@larjkok1184]

It’s appreciated that you appreciate and have shown your appreciation.

[@hohaia01]

Chomsky is trying his hardest to respect these guys and their weird questions.

[@hxd3620]

They didn't ask anything weird.

[@EtcEtcAndEtc]

@@hxd3620 They asked a load of questions that they clearly hadn't thought about for more than ten seconds.

[@EtcEtcAndEtc]

@@hxd3620 "do you take an agnostic view when it comes to 'God'"... Haven't they heard of Noam Chomsky before?

[@hxd3620]

@@EtcEtcAndEtc i see where you're coming from. i don't think (weird) is the proper word tho . Maybe, (playing the absent advocate ➡️the interviewers) they might thought he changed his beliefs regarding God.

[@bradmodd7856]

very hard to get noam out of his shell on metaphysics...they got shortchanged there lol

[@derekeuale2042]

Peter, it's amazing that you got to speak to this man and he didn't berate you. He calmly answered what he thought would be interesting to your viewers and almost completely avoided your questions which I appreciate greatly. He is an incredible man.

[@terrytari1891]

Dr Choamsky should have hung up on those 2 clowns!

[@drbqqq1433]

I'm guessing the answer to the opening riddle is: "go out for a walk".

[@barquerojuancarlos7253]

"I can't say it or my animals will race to the exterior exit." His pet dogs apparently make quite a commotion (as can be heard in the background of previous interviews) at the mere suggestion that he's going out to play with them, which he said he does daily.

[@lupin7559]

People who have had dogs, or at least some kinds of dogs know that even the mention of the word “walk” will send them running to the door waiting for you to take them out. They respond to it and are always listening.

[@Scuor2]

Oooooh as a non dog owner i was actually kinda huh 😂

[@michaelnurse3444]

This guy is so smart and knowledgeable. Sometimes, it's possible to believe that everyone is relatively close to each other, in terms of intellect. Then you listen to a genuine genius and you know that there is a stark difference between the average and the extreme. But it's not just about being smart, being moral is more substantial. Being smart and moral is best...

[@Oil_uj7499]

Noam is an atheist, wowsers; what does Noam, an expert on language, hypothesize on the origin of language? Language is innate to humans, I agree as Chomsky states, but it didnt proceed from them; brains need to be taught. Who taught humans? Aliens? Close. How about the God of the Hebrews!

[@andydonnelly8677]

I could listen to Noam for hours and not feel time passing at all, a wise man indeed.❤

[@chrisnelson9919]

Wow, nice.

[@thechessman21able]

Yea but he can put you to sleep with his monotone. i struggled to keep my eyes open but i made it to the end 😂

[@avaethan6259]

drew smu Cool! SMU 👍

[@patm6704]

Noam deserved the 'great intellect' praise bestowed on him for his many excellent books, like 'Manufacturing Consent' etc. But he uses that well-deserved credibility to deliberately mislead now. For example, he opposes the overwhelming scientific evidence which proves 9/11 was an inside job. He opposes the only effective weapon which can force change on the brutal Israeli apartheid regime i.e. he opposes BDS. When confronted by a reporter with evidence the CIA killed JFK he said "who cares?" He's obviously a gate-keeper who changed sides, from exposing the totally corrupt system to being a willing puppet of the totally corrupt system. But still manages to fool the unwary majority who think their heroes can do no wrong. Tragic for truth, justice etc.

[@gentlefierceness]

@@thechessman21able speed up audio. Sounds good at 1.5x.

[@ally11488]

Noam Chomsky has earned the right to say..."I told you so".

[@ramonseranio8624]

......

[@PrivateSi]

As an atheist ! UNITY THROUGH DIVERSITY ! is as paradoxical and incorrect as ! GOD IS LOVE ! .. Libtard vs Creatards... Chomsky is extremely libtarded, hence he's a numero uno Uber-Lib academic.... Liberal wastage is the liberal way, be it righty neo-lib or lefty uber-lib.

[@Herr2Cents]

@@PrivateSi I sense your confused.

[@gabrielsyme4180]

Why? Because he called Lenin a “right winger”?

[@PrivateSi]

@@Herr2Cents .. No mate, Americans are extremely confused by their extremist programming... Chomsky is full of paradox and confusion. He has pushed confusion all his life, as he is a wishy-washy Lib lecturer of the Left... As someone trained in computer science I also consider Chomsky's contribution hugely overrated... I put him on par with your devout creatard Christain apologists, as a British atheist. If you can't see Chomsky is a CONFUSION MERCHANT of The Left you are confused... more, More, MORE, new, New, NEW, growth Growth, GROWTH.... The Libtardian Way.... Cancerous.

[@stephenwallace8782]

This man is such a good and generous person, off-the-scale industrious as far as individual workload goes. I believe he stands apart from the world of public intellectuals because what he is most interested in is talking with as many folks as possible as long as they, like him, are seekers of truth. It's unbelievable how much he's done with his time on planet Earth. Irreplaceable. But he and, now, with the death of David Graeber, I have gone back to finish my degree...He is very easy to reach and it's amazing how alive he is at 92 years old.

[@sheilamacdougal9948]

Maybe when you do finish your degree, you'll be able to begin the process of thinking for yourself instead of cult-like hero-worship.

[@stephenwallace8782]

@@sheilamacdougal9948 lol, a pointless and inaccurate comment. Chomsky is admirable for the reason that he is a good human being. That's a rare thing in the world of renown.

[@sheilamacdougal9948]

@@stephenwallace8782 Yeah, was he a "good human being" when he wrote that France's leading Holocaust denier was not anti-Semitic but just "an apolitical liberal" who had been publishing his "findings"? Or when he denied that the Pol Pot regime was committing genocide, and obscenely tried to impugn the credibility of escaping refugees? Or when "libertarian" Chomsky used his influence to induce the editors of an encyclopedia to excise passages by linguist Gregory Sampson that referred to these notorious incidents? Or when Chomsky wrote that arch terrorist and head of the fanatical Hezbollah, Nasrallah, was a "serious person" and had presented convincing arguments why Hezbollah should retain its fabulously armed militia within Lebanon (prompting liberal Lebanese to express shock and dismay)? Or when Chomsky has repeatedly written that the terrorist Hamas and Iran have long been seeking peace, but are victims of U.S.-Israeli intransigeance? Or when he repeatedly blamed the U.S. for the Cold War and denied that the Soviet Union was responsible for any aggression or threats to other countries? Or when Chomsky wrote a ludicrous apology for the criminal Serbian regime's actions in Kosovo, denied or minimised the genocidal acts of Serb forces in Bosnia and Kosovo, and blamed NATO and the U.S. for the conflicts? But I agree that a hero-worshipper, uneducated by his own admission, will be ignorant of these and many other of his cult-leader's interventions, or their significance.

[@sheilamacdougal9948]

@Martin Rudling One thing's for sure. YOU'll never know anything. Alternatively you could go back to school and try to finish your education. You may need to finish high school first. But I'm sure it's much more comfortable wallowing in your miserable bigotry and blaming the Jews for all your problems.

[@robertpirsig5011]

@@sheilamacdougal9948 Maybe if you actually had a point people wouldn't think you were an idiot.

[@dlamotte21]

vidéo name of Noam Chomsky is barzeev -> Bar-Zeev, meaning "Ze'ev's son", is a form of the Hebrew Ze'ev, which means "wolf", the 'kinnui' ("secular equivalent") of Benjamin (Genesis 49.27). Bar is the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew Ben ("son"). so the son of the wolf

[@scottpreston5074]

Interesting footnote. Thanks.

[@haya4895]

i was wondering about that! thank u. but does he call himself like that or what, this is interesting

[@scottspa74]

Thank you. I had just noticed the screen name and wondered what that meant.

[@DiegoDiazgt]

Thanks for the comment.

[@noelliebtsie]

I was impressed by the intelligence of the young guys, of course they're from Canada where there is a modicum of real education. Great interview. I always appreciate Chomsky's clarity, historical context and linguistic discernment. The double-speak of a term like "libertarian" is indeed stunning.

[@chewyjello1]

I'm so glad I discovered this channel! What AMAZING guests and content! I'm putting this time mark here so I can come back to it and write it down later. A great way of explaining what's wrong with Neoliberalism. 28:07 I can't wait to see the final project!

[@paulvandijck6476]

Noam Chomsky, a great humanitarian and maybe the last universal mind!

[@garetgrossman539]

I've yet to hear Chomsky speak at any length on poetry, art, architecture, mathematics, physics, continental thought, medicine and many other subjects. In fact, usually international affairs, esp. US foreign policy, and linguistics.

[@paulvandijck6476]

@@garetgrossman539 - You would be surprised! Just watch the many interviews over many, many years!

[@tinymcgoo1195]

@@tomasmccauley569 Democracy in business works great for the majority. The tyrant is functionally indistinguishable in outcome to the minority, whether you have 1 tyrant or hundreds.

[@tinymcgoo1195]

​@@tomasmccauley569 You said one tyrannical CEO can't run it all (assuming you were speaking for Chomsky). Which is demonstrably incorrect. I was pointing out that in a democracy you'd still have people making wild accusations of tyranny, even with checks and balances, just as done with single owner models when the minority feels like they are not getting their wants met. The result would look the same. Some people happy, while others not so much. Just as you would need good reasons to get rid of democracy where it already exists, you would need good reasons to establish democracy where it doesn't. Calling business owners tyrants does not make for that good reason. (yes I am aware that is not the entirety of Chomsky's arguments). Keep in mind that I have not made any distinctions in the different models of employee owned companies. I was talking in generalities as that is what I was responding to.

[@tinymcgoo1195]

@@tomasmccauley569 I am aware of the model, its accomplishments and its criticisms. It being the best example is subjective, not a position others would hold. Again I was not advocating any particular model. I was illustrating the nonsense of the 'tyrannical' argument as you will find that sentiment even in cooperatives. I am sure it wouldn't be too difficult to find it in those that are employees of Mondragon, but not allowed to be a member of the cooperative. Good luck finding any model that doesn't give way to feelings of oppression in some set of it's constituents.

[@dubs20000]

Very stimulating, I must say. His view of God is ...live and let live.. if it helps people, so be it. I like that perspective. In the absence of reductive materialism being able to explain anything in the nature of true reality, it's presumptuous for normal humans to conceive anything beyond. Which doesn't mean that there isn't anything beyond, but for us living in this illusory real world , we need a working model and for arriving at the right moral guides and principles, the man made principles masquerading as the edicts of God doesn't help. They are observed in breach.. Chomsky's recommendation is to be free thinkers and be able to arrive at a consensus on what are the best principles for the most good for most people.. that should workable, right ?

[@GingerDrums]

@Leo Clark hey Leo. The problem is that you are throwing thebbaby out with the bath water. You have convinced yourself that you have achieved clarity on these issues. The truth often lies between camps. The fact that the sjw politically correct crowd is making a mess of things does not discredit the leftist movement, just as Nazis don't discredit the conservatives. Check out John Haidt and his book "The Righteous Mind" to see how your comment appears to be more ideological than truly truth seeking

[@patm6704]

@Leo Clark The Bible is based on a fictional 6,000 year-old Earth where Neanderthals never existed. In the real world, most people have some Neanderthal DNA because our human ancestors mated with Neanderthals and Africans whose ancestors have never left Africa have no Neanderthal DNA. While the majority of religious believers are good and sincere in their beliefs, the powerful, wealthy religious institutions are firmly embedded with the ruling elites in every religious country.

[@ryanblakey1695]

Snowdenbleep Give me an example of these “crazy SJWs” or whatever causing an actual tangible problem... Meanwhile you got the right wing who is literally trending to annihilate human existence by the end of the century... Meanwhile the SJ-DUBYA’s are... Being mean to people who say some pretty questionable things? Yeah, not exactly equivalent. Like at all. No

[@ryanblakey1695]

Leo Clark Buddy... read a fucking book or something. Do you get all of your political information from twitter, or something? Every single point you’ve made is the most tired bullshit cliche from the “anti-SJW” crowd (yknow, the guys who essentially popularized the alt right... yknow that modern white supremacist movement? Oh, I’m sorry, they prefer the term “identitarian”). Like, I don’t even believe you in your claim to know Chomsky. If you knew Chomsky, you would know that at least 70% of your comment is based in flat out lies that the imperialist war machine would be just tickled pink to see you swallow whole - like you’ve done - so good job on that one bud, really. Way to take a stand; supporting the worlds most powerful imperial force in history and all. Christ.

[@mattw2396]

@Leo Clark You just posted CRINGE

[@Selene-u3X]

What l like most of eminent Prof.Chomsky is his free,democratic spirit and realistic vision about people and society!He always focuses on actions rather than on beliefs or declarations..and it s great from a wide world famous linguist!Thanks for awesome interview!

[@hxd3620]

To judge an interview it comes mainly back to what you new info. you got from it at the end and I got alot out of it and many like me did as well and that's a sign of a great interview, keep it up guys!.

[@남산다람쥐-j6l]

U

[@FeelFreeProteinPots]

Noam’s answers are like angles singing into my ear. What beautiful soft spoken logic and rationale.

[@TheJonnyEnglish]

All I could think of is cartoon acute and obtuse triangles yelling at you

[@davidfeld22]

I'm not sure I want to live in a world without Noam Chomsky. His scope of knowledge and understanding,on many subjects, is unparalleled compared to any one else alive. And he delivers it seriously, with no bullshit.

[@barquerojuancarlos7253]

yes, genius is a lot of work. Since the early 1960s his friends and acquaintances were amazed how much he read, subscribing to 100s journals, newspapers, from the NY Times to the most obscure, while keeping up in his and related academic fields.

[@avaethan6259]

Not really. Perhaps you walked in with all the same assumptions he relied on in the last half hour. There was very little explanation of any of his conclusions. He exhibited the heart of a teacher early; not so much later. Maybe three hours would be more appropriate for the scope of topics.

[@davidfeld22]

@Joseph Henderson you claim delusion, without facts. Hmmm, I'll stick with Noam Chomsky.

[@EclecticSceptic]

@Joseph Henderson Jesus man would you get your facts straight before flooding the comments section with this.

[@davidfeld22]

@Joseph Henderson Of course he's critical of America. Observe the behavior over the last 244 years. How many atrocities need to be committed, by the people who own the United States, before a day(s) of atonement is forced on them? Observe the four major crises under which we presently suffer. To call Chomsky gutless is ignorant. He's one of the lone intellectuals of importance who points out the inequities and the inevitable, cyclical failures of a capitalist system that doesn't work for most people. Additionally, he does criticize communism, regularly. Maybe you just can't hear the words. He's actually courageous, if you care to think about it. A professor at MIT, critical of a system that actively recruits and receives funding from private capitalists and the military industrial complex, the recruits MIT's talent to join the greed-fest. How many can do that without losing their jobs, or worse? Answer = no one. You most probably are barking up the wrong tree.

[@MrAlasoft]

Excellent video ! .. doesn't matter If we agree or not with Chomsky, in part or totally, the point here is to listen and try to understand. Thanks a lot !

[@alejandroangeles8587]

As a long term admirer of NC, I sincerely thank you guys for this interview. NC is one of my personal heroes... and I've seen and read a LOT of his interviews and books. And he rarely talks about religion. And believe me... I've seen hundreds of his lectures and interviews. Well done!!

[@kiwitrainguy]

His answer to the question about religion helped to explain to me why I believe in God but don't belong to a religion.

[@krzheph7373]

I was in awe as he effortlessly batted away questions on " God" as empty words and unanswerable as the definitions have never been elucidated . A strange interview - I got the mental picture of a couple of scrappy dogs barking around a majestic but aging Lion who casually walked on.

[@markmark8986]

It is difficult to speak of God without having had an intuitive or mystical experience. Max Planck claimed that what we posit of matter points to consciousness, as does Erwin Schrodinger. Getting over monotheism is quite different from mystical apperception and s theory of matter as light.

[@cherd5343]

Curt's thinking face (furled brow) makes him look perpetually pissed off.

[@curtjaimungal]

Agreed.

[@harleyb6327]

“I’m probably the only person you’ve ever spoken to who’s never used marijuana”

[@mynewestusername1]

Ya but every one from venezuela... And outside... All we want to know is this..... Is someone going to drill venus for oil 🤪😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😅😅🍿

[@eliza1826]

And they say you need drugs to be brilliant

[@fundieddy9164]

Oh! "...who's never used marijuana" Ahaa! Global-agenda-marijuana.

[@Dan-N22]

notice that he didn't say psychedelics.

[@battlestump]

almost every single question asked by the two interviewers is laden with obvious landmine terms with immense baggage used to the highest length of ambiguity to imply an intellect that is sadly lacking. I am unsure if the intent here was to get an intellectual celebrity like Chomsky to 'trip him up' with some sorry gotcha question. Aside from the anecdotal stories of Chomsky, this interview is utterly pointless. If someone were to edit this to be a single talk given by Chomsky it would be greatly improved. I am only annoyed whenever Glinos opens his mouth and spews inanity just to try to 'word salad' Chomsky. His responses generally address the question only in pointing out to the interviewer either what they SHOULD have asked, or to explain the concept behind the words they vacuously speak. The only unarguable aspect of this channel is it's name. How could they possibly have gotten Chomsky to agree to this?

[@hhhahahhhahha]

Chomsky agrees to speak to anyone that asks

[@jeffbrown-hill7739]

I agree. I was just about to write my own comment about what blank slates these two are.

[@carmelaalbanese124]

"When examining Comrade Chomsky, like other radicals, it is important to not only examine what he says (though what he says is often wrong), but what he is not saying. Utopian revolutionaries butchered millions of people in the 1900s, and the United States of America, a creature of the Enlightenment, did the heavy lifting to stop them before the socialist cancer killed human civilization in its entirety. Now that the evils of socialism have become manifest, all Chomsky can provide is nihilism. But the genius of Chomsky’s nihilism resides in this- his ability to combine cynicism and idealism to argue that everything that exists deserves to be destroyed. The idealism - Chomsky’s vague notion of anarchism - functions as an impossible standard to condemn the West- no matter how much good we do, since we can always to better, we’re bad. That’s all it is; it is not a program, and Chomsky has been more than willing to support dictatorships when they are against free enterprise and/or the United States. The cynicism steps in when Chomsky implies that everything is equally bad, as if the crimes of the United States are comparable, if not worse, than those of Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, and Mao’s China. The goal is not self-affirmation, but self-destruction, and Chomsky’s meeting with the Party of God (the Hezb’Allah) symbolizes everything this man is about. If no model of the revolutionary future exists, then revolution *is* destructive suicide and nothing else." ...

[@MrJanes-cl5sj]

poor Chomsky so patient with these two nitwits. He's used to it; I don't think he minds lol. I've been watching twits ask this guy terrible questions for longer than the hosts have been alive. You have to appreciate that he is a linguist first and foremost. He knows the actual meanings of words people use. it confuses him when people misuse words because he only knows them in their most accurate sense. I do really love the hosts they are adorable, they have a long way to go but i like the direction they are heading. God bless you Chomps, never die, my prophet of truth.

[@TheoriesofEverything]

FYI, I showed your comment to Chomsky via email (that he was patient with nitwits / he's used to it / these were terrible questions) and he responded "Crazy. The troll culture is a nuisance. " Hope that helps. - Curt PS: Here's a link: i.imgur.com/NRumRvH.png

[@MrJanes-cl5sj]

@@TheoriesofEverything LOL um...did you include the entire message or did you just send him the negative parts in hopes your misleading context would garner sympathy? Cause it sure looks like you have got this far: "poor Chomsky so patient with these two nitwits. He's used to it; " and then neglected the rest. That would be utterly embarrassing for you if that was the case...that would make YOU the very thing Chomsky despises. I stand by by statement. You two have a long way to go but you are on the right path...keep it up. Don't worry you only look like idiots when talking to Chomsky, don't worry most people do anyway...geez a little sensitive are we? LOL. Cancel culture is a real issue, we must remember that if we believe in free speech it means that we believe that people we hate have the right to say anything they want. now please send this to him as a follow up, as well as my entire first message i'd love another reply.

[@EclecticSceptic]

@@MrJanes-cl5sj The conversation was fine. They asked several interesting and important questions. The interviewers were serious, respectful, and engaged. I don't see where the vitriol is coming from. Take a deep breath.

[@TheoriesofEverything]

@@MrJanes-cl5sj I sent him a longer quote, as well as the KZbin link directly. Feel free to email him yourself. - Curt

[@MrJanes-cl5sj]

@@TheoriesofEverything I do , thank you.

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

Brilliant interview which elicited wide ranging in-depth responses from Prof. Chomsky. Well done guys. 👍

[@TheoriesofEverything]

Thank you. I'll be speaking with Chomsky next week. If you have questions, please leave it soon in r/TheoriesOfEverything.

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

@@TheoriesofEverything What a treat! Something to look forward to ! Will send a question - need to ruminate 🤔

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

@@TheoriesofEverything would love Prof Chomsky to elaborate on his statement that “The US Constitution was framed to thwart the democratic institutions of most of the public”. Perhaps he could provide some historical background and explain what changes are required to the Constitution, in order for the US to become a true democracy.

[@haya4895]

thank you for the nice diverse interview, lots of topics were discussed in this one hour. will you make another interview with him? if so , as you are asking him casually,(I felt after all he talks with us as his children or grand children who always ask for his advice) how does he look at himself? how does he puts his ego on check ? considering that he is one of the best intellectuals on earth, yet he is so considerate and humble. how could he achieve this level ? is he proud of himself, in terms of feeling superior may be, because of what he achieves? please ask him if you can ,thanx

[@kennyw871]

I would loved to have heard untethered conversations with Chomsky and the late Dr. Alan Watts. These two speak endlessly while changing subjects seamlessly.

[@kirglow4639]

Thank you for the great interview

[@Luziao]

"Religion is based on the assumption that God is an idiot". Noam Chomsky

[@douglasthomson4550]

Yes, I liked that one too....

[@anthonybrett]

Yeah its good, but its a quote that so many will take the wrong way and totally misquote. The idiot is always your dishonest "self". Not God.

[@paharipant2]

@@anthonybrett True. its such a good line...sharp AF.

[@kensurrency2564]

Brett Anthony That’s pretty profound ... so ... are you saying that religion is a belief system we created in order to fool ourselves into justifying whatever we want to do? A loophole around natural moral law? I like where that idea takes us.

[@breft3416]

I laughed so hard I had to stop the video! Kinda sums it up, doesn't it?

[@zenarcade64]

Glad to see Noam still going strong in his '90s!

[@bueshkobob1090]

14:50 holds the greatest Quote I have ever heard Noam utter. It is Backed up with such raw common sense and delivered with plain speak. "....and then I did get an insight, religion is based around the idea that God is an idiot." Fucking BRILLIANT. I LOVE THIS MAN!!!!

[@FZ2HELL]

Great interview... A complete different line of questions and I was very curious about his views on the abstract as opposed to politics and power. Thanks

[@abdurrazzaq2314]

To paraphrase Pankaj Mishra that my most dominating thought of any day at any given time is one that of absolute ignorance, that I am an absolute ignorant. By reading and listening to people like Professor Chomsky and others, not only that feeling bites harder but it also lessens the ignorance.

[@jameshamilton9051]

“With disdain I will throw my gauntlet full in the face of the world, and see the collapse of this pygmy giant whose fall will not stifle my ardour. Then will I wander god-like and victorious through the ruins of the world. and, giving my words an active force, I will feel equal to the Creator." “Thus heaven I’ve forfeited, I know it full well. My soul, once true to God, Is chosen for hell.” A portion of Karl Marx’s poems, a hero of Noam Chomsky.

[@stonetrouble5053]

You, on the other hand, are still afraid of an imaginary, cruel God-Monster. Eternal hell! You have forfeited all out of fear. Your monster does not exist. Do something useful, fearful slave!

[@Hassanthehorse]

Out of all things you could criticize Marx for, you choose the subject of one poem? I don't see anything wrong with someone writing an edgy poem about their desire for omnipotent power/destruction, nor do I see anything inherently wrong with rejecting religion. Plenty of religious texts are about the desire for power, and religion is, among other things, a socially acceptable way to express that desire by projecting it onto whatever god-like being you choose to believe in.

[@jameshamilton9051]

stonetrouble why would I fear a loving father? You have been taught the false sectarian god.

[@jameshamilton9051]

Sam Harris, phD in neurosticen. Collector of skins, edgy is one thing, obsessed is another. Engels described Marx as, “the monster possessed by ten thousand devils." Here is another ditty Marx wrote, “To thee my verses, unbridled and daring, Shall mount, O Satan, king of the banquet. Away with thy sprinkling, O priest, and thy droning. For never shall Satan, O priest, stand behind thee. Thy breath, O Satan, my verses inspires, When from my bosom the gods I defy. Of kings pontifical, of kings inhuman: Thine is the lightning that sets minds to shaking. O soul that wanderest far from the straight way, Satan is merciful. See Heloisa! Like the whirlwind spreading its wings, He passes, O people, Satan the great! Hail, of reason the great Vindicator! Sacred to thee shall rise incense and vows! Thou hast the god of the priest disenthroned.”

[@ericm966]

I appreciated the opening volley of questions. It was a bit disappointing that Chomsky shut down the conversation on reclaiming the word God and whether consciousness is derived from the material world or infused/tuned from a yet unknown field. But that is a pretty esoteric topic when he's more concerned with nuclear war and climate change. It was worth a shot though! Glad you got good audio of him. Other recent interviews of Noam were struggling for good volume levels and breaking up.

[@brendansmith2258]

"But what if that's God??" These guys need to examine the Philosophy of language

[@TheoriesofEverything]

I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt

[@Numidium_]

@@TheoriesofEverything I am too late then. I had a question but never mind

[@fairdose]

Chomsky is probably one of the last living wise men on Earth. In India, he would be called a "Baba", a name of veneration for his wisdom. In Native American culture, he would be considered a Wisdom Keeper or an Elder. It's so sad know that we're witnessing the extinction of this breed of men.

[@baraka99]

Robert Wolf (marxist economist)

[@nfwerner2860]

"Having a job is placing yourself under the control of an autocrat, worse than Stalin". Really? I have had unpleasant work relationships with several companies, but none had the authority to send me to a gulag! Chomsky should have been asked what system he advocates which has no autocrats.

[@ismaelcerda5565]

He wants an anarchistic form of government. If it don’t benefit the masses, overthrow it.

[@Scuor2]

I think he's being hyperbolic just to challenge the automatic assumption work good. I don't like invoking murderous dictators but it's pretty common in arguememts. Later on he kinda defends America as not having gulags 🤷‍♂️

[@leftalonetalking991]

Very good interview, you asked him a lot of questions I've never heard him answer before.

[@djohnson5675]

This is the best noam interview I've heard in quite a while. good work. disappointed he hasn't indulged in cannabis. never too late!

[@pemonline3395]

If one person believes the unbelievable it's called insanity. If it's lots of people it's called Religion.

[@jonaddyorig]

@Joseph Henderson - I was going to ask how you came to that conclusion but not sure I really care ... unless of course you have some evidence for whichever flavour of God you believe in?

[@johntavers6878]

at the beginning, was he going to say "go outside"? guess that would make his dogs go crazy?

[@barquerojuancarlos7253]

yes, i think any dog owner would agree.

[@pickletown]

I imagine he was going to say that he walks. That's usually the pup trigger word.

[@lonelycubicle]

John Tavers Thanks, I missed the joke

[@tristanrentz7687]

Nails it again, if through disappointingly naive (though verbose) interviewersw who - like most desperate over-thinkers who seem to fall far short of capably grasping reality - ask (themselves) far too many of the wrong questions. It's comical, but on that note: hats off to his gentle, patient, humble handling, which he manages to execute despite incredible forthrightness. What a guy! And still so sharp despite such advanced years. A great example of what sustained activity can do for the quality of ageing human lives.

[@2tedros]

I think this is the best interview I've ever understood of in a simple words & sense, and that if it wasn't for the interviewers: simplicity wouldn't be possible at all! Tx!

[@heartofodds]

It may be obvious to many of you. But if you're a bit slow, like me, in grasping Chomsky's insights, the nature of his perspective: he's obviously very well informed about what has happened. But the key to understanding much of his thinking is to see things like a child. Resisting the conditioning influence of societies on one's consciousness. To resist/examine the assumptions imposed/foisted on you by all your institutions. Avoiding prejudices and biases of our narrow tribalisms. To measure everything against the unadulterated mind/person. Taking the promises and aspirations of our guiding documents and ideas at face value. Reasserting them. Taking as your base the human being with his/her human rights. It is difficult to find an 'educator' of any kind who is untouched by the conditioning of the world. It can be disorienting to hear someone who is not speaking from a faulty premise or a hidden agenda. Which I would argue is almost the most important question about any person in such a position. What's underneath it all if we dig down? "What 'business' are we in anyway?" We may come to it like a former prisoner or a person with a kind of ptsd, back to a land that is safe, with loving friends, where enemies and intrigue do not abound. In need of re-calibration.

[@Jmriccitelli]

Thank you for typing a guide on what Chomsky is talking about, extremely helpful

[@TheoriesofEverything]

I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt

[@Matt-iy3zy]

I told my supervisor (he and I have a great working relationship) about Noam Chomsky tonight. I can’t wait till he comes back from his day off with an altered viewpoint on the world. Noam Chomsky is not an idol but a beacon from the 20th century for brilliant thought which should not be lost. My hope is we have those who can maintain and grow on this type of grounded, commonsensical and genius thinking.

[@pascalsoucy8896]

Great interview guys, thanks. Thank you always to Noam for his insightful thinking.

[@TheoriesofEverything]

I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt

[@terrytari1891]

@@TheoriesofEverything I just to Dr Chomsky to cancel that interview. Since this one was a farce!

[@terrytari1891]

Both of you are silly but you are the worse Curt!

[@pauline9085]

Prashant Trivedi said that mythology is "My Truth". God is divine, is perfection, is "golden ratio", is perfect fractality, is perfect heart beat of a human being that give immunity to sickness.

[@bander9]

great teacher, I could listen to him for hours on.

[@TheoriesofEverything]

I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt

[@toniat8278]

Yeah I know what he talking about having a job... I’m retired after 27 years and I feel much more free because they controlled what we did on as well as off the job. It was in our code of conduct...

[@timothydavid4975]

I love the interview and the many more recent ones in the past 5 years but Jesus dudes in his 90s its crazy how he has the GRIT to stay up to date everything until his end date.

[@TheoriesofEverything]

I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt

[@JavierBonillaC]

If alien life told me “send us your best” and I was in charge of the decision, I’d send Chomsky for sure.

[@johnmorgan6724]

"well that dicussion can only by pursued if you have some notion"

[@charlesbourgoigne2130]

thank you for the interview

[@masudawan8357]

Who needs to go to university while Chomsky is still with us.

[@jeremyreagan9085]

No I have written Chomsky for many years he is interested in Christian Anarchism he just does not have the time to study it. He is interested in these topics as a matter learning about authors he may not have read yet. If you write him he will respond. I consider him the only intellectual in the United States I respect he is a very kind man.

[@geoffreynhill2833]

Check in at 24 mins for Prof Chomsky on the founding of the Neo-Liberal Programme, the Establishment's response to the ideals ("anarchy") of the Sixties.

[@Pinki2019]

The most interesting part of this to me was at 31:41: Having a job is a severe attack on human rights and dignity, and pointing out that 19th century workers and the Republican Party tended to view wage labor as temporary slavery till you had the chance to become free again. I don't agree with a lot of Chomsky's politics, but I love how he gets us to question contemporary conventional thinking in ways you don't hear very often.

[@russells1902]

Or maybe it's just the grumblings of an old anarchist crackpot that he is

[@alkintugsal7563]

So correct having a job is soul destroying person works all their lives to survive instead of doing what they prefer to do it is important to work but not in the style of this rat race for that reason Scandinavians trying to reduce working days to 4 rather than 5 so person has some more freedom for themselves.

[@groshan]

A great wise man. Respect!

[@patriciogudino7880]

Since we are little children we get accustomed to believe that what is in our minds is true, the fact that we have something in our minds makes believe it is true and it's not. Those " aha" moments we come about every once in a while happen because the mind gets out of the way and we see with something else. Having something in your mind and holding it as fact is a process that happen only in the mind and it is like writing something in a blackboard when it comes to proveability they are both the same, seing something written in a wall or having it in our mind is the absolute same, just a mark in a blank space. Mind don't deal with facts, but speculation and ideas

[@ishmig3967]

clearly he hasn’t read the demands of the BLM demands, nothing constructive can come out of defunding the police

[@ishmig3967]

al luvial I suggest you watch the darkhorse podcast by bret weinstein (kzbin.info ) if you’re really interested in expanding your horizon beyond the tribalistic thinking, if you are truly interested in learning something, otherwise by all means please continue on your ideological path.

[@hhhahahhhahha]

@@ishmig3967 you didnt make an argument you just linked to a podcast, the point of police defunding is that so much of state budgets are allocated towards police and away from social programs, that is what people would prefer. I dont know how effective it is when there are larger structural problems that are issues of capitalism but that is what theyre asking for and it is not unreasonable and at least theyre questioning power rather than being a boot licker like you are

[@ishmig3967]

Hus Rad I linked the podcast because the issue is far more complex than it is being layed out to be. Defunding the police would certainly in the short term increase crime rates and create more corrupt police. If you’re really interested in questioning then maybe you should question the narrative of BLM itself. Where is the opposite side that says Black lives don’t matter? It’s a non argument. 98% of Americans aren’t racist. There is a argument to be made for the concentration of opportunity on the side of big corporations but that has nothing to do with critical race theory. Instead of criticizing me let’s make this a constructive discussion. Your criticism of me without really knowing me just sugests to me that you aren’t really interested in trying to figure out the truth but are playing the tribal game of left vs right.

[@ishmig3967]

check out the podcast of hughes coleman on BLM: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jaWcZpaqZ8x8iaM

[@ishmig3967]

www.google.com/amp/s/www.oregonlive.com/crime/2020/07/portland-police-record-highest-number-of-death-investigations-in-single-month-in-more-than-three-decades.html%3foutputType=amp

[@henryberrylowry9512]

"Having a job means placing yourself under the rule of an autocratic ruler....that Stalin couldn't have dreamed of." Fucking genius. And of course apt.

[@MrResearcher122]

Respect.

[@kwnorton5834]

These are the words undeniably brilliant. I wonder if he is aware that the Tibetan Buddhists have a philosophy/“religion” which directly speaks to this view? Of course we’re organic, mortal beings and as far as we understand “consciousness” comes from life - our own lives and the lives of all other “animals.”

[@henryberrylowry9512]

"The material world keeps changing as we understand more. So the question whether something transcends the material world is just a way of saying we don't know how to incorporate it within our intelligible theories." (paragraph 252) " Matter, on the contrary, is not an existent thing, but is being in the form of a universal, or in the form of a Notion. Reason which is still instinctive makes this correct distinction, without being aware that just by testing the law on all sensuous being, it gets rid of the merely sensuous being of the law, and when it interprets the moments of the law as 'matters', their essential nature has become for Reason a universal, and as such is expressed as a non-sensuous thing of sense, as an incorporeal and yet objective being." Hegel Phenomenology of Spirit (Miller; pg 154)

[@kennyw871]

Now, we need to hear from Karl Marx on the subject of materialism.

[@imyourhuckleberry8009]

Very true , atonement is of no value to one who cannot control their senses. A sinful activity cannot be counteracted by a pious activity. Thus real prāyaścitta, atonement, is the awakening of our dormant spiritual consciousness. When one re-awakens their love for God, their is no more desire for material enjoyment, the selfish "enjoyer" spirit is extinguished.

[@dayvonjenkins2274]

Damn look at all this books I wanna have my own house and day so I can have my own library and still write books

[@kimsherlock8969]

Noam Chomsky Thankyou for year's and year's of education. Love you.

[@omarsolomon7156]

Why are such low level ignoramuses questioning such a great intellect . Like it's a fetish or notch on the board etc . GOD bless Noam Chomsky

[@Tony-hv6mo]

The media abandoned their search for truth in search of a better world long ago, and have abandoned Chomsky in kind. I do wish the interview was a bit more focused, but at least someone is doing the work of keeping Chomsky on the airwaves.

[@maspoetry1]

Having suffered school, and passed Uni studying things I didn't care about (not nearly at the level Chomsky mentions), I lately read about Dewey, Montessori, Bandura, Brunen, Bronfrenbrenner, Steiner, MacMillan, Waldorf schools, forest schools. Those are quite expensive for me to pay though.

[@andrefilipe9080]

Not gonna lie, was about to leave this video after the first question. Then I stayed, now I wish I had left.

[@baheer156]

why?

[@sibengerard1856]

I HOLD ON TO MY FIRMLY TO MY RESPECT FOR CHOMSKY'S INTEGRITY AS AN INTELLECTUAL, TO SAY THAT, I FIND HIM EXCESSIVE/SUPERFICIAL AT CERTAIN INTERVALS. I BELIEF, THAT AN INTELLECTUAL SHOULD NOT ONLY BE A CRITIC OF THE POLITICAL SYSTEM AND ITS PRESIDENTS, BUT AS WELL A CRITIC OF THE ''SOCIETY'' THAT PRODUCES OR TOLERATES THOSE SYSTEMS AND PRESIDENTS.

[@sheilamacdougal9948]

25:58 Curt somebody interrupts Chomsky to make an obtuse remark, obviously not following anything that is being said (although there is nothing complicated or profound about it).

[@moesypittounikos]

Chomsky has the patience of a saint.

[@sheilamacdougal9948]

@@moesypittounikos Chomsky loves publicity, and especially the hero worship by people like the interviewers, and yourself.

[@viclimited9081]

.....dick heads are rarely complicated or profound.

[@sheilamacdougal9948]

@@viclimited9081 For the most part that's probably true. However, denying obvious reality sometimes requires a degree of complication - I wouldn't call it profundity - and Chomsky has occasionally been good at that. For instance, when he was trying to deny or minimise the genocidal massacres by Pol Pot, he went to great length to impugn the motives and credibility of escaping refugees who reported on the atrocities. Obscene certainly, thus dickheaded in the extreme in your more technical terminology, yet somewhat complicated. Similarly, after denying that Holocaust-denial was anti-Semitic, and after claiming that France's leading Holocaust-denier was just "an apolitical liberal" and not anti-Semitic, Chomsky went to some length to argue that Holocaust denial in some imagined world might not be anti-Semitic. Dickheaded and also quite stupid, certainly, but having a degree of complication. Similarly for his attempts to present Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran as peace-loving victims of U.S. and Israeli aggression, although admittedly the method he relies on there is primarily lying and ignoring inconvenient facts, the same method he has employed in blaming the U.S for the Cold War. But I'm in general agreement that Chomsky's standard blaming of the democracies and especially the U.S. for every problem or conflict in which they are remotely implicated is typically both simple-minded and dickheaded.

[@viclimited9081]

@@sheilamacdougal9948 .....more stories of things that never happened - by people who were never there.....yawn.

[@grahamrogers3345]

The whole point of the gospel is that we cannot live up to God's standards hence our need for salvation.

[@ethangburke]

Well done. Excellent interview!

[@TheoriesofEverything]

I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt

[@Primitarian]

"There is no clear notion of materialism. By materialism we mean that which we more or less understand." A well-considered answer to an excellent question.

[@dickdrapper5491]

Why is that a well-considered answer? Its a pretty meaningless answer. Might as well have said "I don't know what you mean by materialism".

[@Primitarian]

@@dickdrapper5491 I didn't see it that way. To me, he was not saying, "I don't know what you mean by materialism." On the contrary, he was saying he does know (i.e., "By materialism we mean that which we more or less understand") but that, as such, materialism is a concept that is next to meaningless. There is a difference. Many assume that materialism means the same as believing in science and dismissing superstition. There is some justice to this view, but it's often carried to the point of making immense, sweeping claims that turn out to be unsupported, e.g., that modern science has dispensed with such traditional or common-sense notions as freedom, responsibility, or morality. It is true that modern science is largely materialistic, but it is not true that it disproves any of these notions. Science does provide a well-defined account of matter in some respects that lend to quantitative analysis--e.g., for prediction of motion, forces, interactions among elements. But beyond this, as Prof Chomsky points out, it provides no clear notion of what matter is ultimately, such that it has little to say ultimately about freedom, responsibility, etc. Accordingly, to my mind, his answer was quite meaningful--indeed, to the point where many are liable to disagree--since he is doing nothing less than defending traditional humanistic notions against scientific reductionism. And he did so in way that was plain, direct and precise and thus, to my mind, in a way that was well considered.

[@Primitarian]

@@kennethboykins264 I already watched it. He has summarized his view of the mind-body problem in words to the following effect: At one time, science believed there was no ghost in the machine, now it realizes there is no machine. He was definitely holding back, in part because the mainstream, which largely takes an absolutist materialism for granted, might easily misunderstand him.

[@QoraxAudio]

In the first few minutes it sounds like the interviewer confuses atheism vs religion with materialist determinism vs unpredictability of physics (i.e. Laplace's demon vs quantum mechanics).

[@mihaimilan9598]

I agree. It seemed like they equate such nuanced views even as deism (or like you say a postulation that some unknown entity could indeed have predictive powers over these seemingly random or chaotic phenomena) with religion, when even for a hard line atheist like myself that is stretching it. But I also fully recognise my own confusion with Noam's. Whenever I am asked what god is I feel confusion at which definition to pick. It is bewildering to me that the conversation is at all popular in philosophy. It's just a bizarre concept our species came up with. It explains nothing and I find the whole thing damaging and intellectually utterly pointless.

[@QoraxAudio]

@@mihaimilan9598 Without assuming a specific definition of "god" of a certain religion, just the word "god" can even be part of a fully materialist word. Pandeism is a fine example of that (belief in one universal particle/energy of which everything is made of). However, Laplace's demon doesn't even necessarily needs an entity for the thought experiment itself. It can be replaced by an object like a calculating device for example. What it does need, is the assumption of classical physics that every action has its corresponding reaction that's always the same under the same circumstances when all variables in the universe are known. Something that's (partially) debunked by quantum mechanics; particles in the same state under the same circumstances can produce various results. However, quantum mechanics don't correlate well with most other "classical/traditional branches" of physics. My point was more like: the discussion of the existence of free will vs determinism isn't related to religion specifically, while the interviewers seemed to think so.

[@kd6613]

Great job! Although I am puzzled as why the audiences here think you guys are asking weird questions.

[@helloitismetomato]

They get an interview with Noam Chomsky and the first thing they ask is if he watches Rick and Morty...wow. I couldn't have come up with something more stupid if I tried for a 1000 years.

[@geralddecaire6164]

You need more nuanced social skills. In context, it was clearly meant as a joke. They think of Noam as a serious intellectual and hit him with that question obviously tongue in cheek.

[@samyamoy]

You need to watch Rick & Morty!

[@elinannestad5320]

I don't know who Rick and Morty are, but I felt the question was in the spirit of an impulse of affection. Chomsky did not seem to mind. He replied in kind, about his dog.

[@m.patsyfauntleroy9645]

EQUALITY IS THE MASTERY " KNOW THYSELF . . . " STUDY SELF - ACTUALITY I AM WONDERFULL LIKE WE ALL ARE D.O.B PROOF 100% COALITION REMEMBER " NO MAN IS AN ISLAND " WITH " EACH ONE TEACH ONE " AWARENESS !

[@nicolinogiancola9644]

With all my mega respects for Chomsky: There is something that Chomsky can never ' apprehend' . In jazz, thought is the enemy of improvisation. Chomsky has incarcerated himself in his analytical mind. There are things that live in the unconscious that thinking destroys. There are dimensions of the human mind , Chomsky will never know.

[@paharipant2]

Such gems - "having a job is placing yourself under the control of an autocrat, worse than Stalin". Beautiful.

[@softcolly8753]

With the option of getting another job or starting your own company. Hardly comparable.

[@roberttulba6990]

There is no intellectual I find it more beneficial and enlightening to listen to than Noam Chomsky. Although, given the current political climate, I would pay quite a bit to hear what Gore Vidal and Christopher Hitchens would have to say about the rise of authoritarianism and fascism in the U.S. and abroad.

[@MrBallynally2]

Put him in a chair w Douglas Murray and see what happens. I used to be such a big fan of Chomsky b since then focused on the flaws of his arguments. I still support many of his views about education b his opinions about the US and politics only focuses on a narrow band. It's just stale confirmation bias as far as im concerned.

[@paulvandijck6476]

@Sam Rich71 - I am a Dutchman and I entirely agree with you. But I am not anti-American! Best wishes to all American women and men, who are decent working people!

[@MrBallynally2]

@Sam Rich71 i used to think it was the truth and there is still some validity in his arguments but as i got older and more aware of other views and facts i realised that his views were rather onesided and narrowminded. It comes with getting older and accumulating more knowledge.

[@davidpretiz4439]

The search for the truth...Chomsky hits the nail on the head.

[@JoshLavian]

Chomsky comes to the conclusion that “religion is based on the assumption that God is an idiot” because his grandfather broke Talmudic law and smoked on Passover. This is the most ludicrous conclusion to come to. Maybe his grandfather was senile, or perhaps he knew exactly what he was doing and was breaking the law-like many people, even Orthodox people, do when it comes to this or that specific rule, and most often with smoking, since they can't stop themselves-and Chomsky’s father just explained it to him with a dismissive response because he didn’t want to get too much into it with his 10 year old son who was seeing something he shouldn’t have seen. To come to the conclusion that “religion is based on the assumption that God is an idiot” because one Jewish man did something one night is absurd. He’s been saying this for decades and it never made any sense.

[@TheTimbo911]

What makes less sense? Is that magical person in the sky is followed by many. That one guy...you know....this guy with a so-called Jesus name. Who apparently came from years ago? It's kind of the same thing!

[@JoshLavian]

@@TheTimbo911 Huh?

[@JoshLavian]

@Jeff Driscoll Excellently argued. I am most impressed, especially, with your attention to detail and the examples you provided to make your point with.

[@JoshLavian]

@Jeff Driscoll Oh, no. I'm very well aware that you're unable to argue. I was simply exposing you for it.

[@breft3416]

The literal twinkle in Noam's eye as he tells a story from childhood that marginally influenced his life and stunned his young interviewers into silence might have told you that he was speaking ironically, humorously and very thoughtfully. Did you listen to anything he said before telling the story? Nope.

[@TheJonnyEnglish]

I love Chomsky because no matter how stupid the questions are I always learn something from him.

[@MooshBoosh]

Thank you for this. Love Chomsky's thoughts on things.

[@TheoriesofEverything]

I'm speaking to Chomsky again this week, so if there are any Q's you have, please quickly leave them. It won't be regarding politics but instead cognitive science / linguistics. - Curt

[@terrytari1891]

@@TheoriesofEverything I love Dr Chomsky, but you 2 Frat boys are silly!

[@terrytari1891]

@@TheoriesofEverything Run Dr Chomsky

[@NoUsernamae]

I'm really curious about why a man like Chomsky, who very obviously knows there's far more to the mind and consciousness that we can analyse and articulate on our own, would have no interest in weed or psychedelics, that obviously change something in the way you perceive and think. It seems he likes sticking to things that can be proven (even though he seemed to find the idea of archetypes interesting), I'd really love to see a somewhat in depth discussion of this. What is it that stopped Chomsky from wanting to experience something that can't be called real in the realm of science, when it's obvious the realm of science is limited? I'm sure he has a shit tonne of ideas that are out of the box that he either refuses to think about or puts on the side due to their unprovability.

[@NoUsernamae]

@Goth “Jedi Master Engineer” Bosch simple minded answers talking about wisdom are a nice touch of irony

[@donnyh3497]

Imagine a padded helmet wearer like SyeTen or Ray Comfort trying to talk to a genius like this

[@kenelkind117]

Consciousness exists in order to establish evolutionary possibilities by Grooving as One, It is our first step of evolving intelligently. Be the One, the musical philosophy, we’re all in the band & only need to entrain for so long, each day

[@lindltailor]

Chomsky appears to favor direct democracy as the highest ideal, and, his criticism of what we have today is that there’s no middle ground between a direct democracy and autocracy, when in fact there are many shades of republicanism inside of a democracy, in order to have specialization, you need expert politicians. Not every ordinary farmer in America is going to be able to out-strategize or outsmart what world is able to produce in terms of Machiavellian fascist thinkers from autocratic empires. How are you gonna ultimately defend your farm from aggressors if there’s no specialization or political hierarchy? His real argument seems to be against ‘broken’ capitalism, but the same thing can be said for ‘broken’ democracy, since both claim to be meritocratic. The free market was after all supposed to be meritocratic in conception, at least that’s the presumption, one dollar one vote, and if it’s not meritocratic then maybe we can fix it just like we can also fix democracy and government to protect the average citizen from errant actors in a free market . His argument is against too much republicanism, therefore nepotism, which can lead to autocratic concentration of power. But otherwise this is a hypocrisy, favoring failed government institutions over failed market regulations. Why not fix both and admit both have their respective utility

[@Kolmir]

It can't be fixed directly. Neoliberalism, perfect free market invisible hand, and socialism/communism on the other hand are unrealistic, false, and utopian concepts. See RebelWisdom War on Sensemaking or read DS Willson if you want to know more about it. This article can also serve as an introduction web.archive.org/web/20200623015648/slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/ Or just watch kzbin.info/www/bejne/iZuxg6eoj8-enKc

[@lindltailor]

@@Kolmir Thanks, watched the TedTalk video. While I think we can dismiss the gimmicky idea that evolutionary biology can be applied to economics, I guess to illustrate his point (after all Ted Talks need a lot of gimmicks because the audience is pretty low-brow). Economics is part of psychology, can have nothing to do with biology. Let's move on to the salient points. First, on negative externalities. This is an age-old subject which I feel could be handled precisely as Adam Smith prescribed, if we would only follow his advice, by regulating and limiting monopolies. I mean we have deviated terribly in the opposite direction, by glorifying monopolies, securing monopolies and worshiping them. All we really need to do is turn back to the principle that competition is good for progress, and no players in the market should be able to unfairly manipulate the markets to their advantage (such as hiding negative externalities from consumers or the government). This takes me back to my OP - we only really need regulation to cut down on such unfair activity, which actually reduces competition and thereby innovation, increases negative externalities, and that would return us to a happier balance. The reason we are where we are today is because in the the Great Depression we saw the one redeeming value of monopolies was in providing stability in the labor markets during times of recession since individual well-being was severely impacted by lack of opportunity. I happen to think that can be addressed not by institutionalizing monopolies which is to the detriment of so much else, but by unionizing (also prescribed in Wealth of Nations) and by means of federal unemployment insurance. Not tackling it that way was the result of our hyper irrational fear of all things socialism, communism and even Keynesianism, which drove us away from common sense. So, we could turn back into incentivizing unions and instituting better unemployment subsidies, and part of that would be health care protections. Next, on getting the influence of money out of politics from lobby groups and big industry - the answer here has a lot of overlap with above. Once you regulate back the incentives for all these negative behaviors wrought by monopolies, you automatically mitigate some of the effects of money on making policy, and the positive feedback loop. Not all but some. The rest of the problem could be fixed by ensuring the voting public has clear and balanced sources of information about where money in politics comes from (i.e. a balanced media and reporting) considering that the media are themselves profit-taking monopolies at present and not reliable as sources of democratic information. This would be further improved by bringing back the FCC Fairness Doctrine which Regan repealed, and the feedback loop later got bolstered by the Citizen's United decision. Finally, I think we can fix the model of corporations and their ruthless profit-taking at the source. Not as Weinstein suggest at a macro level by negative cost accounting but see ideas put forth such as: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3042761 and facebook.com/watch/?v=1844043689199745 The thing I agree with Weinstein the most on is if the framers of the constitution put in the bill of rights something about protecting the environment. That would ensure the ultimate goal is not just protecting our rights and the union, but also the physical geography in which we protect those rights and union.