Is Noam Chomsky a "dweeb"?

[Zack]

This is a current issue sparking scholarly debate all throughout the land. Dweebotologists at universities across this great, manly nation have been arguing endlessly over the question of whether Noam Chomsky can correctly be classified as a "dweeb". What is CFC's take on this very important issue?

Personally, I think I saw him wearing glasses or something, so he's definitely a dweeb.

 

[Joecoolyo]

He's the definition of dweeb.

 

[Leonel]

I don't know but my father seems to have a poor image of him due to his theories on linguistics.

 

[Borachio]

dweeb n, A boring, studious, or socially inept person

See, I had to look it up.

No. I wouldn't say Chomsky is boring or socially inept. I do think he's studious, though. So, 1/3 dweeb.

I think he's a very interesting chap with interesting ideas. Some of his talks are a bit long, though - so perhaps he is boring after all.

2/3 dweeb.

Does he wear odd socks? In which case, 3/3 dweeb.

 

[Azale]

Objectively speaking it is hard to argue the opposite.

 

[ParkCungHee]

He's very punchable. So I say dweeb.

 

[Lord of Elves]

If by dweeb you mean frustrating pseudo-intellectual then yes.

 

[Formaldehyde]

If Noam Chomsky is a "pseudo-intellectual", who would you classify as being real ones?

And why do find him frustrating?

 

[Lord of Elves]

If Noam Chomsky is a "pseudo-intellectual", who would you classify as being real ones?

People who have more to contribute to debate on geopolitics other than proselytizing about the evils of the United States. Admittedly, I haven't read much of his material, but what I have read has been this kind of preachy self-righteousness.

And why do find him frustrating?

Above.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Ah, it's due to you falsely characterizing him as being "anti-American" for merely expressing he well-founded opinions.

 

[Lord of Elves]

Ah, it's due to you falsely characterizing him as being "anti-American" for merely expressing he well-founded opinions.

That's a rather uncharitable exaggeration of my complaint. I don't insist he is anti-American, nor do I find that to necessarily be a flaw. I think his "well-founded opinions" are poorly-construed and stated, and have a tendency to pander to a view of geopolitics that blames nations for acting in their self-interest, instead of approaching geopolitics pragmatically like... any other successful analyst of international relations ever.

I don't think his analysis is false (necessarily). I just think it isn't useful.

 

[Azale]

He proselytizes about ALL states with preachy self-righteousness. It's still fun to read though.

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

Truly speaking, who isn't? People aren't like in the movies you know.

 

[Formaldehyde]

That's a rather uncharitable exaggeration of my complaint. I don't insist he is anti-American, nor do I find that to necessarily be a flaw. I think his "well-founded opinions" are poorly-construed and stated, and have a tendency to pander to a view of geopolitics that blames nations for acting in their self-interest, instead of approaching geopolitics pragmatically like... any other successful analyst of international relations ever.

I don't think his analysis is false (necessarily). I just think it isn't useful.

You were the one who decided to use a word like "proselytize" to describe someone who is clearly atheistic and completely secular. And how he even "panders" for merely stating his opinions, which carry great weight with an extremely large number of people in both this country and others.

It doesn't seem like an exaggeration at all.

 

[downtown]

I'm not trivializing his contributions to scholarships at all (Manufacturing Consent was a great read), but of course he's a dweeb.

 

[Lord of Elves]

You were the one who decided to use a word like "proselytize" to describe someone who is clearly atheistic and completely secular. And how he even "panders" for merely stating his opinions, which carry great weight with an extremely large number of people in both this country and others.

It doesn't seem like an exaggeration at all.

I think it is an exaggeration that I dislike him for being "anti-American".

I dislike him for being exceedingly self-righteous while having nothing useful or innovative to say.

 

[Formaldehyde]

So now I can add "exceedingly self-righteous" to the list? Perhaps you could provide an example?

Speculation about motives and conflicting factors should not blind us to the tragedy that is unfolding. Lebanon is being destroyed, Israel's Gaza prison is suffering still more savage blows, and on the West Bank, mostly out of sight, the United States and Israel are consummating their project of the murder of a nation, a grim and rare event in history.

These actions, and the Western response, illustrate all too clearly the amalgam of savage cruelty, self-righteousness, and injured innocence that is so deeply rooted in the imperial mentality as to be beyond awareness. One can easily understand why Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization, is alleged to have said that he thought it might be a good idea.

The Common Good by Noam Chomsky

When you have as much wealth and power as we do, you can be blind and self-righteous; you don't have to think about anything.

 

[Antilogic]

I'm not trivializing his contributions to scholarships at all (Manufacturing Consent was a great read), but of course he's a dweeb.

It was. That's why I'm picking the joke option.

 

[Zelig]

If by dweeb you mean frustrating pseudo-intellectual then yes.

Even completely ignoring his politics and contributions to philosophy, he's likely the single most influential living person in the field of linguistics.

 

[Leoreth]

Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.