withDefiance
6 HN recommenders · recommended in 12 months, 2015–2026
1:10:03 · 2.7M views · Mar 13, 2013
The full 1971 Dutch television debate between Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucault on human nature, with subtitles. They discuss creativity, knowledge, power and politics.
HN recommends it as a famous, revealing clash between two thinkers, though some note they largely talk past each other.
15 comments from Hacker News
1. Languages are used for much, much more than communication, and there is good reason to think that capacity didn't evolve for communication, but rather for metacognitive problem solving. 2. The idea that Tolkein --one of the most reknowned writers in our entire canon-- did something isn't relevant to the philosophical discussion of creativity and its obvious bounds. Even Tolkein was just painting within the lines set by the linguists he had read and the obscure languages he adored, not to mention the fundamental limits set by our capacity for language in the first place. For anyone who's curious about this kind of thing, I cannot reccomend the infamous debate b/w Chomsky & Foucault enough; it ranges across topics a bit, but chapter markers should help you skip to the core of it (creativity) if you prefer. Video here: this video , some old summaries on /r/AskPhilosophy here: [LINK]
For anyone who hasn't watched the actual, full video of the debate, you should do so. Watching them argue in two languages at the same time is super fun. this video Okay, here's what the video is saying, in slightly-longer form. The exchange in the video is basically Chomsky saying "human nature" and Foucault laughing. This gets at the heart of the hour-long debate: do humans have some sort of nature? Foucault, and philosophers like him, think that the idea of 'human nature' is complete and utter garbage. So when Chomsky admits that his position boils down to an appeal of human nature, Foucault just laughs at him. It's a great moment that really highlights the whole thing. I love it.
I think he is not interested in epistemology. But I always find discussions on the origins or human knowledge just as fascinating as you. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It sounds like you may have already been exposed to it given the content of your arguments, but there is a very enjoyable debate/discussion between Foucault and Chomsky on the acquisitions of human knowledge and human nature [1] and your position sounds quite similar to the one Chomsky elaborates on. [1] this video
It is quite illuminating to see the exchange for instance between Michel Foucault and Noam Chomsky to get a sense of the difference of tone and focus between european and american intellectuals. this video
For anyone who hasn't seen it yet, here's an interesting debate between Foucault and Chomsky: [1] Unfortunately, they're mostly speaking past each other, but it's still worth watching. [1] - this video