[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
doogie wrote:
Prof. X and Zepplin are both semi-illiterate at best.
Zap was just saying that declaring Chomsky a brainiac means jack-shit. Zap thinks I’m Einstein’s smarter, older brother. Doesn’t mean shit.
The point is NO ONE would argue that he(Zap) is a world leading intellect but Chompsky has quite a bit of credentials to in order for that type of assesment to even be made.
If you don’t like semi-illiterate posts then why do you even bother to type:)[/quote]
Why not? My IQ tests indicate a genius level IQ, I was a National Merit Scholar, made Deans list and have a BS in Chemical Engineering.
The thing that separates me from Chomsky is I have a real conscience and I refuse to make a living by bullshitting people.
Chomsky appears to tell disaffected people what they want to hear instead of the truth. Of course I have not read most of his stuff because my bullshit detector goes off full force whenever I try. Maybe he is a greater intellectual than I am, I just don’t see it in what I have seen.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Why not? My IQ tests indicate a genius level IQ, I was a National Merit Scholar, made Deans list and have a BS in Chemical Engineering.
[/quote]
Ah, Zap… most people, I would just make fun of for this post.
[quote]
Chomsky appears to tell disaffected people what they want to hear instead of the truth.[/quote]
[quote]Professor X wrote:
doogie wrote:
Prof. X and Zepplin are both semi-illiterate at best.
Some of you need to seriously consider surgically removing that ass-stick.[/quote]
Prof. X, you have made this thread funny beyond belief. I began reading, believed my time wasted, and lo and behold, there were golden eggs placed smartly throughout this thread to keep my interest. This Bud’s for you.
Intellectuals Poll is a list of the 100 most important living public intellectuals in the world, which has been compiled by the Prospect Magazine (UK), on the basis of a reader’s ballot consisted of more than 20,000 votes.
Name ten others off the top of your head. Maybe that’s how they decided on Gnome. He’s the only one they knew.
And being the most quoted doesn’t mean you’re right - it just means other people quote you. Maybe they do so to highlight the dopiness of many of his positions. It wouldn’t be hard and you get a pretty good scalp along the way.
BTW If you can get through Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent you deserve a medal. It has to be a contender as the most boring, repetitious book ever written (as voted by me). That’s what’s fascinating about him. So many people drool over his polemics but few have the courage to drudge through them - and for good reason: they suck. [/quote]
Admitedly Consent can be a bit dry at times and his speeches are not full of fire and brimstone. However, he is methodical in his logic and for the most part uses everyday language to get his points across.
But the point is whether what he says is the truth or not. That is what matters most not his avoidence of oratory.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Zeppelin795 wrote:
doogie wrote:
Prof. X and Zepplin are both semi-illiterate at best.
Zap was just saying that declaring Chomsky a brainiac means jack-shit. Zap thinks I’m Einstein’s smarter, older brother. Doesn’t mean shit.
The point is NO ONE would argue that he(Zap) is a world leading intellect but Chompsky has quite a bit of credentials to in order for that type of assesment to even be made.
If you don’t like semi-illiterate posts then why do you even bother to type:)
Why not? My IQ tests indicate a genius level IQ, I was a National Merit Scholar, made Deans list and have a BS in Chemical Engineering.
The thing that separates me from Chomsky is I have a real conscience and I refuse to make a living by bullshitting people.
Chomsky appears to tell disaffected people what they want to hear instead of the truth. Of course I have not read most of his stuff because my bullshit detector goes off full force whenever I try. Maybe he is a greater intellectual than I am, I just don’t see it in what I have seen.
[/quote]
Get your bullshit dectector checked. It is in serious need of an overhaul.
It is frightening that you could (presumably) get through the first chapter of that book, and not be shaken by its arguments. I have read few things as powerful as that, in particular the five filters that news get through before being published.[/quote]
You’re right! I made a mistake. I meant “Deterring Democracy”! I tried reading it about 10 years ago and it was so repetitious it bored me to tears. I bought “DD” at the same time as “Manufacturing Consent”, tried to get through it, got bored stiff so have left “Consent” unread. On your recommendation I’ll have a crack at it -I had a quick look last night and it piqued my interest. So thank you.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Why not? My IQ tests indicate a genius level IQ, I was a National Merit Scholar, made Deans list and have a BS in Chemical Engineering.
Ah, Zap… most people, I would just make fun of for this post.
…[/quote]
Of course it was meant for humor value, but it is true.
It is frightening that you could (presumably) get through the first chapter of that book, and not be shaken by its arguments. I have read few things as powerful as that, in particular the five filters that news get through before being published.
You’re right! I made a mistake. I meant “Deterring Democracy”! I tried reading it about 10 years ago and it was so repetitious it bored me to tears. I bought “DD” at the same time as “Manufacturing Consent”, tried to get through it, got bored stiff so have left “Consent” unread. On your recommendation I’ll have a crack at it -I had a quick look last night and it piqued my interest. So thank you.
[/quote]
The funny thing is that, as much as I like all his writings, and as much as the first chapter in “Manufacturing Consent” is my favourite piece of his writing, the rest of the book is indeed tedious, though I suppose necessary to support his thesis. Let me know how the reading goes, and may the Schartz be with you always!
