Elsewhere I believe that Chomsky cites Russell and Dewey as major thinkers who contributed "substance and direction" to his thought. Seems Descartes made some impact on his views too.
@PappyMandarine3 жыл бұрын
Absolutely. Generally speaking, Chomsky is very influenced by analytical thought, and underestimates continental philosophy of the 2nd part of the 20th century, especially structuralism and post-structuralism. I doubt that he's a big fan of Heidegger or Nietzsche either.
@JASmith-oy8db3 жыл бұрын
@@PappyMandarine Yes, definitely in the analytic tradition. I always chuckled when I read his allusions to later 20th century continental philosophy as "post this or that". Have you seen his classic debate with Foucault here on KZfaq? Really interesting.
@PappyMandarine3 жыл бұрын
@@JASmith-oy8db Haha that's a good one, I shall remember this! And yes of course, I watched his debate with Foucault, but I thought it was too short and at times they were misunderstanding each other and therefore were at cross purposes. The moderator was also very average. Still a great debate for today's standards.
@JASmith-oy8db3 жыл бұрын
@@PappyMandarine What moderator??? -- kidding. Yes, it's probably more nostalgia I feel for that debate given the intellectual times and the linguistic turn, etc. If you haven't already watched it here on KZfaq, check out the multipart debate Chomsky vs. Richard Perle (of the Chicago school of economics). Chomsky is full-on, gloves off, 800-pound gorilla, no mercy. Chomsky utterly destroyed Perle.
@PappyMandarine3 жыл бұрын
@@JASmith-oy8db Oh that sounds delightful, some excellent sport! I'll definitely give that a shot. Chicago theologists do have some good arguments occasionally, but usually ideology and make-belief utterly blind them. They also believe in some "human nature" that is actually the result of specific economic policies - and not just anyone. When Milton Friedman in all eloquence proves that (ultra)liberalism is the most just system, he often does it by shoving aside the things he does not want to see. I'd love to see Chomsky ripping that apart. Thanks for the suggestion!
@PappyMandarine4 жыл бұрын
"Nobody influenced me, I influenced them". - every intellectual ever
@brucesmith544 жыл бұрын
"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants" - Newton "I came out of the womb knowing how the world works and how it ought to work" - Chomsky
@faisalhasan59693 жыл бұрын
Chomsky has been very honest. He simply stated the truth. Everyone reads to substantiate and clarify what they already believe in. Sometimes it changes the person, other times it complements his own nature. Simple!
@finlayson68683 жыл бұрын
@@brucesmith54 That's so far from what he's saying. What he's saying is that he already had a set of morals as a child - as every functioning person does - and these morals influenced him more than any philosopher could. Do you really think that reading Nietzsche or Focault will actually influence the way you act or behave? Reading about moral philosophy is fun, but it almost never impacts the way we behave.
@vikramtalreja93 жыл бұрын
This is not what he meant, he always want to awaken the listener. So he want us to find these philosophers by your own exploration. He very honestly trying not to influence.
@PappyMandarine3 жыл бұрын
@@finlayson6868 That's a very good point indeed.
@MW-ic7lr2 жыл бұрын
Chomsky makes it sound like he's never had his fundamental assumptions challenged nor been wrong about his way of looking at the world. That's effed up. To be as old as Chomsky and obviously intelligent yet never to have discovered an idea outside of himself is not good. He believes that his ideas were formed at a young age and he looked for sources to confirm and deepen those beliefs. And he views others through that worldview. Being an anarchist and holding such a deterministic belief is weird. Are we to believe he never actively searched for and read opposing viewpoints? He never read a philosopher and was struck by something they said? A philosopher never challenged him to challenge his own assumptions? Wtf?
@Atherion8 Жыл бұрын
I believe that wasn’t the way the question was worded. What the questioner here is asking Chomsky is what shaped or enticed his current views and ideas not what challenged your ideas and perspective.
@MW-ic7lr Жыл бұрын
@@Atherion8 I think you really have to closely listen to what he's saying. Leave the interviewer's question aside (Chomsky himself leaves the question aside), and listen closely. He insists that his worldview was set in stone early, and that any philosophers he read were just adding substance to that worldview. THAT is an incredible way to look at the world. For him, we form a worldview, and then just search for writings that support that worldview. I totally reject that. I actively seek viewpoints that conflict with my own in order to challenge my interpretations/biases and form new interpretations/biases. To do otherwise is to engage explicitly in confirmation bias. We all do that to a certain extent. But Chomsky says that confirmation bias is all he has! That is bizarre coming from a supposed intellectual.
@cp910510 ай бұрын
@@MW-ic7lr Just because it was formed early doesn't mean it was deterministic. That is an odd comment.
@MW-ic7lr10 ай бұрын
@@cp9105 Just ignore that phrasing then. It isn't really important to my overall thought.
@noahlenten83604 күн бұрын
@@MW-ic7lr midwit
@kennyprice50172 жыл бұрын
Avoids answering the question entirely typical Chomsky.
@mathias4851 Жыл бұрын
What? Chomsky has no role model not every1 need a Kim Kardishan in their life
@MooneyMan985 ай бұрын
unless u actually listen to what he says
@arishkhan-lz8yz4 ай бұрын
Good intellectual trolling
@Arareemote4 ай бұрын
@@mathias4851He has said it himself in a much earlier interview that he was inspired by Immanuel Kant and that his work draws influence from many different elements.
@ulquiorra4criesАй бұрын
It's even funnier once you notice that he dislikes the notion of being influenced because that would conflict with his preferred identity as a highly original creative genius, which--in the land of Henry Ford, Kanye West, and Walt Disney--is one of the most coveted forms of social recognition
@johnnonamegibbon35805 жыл бұрын
He's giving a complex answer to a simple, overly narrow question "I don't think we are influenced so much as we have our own views and look to people who agree with them and can add to them." Is what he basically said.
@leomanso312854 жыл бұрын
@Michael Starr Are you implying that the most important philosopher of our era just lied in a simple question to be considered even smarter than he actually is? How stupid are you, really. Also what he says it's completely true and logical, no mystery behind it.
@ulquiorra4criesАй бұрын
It's even funnier once you notice that he dislikes the notion of being influenced because that would conflict with his preferred identity as a highly original creative genius, which--in the land of Henry Ford, Kanye West, and Walt Disney--is one of the most coveted forms of social recognition
@cp910510 ай бұрын
He's said before in a interview that the cambridge platonists of the 17th century (Cudworth specifically) are some of the richest sources of psychological insight he knows of.
@williamjc71952 жыл бұрын
............and the answer is...............? I hate to say this but he sounded very much like a politician.
@TheJonnyEnglish Жыл бұрын
Russel, Hume, and Kant seem to be big influences
@alexc7736 жыл бұрын
Would be nice if Chomsky would actually answer these types of questions, rather than deliver his typical runaround. I really don't see what's so misleading or difficult about the question.
@chomskysphilosophy6 жыл бұрын
He answered it. His worldview developed early. And like he said, he has mentioned many thinkers in his writings and lectures: Plato, Descartes, Hume, Rousseau, Dewey, Russell, and Rocker, among others.
@tomstrutt67546 жыл бұрын
He answered the question precisely.
@MrPlooky6 жыл бұрын
alexc773 he definitely answered the question enough, hey, there's a cool comic book about Chomsky called Chomsky for beginners, it has nice colorful pictures and cartoons in it and stuff, I bought it for my nine-year-old niece and you could buy that book and read it.
@alexc7736 жыл бұрын
+Vinny Angel Sounds like you need it much more than I do, given such a childish response. I don't see what about my comment warranted the rudeness from you, but I suppose basic civility among strangers is too much to ask for even on a channel featuring only intellectual content.
@settingfiretogiants6 жыл бұрын
I agree 100%. When you ask him for names or books, be prepared to watch an extra 5 videos to finally hear him relay some relevant information
@mattzx003 Жыл бұрын
pretty hilarious coming from the guy who wrote "manufacturing consent" to suggest that his opinions were never influenced by anyone but himself
@khurmiful4 жыл бұрын
What was the answer?
@vikramtalreja93 жыл бұрын
he always want to awaken the listener. So he want us to find these philosophers by your own exploration. He very honestly trying not to influence. Although in several interviews he said name of David Hume, Russel Bertrand, Dewey, Aristotle, newton, Galileo
@gabrielajonczyk56633 жыл бұрын
This is the point of Internet that shows how interpretation can be damaging.
@charlesdahmital8095 Жыл бұрын
A better question may have to ask who challenged his perceptions more.
@slmjkdbtl3 жыл бұрын
some people think before read so it's more like "agree" not "inspired"
@cyberneticsiren2 ай бұрын
“Elaborate on that” “No”
@tartanhandbag Жыл бұрын
guys, he's not dodging the question, he's just making the (personal and valid) point that he's not the kind of guy who got all his ideas by reading other people's ideas. he got ideas by thinking about stuff. that's pretty much his "rationalist" stance. this is also a short excerpt. he's been asked it many times. elsewhere he comments on having grown up in an intellectual environment with his dad who was a famous Hebrew scholar, in a family where robust discussion was encouraged and a daily feature of life, frequenting radical NYC bookshops from an early age and that these discussions influenced him more than the philosophy stuff he read later. bear in mind this is a guy whose dad had him editing his manuscripts and who published linguistic essays at the age of 12. so yeah, he had ideas early. later he read people like Hume and was like, yeah, i like this guy, he seems to talk sense, or Dewey, or Russell. personally, i had a similar experience; most of my philosophical interests were formed in my teenage years through discussion, rather than having read philosophical tracts (and any that came my way were avoided as being boring and stuffy). given that philosophy is broadly theoretical, it lends itself to a child's interest. like i said, Chomsky also had the unusual advantage of having a good understanding of linguistics before he was a teenager due to his dad being an influential Hebrew scholar.
@gavinferguson2938 Жыл бұрын
Currently undergoing my philosophy degree right now. About to go into my final year and I very much so agree with this notion. While I encountered philosophical text and literature primarily in my teenage years, it was more so the discussion generated by the ideas contained within that caught my attention and filled up most of my time. I always felt that discussion allowed for ideas to mutate amd evolve in a much more rapid and intellectually honest manner than written text. In my life so far, ive found that if a person knows how to communicate efficiently and can adapt their attitude to the person they are speaking with. They can spurn conversation with just about anyone. And those conversations can start in one relativley simple observation, before escalating into some uncharted niche territory.
@eltel1043 жыл бұрын
Chomsky ain't a big fan of the co-sign
@nhboy343 ай бұрын
Ya it’s a tough question. Think if you have been immersed in some field long enough, there simply are not going to be just a couple of names. They all contribute in many ways. He has made a lot of references to a lot of people over numerous interviews; Russel, Descartes, Dewey , Hume,… and so on and on. Also, it seems odd to suggest , but this is clearly not your average scholar. He probably stands along with some of those very people in terms of intellectual contribution. Finally, this is a small part of longish interview, so a bunch of context is completely lost
@zzRider6 жыл бұрын
I wonder if Chomsky’s view of William James is similar to John Dewey?
@geico19756 жыл бұрын
He don't want to say for some reason or another, um?
@tomstrutt67546 жыл бұрын
He answered the question precisely. He just didn't give the answer the questioner wanted.
@geico19756 жыл бұрын
The question was, 'can you comment on the Philosophers that have influenced you,' basically @ 0.08 I think Chomsky's answer was fine, but he didn't name names which was the question. And I find that interesting, why he doesn't name names. I don't know man, must be an intellectual thing:)
@MrPlooky6 жыл бұрын
geico1975 I think he's basically saying that he developed his philosophical outlook on the world before he ever came across philosophers, in other words he is a philosophical Source in and of himself, if that makes any sense.
@mr.joesterr53593 жыл бұрын
@@user-js2dr9gv1u do you honestly think Noam Chomsky doesn’t know any philosophers?
@geico19753 жыл бұрын
@Don I remember watching this and just re-watched it again for my recollection. I'm pretty sure I felt like he was avoiding answering the exact question asked, and I was wondering why. For example, I'll never be as smart as Chomsky and I do think he's a very smart guy, because I don't have the gift of an intellectual and I do consider it a gift. I'd just like to maybe learn something Chomsky learned from the same source, that kind of thing. Trying to get as close to the treasure as possible even though I'll never obtain it kind of thing.
@fede25 ай бұрын
I find his answer more anodine than the comments make it up to be. It doesn't sound like arrogance, it's more like a take on how we generally form our outlooks on life. There is something to the notion that we tend to make up our minds before we grab our first book.
@aDarcone6 жыл бұрын
on point..
@sullivansongz6 жыл бұрын
I find it frustrating that he dodges the question but the facts of the matter are that C has always been skeptical of philosophers in general and intellectuals in particular whom he generally regards as pandering to power throughout the centuries
@bathhole Жыл бұрын
Just say Wittgenstein!!!!
@chrisrogers45946 ай бұрын
Lol why is this even a clip
@sokratispasvantidis6239 ай бұрын
great teacher himself wont offer ready meals, socrates and all the ancient greek philosophers influenced him and ALL the other majors
@aliassi5447 Жыл бұрын
How to speak and not say anything 101
@taasinbinhossainalvi91734 жыл бұрын
Noam should use a better mic 🎙
@01ha6 жыл бұрын
Why can’t he lead the whole world? A real mind a real human spirit, the king of ethical approach. I wish he was in charge of the world
@dmike35076 жыл бұрын
Haha that would be Chomsky's worst nightmare, he's an anarchist you know, lol! The whole point is we shouldn't have leaders, we should let people decide democratically how to organize society.
@kaneo32436 жыл бұрын
Haggai Fershtman : The world is not ruled by wisdom; it's ruled by power.
@AlwaysReason6 жыл бұрын
There are two major groups in the world - those who think they create reality and those who try to keep the first group from destroying the planet. Moving Chomsky to the first group makes nosense.
@waindayoungthain21475 жыл бұрын
🙏🏼.
@MAXKENT-mh7lu4 ай бұрын
We have AI....philosophers are as much useful as theologians...
@Alexmw7773 ай бұрын
lol??? xd lmfao
@johncracker521710 ай бұрын
So no? Lol
@balajis16026 жыл бұрын
For me prof Chomsky doesnt have to answer such questions its not about what an individual thinks, its about what the actual Human spirit needs and which path it needs to take for the well being of all thats the true sense of anarchism... chomsky's work is enough...he'll lead to the precise paths.
@xalian172 жыл бұрын
Pretentious
@ridicule13133 жыл бұрын
His answer in my opinion would likely be Aristotle. He just knows it does no good to spout names and ascribe labels to things, it’s about a deeper understanding and more spiritual message that he tries to show, not tell. My opinion tho