Hacker News Reader

Comment by Kenji | Hacker News Reader

Chomsky is a wonderful proof of the fact that it does not matter who the idea comes from, what matters is the idea itself. I.e. you can be an expert on some things and err on others. Nobody is an intellectual authority on all things. Many scientists are wiser than to meddle in political affairs with broad strokes and only stick to their topic of expertise.

View on HN

So, you're the intellectual authority on politics then, capable of declaring with certainty that Noam's ideas in that arena are flawed?

As you may have noticed, I precisely did not go into any details about Chomsky's politics because I know how the large majority of HN thinks and it's pretty much useless to reason about this here. The fact that his political ideas are barely backed up with data speaks for itself. If you look at what he writes, it is obvious that his view on history is strongly influenced by the lens of his ideology. This is very unlike his work on grammars, which I greatly appreciate. That is all I'm going to say about this. Judge for yourself.

From what I've read, his politics are extremely well cited, and he appears to have facts on hand to support all the claims he makes.

Do you have any specific criticism in mind of anything he's said?

> The fact that his political ideas are barely backed up with data speaks for itself.

This is an objectively ridiculous assertion. His works are extensively cited with primary sources. He regularly has hundreds of footnotes per book. Manufacturing Consent and Necessary Illusions are just two examples of a scientific, ideology-free approach to political analysis. There he compares and contrasts how the U.S. media covers similar international events -- by state friends vs. foes -- and it is quite damning.

Chomsky's political writing is actually backed by tons of data (facts). He is clear about his ideology and does not try to hide it,but facts his quoting are facts.

> their topic of expertise

Who is the expert on how the pie should be divided up?

There are objectively better or worse solutions for this problem. Some lead to human flourishing, others prevent it. It is definitely possible to have more or less expertise in this topic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com