This is in no way a defense of Chomsky's views in general, btw, although I do agree with him on his interpretation of the plant bombing.
Conversation
Replying to
A characteristic of all the so-called New Atheists is that they appear to be very convinced they, themselves, lack petty motivations.
1
1
Replying to
That's a take which is laughable to anyone who understands half as much about human motivation as they profess to do. It shows, here.
1
Replying to
"I, Sam Harris, am here to engage you in fruitful conversation. What constitutes fruitful conversation is equal to my definition of such."
1
Replying to
The attempt to find common ground is visibly disingenuous, inasmuch as the easiest way to find common ground is to respond directly.
1
Replying to
... not to entangle the person *you approached for debate* in some morass of verbal cliches and thought experiments.
1
Replying to
In that sense, Chomsky's anger and vitriol is both entirely justified and entirely expected, regardless of what you may think of his views.
1
Replying to
To me the only standout criticism of Chomsky here is that his language is insufferably academic and stilted. But so too with Harris!
1
Replying to
Lastly, the implication that Harris published this letter "just to show the difficulty of debating" is completely, utterly ridiculous.
1
Replying to
Who would do such a pathetic thing? Does anyone need a demonstration that debate, particularly hostile debate, is hard?
Be honest...
1
Replying to
None of this would bother me very much if I didn't see a whole lot of people in my timeline praising Harris as if he's very clever here.
Replying to
He is clever in a way that can only be described as weasely. He is not debating Ben Affleck (!) rhis time. His grandstanding is unjustified.
1
Replying to
People like Harris look insightful by virtue of debating complete tools. If this is accomplishment, I'm Buckminister Fuller (I'm not).
1
Show replies