What begins as a philosophical argument rooted in linguistics (Chomsky) and the theory of knowledge (Foucault), soon evolves into a broader discussion encompassing a wide range of topics, from science, history, and behaviorism to creativity, freedom, and the struggle for justice in the realm of politics. The resulting dialogue is one of the most original, provocative, and spontaneous exchanges to have occurred between contemporary philosophers, and above all serves as a concise introduction to their basic theories. In 1971, at the height of the Vietnam War and at a time of great political and social instability, two of the world's leading intellectuals, Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucault, were invited by Dutch philosopher Fons Edlers to debate an age-old question: is there such a thing as "innate" human nature independent of our experiences and external influences? the idea of justice in itself is an idea which in effect has been invented and put to work in different types of societies as an instrument of a certain political and economic power or as a weapon against that power.Two of the twentieth century's most influential thinkers debate a perennial question. in regard to justice, he says (this is not included in the clips): ".
for him, the issue is not so much whether 'justice' or 'human nature' 'exists,' but how they have historically (and currently) function in society. Chomsky, following a rationalist lineage going back to at least Plato, believes that there is a foundational 'nature' and that its positive aspects (love, creativity, recognizing and embracing justice) must be realized, while Foucault remains skeptical of any such notion. The debate offered sharp contrasts between the more traditional view of 'human nature' and what would become a postmodernist perspective.
In 1971, American linguist/social activist Noam Chomsky squared off against French philosopher Michel Foucault on Dutch television in the program 'Human Nature: Justice Vs.
0 kommentar(er)
