Rakesh, none of these people is here any more. On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 01:22:33PM -0700, Rakesh Bhandari wrote: > i want to be clear that my characterization of the chomsky criticism launched > by hitchens-georgia rondas-andrew hagen-leo casey as misguided, cynical and > perverse in no way implies that i think chomsky is above crititism. > > *i don't think wm lear on pen-l was effective in rebutting the charge that > chomsky had misanalyzed what the costs were and who had borne them in the > Marshall plan. wm lear relied on marcello dececco to defend chomsky; it seems > to differ from the more defensible account in anthony tuo-kofi gadzey's > political economy of power. > > **i do think chomsky can be criticized for not probing into the limits of some > of the opposition groups or states to American empire. this is not his focus, > but how he frames events can be challenged, i believe. however, unlike > hitchens, i do not think chomsky ever apologized for milosevic or the 'serbs'-- > in fact, i think he said the milosevic was guilty of more and greater war > crimes than usually recognized. > > ***i tend to think that chomsky underestimates the political economic basis of > foreign policy; i found edward herman's real terror network to be more helpful, > and i think herman's contribution is underestimated. > > ****i look forward to learning more about chomsky's linguistics. unlike jim > farmelant whose opinion i respect, i think i will find c's critque of skinner's > behaviorism (and quine's philosophy insofar as it was influenced by skinner) to > be persuasive. but aside from that, i appreciate chomsky's scientific audacity > in positing an unobservable structure to explain observed phenomena. such > scientific daring seems preferrable to me than a simple description of the > acquisition of language in a behaviorist mode. but i have no opinion on this, > and i suspect that i will be sympathetic to critiques of chomsky's innatism by > people like bickerton. > > chomsky is certainly not above criticism, but in my opinion it may have beneath > him to have responded to hitchens' and casey's grotesque criticisms. > > Rakesh > > > >
-- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
