Dear everyone,
This debate has spilled over onto a sixth website. (The first five are: this site, Marc Miyake's,
Front Page Magazine, "Gene Expression," and Lucianne.com .)
Anyway, a blog titled
Insolvent Republic of Blogistan by one Justin Slotman at
http://slotman.blogspot.com/ has been following this debate as well. It says:
"I DO SO LOVE THE BLOGS: So I love the Jason Malloy response to a Marc Miyake article [Jason Malloy is the 'Gene Expression' guy I mentioned earlier --ultimate_robber_baron]
, and when I go to Amritas [Marc Miyake's website]
to get a follow-up I don't get one but I do get further criticism of the Scientist-Gnome [nickname for Noam Chomsky].
I'm not informed enough by a long ways to judge how right either guy is; Marc is clearly deep in the Chomsky hate, but he can back up what he says with actual linguistic knowledge -- which impresses me
, anyway. But I do think Chomsky is going to wind up being closer to the Freud of his field than the Darwin; you know, paradigm-altering, dead wrong about a lot of things, and ceaselessly entertaining. (Chomsky not so entertaining to me as Freud, but others find him entertaining, I understand.) Not someone they keep going back to years after the fact like biologists still do with Chuck Darwin."
I don't know if Justin Slotman is here right now, but if he is, I'd like to tell him that I like his coverage. =)
>(Chomsky not so entertaining to me as Freud, but others find him entertaining, I understand.) Not someone they keep going back to years after the fact like biologists still do with Chuck Darwin."
I'm not "entertained"
by Freud or Darwin. Lumping
Chomsky with these two --
even to denounce
him -- just advances his cult
status. Pop figures
just want to be talked
about, for better or worse.
Pop's not about truth.