In that sense, Chomsky's anger and vitriol is both entirely justified and entirely expected, regardless of what you may think of his views.
Conversation
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.
1
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
Replying to
On the rare occasion that you see them debate a peer, gross distortions in their worldview are made apparent - because they're OBVIOUS!
1
Replying to
When you can't hide behind superior intellect or debating skills, your views are actually challenged. New Atheists have a bad record there.
1
Replying to
(Because neither their assumptions nor their insights are all that interesting, nor do they apply as broadly as they seem to assume.)
1
Replying to
The issue is not that they are unintelligent. Far from it. Rather, they are exceedingly intelligent exponents of an impoverished ideology.