...well I hope you don't throw out everything these authors wrote but rather examine their works with a critical eye...and recognize various alternative viewpoints and biases in addition to admiring extraordinarily keen insights or profound statements.
On Nov 25, 1:20 pm, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SO, I must have overlooked them in your library...fodder for the book club? > Whilst we are at it we better spell it right ..*Ayn Rand.* > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Jason (Memphis) > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > ...but he's worth reading and so is Ann Rand. > > > On Nov 25, 12:57 pm, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Okay, rip my liver out but Noam's entourage reminds me of Ann > > Rand's...bit > > > of a parade of pedestals.. > > > > OUCH!..that hurt in advance! > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Jason (Memphis) < > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > I think that Noam (my impression) believes that handing people a > > > > science of human behavior that is essentially a handbook for > > > > predicting and controlling people is sort of like handing nuclear > > > > weapons to a terrorist group. Therefore, only the elite few (my > > > > impression) should be privy to those techniques and that scientific > > > > discipline as that scientific discipline of human behavior unfolds. > > > > In addition, any attempt to develop such a scientific discipline > > > > should be thwarted but it's development is evitable (again, my > > > > impression of Noam). I don't know if that is even close but just my > > > > initial impression from what little that I have read of his works. > > > > > On Nov 25, 12:10 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > ornamentalmind, > > > > > > I think that my major criticism of Noam Chomsky is his lack of > > > > > scientific thinking especially making predictions or controlling > > > > > organisms. Most of what I've read are historical interpretations of > > > > > established facts and descriptions of something that has already > > > > > happened. He definitely has his facts in order. However, Noam > > seldom > > > > > attempts to make specific predictions of societal drifts that could > > be > > > > > verified--or at least he is not any better at predicting than other > > > > > historical experts. In addition, many of his followers do not > > > > > challenge what he says and most of what he says is said in such a way > > > > > that makes it hard to challenge (or test). Framing has been studied > > > > > extensively and the master of framing is Noam Chomsky himself. > > > > > > A particular (this is just one) criticism is that he wrote a review > > of > > > > > B.F. Skinner's "Verbal Behavior" (link below) and presented arguments > > > > > against Skinner that Skinner never claimed. I included Noam's case > > > > > against Skinner and a response by a behaviorist. Chomsky also > > accused > > > > > Skinner of advancing totalitarianism (much the same as Noam--directly > > > > > or indirectly--is accusing Obama). Yes, Skinner does advocate a > > > > > science of the behavior of organisms, which would embrace, explore, > > > > > refine and advance a scientific discipline to predict and control > > > > > organisms with scientific precision (including humans). That is what > > > > > Chomsky seems to fear (as do others including Skinner). The concept > > > > > of "freedom" or "free will" or the idea that humans are above the > > laws > > > > > of nature and therefore immune to scientific prediction and control > > is > > > > > a Western religion and Chomsky is sort of the Priest. At the end of > > > > > Skinner's "Science and Human Behavior," Skinner warned people that > > one > > > > > why to defend against the abuses of a science of human behavior is > > for > > > > > the masses to learn about how that science works and those scientific > > > > > techniques employed. Politicans and government have been working on > > a > > > > > science of human behavior for years (akin to Asimov's psycho- > > > > > history). The problem with Skinner is his ideal that such a > > > > > discipline should be transparent and open to the public and entire > > > > > scientific community. > > > > > > By the way, Chomsky (from the little I've read) is a fun read, and > > > > > he's a linguistic master. > > > > > > A Review of B.F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior (1959) by Noam Chomsky > > > > > >http://cogprints.org/1148/0/chomsky.htm > > > > > > On Chomsky's Review of Skinner's Verbal Behavior (Journal of the > > > > > Experimental Analysis of Behavior, volume 13, pages 83–99) > > >http://seab.envmed.rochester.edu/abstracts/jeababstracts/13/%2013-083... > > > > > > Jason > > > > -- > > > gnothe se auton- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- > gnothe se auton- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
