-
-
This is all a problem of the rest of the field. Can't blame someone if they are blindly adored. You're talking about what other people do.
-
It's interesting you mention blame. Chomsky = linguistics (a field he pretty much created).
-
When you have a leader you can't _just_ blame the followers.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
3. is there such a thing as an unbiased curator? I assume you don't think so. why have only 1? that's why I raise dictator interpretation.
-
It's not a dictatorship if it's self imposed. People deserve the gods and monsters they choose to mythologise.
-
Wow — I think we have very divergent ideas about Putin and Trump then.

-
In your OP you asked if it was beneficial to have a curator (which I think means dictator in this context). I answered why I think it's not.
-
I don't agree with your conflation. I DO agree, however, that in as much as any curator will be biased (because, human), best to have many.
-
So many is... just like every other field within a single curator, right?
-
So you're agreeing linguistics was/is pathological when in the grip of a single curator/dictator because they are inevitably biased?
-
I don't know if linguistics is more pathological than any other discipline, I simply envy it for Chomsky's insight.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.